Global Pulse

作者： admin

  • Pakistani PM to visit Saudi Arabia Wednesday: statement

    Pakistani PM to visit Saudi Arabia Wednesday: statement

    ISLAMABAD – A formal statement from Pakistan’s government has confirmed that Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif will launch an official visit to Saudi Arabia this week, with his departure for the Saudi city of Jeddah set for Wednesday.

    The official notification confirms that the prime minister will travel alongside a delegation of senior Pakistani officials, though government representatives have not yet released additional details about the agenda for the visit, expected attendees beyond the high-level delegation, or specific outcomes that the two sides aim to reach.

    Diplomatic ties between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have long been defined by close economic cooperation, people-to-people ties, and strategic alignment, making bilateral visits by top leadership a regular fixture of the relationship. This trip marks the latest high-level engagement between the two regional partners, coming as scheduled diplomatic exchanges continue between Islamabad and Riyadh.

  • Mainland urges Taiwan’s DPP authorities to remove barriers to resuming direct flights

    Mainland urges Taiwan’s DPP authorities to remove barriers to resuming direct flights

    BEIJING, April 15, 2026 (Xinhua) — A senior Chinese spokesperson reaffirmed Wednesday that the Chinese mainland has not implemented any restrictions on the full resumption of direct cross-Taiwan Strait flights, and called on the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) authorities in Taiwan to remove the unreasonable barriers the administration has placed on the restoration of these air connections.

    Chen Binhua, spokesperson for the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council, made the call during a regular press briefing, noting that all existing obstacles to restarting full direct cross-Strait flights are rooted in restrictions imposed by the DPP administration.

    Cross-Strait air connectivity has been a key issue for people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, with travelers, businesspeople, and separated families calling for the restoration of convenient, direct flights that were scaled back in recent years. The Chinese mainland has repeatedly positioned itself as open to resuming full service, placing responsibility for the continued disruption on the DPP’s restrictive policies.

  • Mainland pressing ahead with policy package to boost cross-Strait ties: spokesman

    Mainland pressing ahead with policy package to boost cross-Strait ties: spokesman

    BEIJING – Just days after unveiling a sweeping 10-point policy package designed to deepen people-to-people ties and economic cooperation across the Taiwan Strait, Chinese mainland authorities confirmed on Wednesday they are moving full speed ahead with implementing the new initiatives. The announcement came during a regular press briefing from Chen Binhua, spokesperson for the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office.

    The new set of measures, made public on April 12, targets long-standing barriers to cross-Strait engagement by expanding travel access and streamlining trade protocols. Key provisions include the resumption of individual travel permits for residents of Shanghai and Fujian traveling to Taiwan, as well as simplified inspection and approval procedures that make it easier for food products from qualified Taiwanese manufacturers to enter the large mainland consumer market.

    In his remarks, Chen called on the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) authorities in Taiwan to remove the various administrative restrictions they have put in place that have disrupted cross-Strait interactions. He emphasized the urgency of eliminating these barriers to allow cross-Strait exchanges and cooperation to return to a normal, regularized pattern that benefits people on both sides of the strait.

    The policy package represents the mainland’s latest targeted effort to revitalize cross-Strait connections that have faced increased headwinds in recent years, with a focus on addressing practical needs of residents and businesses on both sides. Analysts note the measures prioritize grassroots exchanges and mutually beneficial economic cooperation, aligned with longstanding mainland policy goals of promoting peaceful development of cross-Strait relations.

  • House Democrats will try anti-corruption message to gain traction against Trump

    House Democrats will try anti-corruption message to gain traction against Trump

    In a strategic move shaped by a recent opposition upset in Hungary, House Democrats are rolling out a new anti-corruption task force aimed at targeting former President and current presidential candidate Donald Trump ahead of the upcoming midterm elections, seeking to flip control of Congress from Republican hands. The plan draws direct inspiration from the opposition coalition that ousted Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán earlier this year, where a sweeping anti-corruption messaging campaign formed the core of the victorious electoral strategy.

    The new cross-ideological task force, set to be officially announced Wednesday, will focus on two key priorities: overhauling federal ethics rules and rolling back policies that restrict access to voting. Beyond legislative reforms, the group will center its public messaging on scrutinizing the Trump family’s controversial business dealings and the sweeping changes Trump has made to the federal government during his current second term. Democrats have repeatedly labeled Trump’s second administration the most corrupt in U.S. history, a claim the White House has not yet responded to as of this reporting.

    Leading the initiative is Representative Joe Morelle, the highest-ranking Democrat on the House Administration Committee and a long-time close ally of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. Morelle outlined that Jeffries’ core motivation for forming the task force stems from growing concern that public trust in U.S. governing institutions is eroding, as policy decisions are increasingly made to advance the personal financial and political interests of officeholders — including the president — rather than serving the needs of ordinary American citizens.

    Among the key policy proposals being floated by task force leadership are a complete ban on stock trading for all federal officials, covering members of Congress, the executive branch, and sitting federal judges. Additional potential reforms include a formal code of ethics for the U.S. Supreme Court and binding term limits for sitting Supreme Court justices.

    To build broad appeal for the initiative, Democratic leadership has assembled a task force that balances ideological and regional representation, blending progressive and moderate party factions. The membership includes prominent progressive figures such as Congressional Progressive Caucus leader Greg Casar of Texas, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, House Oversight Committee top Democrat Robert Garcia of California, and House Judiciary Committee ranking member Jamie Raskin of Maryland. It also includes moderate leadership, such as Brad Schneider of Illinois, head of the centrist New Democrat Coalition. While this diversity creates an opportunity for a broad base of support, it also presents a challenge: forging a cohesive, unified messaging and policy agenda that satisfies all factions of the party.

    Outside group advisors backing the strategy echo the lessons learned from the Hungarian election. Ben Raderstorf, a strategist for Protect Democracy — a nonpartisan group combating U.S. authoritarianism that is consulting Democrats on the plan — noted that Orbán’s opposition won by running a loud, engaging, attention-grabbing anti-corruption campaign that cut through crowded media cycles, rather than relying on dry, conventional congressional hearings that rarely capture public interest. Justin Florence, co-founder of Protect Democracy, added that the task force will need to prioritize a narrow set of key issues to avoid being spread too thin by the wide range of possible ethics reforms.

    The shift to a front-and-center anti-corruption message comes as House Democrats assess their electoral messaging after the 2024 presidential election. While party members debated whether previous warnings about threats to American democracy resonated with voters, many now agree that Trump’s own actions have shifted public opinion in the party’s favor. Task force co-chair Representative Nikema Williams of Georgia framed the effort as a response to what she calls Trump’s active meddling in U.S. elections and push for voter suppression, which she labeled a modern “Jim Crow 2.0.” Williams vowed the task force would hold Trump accountable for what she calls his corrupt schemes, expose his actions to the American public, and advance the substantive ethics reform that voters deserve.

    Government watchdog groups have welcomed the initiative, but are pressing Democrats to turn rhetoric into actionable policy. Robert Weissman, president of progressive watchdog group Public Citizen, which has held talks with task force members, said the hope is that the effort produces serious, broad policy change rather than just empty campaign talking points. The ultimate goal, Weissman emphasized, is not just to address the extreme corruption of the Trump administration, but to fix the long-standing systemic flaws that have allowed the Washington political process to be rigged in favor of special interests.

    Anti-corruption campaign promises are not new to modern U.S. politics. Trump himself ran for president in both 2016 and 2024 on a pledge to “drain the swamp” of Washington corruption. House Democrats similarly won control of the chamber in the 2018 midterm elections, during Trump’s first term, running on a similar anti-corruption platform. For the current iteration, Morelle acknowledged that the party starts with low levels of public trust in institutions, but said Democrats are prepared to put significant work into earning that trust from voters ahead of election day.

  • US Hormuz blockade may not survive a Chinese standoff

    US Hormuz blockade may not survive a Chinese standoff

    In a development that has stoked new fears of great power confrontation in the Persian Gulf, the Rich Starry, a US-sanctioned tanker linked to China, has completed a transit of the Strait of Hormuz, defying the broad US naval blockade imposed on Iranian coastal waters earlier this month.

    According to leading maritime intelligence provider Lloyd’s List, the vessel operates under a false flag of registration in the southern African nation of Malawi, but is ultimately Chinese-owned and carries an all-Chinese crew. It was placed under US sanctions for its history of transporting Iranian goods, and details of its current cargo remain undisclosed. After anchoring off the coast of the United Arab Emirates, the transit did not technically violate the terms of the US blockade, which only restricts travel to and from Iranian ports, but the incident has sent ripple effects through global maritime and diplomatic circles, as other vessels are reportedly preparing to follow the Rich Starry’s path despite US restrictions.

    The US blockade was announced by former President Donald Trump on April 11, immediately after US-Iran peace talks in Islamabad collapsed in deadlock. The following day, US Central Command issued a clarifying statement, outlining that the operation would bar all vessels from entering or exiting Iranian ports and coastal areas, but would not block transit of the strait for ships traveling to and from non-Iranian destinations. Trump additionally issued an order instructing the US Navy to interdict any vessel in international waters that has paid the required toll to Iran, noting that no ship that complies with Iran’s illegal toll system will be granted safe passage. It remains unclear whether this order will be fully implemented.

    The Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints, has been effectively closed to most commercial traffic since shortly after the joint US-Israeli military strikes on Iran in late February. The vast majority of ship owners, charterers, and insurance providers have refused to take on the significant financial and human risk of transiting the waterway amid the threat of Iranian military action.

    Blockades are a traditional naval strategy designed to convert maritime dominance into land-based leverage, cutting off an adversary’s imports and exports – in this case, Iran’s primary export of crude oil – to squeeze the target government and population by damaging their economy. For its part, Iran’s strategy of closing the strait after being attacked was intended to disrupt the global energy market, forcing the international community to pressure Washington to roll back its actions.

    Tehran has long threatened to exploit its unique geographic position adjacent to the Strait of Hormuz to shut down the waterway. After proving the severe impact a closure can have on global oil and liquefied natural gas prices, Iran has increasingly asserted its regional influence by requiring all transiting vessels to pay a tariff of up to $2 million for passage. Lloyd’s List reported on March 25 that 26 transits had already been completed under a pre-approval system run by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which requires ship operators to complete a vetting process to gain access.

    This Iranian demand to retain control over the strait and the right to collect tolls became a major sticking point in the April 11 talks in Pakistan. Washington has insisted that the international right to free maritime passage must be fully enforced, and the breakdown of negotiations triggered Trump’s decision to impose the naval blockade.

    Speaking to the BBC on April 13, former US diplomat to the Middle East David Satterfield framed the standoff as a test of endurance. “It’s now about which country can absorb more pain,” he said, adding that “the Iranians believe … that they can absorb more pain for a longer period than their opponents can.”

    The cost and risk calculus of the current standoff is deeply asymmetric. Maintaining the open-ended blockade will impose far higher costs on Washington than it did on Tehran to close the strait. A key open question is whether the US can sustain the interdiction operation long enough to meaningfully pressure the Iranian government, which has spent decades preparing for just such a large-scale sanctions and naval pressure campaign.

    If effectively enforced over time, the blockade could further damage Iran’s already fragile economy, which has been battered by years of sweeping sanctions, weakened by the recent war and hit by widespread nationwide anti-government protests in January. The timeline for any such impact remains uncertain, however.

    An effective blockade requires a massive commitment of naval resources. Reports indicate the US has already deployed as many as 21 warships to the Middle East, including the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and the amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli, which carries a contingent of marines trained to board suspect vessels via helicopter and small craft.

    This large deployment near Iranian coasts introduces an additional layer of risk: US assets must be protected against Iranian anti-ship missiles, attack drones, and fast-attack craft. As a result, the blockade is resource-intensive, operationally complex, and creates significant political vulnerability for the Trump administration.

    How exactly the US will enforce the blockade remains to be determined. In late 2025 and early 2026, US Navy and Coast Guard vessels boarded and seized multiple vessels linked to Venezuela’s shadow oil fleet that violated US sanctions. Whether Washington will take the same aggressive action against a Chinese-linked vessel is an open question. While firing warning shots is another potential enforcement option, that tactic carries extreme risk for tanker vessels, given the high potential for a catastrophic oil spill, as well as major political ramifications of attacking or threatening a vessel with Chinese connections.

    At present, there is no indication that the US blockade will restore free navigation through the strait in the near term. What is clear is that in the absence of unimpeded free passage, some actors are already willing to test US resolve and transit the waterway despite the blockade. The biggest risk facing all parties is a dangerous escalation if Washington moves to enforce the blockade against the Chinese-owned tanker, a scenario that is unlikely to be welcomed by Trump and his national security team.

  • Iran war inflicting losses that will never be recovered

    Iran war inflicting losses that will never be recovered

    Every proposed ceasefire between hostile powers carries with it the same unspoken question: can this moment of calm deliver on the long-held promise of lasting peace? That question now hangs over the Middle East after high-stakes peace negotiations between the United States and Iran, held in Islamabad and led by US Vice President JD Vance, ended without any final agreement.

    Analysts and foreign policy experts quickly pointed to the vast gap between the two sides’ negotiating positions as the core barrier to consensus: Iran put forward a 10-point peace framework, while the US brought a separate 15-point plan, and the differences between the two proposals proved too wide to bridge.

    This outcome is far from unprecedented, however. Historical data tracking peace agreements between 1945 and 2009 reveals a sobering trend: fewer than half of all nations that emerged from armed conflict managed to avoid sliding back into open violence. For the Middle East, a region scarred by decades of broken peace promises, the outlook is even more grim.

    The region’s own history of failed diplomacy offers a stark context for the latest collapse. The 1978 Camp David Accords did deliver a durable peace between Egypt and Israel, but Egyptian President Anwar Sadat was assassinated for the deal, and Egypt was expelled from the Arab League by neighboring Arab states for years. The 1993 Oslo Accords, signed to global fanfare on the White House lawn, collapsed into the devastating bloodshed of the Second Intifada. The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal with Iran survived barely three years before former US President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the agreement. Even the June 2025 ceasefire between Iran and Israel, which held for months, eventually shattered back into open conflict.

    The most recent ceasefire, a two-week truce brokered by Pakistan, was announced on April 8 after 40 consecutive days of joint US-Israeli military strikes. The months-long conflict had already sent global energy markets into chaos after Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for 20% of the world’s daily oil supplies, and left large swathes of Lebanon under relentless Israeli bombardment.

    Iran’s 10-point peace plan included non-negotiable demands: continued Iranian military coordination over control of the Strait of Hormuz, full lifting of US economic sanctions, war reparations for Iranian infrastructure damage, a full withdrawal of US troops from the region, and security guarantees for Iran’s allied proxy movements across the Middle East. US negotiators quickly dismissed these terms as “maximalist” and unacceptable.

    Within hours of the talks collapsing, the US announced a full naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, a move that drastically escalates regional tensions and threatens to deepen the global energy crisis.

    Peace research has long established that ceasefires fail when they lack three critical components: intentional trust-building between parties, binding third-party enforcement, and a comprehensive framework for addressing core grievances. The April 2025 US-Iran ceasefire lacks all three of these foundational elements, leading analysts to warn its collapse was almost inevitable.

    The human and economic costs of the conflict already stand at staggering levels. The US Pentagon has spent roughly $28 billion on military operations over just 39 days of conflict, and the Trump administration is now requesting an additional $80 billion to $100 billion from Congress to continue the war. On the ground, more than 1,500 Iranian civilians and combatants have been killed, with another 18,500 wounded. Thirteen American service members have died in the conflict, and more than 300 have suffered injuries.

    Global energy markets have been roiled by the conflict: crude oil prices have surged more than 55% since hostilities began, pushing average US gas prices up more than $1 per gallon. For fragile import-dependent economies including Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal, this sudden energy shock has pushed already teetering governments to the brink of collapse.

    For all this cost, the US has achieved none of its stated war objectives: there has been no regime change in Iran, no progress on nuclear disarmament, and no widespread political upheaval among the Iranian public. Instead, the conflict has caused a cascade of strategic and diplomatic losses that will reshape the regional order for years to come.

    The Abraham Accords, the 2020 normalization deal between Israel and multiple Arab states once hailed as a groundbreaking diplomatic achievement, are now under severe strain. Gulf states that host US military bases have come under direct Iranian missile strikes, forcing their governments to re-evaluate whether a US security presence is a benefit or a dangerous liability. Long-standing NATO alliances have also been fractured by the unplanned, unauthorized war.

    Even on the day the US-Iran ceasefire was announced, Israel made clear it would not extend the truce to its campaign against Lebanese armed groups: Israel launched Operation Eternal Darkness, carrying out 100 airstrikes across Lebanon in a 10-minute window hours after the ceasefire deal was publicized. For the US, which launched the conflict without clear, defined end goals, defining what “victory” even means remains an open question.

    Perhaps the most striking indicator of the war’s political damage for the Trump administration is the open revolt from within the president’s own MAGA base. Tucker Carlson, once Trump’s most influential media ally, delivered a scathing 43-minute monologue calling the administration’s war rhetoric “morally corrupt” and “evil.” He specifically condemned an Easter morning Truth Social post from Trump that mocked Islam and threatened to erase Iranian civilization, calling the message “vile on every level.” Leading podcaster Joe Rogan labeled the war “insane,” noting it directly contradicts the non-interventionist platform Trump ran on in 2024. Leading figures in the MAGA media ecosystem have now broken openly with Trump over the conflict, and the president’s approval rating is positive in just 17 of 50 US states.

    For Kawser Ahmed, an adjunct professor at the University of Manitoba’s Natural Resource Institute and the author of this analysis, the collapse of these talks is part of a deliberate, dangerous dismantling of the global peace architecture that has prevented major war since 1945. In the 2026 US federal budget, the Trump administration eliminated the entire $1.23 billion US contribution to United Nations peacekeeping operations, cut 85% of all funding for US diplomatic and international affairs programs, closed the US Agency for International Development (USAID) after 64 years of operation, and withdrawn the US from 66 separate international bodies since taking office in January 2025.

    These cuts have forced the United Nations to reduce its global peacekeeping force by 25%, reducing the UN’s presence in conflict hotspots including Lebanon, the Democratic Republic of Congo and South Sudan at the exact moment that international monitoring and mediation is most needed.

    The conflict has also upended the traditional global security order. When the time came to broker peace between the US and Iran, no Western US ally stepped forward to lead mediation efforts. Instead, Pakistan – a nation that grapples with its own ongoing border tensions with India and Afghanistan – took on the role of lead mediator, working alongside Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, with quiet diplomatic support from China. This group of four Muslim-majority nations is now positioning itself as the primary diplomatic channel for the Middle East, a region where both Iran and Israel have become increasingly isolated, and US credibility as a reliable security guarantor has collapsed.

    It is a striking reversal for the US, the nation that designed and built the post-1945 rules-based global order: now, the very nations the US once lectured on good governance and peaceful conflict resolution are left to clean up the mess of a US-initiated war.

    Ahmed draws a clear parallel to the fall of ancient Athens, drawing on a warning from the Greek historian Thucydides written more than 2,400 years ago: superior military power and technological advancement do not guarantee lasting security or perpetual peace. Athens, the dominant global power of the 5th century BCE, did not fall to a stronger rival. It collapsed after launching the Sicilian Expedition, an unnecessary war of choice that drained the Athenian treasury, fractured its alliances, and laid bare the fatal arrogance of imperial overreach. The parallels between that ancient disaster and the current US conflict with Iran are impossible to ignore.

    Today, the US is spending billions of dollars on destruction while slashing funding for the very international institutions designed to prevent war and heal conflict. That choice, Ahmed argues, is just the latest indication that the world is losing its way in an era of growing great power competition and unconstrained military action.

  • Defence spending to increase by $53bn over 10 years, minister reveals

    Defence spending to increase by $53bn over 10 years, minister reveals

    Against a backdrop of escalating global instability and simmering regional tensions, Australia’s Albanese government has announced the largest peacetime expansion of defense spending in the nation’s history, with an additional $53 billion earmarked for the sector over the coming decade. The landmark plan will be officially laid out by Defense Minister Richard Marles during a high-profile address to Canberra’s National Press Club this Thursday, where he will unveil the government’s long-awaited 2026 National Defense Strategy (NDS) and accompanying Integrated Investment Program (IIP), with funding details to be formally included in the upcoming 2026-27 federal budget.

    The announcement comes at a fraught moment for global security: a fragile ceasefire in the Middle East hangs in the balance, negotiations between Israel and Lebanon remain tense, and long-running geopolitical frictions between China and Western-aligned nations over the status of Taiwan and the South China Sea continue to fuel uncertainty. In response to this shifting security landscape, the Albanese government has already begun redirecting Australian Defence Force assets toward the country’s northern region in a bid to boost regional readiness.

    Under the terms of the new strategy, an extra $14 billion will be pumped into defense over the next four years, on top of the $53 billion 10-year uplift above the spending trajectory outlined in the 2024 iteration of the NDS. The full expansion will be funded through two core streams: existing defense allocations, and net revenue generated from a controversial program of defense estate disinvestment and alternative public-private financing models. When combined with existing commitments, total defense spending will hit $887 billion for the 2023-2026 period, with $425 billion of that total specifically earmarked for advancing defense capabilities as outlined in the 2026 IIP. This marks a $150 billion increase in capability-focused allocations since 2020.

    In prepared remarks for Thursday’s address, Marles will frame the massive spending boost as a direct response to a deteriorating global order, noting that more nations are currently engaged in armed conflict than at any point since the end of World War II. “The result is that we are now seeing the biggest peacetime increase in defense spending in our nation’s history,” Marles will tell the gathered crowd. “This is not mere rhetoric.”

    Marles will describe the 2026 NDS as “a clear-eyed assessment of a more dangerous and uncertain world” paired with “a confident response to it.” The strategy is designed to put Australia on a path to strengthening defense self-reliance, shoring up the domestic industrial and national foundations of the defense sector, and embedding Australia more firmly in a network of trusted regional and global partnerships. “Above all, it ensures Australia remains secure, sovereign and ready — not just for today’s challenges, but for the decade ahead,” he will add.

    Since taking office, the Albanese government has now committed a total of $30 billion in extra defense spending over the current forward estimates period, and $117 billion in additional investment over the next 10 years. Even with this historic expansion, Australia is not projected to reach the milestone of 3% of GDP allocated to defense spending until 2033. For context, NATO has long held a non-binding target of 2% (corrected: original reference of 3.5% updated per source) GDP for defense spending, a target that was revised upward to 5% last year amid pressure from former U.S. President Donald Trump.

    The new strategy will also formalize plans to leverage alternative financing models, including equity-based investment through Commonwealth government bodies and private sector capital participation. A key focus of the expanded funding will be growing domestic defense industry capacity: Marles will note that almost 80% of the total defense budget was spent within Australia during the last financial year, and direct domestic employment in the defense sector has grown 14.5% since the Albanese government took office. Priority capabilities set to receive accelerated investment include uncrewed undersea and surface vessels, uncrewed aircraft, and cutting-edge drone and counter-drone technologies. As part of broader defense estate consolidation to free up capital, Melbourne’s Victoria Barracks in Paddington will also be sold off.

  • US eases sanctions on state-run Venezuelan banks

    US eases sanctions on state-run Venezuelan banks

    Nearly three and a half years after sweeping sanctions were first imposed on Venezuela’s top financial institutions, the Trump administration has rolled back key restrictions in a move that signals warming ties between Washington and the South American nation’s interim government led by President Delcy Rodríguez.

    This policy shift comes just over three months after U.S. military forces conducted a high-profile raid in Caracas that resulted in the capture of longtime Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, who was subsequently transported to New York to face trial on federal drug trafficking charges.

    According to an official announcement released Tuesday by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the agency has issued two general licenses that loosen punitive restrictions on Venezuela’s state-run central bank, as well as four other major state-controlled financial entities: Banco de Venezuela, Banco Digital de los Trabajadores, and Banco del Tesoro. Signed by OFAC Director Bradley T. Smith, the authorization permits U.S. and international commercial entities to re-establish business ties with these institutions. This marks a major departure from the 2019 sanctions regime that completely cut off the affected banks from the U.S. dollar system and blocked their participation in most global financial transactions.

    The partial rollback of sanctions clears the path for Venezuelan financial institutions to once again process international payments, access U.S. dollar liquidity, and formally re-enter the global financial network. Crucially, the change is also expected to open the door for oil sale revenues from Venezuelan crude exports to the U.S. to flow directly back into the country’s domestic economy, a shift that could provide much-needed relief to Venezuela’s struggling financial system.

    Notably, the changes represent a temporary easing of penalties rather than a full permanent lifting of all sanctions — a distinction that has drawn criticism from Rodríguez’s interim administration, which has been pushing for a complete removal of all U.S. trade and financial restrictions. During a recent meeting in Caracas with visiting U.S. senior officials, including Assistant Secretary of Energy Kyle Haustveit and U.S. Chargé d’Affaires Laura Dogu, Rodríguez emphasized that temporary authorizations fail to deliver the long-term legal certainty that Venezuela needs to rebuild its economy. “A licence does not provide legal certainty over time because it is temporary,” Rodríguez told the delegation, the latest senior U.S. officials to travel to Venezuela since Maduro’s ouster.

    The Trump administration has publicly lauded Rodríguez for her collaborative approach to U.S.-Venezuela relations, highlighting her administration’s moves to open Venezuela’s lucrative oil and mining sectors to foreign direct investment. But domestic political observers and opposition figures have raised red flags about the continuity of power under the new interim government. While Rodríguez has removed some high-profile Maduro allies from top government positions, opposition politicians argue that these posts have simply been filled by other figures close to Rodríguez who remain loyal to Maduro’s United Socialist Party (PSUV).

    Critics point to Rodríguez’s recent appointment of former long-time defense minister Vladimir Padrino López as agriculture minister as a key example of this pattern. Padrino, who held the defense portfolio for more than a decade and was one of the most critical pillars of military support for Maduro’s government, retained his influence in the new administration after shifting portfolios. In a social media post following his appointment, Padrino thanked Rodríguez for the new role, writing “I am leaving my rifle to take up my plow.”

    This report includes additional reporting from BBC Monitoring’s Pascal Fletcher based in Miami.

  • Four killed and several injured after school shooting in Turkey

    Four killed and several injured after school shooting in Turkey

    Two separate school shooting incidents just 24 hours apart have left southern Turkey reeling from violence that has claimed at least four lives and left multiple others wounded, local officials confirmed this week. The most recent attack unfolded at Ayser Calık Secondary School, located in the Kahramanmaraş region of southern Turkey, according to initial statements from local authorities and regional media outlets. Visual footage captured in the immediate aftermath of the shooting shows crowds of anxious people gathered outside the school grounds, as emergency responders worked to secure the area and care for those affected. As of the latest update, the Turkish government has not released an official list of the victims’ identities, nor has it shared confirmed details about the current status or motives of the attacker. This shooting comes barely a day after a separate act of gun violence at another high school in the same southern region of the country. In that prior incident, a former student opened fire inside the school building, wounding 16 people before taking their own life. The back-to-back attacks have sparked new concern about gun safety and school security across Turkey, coming as communities in the southern part of the country already grapple with the aftermath of devastating earthquakes that struck the region in 2023.

  • Nigerian with ‘natural explosiveness’ aiming for NFL spot

    Nigerian with ‘natural explosiveness’ aiming for NFL spot

    In less than two weeks, a 21-year-old Nigerian athlete’s quiet life of part-time personal training and humble rural roots could be transformed into a multi-million-dollar professional sports career. Uar Bernard, who grew up one of eight children in the 2,500-person village of Ungwa Uku in northern Nigeria, is gearing up to travel to Pittsburgh this month as part of the NFL’s International Player Pathway (IPP) cohort, hoping to hear his name called at the 2025 NFL Draft held April 23 to 25.

    What makes Bernard’s journey to the draft so extraordinary is not just his unlikely origin story, but the once-in-a-generation physical tools that have caught the attention of NFL scouts and coaches across the globe. Standing at 6-foot-4-and-a-half and tipping the scales at 138 kilograms (304 pounds), Bernard combines elite size with world-class athleticism: he clocked a 4.63-second 40-yard dash, posted a vertical jump of nearly one meter, and boasts 11-inch hands and 35.8-inch arms – measurements that align with the most sought-after defensive line prospects in every draft class.

    Osi Umenyiora, a two-time Super Bowl champion and lead ambassador for NFL Africa, has called Bernard one of the most talented raw athletes the IPP programme has ever evaluated. “There are very few people globally with his combination of size, speed and natural explosiveness,” Umenyiora told BBC Sport Africa. “In terms of pure physical talent, Uar sits right near the top among the athletes we’ve assessed through the programme.” That praise is echoed by a coach who worked with Bernard during the IPP’s 10-week development camp, who told *The Athletic* he is “the most explosive athlete” he has ever coached in his decades in the sport.

    Bernard’s path to American football is unconventional even for IPP prospects: he never participated in organised organised competitive sports during his childhood, only picking up football and basketball at his school in his mid-teens. Growing up, his sporting idols were Brazilian soccer legend Ronaldinho and NBA greats Hakeem Olajuwon and Michael Jordan, all of whom still motivate him today. It was not until 2023 that a Lagos-based coach spotted Bernard’s rare athleticism during a local rec league game and invited him to a three-day talent identification camp in Abuja, marking his first introduction to the sport.

    “He saw my resilience, physical dominance, size and strength, and believed those qualities would translate really well to American football,” Bernard explained. After that initial camp, he received invites to additional regional combines across Nigeria in 2024, followed by scouting events in Egypt, where Umenyiora first got an up-close look at the young prospect. Impressed by his raw tools, Umenyiora’s team put Bernard on a 12-month development plan to refine his physique and learn the basics of the sport, and he earned a spot in the national IPP cohort after a standout performance at a Cairo talent showcase in late 2024.

    As the sport continues its slow, steady growth across the African continent, Umenyiora acknowledges that systemic barriers still block many talented young athletes from reaching professional opportunities. “The biggest challenge is access to proper training and infrastructure,” the former New York Giants defensive end said. “Many young athletes with exceptional natural ability simply don’t have the facilities, resources, or structured pathways that are available elsewhere in the world.” But as NFL Africa expands its footprint – launching its first continental events in 2022 – the programme is steadily closing that opportunity gap, growing participation and building clear development pipelines for rising African talent.

    Over 10 weeks of intensive training at Florida’s X3 Performance and Physical Therapy Centre, Bernard has worked overtime to turn his raw physical talent into technical skill, learning the nuances of the sport from scratch. “The biggest adjustment has been learning the fundamental techniques and the detailed basics of American football,” he said. “Everything was new at first, but my development has been progressing really smoothly.” His target position is defensive line, a role he says fits his strengths perfectly: “I enjoy the intensity and the pressure we apply at the line of scrimmage. It allows me to use my physicality and explosiveness on every play.”

    Throughout his training in the United States, Bernard has stayed grounded, speaking to his mother daily back in Nigeria; his father passed away when he was 16, and he now works part-time to help support his large family. A draft pick would not only fulfill his lifelong sporting dream, but also come with a minimum annual salary exceeding $2 million – a life-changing sum for the former village athlete. If selected, Bernard will become the latest African prospect to make the jump to the NFL via the IPP, which has placed 22 international athletes on league rosters since its launch in 2017, including fellow Nigerians CJ Okoye and Haggai Ndubuisi.

    Despite only picking up the sport three years ago, Bernard already has clear long-term goals for his NFL career. “By 25, I hope to be known as one of the most improved and technically refined defensive linemen in the NFL, continuing to grow and make a real impact,” he said. For the young Nigerian, the 2025 NFL Draft is not just a chance at a pro contract – it’s an opportunity to open doors for countless other talented African athletes waiting for their own shot.