ReportWire

Tag: military

  • US military in Syria carries out 10 strikes on more than 30 ISIS targets: Photos

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) announced Saturday that it had carried out ten strikes against over 30 ISIS targets in Syria, in recent days as part of a joint military effort to “sustain relentless military pressure on remnants from the terrorist network.”

    CENTCOM said, from Feb. 3 – 12, its forces “struck ISIS infrastructure and weapons storage targets with precision munitions delivered by fixed-wing, rotary-wing, and unmanned aircraft.”

    US MILITARY IN SYRIA CARRIES OUT 5 STRIKES AGAINST ‘MULTIPLE ISIS TARGETS’

    Recently, CENTCOM forces conducted five strikes against an ISIS communication site, critical logistics node, and weapons storage facilities in Syria between Jan. 27 and Feb. 2.

    Operation Hawkeye Strike targets over 30 ISIS sites following a December ambush that killed US troops.  (CENTCOM)

    “Striking these targets demonstrates our continued focus and resolve for preventing an ISIS resurgence in Syria,” Adm. Brad Cooper, the commander of CENTCOM, said in a statement at the time.

    “Operating in coordination with coalition and partner forces to ensure the enduring defeat of ISIS makes America, the region and the world safer,” he added.

    AFTER TRUMP DECLARED ISIS DEFEATED, US FACES NEW TEST AS DETAINEES MOVE AMID SYRIA POWER SHIFT

    On Jan. 27, President Trump told reporters he had a “great conversation with the highly respected” President of Syria, Ahmed al-Sharaa. 

    Photos from u.s. strike in syria hitting over 30 ISIS sites

    More than 50 ISIS terrorists have been killed or captured and over 100 ISIS infrastructure targets have been struck. (CENTCOM)

    “All of the things having to do with Syria in that area are working out very, very well,” said President Trump. “So we are very happy about it.”

    The Operation Hawkeye Strike mission was launched in response to an ISIS “ambush” attack that left two U.S. service members and an American interpreter dead on Dec. 13, 2025, in Palmyra, Syria.

    AFTER TRUMP DECLARED ISIS DEFEATED, US FACES NEW TEST AS DETAINEES MOVE AMID SYRIA POWER SHIFT

    “More than 50 ISIS terrorists have been killed or captured and over 100 ISIS infrastructure targets have been struck with hundreds of precision munitions during two months of targeted operations,” states CENTCOM.

    Photos from u.s. strike in syria hitting over 30 ISIS sites

    The Operation Hawkeye Strike mission was launched in response to an ISIS “ambush” attack that left two U.S. service members and an American interpreter dead. (CENTCOM)

    On Thursday, CENTCOM announced it has completed its withdrawal of American forces from al-Tanf Garrison in Syria pointing to a broader shift in U.S. posture in the region.

    CHAOS IN SYRIA SPARKS FEARS OF ISIS PRISON BREAKS AS US RUSHES DETAINEES TO IRAQ

    Photos from u.s. strike in syria hitting over 30 ISIS sites

    “Striking these targets demonstrates our continued focus and resolve for preventing an ISIS resurgence in Syria,” said Adm. Brad Cooper. (CENTCOM)

    Operation Inherent Resolve was launched in 2014 to combat ISIS with American troops maintaining a limited presence to support partner forces and prevent ISIS from returning after it was territorially defeated in 2019.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP 

    Fox News Digital’s Ashley Carnahan and Greg Norman-Diamond contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • U.S. military reports series of strikes against Islamic State targets in Syria

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The U.S. military on Saturday reported a series of strikes against Islamic State group targets in Syria in retaliation for the December ambush that killed two U.S. soldiers and one American civilian interpreter.


    What You Need To Know

    • The U.S. military is reporting a series of strikes against Islamic State group targets in Syria
    • The strikes were carried out in retaliation of the December ambush that killed two U.S. soldiers and one American civilian interpreter
    • U.S. Central Command says American aircraft conducted 10 strikes against more than 30 IS targets between Feb. 3 and Thursday
    • The strikes were on weapons storage facilities and other infrastructure

    U.S. Central Command said in a statement that American aircraft had conducted 10 strikes against more than 30 IS targets between Feb. 3 and Thursday, hitting weapons storage facilities and other infrastructure.

    At least 50 members of IS have been killed or captured, while more than 100 IS targets have been struck since the United States began its strikes after the Dec. 13 ambush, according to Central Command. That attack killed Sgt. Edgar Brian Torres-Tovar, Sgt. William Nathaniel Howard, and Ayad Mansoor Sakat, the civilian interpreter.

    Meanwhile, the Syrian Defense Ministry said Thursday that government forces took control of a base in the east of the country that was run for years by U.S. troops as part of the fight against IS. The Al-Tanf base played a major role after IS declared a caliphate in large parts of Syria and Iraq in 2014.

    The U.S. military on Friday completed the transfer of thousands of IS detainees from Syria to Iraq, where they are expected to stand trial. The prisoners were sent to Iraq at the request of Baghdad, in a move welcomed by the U.S.-led coalition that had for years fought against IS.

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • AI tool Claude helped capture Venezuelan dictator Maduro in US military raid operation: report

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    The U.S. military used Anthropic’s artificial-intelligence tool Claude during the operation that captured Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro, according to a report.

    Last month, U.S. special operations forces captured Maduro and his wife, who were brought to the U.S. to face sweeping narcotics charges.

    Claude was deployed through Anthropic’s partnership with data company Palantir Technologies, whose tools are widely used by the Defense Department and federal law enforcement, according to The Wall Street Journal, which cited people familiar with the matter.

    “We cannot comment on whether Claude, or any other AI model, was used for any specific operation, classified or otherwise,” an Anthropic spokesperson told Fox News Digital. “Any use of Claude — whether in the private sector or across government — is required to comply with our Usage Policies, which govern how Claude can be deployed. We work closely with our partners to ensure compliance.”

    US RAID IN VENEZUELA SIGNALS DETERRENCE TO ADVERSARIES ON THREE FRONTS, EXPERTS SAY

    Captured Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro is escorted, as he heads towards the Daniel Patrick Manhattan United States Courthouse for an initial appearance to face U.S. federal charges including narco-terrorism, conspiracy, drug trafficking, money laundering and others in New York City, U.S., January 5, 2026.  (Adam Gray/Reuters)

    Anthropic’s usage guidelines prohibit Claude from being used for violence, weapons development, or surveillance.

    A source familiar with the matter told Fox News Digital that Anthropic has visibility into classified and unclassified usage and has confidence that all usage has been in line with Anthropic’s usage policy, as well as its partners’ own compliance policies.

    Reached by Fox News Digital, the Department of War declined to comment.

    SEVEN US SERVICE MEMBERS INJURED IN VENEZUELA RAID TO CAPTURE MADURO, OFFICIAL SAYS

    Apps displayed on phone within an "AI" folder.

    The U.S. military reportedly used Anthropic’s AI tool Claude during the operation that captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)

    Anthropic was the first AI model developer to be used in classified operations by the Department of War, according to the Journal.

    Anthropic has raised concerns about how Claude can be used by the Pentagon, prompting officials within the Trump administration to consider canceling its contract worth up to $200 million, which was awarded last summer, the paper reported.

    The AI tools can be used for everything from summarizing documents to controlling autonomous drones, the outlet noted.

    The Trump administration has prioritized AI development, and in December War Secretary Pete Hegseth said “the future of American warfare is here, and it’s spelled AI.”

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    Nicolas Maduro

    Anthropic’s artificial-intelligence model Claude was reportedly used in a classified U.S. military operation targeting Nicolás Maduro. (Eduardo Munoz/Reuters)

    “As technologies advance, so do our adversaries,” he said. “But here at the War Department, we are not sitting idly by.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Hegseth ending military education ties with Harvard amid Trump feud: ‘We train warriors, not wokesters’

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    The Department of War said Friday that it will end all professional military education, fellowships and certificate programs with Harvard University.

    Secretary of War Pete Hegseth slammed the university in a video announcement posted on X, saying the department would be cutting ties with Harvard for active-duty service members beginning in the 2026–27 school year — a move he said was “long overdue.”

    Harvard is woke; The War Department is not,” Hegseth stated.

    While Hegseth, who has a master’s degree from Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, said the U.S. military has had a “rich tradition” with the Ivy League school, he argued that Harvard has become one of the “red-hot centers of Hate America activism.”

    HARVARD KENNEDY SCHOOL ANNOUNCES LAYOFFS AFTER TRUMP CUTS BILLIONS IN FUNDING

    War Secretary Pete Hegseth arrives at the U.S. Capitol for a briefing with House and Senate members on Venezuela, in Washington, on Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

    “Too many faculty members openly loathe our military. They cast our armed forces in a negative light and squelch anyone who challenges their leftist political leanings, all while charging enormous tuition. It’s not worth it,” he said.
”They’ve replaced open inquiry and honest debate with rigid orthodoxy.”

    The announcement comes amid the Trump administration’s ongoing feud with the Ivy League school.

    President Donald Trump said Monday he is seeking $1 billion in damages from Harvard University, which the Trump administration has made a primary target in its effort to leverage federal funding to crack down on antisemitism and “woke” ideology.

    40-YEAR HARVARD PROFESSOR PENS SCATHING PIECE ON SCHOOL’S ‘EXCLUSION OF WHITE MALES,’ ANTI-WESTERN TRENDS

    Lawyers for the Trump administration have appealed a judge’s order requiring the restoration of $2.7 billion in frozen federal research funding to Harvard. The university sued the administration in April over the funding freeze, arguing in court that the move amounted to an unconstitutional “pressure campaign” aimed at influencing and exerting control over elite academic institutions.

    Hegseth also criticized Harvard’s campus environment, alleging that research programs have partnered with the Chinese Communist Party and that university leadership has encouraged an atmosphere that celebrates Hamas, allows attacks on Jews, and prioritizes Diversity, Equity and Inclusion initiatives.

    “Why should the War Department support an environment that’s destructive to our nation and the principles that the vast majority of Americans hold dear?” Hegseth said.
”The answer to that question is that we should not, and we will not.”

    HARVARD DEAN REMOVED AFTER ANTI-WHITE, ANTI-POLICE SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS RESURFACED

    Secretary of War Pete Hegseth is pictured at a NATO meeting.

    Secretary of War Pete Hegseth announced that military education programs with Harvard University will end in the 2026-27 academic year. (Omar Havana/Getty Images)

    “For too long, this department has sent our best and brightest officers to Harvard, hoping the university would better understand and appreciate our warrior class,” he continued. “Instead, too many of our officers came back looking too much like Harvard — heads full of globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks.”

    In addition to Harvard, Hegseth took aim at much of the Ivy League, saying the schools have a “pervasive institutional bias” and a lack of viewpoint diversity, including the “coddling of toxic ideologies,” that he said undercuts the military’s mission.

    He said that in the coming weeks, all departments at the Pentagon will evaluate existing graduate programs for active-duty service members at Ivy League schools and other civilian universities.

    UNIVERSITIES SLASH 9,000+ POSITIONS IN 2025 AS TRUMP TARGETS FEDERAL FUNDING AND FOREIGN STUDENTS: REPORT

    Harvard students walking through gate surrounded by brick wall and building

    War Secretary Pete Hegseth described Harvard as one of the “red-hot centers of Hate America activism.” (Associated Press)

    “The goal is to determine whether or not they actually deliver cost effective strategic education for future senior leaders, when compared to, say, public universities and our military graduate programs,” he said. “At the War Department, we will strive to maximize taxpayer value in building lethality to establish deterrence. It’s that simple. That no longer includes spending millions of dollars on expensive universities that actively undercut our mission and undercut our country.”

    Hegseth concluded his message, saying, “We train warriors, not wokesters. Harvard, good riddance.”

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    Harvard University did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

    Fox News Digital’s Brian Flood contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • St. Pete company tracks ships trying to avoid detection around the globe

    [ad_1]

    ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. — Working out of the Maritime Defense and Technology Hub in St. Petersburg, Pole Star Defense managing director Alex Field said the company is using innovative technology to track large cargo ships and oil tankers around the globe — including vessels trying to avoid detection.

    “Primarily, we track large commercial vessels across the world,” he said. “We currently support the U.S. Coast Guard.”


    What You Need To Know

    • Pole Star Defense is based out of the Maritime Defense and Technology Hub in St. Petersburg
    • According to managing director Alex Field, the company uses innovative technology to track large cargo ships and oil tankers around the globe, including vessels trying to avoid detection
    • Pole Star Defense has been monitoring a growing number of illicit ship-to-ship transfers in the middle of the ocean 


    The International Maritime Organization passed regulation after 9/11 mandating commercial vessels share their location with their flag states and other countries as the ships enter those waters. Pole Star Defense is part of that large global data-sharing operation.

    “The vessels will send their vessel position and other vessel data up to the satellite,” said Field. “That satellite will then send it to us as an ASP (application service provider) and then ultimately we send it to what’s called a national data center for that flag registry.”

    Field said some vessels, which include sanctioned oil tankers, go to great lengths to spoof or hide their location. Field said a growing problem the defense maritime company has been monitoring is illicit ship-to-ship transfers in the middle of the ocean.

    “What you ultimately see is one vessel coming from a sanctioned port, doing a ship-to-ship transfer in the middle of the ocean to another one,” he said. “Then that vessel will also take it to another vessel that then can go off to another port and they’ve blended product to that point. All these are bulk carriers and so now what’s Iranian oil versus what’s Venezuelan oil?”

    Senior Solutions Engineer Richard Aguilar said he has been investigating an oil tanker which caught his attention on Jan. 9, when it stopped off the coast of Guyana, near Venezuela, and conducted a ship-to-ship transfer with two other ships. Aguilar said an STS is common with two vessels, but three raises suspicion.

    “When you start seeing more than two, then it becomes, ‘Why?’” he said. “Especially in different areas where it’s known to have sanctioned or illicit activity occurring.”

    Field said Pole Star Defense played an adjacent role to the U.S. blockade of sanctioned Venezuelan oil tankers, referred to as the dark fleet, which began last December.

    “We’re helping gather information around what’s going on. Much of those vessels go dark,” he said. “Tracking all the vessels that we could coming out of Venezuela, coming into Venezuela and where they were going. As each of those vessels, I think it’s up to seven now, have been seized by U.S. Coast Guard.”

    Field said the U.S. Coast Guard is his company’s primary customer and the reason it chose to locate its U.S. headquarters in St. Petersburg. The company also supports 65 other countries. Pole Star Defense is a subsidiary of Pole Star Global, a company based in the U.K., with about 20 years of experience in the maritime business.

    Pole Star Defense is one of the first companies which moved into the Hub when it opened nearly five years ago. Field said he expects the company — which began with three employees but has now grown to a 24/7 operation with nearly 50 — to be in St. Petersburg for the long haul.

    “The area is great. The ecosystem in St. Pete, lots of other small businesses focused on maritime space,” he said. “We’ve got the Coast Guard right next door here, which is our primary customer.” 

    [ad_2]

    Josh Rojas

    Source link

  • Pentagon plans to give South Korea primary role in deterring North Korea threats under new strategy

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    The Pentagon said in an unclassified national defense strategy document titled “Restoring peace through strength for a new golden age of America” on Friday, that it plans to shift more of the responsibility of deterring North Korea to South Korea.

    The U.S. would take a “more limited” role in keeping North Korea in line, the Pentagon said in the document obtained by Fox News Digital.

    “With its powerful military, supported by high defense spending, a robust defense industry, and mandatory conscription, South Korea is capable of taking primary responsibility for deterring North Korea with critical but more limited U.S. support,” the document said.

    It added, “South Korea also has the will to do so, given that it faces a direct and clear threat from North Korea. This shift in the balance of responsibility is consistent with America’s interest in updating U.S. force posture on the Korean Peninsula. In this way, we can ensure a stronger and more mutually beneficial alliance relationship that is better aligned with America’s defense priorities, thereby setting conditions for lasting peace.”

    IRAN ALLEGEDLY AIRS 97 ‘COERCIVE’ CONFESSIONS’ AMID RECORD-BREAKING NORTH KOREA-STYLE INTERNET BLACKOUT

    The Pentagon said in an unclassified national defense strategy document titled “Restoring peace through strength for a new golden age of America” on Friday that it plans to shift more of the responsibility of deterring North Korea to South Korea. (Vladimir Smirnov/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)

    The new policy plan on North Korea followed similar strategies for other parts of the world, with the wide-ranging document adding that the department will “no longer be distracted by interventionism, endless wars, regime change, and nation building. Instead, we will put our people’s practical concrete interests first.”

    The document clarified the policy doesn’t mean “isolationism,” but rather a “strategic approach to the threats our nation faces.”

    Further down it added, “We will insist our allies and partners do their part and lend them a helping hand when they step up.”

    Pentagon

    The Pentagon on Friday released an unclassified national defense strategy document titled “Restoring peace through strength for a new golden age of America.” (Daniel Slim/AFP via Getty Images)

    NORTH KOREA TEST LAUNCHES HYPERSONIC MISSILE SYSTEM IN FRONT OF KIM, NATION SAYS

    The document said under a section titled “Increase Burden-Sharing with U.S. Allies and Partners” that it plans to deter China “through strength, not confrontation,” and as the “Department rightly prioritizes Homeland defense and deterring China, other threats will persist, and our allies will be essential to dealing with all of them. Our allies will do so not as a favor to us, but out of their own interests.”

    Chinese military members marching through Tiananmen Square

    The Pentagon document said it would prioritize threats from China while emphasizing burden-sharing by allies in other areas of the world.  (Sheng Jiapeng/China News Service/VCG via Getty Images)

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    On Russia, it said the country “will remain a persistent but manageable threat to NATO’s eastern members for the foreseeable future,” and on Iran, it stated that President Donald Trump has made it clear that Iran won’t be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon.

    This year, South Korea raised its military budget by 7.5% while around 28,500 U.S. troops are stationed there in defense of North Korea.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Analysts warn that Iran crisis carries potential nuclear risks

    [ad_1]

    In the wake of spiraling tensions between the United States and Iran over Tehran’s violent crackdown on protests, analysts warn that the internal upheaval affecting the Iranian theocracy could carry nuclear proliferation risks.While in recent days U.S. President Donald Trump seemed to have backed away from a military strike on Iran, he called Saturday for an end to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s nearly 40-year reign in Iran. Trump’s comments came in response to Khamenei branding Trump a “criminal” for supporting protesters in Iran, and blamed demonstrators for causing thousands of deaths.Meanwhile, a U.S. aircraft carrier, which days earlier had been in the South China Sea, passed Singapore overnight to enter the Strait of Malacca — putting it on a route that could bring it to the Middle East.With those dangers, analysts warn Iran’s nuclear material could be at risk as well.Nuclear material could fall into the wrong handsDavid Albright, a former nuclear weapons inspector in Iraq and founder of the nonprofit Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, said that in a scenario of internal chaos in Iran, the government could “lose the ability to protect its nuclear assets.”He said that Iran’s highly enriched uranium stockpile “would be the most worrisome,” adding that there is a possibility that someone could steal some of this material.There are historical precedents for such a scenario.Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, highly enriched uranium and plutonium suitable for building nuclear bombs went missing due to eroded security and weakened protection of these assets.So far, Iran has maintained control of its sites, even after the U.S. bombed them in the 12-day war in June that Israel launched against the Islamic Republic.Iran maintains a stockpile of 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium enriched up to 60% purity — a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear watchdog.The agency said in a report last November that it has not been able to verify the status and location of this highly enriched uranium stockpile since the war in June.The agency said in November that therefore it had lost “continuity of knowledge in relation to the previously declared inventories of nuclear material in Iran” at facilities affected by the war.A diplomat close to the IAEA confirmed Monday that the agency had still not received any information from Iran on the status or whereabouts of the highly enriched uranium stockpile. The diplomat spoke on condition of anonymity in line with diplomatic protocol.Albright said that Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium would fit in around 18 to 20 cylinders that are designed for transport, weighing around 50 kilograms (110 pounds) each when full. “Two people can easily carry it,” he said of each container.Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy at the Washington-based Arms Control Association, said that there is a risk that the stockpile “could be diverted either to a covert program or stolen by a faction of the government or the military that wanted to retain the option of weaponization.”She said that this risk increases as the Iranian government feels threatened or gets destabilized.Some of the nuclear material could get smuggled out of Iran or sold to non-state actors in the event of internal chaos or potential government collapse, Davenport said.“The risk is real but it is difficult to assess, given the unknowns regarding the status of the materials and the whereabouts,” she stressed.Possibility of Iran building a nuclear bombBoth Davenport and Albright pointed out that there is also a theoretical possibility of making nuclear bombs with Iran’s 60% enriched uranium. Tehran has insisted for years its program is peaceful.However, a weapon made directly from 60% enriched uranium rather than the usual 90% purity requires more nuclear material, which makes it “much bigger and bulkier and probably not well suited to delivery” on a missile, said Eric Brewer, a former U.S. intelligence analyst and now deputy vice president at the Nuclear Threat Initiative.He added that such a device could still be “blown up in the desert,” for example.Brewer said that the possibility that the current government in Iran goes down that road should not be “totally dismissed,” but he underlined that most information suggests that the highly enriched uranium “remains buried in a tunnel as a result of the U.S. strikes and is probably not easily accessible to the regime; at least not with some major risk of detection and another strike by the U.S. or Israel.”He added that recent events “have also shown that the Supreme Leader has a very high bar for any decision to weaponize.”Nuclear power reactor could be a targetIn the case of internal chaos, Iran’s nuclear power reactor in Bushehr — Iran’s only commercial nuclear power plant some 465 miles south of Tehran — could also get sabotaged or targeted with the aim of causing havoc or making a political point, Albright said. Bushehr is fueled by uranium produced in Russia, not Iran.So far, there has been no sign of Iran losing command and control of its security forces.Albright pointed to the attack by the African National Congress’s armed wing on South Africa’s Koeberg Nuclear Power Station near Cape Town, as the country went through increased anti-apartheid resistance in 1982. The act of sabotage caused significant damage but resulted in no nuclear fallout.“If the Bushehr reactor has a major accident, the winds would carry the fallout within 12 to 15 hours to the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Oman,” Albright said.

    In the wake of spiraling tensions between the United States and Iran over Tehran’s violent crackdown on protests, analysts warn that the internal upheaval affecting the Iranian theocracy could carry nuclear proliferation risks.

    While in recent days U.S. President Donald Trump seemed to have backed away from a military strike on Iran, he called Saturday for an end to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s nearly 40-year reign in Iran. Trump’s comments came in response to Khamenei branding Trump a “criminal” for supporting protesters in Iran, and blamed demonstrators for causing thousands of deaths.

    Meanwhile, a U.S. aircraft carrier, which days earlier had been in the South China Sea, passed Singapore overnight to enter the Strait of Malacca — putting it on a route that could bring it to the Middle East.

    With those dangers, analysts warn Iran’s nuclear material could be at risk as well.

    Nuclear material could fall into the wrong hands

    David Albright, a former nuclear weapons inspector in Iraq and founder of the nonprofit Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, said that in a scenario of internal chaos in Iran, the government could “lose the ability to protect its nuclear assets.”

    He said that Iran’s highly enriched uranium stockpile “would be the most worrisome,” adding that there is a possibility that someone could steal some of this material.

    There are historical precedents for such a scenario.

    Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, highly enriched uranium and plutonium suitable for building nuclear bombs went missing due to eroded security and weakened protection of these assets.

    So far, Iran has maintained control of its sites, even after the U.S. bombed them in the 12-day war in June that Israel launched against the Islamic Republic.

    Iran maintains a stockpile of 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium enriched up to 60% purity — a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear watchdog.

    The agency said in a report last November that it has not been able to verify the status and location of this highly enriched uranium stockpile since the war in June.

    The agency said in November that therefore it had lost “continuity of knowledge in relation to the previously declared inventories of nuclear material in Iran” at facilities affected by the war.

    A diplomat close to the IAEA confirmed Monday that the agency had still not received any information from Iran on the status or whereabouts of the highly enriched uranium stockpile. The diplomat spoke on condition of anonymity in line with diplomatic protocol.

    Albright said that Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium would fit in around 18 to 20 cylinders that are designed for transport, weighing around 50 kilograms (110 pounds) each when full. “Two people can easily carry it,” he said of each container.

    Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy at the Washington-based Arms Control Association, said that there is a risk that the stockpile “could be diverted either to a covert program or stolen by a faction of the government or the military that wanted to retain the option of weaponization.”

    She said that this risk increases as the Iranian government feels threatened or gets destabilized.

    Some of the nuclear material could get smuggled out of Iran or sold to non-state actors in the event of internal chaos or potential government collapse, Davenport said.

    “The risk is real but it is difficult to assess, given the unknowns regarding the status of the materials and the whereabouts,” she stressed.

    Possibility of Iran building a nuclear bomb

    Both Davenport and Albright pointed out that there is also a theoretical possibility of making nuclear bombs with Iran’s 60% enriched uranium. Tehran has insisted for years its program is peaceful.

    However, a weapon made directly from 60% enriched uranium rather than the usual 90% purity requires more nuclear material, which makes it “much bigger and bulkier and probably not well suited to delivery” on a missile, said Eric Brewer, a former U.S. intelligence analyst and now deputy vice president at the Nuclear Threat Initiative.

    He added that such a device could still be “blown up in the desert,” for example.

    Brewer said that the possibility that the current government in Iran goes down that road should not be “totally dismissed,” but he underlined that most information suggests that the highly enriched uranium “remains buried in a tunnel as a result of the U.S. strikes and is probably not easily accessible to the regime; at least not with some major risk of detection and another strike by the U.S. or Israel.”

    He added that recent events “have also shown that the Supreme Leader has a very high bar for any decision to weaponize.”

    Nuclear power reactor could be a target

    In the case of internal chaos, Iran’s nuclear power reactor in Bushehr — Iran’s only commercial nuclear power plant some 465 miles south of Tehran — could also get sabotaged or targeted with the aim of causing havoc or making a political point, Albright said. Bushehr is fueled by uranium produced in Russia, not Iran.

    So far, there has been no sign of Iran losing command and control of its security forces.

    Albright pointed to the attack by the African National Congress’s armed wing on South Africa’s Koeberg Nuclear Power Station near Cape Town, as the country went through increased anti-apartheid resistance in 1982. The act of sabotage caused significant damage but resulted in no nuclear fallout.

    “If the Bushehr reactor has a major accident, the winds would carry the fallout within 12 to 15 hours to the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Oman,” Albright said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • L.A.’s defense industry is booming. Federal funding crunch could change that

    [ad_1]

    When former Space X engineer Josh Giegel launched his North Hollywood tech company Gambit in 2023, he had a vision for the battlefield of the future, one with fewer soldiers and more AI-driven assets.

    His software would allow unmanned tanks and swarms of armed drones to communicate and adapt in real time — without human intervention.

    The company now employs more than a dozen people and has contracts with the military, which is testing his software. But its growth has been clouded because of a funding dispute on Capitol Hill over the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program, which provides companies seed capital to develop new technology that can assist the government. Funding for it and related programs expired in September.

    The seed fund has been vital to many local tech startups. Gambit received $3.3 million from the program early on and was hoping to get another $5 million of the Small Business Administration money, which is allocated by the military.

    Workers at K2 Space in Torrance, where the startup is building high-capacity satellites for Medium Earth Orbit. (K2 Space)

    (K2 Space)

    “That funding really helps companies like ours that are putting tech into warfighters’ hands,” Giegel said. “Losing that money becomes more leg work to find other sources.”

    Gambit’s predicament is widely shared across Southern California, which has experienced a proliferation of tech startups launched by SpaceX alumni and other entrepreneurs with the support of SBA money.

    In 2024, 124 contracts worth $173 million were awarded to 71 California companies through SpaceWERX, an El Segundo-based arm of the Space Force that distributes SBA funding to innovative defense startups.

    The money also is disbursed by other branches of the military and departments of the government, which do not take stakes in the companies. Gambit received funds through the Air Force.

    Other local recipients of SBA funding include Costa Mesa autonomous weapons maker Anduril Industries, now valued at more than $30 billion; and satellite platform manufacturers K2 Space in Torrance and Apex Space in Los Angeles.

    The funds are allocated in phases, with initial feasibility awards up to about $300,000 and as much as $2 million for the development of prototypes. A maximum of $15 million is available through a companion SBA-funded program if the companies can bring in other funding.

    “I don’t know if I can name a single company that I work with, or that I know of, that did not start with SBIR” funding, said Maggie Gray, a partner at Silicon Valley venture capital firm Shield Capital, which invested in Apex. “We see SBIR as a crucial part of the defense-tech ecosystem. It’s kind of the way to get your initial foot in the door with the government.”

    Established in 1982, the SBA program provides more than $4 billion to government departments, with the military receiving the lion’s share. But SBA funding ran out on Sept. 30 as lawmakers clashed over proposed reforms.

    Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), who chairs the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, introduced a bill that would set a $75-million lifetime cap on funds for individual companies and establish performance benchmarks. The bill also would beef up due diligence to prevent new technology falling into the hands of foreign adversaries and end diversity, equity and inclusion preferences in funds distribution.

    The legislation, however, has faced stiff opposition from Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey, the ranking Democrat on the committee, who contends the reforms go overboard and would crimp innovation. A bipartisan House bill that would have reauthorized SBA funding for a year failed in the Senate amid opposition by Ernst, who is leaving Congress in a year.

    While negotiations have restarted on Capitol Hill, there is no guarantee SBA financing will be restored, though the military and other government agencies could fund startups through their own budgets.

    The SpaceWERX program, which has played a critical role in Southern California’s resurgent space economy, was established in 2020, just one year after the Space Force was founded.

    Director Arthur Grijalva said the program distributes several hundred million dollars in SBA funding annually across the nation and has not had an issue with foreign influence or companies receiving repeat awards without much to show for it.

    “Even though it might be small [funding] for a really big company, it’s really impactful for these small companies, these startups, where if they don’t have this funding, they might have to do layoffs, they might have to go into debt, or they might ultimately not be successful,” Grijalva said.

    Since September, $94 million in larger contracts has been held up for more than 25 companies, which follow funding for feasibility studies and prototypes, according to SpaceWERX.

    The impasse comes at an inopportune time for the Trump administration, which has been overhauling weapons procurement.

    Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth announced in November a policy to speed up weapons development by first finding capabilities in the commercial market before the government attempts to develop new systems. Last week he visited several L.A.-area defense companies, including Torrance startup Castelion, a manufacture of hypersonic missiles that received SBIR funding.

    Kirsten Bartok Touw, managing partner of New Vista Capital, which invested in Castelion, agreed the program may have flaws but said it plays an invaluable role in attracting venture capital to companies that have drawn the funding.

    “That is an important signal to the market, which says, ‘You should invest in more of these, because this is a technology we want and need,’” she said.

    A report this month by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine found that one dollar of the funding distributed by the military attracts more than four dollars of venture capital or other third-party investment.

    Markey’s office said last week he submitted a proposal to Ernst that includes making the SBIR program permanent, increased allocations, a performance metric, foreign due diligence standards and fellowships for underserved small businesses, among other provisions.

    “This bill is [his] second attempt at breaking the logjam and restarting these critical programs to ensure America’s most nimble allies — small businesses — are not decimated,” a Markey spokesperson said.

    A spokesperson for Ernst said last week that the senator “remains focused on ensuring taxpayer investments in R&D do not benefit China and actually deliver cutting-edge technology for our warfighters.”

    Giegel said that while he is optimistic future SBA funding might come through for Gambit, he is not counting on it. He now assumes he will have to look for other sources of money to grow the company, which already attracted undisclosed venture capital.

    “We’re trying to find operational relevance faster,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Laurence Darmiento

    Source link

  • Is the War Powers Act unconstitutional, as Trump says?

    [ad_1]

    After President Donald Trump’s unilateral decision to use the U.S. military to capture Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, some lawmakers criticized Trump for ordering it without any authorization from Congress. 

    Trump, in a Jan. 8 Truth Social post, said he has the power to do that, and questioned the constitutionality of a related law.

    “The War Powers Act is Unconstitutional, totally violating Article II of the Constitution, as all Presidents, and their Departments of Justice, have determined before me,” Trump wrote.

    But Trump went too far by calling the 1973 War Powers Resolution unconstitutional. Courts have repeatedly declined to rule on its constitutionality.

    Within days of the Venezuela operation, the Senate advanced a resolution to limit further military operations in Venezuela without congressional backing, with five Republicans joining Democrats in supporting it. But this measure has little chance of being enacted, since it would need Trump’s signature if the Republican-controlled House passes it, which is uncertain.

    For decades, presidents and Congress have battled over who has the institutional power to declare war.

    The U.S. Constitution assigns Congress the right to declare war. The last time Congress did that was at the beginning of World War II.

    Since then, presidents have generally initiated military action using their constitutionally granted powers as commander in chief without an official declaration of war.

    In August 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson asked Congress to back his effort to widen the United States’ role in Vietnam. He received approval with enactment of the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, which easily passed both chambers of Congress.

    As public sentiment turned against the Vietnam War, lawmakers became increasingly frustrated about their secondary role in sending U.S. troops abroad. So in 1973, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution, which was enacted over President Richard Nixon’s veto. 

    The resolution required the president to report to Congress within 48 hours of introducing armed forces into hostilities and to terminate the use of U.S. armed forces within 60 days unless Congress approves. If approval is not granted and the president deems it an emergency, an additional 30 days are allowed to end operations.

    Presidents have often, but not always, followed the act’s requirements, usually framing any entreaties to Congress as a voluntary bid to secure “support” for military action rather than “permission.” This has sometimes taken the form of an “authorization for the use of military force” — legislation that amounts to a modern version of a declaration of war.

    Trump has a point that presidents from both political parties have sought to assert power and limit lawmakers’ interference, including in court. But these arguments were never backed by court rulings.

    Between 1973 and 2012, Congress’ nonpartisan Congressional Research Service found eight judicial decisions involving the War Powers Resolution, and “in each and every case” the ruling declined to offer a binding opinion, always finding a reason, such as a lack of standing to sue, to avoid taking a side.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What is Greenland’s status under international law?

    [ad_1]

    After capturing Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and saying the U.S. was taking control of the South American country, President Donald Trump and others in his administration suggested that Greenland could be the next U.S. target.

    The day the U.S. took Maduro into custody to face U.S. drug-trafficking charges, Katie Miller, wife of senior White House aide Stephen Miller, posted on X a map of Greenland overlaid with the U.S. flag. “Soon,” the caption said. 

    The next day, CNN anchor Jake Tapper asked Stephen Miller about Greenland. It’s geographically the world’s largest island — about five times the size of California — and has about 56,000 residents. Denmark colonized it centuries ago, and later incorporated it into Denmark. 

    Miller said the Trump administration’s longstanding policy is that “Greenland should be part of the United States.” 

    When Tapper asked whether the administration would rule out military action, Miller said, “The real question is: By what right does Denmark assert control over Greenland? What is the basis of their territorial claim? What is their basis of having Greenland as a colony of Denmark?”

    White House spokesperson Anna Kelly told PolitiFact that Trump is “confident Greenlanders would be better served if protected by the United States from modern threats in the Arctic region.” 

    We asked experts about the history of the Denmark-Greenland relationship and Greenland’s status under international law. They agreed Greenland’s status as part of Denmark is rock solid and that any attempt to take over Greenland would flout international law.

    What the Trump administration has floated

    U.S. officials have repeatedly expressed interest in controlling Greenland, which is located between the United States and Europe. The naval corridor between Greenland, Iceland and the United Kingdom, called the “GIUK Gap,” is a strategic channel in the Arctic because it is a main transit route for Europe, the Americas and Russia. Greenland also has potentially valuable mineral deposits.

    “We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security,” Trump told reporters Jan. 4 aboard Air Force One. 

    Two days later, the White House issued a statement that Greenland is “vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region” and that Trump and his team are “discussing a range of options” which could include utilizing the U.S. military.

    If the United States did attempt to seize Greenland, it is unlikely to face military resistance, wrote Ivo Daalder, who served as U.S. ambassador to NATO under President Barack Obama.

    “Taking Greenland won’t be difficult,” Daalder wrote Jan. 6. “Its population of 50,000 won’t be able offer much resistance, nor will Denmark want to enter a fight it cannot win.” (Miller said something similar in his interview with Tapper: “Nobody’s going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland.”)

    Daalder warned, though, that such U.S. military action could damage the credibility of NATO, the mutual defense pact the U.S. has led for decades. 

    “To suggest that American security in the Arctic requires that it owns Greenland implicitly indicates that the NATO security commitment is hollow and insufficient for its security,” Daalder wrote. “That’s hardly a reassuring message to the other 31 NATO members, many of whom face far more immediate threats than the United States.”

    What is the basis of Denmark’s claim to Greenland? 

    Denmark’s colonization of Greenland dates to the 1720s. In 1933, an international court settled a territorial dispute between Denmark and Norway, ruling that as of July 1931, Denmark “possessed a valid title to the sovereignty over all Greenland.” 

    In 1940, after Germany invaded Denmark, the U.S. assumed responsibility for Greenland’s defense and established a military presence on the island that remains today. 

    But Greenland has not been a colony for more than three-quarters of a century, said Diane Marie Amann, a University of Georgia emerita law professor.

    After World War II, colonialism “was decidedly rejected in the United Nations charter,” said Tom Ginsburg, a University of Chicago international law professor. 

    After the 1945 approval of the United Nations charter — the organization’s founding document and the foundation of much of international law — Denmark incorporated Greenland through a constitutional amendment and gave it representation in the Danish Parliament in 1953. Denmark told the United Nations that any colonial-type status had ended, and the United Nations General Assembly accepted this change in November 1954, said Greg Fox, a Wayne State University law professor. The United States voted to accept the new status.

    Since then, Greenland has, incrementally but consistently, moved toward greater autonomy. 

    Greenlandic political activists successfully pushed for and achieved home rule in 1979, which established its parliament. Today, Greenland is a district within the sovereign state of Denmark, Amann said, with two elected representatives in Denmark’s parliament. These representatives have full voting rights — greater authority than the U.S. gives congressional delegates for its territories such as Puerto Rico, Guam and the Virgin Islands.

    In 2008, Greenlanders voted 76% to 24% in favor of expanding the island’s autonomous status, in a non-binding referendum. This led to a 2009 law that recognized Greenlanders as a distinct people, as well as making Greenlandic the island’s official language and granting Greenland power over its mineral resources.

    A satellite photo highlighting Greenland, as well as Iceland and the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. (NASA/public domain)

    What is Greenland’s status under international law?

    The 2009 law established that the Greenlandic people have the power to pursue independence from Denmark if they choose. To date, they have not done so.

    While Danish law gives Greenland substantial local control, “That doesn’t mean that Greenland is any less a part of Denmark for international law purposes,” Fox said. “Because Greenland is fully incorporated into Denmark, it means that under international law, Denmark can both represent Greenland’s interests and people to other countries and can assert its rights if other countries cause it harm.”

    Fox compared Greenland’s status within Denmark to Michigan’s or Ohio’s within the U.S. “The U.S. represents their interests and the interests of their people to the rest of the international community,” he said. Denmark’s sovereignty “covers all its territory, including Greenland,” Fox said.

    The United Nations’ charter, to which the U.S. is a signatory, says members must refrain from threatening or using force “against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” Amann said this means that “no other country may assist or secure such a secession, whether by the actual use of military force or by threatening to use such force.” 

    If Greenland “wanted Denmark to transfer them to the United States, they might be able to request that,” Ginsburg said. “But that’s not the situation now.”

    U.S. history of recognizing Denmark’s authority over Greenland

    The U.S. has recognized Denmark’s “territorial sovereignty” over Greenland on multiple occasions, beyond the 1953 United Nations vote: 

    • The United States’ purchase of the Danish West Indies — now known as the U.S. Virgin Islands — included a 1917 agreement with Denmark that mentioned Greenland. Then-Secretary of State Robert Lansing said the U.S. government “will not object to the Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland.” 

    • In 1946, the U.S. under President Harry Truman formally proposed buying Greenland. Denmark declined to sell. 

    • In 1951, the U.S. signed a Greenland-related defense agreement with Denmark, which it updated in 2004. The agreement, which affirmed and outlined the American military’s presence, said in its first paragraph that Greenland’s status had changed “from colony to that of an equal part of the Kingdom of Denmark.”

    Collectively, the existence of these treaties “means the United States believed (Denmark) was the country with authority over Greenland,” Fox said.

    PolitiFact Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report.

    RELATED: Fact-checking Donald Trump on promised U.S. oil company investment in Venezuela

    RELATED: What are the charges against Venezuela’s Maduro? How can the US indict foreign politicians?

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House votes on health insurance subsidies as Senate debates military powers

    [ad_1]

    It’s the first week of a new year for Congress, and each chamber is considering legislation with votes to watch on Thursday.Enhanced Health Care SubsidiesThe House of Representatives is voting on a bill to reinstate tax credits that expired last year and were central to the government shutdown.The bill aims to extend these subsidies for three years, helping those without insurance through their employers pay for coverage. Four Republicans: Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-1st), Rep. Ryan McKenzie (PA-7th), Rep. Rob Bresnahan (PA-8th), and Rep. Mike Lawler (NY-17th) joined Democrats to push the vote, which is expected to pass. Five more Republicans joined Democrats during a test vote on Wednesday.However, the Senate is not expected to consider this bill, as they are working on their own Affordable Care Act reform measure designed to pass both chambers.Venezuela War Powers ResolutionThe Senate is revisiting a war powers resolution that would prevent the president from using military force in Venezuela without congressional approval. This follows a recent military operation in Venezuela’s capital, which led to the arrest of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, who are now in New York facing narcoterrorism charges. President Donald Trump has stated that the U.S. is running Venezuela and may deploy the military again if the remaining Maduro regime does not comply with U.S. demands.The same resolution failed a previous vote, as well as a measure to stop the Trump administration from bombing alleged drug boats in the Caribbean and Pacific that the White House says were connected to Venezuela. Past administrations arrested and charged such suspects. The Trump administration’s campaign has killed more than 100 people.Reactions To Greenland RhetoricThe White House’s suggestion to use military force to take over Greenland has been met with criticism on Capitol Hill. Democrats have long opposed this idea, and several Republicans have recently spoken out against it.Rep. Mike Johnson, House Speaker, said, “All this stuff about military action and all that, I don’t even think that’s a possibility.” Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina criticized the notion, saying, “Making insane comments about how it is our right to have territory owned by the kingdom of Denmark, folks, amateur hour is over.” Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana noted, “In the case of Greenland, you have two things: one, not a present threat, and so they have a duly elected president. So, he doesn’t have the authority without Congress.”Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska added, “It’s very… amateurish. I feel like we’ve got high school kids playing Risk.”Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also stated that the president wants to buy Greenland.Earlier this week, the White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told Hearst Television: “President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it’s vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the Commander in Chief’s disposal.”Keep watching for the latest from the Washington News Bureau:

    It’s the first week of a new year for Congress, and each chamber is considering legislation with votes to watch on Thursday.

    Enhanced Health Care Subsidies

    The House of Representatives is voting on a bill to reinstate tax credits that expired last year and were central to the government shutdown.

    The bill aims to extend these subsidies for three years, helping those without insurance through their employers pay for coverage. Four Republicans: Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-1st), Rep. Ryan McKenzie (PA-7th), Rep. Rob Bresnahan (PA-8th), and Rep. Mike Lawler (NY-17th) joined Democrats to push the vote, which is expected to pass. Five more Republicans joined Democrats during a test vote on Wednesday.

    However, the Senate is not expected to consider this bill, as they are working on their own Affordable Care Act reform measure designed to pass both chambers.

    Venezuela War Powers Resolution

    The Senate is revisiting a war powers resolution that would prevent the president from using military force in Venezuela without congressional approval. This follows a recent military operation in Venezuela’s capital, which led to the arrest of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, who are now in New York facing narcoterrorism charges.

    President Donald Trump has stated that the U.S. is running Venezuela and may deploy the military again if the remaining Maduro regime does not comply with U.S. demands.

    The same resolution failed a previous vote, as well as a measure to stop the Trump administration from bombing alleged drug boats in the Caribbean and Pacific that the White House says were connected to Venezuela. Past administrations arrested and charged such suspects. The Trump administration’s campaign has killed more than 100 people.

    Reactions To Greenland Rhetoric

    The White House’s suggestion to use military force to take over Greenland has been met with criticism on Capitol Hill. Democrats have long opposed this idea, and several Republicans have recently spoken out against it.

    Rep. Mike Johnson, House Speaker, said, “All this stuff about military action and all that, I don’t even think that’s a possibility.”

    Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina criticized the notion, saying, “Making insane comments about how it is our right to have territory owned by the kingdom of Denmark, folks, amateur hour is over.”

    Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana noted, “In the case of Greenland, you have two things: one, not a present threat, and so they have a duly elected president. So, he doesn’t have the authority without Congress.”

    Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska added, “It’s very… amateurish. I feel like we’ve got high school kids playing Risk.”

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also stated that the president wants to buy Greenland.

    Earlier this week, the White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told Hearst Television: “President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it’s vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the Commander in Chief’s disposal.”

    Keep watching for the latest from the Washington News Bureau:


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Letters: Protesters should celebrate a new beginning for Venezuela

    [ad_1]

    Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.

    We should celebrate
    Venezuela’s new start

    Re: “Protests decry Trump’s actions” (Page A1, Jan. 5).

    How I would love to send the Bay Area protesters to South Florida, where residents are celebrating President Trump’s intervention in Venezuela. President Nicolás Maduro and his predecessor, Hugo Chávez, are responsible for “one of the most dramatic political, economic and humanitarian collapses in modern history,” according to a Miami Herald piece (“Venezuela left to grapple with wreckage Maduro leaves behind“) published Sunday.

    [ad_2]

    Letters To The Editor

    Source link

  • Bondi says Trump ‘saved countless lives’ in Venezuelan dictator Maduro capture operation

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    The capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro was “not just about drugs,” U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said in her first interview about the military operation on “Hannity” Monday.

    Maduro and other defendants could face charges in other places, Bondi said.

    “Nothing is off the table,” Bondi told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “These people must remain behind bars. They are responsible for the loss of so many lives, and these aren’t street-level drug dealers. They are narco-traffickers.”

    On Monday, Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, pleaded not guilty to narco-terrorism and other charges in federal court.

    RUBIO DEFENDS VENEZUELA OPERATION AFTER NBC QUESTIONS LACK OF CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL FOR MADURO CAPTURE

    The Justice Department says Maduro provided “Venezuelan diplomatic passports to drug traffickers and facilitated diplomatic cover for planes used by money launderers to repatriate drug proceeds from Mexico to Venezuela.”

    Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro greets his supporters during a rally in Caracas on Dec. 1, 2025.  (Pedro Mattey/Anadolu via Getty Images)

    A man who had a brief exchange with Maduro in the Manhattan court told Fox News the dictator declared himself a “prisoner of war” and compared himself to Jesus.

    “I am innocent, I am not guilty,” Maduro told the court. “I am a decent man. I am still president of my country.”

    UN AMBASSADOR WALTZ DEFENDS US CAPTURE OF MADURO AHEAD OF SECURITY COUNCIL MEETING

    Some Democrats have criticized the military operation as a violation of state sovereignty, comparing it to former President George W. Bush’s actions in Iraq.

    Meanwhile, Bondi insisted “Operation Absolute Resolve” was “well within” President Donald Trump’s constitutional authority in response to critics.

    Persons escorted out of plane believed to carry Maduro, wife after Operation Absolute Resolve under cover of darkness.

    Persons escorted out of plane believed to carry Maduro, wife after Operation Absolute Resolve under cover of darkness. (WNYW)

    “It was a law enforcement function to arrest indicted individuals in Venezuela,” Bondi explained. “Our military pulled off a flawless, flawless execution of that.”

    MARCO RUBIO CLASHES WITH GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS ON VENEZUELA LEADERSHIP IN HEATED EXCHANGE

    She went on to stress Saturday’s covert operation “saved countless lives.”

    “The president saved thousands, countless lives tonight,” Bondi said. “But he also protected Americans from the TDA [Tren de Aragua] members who Maduro let into our country, forced into our country.”

    Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, appear with their attorneys Barry Pollack and Mark Donnelly at their arraignment in a federal court in New York City on Monday, Jan. 5, 2026.

    Captured Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, appear with their attorneys Barry Pollack and Mark Donnelly at their arraignment in a federal court in New York City on Monday, Jan. 5, 2026. (Jane Rosenberg)

    The attorney general listed several murder victims of Venezuelan gang members, including 22-year-old Laken Riley and 12-year-old Jocelyn Nungaray.

    “It’s horrific and it is going to stop,” she vowed.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    While Trump has said the U.S. will temporarily “run” Venezuela, Maduro’s allies in the government have contested the claim.

    The Venezuelan dictator and his wife are set to appear in court again March 17.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Rubio and Hegseth brief congressional leaders as questions mount over next steps in Venezuela

    [ad_1]

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other top officials briefed leaders in Congress late Monday on the striking military operation in Venezuela amid mounting concerns that President Donald Trump is embarking on a new era of U.S. expansionism without consultation of lawmakers or a clear vision for running the South American country.Republican leaders entered the closed-door session at the Capitol largely supportive of Trump’s decision to forcibly remove Venezuela’s president Nicolás Maduro from power, but many Democrats emerged with more questions as Trump maintains a fleet of naval vessels off the Venezuelan coast and urges U.S. companies to reinvest in the country’s underperforming oil industry.A war powers resolution that would prohibit U.S. military action in Venezuela without approval from Congress is heading for a vote this week in the Senate.“We don’t expect troops on the ground,” said House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., afterward.He said Venezuela’s new leadership cannot be allowed to engage in narcoterrorism or the trafficking of drugs into the U.S., which sparked Trump’s initial campaign of deadly boat strikes that have killed more than 115 people.“This is not a regime change. This is demand for a change in behavior,” Johnson said. “We don’t expect direct involvement in any other way beyond just coercing the new, the interim government, to get that going.”Johnson added, “We have a way of persuasion — because their oil exports, as you know, have been seized, and I think that will bring the country to a new governance in very short order,” he said.But Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, emerged saying, “There are still many more questions that need to be answered.”“What is the cost? How much is this going to cost the United States of America?” Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said afterward.Lawmakers were kept in the darkThe briefing, which stretched for two hours, came days after the surprise military action that few, if any, of the congressional leaders knew about until after it was underway — a remarkable delay in informing Congress, which has ultimate say over matters of war.Administration officials fielded a range of questions — from further involvement of U.S. troops on the ground to the role of the Venezuelan opposition leadership that appeared to have been sidelined by the Trump administration as the country’s vice president, Maduro ally Delcy Rodriguez, swiftly became the country’s interim president.Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, and Attorney General Pam Bondi, who brought drug trafficking charges against Maduro, all joined the classified session. It was intended for the called “gang of eight” leaders, which includes Intelligence committee leadership as well as the chairmen and ranking lawmakers on the national security committees.Asked afterward if he had any more clarity about who is actually running Venezuela, Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said, “I wish I could tell you yes, but I can’t.”Leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee — Republican chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and ranking Democrat Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois — said they should have been included in the classified briefing, arguing they have oversight of the Justice Department under Bondi.Earlier in the day, Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer warned that Trump’s action in Venezuela is only the beginning of a dangerous approach to foreign policy as the president publicly signals his interests in Colombia, Cuba and Greenland.“The American people did not sign up for another round of endless wars,” Schumer said.Afterward, Schumer said the briefing, “while extensive and long, posed far more questions than it answered.”Republicans hold mixed views reflective of the deepening schism within Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement as the president, who vowed to put America first, ventures toward overseas entanglements many lawmakers in both parties want to avoid — particularly after the long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.No clarity on what comes nextNext steps in the country, and calls for elections in Venezuela, are uncertain.The Trump administration had been in talks with Rodríguez, who took the place of her ally Maduro and offered “to collaborate” with the Trump administration. Meanwhile, Trump has been dismissive of Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado, who last month won the Nobel Peace Prize for her struggle to achieve a democratic transition in her nation. Trump has said Machado lacks the “support” or “respect” to run the country.But Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., a staunch Trump ally, said he plans to speak soon with Machado, and called her “very popular if you look at what happened in the last election.”“She eventually, I think, will be the president of Venezuela,” Scott said. “You know, this is going to be a process to get to a democracy. It’s not easy. There’s a lot of bad people still there, so it’s going to take time. They are going to have an election, and I think she will get elected.”Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who has been a leading critic of the Trump campaign of boat strikes against suspected drug smugglers, said there are probably a dozen leaders around the world who the U.S. could say are in violation of an international law or human rights law.“And we have never gone in and plucked them out the country. So it sets a very bad precedent for doing this, and it’s unconstitutional,” Paul told reporters. “There’s no way you can say bombing a capital and removing the president of a foreign country is not an initiation of war.”__Associated Press writer Kevin Freking contributed to this story.

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other top officials briefed leaders in Congress late Monday on the striking military operation in Venezuela amid mounting concerns that President Donald Trump is embarking on a new era of U.S. expansionism without consultation of lawmakers or a clear vision for running the South American country.

    Republican leaders entered the closed-door session at the Capitol largely supportive of Trump’s decision to forcibly remove Venezuela’s president Nicolás Maduro from power, but many Democrats emerged with more questions as Trump maintains a fleet of naval vessels off the Venezuelan coast and urges U.S. companies to reinvest in the country’s underperforming oil industry.

    A war powers resolution that would prohibit U.S. military action in Venezuela without approval from Congress is heading for a vote this week in the Senate.

    “We don’t expect troops on the ground,” said House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., afterward.

    He said Venezuela’s new leadership cannot be allowed to engage in narcoterrorism or the trafficking of drugs into the U.S., which sparked Trump’s initial campaign of deadly boat strikes that have killed more than 115 people.

    “This is not a regime change. This is demand for a change in behavior,” Johnson said. “We don’t expect direct involvement in any other way beyond just coercing the new, the interim government, to get that going.”

    Johnson added, “We have a way of persuasion — because their oil exports, as you know, have been seized, and I think that will bring the country to a new governance in very short order,” he said.

    But Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, emerged saying, “There are still many more questions that need to be answered.”

    “What is the cost? How much is this going to cost the United States of America?” Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said afterward.

    Lawmakers were kept in the dark

    The briefing, which stretched for two hours, came days after the surprise military action that few, if any, of the congressional leaders knew about until after it was underway — a remarkable delay in informing Congress, which has ultimate say over matters of war.

    Administration officials fielded a range of questions — from further involvement of U.S. troops on the ground to the role of the Venezuelan opposition leadership that appeared to have been sidelined by the Trump administration as the country’s vice president, Maduro ally Delcy Rodriguez, swiftly became the country’s interim president.

    Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, and Attorney General Pam Bondi, who brought drug trafficking charges against Maduro, all joined the classified session. It was intended for the called “gang of eight” leaders, which includes Intelligence committee leadership as well as the chairmen and ranking lawmakers on the national security committees.

    Asked afterward if he had any more clarity about who is actually running Venezuela, Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said, “I wish I could tell you yes, but I can’t.”

    Leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee — Republican chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and ranking Democrat Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois — said they should have been included in the classified briefing, arguing they have oversight of the Justice Department under Bondi.

    Earlier in the day, Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer warned that Trump’s action in Venezuela is only the beginning of a dangerous approach to foreign policy as the president publicly signals his interests in Colombia, Cuba and Greenland.

    “The American people did not sign up for another round of endless wars,” Schumer said.

    Afterward, Schumer said the briefing, “while extensive and long, posed far more questions than it answered.”

    Republicans hold mixed views reflective of the deepening schism within Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement as the president, who vowed to put America first, ventures toward overseas entanglements many lawmakers in both parties want to avoid — particularly after the long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    No clarity on what comes next

    Next steps in the country, and calls for elections in Venezuela, are uncertain.

    The Trump administration had been in talks with Rodríguez, who took the place of her ally Maduro and offered “to collaborate” with the Trump administration. Meanwhile, Trump has been dismissive of Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado, who last month won the Nobel Peace Prize for her struggle to achieve a democratic transition in her nation. Trump has said Machado lacks the “support” or “respect” to run the country.

    But Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., a staunch Trump ally, said he plans to speak soon with Machado, and called her “very popular if you look at what happened in the last election.”

    “She eventually, I think, will be the president of Venezuela,” Scott said. “You know, this is going to be a process to get to a democracy. It’s not easy. There’s a lot of bad people still there, so it’s going to take time. They are going to have an election, and I think she will get elected.”

    Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who has been a leading critic of the Trump campaign of boat strikes against suspected drug smugglers, said there are probably a dozen leaders around the world who the U.S. could say are in violation of an international law or human rights law.

    “And we have never gone in and plucked them out the country. So it sets a very bad precedent for doing this, and it’s unconstitutional,” Paul told reporters. “There’s no way you can say bombing a capital and removing the president of a foreign country is not an initiation of war.”

    __

    Associated Press writer Kevin Freking contributed to this story.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Cuba faces uncertain future after US topples Venezuelan leader Maduro

    [ad_1]

    Cuban officials on Monday lowered flags before dawn to mourn 32 security officers they say were killed in the U.S. weekend strike in Venezuela, the island nation’s closest ally, as residents here wonder what the capture of President Nicolás Maduro means for their future.The two governments are so close that Cuban soldiers and security agents were often the Venezuelan president’s bodyguards, and Venezuela’s petroleum has kept the economically ailing island limping along for years. Cuban authorities over the weekend said the 32 had been killed in the surprise attack “after fierce resistance in direct combat against the attackers, or as a result of the bombing of the facilities.”Related video above: What happens next: Venezuela’s future after U.S. capture of MaduroThe Trump administration has warned outright that toppling Maduro will help advance another decades-long goal: Dealing a blow to the Cuban government. Severing Cuba from Venezuela could have disastrous consequences for its leaders, who on Saturday called for the international community to stand up to “state terrorism.”On Saturday, Trump said the ailing Cuban economy will be further battered by Maduro’s ouster.“It’s going down,” Trump said of Cuba. “It’s going down for the count.” Loss of key supporterMany observers say Cuba, an island of about 10 million people, exerted a remarkable degree of influence over Venezuela, an oil-rich nation with three times as many people. At the same time, Cubans have long been tormented by constant blackouts and shortages of basic foods. And after the attack, they woke to the once-unimaginable possibility of an even grimmer future.“I can’t talk. I have no words,” 75-year-old Berta Luz Sierra Molina said as she sobbed and placed a hand over her face.Even though 63-year-old Regina Méndez is too old to join the Cuban military, she said that “we have to stand strong.”“Give me a rifle, and I’ll go fight,” Méndez said.Maduro’s government was shipping an average of 35,000 barrels of oil daily over the last three months, about a quarter of total demand, said Jorge Piñón, a Cuban energy expert at the University of Texas at Austin Energy Institute.“The question to which we don’t have an answer, which is critical: Is the U.S. going to allow Venezuela to continue supplying Cuba with oil?” he said.Piñón noted that Mexico once supplied Cuba with 22,000 barrels of oil a day before it dropped to 7,000 barrels after U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited Mexico City in early September.“I don’t see Mexico jumping in right now,” Piñón said. “The U.S. government would go bonkers.”Ricardo Torres, a Cuban economist at American University in Washington, said that “blackouts have been significant, and that is with Venezuela still sending some oil.”“Imagine a future now in the short term losing that,” he said. “It’s a catastrophe.”Piñón noted that Cuba doesn’t have the money to buy oil on the international market.“The only ally that they have left out there with oil is Russia,” he said, noting that it sends Cuba about 2 million barrels a year.“Russia has the capability to fill the gap. Do they have the political commitment, or the political desire to do so? I don’t know,” he said.Torres also questioned whether Russia would extend a hand.“Meddling with Cuba could jeopardize your negotiation with the U.S. around Ukraine. Why would you do it? Ukraine is far more important,” he said.Torres said Cuba should open its doors to the private sector and market and reduce its public sector, moves that could help prompt China to step in and help Cuba.“Do they have an alternative? I don’t think they do,” he said.Rebuilding Venezuela’s oil industryOn Monday, Trump told NBC News in an interview that the U.S. government could reimburse oil companies making investments in Venezuela to maintain and increase oil production in that country.He suggested that the necessary rebuilding of the country’s neglected infrastructure for extracting and shipping oil could happen in less than 18 months.“I think we can do it in less time than that, but it’ll be a lot of money,” Trump said. “A tremendous amount of money will have to be spent and the oil companies will spend it, and then they’ll get reimbursed by us or through revenue.”It still remains unclear how quickly the investment could occur given the uncertainties about Venezuela’s political stability and the billions of dollars needed to be spent.Venezuela produces on average about 1.1 million barrels of oil a day, down from the 3.5 million barrels a day produced in 1999 before a government takeover of the majority of oil interests and a mix of corruption, mismanagement and U.S. economic sanctions led output to fall.___Coto reported from San Juan, Puerto Rico. Associated Press reporters Milexsy Durán in Havana, Isabel DeBre in Buenos Aires and Joshua Boak in Washington, D.C., contributed.

    Cuban officials on Monday lowered flags before dawn to mourn 32 security officers they say were killed in the U.S. weekend strike in Venezuela, the island nation’s closest ally, as residents here wonder what the capture of President Nicolás Maduro means for their future.

    The two governments are so close that Cuban soldiers and security agents were often the Venezuelan president’s bodyguards, and Venezuela’s petroleum has kept the economically ailing island limping along for years. Cuban authorities over the weekend said the 32 had been killed in the surprise attack “after fierce resistance in direct combat against the attackers, or as a result of the bombing of the facilities.”

    Related video above: What happens next: Venezuela’s future after U.S. capture of Maduro

    The Trump administration has warned outright that toppling Maduro will help advance another decades-long goal: Dealing a blow to the Cuban government. Severing Cuba from Venezuela could have disastrous consequences for its leaders, who on Saturday called for the international community to stand up to “state terrorism.”

    On Saturday, Trump said the ailing Cuban economy will be further battered by Maduro’s ouster.

    “It’s going down,” Trump said of Cuba. “It’s going down for the count.”

    Loss of key supporter

    Many observers say Cuba, an island of about 10 million people, exerted a remarkable degree of influence over Venezuela, an oil-rich nation with three times as many people. At the same time, Cubans have long been tormented by constant blackouts and shortages of basic foods. And after the attack, they woke to the once-unimaginable possibility of an even grimmer future.

    “I can’t talk. I have no words,” 75-year-old Berta Luz Sierra Molina said as she sobbed and placed a hand over her face.

    Even though 63-year-old Regina Méndez is too old to join the Cuban military, she said that “we have to stand strong.”

    “Give me a rifle, and I’ll go fight,” Méndez said.

    Maduro’s government was shipping an average of 35,000 barrels of oil daily over the last three months, about a quarter of total demand, said Jorge Piñón, a Cuban energy expert at the University of Texas at Austin Energy Institute.

    “The question to which we don’t have an answer, which is critical: Is the U.S. going to allow Venezuela to continue supplying Cuba with oil?” he said.

    Piñón noted that Mexico once supplied Cuba with 22,000 barrels of oil a day before it dropped to 7,000 barrels after U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited Mexico City in early September.

    “I don’t see Mexico jumping in right now,” Piñón said. “The U.S. government would go bonkers.”

    Ricardo Torres, a Cuban economist at American University in Washington, said that “blackouts have been significant, and that is with Venezuela still sending some oil.”

    “Imagine a future now in the short term losing that,” he said. “It’s a catastrophe.”

    Piñón noted that Cuba doesn’t have the money to buy oil on the international market.

    “The only ally that they have left out there with oil is Russia,” he said, noting that it sends Cuba about 2 million barrels a year.

    “Russia has the capability to fill the gap. Do they have the political commitment, or the political desire to do so? I don’t know,” he said.

    Torres also questioned whether Russia would extend a hand.

    “Meddling with Cuba could jeopardize your negotiation with the U.S. around Ukraine. Why would you do it? Ukraine is far more important,” he said.

    Torres said Cuba should open its doors to the private sector and market and reduce its public sector, moves that could help prompt China to step in and help Cuba.

    “Do they have an alternative? I don’t think they do,” he said.

    Rebuilding Venezuela’s oil industry

    On Monday, Trump told NBC News in an interview that the U.S. government could reimburse oil companies making investments in Venezuela to maintain and increase oil production in that country.

    He suggested that the necessary rebuilding of the country’s neglected infrastructure for extracting and shipping oil could happen in less than 18 months.

    “I think we can do it in less time than that, but it’ll be a lot of money,” Trump said. “A tremendous amount of money will have to be spent and the oil companies will spend it, and then they’ll get reimbursed by us or through revenue.”

    It still remains unclear how quickly the investment could occur given the uncertainties about Venezuela’s political stability and the billions of dollars needed to be spent.

    Venezuela produces on average about 1.1 million barrels of oil a day, down from the 3.5 million barrels a day produced in 1999 before a government takeover of the majority of oil interests and a mix of corruption, mismanagement and U.S. economic sanctions led output to fall.

    ___

    Coto reported from San Juan, Puerto Rico. Associated Press reporters Milexsy Durán in Havana, Isabel DeBre in Buenos Aires and Joshua Boak in Washington, D.C., contributed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • South Korea says North Korea has launched a ballistic missile into the sea

    [ad_1]

    North Korea launched multiple ballistic missiles toward the sea Sunday, its neighbors said, just hours before South Korea’s president leaves for China for talks expected to cover North Korea’s nuclear program.South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said in a statement it detected several ballistic missile launches from North Korea’s capital region around 7:50 a.m. It said the missiles flew about 900 kilometers (560 miles) and that South Korea and U.S. authorities were analyzing details of the launches.Video above: Wildfires in South Korea destroyed an ancient Buddhist templeThe Joint Chiefs of Staff said that South Korea maintains a readiness to repel any provocations by North Korea and is closely exchanging information with the U.S. and Japan on the North’s missile launches.Japanese Defense Minister Shinjiro Koizumi said that at least two missile launches by North Korea have been confirmed. “They are a serious problem, threatening the peace and security of our nation, the region and the world,” Koizumi told reporters.North Korea ramps up weapons display ahead of political meetThe launches were the latest weapons demonstration by North Korea in recent weeks. Experts say North Korea is aiming to show off or review its achievements in the defense sector ahead of its upcoming ruling party congress, the first of its kind in five years. Observers are watching the Workers Party congress to see whether North Korea will set a new policy on the U.S. and respond to its calls to resume long-stalled talks.North Korea has been focusing on testing activities to enlarge its nuclear arsenal since its leader Kim Jong Un’s summitry with U.S. President Donald Trump fell apart in 2019. Kim has also boosted his diplomatic credentials by aligning with Russia over its war in Ukraine and tightening relations with China. Observers say Kim would believe his leverage has sharply increased to wrest concessions from Trump if they sit down for talks again.North Korea hasn’t announced when it will hold the congress, but South Korea’s spy service said it will likely occur in January or February.Launches comes before South Korean leader’s trip to ChinaSunday’s launches also came hours before South Korean President Lee Jae Myung departs for China for a summit with President Xi Jinping. During the four-day trip, Lee’s office said he would request China, North Korea’s major ally and biggest trading partner, to take “a constructive role” in efforts to promote peace on the Korean Peninsula.South Korea and the U.S. have long asked China to exercise its influence on North Korea to persuade it to return to talks or give up its nuclear program. But there are questions on how big of a leverage China has on its socialist neighbor. China, together with Russia, has also repeatedly blocked the U.S. and others’ attempts to toughen economic sanctions on North Korea in recent years.Later Sunday, South Korea convened an emergency national security council meeting where officials urged North Korea to stop ballistic missile launches, which violate U.N. Security Council resolutions. The council reported details of the launches and unspecified South Korean steps to Lee, according to the presidential office.North Korea hasn’t commented on US operation in VenezuelaThe launches followed Saturday’s dramatic U.S. military operation that ousted Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro from power and brought him to the U.S. to face narco-terrorism conspiracy charges. It represented America’s most assertive action to achieve regime change in a country since the nation’s 2003 invasion of Iraq.“Kim Jong Un may feel vindicated about his efforts to build a nuclear deterrent, as he likely did after Trump’s strikes on Iran,” said Leif-Eric Easley, professor of international studies at Ewha Womans University in Seoul. “However, leaders of hostile regimes will probably live with greater paranoia after seeing how quickly Maduro was extracted from his country to stand trial in the United States.”North Korea’s state media hasn’t commented on the U.S. operation.The official Korean Central News Agency said Sunday Kim visited a weapons factory on Saturday to review multipurpose precision guided weapons produced there. KCNA cited Kim as ordering officials to expand the current production capacity by about 2.5 times.Last Sunday, North Korea test-fired what it called long-range strategic cruise missiles. On Dec. 25, North Korea released photos showing apparent progress in the construction of its first nuclear-powered submarine.Associated Press writer Yuri Kageyama in Tokyo contributed to this report.

    North Korea launched multiple ballistic missiles toward the sea Sunday, its neighbors said, just hours before South Korea’s president leaves for China for talks expected to cover North Korea’s nuclear program.

    South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said in a statement it detected several ballistic missile launches from North Korea’s capital region around 7:50 a.m. It said the missiles flew about 900 kilometers (560 miles) and that South Korea and U.S. authorities were analyzing details of the launches.

    Video above: Wildfires in South Korea destroyed an ancient Buddhist temple

    The Joint Chiefs of Staff said that South Korea maintains a readiness to repel any provocations by North Korea and is closely exchanging information with the U.S. and Japan on the North’s missile launches.

    Japanese Defense Minister Shinjiro Koizumi said that at least two missile launches by North Korea have been confirmed. “They are a serious problem, threatening the peace and security of our nation, the region and the world,” Koizumi told reporters.

    North Korea ramps up weapons display ahead of political meet

    The launches were the latest weapons demonstration by North Korea in recent weeks. Experts say North Korea is aiming to show off or review its achievements in the defense sector ahead of its upcoming ruling party congress, the first of its kind in five years. Observers are watching the Workers Party congress to see whether North Korea will set a new policy on the U.S. and respond to its calls to resume long-stalled talks.

    North Korea has been focusing on testing activities to enlarge its nuclear arsenal since its leader Kim Jong Un’s summitry with U.S. President Donald Trump fell apart in 2019. Kim has also boosted his diplomatic credentials by aligning with Russia over its war in Ukraine and tightening relations with China. Observers say Kim would believe his leverage has sharply increased to wrest concessions from Trump if they sit down for talks again.

    North Korea hasn’t announced when it will hold the congress, but South Korea’s spy service said it will likely occur in January or February.

    Launches comes before South Korean leader’s trip to China

    Sunday’s launches also came hours before South Korean President Lee Jae Myung departs for China for a summit with President Xi Jinping. During the four-day trip, Lee’s office said he would request China, North Korea’s major ally and biggest trading partner, to take “a constructive role” in efforts to promote peace on the Korean Peninsula.

    South Korea and the U.S. have long asked China to exercise its influence on North Korea to persuade it to return to talks or give up its nuclear program. But there are questions on how big of a leverage China has on its socialist neighbor. China, together with Russia, has also repeatedly blocked the U.S. and others’ attempts to toughen economic sanctions on North Korea in recent years.

    Later Sunday, South Korea convened an emergency national security council meeting where officials urged North Korea to stop ballistic missile launches, which violate U.N. Security Council resolutions. The council reported details of the launches and unspecified South Korean steps to Lee, according to the presidential office.

    North Korea hasn’t commented on US operation in Venezuela

    The launches followed Saturday’s dramatic U.S. military operation that ousted Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro from power and brought him to the U.S. to face narco-terrorism conspiracy charges. It represented America’s most assertive action to achieve regime change in a country since the nation’s 2003 invasion of Iraq.

    “Kim Jong Un may feel vindicated about his efforts to build a nuclear deterrent, as he likely did after Trump’s strikes on Iran,” said Leif-Eric Easley, professor of international studies at Ewha Womans University in Seoul. “However, leaders of hostile regimes will probably live with greater paranoia after seeing how quickly Maduro was extracted from his country to stand trial in the United States.”

    North Korea’s state media hasn’t commented on the U.S. operation.

    The official Korean Central News Agency said Sunday Kim visited a weapons factory on Saturday to review multipurpose precision guided weapons produced there. KCNA cited Kim as ordering officials to expand the current production capacity by about 2.5 times.

    Last Sunday, North Korea test-fired what it called long-range strategic cruise missiles. On Dec. 25, North Korea released photos showing apparent progress in the construction of its first nuclear-powered submarine.

    Associated Press writer Yuri Kageyama in Tokyo contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fact-checking Trump comments on Venezuela attacks, Maduro

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump said a U.S. military assault succeeded in capturing Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, both facing U.S. charges related to cocaine trafficking under newly unsealed indictments

    In a Jan. 3 press conference at Mar-a-Lago, Trump said the U.S. would “run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.”

    Trump also said Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodríguez was sworn in as interim president. Trump said Rodríguez had talked to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and was “essentially willing to do what we think is necessary to make Venezuela great again.”

    However, Rodríguez criticized the U.S. military action as “brutal aggression” on state television and called for Maduro’s immediate release.

    Maduro, an authoritarian, has led Venezuela since 2013, succeeding an ideological ally, Hugo Chávez, who had been in office since 1999. Under both men, U.S. relations with Venezuela frayed over foreign policy, oil and human rights.

    In July 2024, Maduro declared victory following an election that international observers described as fraudulent. The country’s opposition candidate, Edmundo González Urrutia, received about 70% of the vote.

    Tensions between Trump and Maduro escalated in September after the U.S. government began attacking vessels off the coast of Venezuela, killing more than 100 people, in what Trump described as an effort to thwart drug smuggling.

    When a reporter asked Trump during the Mar-a-Lago press event whether he’d spoken to Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado following Maduro’s arrest, Trump said Machado “doesn’t have the support or the respect within the country.”

    Machado, who recently won the Nobel Peace Prize for her fight for democracy in Venezuela, had a 72% approval rating from Venezuelans according to a March poll by ClearPath Strategies.

    Trump said without evidence that the United States’ role in governing Venezuela “won’t cost us anything” because U.S. oil companies would invest in new infrastructure in the oil-rich country. “It’s going to make a lot of money,” Trump said. 

    Here, we fact-checked Trump’s and Rubio’s statements from the press conference.

    Rubio: “It’s just not the kind of mission that you can pre-notify (Congress about) because it endangers the mission.” 

    The administration’s lack of warning to Congress bucks laws and precedents. 

    Rubio said members of Congress were not notified in advance. Trump said the administration was concerned about Congress potentially leaking news of the administration’s decision to capture Maduro.

    Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., praised the operation as a “decisive action.”

    But Congressional Democrats said Congress should have been notified in advance. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said, “Maduro is terrible. But Trump put American servicemembers at risk with this unauthorized attack.”

    Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., said Trump and his cabinet were not forthcoming about their intentions for regime change, so “we are left with no understanding of how the administration is preparing to mitigate risks to the U.S. and we have no information regarding a long-term strategy following today’s extraordinary escalation.”

    The U.S. Constitution assigns Congress the right to declare war. The last time that happened was for World War II.

    Since then, presidents have generally initiated military action using their constitutionally granted powers as commander in chief without an official declaration of war. 

    Since Congress passed the 1973 War Powers Resolution, the president has had to report to Congress within 48 hours of introducing the U.S. military into hostilities and terminate the use of the military within 60 days unless Congress approves. If approval is not granted and the president deems it an emergency, an additional 30 days are granted for ending operations.

    In recent decades, congressional consent has usually been granted through an authorization for the use of military force. But an authorization has not been passed for operations in Venezuela. Kaine and other lawmakers have pursued legislation — so far fruitlessly —  to prohibit the use of federal funds for any use of military force in or against Venezuela without Congressional authorization.

    The Trump administration has whittled away at prior notification requirements. Under federal law, eight bipartisan, senior members of Congress must receive prior notice of particularly sensitive covert actions. In June 2025, the administration told Republicans, but not Democrats, about the forthcoming U.S. strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. For the Venezuela operation, it appears no lawmakers were notified in advance.

    President Nicolás Maduro, accompanied by first lady Cilia Flores, greets supporters during an event marking the anniversary of a 1958 coup ousting dictator Marcos Pérez Jiménez, in Caracas, Venezuela, on Jan. 23, 2024. (AP)

    Trump: Each U.S. boat strike off the coast of Venezuela saves 25,000 people. 

    Pants on Fire! 

    The Trump administration has struck at least 32 vessels killing about 115 people in the Caribbean Sea and Eastern Pacific Ocean since September. Trump said previously that the boats were carrying drugs en route to the U.S. and during the press conference he said the drugs on each boat would kill “on average, 25,000 people.”

    However, experts on drugs and Venezuela told PolitiFact the country plays a minor role in trafficking drugs that reach the U.S. And the administration has provided no evidence about the type or quantity of drugs it says were on the boats. This lack of information makes it impossible to know how many lethal doses of the drugs could have been destroyed.

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported 73,000 U.S. drug overdose deaths from May 2024 to April 2025. That means the drugs on 32 boats would have been responsible for 800,000 deaths, nearly 11 times the number of U.S. overdose deaths in one year. 

    Trump: “Maduro sent savage and murderous gangs, including the bloodthirsty prison gang Tren de Aragua, to terrorize American communities nationwide.”

    There is no evidence Maduro sent members of Venezuelan prison gang Tren de Aragua to the U.S. 

    The U.S. Justice Department indictment against Maduro does not mention Trump’s statement.

    An April report from the federal National Intelligence Council contradicted Trump’s statements about links between Maduro and Tren de Aragua. 

    “While Venezuela’s permissive environment enables (Tren de Aragua) to operate, the Maduro regime probably does not have a policy of cooperating with TDA and is not directing TDA movement to and operations in the United States,” the report said.

    Trump: Venezuela “stole” U.S oil in the past.

    This needs context

    In the early 20th century, Venezuela’s long-serving dictator, Juan Vicente Gómez, allowed foreign companies almost exclusive access to the country’s oil resources. 

    In 1975, after decades of seeking greater control of its oil resources, Venezuela nationalized its oil industry.

    “Trump’s claim that Venezuela has stolen oil and land from the U.S. is baseless,” Francisco Rodríguez, a Venezuelan economist at the University of Denver, told the Washington Post. “The U.S. was much more interested in having Venezuela be a provider of oil — relatively cheap oil — than to have a production collapse in Venezuela,” Rodríguez said. As a result, the change was “relatively uncontroversial” at the time.

    U.S. oil companies, including Exxon and Mobil and Gulf, now Chevron, lost about $5 billion each in assets and were compensated $1 billion each, according to news reports, the Post reported.

    But Rodríguez said the companies didn’t push for additional compensation at the time, in part because no forum existed to do so.

    In general, experts have told PolitiFact that invading a country to take its oil would be both illegal and unethical. In 2016, Trump mused about how the U.S. should have taken Iraq’s oil when it invaded to oust Saddam Hussein.

    Experts pointed to the Annex to the Hague Convention of 1907 on the Laws and Customs of War, which says that “private property … must be respected (and) cannot be confiscated.” It also says that “pillage is formally forbidden.”

    “If ‘to the victors go the spoils’ was legal doctrine, then we would have believed that (then-Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein) should have been able to keep Kuwait City after he invaded” in 1990, terrorism analyst Daveed Gartenstein-Ross told PolitiFact in 2016. “But we viewed that — quite rightly — as an act of aggression under the U.N. Charter.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Brazen Illegality of Trump’s Venezuela Operation

    [ad_1]

    On Saturday morning, President Donald Trump announced that the United States military, working with American law-enforcement officials, had carried out a strike in Venezuela, capturing the country’s President, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife, Cilia Flores. Maduro was indicted in a federal court in New York for his role in what the Administration claims is a narco-terrorism conspiracy. At a press conference later on Saturday, Trump said, “We are going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper, and judicious transition.” He also said that he was not concerned about “boots on the ground,” referring to an American military presence.

    I spoke by phone on Saturday morning with Oona Hathaway, a professor at Yale Law School and the director of its Center for Global Legal Challenges. She is also the president-elect of the American Society of International Law. During our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity, we discussed whether Maduro can legally be tried in American courts, the long history of U.S. meddling in Latin America, and what makes Trump’s decision so uniquely dangerous.

    What is the legal basis, such as it is, for this action?

    Unfortunately, I don’t think there is a legal basis for what we’re seeing in Venezuela. There are certainly legal arguments that the Administration is going to make, but all the arguments that I’ve heard so far don’t hold water. None of them really justify what the President seems to have ordered to take place in Venezuela.

    What are the arguments that you’ve heard from either people in the Administration or from their supporters?

    We’re still in the early hours, but the arguments that have been made in the run-up to this full-scale effort have largely focussed on self-defense against drug traffickers, who they claim are being supported or maybe even directed by Maduro and his administration. The problem is that that really doesn’t work under international law. There is a right of self-defense under the United Nations charter, which allows states to use force in self-defense against an armed attack. But it’s never been used for something like drug trafficking. And so all of these boat strikes that have been taking place over the past couple of months, which have been justified as self-defense, don’t fall within anything that anyone would recognize as self-defense under international law. Self-defense generally requires that there’s actually an armed attack. And it seems like they’re making a similar argument here to justify the capture of Maduro and the use of force on land in Venezuela.

    What do you think of the argument that lots of people in America die from drug overdoses and so this is a form of self-defense?

    Look, when the U.N. charter was written, eighty years ago, it included a critical prohibition on the use of force by states. States are not allowed to decide on their own that they want to use force against other states. It was meant to reinforce this relatively new idea at the time that states couldn’t just go to war whenever they wanted to. In the old world, the pre-U.N. charter world, it would have been fine to use force if you felt like drug trafficking was hurting you, and you could come up with legal justification that that was the case. But the whole point of the U.N. charter was basically to say, “We’re not going to go to war for those reasons anymore.”

    The charter included a very narrow exception, which was an exception for the use of self-defense. The idea there was that surely we shouldn’t have to wait for the Security Council to authorize a use of force in order to defend ourselves if we’re attacked. But that was meant to be a narrow exception.

    If drug trafficking is a reasonable justification, then a whole range of possible arguments can be made that basically mean that self-defense is no longer a real exception. It’s the new rule. Why couldn’t you make the same argument about communicable diseases? There’s bird flu coming from a country, and therefore we have a legal justification for the use of military force. Once we start going down that road, the idea that there’s any limit evaporates. I mean, yes, drugs are horrific. Do they cause loss of life in the United States? Absolutely. There’s no doubt about that. It’s a terrible scourge, but the idea that because drugs are coming from a country it justifies an invasion and a change of administration in that country basically gets rid of any kind of limits on the use of force.

    What other arguments have you heard from the Administration?

    One of the claims is that Maduro is not, in fact, the leader of Venezuela. This is something that they’ve been saying for a while now—that he’s not the legitimate leader of the country, that they don’t recognize him as the head of state. And that might justify his seizure and indictment, although using military force to do that would not be justified. I don’t know how they get from there to an argument that they can use military force in Venezuela.

    What do you mean, exactly, about his “seizure and indictment”? Venezuela had an election. It was not a free election. He declared himself President, and he’s broadly recognized as the President of Venezuela, but, again, he was not freely elected by the people of Venezuela. That could justify his indictment in an American court?

    I should back up. As part of this military operation, at least one of the key goals seems to have been the capture of Maduro and his wife, who have been indicted for criminal charges in the Southern District of New York. The only way they can do that is if they’re claiming that he’s not a head of state, because heads of state get immunity and heads of state are not subject to criminal prosecution in the domestic courts of other states. That’s just a basic rule of international law. The United States has long recognized it.

    So you were not saying that the fact that he stole an election per se means you can grab him and try him in an American court but, rather, that if he were not a head of state, that would at least allow for trying him in an American court, which normally would not be the case?

    Right. So if he’s not actually a head of state, then head-of-state immunity doesn’t apply. And it’s connected to this broader question of the use of military force in that it may be that they would make a claim—although I haven’t yet seen this—that because he’s not the legitimate head of state that somehow they have a legal authority to use force to grab him. But, again, the two don’t connect. So the problem is that merely saying that he’s not head of state doesn’t then justify the use of military force in Venezuela.

    [ad_2]

    Isaac Chotiner

    Source link

  • U.S. plans to ‘run’ Venezuela, Trump says, after operation to oust Maduro

    [ad_1]

    CARACAS, Venezuela — Hours after an audacious military operation that plucked leader Nicolás Maduro from power and removed him from the country, President Donald Trump said Saturday that the United States would run Venezuela at least temporarily and tap its vast oil reserves to sell to other nations.


    What You Need To Know

    • President Donald Trump says the United States will run Venezuela at least temporarily after an audacious military operation plucked leader Nicolás Maduro from power and removed him from the country
    • Trump on Saturday also described plans to tap Venezuela’s vast oil reserves to sell to other nations
    • The dramatic action capped an intensive Trump administration pressure campaign on the South American nation and its autocratic leader and months of secret planning
    • It resulted in the most assertive American action to achieve regime change since the 2003 invasion of Iraq
    • Legal experts immediately raised questions about whether the operation was lawful

    The dramatic action capped an intensive Trump administration pressure campaign on the South American nation and its autocratic leader and months of secret planning resulting in the most assertive American action to achieve regime change since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

    Legal experts immediately raised questions about whether the operation was lawful. Venezuela’s vice president Delcy Rodríguez demanded in a speech that the U.S. free Maduro and called him the country’s rightful leader, before Venezuela’s high court ordered her to assume the role of interim president.

    Speaking to reporters hours after Maduro’s capture, Trump revealed his plans to exploit the leadership void to “fix” the country’s oil infrastructure and sell “large amounts” of oil to other countries.

    Maduro and his wife, seized overnight from their home on a military base, were first taken aboard a U.S. warship on their way to face prosecution for a Justice Department indictment accusing them of participating in a narco-terrorism conspiracy.

    A plane carrying the deposed leader landed around 4:30 p.m. Saturday at an airport in New York City’s northern suburbs. Maduro was escorted off the jet, gingerly making his way down a stairway before being led across the tarmac surrounded by federal agents. Several agents filmed him on their phones as he walked.

    He was then flown by helicopter to Manhattan, where a convoy of law enforcement vehicles, including an armored car, was waiting to whisk him to a nearby U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration office.

    A video posted on social media by a White House account showed Maduro, smiling, as he was escorted through that office by two DEA agents grasping his arms.

    He was expected to be detained while awaiting trial at a federal jail in Brooklyn.

    Move lacks congressional approval

    The legal authority for the incursion, done without congressional approval, was not immediately clear, but the Trump administration promoted the ouster as a step toward reducing the flow of dangerous drugs into the U.S. The president touted what he saw as other potential benefits, including a leadership stake in the country and greater control of oil.

    Trump claimed the U.S. government would help run the country and was already doing so, though there were no immediate signs of that. Venezuelan state TV continued to air pro-Maduro propaganda, broadcasting live images of supporters taking to the streets in Caracas in protest.

    “We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition,” Trump said at a Mar-a-Lago news conference where he boasted that this “extremely successful operation should serve as warning to anyone who would threaten American sovereignty or endanger American lives.”

    Maduro and other Venezuelan officials were indicted in 2020 on “narco-terrorism” conspiracy charges, but the Justice Department released a new indictment Saturday of Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, that painted the regime as a “corrupt, illegitimate government” fueled by a drug trafficking operation that flooded the U.S with cocaine. The U.S. government does not recognize Maduro as the country’s leader.

    Trump posted a photo on social media showing Maduro wearing a sweatsuit and a blindfold on board the USS Iwo Jima.

    Early morning attack

    The operation followed a monthslong Trump administration effort to push the Venezuelan leader, including a major buildup of American forces in the waters off South America and attacks on boats in the eastern Pacific and Caribbean accused of carrying drugs. Last week, the CIA was behind a drone strike at a docking area believed to have been used by Venezuelan drug cartels — the first known direct operation on Venezuelan soil since the U.S. began strikes in September.

    Maduro had decried prior military operations as a thinly veiled effort to topple him from power.

    Taking place 36 years to the day after the 1990 surrender and seizure of Panama leader Manuel Antonio Noriega following a U.S. invasion, the Venezuela operation unfolded under the cover of darkness early Saturday as Trump said the U.S. turned off “almost all of the lights” in the capital city of Caracas while forces moved in to extract Maduro and his wife.

    Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said U.S. forces had rehearsed their maneuvers for months, learning everything about Maduro — where he was and what he ate, as well as details of his pets and his clothes.

    “We think, we develop, we train, we rehearse, we debrief, we rehearse again and again,” Caine said. “Not to get it right, but to ensure we cannot get it wrong.”

    Early Saturday, multiple explosions rang out and low-flying aircraft swept through Caracas. Maduro’s government accused the U.S. of hitting civilian and military installations, calling it an “imperialist attack” and urging citizens to take to the streets.

    The assault lasted less than 30 minutes, and the explosions — at least seven blasts — sent people rushing into the streets, while others took to social media to report what they saw and heard. Some Venezuelan civilians and members of the military were killed, said Rodríguez, the country’s vice president, without giving a number. Trump said some U.S. forces were injured but none were killed.

    Video obtained from Caracas and an unidentified coastal city showed tracers and smoke clouding the landscape as repeated muted explosions illuminated the night sky. Other footage showed cars passing on a highway as blasts illuminated the hills behind them. The videos were verified by The Associated Press.

    Smoke was seen rising from the hangar of a military base in Caracas, while another military installation in the capital was without electricity.

    Under Venezuelan law, Rodríguez would take over from Maduro. Rodriguez, however, stressed during a Saturday appearance on state television that she did not plan to assume power, before Venezuela’s high court ordered that she assume the interim role.

    “There is only one president in Venezuela, and his name is Nicolás Maduro Moros,” Rodriguez said.

    Government supporters burn a U.S. flag in Caracas, Venezuela, Saturday, Jan. 3, 2026, after U.S. President Donald Trump announced that U.S. forces had captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife. (AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos)

    Some streets in Caracas fill up

    Venezuela’s ruling party has held power since 1999, when Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chávez, took office, promising to uplift poor people and later to implement a self-described socialist revolution.

    Maduro took over when Chávez died in 2013. His 2018 reelection was widely considered a sham because the main opposition parties were banned from participating. During the 2024 election, electoral authorities loyal to the ruling party declared him the winner hours after polls closed, but the opposition gathered overwhelming evidence that he lost by a more than 2-to-1 margin.

    In a demonstration of how polarizing a figure Maduro is, people variously took to the streets to protest his capture and celebrate it.

    At a protest in the Venezuelan capital, Caracas Mayor Carmen Meléndez joined a crowd demanding Maduro’s return.

    “Maduro, hold on, the people are rising up!” the crowd chanted. “We are here, Nicolás Maduro. If you can hear us, we are here!”

    Earlier, armed people and uniformed members of a civilian militia took to the streets of a Caracas neighborhood long considered a stronghold of the ruling party.

    In other parts of the city, the streets remained empty hours after the attack. Some areas remained without power, but vehicles moved freely.

    “How do I feel? Scared, like everyone,” said Caracas resident Noris Prada, who sat on an empty avenue looking down at his phone. “Venezuelans woke up scared, many families couldn’t sleep.”

    In Doral, Florida, home to the largest Venezuelan community in the U.S, people wrapped themselves in Venezuelan flags, ate fried snacks and cheered as music played. At one point, the crowd chanted “Liberty! Liberty! Liberty!”

    In this photo released by the White House, President Donald Trump monitors U.S. military operations in Venezuela with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, center, at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Fla., Saturday, Jan. 3, 2026. (Molly Riley/The White House via AP)

    In this photo released by the White House, President Donald Trump monitors U.S. military operations in Venezuela with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, center, at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Fla., Saturday, Jan. 3, 2026. (Molly Riley/The White House via AP)

    Questions of legality

    Some legal experts raised immediate concerns about the operation’s legality.

    The U.N. Security Council, acting on an emergency request from Colombia, planned to hold a meeting on U.S. operations in Venezuela on Monday morning, according to a council diplomat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a meeting not yet made public.

    Lawmakers from both political parties in Congress have raised reservations and flat-out objections to the U.S. attacks on boats suspected of drug smuggling near the Venezuelan coast. Congress has not specifically approved an authorization for the use of military force for such operations in the region.

    Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said he had seen no evidence that would justify Trump striking Venezuela without approval from Congress and demanded an immediate briefing by the administration on “its plan to ensure stability in the region and its legal justification for this decision.”

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Zelenskyy names Ukraine’s head of military intelligence as his new chief of staff

    [ad_1]

    President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Friday appointed the head of Ukraine’s military intelligence as his new chief of staff, a move that comes as the U.S. leads a diplomatic push to end Russia’s nearly 4-year-old invasion.Announcing the appointment of Gen. Kyrylo Budanov, Zelenskyy said Ukraine needs to focus on security issues, developing its defense and security forces, and peace talks — areas that are overseen by the office of the president.Zelenskyy had dismissed his previous chief of staff, Andrii Yermak, after anti-corruption officials began investigating alleged graft in the energy sector.The president framed Budanov’s appointment as part of a broader effort to sharpen the focus on security, defense development and diplomacy.“Kyrylo has specialized experience in these areas and sufficient strength to achieve results,” Zelenskyy said.Budanov, 39, said on Telegram his new position is “both an honor and a responsibility — at a historic time for Ukraine — to focus on the critically important issues of the state’s strategic security.”In his evening address, Zelenskyy announced further changes to his team, saying he had proposed Mykhailo Fedorov, the current minister for digital transformation, as the new minister of defense.Fedorov, 34, is credited with spearheading the introduction of drone technology in Ukraine’s army and introducing several successful e-government platforms in his current role.He replaces Denys Shmyhal who took up the post last July in a major government shake-up. Zelenskyy thanked Shmyhal and said he would be taking up another role in government. He also credited the ministry for reaching a target production of more than 1,000 interceptor drones per day in December.Earlier, Zelenskyy appointed Foreign Intelligence Service head Oleh Ivashchenko to replace Budanov as intelligence chief.‘Prominent face of Kyiv’s intelligence effort’Budanov is one of the country’s most recognizable and popular wartime figures. He has led Ukraine’s military intelligence agency, known by its acronym GUR, since 2020.A career military intelligence officer, he rose through the defense establishment after Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014. He also took part in special operations and intelligence missions linked to the fighting with Moscow-backed separatist forces in eastern Ukraine before the full-scale invasion of February 2022. He reportedly was wounded during one such operation.Since the full-scale invasion, Budanov has become a prominent face of Kyiv’s intelligence effort, regularly appearing in interviews and briefings that mix strategic signaling with psychological pressure on Moscow. He has frequently warned of Russia’s long-term intentions toward Ukraine and the region, while portraying the war as an existential struggle for the country’s statehood.Under Budanov, the GUR expanded its operational footprint, coordinating intelligence, sabotage and special operations aimed at degrading Russian military capabilities far beyond the front lines. Ukrainian officials have credited military intelligence with operations targeting Russian command structures, logistics hubs, energy infrastructure and naval assets, including strikes deep inside Russian territory and occupied areas.His appointment to lead the office of the president marks an unusual shift, placing an intelligence chief at the center of Ukraine’s political and diplomatic coordination.Ihor Reiterovych, a Kyiv-based independent political expert, noted that Budanov had participated in the talks with the U.S. and “will fit much more naturally into the overall context” of the negotiations.“Unlike Yermak, he has both experience in this field and has worked in a relevant position,” Reiterovych said, adding that the GUR also has had certain contacts with Russia on issues such as prisoner exchanges.Russia reports a higher death toll from a strikeRussian authorities said Friday the death toll from what they called a Ukrainian drone strike on a cafe and hotel in a Russian-occupied village in Ukraine’s Kherson region rose to 28. Kyiv strongly denied attacking civilian targets.Svetlana Petrenko, spokeswoman of Russia’s main criminal investigation agency, the Investigative Committee, said those killed in the village of Khorly, where at least 100 civilians were celebrating New Year’s Eve, included two minors, while 31 people were hospitalized.A spokesman for Ukraine’s General Staff, Dmytro Lykhovii, denied attacking civilians. He told Ukraine’s public broadcaster Suspilne on Thursday that Ukrainian forces “adhere to the norms of international humanitarian law” and “carry out strikes exclusively against Russian military targets, facilities of the Russian fuel and energy sector, and other lawful targets.”He noted that Russia has repeatedly used disinformation and false statements to disrupt the ongoing peace negotiations.The Associated Press could not independently verify claims made about the attack.Washington praises progress in negotiationsU.S. President Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff said Wednesday that he, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Trump’s son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner had a “productive call” with the national security advisers of Britain, France, Germany and Ukraine “to discuss advancing the next steps in the European peace process.”The U.S. efforts has faced a new obstacle earlier this week, when Moscow said it would toughen its negotiating stand after what it said was a long-range drone attack against a residence of Russian President Vladimir Putin in northwestern Russia early Monday.Kyiv has denied attacking Putin’s residence, saying the Russian claim was a ruse to derail the negotiations.In his New Year’s address, Zelenskyy said a peace deal was “90% ready” but warned that the remaining 10% — believed to include key sticking points such as territory — would “determine the fate of peace, the fate of Ukraine and Europe, how people will live.”Overnight attacksElsewhere in Ukraine, Russia struck a residential area of Kharkiv with two missiles Friday, Zelenskyy wrote on his Telegram page, adding that Moscow’s forces “continue the killings, despite all the efforts of the world, and above all the United States, in the diplomatic process.”At least 19 people in the eastern city were injured, including a 6-month-old, said regional administration head Oleh Syniehubov.The Russian Defense Ministry denied launching any strikes with missiles or other airborne weapons on Kharkiv on Friday and suggested, without offering evidence, that the damage could have been caused by the detonation of ammunition at a weapons depot.Earlier Friday, Russia conducted what local authorities called “one of the most massive” drone attacks at Zaporizhzhia. At least nine drones struck the city, damaging dozens of residential buildings and other civilian infrastructure but causing no casualties, according to Ivan Fedorov, head of the regional administration.Overall, Russia fired 116 long-range drones at Ukraine, according to Ukraine’s air force, with 86 intercepted and 27 striking their targets.The Russian ministry said its air defenses intercepted 64 Ukrainian drones overnight in multiple Russian regions.The Russian city of Belgorod was hit by a Ukrainian missile, according to regional Gov. Vyacheslav Gladkov. Two women were hospitalized after the strike, which shattered windows and damaged an unspecified commercial facility and a number of cars in the region that borders Ukraine, he said.

    President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Friday appointed the head of Ukraine’s military intelligence as his new chief of staff, a move that comes as the U.S. leads a diplomatic push to end Russia’s nearly 4-year-old invasion.

    Announcing the appointment of Gen. Kyrylo Budanov, Zelenskyy said Ukraine needs to focus on security issues, developing its defense and security forces, and peace talks — areas that are overseen by the office of the president.

    Zelenskyy had dismissed his previous chief of staff, Andrii Yermak, after anti-corruption officials began investigating alleged graft in the energy sector.

    The president framed Budanov’s appointment as part of a broader effort to sharpen the focus on security, defense development and diplomacy.

    “Kyrylo has specialized experience in these areas and sufficient strength to achieve results,” Zelenskyy said.

    Budanov, 39, said on Telegram his new position is “both an honor and a responsibility — at a historic time for Ukraine — to focus on the critically important issues of the state’s strategic security.”

    In his evening address, Zelenskyy announced further changes to his team, saying he had proposed Mykhailo Fedorov, the current minister for digital transformation, as the new minister of defense.

    Fedorov, 34, is credited with spearheading the introduction of drone technology in Ukraine’s army and introducing several successful e-government platforms in his current role.

    He replaces Denys Shmyhal who took up the post last July in a major government shake-up. Zelenskyy thanked Shmyhal and said he would be taking up another role in government. He also credited the ministry for reaching a target production of more than 1,000 interceptor drones per day in December.

    Earlier, Zelenskyy appointed Foreign Intelligence Service head Oleh Ivashchenko to replace Budanov as intelligence chief.

    ‘Prominent face of Kyiv’s intelligence effort’

    Budanov is one of the country’s most recognizable and popular wartime figures. He has led Ukraine’s military intelligence agency, known by its acronym GUR, since 2020.

    A career military intelligence officer, he rose through the defense establishment after Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014. He also took part in special operations and intelligence missions linked to the fighting with Moscow-backed separatist forces in eastern Ukraine before the full-scale invasion of February 2022. He reportedly was wounded during one such operation.

    Since the full-scale invasion, Budanov has become a prominent face of Kyiv’s intelligence effort, regularly appearing in interviews and briefings that mix strategic signaling with psychological pressure on Moscow. He has frequently warned of Russia’s long-term intentions toward Ukraine and the region, while portraying the war as an existential struggle for the country’s statehood.

    Under Budanov, the GUR expanded its operational footprint, coordinating intelligence, sabotage and special operations aimed at degrading Russian military capabilities far beyond the front lines. Ukrainian officials have credited military intelligence with operations targeting Russian command structures, logistics hubs, energy infrastructure and naval assets, including strikes deep inside Russian territory and occupied areas.

    His appointment to lead the office of the president marks an unusual shift, placing an intelligence chief at the center of Ukraine’s political and diplomatic coordination.

    Ihor Reiterovych, a Kyiv-based independent political expert, noted that Budanov had participated in the talks with the U.S. and “will fit much more naturally into the overall context” of the negotiations.

    “Unlike Yermak, he has both experience in this field and has worked in a relevant position,” Reiterovych said, adding that the GUR also has had certain contacts with Russia on issues such as prisoner exchanges.

    Russia reports a higher death toll from a strike

    Russian authorities said Friday the death toll from what they called a Ukrainian drone strike on a cafe and hotel in a Russian-occupied village in Ukraine’s Kherson region rose to 28. Kyiv strongly denied attacking civilian targets.

    Svetlana Petrenko, spokeswoman of Russia’s main criminal investigation agency, the Investigative Committee, said those killed in the village of Khorly, where at least 100 civilians were celebrating New Year’s Eve, included two minors, while 31 people were hospitalized.

    A spokesman for Ukraine’s General Staff, Dmytro Lykhovii, denied attacking civilians. He told Ukraine’s public broadcaster Suspilne on Thursday that Ukrainian forces “adhere to the norms of international humanitarian law” and “carry out strikes exclusively against Russian military targets, facilities of the Russian fuel and energy sector, and other lawful targets.”

    He noted that Russia has repeatedly used disinformation and false statements to disrupt the ongoing peace negotiations.

    The Associated Press could not independently verify claims made about the attack.

    Washington praises progress in negotiations

    U.S. President Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff said Wednesday that he, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Trump’s son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner had a “productive call” with the national security advisers of Britain, France, Germany and Ukraine “to discuss advancing the next steps in the European peace process.”

    The U.S. efforts has faced a new obstacle earlier this week, when Moscow said it would toughen its negotiating stand after what it said was a long-range drone attack against a residence of Russian President Vladimir Putin in northwestern Russia early Monday.

    Kyiv has denied attacking Putin’s residence, saying the Russian claim was a ruse to derail the negotiations.

    In his New Year’s address, Zelenskyy said a peace deal was “90% ready” but warned that the remaining 10% — believed to include key sticking points such as territory — would “determine the fate of peace, the fate of Ukraine and Europe, how people will live.”

    Overnight attacks

    Elsewhere in Ukraine, Russia struck a residential area of Kharkiv with two missiles Friday, Zelenskyy wrote on his Telegram page, adding that Moscow’s forces “continue the killings, despite all the efforts of the world, and above all the United States, in the diplomatic process.”

    At least 19 people in the eastern city were injured, including a 6-month-old, said regional administration head Oleh Syniehubov.

    The Russian Defense Ministry denied launching any strikes with missiles or other airborne weapons on Kharkiv on Friday and suggested, without offering evidence, that the damage could have been caused by the detonation of ammunition at a weapons depot.

    Earlier Friday, Russia conducted what local authorities called “one of the most massive” drone attacks at Zaporizhzhia. At least nine drones struck the city, damaging dozens of residential buildings and other civilian infrastructure but causing no casualties, according to Ivan Fedorov, head of the regional administration.

    Overall, Russia fired 116 long-range drones at Ukraine, according to Ukraine’s air force, with 86 intercepted and 27 striking their targets.

    The Russian ministry said its air defenses intercepted 64 Ukrainian drones overnight in multiple Russian regions.

    The Russian city of Belgorod was hit by a Ukrainian missile, according to regional Gov. Vyacheslav Gladkov. Two women were hospitalized after the strike, which shattered windows and damaged an unspecified commercial facility and a number of cars in the region that borders Ukraine, he said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link