More stories

  • in

    Turkey Restricts Exports to Israel in Protest of War in Gaza

    Turkey said on Tuesday that it would restrict exports to Israel until there is a cease-fire in Gaza, prompting threats of a tit-for-tat response from a government with which it has long had tense relations.President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey has defended Hamas and lashed out at Israel over the war in Gaza, accusing it of deliberately attacking civilians. But his government had until Tuesday stopped short of taking concrete economic measures against Israel over the conflict.Turkey’s Trade Ministry said it was imposing restrictions covering dozens of exports — including aluminum, steel products, cement and jet fuel — after Israel denied a Turkish government request to airdrop humanitarian aid to Gaza.“This decision will remain in place until Israel declares a cease-fire in Gaza and allows the flow of a sufficient amount of uninterrupted aid to the Gaza Strip,” the ministry said in a statement.The announcement drew an angry response from Israel’s foreign minister, who accused Mr. Erdogan of “sacrificing the economic interests” of Turkey’s people in the name of supporting Hamas.“Israel will not capitulate to violence and blackmail and will not overlook the unilateral violation of the trade agreements and will take parallel measures against Turkey that will harm the Turkish economy,” the minister, Israel Katz, said in a statement.Turkey’s exports to Israel were worth $5.4 billion in 2023, or 2.1 percent of its total exports, according to official data.Turkey has long had turbulent relations with Israel, though in recent years there had been some signs of a thaw: In 2022, Turkey welcomed Israel’s president to Ankara, the first visit by an Israeli head of state since 2008. Mr. Erdogan met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel for the first time last September.Less than a month after that meeting, Hamas led the Oct. 7 attack on Israel that set off the war in Gaza.Under Mr. Erdogan, Turkey has often hosted members of Hamas, some of whose leaders were in the country for meetings on Oct. 7. The Turkish leader has strongly criticized Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, putting him sharply at odds with his NATO allies.But the rising death toll and dire humanitarian crisis in Gaza have prompted increasing criticism from Israel’s allies over how the war is being conducted.President Biden threatened last week to condition future U.S. support for Israel on how it addresses his concerns about civilian casualties and the humanitarian crisis. This week, the foreign minister of France told French news media that imposing sanctions might be one way of putting more pressure on Israel to open humanitarian corridors to Gaza.Gabby Sobelman More

  • in

    Elecciones en Venezuela: Edmundo González es la apuesta de la oposición

    La coalición de partidos que busca desafiar a la presidencia de Maduro dijo que el registro permitiría seguir su “lucha sin descanso en defensa del derecho a elegir de los venezolanos”.Primero fue María Corina Machado, una popular exlegisladora. Luego, se suponía que sería Corina Yoris, una profesora de filosofía poco conocida. Ahora, una coalición opositora ha presentado a un antiguo diplomático, Edmundo González, como su tercer candidato para enfrentarse al presidente Nicolás Maduro en las elecciones previstas para julio.Al menos, esa es la situación por ahora.La coalición de partidos políticos de la oposición, llamada la Mesa de la Unidad Democrática, lleva meses esperando para poder unirse en torno a un candidato único que pueda ser un rival viable para Maduro.Pero, como deja claro la rápida sucesión de posibles candidatos, el gobierno de Maduro ha puesto una serie de obstáculos para impedir ese objetivo.El lunes, una comisión electoral nacional controlada por aliados de Maduro utilizó una maniobra técnica para impedir que la coalición incluyera a Yoris en la papeleta. Era el último día para que los candidatos presidenciales se inscribieran a fin de participar en las elecciones de julio, y parecía que el esfuerzo por presentar un candidato unificado había sido derrotado.Entonces, el martes por la tarde, la coalición anunció en la plataforma de redes sociales X que la autoridad electoral le concedió una prórroga y que había “decidido inscribir provisionalmente” a González, a quien identificó como presidente de la junta directiva de la Mesa de la Unidad Democrática.Los voceros de la oposición dijeron en su publicación de X que la inscripción de González en la papeleta electoral permitiría a la coalición seguir “en su lucha sin descanso” en pro de la democracia, ya que busca desafiar la presidencia de Maduro, cuyo gobierno represivo ha dejado a Venezuela en la ruina financiera y ha ayudado a expulsar a, aproximadamente, una cuarta parte de su población.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Venezuela anuncia que las elecciones serán en julio

    La decisión de realizar elecciones es un cumplimiento parcial de un compromiso con EE. UU., pero con la exclusión de la principal figura de la oposición muchos se preguntan si la votación será libre y justa.Las autoridades venezolanas anunciaron el martes que las elecciones nacionales que muchos esperaban que forjaran un camino hacia la democracia se celebrarán el 28 de julio.Pero la decisión sobre la fecha se produce un mes después de que el más alto tribunal del país excluyera de la votación a la principal candidata de la oposición, lo que hizo que muchos se preguntaran hasta qué punto serán unas elecciones libres y justas.Sin embargo, el anuncio del gobierno del presidente Nicolás Maduro implica al menos un cumplimiento parcial del compromiso adquirido con Estados Unidos de celebrar comicios este año a cambio del levantamiento de las sanciones económicas paralizantes.En octubre, Maduro firmó un acuerdo con la oposición del país y se comprometió a trabajar por unas elecciones presidenciales libres y justas. En el acuerdo, Maduro dijo que celebraría elecciones antes de finales de año, y Estados Unidos, a su vez, levantó algunas sanciones como muestra de buena voluntad.Pero pocos días después, Maduro vio cómo una candidata de la oposición, María Corina Machado, ganaba más del 90 por ciento de los votos en las elecciones primarias organizadas por la oposición, que no tuvieron la participación del gobierno. Los decisivos resultados acentuaron su popularidad y plantearon la posibilidad de que pudiera derrotarlo en unas elecciones generales.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    U.S. Imposes Major New Sanctions on Russia, Targeting Finance and Defense

    The Biden administration, responding to the death of Aleksei A. Navalny, unveiled its largest sanctions package to date as the war in Ukraine enters its third year.The United States on Friday unleashed its most extensive package of sanctions on Russia since the invasion of Ukraine two years ago, targeting Russia’s financial sector and military-industrial complex in a broad effort to degrade the Kremlin’s war machine.The sweeping sanctions come as the war enters its third year, and exactly one week after the death of the opposition leader Aleksei A. Navalny, for which the Biden administration blames President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia. With Congress struggling to reach an agreement on providing more aid to Ukraine, the United States has become increasingly reliant on financial tools to slow Russia’s ability to restock its military supplies and to put pressure on its economy.Announcing the sanctions on Friday, President Biden reiterated his calls on Congress to provide more funding to Ukraine before it is too late.“The failure to support Ukraine at this critical moment will not be forgotten,” he said in a statement.The president added that the sanctions would further restrict Russia’s energy revenues and crack down on its sanctions evasion efforts across multiple continents.“If Putin does not pay the price for his death and destruction, he will keep going,” Mr. Biden said. “And the costs to the United States — along with our NATO allies and partners in Europe and around the world — will rise.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    U.S. to Impose Sanctions on More Than 500 Russian Targets

    A package of economic restrictions to be announced on Friday will be the largest since Russia invaded Ukraine two years ago.The United States plans to impose sanctions on more than 500 targets on Friday in its response to Russia over the death of the opposition leader Aleksei A. Navalny, the largest single package in a flurry of economic restrictions since the country’s invasion of Ukraine two years ago, according to a Treasury Department spokeswoman.The new measures, which are set to be rolled out by the Treasury and State Departments on Friday morning, come after the White House signaled this week that it was preparing “major” penalties after the recent death of Mr. Navalny in a Russian prison. It is not clear which sectors or individuals the Biden administration plans to target, a crucial variable in the sanctions’ ultimate expansiveness and effectiveness.As the war approaches its third year, the Biden administration has become increasingly reliant on using its financial tools to try to damage and isolate Russia’s economy. It has worked with allies from the Group of 7 nations to cap the price at which Russian oil can be sold on global markets, frozen hundreds of billions of dollars of Russian central bank assets, and enacted trade restrictions to try to block the flow of technology and equipment that Russia uses to supply its military.The United States has been closely coordinating with Europe in its efforts to cut Russia off from the global economy. This week, the European Union unveiled its 13th tranche of sanctions on Russia, banning nearly 200 people and entities that have been helping Russia procure weapons from traveling or doing business within the bloc. Britain also announced sanctions this week on companies linked to Russia’s ammunition supply chain, as well as on six Russians accused of running the Arctic prison where Mr. Navalny died.Despite the effort to exert economic pressure on Russia, it has largely weathered the restrictions. China, India and Brazil have been buying Russian oil in record quantities, and spending on the war effort has stimulated the Russian economy, which the International Monetary Fund said last month was growing faster than expected. More

  • in

    Terrorists Are Paying for Check Marks on X, Report Says

    The report shows that X has accepted payments for subscriptions from entities barred from doing business in the United States, a potential violation of sanctions.X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk, is potentially violating U.S. sanctions by accepting payments for subscription accounts from terrorist organizations and other groups barred from doing business in the country, according to a new report.The report, by the Tech Transparency Project, a nonprofit focused on accountability for large technology companies, shows that X, formerly known as Twitter, has taken payments from accounts that include Hezbollah leaders, Houthi groups, and state-run media outlets in Iran and Russia. The subscriptions, which cost $8 a month, offer users a blue check mark — once limited to verified users like celebrities — and better promotion by X’s algorithm, among other perks.The U.S. Treasury Department maintains a list of entities that have been placed under sanctions, and while X’s official terms of service forbid people and organizations on the list to make payments on the platform, the report found 28 accounts that had the blue check mark.“We were surprised to find that X was providing premium services to a wide range of groups the U.S. has sanctioned for terrorism and other activities that harm its national security,” said Katie Paul, the director of the Tech Transparency Project. “It’s yet another sign that X has lost control of its platform.”X and Mr. Musk did not respond to a request for comment. Mr. Musk has said that he wants X to be a haven for free speech and that he will remove only illegal content.Since Mr. Musk’s acquisition of Twitter in 2022, the company has made drastic changes to the way it does business — in some cases spurning advertising in favor of subscription dollars. It has also restored thousands of barred accounts and rolled back rules that once governed the site.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    U.S. Hits Back at Iran With Sanctions, Criminal Charges and Airstrikes

    In the hours before the United States carried out strikes against Iran-backed militants on Friday, Washington hit Tehran with more familiar weapons: sanctions and criminal charges.The Biden administration imposed sanctions on officers and officials of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, Iran’s premier military force, for threatening the integrity of water utilities and for helping manufacture Iranian drones. And it unsealed charges against nine people for selling oil to finance the militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah.The timing seemed designed to pressure the Revolutionary Guards and its most elite unit, the Quds Force, at a moment of extraordinary tension in the Middle East. Although the sanctions have been brewing for some time and the charges were filed earlier under seal, the region has been in turmoil for months.The actions are part of a coordinated governmentwide effort to disrupt Iran’s efforts to use illicit oil sales to fund terrorism, and to push back on the country’s increasingly capable offensive cyberoperations. In the 15 years since the United States mounted a major cyberattack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the country has trained a generation of hackers and struck back at Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United States, among others. Two American officials said the United States conducted cyberoperations against Iranian targets on Friday but declined to provide details.The effects of sanctions and indictments are hard to measure. Few Iranian officers or officials keep assets in Western banks or travel to the United States, meaning the sanctions may have little practical effect. While the indictments and sanctions have a psychological element, demonstrating to Iranians and their business associates around the world that Western intelligence agencies are often tracking their movements and their transactions, actual arrests and trials are infrequent.“The reason that we bring these cases is, we know that the money Iran obtains from the illicit sale of oil is used to fund its malign activities around the world,” Matthew G. Olsen, who heads the national security division of the Justice Department, said on Friday. “The threats posed by Iran and the destabilizing effects of its actions have only come into sharper relief since the attacks of Oct. 7,” the day of the Hamas attack on Israel that killed roughly 1,200 people.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Is North Korea Planning a War?

    An intensification of nuclear threats from North Korea while the world is preoccupied with other wars has ignited an urgent debate over Mr. Kim’s motives.North Korea fired hundreds of artillery shells in waters near South Korean border islands on Jan. 5. Last week, it said it no longer regarded the South as inhabited by “fellow countrymen” but as a “hostile state” it would subjugate through a nuclear war. On Friday, it said it had tested an underwater nuclear drone to help repel U.S. Navy fleets.That new drumbeat of threats, while the United States and its allies have been preoccupied with the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, has set foreign officials and analysts wondering whether the North’s leader, Kim Jong-un, has moved beyond posturing and is planning to assert more military force.For decades, a central part of the North Korean playbook has been to stage carefully measured and timed military provocations — some aimed at tightening internal discipline, others at demanding attention from its neighbors and the United States, or all of that at once.But to several close watchers of North Korea, the latest round of signals from Mr. Kim feels different. Some are taking it as a clue that the North has become disillusioned with seeking diplomatic engagement with the West, and a few are raising the possibility that the country could be planning a sudden assault on South Korea.A New Year’s celebration in Pyongyang, North Korea’s capital, on Dec. 31, 2023.Kim Won Jin/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesTwo veteran analysts of North Korea — the former State Department official Robert L. Carlin and the nuclear scientist Siegfried S. Hecker — sounded an alarm this past week in an article for the U.S.-based website 38 North, asserting that Mr. Kim was done with mere threats. “Kim Jong-un has made a strategic decision to go to war,” they wrote.Analysts broadly agree that North Korea has been shifting its posture in recent years, compelled by an accumulation of both internal problems, including a moribund economy and food and oil shortages, and frustrations in its external diplomacy, like Mr. Kim’s failure to win an end to international sanctions through direct diplomacy with President Donald J. Trump. And most agree that the North’s recent closeness with Russia, including supplying artillery shells and missiles for use in Russia’s war in Ukraine, will be a game-changer in some way.But there is still stark disagreement over where Mr. Kim’s new tack might be leading.Many say that Mr. Kim’s ultimate goal remains not a war with South Korea, a treaty ally of the United States, but Washington’s acceptance of his country as a nuclear power by prompting arms-reduction talks.“The North Koreans won’t start a war unless they decide to become suicidal; they know too well that they cannot win the war,” said Park Won-gon, a North Korea expert at Ewha Womans University in Seoul. “But they would love their enemies to believe that they could, because that could lead to engagement and possible concessions, like the easing of sanctions.”Posters in Pyongyang remind citizens of North Korea’s need to remain on a war footing.Cha Song Ho/Associated PressAnalysts in China, North Korea’s most vital ally, were also deeply skeptical that Mr. Kim would go to war unless the North were attacked. Prof. Shi Yinhong, at Renmin University in Beijing, asserted that the North’s leadership, not being irrational, ultimately acted out of self-preservation — and that starting a war would work against that goal.Others noted that the North could assert itself militarily, including through smaller conventional strikes and bolder weapons testing, without necessarily triggering a deadly response.“There are many rungs of the escalation ladder that North Korea can climb short of all-out war,” said Victor Cha, a Korea expert at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Kim is not that confident in his capabilities to deter U.S. reaction if he were to do something rash.”If Mr. Kim wants to climb that ladder, recent history suggests that this might be the time.North Korea has liked to unsettle its enemies at their most sensitive political moments, and both the United States and South Korea are holding elections this year. The North launched a long-range rocket in late 2012, between the United States and South Korean presidential elections. It conducted a nuclear test shortly before the inauguration of a South Korean leader in 2013. In 2016, it conducted another nuclear test two months before the American presidential election.North Korea could also attempt provocations in the coming weeks to try to help liberals who favor inter-Korean negotiations win parliamentary elections in South Korea in April, said the analyst Ko Jae-hong at the Seoul-based Institute for National Security Strategy. Through provocations, North Korea hopes to spread fears among South Korean voters that increasing pressure on the North, as the current administration of President Yoon Suk Yeol has tried to do, might “lead to a nuclear war,” he said.South Korean military exercises this month near the border with North Korea.Ahn Young-Joon/Associated PressNorth Korea “will continue to increase tensions until after the U.S. elections,” said Thomas Schäfer, a former German diplomat who served twice as ambassador to North Korea. But “at the height of tensions, it will finally be willing to re-engage with a Republican administration in the hope to get sanctions relief, some sort of acceptance of their nuclear program, and — as main objective — a reduction or even complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Korean Peninsula,” Mr. Schäfer said in a rebuttal to Mr. Carlin’s and Mr. Hecker’s analysis.Since Mr. Kim came to power in 2011, he has committed to building North Korea’s nuclear capability, using it both as a deterrent and as a negotiating tool to try to win concessions from Washington, like the removal of U.N. sanctions, to achieve economic growth.He tried it when he met Mr. Trump in 2018 and again in 2019. It failed spectacularly, and Mr. Kim returned home empty-handed and in humiliation.President Donald J. Trump and Kim Jung-un in 2019 in the Demilitarized Zone. In talks that year, the two failed to reach a deal on North Korea abandoning its nuclear ambitions in return for concessionsErin Schaff/The New York TimesHe then vowed to find a “new way” for his country.Since then, the North has rejected repeated calls from Washington for talks. It has also rejected South Korea as a dialogue partner, indicating from 2022 that it would use nuclear weapons against South Korea in a war and abandoning its long-held insistence that the weapons would keep the Korean Peninsula peaceful as a deterrent. It has tested more diverse, and harder-to-intercept, means of delivering its nuclear warheads.There is doubt that the North has yet built a reliable intercontinental ballistic missile that could target the United States. But two of the North’s main enemies, South Korea and Japan, are much closer.On the diplomatic front, Mr. Kim has taken pains to signal that he no longer views the United States as a critical negotiating partner, instead envisioning a “neo-Cold War” in which the United States is in retreat globally. He has aggressively improved military ties with Russia, and in return has most likely secured Russian promises of food aid and technological help for his weapons programs, officials say.South Korean troops patrol the entrance to a beach on an island near the sea boundary with North Korea.Jung Yeon-Je/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“I worry that his confidence might lead him to misjudge with a small act, regardless of his intention, escalating to war amid a tense ‘power-for-power’ confrontation with the United States and its allies,” said Koh Yu-hwan, a former head of the Korea Institute for National Unification in Seoul.Despite its own increasingly aggressive military posture in recent years, China may prove to be a damper on any North Korean military adventurism.China and North Korea are bound by a treaty signed in 1961 that requires each country to provide military assistance if the other is attacked. But China has little incentive to be drawn into a war in Korea right now.“A war on the Korean Peninsula would be disastrous for Beijing. An entire half-century of peace in East Asia, a period of unprecedented growth for the P.R.C., would come to a crashing halt,” said John Delury, a professor of Chinese studies at Yonsei University in Seoul, referring to the People’s Republic of China.The United States has long leaned on Beijing to rein in North Korea. By drawing close to Moscow, Mr. Kim has been putting his own pressure on China’s leader, Xi Jinping.“It is notable that Kim made his first post-pandemic trip to the Russian Far East, skipping China, and he just sent his foreign minister to Moscow, not Beijing,” Mr. Delury said. By raising tensions, Mr. Kim “can see what Xi is willing to do to placate him,” he added.David Pierson More