Mayer announces candidacy for FIA president
The 59-year-old, a former Formula One steward and son of former McLaren principal Teddy Mayer, left the FIA last November.
He said then that he had been fired via text message by an assistant to Ben Sulayem. The FIA dispute that he was sacked by text.
"What I see is a failure in leadership right now," he told a press conference at a hotel near the British Grand Prix circuit Silverstone, adding that he had been working on his campaign for six months.
He described his bid as a Herculean task with the deck stacked in Ben Sulayem's favour, given recent statute changes, and only five months to campaign and win votes from member federations.
Mayer did not say who would be on his presidential list, a requirement for standing, which he admitted still had some open positions.
He said he had good support from Motorsport UK and had informed Stefano Domenicali, chief executive of Liberty Media-owned Formula One, of his plans.
"The job now is to go out and explain to lots of small clubs around the world ... why we can do a better job," said Mayer. "Explaining how we can bring value and restructure the FIA to do a better job.
"I do feel restructuring needs to happen."
Ben Sulayem, an Emirati, has already announced he is seeking a second term and until Friday had no declared opponent, with Spain's double world rally champion Carlos Sainz Sr. recently deciding not to stand.
Mayer said he would have stood even if Sainz had decided to run. He also dismissed any suggestion of a conflict of interest regarding the historic family connection with McLaren.
The FIA is the governing body for F1, the world rally championship and Formula E among other series. — Reuters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Observer
15 hours ago
- Observer
Why celebrity opinions don't matter
We live in strange times. People are so desperate for famous people to agree with them that they're now using AI to fake what TV presenters say. This needs to stop. I've just received a WhatsApp with Piers Morgan telling me how much he likes Islam. It's clearly an AI fake but I'm not interested in Piers Morgan's views either way. Does it really matter if Piers Morgan likes or hates Islam? Does it matter if he supports Israel or Palestine? Or whether he prefers fish and chips to chicken curry? The answer should be obvious: no, it doesn't matter at all. The same goes for any famous person on TV. Oprah Winfrey's views on world politics are no more important than anyone else's. She's good at making TV shows, but that doesn't make her an expert on anything else. Recently, social media has been flooded with fake audio clips. These use AI to make it sound like Morgan is praising Islam or supporting causes he's never actually backed. This is dishonest and completely pointless. As a practising Muslim, I don't understand why some Muslims need approval from a BBC presenter. Islam has existed for over 1,400 years without needing British TV personalities to validate it. We don't need Morgan's opinion on our faith. When people use AI to fake medical advice or promote dodgy investments, we rightly call it dangerous. So why is it acceptable to fake religious or political endorsements? This double standard makes no sense. Here's something most people already know but don't like to admit: Western media lies. These outlets have their own agendas and will twist facts or leave out important information when it suits them. Most British people understand that politicians lie to us every day. We expect it. Piers Morgan is good at his job. He knows how to create controversy and keep people watching. Political debates on TV are just entertainment now. We don't take what they say seriously. So why do we care what these same media figures think about important issues? Why seek approval from a system we know can't be trusted? It's completely illogical. Morgan is good at his job. He knows how to create controversy and keep people watching. These are useful skills for a TV presenter. But being entertaining doesn't make him an expert on religion, politics, or social issues. Just because someone appears on TV regularly doesn't mean they know what they're talking about. Their main skill is attracting viewers and selling advertising space. It's time to stop caring what TV personalities think about serious matters. Important issues need proper consideration based on facts and real expertise, not casual comments from entertainers trying to fill airtime. Next time you find yourself caring about what Morgan or Oprah thinks about something important, ask yourself why. Instead of using AI to fake celebrity endorsements, why not spend that energy learning about issues properly? Talk to real experts. Read primary sources. Build arguments based on evidence, not manufactured celebrity approval. Western media will keep prioritising entertainment over truth. With AI getting better, the lies will become more convincing. This makes it even more important that we learn to judge information by its content, not by who appears to be saying it. Next time you find yourself caring about what Morgan or Oprah thinks about something important, ask yourself why. Their opinions are no more valuable than those of anyone else you might meet, and much less valuable than those of people who actually know what they're talking about. We need to stop treating entertainers as authorities and TV appearances as qualifications for serious discussion. Media personalities are there to entertain us, not to guide our thinking on complex issues. The sooner we realise this, the sooner we can focus on what actually matters: forming our own opinions based on reliable information and genuine expertise, not celebrity approval.
Observer
15 hours ago
- Observer
Why China isn't lecturing trump about his costly bill
Berry Wang The writer is a researcher and a reporter for The New York Times As one of the largest holders of US debt for the past two decades, China has not shied away from lecturing the United States about its financial behaviour. Like a parent scolding a child for racking up credit card bills, China needled Washington to protect its assets during the 2013 debt ceiling impasse and blamed Americans for setting off the 2008 global financial crisis with their profligate spending. But as American lawmakers debated and ultimately passed, a giant domestic bill championed by President Donald Trump that is projected to add more than $3 trillion to the federal debt by 2034, China has remained largely silent despite the potential long-term risk it poses to its holdings. China's main concerns about its holdings has long been over the dollar's value and whether the United States will fail to pay its obligations, said Yasheng Huang, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 'These two concerns are far more material today,' he said. 'The dollar has already depreciated, dragging down the Chinese holdings. In terms of the other concern, I personally do not trust this administration to uphold rule of law and debt obligations'. In covering the debate, Chinese state media have emphasised how divisive the bill has been and the seeming futility of the American democratic process to reflect popular will. Reports described the debates as a 'political circus,' while Chinese pundits said the vote highlighted 'increasing polarisation' in the United States. But Chinese officials have not yet publicly criticised the Trump administration and could be focused on other considerations. China probably sees no reason to antagonise Trump by publicly criticising his bill when it is in a shaky truce with his administration in a trade war that had earlier seen both sides impose sky-high tariffs on each other's goods. The two sides have agreed to lift certain countermeasures and keep working towards a deal. Momentum may even be building towards a meeting between Trump and China's top leader, Xi Jinping. Beijing, which is trying to revive economic growth, can ill afford an extended trade war. Concerns over its treasury holdings are not top of mind. More pressing are the tariffs and efforts by the Trump administration to persuade other countries to restrict their own trade with China. 'China is still trying to maintain a fragile trade truce with the United States,' said Joe Mazur, an analyst at Trivium, a research firm. 'Criticising Trump's signature piece of legislation could anger him and torpedo recent diplomatic understandings'. Members of Congress give thumbs up as President Donald Trump signs his signature policy bill during a Fourth of July celebration event outside the White House in Washington, on Friday, July 4, 2025. (Valerie Plesch/The New York Times) From China's perspective, rather than fuel American economic growth, the measure could push Washington closer to a fiscal cliff and undermine its ability to compete with Beijing. 'The chances of Trump's success are at best uncertain,' said Shen Dingli, a scholar of international relations in Shanghai. Instead, the measure 'could indirectly help make China great again' by weakening the United States, he said. Crises and chaos in the United States feed into one of Xi's primary assertions about the state of the world, that the East is rising and the West is declining. China has highlighted the Trump administration's alienation of US allies and partners and disregard for global norms. On social media, one popular hashtag read: 'Big, Beautiful Bill will make 17 million people lose their health insurance'. Internet commenters also cheered on Elon Musk, who has described the bill as 'insane'. In contrast, Chinese analysts said, China has raised its debt levels, in part, to build infrastructure and to loan money to developing countries — spending that is geared towards expanding China's influence. China is also struggling with a growing mountain of debt because of borrowing by local governments, their investment vehicles and real estate developers. Yao Yang, an economist at Peking University, was skeptical that China stood to gain from any disruption caused by Trump's bill. He said the United States could continue to borrow for years to come as long as it remained the world's biggest consumer market. 'America's financial dominance can't be easily overturned and the same goes for the dollar's supremacy,' he said. Beijing has long complained that Washington has printed more money to serve its domestic needs without considering how it devalues the dollar and, by extension, foreign countries' holdings of US assets. But it has also been gradually reducing its holdings of US Treasury bonds, from a peak of $1.3 trillion more than a decade ago, to about $750 billion now, investing instead in other assets like gold. China is also invested in weakening what it calls the US dollar's hegemony as the world's leading currency for trade. That power fuels the world's dependency on American consumers, making major exporting nations like China 'more submissive' to the United States because of the threats of tariffs, said Henry Huiyao Wang, president of the Center for China and Globalization in Beijing. 'The United States is using the greenback and its large deficit financing to sustain its global power,' he said.
Observer
15 hours ago
- Observer
Israel kills starving Gazans gathering to collect food
In Gaza, a humanitarian disaster is unfolding. Under a tight Israeli siege, thousands of Palestinians are starving and facing deadly violence when they try to collect food. Civilians are being killed not in combat but while lining up for flour, water, or aid. These scenes are tragic, shocking and plague a population stripped of basic survival — yet the global response remains slow and inadequate. One of the deadliest incidents occurred on February 29, 2024, now known as the 'Flour Massacre.' On that day, Israeli forces opened fire on a crowd in Gaza City waiting for flour from an aid convoy. According to Al Jazeera, citing UN experts, at least 112 people were killed and hundreds more injured. The UN and rights groups described it as a massacre — a stark warning of the lethal risks for any Gazan attempting to gather food. Sadly, similar attacks continued. On June 17, 2025, Israeli tanks fired on civilians near food trucks in Khan Yunis, killing at least 59 and injuring more than 200, according to Reuters. Just a week later, the UN confirmed that over 400 Palestinians had been killed recently while trying to reach aid distribution centres. Then, on June 30, Israeli air strikes claimed 95 more lives — including 39 people at a seaside café. These were not military locations, but public places where desperate civilians sought sustenance. Such incidents raise grave concerns about the deliberate targeting of vulnerable populations and may amount to war crimes under humanitarian law. These attacks have not been limited to Israeli forces alone. According to AP News, American private contractors guarding aid sites in Gaza have fired live bullets at Palestinians trying to collect food. This involvement by foreign actors intensifies the crisis and prompts urgent questions about international responsibility. International reaction and legal scrutiny have been growing — though yet to change the situation on the ground. UN Secretary‑General António Guterres has repeatedly expressed deep alarm, calling the hunger crisis one of the worst humanitarian disasters in decades. UN Human Rights Chief Volker Türk described the killings of aid‑seekers as 'unconscionable' and UN agencies warned that using starvation as a weapon of war is strictly prohibited. Human rights organisations have produced damning reports. Human Rights Watch documented at least eight strikes on aid convoys or facilities — despite coordination efforts to prevent such attacks. Amnesty International accused Israel of deliberately inflicting starvation on a civilian population — calling it a crime of genocide. Their findings state that Israeli authorities had full awareness of the harm caused yet persisted regardless. In a rare move towards accountability, legal action has been initiated. On May 20, 2024, the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor requested arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant. The charges include war crimes and crimes against humanity related to the starvation campaign in Gaza. While this represents a major step in international justice, the violence has continued unabated. A Palestinian carries a sack of food items in Khan Younis. — Reuters Despite mounting evidence and global condemnation, major governments have largely failed to take meaningful action. The United States continues to provide military support and political cover to Israel. Critics warn this enables continued aggression and undermines international law. The muted response from many nations suggests that some lives — especially Palestinian lives — are treated as less valuable on the world stage. On the ground, the situation is dire. Gaza's healthcare system is on the verge of collapse due to shortages of medicine, clean water and electricity. Hospitals are overwhelmed with wounded civilians, many of whom were shot at aid queues. Children and elderly people are most at risk, suffering from malnutrition, dehydration and fear. The world must act now — decisively and collectively. A full and immediate ceasefire is needed to halt the bloodshed. Humanitarian aid must be granted safe and unrestricted access. Donor nations should insist on protection for civilians and accountability for violations. And individuals and organisations responsible for war crimes — including those using starvation as a weapon — must face justice, regardless of rank or nationality. If the world does not stand up today, the tragedies in Gaza will not only stain the current generation but also set a precedent that civilian suffering is acceptable in future conflicts. For Gaza's starving and bereaved families, indifference is not only cruel — it is complicity.
