❌

Reading view

Saudi Arabia postpones major investment conference as Iran war fallout expands

Attendees at the Future Investment Initiative in 2024
Participants attending the annual Future Investment Initiative (FII) conference in Riyadh are seen here in 2024. Amid the US-Iran War, organizers announced that the 2026 event is postponed.

Fayez Nureldine/AFP via Getty Images

  • Saudi Arabia is postponing the "Future Investment Initiative" conference, which was set for later this month.
  • The announcement came as fighting has renewed between Iran-backed Houthi rebels and Saudi Arabia.
  • The conference, which was set to return Wall Street titans to Riyadh, will now take place next year.

Saudi Arabia has postponed a gathering of Wall Street titans as instability spreads across the Middle East amid the US-Iran War.

On Monday, Princess Maha Bint Mishari Al Saud announced that officials were postponing the Future Investment Initiative, which was scheduled for October 26 through the 29th until next year.

"This decision comes from a deep commitment to our partners, members, speakers, and delegates," Princess Maha said in a statement. "Because this is our landmark tenth edition, we want to ensure it delivers the full scale, extraordinary quality, and unforgettable impact that our community has come to expect and truly deserves."

The postponement comes after a recent attack by Iran-backed Houthi rebels on Riyadh's King Khalid International Airport, which left at least 13 people dead, the Associated Press reported. Before the announcement, CNBC reported that some delegates were prepared to land in Bahrain and then drive around five hours to Riyadh.

The conference, which has become a major gathering since its launch in 2017, was set to feature the likes of Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, and BlackRock CEO Larry Fink.

"We will announce the new 2027 dates very soon," the statement said.

Houthi rebels have attacked Saudi Arabia in recent weeks as an informal 2022 truce between the two sides deteriorated amid the US-Iran War. In 2015, Saudi Arabia began a bombing campaign against the rebels after they seized Sanaa, Yemen's capital.

Read the original article on Business Insider

  •  

Geneva UNHRC side event examines Pakistan terrorism, GSP+ and minority rights

A side event held during the 63rd session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva has brought together parliamentarians, journalists and civil-society representatives to discuss terrorism, religious freedom and the European Union’s relationship with Pakistan.

The event, “Remembrance and Tribute to the Victims of Terrorism”, took place at the Palais des Nations on 1st October. Speakers included Greek MP Georgios Manous, EU Today Publisher and Editor Gary Cartwright, Stéphane Michot of Ideal International, with a contribution from Prof K. Warikoo.

Two interventions focused particularly on Pakistan and the implications for European policy.

Victims of terrorism at centre of debate

Gary Cartwright began with the victims rather than trade or institutional policy.

“Terrorism is not an abstract concept,” he told the meeting, describing a bomb exploding in a market, a child killed outside a school and families waiting for someone who will never return.

He acknowledged that Pakistan itself has suffered heavily from terrorist violence. The 2026 Global Terrorism Index ranked Pakistan as the country most affected by terrorism in 2025, recording 1,139 deaths and 1,045 incidents.

At the same time, Gary raised the record of militant organisations operating from Pakistani territory. The UN Security Council describes Lashkar-e-Tayyiba as a Pakistan-based organisation involved in terrorist activity and records its involvement in the November 2008 Mumbai attacks, in which approximately 164 people were killed and hundreds injured. The same UN entry also records links to the December 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament.

Questions over EU education funding

Gary also questioned the safeguards surrounding European education funding in Pakistan.

In December 2024, Dutch MEP Bert-Jan Ruissen asked the European Commission whether EU money intended for education could reach Islamic religious seminaries and what controls were in place over the use of those funds.

In its February 2025 response, the Commission said EU assistance in Sindh and Balochistan was primarily directed through provincial education authorities. It also confirmed that, in selected areas of Balochistan, EU support facilitated formal education for pupils enrolled in religious seminaries through a government-recognised certification programme intended to ease their transition into state education. The Commission said projects were subject to field visits, reporting, monitoring and evaluation.

Gary stressed that he was not arguing that religious education itself constituted extremism. His argument was that European taxpayers should be able to establish where money was going, who administered programmes and what safeguards existed against extremist recruitment.

His intervention then turned to Pakistan’s GSP+ trade status.

Pakistan has benefited from GSP+ since 2014 and is currently the scheme’s largest beneficiary. According to the European Commission’s figures on EU-Pakistan trade, more than 85 per cent of Pakistan’s exports enter the EU duty and quota free. Continued participation requires Pakistan to ratify and effectively implement 27 international conventions covering human and labour rights, environmental protection and good governance.

Gary called for Pakistan’s GSP+ preferences to be suspended pending an assessment of the country’s compliance with its international commitments, counter-terrorism obligations and safeguards surrounding EU-funded programmes.

The issue has been examined previously by EU Today. Its 2025 white paper on Pakistan’s GSP+ compliance argued that the evidential threshold for beginning temporary withdrawal proceedings had been reached, while a Geneva side event in March 2026 considered Pakistan’s human-rights record and the conditionality attached to GSP+ preferences.

Pahalgam attack raised by Greek MP

Greek MP Georgios Manous approached the subject through terrorism, religious freedom and European security.

He referred to the terrorist attack at Pahalgam in Indian-administered Kashmir on 22 April 2025, in which 25 tourists and one local civilian were killed. EU Today previously examined the attack and its victims in its coverage of the Pahalgam massacre.

In December 2025, India’s National Investigation Agency filed a 1,597-page charge sheet naming Lashkar-e-Tayyiba/The Resistance Front and six other accused. The NIA said its investigation alleged that the attack had been planned, facilitated and executed with direction from Pakistan.

Pakistan rejects Indian allegations of responsibility. Islamabad has said India acted without verifiable evidence and maintains that Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif offered a transparent and independent investigation into the Pahalgam attack.

Manous also addressed Pakistan’s blasphemy legislation and the position of Christians, Hindus and Ahmadis, linking those questions to the broader problem of religious extremism. Concerns over minority rights and blasphemy laws have also featured in EU Today’s continuing coverage of the debate over Pakistan’s GSP+ eligibility.

The Greek MP then turned to Europe, arguing that extremist ideologies and networks should not be viewed solely as a South Asian security problem.

Pakistan, meanwhile, continues to present itself as both a major victim of terrorism and an international counter-terrorism partner. At the fourth US-Pakistan Counterterrorism Dialogue in Washington in August, the two governments reaffirmed cooperation against ISIS-K, al-Qaeda, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan and the Balochistan Liberation Army, while discussing border security and the disruption of terrorist facilitation networks.

The Geneva discussion therefore centred on two linked questions for European policymakers: how Pakistan’s counter-terrorism record should be assessed, and how that assessment should interact with the conditions attached to EU trade preferences and European-funded programmes.

  •  
❌