Global Pulse

作者： admin

  • Plug pulled on plans for $134K statue of former Victorian premier Dan Andrews

    Plug pulled on plans for $134K statue of former Victorian premier Dan Andrews

    Victoria’s newly sworn-in premier Ben Carroll has scrapped a longstanding automatic policy that granted taxpayer-funded bronze statues to long-serving state premiers, scrapping a planned $134,000 monument for his predecessor Daniel Andrews in the process.

    Andrews, who led Victoria for 3219 days – just over eight years – crossed the 3000-day threshold that has guaranteed a public statue under existing rules. But just weeks after taking over the top job from Jacinta Allan, Carroll has put an immediate end to the policy, arguing it no longer aligns with what Victorian communities expect from public spending.

    “Gratitude does not require a taxpayer-funded statue,” Carroll told reporters Wednesday, confirming the Andrews statue project has been formally taken off the table. “I respect your money. That means, being careful and deliberate about how government spends it.”

    The decision comes as Victoria grapples with deepening fiscal pressure, with official projections showing the state’s gross debt is on track to hit nearly $200 billion by the 2029-30 financial year. Carroll already tabled a sweeping package of public spending cuts in his first weeks in office, ranging from pausing work on a slate of major infrastructure projects to smaller, high-profile cuts including ending taxpayer-funded office plant rentals and discontinuing production of branded government merchandise like stubby holders and t-shirts.

    Alongside scrapping the automatic statue rule, Carroll announced an independent public review to overhaul the state’s protocols for commemorating long-serving public officials, including reassessing the criteria for granting official state funerals. The review will examine what forms of commemoration are appropriate, how much public money should be allocated to these events, and whether automatic entitlements remain justifiable.

    Carroll noted that the rarity of state funerals is central to their significance as public tributes, signaling that future state funerals may be granted only in exceptional circumstances rather than as an automatic entitlement. The review is expected to deliver a set of recommendations to government in the coming months, which will inform formal policy changes to Victoria’s public commemoration framework.

    Supporters of the change argue that prioritizing fiscal restraint during a period of growing state debt makes the end of the automatic statue rule a necessary and popular step, while critics have pushed back that denying formal commemoration to premiers who dedicate decades of service to the state undermines the recognition of their contributions to public life.

  • ‘No end in sight’: Democrats slam Trump after six months of Iran war

    ‘No end in sight’: Democrats slam Trump after six months of Iran war

    As the joint US-Israeli military campaign against Iran hits its six-month milestone, congressional Democrats have launched sharp criticism of the Trump administration, warning that the ongoing conflict’s staggering human and economic costs will lead to Republican backlash at the November midterm polls.

    The offensive, which launched on February 28, was originally projected by former President Donald Trump to wrap up in just a few weeks. But half a year later, the conflict remains locked in stalemate, with mounting losses on all sides and growing domestic discontent in the United States. So far, the campaign has claimed the lives of at least 18 US service members and drained $100 billion in federal military funding. The bulk of this spending – a $60 billion supplemental funding request – was approved just last month by the Republican-controlled Congress at the urging of US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.

    Beyond direct military spending, the conflict has imposed heavy new costs on everyday American households. After Iran retaliated by blocking shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global energy chokepoint, the average US taxpayer has paid between $600 and $1,000 in extra energy costs, according to combined analysis from Brown University’s cost of war project and estimates from Moody’s Analytics. On the Iranian side, civilian and military casualties range widely: the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) puts the death toll at 3,400, while Israeli military estimates place the number as high as 6,000.

    In a formal statement released Friday, Democratic National Committee (DNC) chair Ken Martin blasted the administration’s broken promises and mishandling of the conflict. “Trump and his chief dealmaker, Vice President JD Vance, have failed to deliver on their promise to end this war,” Martin said. “Back in March, they claimed the conflict would be over ‘soon’ – but just this week, Trump admitted he is ‘not in a hurry’ to wrap it up. They dragged the United States into a deadly, costly war they have no exit plan for, and working-class Americans footing the bill are the ones paying the price. Trump and Vance explicitly campaigned on avoiding new foreign wars, yet six months in, there is no end in sight, and the conflict has driven up prices for everything from gasoline to groceries.”

    Martin added that while Republicans repeatedly claim they lack the funds to lower household costs or expand affordable healthcare for American families, they continue to pour billions into an unpopular, unnecessary conflict. “Voters will not forget this betrayal when they cast their ballots in November,” he warned.

    Public opinion polling tracked by independent analyst group The Silver Bulletin shows majority opposition to the war nationwide: roughly 55% of Americans disapprove of the joint US-Israeli campaign, while just 37% support it.

    The intra-party dynamics around the conflict have been complex for Democrats. House progressive lawmakers pushed for a War Powers Resolution vote in late February that would reassert Congress’s constitutional authority to declare war, curbing unilateral presidential power to launch military action, but the party establishment has taken a more ambiguous stance. Before the offensive launched, reports indicated Democratic Party leadership was working to rein in grassroots efforts to restrict Trump’s war-making authority. Many establishment Democrats, who have largely declined to condemn Israel over the UN-documented genocide in Gaza, have openly backed a hard line on Iran, arguing that military confrontation with Tehran is inevitable at some point.

    Top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer echoed this stance in statements ahead of the offensive. Shortly after a closed-door briefing with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and CIA Director John Ratcliffe a week before strikes began, Schumer told reporters “this is serious, and the administration has to make its case to the American people.” Days earlier, he released a statement arguing that “confronting Iran’s ruthless campaign of terror, nuclear ambitions, regional aggression, and horrific oppression of the Iranian people demands strength, resolve, regional coordination, and strategic clarity.”

    For its part, Iran has stated it is prepared to defend itself against US and Israeli aggression pushed by Tel Aviv, but remains open to a diplomatic deal that would recognize its right to develop defensive military capabilities as a sovereign nation.

    To date, diplomatic efforts to end the conflict have shown little meaningful progress. Two attempted ceasefires have collapsed within days of being implemented, and there is no public evidence that senior-level negotiations are close to producing a breakthrough. Qatari Prime Minister traveled to Tehran Thursday to support a joint Iran-Oman initiative to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a diplomatic move that has pushed global oil prices slightly lower this week. However, the Trump administration’s recent decision to deploy the USS Theodore Roosevelt for a seven-month tour of the region signals that tensions are unlikely to de-escalate in the near term.

    The administration has instead doubled down on economic pressure: Last week, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced a new round of sweeping sanctions against Iran and what he called the regime’s “enablers,” dubbed “Operation Economic Outcast.” Bessent said the Treasury is using a “zero leakage approach” that has mapped every smuggling network and facilitator Iran uses to export oil and evade existing sanctions, and that Trump has already contacted world leaders to request they cut all economic ties with Tehran. He declined to name which leaders were contacted or offer a timeline for global cooperation on the new sanctions regime.

    Compounding the administration’s challenges is a growing critical shortage of US military munitions. The Pentagon has diverted large stockpiles of missiles and advanced weapons to the Gulf region to counter Iranian retaliatory strikes against US military bases and regional energy infrastructure. A Reuters report published this month found that the US has already exhausted its stockpiles of advanced long-range missiles, including ATACMS surface-to-surface missiles and Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM), during the Iran campaign. The Associated Press also reported a “beyond critical” shortage of advanced missile interceptors, particularly Patriot systems, which have been heavily used to shoot down Russian ballistic missiles in the US-backed war in Ukraine.

  • Watch: ‘He’s losing it’ – Americans react to Lake Ontario name change

    Watch: ‘He’s losing it’ – Americans react to Lake Ontario name change

    A bombshell executive order signed by former US President Donald Trump has sent shockwaves across the nation, igniting fierce public debate after it proposed rebranding one of North America’s iconic Great Lakes — Lake Ontario — to a new name: Lake America. The unexpected policy move has drawn divided responses from US citizens, with many taking to social media and public gatherings to voice their criticism, with some commentators going so far as to declare “He’s losing it” in response to what many see as an unnecessary and divisive policy gesture.

    Lake Ontario is one of the five Great Lakes that straddle the border between the United States and Canada, holding deep geographic, cultural, and economic significance for communities on both sides of the international boundary. The lake’s long-standing name has roots in Indigenous history, tracing back to centuries-old Haudenosaunee terminology that has endured through colonial and modern eras. The sudden push for a name change has raised questions not only about domestic political priorities but also about potential diplomatic ripples between the US and its northern neighbor, which shares jurisdiction over the lake.

    Footage captured from public reactions across several US states shows a range of public opinion, from a small subset of nationalist supporters who frame the change as a gesture of national pride to the overwhelming majority of critics who argue that the executive order wastes government time and political capital on a non-issue that could damage cross-border relations. Many members of the public have also pointed out that the name change erases the lake’s Indigenous historical roots, further adding to the backlash against the proposal. As of now, it remains unclear how the order will be implemented, as legal experts note that changing a transboundary geographic feature requires cooperation from Canadian authorities, making the executive order largely symbolic at this stage.

  • Trump announces deal for huge US stake in Venezuelan oil reserves

    Trump announces deal for huge US stake in Venezuelan oil reserves

    In a surprise announcement made public Friday, former and current President Donald Trump revealed that his administration has finalized a historic energy agreement with Venezuela’s interim government that secures majority U.S. ownership of 65 billion barrels of the country’s proven oil reserves. Trump hailed the agreement as unparalleled in global energy history, saying it would dramatically expand America’s domestic-held petroleum reserves and deliver much-needed relief to U.S. consumers facing elevated fuel prices.

    U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed that the arrangement is set to unlock nearly $100 billion in private sector investment into Venezuela’s struggling oil sector, a move the top diplomat framed as a win for both nations. The breakthrough comes less than five months after the Trump administration oversaw the ousting and capture of long-time Venezuelan ruler Nicolas Maduro in January, after years of escalating diplomatic and economic pressure on his socialist government. Following Maduro’s removal, the U.S. allowed Maduro’s former vice president Delcy Rodriguez to remain in place as interim head of government on the condition that she align her policy agenda with Washington’s priorities.

    Trump has long positioned securing Venezuelan oil reserves as a core foreign policy goal, and in a post on his Truth Social platform, he emphasized that the agreement will more than double the volume of proven oil reserves under U.S. control. He credited Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth with negotiating the arrangement with Rodriguez’s administration, noting that the deal was structured as a public-private partnership with U.S. private energy firms. “This Transaction will greatly strengthen the already growing relationship between Venezuela and the United States!” Trump wrote in his post.

    Rubio echoed that framing in a post on X, arguing that the deal delivers on the Trump administration’s core “America First” foreign policy agenda. “President Trump’s bold foreign policy is driving America First wins: securing stable reserves and low-cost oil in our Hemisphere and lowering gas prices here at home,” Rubio wrote, adding that for Venezuelan citizens, the near-$100 billion in private investment will support thousands of high-wage jobs and lay the groundwork for widespread economic reconstruction after decades of mismanagement under the Maduro regime. No additional details on the terms of the agreement, including timeline for development or revenue sharing arrangements, have been released publicly.

    As of Friday afternoon, there has been no official confirmation of the agreement from Rodriguez’s interim government in Caracas. Prior to Trump’s announcement, U.S. news outlet Axios published a report Thursday citing two unnamed senior U.S. officials that the two countries had been in advanced negotiations over a dozen producing oil fields holding a combined 90 billion barrels of proven reserves – roughly one-third of Venezuela’s total 300 billion barrel proven reserve base, the largest in the world. According to Axios’ reporting, in exchange for U.S. private and public entities taking an ownership stake in the fields, American and international private energy firms will lead infrastructure upgrades and development of the reserves, with a larger share of gross oil revenue returned to Venezuela’s government than under previous arrangements.

    The report also noted that the deal comes at a critical moment for U.S. energy security: America’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve currently sits at its lowest level in 40 years, and the agreement would allow the U.S. to more than double its total domestically controlled proven reserves.

    For the Trump administration, the deal also addresses a pressing political vulnerability: the president has faced sliding approval ratings ahead of November’s midterm elections, driven in part by elevated global oil prices that have pushed up U.S. gasoline costs. The price spikes followed Trump’s decision to launch a military campaign against Iran that disrupted global oil supply chains, and Trump has explicitly tied the new Venezuelan deal to lower pump prices for American consumers.

    While the Trump administration has spent months urging U.S. energy companies to expand operations in Venezuela, many firms have remained cautious about committing large-scale capital to the country. Venezuela’s oil infrastructure has fallen into severe disrepair after decades of underinvestment and mismanagement, and previous Venezuelan governments led by Maduro and his predecessor Hugo Chavez expropriated billions of dollars in foreign-owned energy assets, leaving many investors wary of future political risk.

    Chevron, the only major U.S. oil company that maintained operations in Venezuela through the end of the Maduro regime, announced in July that it had already lifted its daily crude production in the country to 280,000 barrels, with plans to increase output by an additional 50% by the end of 2028.

  • US and Venezuela reach ‘historic’ oil deal, Trump says

    US and Venezuela reach ‘historic’ oil deal, Trump says

    In a surprising announcement that has sent ripples through global energy and political circles, former U.S. President Donald Trump has confirmed that Washington has struck a wide-ranging agreement with Venezuela that grants the United States control over more than 65 billion barrels of the South American nation’s proven crude oil reserves.

    Taking to his social media platform, Trump framed the agreement as a landmark achievement for American energy security, emphasizing that the deal would more than double the United States’ total documented oil reserves. He added that the expanded access to Venezuelan crude would significantly boost domestic oil supply and drive down retail gasoline prices for consumers across the country, a key priority for his political agenda.

    The agreement comes months after U.S. authorities arrested Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela’s sitting president, earlier this year. Following that high-profile detention, Trump publicly pledged to unlock access to Venezuela’s vast oil reserves, which are officially recognized as the largest proven crude reserves on the planet. In recent weeks, the former president has faced mounting domestic political pressure to address elevated gasoline prices that have weighed on American household budgets, making a push for expanded oil supply a critical policy and political win.

    U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also publicly praised the pact, calling it a transformative victory that delivers tangible benefits for both the American public and the people of Venezuela. As of the current announcement, no further details about the terms of the deal, its timeline for implementation, or the specific terms of control over the reserves have been released to the public, leaving energy analysts and political observers waiting for additional clarity on the agreement’s long-term implications.

  • Canada poaches dozens of top US researchers for its universities

    Canada poaches dozens of top US researchers for its universities

    Against a backdrop of worsening U.S.-Canada relations and growing politicization of academic research in the United States, Canada is successfully recruiting dozens of leading academic researchers from top American universities through a generous new federal funding initiative, with climate science and medical research among the key focus areas.

    Out of 64 international researchers moving to Canadian institutions under the program, 48 — more than three-quarters of the total cohort — hail from U.S. universities, including elite institutions such as Harvard University. The initiative allocates a total of C$504 million (equivalent to roughly $362 million) to support researchers working in high-priority fields ranging from climate change adaptation to cutting-edge medical research.

    The shift of academic talent comes as the Donald Trump administration has taken multiple steps that have created widespread uncertainty for U.S.-based researchers. The administration has repeatedly criticized U.S. universities for what it claims is a dominance of left-wing ideology, and has accused institutions of failing to address alleged antisemitism on campus. It has also frozen billions in federal research funding for a range of programs it deems wasteful, creating an unstable funding landscape that has pushed many scholars to seek opportunities abroad.

    This talent migration unfolds alongside an escalating U.S.-Canada trade war, which recently hit a major turning point amid new tariff disputes. As tensions rise, Canada has taken an increasingly assertive stance on the global stage, positioning itself as a welcoming alternative for scholars locked out of stable funding in the U.S.

    Seth Guikema, a leading climate resiliency researcher currently based at the University of Michigan who will join the University of Western Ontario, is one of the many scholars making the move. Guikema explained that he began reaching out to Canadian institutions last year, frustrated by the growing challenges facing climate-related research in the U.S. “The funding environment in the U.S. for anything related to climate and resilience has become challenging,” he said. “I was looking for a good intellectual home where I could have practical impact.” Over the next eight years, Guikema will use C$8 million in program funding to develop new tools for improving community preparedness for natural hazards including extreme storms and wildfires. The University of Michigan declined to provide comment on his departure.

    Another high-profile recruit is Peter Caravan, a biopharmaceutical researcher who spent 20 years on the faculty at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School. Caravan, who will now continue his work on early detection of cancer and chronic diseases at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, spoke emotionally at a press conference announcing the new appointments this week. Some recruits like Caravan and Guikema are U.S.-born scholars, while others are Canadian academics who built their careers abroad and are now returning to their home country.

    Academics across the U.S. have cited the Trump administration’s policies as the core driver of this brain drain. Steven Lamy, a professor of international relations at the University of Southern California, noted that major U.S. grant agencies “have been cut and politicised” by the current administration, making offers from foreign universities far more appealing than they once were. Stephanie Burt, an English professor at Harvard University, called the ongoing funding cuts “a generational disaster for science and scientists,” adding that Canada offers a “far more welcoming environment” for academic work.

    While U.S. universities still top global rankings — with MIT, Stanford, and Harvard holding three of the top five spots in the 2026 QS World University Rankings — higher education leaders warn that the long-term impact of current policies could severely damage U.S. research leadership. Lynn Pasquerella, president of the American Association of Colleges and Universities, said member institutions feel “helpless” in the face of widespread federal and state funding cuts. “The deeper concern is not the short-term brain drain,” she explained, “but the possibility that the U.S. could become less attractive as a place to pursue knowledge.”

    Canadian officials have pushed back against suggestions that the program amounts to deliberate talent poaching that could further escalate bilateral tensions. “The US administration is taking its own decisions and we’re taking ours,” Industry Minister Melanie Joly told reporters this week, adding that the Canadian government is “very glad that these fantastic professors are coming.”

  • Sudanese in Kordofan’s Bara the latest civilians to be forced into battle

    Sudanese in Kordofan’s Bara the latest civilians to be forced into battle

    Two and a half years into Sudan’s brutal civil conflict between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), civilian communities across the country have been left with no choice but to take up arms to defend their homes, families and lives. As fighting shifts to the resource-rich Kordofan region south of Darfur, this pattern of civilian mobilisation has repeated – drawing in pro-democracy activists, former regime opponents, and ordinary people united by the shared threat of RSF violence, even as political divisions over the movement persist.

    This wave of civilian self-defence is not a new development. From the earliest months of the war, which broke out in April 2023, communities have risen up to repel RSF incursions when central military defences failed. In summer 2023, Masalit fighters in Darfur’s al-Geneina launched a counteroffensive against advancing RSF and allied militias that were rampaging through the city. Villages in al-Jazira state, south of Khartoum, fought off invading RSF fighters even as surrounding neighbourhoods and towns fell. Most infamously, residents of el-Fasher – the besieged capital of North Darfur – helped hold RSF forces at bay for more than 550 days, until defensive lines collapsed in October 2025, leading to a massacre that killed an estimated 60,000 people.

    Today, the epicentre of the conflict has moved south to Kordofan, and civilians here too have joined the fight. Most have aligned with Popular Resistance units, organised to fight alongside the SAF. The Popular Resistance was formally established by SAF chief General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan in June 2023, with the military providing tens of thousands of civilian volunteers with weapons and basic combat training. Its ranks include a diverse cross-section of Sudanese society, even counting pro-democracy revolutionaries who once opposed Burhan and his military government.

    But the movement has not escaped political controversy. Sumood, a bloc of civilian political parties led by former Sudanese prime minister Abdalla Hamdok, argues that the Popular Resistance is dominated by religious conservatives who seek to use the movement as a vehicle to restore political figures from the authoritarian regime of former president Omar al-Bashir to power.

    For civilians on the frontlines in North Kordofan, however, politics have been set aside in the face of existential violence. Mustafa Karam al-Din, a pharmacist from the strategic city of Bara, joined the Popular Resistance under SAF command after RSF fighters killed his brother and ransacked his family home in 2024. “They raided our house, killing my brother and others in my neighbourhood, so I had no option other than taking up weapons to protect myself and my family and neighbours,” Karam al-Din explained in an interview with Middle East Eye in el-Obeid, capital of North Kordofan. “The RSF was very brutal with everybody when they entered the city. That wasn’t just against armed people but against all citizens, including the civilians.”

    According to Karam al-Din, the RSF launched a campaign of collective revenge when it recaptured Bara in 2024, after the SAF briefly seized control of the city and residents celebrated the RSF’s expulsion. “They had videos and lists of some people, including the agents of the Popular Resistance,” he said. For civilian communities across Bara and wider Kordofan, this brutality made clear that self-defence was a necessity. “They entered police stations and weapons stores and took up weapons. They also got others from the SAF. Then the Popular Resistance was organised, including in Bara, el-Obeid and other areas in Kordofan,” Karam al-Din added.

    Bara has been one of the hardest-hit areas in the latest phase of the war, changing hands between the SAF and RSF multiple times over the past three years due to its position along Kordofan’s critical Export Road. Since July 2025, the city has been held by the SAF. “Since October last year we have been fighting with the SAF against the RSF until we liberated our city, and I’m very proud of that,” Karam al-Din said.

    Karam al-Din frames the conflict not just as a domestic civil war, but as a fight against foreign intervention: the RSF has been widely backed by the United Arab Emirates, which has continued to supply the paramilitary with weapons and foreign mercenaries despite global condemnation and widespread accusations of RSF war crimes, including genocide in Darfur – a charge already formally leveled by the U.S. government and multiple leading human rights organisations. “This conflict has become a war against the UAE’s foreign invasion, which is using the RSF as a tool,” said Karam al-Din, who now mans frontline checkpoints. He added that SAF forces recovering Bara found evidence of UAE-origin weapons and supplies in captured RSF positions, and that resistance fighters have arrested foreign mercenaries from Colombia, South Sudan and other countries fighting alongside the RSF in towns including Um Syala and Gabrat al-Shiekh.

    Godat Abdul Hadi, a senior Popular Resistance leader, told MEE that the organisation now runs military training programs for hundreds of young people displaced from Bara to el-Obeid. “The Popular Resistance in el-Obeid, Bara and other areas began at the start of the war and even before the SAF officially declared and expanded it under SAF command,” he explained. “The number was initially small, but it has hugely increased in response to the RSF invasion of the majority of North and West Kordofan and with the widespread atrocities it committed.”

    Not all civilian activists in Kordofan have embraced armed resistance alongside the SAF, however. Mohammed Adam, a pro-democracy activist and member of the Resistance Committees network that led the 2019 revolution that ousted Bashir, long questioned whether aligning with the military was the right response to RSF aggression. When the RSF overran Bara in October 2024, Adam was sheltering a group of armed young resistance fighters in his home, and faced immediate danger when the paramilitary advanced.

    “I can never forget that day. Some of the armed youths were with me in my house, and they were unable to join their units because of intensive RSF fire. So, we lay under beds for hours, and when the crossfire stopped, we realised the SAF had been defeated and RSF fighters were starting to attack civilians,” Adam recalled. The group quickly hid all weapons and military uniforms, and Adam provided civilian clothes for the fighters before they attempted to flee. Even after RSF fighters entered the home, accused the group of being associates of the former “deep state” and searched the property, they did not discover the hidden arms, allowing Adam and the fighters to escape that night to el-Obeid.

    Looking back on the chaos, Adam described scenes of widespread carnage: dozens of civilian bodies left in the streets, with wounded and displaced residents relying on help from nearby village communities for basic food, water and emergency medical care. He recalled a particularly brutal incident that turned even hesitant residents in Bara completely against the RSF: paramilitary fighters killed a local neighbour, then opened fire on his funeral the same day, killing dozens more unarmed civilians for no reason.

    Critics within Kordofan’s pro-democracy movement share the concern that the Popular Resistance has been co-opted by allies of the old Bashir regime. One anonymous Resistance Committees activist from Bara told MEE that former regime associates are leading the Popular Resistance in the region to pave the way for an authoritarian comeback. “Former regime associates are leading the so-called Popular Resistance in Bara and other places in order to pave the way for the old regime to exploit the war and return to power,” the activist said. “This war has to be stopped by all means and concessions. It destroyed the country and enabled the old regime to come back through the SAF.”

    Even Adam, who has reservations about aligning with Burhan’s military, acknowledges that ordinary civilians have no other viable option to protect themselves from RSF brutality. “The RSF has attacked everybody: civilians or military, young or old, men or women. They take revenge on everybody in Bara,” he said. “Those who took up weapons in self-defence were our brothers, cousins and neighbours. Any previous political disagreements are not an issue at the moment. Let me tell you: I prefer not to carry weapons under the SAF, but I can’t tell those who have been attacked and humiliated by the RSF not to defend themselves by all means.”

  • Trump says US has entered deal with Venezuela to take control of 65 billion barrels of oil reserves

    Trump says US has entered deal with Venezuela to take control of 65 billion barrels of oil reserves

    Nearly nine months after ordering a U.S. military operation to capture Venezuelan sitting president Nicolás Maduro on federal narcoterrorism and drug trafficking charges, former President Donald Trump made a bombshell announcement Friday: the United States has struck a deal with Venezuela’s US-aligned interim government to take control of 65 billion barrels of the South American nation’s proven crude reserves.

    In a social media post, Trump framed the arrangement as the single largest oil agreement in global history, noting it was negotiated by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Venezuela’s interim President Delcy Rodriguez. The Maduro-aligned Venezuelan government did not immediately issue a response to requests for comment, and the White House also declined to elaborate on key details including which private sector partners would be involved in the deal, or how operational control of the reserves would be transferred.

    The announcement comes at a moment of intense political pressure for the Trump administration, as the U.S.-Israel war on Iran passes the six-month mark with no end to conflict in sight. The ongoing hostilities have severely disrupted global oil supplies, cutting off a large share of Gulf crude that once moved through the Strait of Hormuz — a chokepoint that carried roughly 20% of the world’s petroleum supplies before the conflict broke out.

    Domestically, the supply crunch has pushed U.S. gasoline prices sharply higher: AAA data puts the national average for a gallon of regular gas at $4.09 as of Friday, a steep jump from $3.21 per gallon during the same period last year. To offset market volatility, the Trump administration has drawn heavily from the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which dropped below 300 million barrels in early August. That marks a decline of more than 100 million barrels since the start of 2026, leaving the reserve at its lowest level in decades.

    Trump only alluded to the deal’s structure as a private partnership in his post, but industry experts warn that persuading major U.S. oil firms to ramp up operations in Venezuela will face significant obstacles. Decades of underinvestment and political upheaval have left the country’s oil extraction and transport infrastructure severely dilapidated, and many major operators still carry bad memories of past nationalization efforts.

    Shortly after Maduro was ousted from power, Trump hosted top oil industry executives at the White House to urge a rapid return to Venezuelan operations. While many firms expressed preliminary interest in the massive reserve potential, leadership remained cautious. Darren Woods, CEO of ExxonMobil — the United States’ largest domestic oil company — publicly characterized Venezuela as “un-investable” in the immediate aftermath of the regime change.

    Despite these headwinds, the Trump administration has pushed forward with the agreement, arguing that past Venezuelan governments seized U.S. corporate assets decades ago when former President Hugo Chavez completed the nationalization of hundreds of foreign-owned oil holdings, including assets belonging to major American energy firms. The administration claims it has restored sufficient stability to Venezuela to open the sector for foreign investment, a claim echoed by Rodriguez’s interim government. One of Rodriguez’s first policy moves after taking power was signing legislation that reverses the core socialist principle of state control over oil that defined Venezuelan policy for more than two decades, fully opening the sector to private foreign investment.

    Appearing on the social platform X, Rubio framed the agreement as a mutually beneficial breakthrough, saying it would bring $100 billion in private investment into Venezuela while driving down domestic gasoline prices for U.S. consumers. “This deal is a huge win for both the American and Venezuelan people,” Rubio wrote.

    Venezuela already holds one of the largest proven crude reserve bases in the world. Data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration puts the country’s total in-ground reserves at 303 billion barrels, equal to roughly 17% of global proven supplies. Unlike most other major oil-producing regions, nearly all of Venezuela’s untapped reserves are already mapped and confirmed, eliminating the high costs of exploratory drilling. Yet due to decades of crumbling infrastructure and mismanagement, the nation currently produces only around 1% of the world’s total annual crude output, leaving massive room for expansion if new investment is successfully deployed.

  • Tennessee governor plans to name Nashville airport after Dolly Parton

    Tennessee governor plans to name Nashville airport after Dolly Parton

    Following the passing of 80-year-old country music icon Dolly Parton from cancer earlier this week, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee has formally tabled a plan to rename Nashville International Airport in her honor, a move that comes after a massive grassroots outpouring of support from fans across the globe.

    Born and raised in rural Sevier County, Tennessee, Parton launched her legendary entertainment career after moving to Nashville, the heart of American country music, making the city’s primary travel hub a fitting site to carry on her legacy. The push to rename the airport did not emerge overnight: the original online petition calling for the change was first launched in January 2025, but it saw a surge of new signatures after Parton’s death, accumulating nearly 160,000 signatures by Friday evening. The petition itself frames the renaming as a perfect way to spread Parton’s famous warmth, creativity, and generosity to visitors arriving from across the world, writing, “What a wonderful way to share her light and magic across Tennessee and the world.”

    In an official statement released Friday, Governor Lee confirmed that he has already reached out to Parton’s personal team, who conveyed their gratitude for the overwhelming public support to honor the late star. “Dolly Parton’s extraordinary life is forever woven into the fabric of our state,” Lee said. “At a place where Tennessee welcomes the world, it is fitting that Nashville International Airport would bear the name of our state’s favorite daughter and greet travelers with the enduring legacy of Dolly’s music, generosity, faith, and kindness.”

    The proposal still needs to clear several regulatory hurdles before it becomes official. The governor’s office confirmed that the Metro Nashville Airport Authority board will hold a formal vote on the name change at its upcoming meeting on September 17, and a final greenlight will also require approval from the Federal Aviation Administration. Beyond the grassroots petition, the push has also gained institutional support: a sitting Tennessee lawmaker has already pledged to introduce formal legislation in the state legislature to advance the renaming in Parton’s honor.

    This naming convention is not without precedent in the United States, where a number of major airports already bear the names of iconic cultural figures. New Orleans’ primary airport is named for jazz legend Louis Armstrong, while Louisville, Kentucky’s main airport honors boxing and cultural icon Muhammad Ali.

    Over the course of her decades-long career, Parton cemented her status as one of the most influential artists in American history: she won 10 Grammy Awards, sold more than 100 million records worldwide, and produced countless enduring hits including *Coat of Many Colors*, *9 to 5*, *Jolene*, and *I Will Always Love You*. In a touching tribute to Parton just days after her death, guards at Buckingham Palace paid their respects by playing her hit song *9 to 5* during a public ceremony, underscoring the global reach of her legacy.

  • Watch: Marchers reflect on voting rights 63 years after ‘I have a dream’ speech

    Watch: Marchers reflect on voting rights 63 years after ‘I have a dream’ speech

    Six decades have passed since Martin Luther King Jr. stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and delivered his transformative ‘I Have a Dream’ speech, a moment that redefined the American civil rights movement. Today, thousands of activists, community organizers, and ordinary citizens gathered once again in the U.S. capital for the annual March on Washington commemoration, but this year’s gathering carried a renewed sense of urgency around a core promise of King’s work: equal access to the ballot box.

    Attendees marched through the streets of Washington D.C., carrying signs and sharing personal stories about persistent barriers to voting that remain entrenched across the country, from restrictive voter ID laws to gerrymandering, and cuts to early voting access. For many participants, the 63rd anniversary was not just a moment to reflect on how far the nation has come in advancing racial equality and democratic rights, but also a stark reminder of how much work remains unfinished. Speakers and marchers alike emphasized that the fight for voting rights is the direct continuation of the struggle King led in 1963, arguing that any celebration of his legacy must include concrete action to protect and expand access to voting for all marginalized communities.

    Unlike the historic 1963 march that drew national attention to segregation and unequal rights, this year’s gathering comes amid a series of recent legal and political setbacks for voting rights advocates. Federal voting rights legislation has stalled in Congress in recent years, and multiple states have enacted new restrictions on voting since 2020. Marchers called on federal and state policymakers to reverse these changes, pass sweeping national voting rights protections, and uphold the core democratic principle that every eligible voter deserves a voice, regardless of their race, zip code, or political affiliation.