Tag: News – Al Jazeera

Legal fight over Trump’s enormous construction project will continue despite panel’s approval.

A planning commission has approved President Donald Trump’s proposal to build an enormous ballroom at the White House, an effort to put his personal touch on a national landmark that has stoked backlash and legal challenges.

The National Capital Planning Commission, tasked with overseeing proposed construction on federal sites in the Washington, DC area, voted in favour of the project on Thursday.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“I believe that, in time, this ballroom will be considered every bit as much of a national treasure as the other key components of the White House,” said Will Scharf, who chairs the commission and is Trump’s former personal lawyer.

But the future of the ballroom, to be built on the site of the East Wing of the White House that Trump had demolished in October, remains uncertain. A federal judge ruled earlier this week that the project could not move forward without Congressional authorisation.

“The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner!” US District Judge Richard Leon stated in a ruling on Tuesday.

The US president has paid little mind to the contested legality of the project, knocking down the East Wing of the White House with little prior notice and proceeding with construction despite legal challenges.

Trump reacted angrily to the Tuesday ruling over social media, stating that the ballroom was being financed through private donations rather than federal funds and that previous construction had not required approval from Congress.

“In the Ballroom case, the Judge said we have to get Congressional approval. He is WRONG!” Trump said on Wednesday. “Congressional approval has never been given on anything, in these circumstances, big or small, having to do with construction at the White House.”

The 12-person commission, which includes three people appointed by Trump, was originally set to vote on the project in March. The date was moved back due to a large number of people signing up to comment on the project, with a large majority strongly opposed.

The 90,000-square-foot (8,400-square-metre) is currently estimated to cost about $400m, and Trump has expressed his hope that it will be completed before he completes his current term in early 2029. The price of the ballroom has expanded over time, with a statement from the White House in July 2025 estimating that the project would cost $200m.

Private funding from wealthy donors has also raised questions about whether the project has become a means of buying influence with the White House.

“The American people have weighed in on this project, and they hate it,” Jon Golinger, democracy advocate with Public Citizen, said as he criticised Trump over the project. “He needs to put the White House back the way the people gave it to him.”

US has exerted growing influence over the Venezuelan government after abducting former President Nicolas Maduro.

The United States has lifted sanctions against Venezuela’s interim President Delcy Rodriguez, following its abduction and imprisonment of her predecessor, Nicolas Maduro.

The US Department of the Treasury website was updated on Wednesday to show that Rodriguez had been removed from the Specially Designated Nationals List.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

The move was seen as yet another sign of tightening relations between Rodriguez and US President Donald Trump, who has sought to exert control over Venezuela’s politics since Maduro’s removal.

Rodriguez hailed Wednesday’s decision with a post calling for more sanctions against Venezuelan entities and individuals to be nixed.

“President Trump’s decision is a significant step in the right direction to normalize and strengthen relations between our countries,” she wrote.

“We trust that this progress and determination will ultimately lead to the lifting of the additional active sanctions on our country.”

Rodriguez had been sanctioned under the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) since 2018, during Trump’s first term in office. The sanctions froze any assets she may have held in the US and prohibited any US-based entity from doing business with her.

In a news release at the time, the US accused Rodriguez of being among a group of government leaders that were “involved in the destruction of democracy in Venezuela” and were “enriching themselves at the expense of the Venezuelan people”.

At the time of the sanctions, Rodriguez had recently been appointed as vice president, a role she served in until January 3, when a US military operation abducted Maduro.

Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, who was also captured in the raid, currently await trial in the US on drug-trafficking and weapons possession charges.

Legal experts have widely condemned the US attack as illegal under international law, and Rodriguez herself has called for Maduro and Flores to be returned to Venezuela.

But since being sworn in as Maduro’s replacement, Rodriguez has taken a largely conciliatory approach to US-Venezuela relations.

Rodriguez has taken steps to open the country to greater outside investment, including by signing into law in January a piece of legislation designed to open Venezuela’s vast oil reserves to private investment.

A similar bill, to attract outside investment to the mining sector, received an initial vote in March.

But critics have questioned the circumstances under which these reforms have progressed. Trump has pledged to “run” Venezuela, and after Maduro’s abduction, he warned that a second wave of military action could follow if Rodriguez did not comply with his demands.

“If she doesn’t do what’s right, she is going to pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro,” Trump told The Atlantic magazine in an article published on January 4.

For her part, Rodriguez has struck a careful balance between sparse criticism of Maduro’s abduction and improving ties with the US.

The US Department of State said that the country’s embassy in Caracas had officially resumed operations on Monday after a seven-year closure.

International organisations such as the United Nations have said that human rights violations have persisted in the South American country, despite the change in president.

Trump has held up Venezuela as a model for the regime change he would like to see in Iran and Cuba, but critics note that he has kept its government largely intact, despite the ouster of Maduro himself.

Venezuela’s government has long faced accusations of violently suppressing its political dissent through arbitrary arrest, torture and extrajudicial killing.

The countdown is under way at Kennedy Space Center for the liftoff of Artemis II, which will send four astronauts around the moon and back in the first crewed lunar mission since 1972.

After a mission management team meeting on Monday, NASA Associate Administrator Amit Kshatriya said Artemis II is ready for launch on Wednesday.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

The weather is now the only potential constraint. The forecast indicates an 80 percent chance of favourable conditions with the primary concerns being cloud coverage and the potential for high winds, NASA noted.

When will Artemis II launch?

At 6:24pm (22:24 GMT) on Wednesday, a two-hour window will open for the Artemis II mission to lift off from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

The launch window will remain open until April 6 for two hours each day after sunset. The mission can launch only when the moon, orbital paths, weather and Earth’s rotation line up safely.

Artemis II has faced two major delays that pushed it from its original early 2026 launch window.

In early February, the first attempt was scrubbed after a liquid hydrogen leak was detected during a practice countdown.

A second launch attempt in early March was cancelled when engineers discovered a helium flow issue in the rocket’s upper stage.

How to watch the launch

NASA will livestream the launch on YouTube , which has shown Artemis II from its rollout at the vehicle assembly building to Launch Pad 39.

What is NASA’s Artemis programme?

The Artemis programme is NASA’s multidecade mission to return humans to the moon for the first time since 1972, establish a long-term base there and eventually enable future human missions to Mars.

The programme is currently divided into five missions: Artemis I, II, III, IV and V.

Artemis I was the inaugural uncrewed test flight, which launched on November 16, 2022, and lasted 25 days. It successfully placed the Orion spacecraft into Earth’s orbit and provided crucial data for Artemis II.

What is Artemis II?

Artemis II is the first human mission of the Artemis programme. While Artemis I was an uncrewed test mission that carried only mannequins and sensors, Artemis II will mark the first time since 1972 that astronauts will travel beyond low Earth orbit.

Will Artemis II land on the moon?

No. The four-person crew will not land on the moon but rather perform a lunar flyby, looping around the moon’s far side before returning to Earth.

What is the goal of the Artemis programme?

At its core, Artemis II is a systems validation mission. NASA will use the flight to test the Orion spacecraft’s life support systems, navigation, communication links and overall performance in deep space with a crew on board – conditions that cannot be fully replicated on Earth.

If successful, Artemis II will pave the way for Artemis III, a crewed low Earth orbit mission; then Artemis IV, which aims to land astronauts on the moon; and future missions that could establish a sustained human presence beyond Earth.

Here’s how the 10-day Artemis II journey is planned:

How is Artemis different from Apollo?

In Greek mythology, Artemis is the twin sister of Apollo and the goddess of the moon. The name symbolises the programme’s connection to the original Apollo lunar missions, which took place from 1961 to 1972.

The most notable of the Apollo missions was Apollo 11 when on July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin became the first humans to walk on the lunar surface.

The last mission was Apollo 17 when Eugene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt left the lunar surface on December 14, 1972, becoming the last people to walk on the moon.

Who are the Artemis II astronauts?

The mission will carry four astronauts:

• Reid Wiseman, 50, commander: The NASA veteran and former International Space Station commander is leading the Artemis II mission. A test pilot-turned-astronaut, he has leadership and deep spaceflight experience.
• Victor Glover, 49, pilot: The US Navy aviator is the first Black astronaut assigned to a lunar mission and flew on SpaceX Crew-1.
• Christina Koch, 47, mission specialist: The record holder for the longest single spaceflight by a woman at 328 days is a veteran of multiple spacewalks and has scientific and deep-space mission expertise.
• Jeremy Hansen, 50, mission specialist: The first Canadian set to travel to the moon is a former fighter pilot and represents international collaboration in deep space exploration.

What will the Artemis crew do during the mission?

During the flight, the four astronauts will evaluate the spacecraft, test their own responses to radiation and onboard fires, and perform a suit pressurisation test.

They will also carry out medical and scientific experiments and make detailed observations of the lunar surface during the flyby.

Why is NASA going back to the moon?

The mission reflects broader long-term goals. NASA plans to establish a sustained human presence on and around the moon, particularly near the lunar south pole, where water in the form of ice is believed to exist.

This is seen as a stepping stone towards future human missions to Mars. At the same time, Artemis is unfolding within a wider geopolitical context as the United States seeks to maintain leadership in space exploration amid growing competition, particularly from China.

When are the next Artemis missions?

Artemis III – 2027

NASA recently overhauled the mission profile of Artemis III. The mission, scheduled for next year, will no longer land on the moon but rather send a crew into low Earth orbit, where it will test integrated operations between the Orion spacecraft and one or both commercial landers from SpaceX and Blue Origin.

Artemis IV – early 2028

The mission is to be the first crewed lunar landing since Apollo 17. NASA plans to send its crew into lunar orbit and two of its astronauts to the lunar south pole.

Artemis V – late 2028

With this mission, NASA plans a second crewed lunar landing and the start of a lunar base.

The Trump administration says protections would diminish US energy competitiveness amid the ongoing war on Iran.

A committee with ties to United States President Donald Trump has exempted oil and gas drillers in the Gulf of Mexico from protections under the Endangered Species Act meant to safeguard vulnerable species.

On Tuesday, the government’s Endangered Species Committee convened for a rare meeting to weigh whether the protections should be lifted.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

The panel, composed of six senior Trump officials, ultimately voted unanimously in favour of lifting the restrictions.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told the meeting that environmental rules could hobble US energy production as the ongoing war on Iran snarls energy markets.

“Disruptions to Gulf oil production doesn’t hurt just us. It benefits our adversaries,” Hegseth said.

“We cannot allow our own rules to weaken our standing and strengthen those who wish to harm us. When development in the Gulf is chilled, we are prevented from producing the energy we need as a country and as a department.”

But environmental groups have objected to the decision, and a legal fight is expected in the coming months.

This is only the fourth time in US history that the Endangered Species Committee has convened, and Tuesday marks the third time it has granted an exemption to the Endangered Species Act.

Considered a landmark piece of legislation, the Endangered Species Act of 1973 prohibits actions that might kill or harm species close to extinction or their habitats.

The act has been invoked in the Gulf of Mexico to protect vulnerable species like Rice’s whale, which is found exclusively in the ecosystem. Scientists estimate that only about 50 of the rare whales remain.

Birds, sea turtles and Gulf sturgeon are also among the local species protected by the act.

Hegseth first requested a convening of the Endangered Species Committee on March 13, arguing that increasing oil and gas production in the Gulf of Mexico was necessary for “reasons of national security”.

But critics have dubbed the committee a “god squad”, a reference to the power it holds over a species’ continued existence.

Tuesday’s committee was staffed by Trump appointees, including Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum and Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins.

Advocates have promised to challenge the exemptions, arguing that the Trump administration failed to abide by the protocols set out under the Endangered Species Act. They also question whether the rationale for Tuesday’s exemption is justified by facts.

“The Endangered Species Act has not slowed an iota of oil from being extracted from the Gulf,” said Andrew Bowman, the president of the advocacy group Defenders of Wildlife. “I cannot stress enough how unprecedented and unlawful this action is.”

Environmental protections have been a low priority for the Trump administration, which has rolled back existing rules and championed pro-fossil fuel policies, while dismissing climate change as a “hoax”.

“If Trump is successful here, he could be the first person in history to knowingly extirpate a species from the face of the earth,” Patrick Parenteau, emeritus professor of law at Vermont Law School, told The Associated Press. “That’s how precarious the condition of the Rice’s whale is.”

In an eight-to-one decision, the high court ruled against a law banning the discredited practice on free speech grounds.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled against a law in the state of Colorado that bans the controversial practice of “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ children, a discredited practice that has been linked to serious harm for participants.

Tuesday’s ruling was an eight-to-one decision, with two of the court’s three liberal justices joining its six conservatives in opposing the ban.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

The court majority argued that restricting talk therapy could violate the free speech protections enshrined in the First Amendment of the Constitution.

“Once again, because the State has suppressed one side of a debate, while aiding the other, the constitutional issue is straightforward,” Elena Kagan, a left-leaning justice, wrote in a supporting opinion.

About two dozen US states have laws banning conversion therapy, which aims to “convert” the gender identity or sexual orientation of individuals to reflect heterosexual, cisgender norms.

Studies have linked the practice to higher rates of depression and suicidal thoughts for LGBTQ people.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, one of the court’s conservatives, argued that the First Amendment “stands as a shield against any effort to enforce orthodoxy in thought or speech in this country”.

That, in turn, prevents any state from limiting what a therapist might talk about with a patient, even if that therapist seeks to dissuade a child from their LGBTQ identity.

Only one justice, the left-leaning Ketanji Brown Jackson, cast a dissenting vote in Tuesday’s case.

She argued that the ruling “threatens to impair states’ ability to regulate the provision of medical care in any respect”, and she highlighted the dangers of conversion therapy to the health of LGBTQ youth.

In the lead-up to Tuesday’s ruling, Christian counsellor Kaley Chiles successfully argued that the Colorado law banned her from offering voluntary, faith-based talk therapy for children. Her case was supported by the administration of President Donald Trump.

Colorado, meanwhile, maintained that, while its law barred any “practice or treatment” to “convert” LGBTQ youth, discussions about religion, gender and sexuality were in general not prohibited.

Talk therapy, it argued, is also different from other forms of speech, as it represents a form of healthcare. Colorado maintained it had the ability to regulate it as a result.

Nobody has been sanctioned under Colorado’s law, which was passed in 2019. Tuesday’s ruling will likely make similar laws more difficult to enforce. LGBTQ advocates slammed the decision as a step backwards.

“This is a dangerous practice that has been condemned by every major medical association in the country,” Polly Crozier, director of family policy at the advocacy group GLAD Law, said in a statement.

“Today’s decision does not change the science, and it does not change the fact that conversion therapists who harm patients will still face legal consequences.”

Plea comes hours after sheriff’s report said the golfer showed signs of impairment at the scene of last week’s crash.

Golfer Tiger Woods pleaded not guilty in his driving under the influence case in Florida on Tuesday, hours after a sheriff’s report said he had pain pills and showed signs of impairment at the scene of the crash last week.

The online court docket for Martin County, Florida, showed that Woods entered a written plea of not guilty and planned to waive his appearance during an arraignment hearing next month.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

Woods’s eyes were bloodshot and glassy, his pupils were dilated, and he had opioid pills in his pocket when interviewed at the scene of the crash, according to the arrest report released by the Martin County Sheriff’s Office.

The golfer’s movements were slow and lethargic, and he was sweating as he talked to deputies and told them he had taken prescription medication earlier in the morning, according to the report. Woods told deputies he had been looking at his phone and fiddling with the radio before he clipped a truck in front of him, the report said.

Deputies found two white pills, which were identified as the opioid hydrocodone, used to treat pain, in his pocket, the report said.

When asked by a deputy if he took any prescription medications, Woods said, “I take a few.”

Woods’s agent at Excel Sports, Mark Steinberg, has not responded to multiple messages seeking comment.

The golfer was travelling at high speeds on a beachside, residential road on Jupiter Island when his Land Rover clipped the truck and rolled onto its side, according to the sheriff’s office, which noted that Woods had shown signs of impairment.

The truck had $5,000 in damage, according to the report.

The truck driver and another person helped Woods out of his vehicle, with the golfer needing to climb out from the passenger side. Neither Woods nor the truck driver was injured.

During a field sobriety test, deputies noticed Woods limping and that he had a compression sock over his right knee. The golfer explained he had undergone seven back surgeries and more than 20 leg operations, and that his ankle seizes up while walking. Woods, who was hiccupping during the questioning, continuously moved his head during one of the sobriety tests, and deputies had to instruct him several times to keep his head straight, the report said.

“Based on my observations of Woods, how he performed the exercises and based on my training, knowledge, and experience, I believed that Woods’ normal faculties were impaired, and he was unable to safely operate the motor vehicle,” the deputy wrote after the tests.

Woods, 50, is the most influential figure in golf and has become as recognisable as any athlete in the world. The first person of Black heritage to win the Masters in 1997, he has captivated golf fans with records likely never to be broken.

But his injuries kept him from accomplishing more, including those suffered in a 2021 car crash that damaged his right leg so badly he said doctors considered amputation.

At this latest crash, Woods agreed to a breathalyser test, which showed no signs of alcohol, but he refused a urine test, authorities said. He was arrested and released on bail eight hours later.

No one from Woods’s camp or the PGA Tour – he is on the board and is the chairman of the committee reshaping the competition model – has commented since his arrest.

Woods, who has been involved in many crashes over the years, is charged with driving under the influence, with property damage and refusal to submit to a lawful test. He is scheduled for arraignment on April 23. Online court records do not list a lawyer for him.

Under a change to Florida law last year, refusing a law enforcement officer’s request to take a breath, blood or urine test has become a misdemeanour, even for a first offence.

Former agents say that they were fired for work on probe into Trump’s efforts to stay in power after 2020 election loss.

Three former agents with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have filed a class-action lawsuit alleging that they were wrongfully fired in retaliation for their work in the United States.

The lawsuit, filed on Tuesday, marks the latest legal challenge against efforts under President Donald Trump to purge staff at the federal law enforcement agency.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

The three agents involved — Michelle Ball, Jamie Garman and Blaire Toleman — argue that their employment was terminated as a result of their work on an investigation into Trump’s efforts to stay in power after losing the 2020 election.

Career agents at the FBI are nonpartisan employees. The three plaintiffs argued that agents should not be required to show “fealty to any political party, movement, or figure”.

“Serving the American people as FBI agents was the highest honor of our lives,” the agents said in a statement.

“We took an oath to uphold the Constitution, followed the facts wherever they led and never compromised our integrity. Our removal from federal service — without due process and based on a false perception of political bias — is a profound injustice that raises serious concerns about political interference in federal law enforcement.”

Each of the former agents had between eight and 14 years of experience at the FBI.

In their 48-page complaint, they explain they were abruptly fired in October and November in what they describe as a “retribution campaign” under the Trump administration.

The lawsuit explains they received termination letters, signed by FBI Director Kash Patel, that “baselessly accused them of ‘weaponizing’ their positions within the government”.

The three agents had been assigned to offer FBI support to an investigation led by special counsel Jack Smith, an independent prosecutor assigned to probe Trump’s actions.

As a result of that investigation, Trump was indicted in 2023 on charges he had taken part in an illegal effort to overturn his loss in the 2020 election.

Smith eventually dropped that case, along with another focused on Trump’s retention of classified documents, after the Republican leader was re-elected for a second term in 2024. The Department of Justice has an internal policy prohibiting the prosecution of sitting presidents.

Smith also resigned his position before Trump took office in January 2025.

But since returning to the White House, Trump has faced criticism for allegedly seeking retribution against employees involved in policies he disagrees with.

“President Trump made clear that upon his return to office, he expected top officials in federal law enforcement to carry out his retribution,” Tuesday’s lawsuit asserts.

Nonpartisan members of both the FBI and Department of Justice who were involved in Smith’s work have seen their jobs cut in the aftermath of Trump’s inauguration.

But Tuesday’s class-action lawsuit (PDF) could pave the way for more agents fired for perceived disloyalty to return to their jobs.

By accusing the agents of “weaponising” the FBI, the lawsuit argues that the Trump administration not only damaged their individual reputations but those of all law enforcement officers in similar situations.

“This false and defamatory public smear impugned the professional reputation of Plaintiffs and the proposed class members, suggesting they were something other than faithful and apolitical law enforcement officials,” the lawsuit argues.

A group of 12 former FBI workers also sued the agency in December, alleging that they were wrongfully terminated for taking a knee during a Black Lives Matter protest in 2020.

Iran’s top diplomat Araghchi has told Al Jazeera that, despite contacts, Iran is not in negotiations with the US.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has confirmed that messages had been exchanged with the United States, either directly or through countries in the region, amid the ongoing US-Israel war on Iran.

During an interview with Al Jazeera, Araghchi said that the contacts with the US did not mean that Tehran was in negotiations with Washington.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“I receive messages from [US special envoy Steve] Witkoff directly, as before, and this does not mean that we are in negotiations,” he said.

“There is no truth to the claim of negotiations with any party in Iran. All messages are conveyed through the Foreign Ministry or received by it, and there are communications between security agencies,” he said, adding that Tehran has not made any decision about negotiating with Washington as it has reservations about them.

The foreign minister also clarified to Al Jazeera that Tehran has not yet responded to the 15-point proposal that was sent by the US, “nor have we submitted any proposals or conditions.”

Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Ali Hashem said that much of what Araghchi talked about was not new, but the significant update was the contact with Witkoff.

“The new piece of information is that he’s in touch directly with Witkoff and that there are some security discussions going on,” he said.

Last week, a senior diplomatic source told Al Jazeera that Iran had received a 15-point plan from the US that was aimed at ending the war.

The plan included proposals ranging from calls on Iran to commit to never acquiring a nuclear weapon to limiting its missile stockpile in both range and quantity.

Still, the Iranian foreign minister reiterated that Iran will only accept an end to all attacks in the region rather than a ceasefire.

The chief of global football’s governing body says US-Israeli war on Iran will not affect scheduling of 2026 World Cup.

Iran will play their World Cup 2026 games at US venues as scheduled, FIFA President Gianni Infantino has insisted.

The Iranian football federation said earlier this month that it was “negotiating” with FIFA to relocate the country’s World Cup matches from the United States to Mexico, due to the US and Israel’s war with Iran.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum also said that her country is prepared to host Iran’s first-round matches at the tournament if needed.

“The matches will be played where they are supposed to be, according to the draw,” the chief of football’s global governing body said on Tuesday.

The World Cup, being hosted by the US, Mexico and Canada, gets under way on June 11, with Iran set to play their first Group G game against New Zealand in Los Angeles on June 15.

They are then scheduled to play Belgium in Los Angeles on June 21 and Egypt in Seattle on June 27.

Iran’s participation had been thrown into doubt by the war with the US and Israel that broke out on February 28.

Speaking at half-time of Iran’s friendly match against Costa Rica on Tuesday, Infantino also moved to quell concerns that Iran will not feature at the next edition of the World Cup at all.

“Iran will be at the World Cup … That’s why we’re here,” Infantino told the news agency AFP at Iran’s warm-up match being staged in Turkiye.

“We’re delighted because they’re a very, very strong team. I’m very happy.

“I’ve seen the team, I’ve spoken to the players and the coach, so everything is fine,” added Infantino, whose attendance at Tuesday’s game was unannounced.

Infantino initially said that US President Donald Trump had given assurances that the Iranian team would still be welcome.

But Trump then stated that Iran’s team should not travel to the tournament “for their own life and safety”.

Iran hit back at Trump’s comments, saying that “no one can exclude Iran’s national team from the World Cup”.

On March 19, Infantino said FIFA was committed to making sure the World Cup goes ahead “as scheduled” with “all teams” taking part.

“FIFA is looking forward to all teams participating at the World Cup to compete in a spirit of fair play and mutual respect,” Infantino said from Zurich during an online FIFA Council meeting.

“FIFA can’t solve geopolitical conflicts, but we are committed to using the power of football and the World Cup to build bridges and promote peace as our thoughts are with those who are suffering as a consequence of the ongoing wars,” added Infantino.

Iran also played a friendly against Nigeria in the Turkish town of Belek last Friday.

Iran’s players wore black armbands and posed with school rucksacks as the national anthem played to remember the victims of a strike on a primary school in Iran on the first day of the Middle East war.

The air strike on the school in the southern Iranian city of Minab on February 28 killed at least 170 people, including students and teachers.

The New York Times has reported that the preliminary findings of a US military investigation indicate that a US Tomahawk cruise missile hit the school due to a targeting mistake.