The United Kingdom has strongly condemned the security breach involving India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar in London. The UK Foreign Office asserted that the Metropolitan Police acted promptly to address the situation and warned that any attempts to “intimidate and threaten” are unacceptable.

A pro-Khalistani protester attempted to breach security barricades and shouted anti-India slogans outside Chatham House, where Jaishankar had attended an interactive session at the Royal Institute of International Affairs. The foreign minister, who was on the other side of the road, remained unharmed.

Swift police action

In response to the incident, UK authorities emphasized their commitment to security and law enforcement. “The Metropolitan Police acted swiftly to address the situation,” sources from the UK Foreign Office stated. They further condemned the act and reassured cooperation in diplomatic security matters.

A video circulating on social media showed a man attempting to break through the police cordon and block Jaishankar’s motorcade. However, the individual was quickly apprehended by officers on duty.

India’s response

India has expressed strong disapproval of the incident, stressing that host nations must uphold their diplomatic responsibilities. “We condemn the provocative activities of this small group of separatists and extremists,” Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said.

“We deplore the misuse of democratic freedoms by such elements. We expect the host government in such cases to fully live up to their diplomatic obligations,” Jaiswal added.

This is not the first instance of Khalistani groups attempting to disrupt Indian diplomatic missions in the UK. In March 2023, protesters pulled down the national flag at the Indian High Commission in London, which led India to summon the senior-most British diplomat in Delhi, demanding an explanation for the “absence of security.”

India urges UK to take action

Following the latest security breach, India has once again urged the UK government to take action against separatist elements operating from British soil. The ongoing activities of pro-Khalistani groups in the UK remain a point of contention between the two countries, with India pressing for stricter measures to curb such incidents.

NASA astronaut Sunita Williams is finally preparing to return to Earth after an unplanned nine-month stay in space. Originally intended to be an eight-day mission, her journey stretched unexpectedly due to technical difficulties with Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft.

Williams, along with fellow astronaut Butch Wilmore, embarked on the mission in June last year aboard Boeing’s new Starliner capsule. This marked the spacecraft’s first crewed flight. However, technical malfunctions surfaced upon their arrival at the International Space Station (ISS), prompting NASA to deem the capsule unfit for their return. Consequently, the agency opted to send the spacecraft back without any passengers, leaving Williams and Wilmore in space indefinitely.

NASA confirms return schedule

With multiple delays over the months, NASA had to wait for a safe alternative. Now, with the upcoming launch of SpaceX’s Crew-10 mission on 12 March, their replacements will finally arrive at the ISS. The returning astronauts, including Williams, are scheduled to depart on 19 March in an older SpaceX capsule.

Emotional and mental challenges of prolonged space stay

Speaking during a press conference, Williams reflected on the challenges of an extended mission. She described the experience as “an emotional rollercoaster,” emphasizing the difficulty of being away from family for such an extended period.

While the ISS provides astronauts with an extraordinary perspective of Earth and space, the psychological toll of isolation and uncertainty has been a significant challenge. Williams’ return will mark the end of an unexpectedly long and complex mission, highlighting both the rewards and difficulties of human spaceflight.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a federal judge’s authority to order the Trump administration to pay $2 billion to contractors of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) but stopped short of requiring immediate payment. The 5-4 decision rejected an emergency application filed by the Justice Department, which sought to block the order issued by U.S. District Judge Amir Ali.

Judge Ali had issued a series of rulings demanding the government release funds that President Donald Trump froze through an executive order targeting what he called wasteful foreign aid programs. While the Supreme Court’s decision is a temporary setback for the Trump administration, the nonprofit organizations and businesses awaiting payment remain in limbo. One organization recently laid off 110 employees due to the funding freeze, according to court documents.

Justice Samuel Alito, leading the dissenting conservative justices, criticized the ruling, calling it a reward for “an act of judicial hubris” and arguing that it imposes a $2 billion burden on American taxpayers. Alito contended that Judge Ali lacked the authority to mandate such payments.

The Supreme Court’s decision leaves in place Ali’s temporary restraining order, which had paused the spending freeze. Judge Ali is scheduled to hold a hearing on Thursday to consider a more permanent solution.

The majority opinion, supported by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett alongside the court’s three liberal justices, noted that the Trump administration had not challenged Ali’s initial order but only the deadline for compliance, which has already passed. The court instructed Ali to clarify the government’s obligations under the temporary restraining order, taking into account the feasibility of compliance timelines.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh joined Alito in dissent.

The Trump administration argued that the situation had evolved since the initial freeze, as it replaced the blanket spending halt with individualized assessments. These assessments led to the cancellation of 5,800 USAID contracts and 4,100 State Department grants, totaling nearly $60 billion in aid.

The funding freeze was implemented following an executive order by President Trump, who criticized foreign aid programs as wasteful and misaligned with his foreign policy objectives. The subsequent lawsuit alleged that the freeze violated federal law and disrupted critical, life-saving programs abroad.

Judge Ali initially ordered the temporary restoration of funding on February 13. However, after nearly two weeks of non-compliance, he set a deadline for the government to release payments for work already completed. The administration appealed, calling Ali’s order “incredibly intrusive and profoundly erroneous” and objecting to the timeline for releasing the funds.

The Supreme Court’s decision underscores the ongoing tension between the judiciary and the executive branch over the administration’s foreign aid policies. While the ruling affirms the judiciary’s role in overseeing executive actions, the delay in payment leaves contractors and aid organizations grappling with financial uncertainty.

As the legal battle continues, the fate of billions of dollars in foreign aid remains unresolved, with significant implications for global humanitarian efforts and U.S. foreign policy.