Full list of kontris wey dia pipo no fit enta US as Trump sama ban on dem
Di US president say dem fit revise di list if "material improvements" dey and dem fit also add some kontris as "threats emerge around di world".
Dis na di second time Trump go ban travel from certain kontris.
Trump bin sign similar order for 2017, during im first term for office.
Which kontris dey affected?
Trump has signed a proclamation banning travel to the US from nationals of 12 countries:
E get additional seven kontris wey dia citizens face partial travel restrictions:
We dey update dis tori
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
4 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Europe is scrambling to form a united front and regain relevance in the Iran crisis
Exposed as divided and marginalised during the Iran crisis, European nations are scrambling to retrieve a place at the Middle East negotiating table, fearing an impulsive Donald Trump has diminishing interest in stabilising Iran or the wider region now he believes he has achieved his key objective of wiping out Tehran's nuclear programme. On Tuesday the EU's top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, was the latest senior European figure to phone the Iranian foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, offering to be a facilitator and urging Tehran not to leave the crisis in a dangerous limbo by keeping UN weapons inspectors out of Iran. The French president, Emmanuel Macron, has even broken a three-year silence to speak to Vladimir Putin about the risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, including how a deal could be struck between Iran and the US on a restricted civil nuclear programme. Macron has been involved in Iranian diplomacy for a decade and came close to engineering a rapprochement between Trump and the then Iranian president, Hassan Rouhani, at the UN general assembly in 2018. But Iran, faced with what it regards as craven European support for Israeli and American airstrikes that killed more than 930 people and injured as many as 5,000, is not placing much faith in the continent's ability to influence the White House. For Europe, this signals a slow slide into irrelevance. The three major European powers known as the E3 – France, Germany and the UK – were once key fixtures in Iran's diplomacy and played a central role in brokering the Iran nuclear deal, which they signed alongside the EU, the US, China, Russia and Iran in 2015. Europe had little input in the US's recent negotiating strategy with Iran, led by Trump's special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, and was given just over an hour's official warning before the Israeli and US attacks. The one meeting that the E3 foreign minsters held during the crisis with Iranian diplomats in Geneva on 20 June proved a failure and was followed by the US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. France claimed it helped Israel repel Iranian drones. Trump crowed afterwards that 'Iran doesn't want to speak to Europe. They want to speak to us. Europe is not going to be able to help in this one.' From the Iranian perspective, Europe has long been a disappointing negotiating partner, repeatedly failing to show any independence from the US. When Trump withdrew the US from the nuclear deal in 2018, the E3 condemned the move in a joint statement issued by its then-leaders, Angela Merkel, Theresa May and Macron. But it did nothing effective to pursue an independent strategy to lift European sanctions on Iran as it had promised. The fear that European firms trading with Iran would be put under US sanctions was too great. The view from Tehran, it was felt, was that Europe's timidity left it with no choice but to follow the policy of nuclear brinkmanship, including gradually increasing its stockpile of enriched uranium. At the start of Trump's second term, the E3 plus Kallas tried again to insert themselves into the process by holding three low-key meetings with Iranian negotiators. But Araghchi was always angling to speak to Washington, telling the Guardian of his discussions with the Europeans: 'Perhaps we are talking to the wrong people.' After Trump indicated he was willing to speak to Iran bilaterally and showed some flexibility about Tehran's right to enrich uranium, Iran cast Europe aside. Iran believes Europe played a role either through naivety or complicity in opening the door for the Israeli attack by tabling a motion of censure at the board of the UN nuclear inspectorate, the International Atomic Energy Agency. Such motions have been passed before at the IAEA and usually led to Iran retaliating by increasing its stocks of enriched uranium. But the 12 June motion was different – for the first time in 20 years the board found Iran in breach of its obligations under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Europe had to take that step to use its right as a signatory to the 2015 deal to reimpose sanctions on Iran before expiry of the deal on 15 October. Because of the way the deal was negotiated, neither Russia nor China can veto Europe reimposing sanctions. America is no longer party to the deal so this power to reintroduce UN sanctions is Europe's diplomatic re-entry point into the Iranian file. European diplomats insist that the IAEA censure motion was necessary, and that they had no option owing to Iran's mounting stocks of highly enriched uranium that had no possible purpose in a civilian nuclear programme. Europe also still hoped the talks between the US and Iran, mediated by Oman, would bear fruit, and had not foreseen the US giving Israel the green light to attack. Since the Israeli strikes, European unity has frayed further. Britain has largely opted for opacity, but it was obvious from what ministers did not say that the government's legal advice was that the Israeli attack could not be justified as an act of self-defence under the UN charter. France openly asserted that the attack was unlawful. By contrast, Germany endorsed all that Israel has done. At the G7 summit in mid-June, the chancellor, Friedrich Merz, said: 'This is the dirty work that Israel is doing, for all of us.' Germany's foreign minister, Johann Wadephul, told parliament that 'Israel has the right to defend itself and protect its people. Let me say clearly that, if Israel and the US have now managed to set back the Iranian nuclear programme, it will make Israel and its neighbourhood more secure.' Asked by the newspaper Die Zeit if he believed Israel's actions were lawful, he said Germany did not have the same quality intelligence sources as the US and Israel, but he had to trust their belief that Iran was close to acquiring a nuclear weapon. 'They told us that, from their perspective, this is necessary – and we must accept that.' Such remarks have left Iranian diplomats spitting about European double standards over the sanctity of international law. By contrast, Enrique Mora, the EU's point person on Iran from 2015 to early 2025, has written a scathing piece in which he says Israel has killed nuclear diplomacy and Iran's nuclear knowledge cannot be destroyed. He wrote: 'If Iran now chooses the militarisation of its nuclear capabilities, if it now decides to move toward a bomb, it will do so following a clear strategic logic: no one bombs the capital of a nuclear-armed country. June 21, 2025, may go down in history not as the day the Iranian nuclear programme was destroyed, but as the day a nuclear Iran was irreversibly born.' There are different strategies Europe can pursue. It can, like Germany, show Iran there is no daylight between the E3 and Israel and assert that Iran can only have a civil nuclear programme that excludes domestic enrichment of uranium. It can press ahead with the reimposition of sanctions and hope that Iran buckles. Alternatively, it can champion a compromise that Tehran can wear. In a recent statement, the European Council on Foreign Relations said 'maximalist demands on Iran – including negotiating over missiles now viewed by Tehran as its main deterrence umbrella – will likely push the country to use every means still available to reach nuclear breakout. A more viable endgame would involve a return of wide-scale inspections by international monitors and an immediate, substantial roll-back of Iranian uranium enrichment. The goal should be Iran pursuing this enrichment through a regional consortium backed by the United States.' That is broadly closer to the French position. Europe will never hold sway like Israel or the US, but it has one last chance to help create something durable, and prevent the Iranian crisis becoming a nuclear proliferation crisis for the whole region.
Telegraph
9 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Trump: I'll spare undocumented farm workers if bosses can vouch for them
Donald Trump said he will spare undocumented farm workers from deportation if their bosses can vouch for them. The US president floated the idea for the exemptions, which could also apply to hotel and restaurant workers, during a visit to Iowa. Legislation is already being drafted for the carve-out how to deal with undocumented agricultural workers with Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary. 'You know, they've had people working for them for years. And we're going to do something … we're going to sort of put the farmers in charge,' he said on Thursday night. 'If a farmer has been with one of these people that worked so hard – they bend over all day, we don't have too many people that can do that, but they work very hard, and they know him very well, and some of the farmers are literally, you know, they cry when they see this happen. 'If a farmer is willing to vouch for these people, in some way, Kristi, I think we're going to have to just say that's going to be good, right?' Mr Trump was repeating remarks he made earlier in the week. Underpinning the proposed exemptions is a dispute within the administration, with Brooke Rollins, the agriculture secretary, pushing for concessions for farmers and their workers, while immigration hardliner and White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller strongly opposes any concessions. At one point, raids on farms, meatpacking plants and restaurants were paused. But they were resumed again after immigration hawks, including Mr Miller and Ms Noem, leaned on the president. Mr Trump's remarks this week suggest that he could be leaning towards backing his agriculture secretary after all. According to the Centre for Migration Studies, there are around 283,000 undocumented farm workers in the US, with nearly half being employed in California; other estimates put the figure even higher. More than 80 per cent come from Mexico, with the remainder hailing from Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador and Nicaragua. Agriculture industry hit by deportation drive The Trump deportation drive has wrought havoc on the agriculture industry. Fearful of being picked up by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), as many as 70 per cent of farm workers in some parts of the country have been staying away. This has led to crops rotting in fields and labour shortages at meat-packing facilities. 'We do not have enough workforce in the United States to do manual work, to do those jobs that other people are not qualified to do and do not want to do,' Alexandra Sossa, chief executive of Farmworker and Landscaper Advocacy Project, told Newsweek. 'For example, we are running into a problem where we do not have enough farm workers to grow the food we eat every day.' According to Farmonaut, an agriculture technology company, the stricter immigration polices are creating a labour shortage, which is putting up food prices. There is similar pressure on the hospitality industry, with hotels and restaurants heavily dependent on immigrant labour. Even Mr Trump's Mar-a-Lago has imported foreign workers, with Department of Labour statistics showing that it applied for 136 H-2B visas for non-agricultural workers in 2023. Trump urged to fix long-term labour issues 'We are encouraged that the president recognises the valuable contributions farmworkers play in America's food security,' John Walt Boatright, director of Government Affairs for the American Farm Bureau Federation told The Telegraph 'Farmers support a secure border and safe communities, and they also understand that without a stable workforce, it's not possible to get food from the farm to the tables of America's families.' 'We have not seen specifics on President Trump's plans, but we urge him and Congress to address long-term agriculture labour issues by revising overreaching regulations, modernising current guestworker programmes to allow for year-round access to employees, and fixing outdated wage rate calculations that put help out of reach for many farmers.' While the administration is willing to make concessions for these key groups of workers, there will be no let-up in ICE's activities. Within days of the announcement of an 'Alligator Alcatraz' to house deportees in Florida, Alaska, albeit tongue in cheek, suggested its large bear population could do a similar job in the frozen north. The state has the option of bidding for a slice of the $5 billion earmarked in the Big Beautiful Bill for the construction and renovation of ICE's detention facilities.
The Guardian
13 minutes ago
- The Guardian
A ceasefire in Gaza appears to be close. Here's why it could happen now
After nearly 21 months of bloody war, it now appears a question of when rather than if a new ceasefire brings a pause to the fighting that has devastated Gaza, destabilised the region and horrified onlookers across the world. On Friday, Donald Trump said he expected Hamas to agree within 24 hours to a deal that Israel has already accepted. Analysts predict a formal announcement after Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel's prime minister, arrives in Washington on Monday on his third visit to the White House since Trump began his current term. If a new ceasefire does come into effect, it will be the third during the war, in which about 57,000 Palestinians, mostly civilians, have died. The first lasted just 10 days in November 2023. The second was forced on a reluctant Netanyahu by Trump in February this year and ended in March when Israel reneged on a promise to move to a second scheduled phase that could have led to a definitive end to hostilities. The terms of the new deal include the staggered release of hostages held by Hamas; freedom for hundreds of Palestinians in Israeli jails; desperately needed aid for Gaza; and the phased withdrawal of Israeli forces from some parts of the strip seized in recent months. Once again, the ceasefire will last for 60 days, during which time talks about what happens next will be held. Trump and regional powers are offering guarantees to reassure Hamas that Israel will not simply return to an all-out offensive and that meaningful discussions about a permanent end to the war will actually take place. One factor that has brought a new ceasefire closer is the brief conflict last month between Israel and Iran, which ended in a US-brokered ceasefire. That capped a series of military and political developments that had seriously weakened Tehran and the various militant groups it had supported around the region, which include Hamas. More important is the boost that gave Netanyahu. Though polls record only a slight increase in support for his Likud party and in his personal popularity, many Israelis nonetheless rejoiced in what was seen as a crushing victory over a much-feared foe. If Netanyahu brings the war in Gaza to what voters see as a successful, or at least acceptable, close, Netanyahu can stand in elections – probably next year – claiming to be the man who made Israel safer than it has ever been, even if few have forgotten the security and strategic failures that led to the Hamas attack of October 2023 in which militants took 251 hostages and killed 1,200, mostly civilians. By the end of this month, Israel's parliament will have risen for a three-month recess and courts will also not sit, giving Netanyahu respite from the threat of a no-confidence vote or dissolution motion as well as from continuing cross-examination in his trial for corruption. This undermines the threats to collapse the government made throughout the conflict in Gaza by far-right coalition allies bitterly opposed to a deal with Hamas. Successive opinion surveys show that an agreement that brings back hostages would be very popular with Israelis, so this, too, would help Netanyahu in elections. Israeli casualties in Gaza – 20 soldiers died in June – are also causing concern. A poll published by Maariv, an Israeli newspaper, on Friday showed a further boost for the prime minister as hopes of a ceasefire rose. As for Hamas, analysts and sources close to its leaders say the militant Islamist organisation is divided, much weakened by the Israeli onslaught in Gaza and aware that it has few allies who can or will offer any practical support. The main aim of its leaders now is to retain some presence in Gaza, even a residual one. This alone would constitute some form of victory, and partly explains the determination with which Hamas seek a permanent end to the fighting. Whether it will get one is still not clear. Israeli media have been briefed by 'sources close to Netanyahu' that if Hamas cannot be disarmed in Gaza and its leaders exiled from the devastated territory through negotiations then Israel will resume military operations, and that Washington would support its decision to return to war. Many 'close to Netanyahu' also continue to support mass 'voluntary' emigration from Gaza, or the relocation of much of its population to an area in the south, or both. Recent days have been noisy with voices: American, Israeli, Saudi Arabian, Qatari and many others. Barely heard have been the voices of the 2.3 million Palestinians in Gaza, where Israel's offensive continues. On Friday, local officials and medics said Israeli airstrikes killed 15 Palestinians in the territory and another 20 people died in shootings while waiting at food points.
