Home Blog Page 350

Hostages Still Held in Gaza Cast Shadow Over Passover in Israel

0


When Yona Schnitzer, a marketing writer from Tel Aviv, attended the traditional Passover Seder meal last year, he said a special prayer for the return of all of the hostages still being held by Palestinian militants in Gaza.

He had thought their freedom would be secured by Passover 2025, but that did not happen.

“It’s become so normalized that there are hostages in Gaza,” said Mr. Schnitzer, 36. “It’s surreal and heartbreaking.”

On Saturday evening, Israelis observed the beginning of Passover, the weeklong Jewish festival of freedom, for the second time since the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023, attack that ignited the war in Gaza. The holiday is usually a celebration of the biblical story of the ancient Israelites being liberated from slavery in Egypt, with families gathering to retell that story, sing songs and eat special foods.

But for many Israelis, the continuing captivity of the hostages has made it difficult to feel the joy of the holiday.

“We will mark the holiday. We won’t celebrate it,” said Orly Gavishi-Sotto, 47, a college administrator from northern Israel. “We can only celebrate when all the hostages are home.”

Ms. Gavishi-Sotto said her family would put an empty chair at the Seder table, symbolizing the hostages in Gaza who could not be with their families.

The Israeli government has said that it believes that 24 of the 59 remaining hostages are still alive.

On Saturday evening, as Israelis gathered with their families to mark Passover, Hamas released a new video showing one of those hostages, Idan Alexander. In a statement distributed by a hostage advocacy group, Mr. Alexander’s family asked the news media not to circulate the footage.

In January, Israeli and Hamas negotiators agreed to a cease-fire that was supposed to lead to the freedom for the rest of the hostages. Thirty living hostages and the bodies of eight others were returned during the initial six weeks of the agreement, but Israel resumed attacks on Gaza on March 18 after the two sides failed to agree on an extension of the truce.

Some 1,200 people were killed in Israel in the October 2023 attack, according to the government. More than 50,000 people in Gaza have been killed since the start of the war, according to the territory’s health ministry, which does not differentiate between civilians and combatants in casualty counts. Since the cease-fire fell apart, more than 1,500 people in Gaza have been killed, the ministry says.

Dani Miran, 80, whose son Omri Miran is a hostage in Gaza, said he was planning a simple Seder with his family and trying to reassure his granddaughters that their father would come home.

Omri Miran, now 48, was taken by Palestinian militants on Oct. 7, 2023, from Kibbutz Nahal Oz near the Israeli border with Gaza. He; his wife, Lishay Miran-Lavi; and their two daughters, Roni and Alma, were initially held at gunpoint, according to family members, but only he was forced to Gaza.

“Omri has been in the tunnels for over a year and a half,” Mr. Miran said. “I don’t know what his mental state is. I can only hope he’s strong enough to endure this tragedy.”

The Hostages Families Forum, a group that represents the relatives of many captives, called on Israelis to hold Seders in an outdoor plaza in Tel Aviv that has come to be known as “Hostages Square.” The group described Passover this year as “another Festival of Freedom without true freedom.”

Odie Arbel, 77, a resident of Kibbutz Yiftah in northern Israel, said his family would be using a hostage-themed Haggadah, the text read during the Seder, which tells the story of the Israelites’ liberation.

“A key principle of Judaism and Israeli identity is the redeeming of captives,” he said.

More than 68 percent of Israelis say they believe freeing hostages is more important than removing Hamas from power, according to a survey published by The Israel Democracy Institute on Thursday.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel has said the war will not end until Hamas’s military wing and Gaza government are dismantled. Hamas has said it will not free all of the hostages unless Israel ends the war permanently.

Mr. Arbel, who is critical of the government, said while he was reflecting on the plight of the hostages this Passover, he was also thinking about the suffering of Palestinian civilians in Gaza and the West Bank.

“I’m thinking about the difficulties of both peoples,” he said.



Source link

The 2025 Masters In Photographs

0


The Masters Tournament is a symbolic start of spring in North America, and the hundreds of acres of magnificent flora at Augusta National Golf Club — azaleas, pink dogwood, yellow jasmine, magnolia and oak trees, and hundreds more varieties of flowers, shrubs and trees for which the course’s 18 holes are famously named — are a breathtaking backdrop for the first major tournament of the men’s golf season.

Justin Rose began Saturday’s third round at eight under par, followed closely by the two-time U.S. Open winner Bryson DeChambeau at seven under and the 2022 Masters runner-up Rory McIlroy tied with Corey Connors at six under. Scottie Scheffler, the 2022 and 2024 Masters champion, was in a four-way tie for fifth at five under par.

Rose, a 44-year-old Englishman, has led or shared the lead after a round at the Masters 10 times, including on both Thursday and Friday, but has never won a green jacket. He finished as a runner-up in 2015 and again in 2017, when he lost in a playoff to Sergio Garcia.



Source link

Inside Mohamed Salah’s contract saga: Lawyer’s concerns, Saudi interest – and a deal that pleases everyone

0


In the end, the news that Mohamed Salah will remain at Liverpool was delivered with a humorous tagline.

“More in than out,” read the message across the club’s social media pages at 8am on Friday, around 36 hours after reports in the forward’s homeland of Egypt first suggested he had agreed to extend his eight-year stay at Anfield.

It was a play on words, nodding to Salah’s comments in November when his future on Merseyside felt far more tenuous. The fact that he felt “more out than in” after scoring two crucial goals in a 3-2 come-from-behind win at Southampton that day was confirmation that the process of his contract negotiations has not exactly been smooth. Though Liverpool always felt confident a successful resolution would be reached, that scenario was not inevitable.

Now, however, the deal is done.

Salah has signed a two-year extension, with no breaks or release clauses, on terms very similar to the ones that almost certainly made him the second-highest-paid player in the Premier League behind Manchester City striker Erling Haaland. While his previous contract included a basic weekly salary of £350,000 ($480,000), when bonuses and performance-related incentives were taken into account, Salah’s package was worth far more. Including external commercial endorsements, some of which also had performance-related clauses, he earned up to £1million per week.

This new contract’s lucrative nature reflects Salah’s status and his ongoing excellence, even though he’ll turn 33 in June. After scoring 243 goals in 394 games, he is set to complete a decade’s service at Anfield.

Discussions on this latest deal have been a drawn-out process, rather than there being any breakthrough ‘moment’, and have taken nearly a year. The path has not been straightforward.

The Athletic has talked to figures with intimate knowledge of those negotiations, who spoke to us on condition of anonymity to protect relationships, to understand why they took so long, how both parties approached them and what ultimately clinched an agreement.


Ramy Abbas, the Colombian lawyer who is Salah’s long-time representative, does not like discussing sensitive matters on his phone. For him, it is convenient that services such as WhatsApp are banned from receiving or making calls in the United Arab Emirates, where he lives.

Though messages are permitted, hundreds of them are usually left unread on his accounts, many from potential commercial partners looking to work with his most famous client. A note on his WhatsApp profile warns: “Voice notes ignored. If you’re late, I will leave.”

Abbas is transactional, he likes efficiency and he prefers to meet in person.

When Liverpool signed Salah in the summer of 2017, their sporting director at the time, Michael Edwards, and chief scout Dave Fallows flew to Dubai out of respect for Abbas. They wanted to show him how keen they were to sign Salah from Roma.

Having arrived in the evening when it was already dark, they headed home to England a few hours later without ever taking their jumpers off. On that return journey, the pair joked they must be the only visitors to leave the Gulf resort without experiencing any sun on their backs.

That negotiation was relatively straightforward due to Salah’s enthusiasm for a return to the Premier League, where he felt he had much to prove having barely played during a previous spell with Chelsea.

When Liverpool’s new sporting director, Richard Hughes, picked up the phone to introduce himself to Abbas in July last year, however, there was much work to do.

Hughes had inherited significant challenges at Liverpool, starting with the recruitment of a manager/head coach to succeed Jurgen Klopp, who stepped down at the end of last season after almost nine years. Following the hiring of Feyenoord coach Arne Slot to fill that vacancy, Hughes moved on to player retention: as with Salah, there was only 11 months left on the contracts of the team’s captain, Virgil van Dijk, and his deputy, Trent Alexander-Arnold, the Liverpudlian local hero.

Alexander-Arnold’s case was different to the others in that he was in his mid-twenties, and had active interest from Real Madrid. Salah and Van Dijk were in their early thirties, and while still performing at an elite level, Liverpool were conscious that their previous contracts had been agreed when both were at the peak of their powers.

The mantra from Liverpool and the club’s owners at Fenway Sports Group (FSG) was the need to ignore the question of, ‘What looks like the right decision today?’, and rather frame it as, ‘What will look like the right decision in future?’.


Virgil van Dijk was also holding contract talks (Ryan Pierse/Getty Images)

That first conversation between Hughes and Abbas was brief and casual, with the sporting director promising that he would be in touch again soon to discuss Salah’s future. Like Edwards and Fallows had years earlier, Hughes would subsequently travel to Dubai to see Abbas, going twice before the end of 2024.

The first meeting, in late September, was held in the bar of one of the city’s quieter restaurants but the discussion was again short and informal until Hughes asked Abbas whether Salah wanted to stay at Liverpool. Abbas told him that he did, but the sporting director flew back to the UK with Abbas concerned the club might not be willing to maintain his client’s level of remuneration.

Abbas was impressed by Hughes but was left asking himself whether Liverpool valued Salah quite as much as they used to. He wondered whether the lack of commitment represented a hostile act.

As far as Salah was concerned, he was operating at the same level as the best players on the planet and showing no signs of slowing up, despite a disappointing end to last season after sustaining a hamstring injury at the Africa Cup of Nations in January 2024. The goals and assists were flowing.

Salah and Abbas understood the player’s salary would be in line with what he might achieve in the future but they wanted to sustain his position as one of world football’s best-paid players.

Liverpool, for their part, maintain that a pay cut was never on the agenda and that they always wanted to keep Salah. They had no issue with Salah pushing for the best possible terms and FSG had, after all, sanctioned lucrative deals for players — including Salah — worth the investment. They were also conscious of the need to try to find common ground with Abbas before tabling a formal offer.

There was also an acknowledgement, however, that any deal could not run counter to FSG’s sustainable financial model and had to be in the best interests of the club. For Liverpool’s owners, this principle could not be sacrificed, regardless of how valuable Salah was to the team’s chances of on-pitch success.


Richard Hughes, Liverpool’s sporting director (John Powell/Liverpool FC via Getty Images)

Salah thought the best years of his career were still to come.

Until Manchester City’s Rodri won it at age 28 last year, Ballon d’Or winners over the previous decade had all been in their early to mid-thirties and he wasn’t turning 33 until June 2025. Salah believed that his goals fuelling a successful Liverpool side would allow him to follow legends such as Lionel Messi, Cristiano Ronaldo, Luka Modric and Karim Benzema in winning that award, recognising the best footballer of the previous 12 months.

Hughes had travelled to that first meeting alone but Abbas wondered about Edwards’ involvement behind the scenes. Though he now officially worked for FSG, rather than the club, it was ultimately his responsibility to manage the budgets in the organisation’s football interests. Liverpool were not in financial distress. Though the club was expected to post a loss before tax for the 2023-24 season, it remained well within the limits for profit and sustainability rules (PSR) for the following campaign.

When Salah last renewed with Liverpool in July 2022, a deal that made him the highest-paid player in the club’s history, the contract was brokered and signed off by FSG president Mike Gordon. Julian Ward had succeeded Edwards as Liverpool’s sporting director but the meatier conversations were between Gordon and Abbas. That negotiation was a slog and Abbas and Salah both felt that the player’s future lay elsewhere just three weeks before an agreement was reached.

Abbas was unsure whether a resolution would have been found had Edwards led that process. He had brokered a complex package that was realistically achievable but, on a basic level, more lucrative than the figure suggested publicly. He was proud of the deal, realising that the club and their owners had extended themselves as far as they could to keep Salah, and even allowed the prestigious Harvard Business School in the United States to turn it into a case study.


Mohamed Salah signs his previous contract in 2022, along with Ramy Abbas (facing away from camera), and club officials Jonathan Bamber and Julian Ward (Nick Taylor/Liverpool FC via Getty Images)

The revelation that FSG had authorised a record-breaking deal to keep Liverpool’s star man meant it was more difficult for any of its critics to accuse it of being tight with money but it also suited the owners to keep the figures lower. If it was known that Salah was earning considerably more than some of his team-mates, there was a danger that Liverpool’s pay structure would spiral out of control.

FSG brought Edwards back into the organisation in March last year to try to re-establish a chain of command that existed at Liverpool before it became a manager-led operation under Klopp. The owners knew how ruthless Edwards could be. Yet beyond him and Hughes, Abbas could not shake the feeling that Gordon would also still be involved when it came to the final figures, if the negotiations ever got to that stage. FSG’s money was ultimately Gordon’s, and he would be the one signing off any deal.


In a second Dubai meeting between Abbas and Hughes in October, the conversation didn’t move on very far, with the lawyer concluding the discussion was light on meaningful content. It was his view that negotiations had not even really started. Abbas’ policy had always been to let the club make the first move, allowing him to see clearly how highly they valued his client. The lack of pace or urgency worried him.

Towards the end of November, Abbas did not know how much Liverpool were willing to pay Salah or how long they wanted him to stay. Though he was told there was an offer in the making, nothing happened. He was confident Liverpool would deliver on their promise eventually, but was increasingly beginning to think it would only be done to save face, allowing the club to claim they had tried to keep Salah — even though they knew the offer made to him would be rejected.

This explains why, on November 24, after he’d scored twice in the second half to inspire that win at Southampton, the player decided to speak to journalists about his future, telling them he was disappointed not to have received a new contract offer, before making his “more out than in” comments regarding the 2025-26 season.

Nothing that Salah says publicly is done without consideration. He is rarely impulsive and little is improvised. Initially, he planned to tell UK broadcaster Sky Sports about his frustrations but in the immediate post-match interview, he was not asked about his future. Outside the stadium, as he boarded the team bus, he asked print journalists whether they were willing to ask the difficult questions.

It was unusual to hear a player as private as Salah speak so openly. Yet on this occasion, he felt as though he was able to attack the situation because Abbas only represents him. Neither the player nor the lawyer had team-mates or other clients to think of at Liverpool.

Salah would subsequently receive criticism, notably from Sky Sports pundit Jamie Carragher, a former Liverpool defender, for speaking out. A comparison was drawn with Van Dijk, but Abbas had been told that the Dutchman had already received a contract offer while his client had not. Therefore, Salah had more of a reason to go public about his concerns.

Hughes had taken the view early on in the process that he had no desire to put anything relating to the contract talks in the public domain, reasoning that doing so would only cause issues for Salah (who he wanted to focus simply on scoring goals and winning games), new coach Slot or the team as a whole.

This often meant the club being subjected to ferocious criticism, particularly on social media, for seemingly allowing talks to drift and uncertainty to foment. A fan’s banner also appeared on the Kop during a match at Anfield, nodding to Salah’s ‘bow and arrow’ goal celebration, urging FSG: “He fires a bow, now give Mo his dough!”

Yet, for Hughes, it was deemed a price worth paying, even after the Southampton game when the temptation to become drawn into a public debate may have been acute. Following that banner’s advice would have been the antithesis of FSG’s principles.


A banner on the Kop encouraging FSG to finalise Salah’s new contract (Visionhaus/Getty Images)

Abbas was open-minded about the length of any new contract, despite some claims the issue was causing a dispute. If the offer was right, Salah was willing to extend his stay at Liverpool by only one year. Yet as November turned into December, both parties were not even at the numbers stage.

It was certainly in Liverpool’s interest to ensure Salah’s deal was the last one signed among the three players approaching free agency. If he were the first and his salary remained high, the representative of every other player at the club would have a figure to work from during their own contract negotiations. It was Abbas’ view that Salah was the star player and, just as Andriy Shevchenko (a striker) had earned more money than Paolo Maldini (a defender) at Milan decades earlier, so Salah deserved the more lucrative package.

With the focus swinging from Liverpool’s table-topping surge in the Premier League to Salah’s future after his words with reporters in Southampton, champions Manchester City were the team’s next opponents at Anfield the following Sunday — December 1. Earlier in the week, Abbas had flown into London’s Heathrow Airport, taking a meeting with a sponsor in Manchester before a night back in London, where he ate at one of his favourite Japanese restaurants. He travelled north again by train, arriving in Liverpool a few hours before kick-off and heading into a hospitality suite at the stadium without anyone from the media noticing him.

Though Hughes had contacted him about Salah’s comments the previous weekend, there was no summit with the sporting director. After watching the match, which Liverpool won 2-0, with Salah scoring the late clincher, Abbas flew back the next morning to Dubai via Manchester, no closer to knowing where his client’s future lay.


Abbas had earmarked the start of February as a cut-off point for any decision. That would leave a reasonable amount of time to try to find a resolution with Liverpool, or failing that, reach an agreement somewhere else.

Foreign clubs could not officially talk to Salah until January. Abbas was planning to spend the first month of 2025 broadening his client’s options but he knew that Salah’s priority was to re-sign with Liverpool. He was enjoying playing under Slot, and admired the head coach’s sense of superiority — he did not seem to mind embracing the expectations that fall upon the club.

Previously, Klopp liked to cast himself as the underdog but Slot was the opposite: Liverpool were a global superpower who should be winning trophies. Salah respected that attitude. Whereas Klopp had regularly complained about the demanding fixture schedule, Slot seemed to relish it. There were no excuses — it was all on the manager, the staff and the players to find solutions.

By Christmas, Liverpool were leading the Premier League by four points and also top of the reformatted Champions League table. Salah was convinced this was his and the club’s season of opportunity. Abbas, by comparison, believed success did not always lead to good sporting or business decisions. Win the league and it would be a much easier argument for Liverpool to then let Salah go, as the fan pressure might not be as significant.

This potentially left a curious dynamic: could it be true that the better Salah and Liverpool did, the weaker his chances of staying at Anfield beyond the summer of 2025 became? Salah wanted to play at the highest level for as long as possible. If Liverpool ended up winning the Premier League and Champions League, then anywhere else at that point was down as far as he was concerned.

At the turn of the year, this made the Saudi Pro League a low-probability destination. Though it was a league with mind-boggling resources, Saudi Arabia was also a developing country in football terms. Salah also loved living in England, where his family privacy was respected — he has a wife and two daughters who are well settled in the county of Cheshire, just south of Liverpool — and he could focus on his career. Would that be the same if he returned to the Middle East?

In the long-term, Abbas was interested in the United States but Major League Soccer did not make any approaches. While there was press speculation that Paris Saint-Germain were another option, in early January, the French club’s president Nasser Al-Khelaifi denied he was targeting the player.

By mid-January, the player’s sponsors were getting twitchy, keen to know where Salah’s future lay. Abbas did the maths about what a move to France would mean — Salah’s endorsements would take a serious hit because Ligue 1 does not have the same global visibility as the Premier League. This contributed to Abbas being more inclined towards a longer stay in England, preferably with Liverpool. Salah would not trash his legacy by joining a rival, which ruled out both Manchester City and neighbours United.

There was some intrigue about Chelsea, where he’d played for just over a year across 2014 and early 2015 and was considered a failure as he was first loaned to Fiorentina and fellow Italians Roma, then sold to the latter in August 2016. Salah felt as though he still had something to prove at Stamford Bridge, yet any deal to go back was reliant on Chelsea abandoning a transfer strategy that focuses on signing young players. Any move to another English club was also made more complicated by the fact none of them were legally allowed to negotiate with Salah until May.


Salah feels he has unfinished business with Chelsea (Richard Heathcote/Getty Images)

By the end of January, Salah had told his family that there was a chance they would have to uproot from their Cheshire home. For Abbas, there were now two clear options: stay at Liverpool, or, somewhat reluctantly, agree a deal with the only alternative that could satisfy his financial expectations.

That meant one of the Saudi Arabian clubs, most likely reigning champions Al Hilal in the capital, Riyadh, who had wanted him for their Club World Cup campaign this summer. Though Abbas had held talks with other clubs owned by the state Public Investment Fund (PIF), he was increasingly beginning to think that the interest in his client was a charm offensive by the country’s football powers to show how highly Salah was valued.

Abbas did not have an offer in writing but the numbers the Saudis were talking about would remove any concerns about sponsors and how they would react. His contacts in Saudi Arabia told him that if Salah wanted to move there, then an offer would come, though Abbas was mindful of what might happen if it became clear first that a new deal was not happening at Liverpool. Potentially, this would leave Salah exposed and suddenly he would be in a buyers’ market.

Of more significance, however, was what was happening closer to home.

By early December, Liverpool had finally made Salah an offer. Abbas’ fears were allayed and he considered it something to work from. He was happier now with the way things were going because of the regularity of the contact with the club.

Liverpool seemed more serious but Haaland’s nine-year contract at City, announced in the middle of January, had the potential to complicate things. What was he earning? Abbas understood that any deal for Salah would be much shorter but if Haaland was setting the rate for forwards, given Salah was outscoring him and playing for a team higher up the table, his wage ought to be competitive with what City were paying the Norwegian.


By now, speculation was reaching fever pitch, something Abbas found faintly amusing.

When it was suggested by local media on Merseyside at the end of January that he was flying in for talks, Abbas posted a picture on Instagram of the view from his home in Dubai.

Halfway across the world, Salah continued to hit landmarks: after scoring his 50th European goal for Liverpool on January 21 in a Champions League game against Lille, Slot spoke about his “elite mindset”. Back in Dubai, Abbas had dinner with his wife before watching that game at their apartment. Despite making progress, he and Liverpool remained some distance away from an agreement.

After January, however, Salah did his best to divert questions about his future.

In an interview with Sky, he insisted he did not know which club he was going to be playing for after this season, suggesting that if these were his final months at Liverpool, he did not want his memories of the period attached to any wrangling related to an impending exit. Instead, the focus would be on his and the club’s attempts to bring more trophies to Anfield.

The change of tactics was also a reflection of momentum shifting, with progress being made between Hughes and Abbas. On Valentine’s Day, Abbas was in a somewhat combative mood, posting on Instagram about too many social media users craving “attention and validation” from people they’ve never met, before switching to X, where he was rather more complimentary about Liverpool’s head coach, who he said was “excellent at his job” after taking the team seven points clear at the top of the Premier League.

Slot, meanwhile, was making it clear in interviews that he wanted Salah to stay, and the determination of the player to continue with Liverpool reflected the respect the Dutchman had gained during his debut season.


Arne Slot has struck up a good relationship with Salah (Alex Livesey/Getty Images)

Outside the club, many were baffled why all this was taking so long. Internally, Liverpool were relaxed about leaving any decision about Salah as late as possible.

They knew the retention of Salah would allow Liverpool to continue as the “destination club” they had become under Klopp, but they considered it smart practice to wait, as the team had settled into a rhythm, and this time gave Hughes and other club officials more of an opportunity to be sure the player was capable of maintaining his performances at age 33 and beyond.

The deal, when it was announced just before 8am on Friday UK time, involved images of Salah sitting on a throne beneath the Anfield floodlights at night. They had been taken the previous evening, when it was easier to get him in and out of the stadium without being seen.

For Liverpool, the announcement was a vindication of the work Hughes and Edwards have done behind the scenes, and of the impression made by Slot since his arrival last summer. The club feel the same will be true of Van Dijk, whose own two-year contract extension is also nearing confirmation.

Salah’s team-mates had long expected him to commit his future to Liverpool, not just because of his contribution this season, but because of the relationship he has struck up with Slot and how positive he has been about the head coach helping to elevate his game over course of this season. They have also been struck by how Salah has embraced the responsibility that comes with being part of the club’s leadership group and the support he gives to the younger players as a role model.

When the video was released on Friday morning, Abbas was back in Dubai. In some ways, dealing with him had been simple because only he acts on Salah’s behalf, and Salah is a footballer who does not have an entourage interfering in his affairs, unlike other players of his stature.

Abbas has no emotional connection as to where Salah plays his football — for him, it is simply a case of getting the best deal for his client, and he knows Liverpool are good for business.

But Salah was desperate to stay, as were his family. In the video released by LFCTV, he spoke about how his daughter Makkah was “the happiest one in the family” when he told the family he was staying because she didn’t want to move away from her school and friends.

Despite some difficulties, the dialogue between Abbas and Hughes was respectful, helping them extend a relationship that, until this point, has worked out handsomely for everyone.

Additional reporting: James Pearce

(Top photo: Carl Recine/Getty Images; design: Eamonn Dalton)





Source link

In South Carolina, a Once Thriving Textile Hub Is Baffled by Trump’s Tariffs

0


In the 1970s, when the Upstate region of South Carolina was known as the textile capital of the world, Adolphus Jones would clock in for grueling summer shifts at one of the many mills in Union, his hometown.

Trains roared around him, transporting materials around the country. Chimney stacks on the red brick mills stretched dozens of feet high, like flag poles. This was textile country, and the cities of Union, Spartanburg and Greenville were at the heart of it.

By the end of the 1990s, automation and cheaper labor overseas took the industry away from the state. Union’s economy cratered, as did most of the region’s. But leaving Sunday church service on a recent afternoon, Mr. Jones, now 71 and retired, scoffed at President Trump’s vision of an American manufacturing revival through tariffs. The mill work had paid little, Mr. Jones recalled, and upward mobility was nonexistent.

“The textile industry is dead,” he said, buttoning his wool suit made in Italy. “Why would you want to bring it back here? Truthfully, why would the younger generation want to work there?”

Since taking office, Mr. Trump has imposed and suspended tariffs on imports at breakneck speed, with the goal of forcing companies to bring manufacturing back to the United States.

This week, he abruptly paused reciprocal tariffs for the next three months on some of America’s largest trading partners, dropping levels to a universal 10 percent, while exponentially raising tariffs on Chinese exports (though on Friday night he appeared to exempt many electronics like smartphones from most of those punishing tariffs on China).

But Mr. Trump’s goals have clashed with the current economic reality in places like Spartanburg and Greenville, S.C., heavily Republican areas where foreign companies have turned the onetime textile hubs into wealthy, industrial heavyweights. Should those levies go back into effect, locals worry that they will threaten the very businesses that saved the region, home to some 1.5 million residents, all to revive a bygone industry that few people miss.

Many retirees still remember what it was like to work in the textile mills. It had a negative connotation, said Rosemary Rice, 70, with some workers derogatively called “lint heads” because they would come home covered in cotton shreds. Many developed “brown lung disease,” or byssinosis, a respiratory condition caused by ingesting dust particles from fabric materials.

“I wouldn’t want my son working there,” said Ms. Rice, who lives in Union.

Today, companies like BMW and Michelin — from Germany and France — are the economic engines of the region. Since BMW opened its plant in Spartanburg County in the early ’90s, it has invested more than $14.8 billion into its South Carolina operations. The plant has more than 11,000 jobs, its largest single production facility in the world, according to the company. And it is the country’s largest car exporter by value, with $10 billion in shipments last year.

So the local business community was stunned when the White House’s top trade adviser, Peter Navarro, attacked BMW’s manufacturing process in an interview this week. He told CNBC on Monday that “this business model where BMW and Mercedes come into Spartanburg, S.C., and have us assemble German engines and Austrian transmissions — that doesn’t work for America. It’s bad for our economics. It’s bad for our national security.”

“There was widespread bewilderment in our community about that,” said Carlos Phillips, the president and chief executive of the Greenville Chamber of Commerce.

In response to Mr. Navarro’s comments, South Carolina’s governor, Henry McMaster, told reporters this week that ever since BMW arrived in the state with well-paying jobs, other companies had followed suit and “sent the word out around the world that this is a great manufacturing state.”

“They’ve done a lot of good for South Carolina,” Mr. McMaster, a Republican, said of BMW. Still, the governor has spoken positively about Mr. Trump’s tariffs, saying that he agreed with the president’s goal to make the United States more self-sufficient.

Business leaders have attributed the region’s success partly to South Carolina’s staunchly anti-union stance, and its legacy of a work force familiar with manufacturing. Last year, the governor drew the ire of labor organizers when he criticized unions in his State of the State address, saying, “We’ve gotten where we are without them.”

Now, leaders say that waging a trade war could undermine future recruitment of international investments and risk losing the jobs that are already in the region.

If tariffs raise prices on products and BMW’s sales drastically drop, they said, there’s a higher chance of layoffs at the Spartanburg plant. And it is difficult to imagine how cheap fabric or yarn manufacturing, the kind made in factories in Vietnam, Cambodia and China, could meaningfully fill the gaps, they added.

John Lummus, the president of Upstate SC Alliance, an economic development group, said that the region’s standard of living “has gone up so much more, that unless those companies are much more niche we’re not going to see companies come back and making T-shirts.”

In 1970, when there were dozens of textile manufacturers in Spartanburg, Mr. Lummus said, the per capita personal income in Spartanburg was about $3,250 — about $25,000 today, after adjusting for inflation. Today, he said, it is about $56,000.

David Britt, vice chair of the Spartanburg County Council and a Republican who has helped recruit businesses to the county since the ’90s, including BMW, put the prospect of a textile revival more bluntly: “It will never come back.”

Remnants of the old world are still visible: In Greenville, Judson Mill was turned into an 800,000-square-foot complex with apartments and retail space. It has an ax-throwing venue and an indoor playground for families. In Spartanburg, Beaumont Mill was transformed into offices for the Spartanburg Regional Healthcare System.

Union, which has about 8,000 residents and is about an hour drive from Spartanburg and Greenville, has not fared nearly as well. The sprawling Monarch Mill sits abandoned and for sale near downtown. Weeds have grown and crawled across the building. Less than a mile away is a faded, cracked mural depicting a train with smiling mill workers riding it.

Harold E. Thompson, the mayor of Union, said that when the mills completely left in the ’90s, the unemployment rate rose to about 22 percent. Many residents went to work in other towns, including Spartanburg, where the BMW plant was just opening. Others in the twilight of their lives tried to get by on unemployment benefits.

“It clawed out a big notch in our economy, and it took us awhile to get it back,” Mr. Thompson said.

In recent years, Union County has successfully recruited renewable power companies, bioscience and medical employers, and a Dollar General distribution center that employs nearly a thousand people. The mayor said he was interested in recruiting more well-paying jobs in an effort to curb its 26 percent poverty rate.

The textile industry continues to have a minor footprint in the region, but those companies now mostly focus on specialized products, such as fire-retardant or “Sunbrella” fabrics.

Chris Cole, a professor emerita of materials science and engineering at Clemson University, says manufacturing has evolved to the point where it may not even be called textiles. Arthrex Manufacturing in Pendleton, S.C., for example, makes surgical sutures, or threads that surgeons use for stitches, but they are not considered a textile company because the end product is medical, Ms. Cole said.

Some residents do welcome the possible return of a textile industry, but one that is more modern and high-tech.

“With the automation now and better working conditions, I think it would really be attractive to a lot of kids coming out of school who don’t want to go to college,” said Don Harkins, the chairman of the Greenville Textile Heritage Society.

Leroy Spencer, a retiree in Union whose sister used to work in a mill decades ago, said that “if Trump can bring that back, it would be amazing, and I think the economy would pick up around here and get better.”

But building those mills would still require bringing in materials from overseas, which, if Mr. Trump’s aims are realized, would be subject to tariffs and more expensive. “It’s very convoluted,” Ms. Cole said.

For Mr. Jones, who before retiring went on to work at Spartanburg Community College teaching job placement and helping people find work, the whole tariff back and forth has been baffling.

When he worked in a plant decades ago, he made tassels for graduation caps. Now, he says, more of Union’s next generation should be wearing those caps — not making them.

“Why would we want to go back?” he asked.

Audio produced by Adrienne Hurst.



Source link

The Real ID Deadline Is Coming. Here’s What You Need to Know.

0


For years, the U.S. government has warned travelers they will soon need a Real ID to board domestic flights, only to keep postponing the deadline. But “soon” appears to be real this time.

As of May 7, a standard driver’s license or state ID will no longer pass muster at airport security checkpoints, the Department of Homeland Security says. Passengers will instead need to present a security-enhanced, star-emblazoned Real ID or another approved form of identification like a passport.

The change, nearly 20 years in the making, is meant to enhance security by setting a more consistent standard for state-issued documentation, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

Here’s what you need to know about the coming deadline.

A Real ID is a federally compliant state-issued driver’s license, learner’s permit or nondriver ID. Real IDs are marked with a star — generally gold or black — and vary in appearance by state or territory.

Any resident of a U.S. state or territory who wishes to use a driver’s license or nondriver ID at a T.S.A. checkpoint must make sure that it is Real ID-compliant. Driver’s licenses that do not have the star are not Real IDs. Some noncompliant IDs will also have the words “Federal limits apply.”

The percentage of Americans who have updated their driver’s licenses to be Real ID compliant appears to vary widely by state. For example, in Pennsylvania, where there have been reports of long lines at license offices, it is a little more than 26 percent, the state’s Transportation Department said. In California, it is just over 55 percent.

The hijackers responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were carrying U.S. driver’s licenses and state IDs. In the aftermath, the government pushed to tighten national standards for state-issued documentation, and in 2005, Congress passed the Real ID Act.

The act sets minimum standards for licenses and other types of identification cards. Enforcement of the Real ID Act was initially set to begin in 2008, but it has been repeatedly delayed for numerous reasons, including the Covid-19 pandemic and opposition from states concerned about privacy.

No. Regular Real IDs will get you on domestic flights, but they will not let you cross international borders, including those with Canada and Mexico. They can’t be used for international cruises, either. You will still almost always need a passport for such trips.

A handful of states — Minnesota, Michigan, New York, Washington and Vermont — offer enhanced driver’s licenses. These licenses, which comply with Real ID requirements to board domestic flights, also allow travelers to cross land and sea borders to Canada, Mexico, Bermuda and the Caribbean without a passport.

Enhanced licenses display an American flag instead of a star. The flag’s location on the card varies by state.

Enhanced licenses can’t be used in lieu of a passport if you’re traveling internationally by air, and only U.S. citizens can get them. The cost varies by state. In Minnesota, for example, it’s an additional $15; in New York, it’s $30 more.

The T.S.A. also accepts certain other forms of identification at airport security checkpoints. These include valid passports, passport cards, permanent resident cards (also known as green cards) and cards for trusted traveler programs like Global Entry and NEXUS, which allows prescreened travelers to transit quickly across the United States-Canada border.

To apply for a Real ID, you’ll generally need to provide a Social Security number or proof of ineligibility, corroborate your address through documents like utility bills or bank statements, and verify your identity and lawful status through a handful of additional documents, including a birth certificate or a passport.

Check your state’s driver’s licensing agency website to find out how to apply and learn more about the specific documentation you’ll need.

Getting a Real ID most likely involves making an in-person appointment, which might take a while. There are reports of long lines at licensing offices across states, including Pennsylvania and Kentucky. New York is extending service hours at select offices and boosting the number of appointments to meet demand.

In many states, including South Carolina and New York, there is no additional cost to receive a Real ID if you’re already renewing your license. But some states charge extra. Pennsylvania, for example, charges a one-time $30 fee in addition to the cost of renewal, the first time you upgrade to Real ID.

The T.S.A. doesn’t require those under 18 to show identification for domestic travel. Individual airlines have their own policies about what types of ID minors are required to carry.

For international travel, children of all ages are required to carry passports.

Not necessarily, but they may face holdups.

This year, the T.S.A. published a final rule allowing a phased two-year transition to full enforcement of Real ID, citing delays in making state IDs compliant with the rules. However, a T.S.A. spokesperson said on Friday that the agency had decided that the phased approach was not necessary and that full enforcement would begin on May 7.

Still, the T.S.A. continues to have general guidance on its website that passengers who don’t bring accepted forms of identification to the airport may still be allowed to fly, after an additional identity verification.


Follow New York Times Travel on Instagram and sign up for our Travel Dispatch newsletter to get expert tips on traveling smarter and inspiration for your next vacation. Dreaming up a future getaway or just armchair traveling? Check out our 52 Places to Go in 2025.





Source link

What Spring? Snow Blankets the Northeast.


Residents across a broad stretch of the Northeast woke up on Saturday to snow blanketing backyards and frosting trees, just as the pastel colors of Easter promised that spring was near.

An area stretching from around Albany, N.Y., to Maine experienced moderate snowfall, mostly from two to five inches, overnight Friday into Saturday morning, according to the National Weather Service. And while spring technically started on March 20, snowfall at this time of year is far from rare.

“In upstate New York, you know, a couple inches here and there is certainly not unheard-of, even in the early spring,” said Abbey Gant, a meteorologist with the Weather Service office in Albany.

While the Weather Service reported a trace of snow at LaGuardia Airport, there were no reports of snow in other parts of New York City.

In Maine, where two to five inches of snow had fallen by Saturday morning, Michael Clair, a Weather Service meteorologist, said that the snow was “nothing we haven’t seen before.”

It’s also something the state might see again before warmer weather moves in.

“It’s still too early to say we’re done for sure,” Mr. Clair said. “This is sort of what our spring looks like. It’s a mix of things.”

Snow was expected to continue through Saturday, tapering off as the day progressed, before the region dries out next week, forecasters said.

For Jill Woodworth, 58, who grew up in Connecticut and has lived in Orange, Mass., for the past 25 years, waking up to snow in April can be routine, but it’s still shocking.

In Orange, Mass., snow in April is not necessarily unusual but can still come as a bit of a shock, one resident said.Credit…Jill Woodworth

“I’ve lived in this area for most of my life, and it’s not unusual, but it’s just like, ‘Oh my God,’” Ms. Woodworth said. “It feels like it’s been a long ramp up to spring with the flowers and the trees.”

Ms. Woodworth said she remembered past Aprils when up to two feet of snow had fallen. This time around, she estimated that only about two inches had dusted her backyard, with no need to shovel any snow.

“I’ll brush off the car, though,” she said, “before I go get Dunkin’.”

Amy Graff contributed reporting.



Source link

Sudan Clinic Workers Killed in Zamzam Camp

0


Sudanese paramilitaries killed the entire staff of the last medical clinic in a famine-stricken camp in the western region of Darfur, Sudan, as part of a broader assault that killed at least 100 people, aid groups and the United Nations said on Saturday.

The assault on the Zamzam camp, which holds 500,000 people in the besieged city of El Fasher, was notable even by the standards of a civil war that has seen countless atrocities as well as accusations of genocide.

Paramilitaries with the Rapid Support Forces, or R.S.F., broke through the camp perimeter on Friday evening after hours of shelling. They then destroyed hundreds of homes and the camp’s main market before turning their attack on the camp’s last remaining medical clinic, according to Relief International, the aid group that runs the facility.

Nine hospital employees were killed, including the head doctor, the aid group said in a statement on Saturday. “We have learned the unthinkable,” the statement said. “This is a profound tragedy for our organization.”

Kashif Shafique, the group’s Sudan director, said in a phone interview that the aid workers — five medics and four drivers, his entire staff at the clinic — had been shot dead.

Paramilitaries had warned the medics to leave the day before the attack, Mr. Shafique said. But they had to treat civilians wounded by shelling and, in any event, the main routes out of the camp were closed.

“There was no way out,” he said.

The R.S.F. has been battling Sudan’s military since April 2023, in a sprawling conflict that has caused the world’s largest humanitarian crisis. As many as 150,000 Sudanese have been killed, according to U.S. estimates, and 13 million have been forced from their homes.

The head of the United Nations in Sudan, Clementine Nkweta-Salami, said she was “appalled and gravely alarmed” by the violence in El Fasher, which continued into Saturday. At least 20 children were among 100 people killed, she said.

Satellite images posted on Friday by the Humanitarian Research Lab at the Yale School of Public Health showed military vehicles near the camp and fires burning inside it. The group called it “the most significant ground-based attack” on Zamzam camp in a year.

The escalating violence comes days before a major international conference on Sudan that is scheduled to take place in London on Tuesday, the second anniversary of the war. The purpose of the conference is to attract funds for Sudan’s severe humanitarian crisis. So far, donors have committed to just 10 percent of a $4.2 billion appeal by the United Nations.

The conference has stoked criticism from some Sudanese because it will be attended by delegates from the United Arab Emirates, which has been accused of providing military and financial support to the R.S.F.

Human Rights Watch urged the U.N. Security Council to impose sanctions on R.S.F. commanders responsible for abuses, and to condemn “countries providing support to parties in violation of the ongoing U.N. arms embargo.”

“Global leaders need to act,” the organization said in a statement.

Both sides in Sudan’s war have been accused of war crimes by right groups, the United Nations and the United States, although only the R.S.F. has been accused of genocide. Sudan’s military has regularly been accused of indiscriminately bombing crowded markets, often in the Darfur region, in multiple incidents that have sometimes killed more than 100 people at a time.

Earlier this month, the top United Nations human rights official, Volker Türk, said he was “utterly appalled” by reports of widespread summary executions of civilians in the capital, Khartoum, following the city’s recapture by the Sudanese military.

On March 24, the military killed at least 54 people in an attack on a busy market in Toura, a small town in North Darfur.

Most of Darfur, however, is held by the R.S.F., which has been laying siege for more than a year to El Fasher, the last major city in the region that it does not control. It had been expected to step up the assault in recent weeks, since R.S.F. forces were expelled from Khartoum by the military in late March.

There were signs for days before Friday’s violence that a major attack was imminent.

Video of the R.S.F. deputy leader Abdul Rahim Dagalo mobilizing his forces in the area circulated on social media. On Thursday, the R.S.F. began to shell Abu Shouk, another camp in the north of the city, killing at least 12 people, according to local rescue workers.

The fighters also began to attack Zamzam camp with artillery, gunfire and drones, according to aid groups and local activists. A famine was officially declared at the camp last August.

A Sudanese research group, Fikra for Studies and Development, urged the U.N. to begin airdrops of food to Zamzam.

American officials have repeatedly warned of a possible ethnic massacre if the R.S.F. overruns El Fasher. Similar violence against the ethnic Masalit group in late 2023 led to thousands of deaths and was central to the U.S. decision in January to accuse the R.S.F. of genocide.

Abdalrahman Altayeb contributed reporting from Port Sudan, Sudan.



Source link

Football latest: Bayern Munich slip up as Dortmund fight back to earn point

0




Football latest: Bayern Munich slip up as Dortmund fight back to earn point



Source link

Tech C.E.O.s Spent Millions Courting Trump. It Has Yet to Pay Off.

0


The biggest technology companies and their chief executives donated millions to President Trump’s inauguration, hosted black-tie parties and dinners in his honor, and allowed him to announce and take credit for new multibillion-dollar manufacturing projects.

But less than three months into the president’s second term, Mr. Trump has hardly returned their lavish gestures with favors.

The sweeping tariffs he imposed last week will squeeze Apple’s iPhone supply chain and make it much more expensive for Amazon, Meta, Google and Microsoft to build supercomputers to power artificial intelligence. The president has slashed federal funding for research into emerging technologies like A.I. and quantum computing. His immigration clampdown has incited fears that he will cut off pipelines for tech talent.

The Trump administration has also signaled that it will continue an aggressive regulatory stance on reining in the power of the biggest tech companies, beginning next week with a landmark antitrust trial to break up Meta, the owner of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp.

Since the inauguration, the combined market value of Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta and Microsoft has fallen 14.6 percent to $11.3 trillion. And the tech-heavy Nasdaq index is down 15.3 percent.

The efforts to court Mr. Trump are a far stretch from the industry’s approach to his first administration, when many tech leaders were openly hostile toward the president. With an about-face and flattery, executives hoped this time around that Mr. Trump might show tech more deference, including it in his efforts to deregulate industries like energy and autos.

Instead, the genuflection of Silicon Valley’s top leaders may be a misreading of how to succeed in Mr. Trump’s Washington, according to Democratic and Republican policy experts.

The relationship that tech executives have with the president has been a “one-way street,” said Gigi Sohn, a former senior adviser to the Federal Communications Commission under the Obama administration. “They give him everything, and he promises nothing, which in this case is a good thing.”

That hasn’t stopped them from trying. Last week, Meta’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, was at the White House to try to persuade the administration to settle the Federal Trade Commission’s antitrust lawsuit against Meta. Tech leaders including Sundar Pichai, the chief executive of Google, have also visited the White House in recent weeks.

The companies have said that they want to engage with Mr. Trump on a variety of issues and that they are looking at the long-range effects of his policies. Apple, Google, Meta and Amazon declined to comment.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

The hostilities between the tech industry and Mr. Trump date back to at least 2016, when multiple tech executives endorsed Hillary Clinton for president and donated to her campaign. After Mr. Trump was elected, tech leaders criticized the president’s immigration ban for Muslims and his skepticism about Covid-19 vaccines.

Mr. Trump’s first administration took a tough regulatory stance on the industry, filing antitrust lawsuits against Google and Meta. He railed against social media and other internet giants for censoring him and amassing too much power. He also blamed the platforms for contributing to his election loss in 2020.

The tech industry’s public tone toward Mr. Trump abruptly shifted last year after he was wounded in an assassination attempt.

In the aftermath, Mr. Zuckerberg called him a “badass.” Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, commended Mr. Trump for “grace under fire.” Elon Musk, who leads the rocket company SpaceX, the electric carmaker Tesla and the social media platform X, endorsed Mr. Trump and went on to stump for and donate $300 million to his campaign.

After the election, Apple’s chief executive, Tim Cook, alongside Meta, Google and Amazon, donated $1 million each to the inauguration. Several of the executives made trips to Mar-a-Lago, Mr. Trump’s resort in Palm Beach, Fla. And at the inauguration, Mr. Musk, Mr. Bezos, Mr. Zuckerberg, Mr. Cook and Mr. Pichai all appeared on the dais next to cabinet members.

“If you look at the inauguration, look at the people that were on that stage — here was a who’s who of a world that was totally against me the first time,” Mr. Trump said recently in an interview with Clay Travis of OutKick, a sports and news site owned by Fox.

There have been some benefits. Mr. Musk is now a close adviser to the president, and critics say his businesses are likely to reap rewards from his proximity. Mr. Trump has also signed executive orders delaying a sale or ban of TikTok, as mandated by a law passed last year over security concerns about the app’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance.

Despite slashing its federal funding, Mr. Trump has opened the door to a continued light regulatory touch on A.I., which he has declared his top priority to beat China in a race for global tech leadership. Last month, Google, Microsoft, Meta and other tech giants submitted suggestions, asking for the administration to stay out of the way.

And U.S. regulators have almost entirely dismantled a yearslong government crackdown on the crypto industry, a volatile sector rife with fraud, scams and theft. That benefits companies including the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, a major investor in the space.

But tech companies still face intensifying pressures under the current Trump administration.

The new leaders appointed to the Justice Department and the F.T.C. have shown no signs of backing down on a series of antitrust suits filed against Google, Meta, Amazon and Apple.

Mr. Trump chose Gail Slater, a veteran lawyer and a vocal tech critic, to lead the antitrust division at the Justice Department. Mr. Trump emphasized the importance of her role to quell powerful Silicon Valley giants during his announcement.

“Big Tech has run wild for years, stifling competition in our most innovative sector and, as we all know, using its market power to crack down on the rights of so many Americans, as well as those of Little Tech!” Mr. Trump said in a post on Truth Social, his social media platform.

The president also appointed Andrew Ferguson, who has expressed concerns about social media companies’ power, as chair of the F.T.C. Next week, Mr. Ferguson will lead the antitrust trial against Meta, in which the government accuses Facebook of buying Instagram and WhatsApp nearly a decade ago to cement its monopoly in social networking.

It’s unclear if efforts by Mr. Zuckerberg to secure a settlement will be successful. But ultimately, any decision on whether or not to proceed will be made by the president, Mr. Ferguson said last week at a conference held by the tech start-up incubator Y Combinator in Washington.

“The president’s head of the executive branch, and I think it’s important for me to obey lawful orders,” he said when asked if he would drop a suit like the Meta case if instructed by Mr. Trump.

“I think that the president recognizes that we’ve got to enforce the laws, so I’d be very surprised if anything like that ever happened,” he added.

Perhaps the biggest blow to the tech industry came in the form of tariffs last week. Apple, one of the hardest-hit companies, produces 90 percent of the iPhones it sells around the world in China, where tariffs, which were already at 20 percent, are expected to increase to 34 percent this week.

“These tariffs will raise consumer prices and will force our trade partners to retaliate,” said Gary Shapiro, the chief executive of the Consumer Technology Association, a trade group. “Americans will become poorer because of these tariffs.”



Source link

British Government Takes Control of Country’s Last Major Steel Mill

0


The British government moved swiftly on Saturday to take control of operations at the country’s last large crude steel producing facility, in what appeared to be a major step toward nationalizing the plant.

In an unusual and dramatic move, the government had summoned lawmakers back from vacation on Saturday to approve the government’s emergency legislation.

The government said it was acting to prevent the owners of the British Steel complex in Scunthorpe, a Chinese company called Jingye, from taking steps unilaterally to close the blast furnaces, potentially costing 2,700 jobs.

“Steel is fundamental to Britain’s industrial strength, to our security and to our identity as a primary global power,” Jonathan Reynolds, the business and trade secretary, told Parliament on Saturday in introducing the legislation.

Despite the interest in preserving steel making now, it has long been in decline in Britain. Crude steel output has fallen by about 50 percent over the last decade, according to UK Steel, a trade group.

The industry in Britain struggles with high energy costs as well as competition, mainly from China, which now makes more than half of all global steel.

The 25 percent tariffs that President Trump recently imposed on steel imported into the United States have added a further hurdle.

In this difficult environment, the government of Prime Minister Keir Starmer now risks being stuck with supporting a business whose owners say is losing 700,000 pounds a day or around $915,000.

The government insists that it is not nationalizing British Steel, but it is asserting control over the board and management and, it seems, taking responsibility for the running costs.

In a sign of the increasingly bitter tone of the dispute, the government said Friday that employees who are fired for “defying the orders of the Chinese owners” would be able to be reinstated.

The government says it wants to find a partner to invest in a greener steel-making process, but critics say these moves are tantamount to nationalization.

“This is a botched nationalization plan,” warned Andrew Griffith, the business spokesman for the opposition Conservative Party.

A variety of motivations appear to be behind Mr. Starmer’s approach.

He was wary of letting a large plant close at the cost of thousands of jobs of his trade union supporters.

Last year Tata Steel, the large India-based company, closed much of what was Britain’s other large steel mill at Port Talbot in Wales, leading to heavy job losses.

“We’ve had big concerns about that and a lot of anger,” said Alasdair McDiarmid, assistant general secretary of the Community Union, which represents many steel workers.

In a world of growing economic nationalism, Mr. Starmer seems to have accepted the argument that it is important for a country to retain some domestic ability to make what is known as virgin steel.

The British Steel plant in Scunthorpe, in northeast England, has Britain’s last two operating blast furnaces, huge chambers that produce molten metal using iron ore and coke, a derivative of coal. Other mills then finish the crude steel into products like rails for train lines and beams for the construction industry.

Pressure to keep Scunthorpe open appears to have increased in the wake of the Trump administration’s signals that it was less committed to European security than previous U.S. administrations. President Trump’s tariffs were apparently also part of that calculation.

“Given global economic instability, it is crucial that manufacturing is protected at home,” the government said on Friday.

Mr. Reynolds said he made what he called “a generous” offer of aid to Jingye, which proposed to shift production at Scunthorpe to electric furnaces that would make steel by melting scrap metal.

Blast furnaces like those at Scunthorpe make high quality steel but also spew emissions, and many European steel firms are considering converting to other technologies.

Mr. Reynolds told lawmakers that Jingye wanted what he called an “excessive amount” of government support. The costs of converting to electric furnaces were estimated at £2 billion or more.

He also said that in recent days Jingye appeared to be trying to starve the blast furnaces of raw materials like coke to force a shut down. “The company would, therefore, have irrevocably and unilaterally closed down primary steel making,” he said.

A spokesman for British Steel declined to comment. The company said in a news release last month that it had invested £1.2 billion in British Steel since taking it over in 2020. “Despite this, the blast furnaces and steel making operations are no longer financially sustainable,” it said.



Source link