World
Here’s the latest.
The military conflict between India and Pakistan expanded in the days after the first airstrikes that followed a deadly terrorist attack last month on the Indian-controlled side of the disputed Kashmir region.
The confrontation was the latest escalation of a decades-long conflict over Kashmir, a scenic valley in the Himalayas that is wedged between the two nations. Kashmiris have rarely had a say in their own fate.
Here is a history of the dispute.
1947
Fraught Beginnings
Contention over Kashmir began nearly as soon as India and Pakistan were formed.
In 1947, Britain divided India, its former colony, into two countries. One was Pakistan, with a Muslim majority. The other, made up mostly of Hindus, kept the name India. But Kashmir’s fate was left undecided.
Within months, both India and Pakistan had laid claim to the territory. A military confrontation ensued. The Hindu ruler of Kashmir, who had at first refused to abdicate his sovereignty, agreed to make the region part of India in exchange for a security guarantee, after militias from Pakistan moved into parts of his territory.
What followed was the first war that India and Pakistan would fight over Kashmir.
Years later, in 1961, the former ruler of Kashmir passed away in Bombay. In an obituary, The New York Times summarized his decision to cede the territory to India in words that would prove true for decades to come. His actions, the article said, had contributed to “a continuing bitter dispute between India and Pakistan.”
1949
A Tenuous Cease-Fire
Militants killed 26 tourists on April 22
Militant attack
on April 22
Militant attack
on April 22
Militants killed 26 tourists on April 22
In January 1949, the first war between India and Pakistan over Kashmir concluded after the United Nations intervened to broker a cease-fire.
Under the terms of the cease-fire, a line was drawn dividing the territory. India would occupy about two-thirds of the area, and Pakistan the other third.
The dividing line was supposed to be temporary, pending a more permanent political settlement.
1965
War Breaks Out Again
Tensions were already high between India and Pakistan in the summer of 1965. There had been a skirmish between their forces along the border earlier in the year, in an area south of Kashmir.
When Pakistan conducted a covert offensive across Kashmir’s cease-fire line in August, the fighting quickly escalated into a full-scale war. The clash was short-lived — only about three weeks long — but bloody.
In January 1966, India and Pakistan signed an agreement to settle future disputes through peaceful means.
But the peace would not last.
1972
An Official Division
After a regional war in 1971 that led to the creation of Bangladesh, Pakistan and India decided to revisit the unsolved issue of Kashmir.
In December 1972, the countries announced that they had resolved the deadlock over Kashmir’s cease-fire line. But little changed besides the designation. The temporary cease-fire line from 1949 became an official “line of control.” Each country retained the section of Kashmir that it had already held for more than 20 years.
While the agreement did little to change the status quo in Kashmir, it came with an aspiration to improve the volatile relationship between India and Pakistan.
Reporting on the deal from New Delhi, a Times correspondent wrote of the two countries: “Official sources here indicated that they were satisfied with the settlement, which they said had been reached ‘in an atmosphere of goodwill and mutual understanding.’”
1987
The Rise of Insurgency
During a period of particular political turmoil — aggravated in 1987 by disputes over local elections that many thought were rigged — some Kashmiris turned to militancy, which Pakistan would eventually stoke and support.
Over the next decade or so, state police in Kashmir recorded tens of thousands of bombings, shootouts, abductions and rocket attacks.
That violence began to moderate around the 2000s, but the years of intense insurgency had further eroded the fragile relationship between Pakistan and India.
1999
Peace Talks Come Up Short
As a new millennium neared, India and Pakistan seemed poised to establish a more permanent peace.
In a gesture of goodwill, Pakistan’s prime minister hosted his Indian counterpart for a weekend of jocular diplomacy in February 1999. No Indian prime minister had visited Pakistan in a decade.
The summit — between the leaders of adversaries that each now had nuclear arms — produced signed documents affirming their mutual commitment to normalizing relations.
“We must bring peace to our people,” Pakistan’s prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, said at a news conference, as Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee of India smiled at his side. “We must bring prosperity to our people. We owe this to ourselves and to future generations.”
Three months later, their countries were at war. Again, Kashmir was the point of discord.
Fighting broke out after infiltrators from Pakistan seized positions within the Indian-administered part of Kashmir. India claimed that the infiltrators were Pakistani soldiers, which Western analysts would also come to believe. Pakistan denied that its forces were involved, insisting that independent freedom fighters were behind the operation.
The war ended when Mr. Sharif called for the infiltrators to withdraw (he maintained all along that they were not Pakistani forces and that Pakistan did not control them). A few months later, Mr. Sharif was deposed in a military coup led by a Pakistani general who, it was later determined, had directed the military incursion that started the war.
2019
India Cracks Down
After the war in 1999, Kashmir remained one of the world’s most militarized zones. Near-constant unrest in the territory brought India and Pakistan to the brink of war several times in the years that followed.
The last major flare-up was in 2019, when a bombing in Kashmir killed at least 40 Indian soldiers. Indian warplanes conducted airstrikes in Pakistan in retaliation, but the conflict de-escalated before becoming an all-out war.
A more lasting move came later that year, when the Indian government stripped Kashmir of a cherished status.
For all of Kashmir’s modern history — since its Hindu ruler acceded to India — the territory had enjoyed a degree of autonomy. Its relative independence was enshrined in India’s Constitution. But in August 2019, India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, rolled back Kashmir’s privileged status.
The crackdown came with a quick succession of draconian measures: Thousands of Indian troops surged into the territory. Internet connections were severed. Phone lines were cut. Mr. Modi’s government began directly administering the territory from New Delhi, and it imprisoned thousands of Kashmiris, including political leaders who had long sided with India in the face of separatist militancy.
The government’s heavy-handed approach stunned observers around the world. But the results, as far as India was concerned, justified the means. A new era of peace seemed to ensue. Acts of terrorism declined. Tourism flourished.
It was an illusion.
2025
A Terrorist Attack
On April 22, militants shot and killed 26 people, mostly tourists from different parts of India, near Pahalgam, Kashmir. Seventeen others were wounded. It was one of the worst terror attacks on Indian civilians in decades.
Almost immediately afterward, Indian officials suggested that Pakistan had been involved. Mr. Modi, the prime minister, vowed severe punishment for the attackers and those giving them safe haven, though he did not explicitly mention Pakistan. Pakistan swiftly denied involvement and said it was “ready to cooperate” with any international inquiry into the terrorist attack.
But India was not placated.
Its retaliatory move came on Wednesday. India said it struck sites in Pakistan and on Pakistan’s side of Kashmir, after it accused Pakistan of being involved in the April attack. Pakistan denied those claims and vowed to retaliate, and witnesses and Indian officials said that at least two Indian jets had crashed.
The clashes on Friday escalated into the two archrivals’ most expansive military conflict in decades. India said that Pakistan had launched attacks using drones and other weapons along its entire western border, while Pakistan rejected those claims. Shelling and gunfire was exchanged on both sides of the disputed border, blacking out towns and killing civilians.
Mujib Mashal, Salman Masood and John Yoon contributed reporting.
As the year draws to a close, Euronews explores the key moments that shaped the policy and politics at the European Parliament in 2025.
This parliamentary year was shaped by multiple attempts, albeit unsuccessfully, to topple the European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen.
Then there was an emerging — if informal — alliance of conservatives with the hard right that could pave the way for a new right in the lead-up to the general elections in France, Italy, and Spain in 2027.
It was also the year when the parliament adopted a much harder line on migration, doubled down on simplifying red tape and regulation to assist the ailing European industry, and moved further away from the landmark Green Deal, now under scrutiny.
1. Fresh corruption scandal looming over the Parliament
A major corruption investigation rattled the European Parliament in March.
Belgian prosecutors investigated an alleged corruption involving MEPs and assistants of the European Parliament and the Chinese tech company Huawei.
According to the allegations, payments, excessive gifts such as food and travel expenses, and regular invitations to football matches were used to influence MEPs, which Belgian authorities regard as pointing to corruption.
All these incentives were allegedly intended to secure favourable political positions on issues of interest to the Chinese company.
Eight individuals were charged with offences including corruption, money laundering, and participation in a criminal organisation.
Prosecutors also asked to lift the immunity of four MEPs: Italians Salvatore De Meo and Fulvio Martusciello (EPP), Maltese MEP Daniel Attard (S&D), and Bulgarian lawmaker Nikola Minchev (Renew Europe).
They have denied the allegations.
The Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs is still discussing the four cases, with the decision on whether to lift or maintain immunity set for the first months of 2026.
In the meantime, the European Parliament has barred Huawei lobbyists from its premises in Brussels, Strasbourg and Luxembourg.
2. Von der Leyen’s Commission survived no-confidence votes
Members of the European Parliament tried three times to topple the European Commission, tabling almost back-to-back no-confidence votes in an unprecedented sequence for the chamber.
To be approved, any motion of censure requires at least two-thirds of the votes cast in the Parliament, representing a majority of all its members. The threshold is high, and none of the three votes held got close to forcing the Commission to resign.
But it was the gesture that mattered. This is a defiant parliament, even among her conservative ranks.
The first vote held in July was initiated by some members of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR), challenging Ursula von der Leyen.
The 360 MEPs who voted against the motion of censure — and therefore defended the European Commission — were fewer than the 370 who had approved the Commission back in November 2024.
Several MEPs from S&D and Renew Europe groups, both part of the centrist majority, chose not to take part in the vote: it was a way of expressing their discontent with von der Leyen’s policies without supporting a motion coming from the far-right.
The following two votes held in October and tabled respectively by the Left and the far-right Patriots for Europe (PfE) groups, saw a more substantial majority defending the Commission, and von der Leyen’s position was strengthened as a result.
As one source told Euronews, the Parliament showed its teeth, and von der Leyen managed to prove there is no alternative to her leadership at the top of the Commission.
3. Magyar and Salis win against Hungary’s judiciary
Peter Magyar, the leader of the Hungarian opposition party Tisza, Klára Dobrev, a Socialist Hungarian lawmaker, and Ilaria Salis, an Italian activist and left-wing MEP, were sought by Hungary’s judiciary over different claims, but remained protected by the EU’s parliamentary immunity even as Hungarian MEPs tried to export domestic politics from Budapest into the grand stage of Brussels.
Magyar faced three requests to have his parliamentary immunity removed: two for defamation and one for allegations claiming he threw a man’s phone into the Danube river after an argument at a Budapest nightclub with a man who was filming him.
He considered the accusations a “political issue”, given his role as leader of the opposition to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and his former romantic relationship with Judit Varga, who served as justice minister under Orbán, which did not end on amicable terms.
MEP Dobrev was also accused of defamation, after she claimed that a local official was involved in a paedophilia scandal that led to the downfall of Hungary’s President Katalin Novák and Varga, the ex-partner of Magyar. She maintained her parliamentary immunity.
Separately, Italian MEP Ilaria Salis, who was arrested in February 2023 in Budapest after a brawl in which she was accused of assaulting and beating two men described as far-right militants during the so-called Day of Honour, a neo-Nazi gathering in Europe.
The issue became a point of tension between Budapest and Rome, torn between Salis’ clashing political views with the Meloni government, and the duty to protect an Italian citizen abroad. Her parliamentary immunity was also maintained.
The Parliament rejected all the requests in a tense voting session on 7 October.
Salis’ case went down to the wire: in a secret ballot, 306 MEPs voted in favour and 305 against, revealing deep divisions within the Parliament.
Salis later referred to it as a victory against fascism in Europe.
4. The EPP’s ‘dangerous liaison’ with the far right
This year was also marked by the emergence of an alternative to the traditional majority between the conservatives, socialists and liberals in the European Parliament, all of whom are often presented as pro-Europe and pro-rule of law.
On specific occasions, the EPP abandoned its traditional allies to advance legislation with the votes of the right-wing ECR and the far-right PfE and Europe of Sovereign Nations (ESN).
The unofficial alliance benefited the EPP in votes on migration and environmental issues.
One example was a legislative package titled Omnibus I, proposed by the Commission to support European businesses.
The package diluted the EU’s due diligence law, which required companies to assess their supply chains for potential environmental and labour violations.
New rules on sustainability reporting and due diligence obligations, which were more relaxed than the original law, were initially agreed by the political groups of the centrist majority. However, some MEPs from S&D and Renew voted to reject them.
Therefore, on 22 October in Strasbourg, the lawmakers subverted the decision adopted by the Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee on 13 October and the simplification package was rejected with 318 votes against, 309 in favour and 34 abstentions.
Three weeks later, the EPP managed to pass the bill with the votes of the ECR, PfE, and ESN, rather than negotiate a compromise version with its traditional allies.
The package significantly changed the original provisions of the due diligence law, which would apply now only to companies with more than 5,000 employees and a net annual turnover of over €1.5 billion (instead of 1,000 employees and a yearly turnover of €450 million as initially redacted).
The Parliament’s adopted version also scrapped fines of up to 5% for non-compliance, introducing a vaguer formula around “appropriate levels” of sanctions, to be decided by the member states.
5. A harder line on illegal migration
December saw a rush in Parliament to approve key migration-related documents, a divisive issue.
In the final plenary session in Strasbourg, the Parliament approved a change to the concept of a “safe third country,” which will expand the set of circumstances under which asylum applications can be rejected, enabling EU countries to deport asylum seekers to third countries, even if they have a connection to it.
The other legislative bill adopted was a new EU list of “safe countries of origin” for the purposes of asylum, which now includes Bangladesh, Colombia, Egypt, India, Kosovo, Morocco and Tunisia, as well as all EU candidate countries except Ukraine. Nationality-based selection of asylum applicants from those countries seeking to apply for asylum in the EU would be assessed through fast-track procedures.
On migration, the Parliament’s and the Council’s positions are aligned, signalling a pivot into a harder line when it comes to illegal migration in Europe.
World
The Kremlin says Moscow made an offer to France regarding a French citizen imprisoned in Russia
The Kremlin on Thursday said it was in contact with the French authorities over the fate of a French political scholar serving a three-year sentence in Russia and reportedly facing new charges of espionage.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters that Russia has made “an offer to the French” regarding Laurent Vinatier, arrested in Moscow last year and convicted of collecting military information, and that “the ball is now in France’s court.” He refused to provide details, citing the sensitivity of the matter.
The French Foreign Ministry said Thursday it had no comment.
Peskov’s remarks come after journalist Jérôme Garro of the French TF1 TV channel asked President Vladimir Putin during his annual news conference on Dec. 19 whether Vinatier’s family could hope for a presidential pardon or his release in a prisoner exchange. Putin said he knew “nothing” about the case, but promised to look into it.
Vinatier was arrested in Moscow in June 2024. Russian authorities accused him of failing to register as a “foreign agent” while collecting information about Russia’s “military and military-technical activities” that could be used to the detriment of national security. The charges carry a maximum penalty of five years in prison.
The arrest came as tensions flared between Moscow and Paris following French President Emmanuel Macron’s comments about the possibility of deploying French troops in Ukraine.
Vinatier’s lawyers asked the court to sentence him to a fine, but the judge in October 2024 handed him a three-year prison term — a sentence described as “extremely severe” by France’s Foreign Ministry, which called for the scholar’s immediate release.
Detentions on charges of spying and collecting sensitive data have become increasingly frequent in Russia and its heavily politicized legal system since Moscow invaded Ukraine in February 2022.
In addition to criticizing his sentence, the French Foreign Ministry urged the abolition of Russia’s laws on foreign agents, which subject those carrying the label to additional government scrutiny and numerous restrictions. Violations can result in criminal prosecution. The ministry said the legislation “contributes to a systematic violation of fundamental freedoms in Russia, like the freedom of association, the freedom of opinion and the freedom of expression.”
Vinatier is an adviser for the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue, a Switzerland-based nongovernmental organization, which said in June 2024 that it was doing “everything possible to assist” him.
While asking the judge for clemency ahead of the verdict, Vinatier pointed to his two children and his elderly parents he has to take care of.
The charges against Vinatier relate to a law that requires anyone collecting information on military issues to register with authorities as a foreign agent.
Human rights activists have criticized the law and other recent legislation as part of a Kremlin crackdown on independent media and political activists intended to stifle criticism of the war in Ukraine.
In August 2025, Russian state news agency Tass reported that Vinatier was also charged with espionage, citing court records but giving no details. Those convicted of espionage in Russia face between 10 and 20 years in prison.
Russia in recent years has arrested a number of foreigners — mainly U.S. citizens — on various criminal charges and then released them in prisoner swaps with the United States and other Western nations. The largest exchange since the Cold War took place in August 2024, when Moscow freed journalists Evan Gershkovich and Alsu Kurmasheva, fellow American Paul Whelan, and Russian dissidents in a multinational deal that set two dozen people free.
World
Pope Leo XIV delivers first Christmas message calling for end to violence in Middle East, Russia-Ukraine war
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Pope Leo XIV appealed Thursday in his Christmas Day message for peace in conflict-scarred regions, calling for an end to violence in the Middle East and Ukraine.
Speaking to tens of thousands gathered in St. Peter’s Square for his first Christmas “Urbi et Orbi” address, Latin for “to the city and to the world,” Pope Leo prayed for “justice, peace and stability for Lebanon, Palestine, Israel and Syria.”
The pontiff then turned to the Russia-Ukraine war, calling on believers to pray for the “tormented people” of Ukraine.
“May the clamor of weapons cease, and may the parties involved, with the support and commitment of the international community, find the courage to engage in sincere, direct and respectful dialogue,” he said.
ZELENSKYY CALLS FOR US TO RESPOND TO ‘SIGNALS’ RUSSIA IS ‘PREPARING TO MAKE NEXT YEAR A YEAR OF WAR’
Pope Leo XIV waves before delivering the “Urbi et Orbi” Christmas Day blessing from the main balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican, Thursday, Dec. 25, 2025. (Gregorio Borgia/AP)
Pope Leo also remembered civilians caught in other conflicts, including in parts of Africa and Asia, and prayed for peace for people suffering under political instability, religious persecution and terrorism.
He urged world leaders to reject violence and indifference, stressing that peace must be rooted in justice, dialogue and solidarity with the most vulnerable.
“In becoming man, Jesus took upon himself our fragility, identifying with each one of us: with those who have nothing left and have lost everything, like the inhabitants of Gaza; with those who are prey to hunger and poverty, like the Yemeni people; with those who are fleeing their homeland to seek a future elsewhere, like the many refugees and migrants who cross the Mediterranean or traverse the American continent,” the pontiff said.
Pope Leo XIV, after delivering the Urbi et Orbi” Christmas Day blessing from the main balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican, Thursday, Dec. 25, 2025. (Gregorio Borgia/AP)
TRUMP TOUTS ‘PROGRESS’ ON UKRAINE-RUSSIA DEAL, ADMITS IT’S ‘ONE OF THE MORE DIFFICULT’ CONFLICTS TO SOLVE
“On this holy day, let us open our hearts to our brothers and sisters who are in need or in pain. In doing so, we open our hearts to the Child Jesus, who welcomes us with open arms and reveals his divinity to us,” he added.
Pope Leo, the first U.S.-born pope, was elected in May following the death of Pope Francis and has made appeals for peace a central theme of his early papacy.
Pope Leo XIV waves before delivering the “Urbi et Orbi” Christmas Day blessing from the main balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican, Thursday, Dec. 25, 2025. (Gregorio Borgia/AP)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
He has repeatedly called for an end to Russia’s war in Ukraine and has met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as part of his diplomatic outreach.
The Vatican said in July that Pope Leo expressed willingness to host representatives of both Russia and Ukraine for peace negotiations, a position he has maintained.
Indian truckers sue California’s DMV for revoking their licenses
How the Grinch went from a Yuletide bit player to a Christmas A-lister
Seven books to help you work through the climate anxiety you developed in 2025
Federal judge blocks ICE from arresting immigrants who show up for court appointments in Northern California
Lakers’ Austin Reaves will not return vs. Rockets because of calf soreness
Florida High School Football Rankings: Top 25 teams – Oct. 21
Cleary's 21 help Le Moyne down Central Connecticut State 69-64 in OT
How old is Bo Nix? What to know about Oregon quarterback ahead of 2024 NFL Draft
99th annual Pony Swim held in Virginia
Video: ‘It Didn’t Have to Happen This Way:’ U.Va. Faculty Call for Review of Police Response to Protests
Best of 2025: Top five defining moments in the European Parliament
DOJ says it may need a ‘few more weeks’ to finish releasing Epstein files
Trump lists accomplishments, says ‘Radical Left Scum’ are ‘failing badly’ in Christmas message
Ukraine accepts demilitarised zone to end Russia war, but do DMZs work?
Into the void: how Trump killed international law
-
Maine1 week agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
New Mexico1 week agoFamily clarifies why they believe missing New Mexico man is dead
-
Massachusetts1 week agoMIT professor Nuno F.G. Loureiro, a 47-year-old physicist and fusion scientist, shot and killed in his home in Brookline, Mass. | Fortune
-
Culture1 week agoTry This Quiz and See How Much You Know About Jane Austen
-
World6 days agoPutin says Russia won’t launch new attacks on other countries ‘if you treat us with respect’
-
Maine1 week agoFamily in Maine host food pantry for deer | Hand Off
-
Minneapolis, MN1 week agoMinneapolis man is third convicted in Coon Rapids triple murder
-
Politics1 week agoBorder Patrol chief, progressive mayor caught on camera in tense street showdown: ‘Excellent day in Evanston’