US foreign policy

Subterms

    More stories

    • 200 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Travelling to Trump’s US is a low-level trauma – here’s what Africans can do about it

      by

      Hello and welcome to The Long Wave. This week, I reflect on the increasing difficulty of travel and immigration for many from the African continent, and how one country is plotting a smoother path.Parallel experiences of travelView image in fullscreenI have just come back from holiday, and I’m still not used to how different travel is when not using an African passport. My British citizenship, which I acquired about five years ago, has transformed not only my ability to travel at short notice but it has eliminated overnight the intense stress and bureaucratic hurdles involved in applying for visas on my Sudanese passport.It is difficult to explain just how different the lives of those with “powerful” passports are to those without. It is an entirely parallel existence. Gaining permission to travel to many destinations is often a lengthy, expensive and sickeningly uncertain process. A tourist visa to the UK can cost up to £1,000, in addition to the fee for private processing centres that handle much of Europe’s visa applications abroad. And then there is the paperwork: bank statements, employment letters, academic records, certified proof of ownership of assets, and birth and marriage certificates if one is travelling to visit family. This is a non-exhaustive list. For a recent visa application for a family member, I submitted 32 documents.It may sound dramatic but such processes instil a sort of low-level trauma, after submitting to the violation of what feels like a bureaucratic cavity search. And all fees, whatever the decision, are non-refundable. Processing times are in the hands of the visa gods – it once took more than six months for me to receive a US visa. By the time it arrived, the meeting I needed to attend for work had passed by a comically long time.Separation and severed relationshipsView image in fullscreenIt’s not only travel for work or holiday that is hindered by such high barriers to entry. Relationships suffer. It is simply a feature of the world now that many families in the Black diaspora sprawl across continents. Last month Trump restricted entry to the US to nationals from 20 countries, half of which are in Africa. The decision is even crueler when you consider that it applies to countries such as Sudan, whose civil war has prompted many to seek refuge with family abroad.That is not just a political act of limiting immigration, it is a deeply personal one that severs connections between families, friends and partners. Family members of refugees from those countries have also been banned, so they can’t visit relatives who have already managed to emigrate. The International Rescue Committee warned the decision could have “far-reaching impacts on the lives of many American families, including refugees, asylees and green card holders, seeking to be reunified with their loved ones”.A global raising of barriersView image in fullscreenThe fallout of this Trump order is colossal. There are students who are unable to graduate. Spouses unable to join their partners. Children separated from their parents. It’s a severe policy, but shades of it exist elsewhere by other means. The UK recently terminated the rights of foreign care workers and most international students to bring their children and partners to the country. And even for those who simply want to have their family visit them, access is closed to all except those who can clear the high financial hurdles and meet the significant burdens of proof to show that either they can afford to maintain their visitors or that they will return to their home countries.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIt was 10 years before I – someone with fairly stable employment and a higher-education qualification – satisfied the Home Office’s requirements and could finally invite my mother to visit. I broke down when I saw her face at arrivals, realising how hard it had been for both of us; the fact that she had not seen the life I had built as an adult. Compare this draconian measure to some countries in the Gulf, such as Saudi Arabia, that have an actual visa category, low-cost and swiftly processed, for parental visits and residency.A new African modelView image in fullscreenBut as some countries shut down, others are opening up. This month, Kenya removed visa requirements for almost all African citizens wanting to visit. Here, finally, there is the sort of regional solidarity that mirrors that of the EU and other western countries.Since it boosts African tourism and makes Kenya an inviting destination for people to gather at short notice for professional or festive reasons, it’s a smart move. But it also sends an important signal to a continent embattled by visa restrictions and divided across borders set by colonial rule.We are not just liabilities, people to be judged on how many resources they might take from a country once allowed in. We are also tourists, friends, relatives, entrepreneurs and, above all, Africans who have the right to meet and mingle without the terror, and yes, contempt, of a suspicious visa process. If the African diaspora is being separated abroad, there is at least now a path to the option that some of us may reunite at home.

      To receive the complete version of The Long Wave in your inbox every Wednesday,please subscribe here. More

    • 200 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s shift on Ukraine has been dramatic – but will it change the war? | Rajan Menon

      by

      Donald Trump presents himself as a peerless president, an unrivaled negotiator, even a “genius”. So it’s a unique moment when he comes close – I emphasize the qualifier –to conceding that another leader has outfoxed him. Trump suggested as much recently when characterizing Vladimir Putin’s modus operandi. “Putin,” he told reporters on 13 July, “really surprised a lot of people. He talks nice and then bombs everybody in the evening.” Melania Trump may have contributed to this reassessment. As Trump recounted recently, when he told her about a “wonderful conversation” with the Russian leader, she responded, “Oh, really? Another city was just hit.”Trump’s new take on Putin is a break with the past. His esteem for Putin – whose decisions he has described as “savvy” and “genius” – has contrasted starkly with his derisive comments about the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, whom he memorably disrespected during a White House meeting and even blamed for starting the war.As recently as February, he declared that Russia’s invasion didn’t matter to the United States because, unlike Europe, it was separated from Ukraine by “a big, big beautiful ocean”. He criticized Joe Biden’s assistance to Ukraine as a waste of taxpayers’ money.Now, Trump has not only changed his view of Putin, stunning many within his “America First” MagaA movement; he’s decided to start arming Ukraine. Well, sort of.Trump has gone beyond in effect conceding that Putin has played him. He has decided to sell military equipment to individual European countries so that they can supply Ukraine and restock their arsenals with purchases from the United States. The president formally announced the change during his 14 July meeting with Mark Rutte, Nato’s secretary general.There was more. Trump warned Putin that if he did not accept a ceasefire – which he has steadfastly refused, just as he has ignored Trump’s demand to stop bombing Ukraine’s cities – within 50 days, Russia would be slammed with tariffs as high as 100%, as would countries that continued to trade with it after the deadline.Two things are clear. First, Trump’s perspective on Putin has changed, unexpectedly and dramatically. Second, a war that Trump once said was none of America’s business now apparently matters. The president said European countries would buy “top of the line” American military equipment worth “billions of dollars” to arm Ukraine. According to one report citing “a source familiar with the plan”, the total will be $10bn.This all sounds like a very big deal. But here’s where it becomes important to go beyond the headlines and soundbites and delve into the details.Take the $10bn figure. That’s certainly not chump change. Moreover, the main piece of equipment specified so far, the Patriot “long range, high altitude, all weather” missile defense system, will provide desperately needed relief to Ukrainian city dwellers, who have endured relentless waves of drone attacks – several hundred a night – followed by missiles that slice through overwhelmed defenses. Ukraine has some Patriots but needs more: it’s a vast country with a dozen cities whose populations exceed 400,000.However, a Patriot battery (launchers, missiles, a radar system, a control center, antenna masts, and a power generator) costs $1bn, the missiles alone $4m apiece. Ukraine may not need 10 Patriot batteries, but even a smaller number will consume a large proportion of the $10bn package. The other system that has been mentioned is the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (Jassm), which combines stealth technology and GPS guidance with a 230-mile range. Ukraine will be able to use its American-made F-16 jets to fire Jassms into Russia from positions beyond the reach of Russian air defense systems. But a single Jassm costs about $1.5m, so the costs will add up quickly. Additional items have been mentioned but only generically; still, their price must also be figured in, bearing in mind that the war could drag on. So, $10bn could be depleted quickly.Moreover, beyond a certain point the US cannot sell equipment from its own stocks without regard to its military readiness requirements. Precisely for that reason, the defense department recently declined to send Ukraine some of the equipment promised under Joe Biden.And Trump has not said that there will be follow-on sales to benefit Ukraine once the $10bn mark is reached. Even if he were to change his mind, individual European countries would be able to buy only so much American weaponry without straining their finances, especially because France and Italy have opted out of the arrangement. Trump has been uninterested in joining the recent move by the UK and the EU to impose a $47.60 per barrel price cap on Russian oil sales, toughening the $60 limit the west enacted in 2022. Finally, Trump isn’t going to resume Biden’s multibillion-dollar military assistance packages – 70-plus tranches of equipment, according to the DoD.Trump’s 50-day tariff deadline permits Putin to continue his summer offensive, and may even provide an incentive to accelerate it. Russia has already shrugged off Trump’s tariff threat. Its exports to the US in 2024 amounted to $526m, a tiny fraction of its global sales.By contrast, Trump’s secondary tariffs will hurt Russia, which earned $192bn in 2024 from its global exports of oil and related products, much of that sum from India and China. If the president follows through with his threat, Beijing will surely retaliate, and the consequence will be painful: the United States exports to China totaled $144bn last year. Will Trump proceed anyway, and during his ongoing trade wars, which have already started increasing prices in the US? His track record on tariff threats leaves room for doubt.Ukraine’s leaders are understandably elated by Trump’s reappraisal of Putin. But it’s premature to conclude that it’s a turning point that could change the war’s trajectory. Washington’s new policy may prove far less momentous than Maga critics fear and not quite as transformative as Kyiv and its western supporters hope for.

      Rajan Menon is a professor emeritus of international relations at the City College of New York and a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      US Senate passes aid and public broadcasting cuts in victory for Trump

      by

      The US Senate has approved Donald Trump’s plan for billions of dollars in cuts to funding for foreign aid and public broadcasting, handing the Republican president another victory as he exerts control over Congress with little opposition.The Senate voted 51 to 48 in favour of Trump’s request to cut $9bn in spending already approved by Congress.Most of the cuts are to programmes to assist foreign countries stricken by disease, war and natural disasters, but the plan also eliminates the $1.1bn the Corporation for Public Broadcasting was due to receive over the next two years.Trump and many of his fellow Republicans argue that spending on public broadcasting is an unnecessary expense and reject its news coverage as blighted by “anti-right bias”.Standalone rescissions packages have not passed in decades, with lawmakers reluctant to cede their constitutionally mandated control of spending. But the Republicans, who hold narrow majorities in the Senate and House, have shown little appetite for resisting Trump’s policies since he began his second term in January.The $9bn at stake is small in the context of the $6.8tn federal budget, and represents a tiny portion of all the funds approved by Congress that the Trump administration has held up while it has pursued sweeping cuts, many ordered by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (Dog)e.By mid-June, Trump was blocking $425bn in funding that had been appropriated and approved by Congress, according to Democratic lawmakers tracking frozen funding.However, the president and his supporters have promised more of the “rescission” requests to eliminate previously approved spending in what they say is an effort to pare back the federal government.The House of Representatives passed the rescissions legislation, without altering Trump’s request, by 214-212 last month. Four Republicans joined 208 Democrats in voting no.But after a handful of Republican senators balked at the extent of the cuts to global health programmes, Russell Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, said on Tuesday that Pepfar, a global programme to fight HIV/Aids launched in 2003 by President George W Bush, was being exempted.The change brought the size of the package of cuts to $9bn from $9.4bn, requiring another House vote before the measure could be sent to the White House for Trump to sign into law.The rescissions must pass by Friday. Otherwise, the request would expire and the White House required to adhere to spending plans passed by Congress.Two of the Senate’s 53 Republicans , Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine, joined Democrats in voting against the legislation. “You don’t need to gut the entire Corporation for Public Broadcasting,” Murkowski said told the Senateskip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionShe said the Trump administration had not provided assurances that battles against diseases such as malaria and polio worldwide would be maintained. Murkowski called for Congress to assert its role in deciding how federal funds were spent.The Republican Senate majority leader, John Thune of South Dakota, called Trump’s request a “small, but important step toward fiscal sanity”.Democrats scoffed at that, noting that congressional Republicans had this month passed a massive package of tax and spending cuts that nonpartisan analysts estimated would add more than $3tn to the country’s $36.2tn debt.Democrats accused Republicans of giving up Congress’s constitutionally mandated control of federal spending.“Today, Senate Republicans turn this chamber into a subservient rubber stamp for the executive, at the behest of Donald Trump,” Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leader, representing New York, said. “Republicans embrace the credo of cut, cut, cut now, and ask questions later.”The cuts would overturn bipartisan spending agreements most recently passed in a full-year stopgap funding bill in March. Democrats warn a partisan cut could make it more difficult to negotiate government funding bills that must pass with bipartisan agreement by 30 September to avoid a shutdown.Appropriations bills require 60 votes to move ahead in the Senate but the rescissions package needs just 51, meaning Republicans can pass it without Democratic support. More

    • 213 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Tuesday briefing: What Trump’s ‘massive’ weapons deal for Ukraine means for the war – and for Putin

      by

      Good morning. It looks like the bromance between Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, is over. Maybe for good.Last night an exasperated Trump said he had finally had enough of “tough guy” Putin’s refusal to give him what he wants: an end to the war in Ukraine. The United States, he announced, will start selling what the Nato secretary general Mark Rutte, sitting alongside him at a White House press conference, called “massive numbers” of weapons to Ukraine to help it defend itself against Russia.Trump also delivered an ultimatum to Putin: agree to a ceasefire within 50 days or face – you guessed it – tariffs.Yesterday’s press conference with Rutte is a sign of just how much has changed in the past six months. It was only in February that the world witnessed the excruciating spectacle of Trump and his vice-president, JD Vance, humiliating and belittling the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, at the Oval Office before a live global TV audience of millions.For Ukraine’s supporters in Congress and in Europe, this is a moment of victory with the US now firmly diplomatically and militarily in Kyiv’s corner. The issue is the extent to which Trump’s antipathy towards Putin translates into long-term support for Kyiv, and whether the extra military clout ends up being enough to turn the conflict decisively in Ukraine’s favour.For today’s newsletter, I talked to Dan Sabbagh, the Guardian’s defence and security editor, about what the breakdown in diplomatic relations between Trump and Putin could mean for Ukraine and the prospects for peace. That’s after the headlines.Five big stories

      Middle East crisis | A feud has broken out between the Israeli government and the military over the cost and impact of a planned camp for Palestinians in southern Gaza, as politicians attacked the former prime minister Ehud Olmert for warning that the project would create a “concentration camp” if it goes ahead.

      UK news | A senior coroner’s officer who first reviewed the deaths of babies at the Countess of Chester hospital for Cheshire police in 2017 has said she believes Lucy Letby has suffered a miscarriage of justice. Last month, Stephanie Davies wrote to Cheshire’s senior coroner that: “I am now extremely concerned that the convictions of Ms Letby are wholly unsafe.”

      NHS | Wes Streeting has said resident doctors’ strikes would be “a gift to Nigel Farage” before a meeting with the British Medical Association this week where he will seek to avert industrial action.

      UK news | Constance Marten and Mark Gordon have been found guilty of the manslaughter of their newborn daughter, who died after they took her to live in a tent in freezing wintry conditions to evade social services.

      Media | A report on the behaviour of Gregg Wallace has substantiated 45 allegations made against the former BBC presenter, including claims of inappropriate sexual language and one incident of unwelcome physical contact.
      In depth: ‘Tonally, today we saw a very, very different Trump’View image in fullscreenAs relationships go, it’s fair to say Trump and Putin’s status has now shifted from “it’s complicated” into more definitively hostile territory, as the former’s frustration with Russia’s refusal to budge in the stalled peace talks seems to have reached a crescendo.“I don’t want to say he’s an assassin, but he’s a tough guy,” Trump said yesterday as he announced the new US arms sales to Ukraine, noting that several of his predecessors had also become disillusioned with Putin.“Tonally, today we saw a very, very different Trump when it comes to Russia,” said Dan Sabbagh. “Up until yesterday there was this feeling that he still believed he could get Putin to the table and make some kind of sweetheart peace deal but all of that seems to have gone away. Diplomatically it is a decisive shift.”What military support did Donald Trump announce?Although neither Trump nor Rutte put a number on the value of the weaponry heading Ukraine’s way, Trump said “top of the line” equipment would be arriving to Ukraine’s European allies very soon.The US will provide a number of Patriot missile systems – a long-range, all-altitude, all-weather air defence system to counter tactical ballistic missiles and aircraft – funded by Germany and other Nato partners.Considering the almost nightly bombardment Ukraine and its people are coming under, this is likely to be very welcomed by Ukraine and would be a significant step in helping Ukraine to defend itself.Trump also threatened tariffs of “about 100%” if a deal isn’t done to end the war in 50 days.How have relations soured between Trump and Putin?After Trump won his first term in 2016, his admiration for Putin’s strongman image and insistence that the Russian president wasn’t such a bad guy set the US on a wholly different course in terms of its willingness to engage with Russia.The start of his second term was characterised by hostility towards Ukraine and its president, Zelenskyy – whom Trump branded a “dictator” – and a desire to negotiate one-to-one with Putin about a ceasefire and end to the war. Only this month the US briefly halted shipments of arms to Ukraine because it said its own stockpiles were too low.Still, over the past month Trump has been increasingly bewildered at Putin’s refusal to give him the peace deal he so desperately needs to make good on his boast that he can end the Ukraine war – even if not in his promised 24 hours. While Ukraine has buckled to US demands such as signing a minerals deal, Putin has given Trump nothing of any substance (apart from, of course, a flattering portrait). Trump’s sense of betrayal has only increased as Putin has stepped up his attacks on Ukrainian cities. Putin “talks nice but then he bombs everybody in the evening”, Trump said at the weekend.Dan said the new arms package that the US has announced for Ukraine was Trump’s attempt to claw back some leverage over the Russian leader. While it remains to be seen what difference it can make militarily, this is a diplomatic turning point in relations between the two superpowers.“For me, the fact that he’s agreed in principle to sell weapons to Ukraine is more important than any threat about tariffs,” said Dan. “Some Ukrainian analysts have been saying that they thought that Putin has overplayed his hand with Trump and I would agree with that.”What does this mean for Ukraine?Dan said that after his public humiliation in the Oval Office, Zelenskyy was quick to act on advice from European leaders to appeal to Donald Trump’s ego. One fascinating detail in an Axios report yesterday was that one of the things that seems to have worked in Zelenskyy’s favour with Trump was him wearing a suit instead of his usual military attire at the recent Nato summit.“After Zelenskyy walked into that ambush he swiftly realised that he had to be patient because Putin himself would prove to Trump that he was not a good-faith actor, which so far appears to have played out,” said Dan.While the US arms sale for Ukraine is, undoubtedly, a sign of better relations with Washington, Dan also agreed with the assessment that the new shipment was probably more to do with Trump’s anger and frustration at Putin than deep-seated support of Ukraine.“I don’t think Trump thinks he’s fallen out with Putin,” said Dan. “It could be that in a few days or weeks, if Putin starts making noises again about being prepared to make concessions, we could see Trump flexing back.”Dan thought it was significant that Trump brought up his wife, Melania, at the press conference saying that she had been sceptical about their friendly phone calls all along. “Even if he was just musing aloud it was an acknowledgment that at the heart of his family there has been someone just prodding him out of the idea that Putin was serious about peace.”How could this influence the outcome of the war?Dan said that without a concrete dollar amount in the billions attached to what the US will sell Ukraine’s European allies, it is hard to get a firm understanding of just how potentially decisive this military support to Ukraine could be.“The real question is how much these new US weapons will make a difference to the war and improve Ukraine’s ability to fight the kind of war it needs to fight, which is a hard defensive war that will allow it to remain stable and better counter these Russian missile attacks,” said Dan.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionDan said what is clear is that Russia is setting itself up for engaging in a “forever war” until it achieves its objectives, whatever the cost. “Russia just hopes to just grind Ukraine down,” said Dan. “It seems prepared to stomach casualties of more than 1,000 per day and has organised itself around a war economy that could keep going for a long time.”Could the US starting to send “massive” amounts of weaponry to Ukraine make the Kremlin think again?Dan doesn’t think so. “Militarily at the moment it doesn’t appear to be a decisive intervention and my instinct is that Russia isn’t going to stop and that Ukrainians have to come to terms with the fact that nothing is going to change any time soon.”What else we’ve been readingView image in fullscreen

      This feature by Keith Stuart is a fascinating deep dive into how creative video games like Minecraft and Animal Crossing can help Ukrainian refugee children understand and cope with trauma. Craille Maguire Gillies, newsletters team

      This interview by Ruaridh Nicoll with the Guardian’s Gaza diarist, the anonymous writer who catalogued his life during the five months of the war, is a devastating but urgent read about his life under fire and how he escaped into exile. Annie

      John Merrick is pointed on how “a new chorus of ‘declinism’” is becoming part of the national consciousness once again – and with it comes racialised undertones that distract us from the true causes (it’s not migrants) and solutions (hello, wealth distribution). Craille

      I absolutely hoovered up this beautiful ode to Pamela Anderson by Caitlin Flanagan in the Atlantic (£). A gorgeous piece of writing about her love for Anderson and what she can teach us about resilience and grace in the face of industrial-levels of misogyny. Annie

      Thanks to Rukmini Iyer, who has not only solved supper at my house with her recipe for cashew rice bowls with stir-fried tofu, but helped me see what I might do with kimchi, an ingredient I enjoy but don’t often reach for. Craille
      SportView image in fullscreenCricket | England beat India at Lord’s to take a 2-1 lead in the series after a tense final day. Third Test: England, 387 & 192, bt India, 387 & 170, by 22 runs.Football | The president of Fifpro has described the Club World Cup as a “fiction” and compared Gianni Infantino to the Roman emperor Nero, as the dispute between the players’ union and Fifa continued to escalate.Cycling | Ben Healy rode himself into the ground to become the first Irishman in 38 years to wear the yellow jersey, as Simon Yates claimed victory in stage 10.The front pagesView image in fullscreenThe Guardian print edition leads with “Trump issues warning to Putin as he does deal with Nato to arm Kyiv”. The Telegraph says “Trump threatens China over Russian oil” and the Financial Times has “Trump threatens 100% trade levies if Russia does not end war in 50 days”. The Daily Mail splashes on “The killer aristocrat” and further offers “Revealed: why daughter of privilege had four children taken into care”. “Arrogance of monster parents” – that’s the Metro about the same case. The Daily Mirror’s top story is “Sacked Gregg: I won’t be the last” while the Times runs with “New grant to push sales of electric cars for net zero” and the Express predicts “Next tax raid will ‘pick the pockets’ of the grafters”. In the i paper you can read “UK to offer new bumper mortgages for £30,000 earners as Reeves sweeps away crash rules”.Today in FocusView image in fullscreenThe law change that could transform toxic workplacesZelda Perkins was Harvey Weinstein’s PA – and has spent the last eight years campaigning against the non-disclosure agreements used to silence abused employees. Now she has won a major victory. Alexandra Topping reportsCartoon of the day | Ben JenningsView image in fullscreenThe UpsideA bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all badView image in fullscreenFussy eaters are often mocked and, as Jason Okundaye writes, they are misunderstood. “I am of Nigerian heritage after all, and I grew up eating and loving a range of dishes – abula, efo riro, bokoto – that would probably flip the stomachs of many Europeans on sight.” What stresses him out are ordinary foods with textures he finds unpleasant: nuts in desserts, cheese, oats, tuna, brown bread. “But I eventually grew tired of my own fussiness”, he admits, and so he made one small change: every week, he would eat as much of a food containing a single ingredient he had previously avoided, a kind of culinary exposure therapy. It’s still a work in progress: he’s overcome his nut aversion thanks to baklava but can’t stomach the oats in Hobnobs. But while he “recently braved the evil mayonnaise, and heaved so violently that I thought I was dying”, Okundaye gives himself full points for trying. His old dislikes, he realises, are a matter of taste – not a reason to panic.When he’s not forcing food down, Jason edits The Long Wave, our weekly Black life and culture newsletter – make sure you sign up here.Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every SundayBored at work?And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow.

      Quick crossword

      Cryptic crossword

      Wordiply More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Netanyahu flies home without a Gaza peace deal but still keeps Trump onside

      by

      Benjamin Netanyahu arrived back in Israel on Friday without a ceasefire in the Gaza war despite heady predictions from US and Israeli officials that this week could provide a breakthrough in negotiations. But he did not come home completely empty-handed.The Israeli PM’s visit was his third since Donald Trump’s inauguration, with several high-profile meetings at the White House, a nomination for Trump to receive the Nobel peace prize, and suggestions from Trump and the special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, that peace could be achieved in a week.But as Netanyahu’s trip ended, no clear results had been achieved. Witkoff postponed a trip to Doha on Tuesday as it became clear that the negotiations had not reached a point where they could produce a ceasefire agreement.While Netanyahu repeated a refrain that a ceasefire could be announced within days, a deal to bring peace to more than 2 million Palestinians in the Gaza Strip remained elusive.“I hope we can complete it in a few days,” Netanyahu said during an appearance on Newsmax, a conservative, pro-Trump news network on Wednesday. “We’ll probably have a 60-day ceasefire. Get the first batch [of hostages] out and then use the 60 days to try to negotiate an end to this.”By Thursday, when he attended a memorial service for two Israeli embassy staff killed in Washington, Netanyahu said Israel would not compromise on its demands for Hamas to disband. “I am promoting a move that will result in a significant liberation, but only on the conditions Israel demands: Hamas disarm, Gaza demilitarise,” he said. “If it is not achieved through diplomacy, it will be achieved by force.”Several officials suggested during the week that only a single sticking point remained between negotiators in Doha: the extent of a withdrawal by the Israel Defense Forces that would follow the release of some of the hostages being held by Hamas. The White House had pushed back against an initial map that would have left Israel with significant zones of control in Gaza, which Witkoff had compared to a “Smotrich plan”, referring to the hardline Israeli finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich. Israel reportedly redrew that map to make it more palatable to the US administration.But Hamas has said there were other disagreements, including negotiations over whether the Gaza Humanitarian Fund, an Israeli and US-backed logistics group, would be allowed to continue to deliver food to the territory (the UN said on Friday that 798 people had been killed trying to reach GHF sites since its introduction in May) and whether Israel would agree to a permanent truce, which it has said it would not. US mediators sought to bridge the gap by telling Qatari intermediaries they would guarantee the ceasefire’s continuation after 60 days as negotiations continued.The upshot is that while Netanyahu leaves the US without a ceasefire, he has managed his relationship with Trump through high-profile assurances that he is seeking a peace in Gaza, while maintaining a status quo that members of his rightwing coalition, including the ministers Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, have said is preferable to a peace deal.For Netanyahu, the trip produced images that reinforced Israeli claims there was “no daylight” between him and Trump, and came as the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, announced a decision to impose sanctions on Francesca Albanese, a UN expert on the occupied Palestinian territories, for urging the international criminal court to investigate Israeli officials and US companies over the Gaza war.Trump’s frustrations with Netanyahu appeared to be boiling over a month ago as the US president sought to negotiate a truce between Iran and Israel, which had been trading airstrikes and missile barrages as Israel sought to dismantle the Iranian nuclear programme.“I’m not happy with Israel,” he said on the White House lawn. “We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the fuck they’re doing.”That recalled remarks by Robert Gates, a former US secretary of defence, about successive White House administrations’ difficulties in managing an ally in the region that also had considerable political influence in the US.“Every president I worked for, at some point in his presidency, would get so pissed off at the Israelis that he couldn’t speak,” Gates said.But a full breach with the US would have been disastrous for Netanyahu, who is managing his own difficult coalition and has been targeted in a graft investigation at home that was again delayed as a result of his international travel. And, after joint strikes against Iran, the Israeli PM was keen to show that the two men were in lockstep, while giving the Trump administration an opportunity to show it was working toward a Gaza peace.Elliott Abrams, the senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, said the Trump administration had sought, as it did during the first short-lived ceasefire, to bring “pressure to bear on Israel directly” through discussions with Netanyahu and his chief lieutenant, Ron Dermer, and “trying to bring pressure on Hamas mostly through the Qataris, when there are these talks in Doha”.He added: “Whether that pressure is effective is unclear.” More

    • 188 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Threats, delays and confusion: 10 key points to understand another week of Trump tariff turmoil

      by

      Donald Trump ramped up his trade rhetoric this week, firing off more than 20 letters to governments outlining new tariff rates if agreements aren’t reached by 1 August.In April, Trump announced a 10% base tariff rate and additional duties ranging up to 50% for many other countries, although he later delayed the effective date for all but 10% duties until 9 July after market panic.Trump officials initially suggested they would strike dozens of deals with key economies by the 9 July deadline, but as the 90-day pause ended this week, the president announced a range of new rates for various countries, but delayed their implementation until next month.Here’s what’s happened:

      Trump informed powerhouse suppliers Japan, South Korea and a number of other nations at the start of this week that they will face tariffs of at least 25% starting from August unless they can quickly negotiate deals.

      On Wednesday he announced more tariffs on countries like the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Algeria, as well as a 50% tariff on products from Brazil, tying the move to what he called the “witch-hunt” trial against its former president, Jair Bolsonaro. Trump criticised the trial Bolsonaro is facing over trying to overturn his 2022 election loss. Brazil’s president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, threatened to hit back with reciprocal 50% tariff on US goods.

      On Thursday, Trump announced the US would impose a 35% tariff on imports from Canada, despite ongoing negotiations and prime minister Mark Carney’s decision last month to rescind a digital services tax that faced criticism from the US president. Carney said his government would continue to defend Canadian workers and businesses in their negotiations and work towards the 1 August deadline.

      Trump also said on Thursday that a letter would be sent to the European Union, the US’s biggest trading partner, “today or tomorrow”. Last week the EU and US were closing in on a high-level “framework” trade deal that would avert 50% tariffs on all exports from the bloc.

      The steep tariff rates announced throughout the week range from 25-50%, with some of the harshest levies imposed on developing nations in south-east Asia, including 32% for Indonesia, 36% for Cambodia and Thailand and 40% on Laos and Myanmar, a country riven by years of civil war.

      On his first official visit to Asia, US secretary of state Marco Rubio sought to reassure regional powers of Washington’s commitment to them, saying countries there may get “better” trade deals than the rest of the world. Prior to Rubio’s arrival in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysian prime minister Anwar Ibrahim condemned the tariffs at the opening of an Asean foreign ministers’ meeting.

      Trump has also vowed to implement tariffs of up to 200% on foreign drugs and 50% on copper. Copper prices hit a record high in the US after the announcement.

      US treasury secretary Scott Bessent said he expected several trade announcements this week, but to date the US has secured just two deals with trading partners. The first with the UK, signed on 8 May, includes a 10% tariff on most UK goods, including cars, and zero tariffs for steel and aluminium. A second deal was reached with Vietnam last week that sets a 20% tariff for much of its exports, although the full details are unclear, with no text released.

      On Thursday, Trump said the tariffs had been “very well-received”, adding that the stock market “hit a new high today”.

      Global stock markets have largely shrugged off the latest threats. Analysts say traders now expect a deal or another delay, while investors appear to be waiting until a deal is done or the tariffs kick in. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Lobbyists linked to Donald Trump paid millions by world’s poorest countries

      by

      Some of the world’s poorest countries have started paying millions to lobbyists linked to Donald Trump to try to offset US cuts to foreign aid, an investigation reveals.Somalia, Haiti and Yemen are among 11 countries to sign significant lobbying deals with figures tied directly to the US president after he slashed US foreign humanitarian assistance.Many states have already begun bartering crucial natural resources – including minerals – in exchange for humanitarian or military support, the investigation by Global Witness found.USAID officially closed its doors last week after Trump’s dismantling of the agency, a move experts warn could cause more than 14 million avoidable deaths over five years.Emily Stewart, Global Witness’s head of policy for transition minerals, said the situation meant that deal making in Washington could become “more desperate and less favourable to low-income countries”, which had become increasingly vulnerable to brutal exploitation of their natural resources.Documents show that within six months of last November’s US election, contracts worth $17m (£12.5m) were signed between Trump-linked lobbying firms and some of the world’s least-developed countries, which were among the highest recipients of USAID.Records submitted under the US Foreign Agents Registration Act reveal some countries signed multiple contracts, including the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), which has endured mass displacement and conflict over its mineral wealth for years.The DRC is primed to sign a mineral deal with the US for support against Rwanda-backed rebels, providing American companies access to lithium, cobalt and coltan.The DRC – a former top-10 USAID recipient – signed contracts worth $1.2m with the lobbyists Ballard Partners.The firm, owned by Brian Ballard, lobbied for Trump well before the 2016 US election and was a leading donor to the US president’s political campaign.Somalia and Yemen signed contracts with BGR Government Affairs – $550,000 and $372,000 respectively.A former BGR partner, Sean Duffy, is now Trump’s transport secretary, one of myriad links between the US president and the lobbying firm.The government of Pakistan, a country that struggles with extreme poverty but is extremely rich in minerals, has signed two contracts with Trump-linked lobbyists worth $450,000 a month.Pakistan is now tied up in deals with multiple individuals in Trump’s inner circle, including the president’s former bodyguard Keith Schiller.Access to key natural resources has become a priority for Trump, particularly rare earth minerals. These are considered critical to US security, but the global supply chains for them are dominated by China.Other nations are offering exclusive access to ports, military bases and rare earths in exchange for US support.Although Global Witness said the revolving door between governments and lobbyists was nothing new, the organisation said it was concerned by the broader, exploitative dynamics driving new deals.Stewart said: “We’re seeing a dramatic cut in aid, combined with an explicit rush for critical minerals, and willingness by the Trump administration to secure deals in exchange for aid or military assistance.“Dealmaking needs to be transparent and fair. It is vital to recognise the role that international aid plays in making a safer world for all, and that aid should retain its distinct role away from trade.” More

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Maga influencer and de facto national security adviser Laura Loomer holds outsized sway on Trump

      by

      After years of claiming to be the vanguard of a new “America First” isolationist movement rebelling against the neoconservative policies of the George W Bush administration that led to the bloody wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Maga’s online influencers are cheering for another war in the Middle East.And not just any war: they are applauding Donald Trump’s high-risk decision to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities, a move that was considered a war too far even by the Bush administration.Maga’s quick flip-flop has made it clear that Maga was never really anti-war. Maga is about xenophobia, not isolationism, and its support for Trump’s decision to bomb a Muslim country fits in with its support for his draconian campaign against immigrants.But above all, Maga is about fealty to Trump.That formula certainly helps explain why Laura Loomer, who has emerged as the most prominent Maga America First influencer in the early days of Trump’s second term, has given her full support to his Iran strike.In early April, Loomer, a 32-year-old pro-Trump online influencer widely seen as a rightwing conspiracy theorist, met with Trump and gave him a list of names of people on the staff of the national security council that she believed were not loyal enough to Trump or at least had professional backgrounds that she considered suspect. Trump fired six staffers. Later, national security adviser Mike Waltz, whom Loomer had criticized for his role in the Signalgate chat leak scandal, was ousted as well.Loomer doesn’t have a job in the government, but she has still emerged as one of Trump’s most important and most polarizing foreign policy advisers in the early days of his second administration. She has had direct access to Trump and has used it to push for ideological purges inside the administration, instilling fear and anger among national security professionals.In fact, when it comes to the national security side of the Trump administration, Loomer has been something akin to a one-woman Doge. Now the big question is how long her influence with Trump will last, or whether she will soon go out the same way as Elon Musk.Loomer’s power in the Trump administration is ill-defined. Her many critics say she has just been taking credit for moves that Trump was already planning. But Trump himself has said he takes her seriously, so it may be more accurate to describe her as Trump’s de facto national security adviser.Press reports recently suggested that Loomer’s status in the White House was waning because she had overreached, much like Musk. She has left a trail of bitter Trump aides, while there have also been reports that Trump himself has grown weary of her. But, as if to disprove the reports that she was getting frozen out, Loomer had a private meeting with JD Vance in early June.In a revealing interview on journalist Tara Palmeri’s podcast in late April, Loomer said that her White House access came directly from Trump himself, and that she maintained her relationship with the president even as his aides tried to keep her out. “Donald Trump is my biggest ally in the White House,” she said.“I don’t have delusions of grandeur, but I certainly do believe that a lot of the information I have given him has protected him and has prevented disasters from happening,” she added. “I believe that the information that I provide is valuable. And I believe that it has proven itself to be an asset to President Trump and his apparatus. I don’t know why some of the people that work for him don’t want that information around him. But I’m not going to let that stop me. I’m going to keep on uncovering information and finding ways to get it to President Trump – and informing President Trump about individuals within his inner circle that are working against his agenda.”Loomer added that “it all comes down to vetting at the end of the day”.Loomer’s close ties to Trump first became big news during the 2024 presidential campaign, when she traveled with the Republican candidate on his campaign plane despite repeated efforts by Trump aides to keep her away. The aides were particularly upset that Loomer traveled with Trump on September 11, since she had earlier gained online infamy after posting a video claiming that the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center was an “inside job”. To be sure, fears by his aides that Trump was associating with a conspiracy theorist ignored the fact that he relishes in spreading conspiracy theories far and wide. During the 2024 campaign, Trump promoted a conspiracy theory that Haitian immigrants were eating pets in Springfield, Ohio; that xenophobic lie became the hallmark of Trump’s fall campaign.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOnce Trump returned to office, Loomer began to flex her newfound power, and even professional ties to top Trump administration officials weren’t enough to protect staffers from being fired after Loomer gave her list of names to Trump. Among those fired at the NSC was Brian Walsh, who had worked on the staff of the Senate intelligence committee for Marco Rubio, now serving as both secretary of state and national security adviser, when Rubio was in the Senate.The most stunning purge attributed to Loomer came in April when Trump fired Gen Timothy Haugh, the director of the National Security Agency, along with his top deputy, after they had found their way on to Loomer’s list as well. The fact that Loomer could trigger the firing of a senior military officer in charge of the nation’s largest intelligence agency finally led to a bipartisan outcry in Washington. A group of Senate Democrats wrote to Trump saying that the firings were “inexplicable”, while Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican senator who is now a leading Trump critic, lamented that experienced military leaders were being ousted while “amateur isolationists” are in senior policy positions. The moves even troubled Mike Rounds, a South Dakota Republican senator and Trump loyalist who is the chair of the cybersecurity subcommittee of the Senate armed services committee. Rounds made a point of praising Haugh during a subcommittee hearing soon after his firing and noted that “men and women capable of leading the National Security Agency … are in short supply. We do not have enough of these types of leaders, and a loss of any one of them without strong justification is disappointing.”But like Musk, Loomer has been so red-hot in the early days of Trump’s second term that her fall seems almost inevitable, especially after she began to call out White House actions she didn’t like.In May, for example, she publicly criticized Trump’s decision to accept a luxury jet from Qatar.When news of the gift was first reported, Loomer posted a statement saying: “This is really going to be such a stain on the admin if this is true.” She added: “I say that as someone who would take a bullet for Trump. I’m so disappointed.” She later backtracked and became more supportive. But later she was critical of Trump’s decision to withdraw the nomination of billionaire Jared Isaacman to be the head of Nasa, whose nomination she had supported. “There is reason to believe that Isaacman may be facing retaliation because of his friendship with @elonmusk,” Loomer posted as the news first broke. Days later, Isaacman suggested that he also believes that his nomination was withdrawn because of his ties to Musk.Loomer has been careful to try to limit her criticism to Trump’s aides, and not to Trump himself. But it is an open question how long that distinction will make a difference for Loomer. During the Palmeri podcast, Loomer said that she is “not going to be a sycophant and sit there and pretend that every little thing is great”. She added that “there’s a lot of incompetence in the White House. There’s a lot of people in positions they shouldn’t be in and they embarrass the president on a daily basis.”That is the backdrop for Loomer’s strong support for Trump’s decision to attack Iran. Perhaps concerned that her earlier criticism was damaging her ties to Trump world, Loomer has been profuse with her praise of Trump’s Iran attack, while also defending her America First credentials. In one post, she asked “How is it not AMERICA FIRST to congratulate those who just made sure Islamists who chant ‘DEATH TO AMERICA’ … never have an opportunity to have a nuke?” She has even gone on the offensive against other rightwing influencers, including Tucker Carlson, who have dared criticize the Iran strike. “I am screenshotting everyone’s posts and I’m going to deliver them in a package to President Trump so he sees who is truly with him and who isn’t,” Loomer posted. “And I think by now everyone knows I mean it when I say I’m going to deliver something to Trump.”For Maga influencers, staying on Trump’s good side seems to matter more than issues of war and peace. More