Iran holds state funeral for top brass slain in war with Israel
TEHRAN: Iran held a state funeral service today for around 60 people, including its military commanders, killed in its war with Israel, after Tehran's top diplomat condemned Donald Trump's comments on supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as "unacceptable."
The proceedings started at 8am local time (0430 GMT) in the capital Tehran as government offices and many businesses were closed today for the occasion.
"The ceremony to honour the martyrs has officially started," state TV said, showing footage of thousands of people donning black clothes, waving Iranian flags and holding pictures of the slain military commanders.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, along with other senior government officials and military commanders – including Esmail Qaani, head of the Quds Force, the foreign operations arm of the Revolutionary Guards – attended the event.
Senior advisor to Iran's supreme leader, Ali Shamkhani, who was targeted and wounded during the war, also took part in the ceremony, using a walking cane, state TV showed.
Images also displayed mock-ups of Iranian ballistic missiles as well as coffins draped in Iranian flags and bearing portraits of the deceased commanders in uniform near Enghelab (Revolution) Square in central Tehran, where the march began.
A patriotic eulogy blared from loudspeakers as the procession set out across the sprawling metropolis toward Azadi (Freedom) Square, 11 kilometres (seven miles) away.
"Boom boom Tel Aviv," read one banner, referring to Iranian missiles fired at Israel during the conflict in retaliation for its attacks on Iran.
Among the dead is Mohammad Bagheri, a major general in Iran's Revolutionary Guards and the second-in-command of the armed forces after the Iranian leader.
He will be buried alongside his wife and daughter, a journalist for a local media outlet, all killed in an Israeli attack.
Nuclear scientist Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, also killed in the attacks, will be buried with his wife.
Revolutionary Guards commander Hossein Salami, who was killed on the first day of the war, will also be laid to rest after today's ceremony – which will also honour at least 30 other top commanders.
Of the 60 people who are to be laid to rest after the ceremony, four are children and four are women.
The United States had carried out strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites last weekend, joining its ally Israel's bombardments of Iran's nuclear programme in the 12-day conflict launched on June 13.
Both Israel and Iran claimed victory in the war that ended with a ceasefire, with Iranian leader Khamenei downplaying the US strikes as having done "nothing significant."
In a tirade on his Truth Social platform, Trump blasted Tehran Friday for claiming to have won the war.
He also claimed to have known "EXACTLY where he (Khamenei) was sheltered, and would not let Israel, or the US Armed Forces... terminate his life."
"I SAVED HIM FROM A VERY UGLY AND IGNOMINIOUS DEATH, and he does not have to say, 'THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRUMP!'" the US leader said.
Trump added he had been working in recent days on the possible removal of sanctions against Iran, one of Tehran's main demands.
"But no, instead I get hit with a statement of anger, hatred, and disgust, and immediately dropped all work on sanction relief, and more," Trump said.
Hitting back at Trump today, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi condemned the Republican president's comments on Khamenei.
"If President Trump is genuine about wanting a deal, he should put aside the disrespectful and unacceptable tone towards Iran's Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Khamenei," Araghchi posted on social media platform X.
"The Great and Powerful Iranian People, who showed the world that the Israeli regime had NO CHOICE but to RUN to 'Daddy' to avoid being flattened by our Missiles, do not take kindly to Threats and Insults."
The Israeli strikes on Iran killed at least 627 civilians, Tehran's health ministry said. Iran's attacks on Israel killed 28 people, according to Israeli figures.
During his first term in office, Trump pulled out in 2018 of a landmark nuclear deal – negotiated by former US president Barack Obama.
The deal that Trump had abandoned aimed to make it practically impossible for Iran to build an atomic bomb, while at the same time allowing it to pursue a civil nuclear programme.
Iran, which insists its nuclear programme is only for civilian purposes, stepped up its activities after Trump withdrew from the agreement.
After the US strikes, Trump said negotiations for a new deal were set to begin next week.
But Tehran denied a resumption, and leader Khamenei said Trump had "exaggerated events in unusual ways", rejecting US claims Iran's nuclear programme had been set back by decades.
Israel had claimed it had "thwarted Iran's nuclear project" during the 12-day war.
But its foreign minister reiterated Friday the world was obliged to stop Tehran from developing an atomic bomb.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malay Mail
an hour ago
- Malay Mail
Even as markets rally, Trump's policy shifts keep investors on edge
Investors see rally to fresh highs as fragile Analysts describe environment of 'extreme policy uncertainty' Options market shows little sign of euphoria Wide bid/ask spreads, diminished liquidity characterise US stocks NEW YORK, June 28 — As Wall Street puts April's tariff shakeout in the rearview mirror and indexes set record highs, investors remain wary of US President Donald Trump's rapid-fire, sometimes chaotic policymaking process and see the rally as fragile. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq composite index advanced past their previous highs into uncharted territory on Friday. Yet traders and investors remain wary of what may lie ahead. Trump's April 2 reciprocal tariffs on major trading partners roiled global financial markets and put the S&P 500 on the threshold of a bear market designation when it ended down 19 per cent from its February 19 record-high close. This week's leg up came after a US-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Iran brought an end to a 12-day air battle that had sparked a jump in crude prices and raised worries of higher inflation. But a relief rally started after Trump responded to the initial tariff panic that gripped financial markets by backing away from his most draconian plans. JP Morgan Chase, in the midyear outlook published on Wednesday by its global research team, said the environment was characterised by 'extreme policy uncertainty.' 'Nobody wants to end a week with a risk-on tilt to their portfolios,' said Art Hogan, market strategist at B. Riley Wealth. 'Everyone is aware that just as the market feels more certain and confident, a single wildcard policy announcement could change everything,' even if it does not ignite a firestorm of the kind seen in April. Part of this wariness from institutional investors may be due to the magnitude of the 6 per cent S&P 500 rally that followed Trump's re-election last November and culminated in the last new high posted by the index in February, said Joseph Quinlan, market strategist at Bank of America. 'We were out ahead of our skis,' Quinlan said. A focus on deregulation, tax cuts and corporate deals brought out the 'animal spirits,' he said. Then came the tariff battles. Quinlan remains upbeat on the outlook for US stocks and optimistic that a new global trade system could lead to US companies opening new markets and posting higher revenues and profits. But he said he is still cautious. 'There will still be spikes of volatility around policy unknowns.' Overall, measures of market volatility are now well below where they stood at the height of the tariff turmoil in April, with the CBOE VIX index now at 16.3, down from a 52.3 peak on April 8. Unstable markets 'Our clients seem to have become somewhat desensitised to the headlines, but it's still an unhealthy market, with everyone aware that trading could happen based on the whims behind a bunch of' social media posts, said Jeff O'Connor, head of market structure, Americas, at Liquidnet, an institutional trading platform. Trading in the options market shows little sign of the kind of euphoria that characterised stock market rallies of the recent past. 'On the institutional front, we do see a lot of hesitation in chasing the market rally,' Stefano Pascale, head of US equity derivatives research at Barclays, said. Unlike past episodes of sharp market selloffs, institutional investors have largely stayed away from employing bullish call options to chase the market higher, Pascale said, referring to plain options that confer the right to buy at a specified future price and date. Bid/ask spreads on many stocks are well above levels O'Connor witnessed in late 2024, while market depth — a measure of the size and number of potential orders — remains at the lowest levels he can recall in the last 20 years. 'The best way to describe the markets in the last couple of months, even as they have recovered, is to say they are unstable,' said Liz Ann Sonders, market strategist at Charles Schwab. She said she is concerned that the market may be reaching 'another point of complacency' akin to that seen in March. 'There's a possibility that we'll be primed for another downside move,' Sonders addded. Mark Spindel, chief investment officer at Potomac River Capital in Washington, said he came up with the term 'Snapchat presidency' to describe the whiplash effect on markets of the president's constantly changing policies on markets. 'He feels more like a day trader than a long-term institutional investor,' Spindel said, alluding to Trump's policy flip-flops. 'One minute he's not going to negotiate, and the next he negotiates.' To be sure, traders seem to view those rapid shifts in course as a positive in the current rally, signaling Trump's willingness to heed market signals. 'For now, at least, stocks are willing to overlook the risks that go along with this style and lack of consistent policies, and give the administration a break as being 'market friendly',' said Steve Sosnick, market strategist at Interactive Brokers. — Reuters
Malay Mail
an hour ago
- Malay Mail
Trump scores win as Supreme Court limits judges, yet birthright citizenship policy remains in limbo
Trump directive would limit birthright citizenship Supreme Court did not decide legality of directive Court's ruling leaves room to maintain block on policy WASHINGTON, June 28 — The US Supreme Court's landmark ruling blunting a potent weapon that federal judges have used to block government policies nationwide during legal challenges was in many ways a victory for President Donald Trump, except perhaps on the very policy he is seeking to enforce. An executive order that the Republican president signed on his first day back in office in January would restrict birthright citizenship — a far-reaching plan that three federal judges, questioning its constitutionality, quickly halted nationwide through so-called 'universal' injunctions. But the Supreme Court's ruling on Friday, while announcing a dramatic shift in how judges have operated for years deploying such relief, left enough room for the challengers to Trump's directive to try to prevent it from taking effect while litigation over its legality plays out. 'I do not expect the president's executive order on birthright citizenship will ever go into effect,' said Samuel Bray, a Notre Dame Law School professor and a prominent critic of universal injunctions whose work the court's majority cited extensively in Friday's ruling. Trump's executive order directs federal agencies to refuse to recognise the citizenship of children born in the United States who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also called a 'green card' holder. The three judges found that the order likely violates citizenship language in the US Constitution's 14th Amendment. The directive remains blocked while lower courts reconsider the scope of their injunctions, and the Supreme Court said it cannot take effect for 30 days, a window that gives the challengers time to seek further protection from those courts. The court's six conservative justices delivered the majority ruling, granting Trump's request to narrow the injunctions issued by the judges in Maryland, Washington and Massachusetts. Its three liberal members dissented. The ruling by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who Trump appointed to the court in 2020, emphasised the need to hem in the power of judges, warning against an 'imperial' judiciary. Judges can provide 'complete relief' only to the plaintiffs before them, Barrett wrote. A host of policies That outcome was a major victory for Trump and his allies, who have repeatedly denounced judges who have impeded his agenda. It could make it easier for the administration to implement his policies, including to accelerate deportations of migrants, restrict transgender rights, curtail diversity and inclusion efforts, and downsize the federal government — many of which have tested the limits of executive power. In the birthright citizenship dispute, the ruling left open the potential for individual plaintiffs to seek relief beyond themselves through class action lawsuits targeting a policy that would upend the long-held understanding that the Constitution confers citizenship on virtually anyone born on US soil. Bray said he expects a surge of new class action cases, resulting in 'class-protective' injunctions. 'Given that the birthright-citizenship executive order is unconstitutional, I expect courts will grant those preliminary injunctions, and they will be affirmed on appeal,' Bray said. Some of the challengers have already taken that path. Plaintiffs in the Maryland case, including expectant mothers and immigrant advocacy groups, asked the presiding judge who had issued a universal injunction to treat the case as a class action to protect all children who would be ineligible for birthright citizenship if the executive order takes effect. 'I think in terms of the scope of the relief that we'll ultimately get, there is no difference,' said William Powell, one of the lawyers for the Maryland plaintiffs. 'We're going to be able to get protection through the class action for everyone in the country whose baby could potentially be covered by the executive order, assuming we succeed.' The ruling also sidestepped a key question over whether states that bring lawsuits might need an injunction that applies beyond their borders to address their alleged harms, directing lower courts to answer it first. States challenge directive The challenge to Trump's directive also included 22 states, most of them Democratic-governed, who argued that the financial and administrative burdens they would face required a nationwide block on Trump's order. George Mason University constitutional law expert Ilya Somin said the practical consequences of the ruling will depend on various issues not decided so far by the Supreme Court. 'As the majority recognises, states may be entitled to much broader relief than individuals or private groups,' Somin said. New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin, a Democrat who helped lead the case brought in Massachusetts, disagreed with the ruling but sketched out a path forward on Friday. The ruling, Platkin said in a statement, 'recognised that nationwide orders can be appropriate to protect the plaintiffs themselves from harm — which is true, and has always been true, in our case.' Platkin committed to 'keep challenging President Trump's flagrantly unlawful order, which strips American babies of citizenship for the first time since the Civil War' of 1861-1865. Legal experts said they expect a lot of legal maneuvering in lower courts in the weeks ahead, and the challengers still face an uphill battle. Compared to injunctions in individual cases, class actions are often harder to successfully mount. States, too, still do not know whether they have the requisite legal entitlement to sue. Trump's administration said they do not, but the court left that debate unresolved. Meanwhile, the 30-day clock is ticking. If the challengers are unsuccessful going forward, Trump's order could apply in some parts of the country, but not others. 'The ruling is set to go into effect 30 days from now and leaves families in states across the country in deep uncertainty about whether their children will be born as US citizens,' said Elora Mukherjee, director of Columbia Law School's immigrants' rights clinic. — Reuters
The Sun
2 hours ago
- The Sun
Serbian protesters issue election ultimatum amid corruption outcry
BELGRADE: Serbian protesters are expected to gather in their tens of thousands in the capital Belgrade on Saturday, issuing an 'ultimatum' for the government to call early elections after months of student-led strikes. Anti-graft protests have rocked the Balkan nation since November when a train station roof collapse in the northern city of Novi Sad killed 16 people -- a tragedy widely blamed on entrenched corruption. For more than half a year, students have blockaded universities and organised large demonstrations around the country, demanding a transparent investigation into the deaths. With little action from authorities, their focus shifted last month to calls for early parliamentary elections. Ahead of Saturday's protest, students issued the 'ultimatum' to President Aleksandar Vucic, with a deadline of 9 pm (1900 GMT), three hours after the protest is set to begin in one of Belgrade's main squares. Vucic responded on Friday, again rejecting the student's demands for immediate elections, having previously stated that a national poll would not be held before the end of 2026. 'The ultimatum was not accepted, you don't have to wait until 9 pm tomorrow,' he told state television station RTS. 'Foreign powers' The outcry over the Novi Sad tragedy has already toppled the country's prime minister, but the ruling party remains in power -- with a reshuffled government and the president at its heart. Vucic has repeatedly accused the protests, which have remained peaceful throughout, of being part of a foreign plot to destroy his government. 'The foreign powers sent an ultimatum through local henchmen,' Vucic said after attending a mass in the central Serbian city of Krusevac on Friday. 'People should not be afraid, only those who plan violence should be afraid.' More than a dozen people have been arrested in recent weeks, a crackdown that has now become a routine government reaction ahead of large demonstrations. In the latest arrests on Friday, five people were charged and held for allegedly plotting to overthrow the government, according to a statement from Serbia's Higher Court in Belgrade. 'Radicalisation' Students have also called for the removal of pro-government encampments outside parliament, which have been blocking a park and a major intersection in the city centre for months. Protesters warned of 'radicalisation' of the movement if their demands were not met. The police urged protesters to remain peaceful. 'Any attempt to attack the police, to storm any state institution, media outlet, or private property will not be tolerated by the Serbian police,' police director Dragan Vasiljevic said in a statement. Initial plans by Vucic's ruling party to host a counter-rally were scrapped, though party officials said they might visit their supporters' camps. Saturday's rally is expected to be the largest since March when 300,000 people gathered in Belgrade, according to an independent counting organisation. Earlier this month, local polls in two municipalities marked the first electoral clash between an opposition coalition and the Serbian Progressive Party, led by Vucic. The ruling party secured a narrow victory amid accusations of voter bribery and electoral interference -- similar to those following its win in the December 2023 parliamentary elections. As before, Vucic dismissed allegations of fraud.
