An announcement by Geert Wilders, a far-right Dutch opposition leader, to hold a competition for cartoons depicting Islam’s Prophet Muhammad has led to protests in Pakistan, where the far-right Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) threatened to blockade Islamabad unless the country severs diplomatic relations with the Netherlands.

Physical depictions of God or the Prophet Muhammad are forbidden in Islam, and the TLP says the competition amounts to “blasphemy”.

According to Sehar Tariq, a counter violent extremism researcher based in Islamabad, and Stijn van Kessel, a political scientist based in London, the reason behind the announcement by Wilders’ Freedom Party and the TLP’s demands is the same: attention.

Both parties have not been as successful recently as they had hoped, so generating controversy is a perfect opportunity to rile up their far-right base.

Al Jazeera spoke to both experts and asked them to explain the situation both Wilders and the TLP are in.

---

Sehar Tariq, counter violent extremism analyst, based in Islamabad. She is also the country representative for the United States Institute of Peace (USIP).

Al Jazeera: How does holding this protest benefit TLP?

Sehar Tariq: The Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan didn’t do as well at the polls as they had hoped, I think, and so this helps to bring them back to political relevance in Pakistan, and it keeps their voter base engaged. They are a single-issue party, so this is great for them, that such an event has emerged in the Netherlands.

They can use this to keep the base engaged. Without [events like Wilders’ cartoon competition], they risk becoming irrelevant. This is a reminder that “Hey! We are here, and we are watching and are ready to fight on the issue of blasphemy”.

So I think this protest mobilises and re-energises their voter base, which might have been feeling slightly despondent on their electoral performance. They did well by an objective standard, for a brand new party, but not based on their own standards for success, perhaps.

[The TLP won only two provincial assembly seats in Pakistan’s general election on July 25, but bagged 2.2 million votes nationwide, making it the fifth-most-popular political party in the country.]

Al Jazeera: Does holding this protest, therefore, allow them to burnish their credentials as so-called defenders of the faith?

Tariq: Absolutely. That [being defenders of the faith] is how they have set themselves up. [TLP chief] Khadim Hussain Rizvi is a preacher, and for them to generate international news with this, it not only establishes his credentials as a defender of the faith but also as someone who can stand up to the West.

That really resonates with his voter base… He is seen as a knight in shining armour, so to speak, of a Muslim world that faces the onslaught of Islamophobia by the West.

Al Jazeera: Is there an element here of both sides of the far-right getting exactly what they want?

Tariq: Absolutely. Khadim Hussain Rizvi needs someone to be Islamophobic or blasphemous for him to continue to say blasphemy is a relevant topic. If there is no blasphemy, what is he going to do? On the other hand, someone like Wilders needs someone who is out on the streets, baying for blood, so he can point to them, too.

It is kind of a symbiotic and mutually beneficial relationship. They both feed off the worst stereotypes of each other.

The worst thing is that in the media eye, this catches attention and gets amplified by both sides. It also then skews international discourse into this paradigm of a ‘clash of civilisations’.

Al Jazeera: TLP won the fifth-most number of votes in the general election – how significant is that, and what next for them?

Tariq: They are genuinely tapping into a local sentiment, and there is also a global shift happening. They have won two provincial seats. To me, the scary part is that they are the fifth-most popular political party in this country – that speaks to a societal shift that is happening in Pakistan.

What they are doing today [with the protest], is likely to help them in the upcoming local government elections, even more so than perhaps their performance in the general elections.

Right now they are a single-issue party, but I do see them, in terms of what next, expanding their list of issues – soon they will find that there may not be enough events around blasphemy to create a ruckus. Where does it go next? Non-Muslims? Minorities? Women? If they want to stay relevant, they will have to evolve into other areas.

Al Jazeera: How much of this is about religion and freedom of expression, and how much about gaining political prominence and power?

Tariq: It’s entirely about political prominence and power. Wilders is a long-time politician, he has a history. These guys are new to politics, but they have had a long-standing commitment to religious propagation. It is not fair to say that none of this has to do with religion – being very cynical, the people at the top may not, but their constituents definitely do care about these issues.

It’s like an “our way of life” vs “their way of life”, that’s the clash, and what is the ideal way of life? It’s not just that they are doing it to get to political power – it’s that they know if political power is defined by these issues, then they will be in power.

---

Stijn van Kessel, lecturer at the Queen Mary University of London, is specialised in populism, Euroscepticism and ideology, voters, members and electoral performance of (far-right) populist parties.

Al Jazeera: How does the cartoon competition benefit Wilders and his Freedom Party?

Stijn van Kessel: As far as Wilders is concerned, he seeks to generate attention by means of this contest. He is not truly interested in a cartoon contest but this is a way for him to generate media attention; he hopes that will eventually translate to votes.

And what a number of recent studies have shown is that when the media focuses on a certain number of themes, people will consider this theme to be more important.

So, in turn, that benefits parties that mobilise on the basis of this theme.

In an indirect way, media attention does create support. However, Wilders is not the only person focusing on these themes any more.

Al Jazeera: Is Wilders actually getting what he wants out of this then?

Van Kessel: That remains to be seen. Obviously, he is getting media attention, and that was probably his immediate goal.

However, you see that his star is waning somewhat, or he at least finds it hard to attain the attention he once did, partially because he has a competitor on the far-right, the Forum for Democracy (FvD).

Both parties, Wilders’ Freedom Party and the FvD both attract culturally conservative voters, they both stress the issue of Islam, they’re both eurosceptic.

However, FvD interestingly attracts also younger voters, it tries to appeal more to people who are higher educated.

So in that sense, you see that younger people vote for FvD, not for Wilders.

Al Jazeera: Do the competition and the protests play into each other’s hands?

Van Kessel: I can’t comment on the Pakistani part of the story because I know too little, but what is clear is that Wilders is doing this for domestic use.

What you see happening now, the protests in Pakistan, only helps him gain media attention in the Netherlands, thus becoming the centre of attention for his potential voters.

But Wilders seems a little bit over the hill, although I wouldn’t count him out, but because there’s so much political competition [on the right] I don’t know if this will boost his support again.

Al Jazeera: How much of this is about religion and freedom of expression, and how much about gaining political prominence and power?

Van Kessel: Obviously I can’t look into the head of Wilders, but this is simply a tactic to increase media attention.

If you’re in the news, it gives emphasis to the issues and the parties, and he hopes that will increase public support for his political project.

Manchester United defender Luke Shaw has been included in Gareth Southgate’s 23-man England squad for September’s fixtures against Spain and Switzerland.

Shaw, 23, last played for England in March 2017, as a second-half substitute in a 1-0 friendly defeat by Germany.

Liverpool pair Joe Gomez and Adam Lallana, and Burnley’s James Tarkowski are also included in Southgate’s first post-World Cup squad.

“Luke has always been a player we have liked,” said Southgate.

Shaw endured a tough 2017-18 season, facing public criticism from United manager Jose Mourinho, who questioned his approach to training and commitment to the club.

But the former Southampton player, who has seven international caps, has enjoyed a strong start to the new Premier League season, scoring his first senior goal against Leicester City this month.

“He’s had a difficult period in terms of adapting to a new club and a horrendous injury that he had to overcome,” Southgate added.

“I’m really impressed with his physical condition. He’s shown an extra edge to his game in the last couple of games. He’s shown aggression and a desire not to lose, and is looking back to his powerful best.”

England open their Uefa Nations League campaign against Spain at Wembley on 8 September, before facing Switzerland three days later in Leicester for a Kick It Out international friendly.

Shaw’s United team-mate Ashley Young, who helped England reach the World Cup semi-finals, has been left out of the squad, as has Phil Jones, who is injured.

“I want us to try and capture what we had this summer,” said Southgate.

“Once we’re through this camp, there’s going to be competition from others. People are going to have to play at a good level to retain their places.”

Goalkeeping crisis?

Southampton goalkeeper Alex McCarthy has been called up to replace the injured Nick Pope, joining Everton’s Jordan Pickford and Stoke’s Jack Butland as one of three goalkeepers in the squad.

But Southgate says he would like “more competition” for the position – especially with Butland now playing in the Championship.

“There are four or five maximum still playing in the Premier League – obviously Jack [Butland] has dropped into the Championship and he’s now going to have a challenge to stay in the squad,” he said.

“It’s an area where we’d like more competition.”

He added that the door was still open for Burnley goalkeeper Joe Hart – who has 75 England caps but has not played for his country since November 2017 – but said it was “too early” after his omission from the World Cup squad.

“Joe is somebody who we know about,” he said.

“We know what he can do and having got so close to the World Cup it’s a bit early to bring him back into the fold.”

‘Our pool is getting smaller and smaller’

Southgate has made no secret of his desire to include more youth in his England squads, but said young players were not getting enough first-team football at club level for them to be called up to the national side.

“One of our biggest concerns is playing time for English players. More concerning, young players that may be coming through to challenge are not getting opportunities to play,” he said.

He added work needed to be done on providing better pathways for young players in the Premier League, admitting he may have to start looking at players in the second tier.

“There is still this link between 17 to 21 where the bridge into first-team football and the financial power of the Premier League has a big impact,” he said.

“I think it’s worth us having that debate and getting people around the table to discuss that missing piece. If players are as good as any young players around the world then that opportunity needs to be there.

“If we are encouraging young players about entering academies we are selling them the dream and there’s an ethical element there too.

“I can’t rule out players in the Championship now as our pool is getting smaller and smaller.”

England squad

Goalkeepers: Jack Butland (Stoke), Jordan Pickford (Everton), Alex McCarthy (Southampton)

Defenders: Trent Alexander-Arnold (Liverpool), Fabian Delph (Manchester City), Joe Gomez (Liverpool), Harry Maguire (Leicester City) Danny Rose (Tottenham Hotspur), Luke Shaw (Manchester United), John Stones (Manchester City), James Tarkowski (Burnley), Kieran Trippier (Tottenham Hotspur), Kyle Walker (Manchester City)

Midfielders: Dele Alli (Tottenham Hotspur), Eric Dier (Tottenham Hotspur), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Adam Lallana (Liverpool), Jesse Lingard (Manchester United), Ruben Loftus-Cheek (Chelsea)

Forwards: Harry Kane (Tottenham Hotspur), Marcus Rashford (Manchester United), Raheem Sterling (Manchester City), Danny Welbeck (Arsenal)

Analysis

Chief football writer Phil McNulty

Gareth Southgate has resisted the temptation to inject the next generation into his squad. He has, however, still provided plenty of interest – including what some might even regard as a step into the past.

It is a sign of Southgate’s regard for Liverpool’s Adam Lallana that he gets a surprise recall despite being marginalised at Liverpool and not having made a start in the Premier League so far this season.

Lallana, who did not make the World Cup squad for Russia, looked to have been consigned to England’s past but has now been handed an unlikely lifeline.

The selection of his Liverpool team-mate Joe Gomez comes as no surprise given his form alongside Virgil van Dijk in a defence that has yet to concede a Premier League goal this season.

He is the beneficiary of Gary Cahill’s decision to retire and Southgate will have welcomed the chance to bring back the 21-year-old, who looked so comfortable in an England shirt before sustaining an ankle injury against the Netherlands in March that eventually kept him out of the World Cup.

Luke Shaw’s many admirers will be delighted to see his renaissance at Manchester United rewarded with a return to England colours, and with United team-mate Ashley Young’s exclusion surely marking the end of his England career, Shaw has a real opportunity to make his mark.

There will be an element of disappointment that Southgate has not trusted more to youth in the shape of teenagers Phil Foden of Manchester City, Borussia Dortmund’s Jadon Sancho and Fulham’s outstanding youngster Ryan Sessegnon.

Southgate, though, will rightly say he is justified in showing loyalty to players who served him so well as England reached the World Cup semi-final – and time is very much on the side of that gifted young trio.

The independent board of directors of Papa John’s Wednesday denounced ousted chairman John Schnatter, charging that he is “promoting his self-interest at the expense of all others in an attempt to regain control.“

In a harshly worded statement, the board members said Schnatter is “hurting the company, not helping it,” and that he has demonstrated “a continued pattern of ignoring decisions of the board,” both when he was CEO and more recently as chairman.

The directors also flatly denied his claims earlier this week that they asked him to run the company as executive chairman and had decided to dump CEO Steve Ritchie, whom they note Schnatter praised in his book last year as a “model of what a leader should be.”

They also say he has acted out of spite.

More coverage 

► In letter, Schnatter offers possible proof Papa John’s asked him to return
► John Schnatter sends his love to workers. Papa John’s returns to sender
► ‘Papa John’ Schnatter has sent a love letter to his former employees

“When the company decided to implement a new marketing plan that did not feature John Schnatter, he began to criticize the management team and undermine the new CEO’s leadership,” says the statement, which was distributed nationally.

Schnatter’s Los Angeles-based public relations firm, Sitrick and Company, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The board members say Schnatter has repeatedly violated directives:

• After being told not to talk about the NFL controversy related to the national anthem, “in direct defiance of these instructions,” he made unscripted comments about the controversy.
• When independent market research showed that a change in spokesperson and advertising strategy was warranted, Schnatter commissioned his own research and produced separate commercials that starred himself.
• After being instructed to meet with another restaurant company’s executive only with the CEO present, Schnatter did so without Ritchie. That may have been a reference to talks Schnatter reportedly had about a merger with Wendy’s.

Schnatter was forced to step down as chairman last month after a report that in May, he used the N-word during a media training session. He later said he shouldn’t have quit and sued the company. Analysts say his criticism has driven down Papa John’s stock price, which has lost nearly half its value over the past 12 months. It closed Wednesday at $46.54 per share.

The independent directors say Schnatter didn’t respond to requests to meet until last week. That is when his attorney said he would do so only if the company canceled its annual operators’ conference that brings together about 1,500 team members and franchisees from around the world.

More coverage 

► Can Papa John’s end this pizza war without everyone getting burned?
► ‘Papa John’ Schnatter: Black people know ‘I’m not a racist’ 
► ‘Papa’ John Schnatter says he was justified in actions against CEOs

“John Schnatter’s demand that it be cancelled just one week in advance was unreasonable and does not support his purported concern for the future success of Papa John’s franchisees, employees and team members,” the directors said.

Throwing down a gauntlet to Schnatter, they said “we will defend the company against his actions and continue to do what is right for Papa John’s and our stakeholders.”

The board members said they have received “outspoken support from customers, employees, franchisees, partners and shareholders for the actions we are taking.”

The company last week hired two investment banking firms, which experts said may signal it expects Schnatter to make a hostile bid to buy the company outright.

Schnatter, who founded Papa John’s in 1984, owns 31 percent of its shares, a stake that is worth about $400 million.

Andrew Wolfson: 502-582-7189; awolfson@courier-journal.com; Twitter: @adwolfson. Support strong local journalism by subscribing today: www.courier-journal.com/andreww.

Read or Share this story: https://ift.tt/2LDwcFe

When the first launched in 2010, digital media was still new terrain. Developments in artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency were just getting started, and social platforms like Instagram and Snapchat were yet to be released.

In just nine years, the way we think about new media has completely changed. The internet has made it so that anyone, anywhere, at anytime can have a voice; and now, we’re expected to use it.

One such person making the most of their digital voice is multifaceted entertainer and activist . As one of the most recognizable digital creators, Singh has amassed a global audience more than 14 million YouTube subscribers with more than 2 billion video views on her . Singh created the initiative to inspire positivity among young women in order to better support each other’s voices and encourage upward mobility. And in 2017, UNICEF appointed Singh as one of their Goodwill Ambassadors.

Joining Singh at this year’s Summit is actress and environmentalist . Having starred in a host of blockbuster Bollywood films, Mirza quickly learned of the power of media as a tool for social change. Her latest role is that of a UN Environment Goodwill Ambassador. Throughout her career, Mirza has become a prominent voice for environmental conservation in India, and is one of the leading global advocates for UNEP’s campaign.

The Summit will feature thought-provoking dialogue highlighting ideas and innovations that have the power to change the world. Make sure you’re part of that change, and !

The 2018 Social Good Summit will be held at New York’s 92nd Street Y on Sunday, Sept. 23. For the full list of speakers, visit SocialGoodSummit.com. 

Interested in covering the conversation IRL? The Summit is accepting applications to join the , a dedicated onsite workspace for journalists and bloggers.

For more event updates, be sure to follow on Twitter. 

The 2018 Social Good Summit is presented by:

A US pastor under house arrest in Turkey is prepared take his case to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) unless the Turkish judiciary sets him free, his lawyer told Al Jazeera.

The case against Andrew Brunson, who is being held on terrorism charges, has triggered a full-blown diplomatic dispute between Washington and Ankara with no end in sight. 

A Turkish court in the western province of Izmir on August 17 rejected an appeal to release Brunson, upholding a judgment taken by a lower court earlier in the week.

Ismail Cem Halavurt, Brunson’s lawyer, said that they would go to the Constitutional Court, the highest court in Turkey, within weeks as the last effort to find a domestic remedy to Brunson’s situation.

“We will receive a formal notification on the latest verdict by the criminal court in Izmir soon. Then we have a month to appeal it at the Constitutional Court,” Halavurt said, adding that Brunson’s “right to liberty and security” as well as “right to travel” have been breached.

“Unless the Constitutional Court frees him, we will have to take the case to the ECHR as the domestic legal remedies we can seek will be exhausted,” he added.

Turkey is one of 47 signatories of the European Convention on Human Rights that established the supranational human rights court, which makes binding verdicts.

Arrested in 2016

A protestant pastor, Brunson, who lived in Turkey over two decades with his family, was arrested in 2016 in a government crackdown following a failed coup bid. He faces 35 years in prison on espionage and violence charges.

Brunson was in prison before he was allowed to be kept under house arrest on July 25. He also has a court-ordered travel ban imposed on him. 

Halavurt said that the case has been increasingly politicised because of the eroding diplomatic climate between Washington and Ankara.

“It is very hard for the Turkish judiciary to act impartial in such a politicised case. Therefore, we are prepared to take it to the relevant international judicial authority, the ECHR,” he told Al Jazeera.

US and Turkish officials have been trading barbs over the Brunson case, which included remarks from US President Donald Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Turkish officials have stressed that the Turkish courts were independent, including the ones hearing the case of Brunson.

Erdogan said earlier in August that his country would not make compromises regarding the independence of the judiciary, in a reference to the Brunson issue.

Talking to Al Jazeera, Ahmet Berat Conker, an MP with Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party, called on the US to respect the judicial process for the pastor.

“The independent Turkish judiciary will make a verdict on the case without bowing to any pressures,” said Conker, who is also a member of parliament’s foreign affairs committee.

Tariff war

The NATO allies have recently imposed increased tariffs on each other as the diplomatic dispute spilled over to the economic arena.

Washington announced a doubling of steel and aluminium tariffs on Turkey on August 10, with Ankara hitting back five days later by doubling tariffs on certain US imports, such as passenger cars, alcohol and tobacco.

“It is a big mistake to link the future of mutual relations to a judicial judgment. The approach of the Trump administration to the issue is wrong,” Conker told Al Jazeera.

“The two countries should discuss the issues they have through diplomatic channels, and independent from judicial processes.”

The Turkish lira has taken a dive since the beginning of the year, and with an acceding speed in the month of August. The currency lost more than 40 percent of its value against the US dollar this year, amid macroeconomic concerns and the diplomatic showdown between Washington and Ankara.

The Turkish government has demanded extradition of Fethullah Gulen, an exiled religious leader based in the US and wanted in Turkey. Ankara accuses Gulen of masterminding the July 15 coup attempt that killed about 300 people.

Erdogan has suggested in public addresses that an exchange of Gulen for Brunson would be possible.

Follow Umut Uras on Twitter: @Um_Uras

Premier League news plus Gareth Southgate’s England squad announcement – Live – BBC Sport

<!–

<!–

<!–
<!–

<!–
<!–

<!–

<!–

<!–

Campbell Soup plans to pursue a sale of its international division and its Campbell Fresh unit as the company seeks a turnaround amid declining soup sales and turmoil for the packaged foods industry.

The food giant announced Thursday that it would refocus its strategy primarily on the North America market in snacks, meals and beverages.

The moves include a plan to sell the Bolthouse Farms and Garden Fresh Gourmet brands, as well as the company’s refrigerated soup products. Bolthouse Farms makes healthy drinks and was acquired in 2012, while Garden Fresh Gourmet makes hummus and salsa and was acquired in 2015. 

Remaining brands will include the company’s namesake soup, as well as Goldfish crackers, Pepperidge Farm cookies, Snyder’s of Hanover pretzels and V8 drinks.

After the sudden exit of CEO Denise Morrison earlier this year, Campbell Soup is trying to get traction amid a cultural shift away from packaged foods and toward natural ingredients and prepared foods.

Campbell Soup also reported Thursday that fiscal fourth-quarter sales when excluding acquisitions and one-time factors fell 3 percent for the quarter, while its profit tumbled 70 percent to $94 million.

More: Campbell Soup CEO Denise Morrison suddenly exits post as U.S. soup sales struggle

More: Campbell becomes snack empire, as soup sales cool

More: Campbell Soup to acquire Snyder’s pretzel, Pop Secret popcorn maker

A 14 percent drop in U.S. soup sales, when excluding a recent acquisition, drove much of the overall decline.

A recall of Goldfish crackers after a salmonella scare also hurt the company’s sales and bottom line.

The company, which is also under pressure to shed unnecessary expenses, said Thursday that it would cut an additional $150 million in costs. That will include “continuing to optimize its manufacturing network.”

Campbell Soup had already announced plans to cut $500 million in costs and pursue $295 million in savings from its acquisition of snack maker Snyder’s-Lance. The goal is to achieve those cost cuts by the end of its 2022 fiscal year.

The food giant said it had hired financial advisers to seek buyers of its Campbell International and Campbell Fresh businesses. That includes physical operations in Indonesia, Malaysia, Hong Kong and Japan. 

Taken together, the assets up for sale have 2018 sales of about $2.1 billion.

Campbell Soup interim CEO Keith McLoughlin said the company also considered splitting or pursuing a sale of the entire operation.

“Our new leadership team will concentrate on significantly improving operational discipline through a rigorous management model that aligns the enterprise from strategy through execution,” McLoughlin said in a statement. “We are moving forward with a sense of urgency to complete these changes in fiscal 2019, setting the foundation for sustainable, profitable growth in fiscal 2020 and beyond.”

Follow USA TODAY reporter Nathan Bomey on Twitter @NathanBomey.

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2N43fqL

UN Syria envoy Staffan de Mistura said a potential “perfect storm” is looming over Syria’s Idlib province, with possible military implications beyond the region.

Speaking to reporters in Geneva on Thursday, De Mistura offered to travel to Idlib to help ensure civilians can leave through a humanitarian corridor amid fears of an imminent government offensive to retake the last major region controlled by rebels.

“You can understand that when there is a perfect storm coming up in front of our eyes potentially, we need to address first things first,” De Mistura said. 

“I am once again prepared … personally and physically, to get involved myself … to ensure such a temporary corridor would be feasible and guaranteed for the people so that they can then return to their own places once this is over,” he added.

The UN also called on Russia, Iran and Turkey to forestall the battle in Idlib, which would affect millions of civilians and could see both sides using chemical weapons.

Idlib, which borders Turkey, is home to nearly three million people, up to half of whom are rebels and civilians transferred en masse from other territories that has fallen to Syrian troops after intense battles.

A major military operation in Idlib would pose a particularly threatening humanitarian situation because there is no opposition territory left in Syria where people could be evacuated to.

“There is no other Idlib,” De Mistura said, stressing the need to ensure civilians can evacuate to nearby areas under government control, with guarantees their rights will be respected once they get there.

“It would be a tragic irony frankly if at almost the end of … a territorial war inside Syria, we would be witnessing the most horrific tragedy to the largest number of civilians,” he said.

“It would be quite tragic at this stage, having seen how difficult the seven years [of Syria’s war] have been.”

‘Hotbed of terrorists’

Meanwhile, the Kremlin on Thursday called the Syrian rebel-held province of Idlib a “hotbed of terrorists” and said not tackling the problem was not a good option.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov made the comments to reporters on a conference call while answering a question about planned Russian naval drills in the Mediterranean, an exercise he said was justified due to the difficult situation in Syria.

Russia said on Wednesday that fighters there “must be liquidated” and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov described them as “a festering abscess”.

More than 350,000 people have been killed and millions displaced since Syria’s war started in 2011 with the brutal repression of anti-government protests.

Two years ago, De Mistura offered to go to eastern Aleppo and to personally escort al-Nusra rebels out of the besieged city. 

“Al-Nusra refused my offer to accompany them out, and they went to Idlib, and we lost two months at least and thousands of people died because of that,” he said.

The UN envoy said there were an estimated 10,000 al-Qaeda and al-Nusra fighters in Idlib, along with their families.

While he stressed the legitimacy of battling such “UN-identified terrorists”, he insisted efforts to defeat them did not justify putting the lives of some 2.9 million people in the area at risk.

“There is and can be no justification … to not avoid using heavy weapons in densely populated areas,” he said.

On Wednesday, UN chief Antonio Guterres warned that full-scale military operations in Idlib province could lead to a “humanitarian catastrophe” and cautioned against the use of chemical weapons.

A major offensive in the Idlib area, where displaced people already make up half the population, risks forcing another 700,000 Syrians from their homes, the United Nations said.

It also risks raising tensions with Turkey, whose army established a ring of observation posts around the rebel territory last year under a “de-escalation” deal with Russia and Iran.

Turkey, which has a small military presence in Idlib, has warned against such an attack.

SOURCE: Al Jazeera and news agencies

The Football Association of Wales has held talks over a potential home nations bid for the 2030 World Cup.

FAW chief executive Jonathan Ford believes the joint proposal would be “strong and compelling”.

The Scottish FA has also confirmed that exploratory discussions have begun, while the FA is already looking at a bid that Uefa has previously said it would “strongly support”.

Ford confirmed there is set to be a feasibility study into the prospect.

A Downing Street spokesman has also said the UK government would be supportive of a bid involving the home nations.

The SFA says its current focus is on Euro 2020, with Glasgow one of the host cities for the tournament, but BBC Scotland understands the Scottish government is aware of the discussions and would also support any bid.

“This is something that has come up in conversation and it is something we are looking into,” Ford told BBC Sport Wales.

“It’s no more than that and there’s going to be no news until at least midway through 2019.

“But there is going to be a little bit of a feasibility study to see whether or not a UK-wide bid, a home nations bid or similar, would be a powerful, strong bid.

“Personally, I think it would be and I think, should we go forward at that stage – which, as I say, won’t be determined until well into 2019 – I think we’d have a very strong and compelling bid.

“There’s a long way to go on it but it could be 2030, Fifa World Cup in the home nations – what a fantastic opportunity that would be.”

The Welsh government is also supportive of any bid, with economy and transport secretary Ken Skates confirming: “We are fully aware and supportive of the proposed feasibility study into a potential 2030 UK World Cup bid.

“Given Wales’ proven track record in delivering major events, and our ambition to host further events, we are fully supportive of the FAW’s aspirations.”

An English-led home nations bid for the 2030 World Cup was described in June as “definitely on the radar” by former Scottish FA boss Stewart Regan.

It came after Fifa vice-president David Gill said England should have “great confidence” in bidding for the 2030 tournament, having lost out to Russia for the right to host the 2018 tournament.

An SFA spokesman said in July it would be “open-minded” about a joint bid while, earlier this month, Northern Ireland manager Michael O’Neill said hosting World Cup games at Windsor Park would be “huge” for the country.

Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay have announced their plans to jointly bid for 2030 while Tunisia would be open to the idea of a North African bid along with Algeria and Morocco.

“The reality is for countries like Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, it’s always going to be a case of having to do it in partnership with another, and the logical partner for us would be England,” added Ford.

“You need a lot of stadia now; of course, the structure of the competition has changed – you need 16 40,000-seater stadia.

“Of course, we have a fantastic stadium with the Principality Stadium and we’d love to be there, but there’s a lot of discussions to be had.”

Asked whether the potential bid would include all four home nations, Ford said: “All of the discussions are still being had, so there’s a lot of wait and see.”