17 dead in stampede as over 100 million people gather at India’s Maha Kumbh festival
Ritesh Shukla/Getty Images
(ALLAHABAD, INDIA) — At least 17 people were killed and over 30 have been injured in a stampede at the Maha Kumbh Mela, one of the world’s biggest gatherings that occurs every 12 years, authorities said.
The Maha Kumbh Mela takes place every dozen years in the Indian city of Prayagraj, about 90 miles west of the holy city of Varanasi in Uttar Pradesh, when an estimated 100 million people gather to bathe in holy river waters at the confluence of the Ganges, the Yamuna and the Saraswati rivers. It is considered one of the most auspicious and holy dates on the Hindu calendar.
The stampede began in the early hours Wednesday morning, according to Indian officials. The death toll and numbers of those injured is expected to rise.
It was not immediately clear what triggered the panic at the festival but Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi called the incident “extremely sad” and extended his condolences to those affected.
“My deepest condolences to the devotees who have lost their loved ones. Along with this, I wish for the speedy recovery of all the injured,” Modi said in a post on X.
Modi added that he is in touch with his chief minister and other related authorities regarding the incident.
Authorities are expecting more than 100 million people to visit Prayagraj for the Maha Kumbh Mela — meaning “Festival of the Sacred Pitcher” — on Wednesday for the holy dip. It is regarded as a significant and auspicious day for Hindus due to a rare alignment of celestial bodies after 144 years.
Authorities have built a gigantic tent city on the banks of the rivers to accommodate the millions of pilgrims and tourists attending the festival — equipped with 3,000 kitchens, 150,000 toilets, roads, electricity, water, communication towers and 11 hospitals, according to the Associated Press.
An estimated 50,000 security personnel are also stationed in the city to help keep the peace as well as manage the tens of millions of people in the crowds.
ABC News’ Somayeh Malekian and Prashun Mazumdar contributed to this report.
Palestinians released by Israel during the 5th round of prisoner-hostage swap between Hamas and Israel, return to their families after taken by the International Committee of the Red Cross’ buses, in Ramallah, West Bank on February 8, 2025. (Photo by Issam Rimawi/Anadolu via Getty Images)
(LONDON) — Hamas militants freed three more Israeli hostages on Saturday in exchange for Israel releasing another 183 Palestinian prisoners as part of the ceasefire agreement between the warring sides.
The latest round of the hostage release took place in the city of Deir Al-Balah in the central Gaza Strip on Saturday morning. Two Red Cross officials took part in a signing ceremony with a Hamas commander on a stage prior to the handover. A banner could be seen on the stage that read in Arabic “We are the flood … We are the day after” and another banner with the words in Hebrew “Absolute victory” alongside an image of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s face.
The three Israeli hostages — Ohad Ben Ami, Eli Sharabi and Or Levi — were then escorted one-by-one out of vehicles by Hamas militants and brought onto the stage. All three appeared very thin and weak but able to walk and stand.
Hamas militants eventually escorted the hostages off the stage and into three Red Cross vehicles, which slowly drove away through the crowd of people. Meanwhile, the hostages’ families watched the events unravel on a television in southern Israel and they were seen crying at the sight of their loved ones.
“According to information communicated by the Red Cross, three hostages were transferred to them, and they are on their way to IDF and ISA forces in the Gaza Strip,” a joint statement from the Israel Defense Forces and the Israel Security Agency read following their departure.
The Red Cross later handed over the three newly-released hostages to IDF and ISA forces in Gaza before they crossed into southern Israel, where they underwent an initial medical assessment as their families waited for them at a hospital.
“Three returning hostages are currently being accompanied by IDF special forces and ISA forces on their return to Israeli territory, where they will undergo an initial medical assessment,” the IDF and ISA said in another joint statement. “The commanders and soldiers of the Israel Defense Forces salute and embrace the returning hostages as they make their way home to the State of Israel. The IDF Spokesperson’s Unit asks everyone to respect the privacy of the returning hostages and their families.”
As images of the newly released hostages surfaced, the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office issued a statement saying Netanyahu, who remained in the United States after an official visit to the White House in Washington D.C., “has instructed to not allow the situation to go unaddressed, and to take appropriate measures” because of “the serious condition of the three hostages and the repeated violations by the Hamas terrorist organization.”
In exchange for the three freed hostages, Israel released another 183 Palestinians from its prisons across the country — 72 were transferred to Ramallah and Jerusalem and 111 were transferred to Khan Yunis in southern Gaza Strip. Some of those released appeared frail, including an elderly man on an oxygen tank who had to be carried off one of the buses that arrived in Ramallah.
At least seven of the 72 Palestinian prisoners released in Ramallah and Jerusalem on Saturday were immediately transferred to a hospital, according to the Palestine Red Crescent Society. Their conditions were unknown. All 111 of the Palestinian prisoners released in Gaza on Saturday were taken to the European Hospital near Khan Yunis for medical evaluation. Their conditions were also unknown.
ABC News’ Nasser Atta, Jordana Miller, Dana Savir and Samy Zyara contributed to this report.
(LONDON) — President Volodymyr Zelenskyy declared martial law early on Feb. 24, 2022, under Kyiv skies still tinged black by the smoke from Russian missile strikes.
Three years later, the ravaged nation is still living under the extraordinary powers granted to the government in order to sustain its defensive and existential war against President Vladimir Putin’s invading Russian forces. Powers that Russia is wielding to undermine the country’s wartime leader.
Under the Ukrainian constitution, elections — whether presidential or parliamentary — cannot be held while martial law is in force.
Moscow has for months been seeking to weaponize Ukraine’s democratic freeze, with Putin and his allies framing Zelenskyy as illegitimate and therefore unsuitable to take part in peace talks.
President Donald Trump now appears to be lending his weight to the Kremlin’s campaign.
On Wednesday, Trump criticized his Ukrainian counterpart as “a dictator without elections” — prompting widespread consternation of Trump’s remarks both within the U.S. and especially among European allies.
Trump also claimed — without offering evidence — that Zelenskyy’s public approval rating was “down to 4%.” Recent major surveys show Zelenskyy’s approval rating at above 50%.
The push for new elections is “not a Russia thing,” Trump said. “That’s something coming from me and coming from many other countries also.”
A source close to the Ukrainian government — who did not wish to be named as they were not authorized to speak publicly — told ABC News they believe the push is coming from those who “believe that Zelenskyy, personally, is a problem because he is not compliant enough, he’s not simply going to accept anything that they propose or anything that they demand.”
Kyiv has repeatedly warned that elections during war time would be severely destabilizing. If Ukraine is forced into a rush and insecure election, “We could see absolute political chaos in Kyiv,” the source said.
In reality, until now, the legitimacy argument has come almost exclusively from Moscow.
“You can negotiate with anyone, but because of his illegitimacy, he has no right to sign anything,” Putin said of Zelenskyy in January, repeating his false claim that Ukraine’s inability to hold elections in 2024 meant that the president’s term had expired.
The country’s parliament and its speaker “remain the only legitimate authorities in Ukraine,” Putin said in May 2024.
Foreign allies of Kyiv have dismissed Putin’s claims, noting the totalitarian nature of Kremlin rule and Russia’s own carefully managed electoral theater, that has kept Putin in power for more than two decades.
They have also pushed back Trump’s attacks on Zelenskyy, with most leaders expressing solidarity with him. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz — for example — said it was “wrong and dangerous to deny President Zelenskyy democratic legitimacy.” Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer also said it was “reasonable” not to hold elections during wartime, following a call with Zelenskyy.
Trump’s domestic allies mobilized to support the president and criticize Zelenskyy. Elon Musk, for example, said Trump “is right to ignore” the Ukrainian president. Sen. Lindsey Graham told reporters, “We need elections in Ukraine,” while Sen. Josh Hawley likewise said Zelenskyy “should hold an election.”
Most Ukrainians politicians and experts have warned that any contest held during wartime would be vulnerable to Russian interference, could not guarantee the representation of soldiers deployed on the battlefield or refugees displaced either internally or abroad, and would threaten to destabilize the state at its most vulnerable moment.
Oleksandr Merezhko, a member of the Ukrainian parliament representing Zelenskyy’s party and the chair of the body’s foreign affairs committee, told ABC News that Putin “wants to use an election campaign during the war to undermine stability with Ukraine.”
“Putin is trying to push this narrative through someone in Trump’s entourage,” Merezhko said.
The Trump effect
Trump’s recent attacks on Zelenskyy appear to have bolstered the latter’s political position. Allies and rivals alike rallied around the Ukrainian president’s office in the aftermath of Trump’s broadsides.
“Only Ukrainians have the right to decide when and under what conditions they should change their government,” former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko wrote on Facebook. “None of us will allow such elections before the end of the war. Our enemies and even our allies may not like it, but it is true.”
Serhiy Prytula — another prominent political figure — urged compatriots to “ignore that rhetoric and ‘dictator’ accusations from Trump.”
The source close to the Ukrainian government said that certain figures in Trump’s orbit want Zelenskyy replaced by a more malleable successor, one less likely to push back on controversial American efforts to force a peace deal.
“According to their logic, the problem here is not Russia or Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, it’s the ‘the ongoing war,'” the source said. “What is the mechanism for changing that, and in their view creating the conditions for someone who would be more compliant in Kyiv? It’s elections.”
The source said Trump’s team are wrong to think that Zelenskyy is on unstable political ground. “They’re operating under all of these false assumptions, one of which is that if you hold elections in Ukraine, it will necessarily result in the success of a candidate who is willing to bend to whatever it is that Trump is demanding,” they said.
“I don’t think that they have anyone in mind,” the source added. “I just think that they’re confident in their ability to either create that individual in a way, or to cut some sort of private deal with someone.”
Even if the U.S. and Russia succeeded in unseating Zelenskyy in favor of a more pliant successor, “if you end up with leadership in Kyiv that is willing to cut some sort of deal that is absolutely unacceptable to a large segment of Ukrainian society, we could see fragmentation, even of the Ukrainian military,” they said.
“If the Trump administration pushes this government, or any Ukrainian government, too far, I think that this scenario becomes a real one, and this is certainly not in Ukraine’s interest or Europe’s interest, but I don’t see how it’s in the interest of the United States either.”
Zekenskyy’s challengers
For now, there appears little in the way of a concrete challenge to the incumbent.
In Kyiv, Valerii Zaluzhnyi — the former Ukrainian commander-in-chief who is now serving as Kyiv’s ambassador to the U.K. — is widely seen as the only real potential challenger to Zelenskyy.
Zaluzhnyi publicly fell out with the president and his team — prime among them Andriy Yermak, the head of Zelenskyy’s office — in late 2023 over public comments framing the war as a “stalemate.”
It is not clear whether Zaluzhnyi would stand for election. The former commander-in-chief has dodged questions about any future political ambitions.
But a November poll by the Social Monitoring Center organization put the former general at the top of preferred potential presidential candidates backed by 27% of 1,200 respondents. Zelenskyy trailed on 16%, with former President Petro Poroshenko on 7%.
A February survey by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) indicated diminished trust in the current president compared to the extraordinary highs of the early months of the war. But it still remains high compared to most democratically-elected leaders. Public trust in Zelenskyy among 1,000 respondents was at 57% in February, compared with 77% in December 2023 and 90% in May 2022, around three months after Russia’s invasion. The latest poll showed a 5% bump in trust from December 2024.
Another recent poll by the Identity and Borders in Flux project in partnership with KIIS published on Feb. 19, showed two-thirds of Ukrainians approve of Zelenskyy’s actions.
The KIIS poll found that trust in Ukraine’s civilian government overall fell to 26% — a decline from 52% in 2023. In contrast, those surveyed reported overwhelming 96% trust in the Ukrainian military, with 88% saying they trust Zaluzhnyi.
The showdown between Zelenskyy and Zaluzhnyi ended with the former assuming an ambassadorial posting to the U.K., in which the former general has maintained a relatively low media profile and avoided any public revival of tensions with the president.
The same cannot be said for Poroshenko — another potential electoral rival — with whom the president is now locked in a very public battle. Earlier this month, Zelenskyy signed a decree sanctioning Poroshenko and several other politically connected wealthy Ukrainians for allegedly undermining national security.
Poroshenko dismissed the sanctions as politically motivated and unconstitutional. “Why are they doing this? Hatred, fear and revenge,” he said in a statement. “And because they have elections. Not us. The government.”
The IBF project poll showed a much lower proportion — 26-32% — of Ukrainians would vote for Zelensky in an election. But that still far outpaces Poroshenko, his nearest current rival, and remains far above the 4% figure put forward by Trump.
Zelenskyy has been unclear on his own political goals. In 2022, the president said he will “definitely” remain in his post until Kyiv achieves victory. “After that, I don’t know,” he added. “I’m not thinking about that now, I’m not ready.”
Peace could prove perilous for Zelenskyy if Ukrainian voters do not agree with its terms.
One former official — who asked not to be named for fear of retaliation — told ABC News the president “needs to blame Trump” if Ukraine is indeed forced into a controversial peace deal.
“He cannot stop this war now and take responsibility, because for him, it will be political suicide,” they said.
(MANILA, PHILIPPINES)– Former Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte was detained on Tuesday under an International Criminal Court arrest warrant, which accused him of crimes against humanity in connection with the brutal “war on drugs” he led while in office, the Philippines Presidential Communications Office said.
Members of the Philippine National Police met the former president as he arrived in Manila, the capital, on a flight from Hong Kong, the office said.
Duterte carried out an extensive “war on drugs” after taking office in 2016. Independent rights organizations have accused him of overseeing a crusade of extrajudicial killings, many of which were alleged to have been carried out by so-called “death squads.”
More than 12,000 people were thought to have been killed, according to Human Rights Watch.
Officials in Manila said they received a copy of an ICC arrest warrant via Interpol on Tuesday morning. Dozens of officers swarmed Ninoy Aquino International Airport to arrest Duterte as he and his aides arrived at about 9:20 a.m., the presidential office said.
“The former President and his entourage are in good health and have been examined by government doctors,” the office said in a statement posted on social media in Filipino. “They have assured that he is in good condition.”
The ICC began an investigation into Duterte’s “war on drugs” in September 2021. The Philippine government that year sought to put an end to the probe, a request that was denied in 2023 by Karim A.A. Khan, the ICC prosecutor, according his office.
Khan in rejecting the request pointed to an investigation by the Philippine Commission on Human Rights into police and state activities carried out under the “war on drugs” between 2016 and 2021.
That investigation found that the government “failed in its obligation to respect and protect the human rights of every citizen, in particular, victims of drug-related killings” and “has encouraged a culture of impunity that shields perpetrators from being held to account,” Khan wrote, citing the rights group.
The ICC focused its investigation on Duterte’s actions between 2011, when he was a local mayor, and 2019. During those years, Duterte and other high-level government officials “reportedly encouraged, supported, enabled, and excused the killing of drug users and drug dealers,” the ICC prosecutor said in a filing.
Duterte, who is now 79, swept into national office from Davao City, where he had been mayor, with a promise to curb crime and corruption.
His methods for fighting illegal drug use had been described as “unorthodox” and on the verge of “the illegal,” he said in his inaugural address in 2016.
“As a lawyer and a former prosecutor, I know the limits of the power and authority of the president. I know what is legal and what is not,” he said in that address. “My adherence to due process and the rule of law is uncompromising.”
ABC News’ Andrew Evans and Karson Yiu contributed to this report.
