More stories

  • in

    Jury in El Salvador Convicts 3 Ex-Officers in 1982 Killings of Dutch Journalists

    A jury convicted the former military officers for the murder of four Dutch television journalists who were covering the Salvadoran civil war.A jury in El Salvador convicted three former senior military officers of murder in the 1982 killings of four Dutch journalists on Tuesday, according to the Comunicándonos Foundation, a nonprofit group that has long pursued justice in the case.The three officers — Gen. José Guillermo García, 91, a former defense minister; Col. Francisco Morán, 93, a former police director; and Col. Mario Adalberto Reyes Mena, 85 — each received 15-year prison sentences after a trial that took about 10 hours.The jury also condemned the government of El Salvador for delaying a resolution of the case for more than four decades. General García and Colonel Morán are in detention in El Salvador after being arrested in 2022, and Colonel Reyes Mena is in Virginia awaiting extradition, according to the Dutch government.The four young Dutch journalists — Koos Koster, Jan Kuiper, Joop Willemsen and Hans ter Laag — were working for a now-defunct Dutch broadcaster, covering a brutal civil war that killed tens of thousands of people.In Chalatenango, El Salvador, on March 17, 1982, they were traveling behind rebel lines with three guerrilla fighters. Soldiers from the Salvadoran army were waiting to ambush them and shot and killed the men, according to the Dutch government.The Dutch ambassador to Costa Rica and El Salvador, Arjen van den Berg, center, at the Judicial Center in Chalatenango, El Salvador, after the sentencing of three former military commanders on Tuesday.Marvin Recinos/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesAt the time, the Salvadoran army told the news media that the four journalists had died when guerrillas accompanying them opened fire on an army patrol. But a 1993 report by the United Nations Truth Commission for El Salvador concluded that the army had set up the ambush. The report also found that the killings were ordered by Colonel Reyes Mena, who had since moved to the United States.“Reporters who went to the scene in Chalatenango Province north of the capital found bloody clothing and 30 spent M16 shells near the spot where associates of the four men said they had been dropped off at 5 p.m.,” The New York Times reported in 1982, adding that residents of nearby villages had said they heard 20 minutes of gunfire.The Dutch journalists had been shot repeatedly at short range, the Times report said.The killings were a major story in the Netherlands, fueling widespread outrage. In the decades since, the Dutch government and organizations in El Salvador have continued to push for justice in the case.In a blog post before the trial on a Dutch government website, Arjen van den Berg, the country’s ambassador to Costa Rica and El Salvador, said he remembered the atmosphere in the Netherlands at the time. People were angry, he said, “partly because these men were just doing their jobs, but partly also because it was unimaginable for Dutch people that a government would kill journalists in cold blood.”Dutch officials expressed relief and gratitude for the sentence. “This is an important moment in the fight against impunity and in the pursuit of justice for the four Dutch journalists and their next of kin,” Caspar Veldkamp, the outgoing Dutch minister of foreign affairs, wrote on social media. More

  • in

    U.N. Orders Agencies to Find Budget Cuts, Including via Staff Moves From N.Y.

    The instructions from the office of Secretary General António Guterres were reviewed by The New York Times and came after President Trump ordered a review of U.S. funding to the agency.The United Nations, anticipating that President Trump will slash U.S. contributions to the global body, has told its departments to draw up plans for budget cuts, including through staff relocations from New York and Geneva to less-expensive cities.The instructions — outlined in a two-page memo dated April 25 that was reviewed by The New York Times — were sent from Secretary General António Guterres’s office to the heads of all agencies that report directly to him. The memo set a May 15 deadline for all proposals so that they could be added to the 2026 budget.“Your objective is to identify as many functions as possible that could be relocated to existing lower-cost locations,” the memo reads, “or otherwise reduced or abolished if they are duplicative or no longer viable.”In February, President Trump signed an executive order calling for a review of the overall U.S. funding and ties to the U.N. He withdrew the United States from several U.N. organizations, including those dealing with human rights, women’s reproductive rights, climate change, Palestinian aid and global health. In his first term, he also reduced U.S. contributions to peacekeeping efforts.Three senior U.N. officials said on Tuesday that the drastic, cost-cutting measures laid out in the memo had caught the agency’s departments by surprise and went beyond what they had expected. The officials, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly, said the directive was largely viewed as a way for the U.N. to brace for potential additional cuts by Mr. Trump and to proactively insulate it from the financial blow.But the U.N. officials said the budget cuts were ordered only partly in response to Mr. Trump’s moves. The directive comes as the U.N. is adjusting to a host of financial problems, they said, from the withdrawal and reduction in financial contributions by major donors like the United States and Europe to a cash-flow crisis caused by member states’ not paying their annual dues on time and in full.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Europe can’t just hope for the best with Trump. Ukraine needs all the arms we can send | Frans Timmermans

    After US vice-president JD Vance’s speech in Munich last month, most European leaders came to the conclusion that our world has fundamentally changed. The Pax Americana that long ensured peace, security and freedom in Europe is over. Anyone who still doubted this will hopefully now realise, after the disgraceful treatment Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelenskyy endured last Friday at the White House, that we can no longer rely on the Americans for our collective security.We must hope for the best, but hope is not a policy. We – the Netherlands, the EU, and all western countries standing with Ukraine – must prepare for the worst. The question is this: how do we keep Ukraine free and independent, and how do we protect our economy, our freedom and democracy, and our borders?This begins with the awareness that our security is already directly threatened by Russia. Trump wants to do business over our heads with this country. It appears that he and Vladimir Putin have divided Europe into spheres of influence like two mob bosses in a low-budget movie. As the saying goes: if you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.The Netherlands is not an island in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean; we are fully exposed when geopolitical and economic storms brew on our continent. It is the Russian aggression in Ukraine that has made our energy prices rocket. We cannot batten down the hatches and wait for the storm to pass. We are a medium-sized country with significant European and international interests. It is high time we acted accordingly.But political divisions at the heart of our government are leaving us exposed. The biggest party in the coalition governing the Netherlands, the Party for Freedom (PVV), led by Geert Wilders, has a history of pro-Kremlin rhetoric. While other parties, such as the centre-right People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD), formerly led by Mark Rutte, are staunch advocates of unwavering support of Ukraine. Combined with an unelected prime minister, Dick Schoof, who serves no specific political party, the coalition government is rudderless and unstable.It is abundantly clear that our national scale is far too small to make a real difference. Today, we need the EU more than ever before. We must also work on closer ties with countries that share our sense of urgency and are not EU members, primarily the UK and Norway, but also Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The EU will also need to take a much firmer stance against member states such as Hungary that spare no effort in promoting Putin’s (and Trump’s) agenda.View image in fullscreenThe most urgent priority now is to support Ukraine. We must fill the gaps that Trump is leaving behind. Financially, this should not be too complicated, but in military terms, this is a different challenge. Russia will now intensify its attacks, so all available military equipment must be sent to Ukraine as quickly as possible. With additional financial support, we can also get the Ukrainian defence industry up and running at full capacity.The Russians are struggling more than it appears at first glance; sanctions are damaging the country, the losses are significant, and the war economy is creating large gaps elsewhere. Sanctions need to be scaled up much further, and all frozen Russian assets in the EU must be transferred to Ukraine immediately.EU member states must wake up and stop squabbling over trivial matters. The same goes for the Schoof cabinet. It is all hands on deck now. This means thinking creatively about European war bonds and finding the fastest possible way to bolster our defence in preparation for a confrontation in which the Americans may leave us to fend for ourselves. This requires investing in areas that the Americans currently cover within Nato. Moreover, it is vital for the overall resilience of Dutch society that defence investments do not come at the expense of our social safety net.In the longer term, we must first establish a partnership that provides the collective security guarantee of Nato without having to rely on the US. Crucial to this is the involvement of Britain and possibly Canada, and European countries that are not members of the EU. Therefore, it should go beyond the EU and perhaps also exclude countries, if these, such as Hungary or the nominally neutral Austria and Ireland, for example, do not want to participate.Second, it is of national security interest to make progress on a genuine energy union. High energy prices constitute the primary economic threat to this continent. This requires much more collective investment in energy networks, renewable energy, and also joint procurement of gas for as long as we need it.The Netherlands can play a leading role in all these areas, but it is not doing so. Because the coalition is deeply divided, the prime minister speaks too hesitantly, too late, and too ambiguously. Because the coalition is not allocating additional funds for Ukraine and is implementing utterly nonsensical cuts to the contributions to the EU, the words of support are literally and figuratively cheap. Because the largest coalition party is at best ambiguous and usually sides with Trump – who is now also siding with Putin – our government is adrift.Fortunately, there is still hope. The rudderless government may be on the brink of despair, but the people are not without hope, and our country is certainly not without prospects. The Dutch people see that the world order is changing. In such extraordinary, dangerous times, they deserve a decisive, united government.

    Frans Timmermans is the leader of the leftwing alliance of the Dutch Green party and the Labour party (GroenLinks/PvdA)

    Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More

  • in

    Gaza War Strains Europe’s Efforts at Social Cohesion

    Institutions meant to promote civility, from soccer to song, have come under severe stress from rising antisemitism and anti-immigrant politics.The various institutions of postwar Europe were intended to keep the peace, bring warring peoples together and build a sense of continental attachment and even loyalty. From the growth of the European Union itself to other, softer organizations, dealing with culture or sports, the hope has always been to keep national passions within safe, larger limits.But growing antisemitism, increased migration and more extremist, anti-immigrant parties have led to backlash and divisions rather than comity. The long war in Gaza has only exacerbated these conflicts and their intensity, especially among young Muslims and others who feel outraged by Israeli bombings and by the tens of thousands of deaths in Gaza, a large proportion of them women and children.Those tensions were on full display in the recent violence surrounding a soccer match between an Israeli and a Dutch team in Amsterdam, where the authorities are investigating what they call antisemitic attacks on Israeli fans, as well as incendiary actions by both sides. Amsterdam is far from the only example of the divisions in Europe over the Gaza war and of the challenges they present to European governments.The normally amusing Eurovision Song Contest, which was held this year in Malmo, Sweden, a city with a significant Muslim population, was marred by pro-Palestinian protests against Eden Golan, a contestant from Israel, which participates as a full member.The original lyrics to her song, “October Rain,” in commemoration of the 1,200 Israelis who died from the Hamas-led attack on Oct. 7, which prompted Israel’s response in Gaza, were rejected by organizers for their political nature, so were altered to be less specific. Her performance was met with booing and jeering from some in the audience, but she did receive a wave of votes from online spectators, pushing her to fifth place.It was hardly the demonstration of togetherness in art and silliness that organizers have always intended.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    ‘The Safekeep’ Is a Story in the Shadow of Anne Frank

    In Yael van der Wouden’s debut novel, “The Safekeep,” the writer spins an erotic thriller out of the Netherlands’ failure to face up to the horrors of the Holocaust.The author Yael van der Wouden stood in her slippers at the front door of a canal house in the Dutch city of Utrecht. “Let me prepare you for the journey ahead,” she said, smiling. “There will be a lot of stairs.”She turned and led the way through a long darkened hallway, up a narrow staircase, to another winding hallway, and up more stairs to reach her attic-level apartment in the back of the building.“My landlady calls it ‘het achterhuis,’” said van der Wouden, once inside the cozy interior with slanting roof beams, decorated with books and bric-a-brac. “She’s about 90, and I don’t think she quite understands what that means to me.”“Het Achterhuis,” is the Dutch title of Anne Frank’s famous World War II diary. In English, it is often translated as “the secret annex,” referring to the storage space where the teen diarist and her family hid to escape the Nazis for more than two years. But “achterhuis” is also just a term for the back part of a house, and van der Wouden, who is Israeli and Dutch, does not fault her landlady for missing the reference.“It feels like just another part of existing invisibly, where no one quite thinks about the full effect of their words,” van der Wouden said.“The Safekeep,” van der Wouden’s debut novel and one of six books shortlisted for the 2024 Booker Prize, is full of such clashing perspectives. Words that mean one thing to a character can hold explosive charge for another. Seemingly innocuous objects like silver spoons, or a single shard of broken china, become emotional land mines.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Greenpeace Tries a Novel Tactic in Lawsuit Over Dakota Access Pipeline

    The environmental group, which is being sued by the pipeline company in North Dakota, threatened to use new European rules to try to limit potential damages.The NewsGreenpeace recently unveiled a new strategy for fighting a costly lawsuit by an energy company that the group contends is designed to silence critics of the oil industry.The suit, first filed in federal court in 2017, alleged that Greenpeace had incited the protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North Dakota in 2016 and 2017, and it sought $300 million in damages.Greenpeace disputes the claims. It says the lawsuit is designed to essentially force the environmental group to go out of business with an expensive legal fight.Its new tactic, led by Greenpeace International in Amsterdam, would use the European legal system to try to minimize the financial consequences of a potential loss in United States courts. In a letter to the company last month, lawyers for the group cited a new European Union directive aimed at curbing SLAPP suits, or Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation. Those are defined as meritless suits that seek to shut down civil society groups.The letter called on the company suing it, Dallas-based Energy Transfer, to drop its suit against Greenpeace International, and to pay damages for its legal costs, or risk a countersuit under the new European rules.The BackgroundAfter the Dakota Access Pipeline was approved in 2016, it became the target of high-profile protests by Native American tribes and environmental groups. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe argued that the pipeline encroached on reservation land and endangered the water supply. Thousands of its supporters joined a nearly eight-month protest encampment near the reservation, and tribal leaders mounted their own legal challenge to the project.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Nicki Minaj Apologizes for Postponed Show After Video Appears to Show Arrest

    In a video posted live by Minaj to Instagram, the rapper appeared to step into a law enforcement vehicle after being accused of “carrying drugs.”The rapper Nicki Minaj apologized to fans in Manchester, England, for postponing a show scheduled in the city for Saturday night after footage posted to one of her social media accounts appeared to show her being arrested by Dutch authorities for drug possession.The live Instagram video, captured by CNN and shared more broadly, is no longer available on Minaj’s account. It appears to show Minaj, who had performed Thursday in Amsterdam, being directed toward a van by law enforcement officers.“You’re under arrest,” one of the officers says in the video, informing Minaj that she will be taken to the police station. When Minaj asks why, he responds, “because you’re carrying drugs.”The video then shows Minaj denying the accusation and repeatedly requesting a lawyer before eventually stepping into the van. Another video posted to her Instagram account appears to show a man telling Minaj that her luggage will need to be searched.Neither the Dutch Police nor the Royal Netherlands Marechaussee, a branch of the Dutch military, would respond to questions about potential charges against Minaj when reached by phone late on Sunday evening.Minaj has since been released and is continuing the Pink Friday 2 World Tour, according to posts and videos shared by the tour account.On Saturday, the Co-op Live arena in Manchester said in a statement that Minaj’s show scheduled for that evening had been postponed. “Despite Nicki’s best efforts to explore every possible avenue to make tonight’s show happen, the events of today have made it impossible,” the venue said. “We are deeply disappointed by the inconvenience this has caused.”Fans leaving the Co-op Live venue after the Nicki Minaj show was postponed.Temilade Adelaja/ReutersMinaj also apologized to fans in statement, saying that she had sat in a jail cell for five to six hours.“Please please please accept my deepest & most sincere apologies. They sure did know exactly how to hurt me today but this too, shall pass,” Minaj said, noting that she would make up the date for the performance in either June or July.On Sunday, another video posted to X showed Minaj meeting with screaming fans outside her hotel in Manchester. The footage shows two men repeatedly trying to hush the crowd, warning that if they did not calm down then she would go inside.“I can honestly tell you that I love you,” she said.Nina Siegal More

  • in

    Eurovision Disqualifies Joost Klein Hours Before Final

    The competition’s organizers said that Swedish police were investigating the singer Joost Klein and that it would be inappropriate for him to take part in Saturday’s final.Just hours before this year’s Eurovision Song Contest final was scheduled to begin in Malmo, Sweden, on Saturday, the glitzy singing competition was thrown into crisis after organizers banned the Netherlands’ entry from taking part.On Friday, the Dutch musician, Joost Klein, whose songs mix pop with hyperfast beats, did not appear for a scheduled rehearsal to perform his song “Europapa,” which was then among the favorites to win.Shortly afterward, the European Broadcasting Union, which organizes the contest, said in a statement that it was “investigating an incident” involving the Dutch artist. On Saturday morning, a Swedish police spokeswoman said in an email that officers were investigating a man “suspected of unlawful threats” toward a Eurovision employee and had passed a file to prosecutors to consider charges.Eurovision organizers said in a new statement that it was Klein under investigation, and that “it would not be appropriate” for the musician to compete in Saturday’s final while a legal process was underway.The decision caused an immediate uproar among Eurovision fans on social media, many of whom were backing Klein to win.AVROTROS, the Dutch public broadcaster that picked Klein to represent the Netherlands at Eurovision, also objected to his disqualification. In an emailed statement, a spokesperson for the broadcaster said that Eurovision’s action was “disproportionate” and that it was “shocked by the decision.”“We deeply regret this and will come back to this later,” the spokesperson added. More