分类： politics

In a significant move underscoring continued American support for its Middle Eastern ally, the US House of Representatives has approved a substantial military aid package for Israel. The funding, totaling $3.3 billion in Foreign Military Financing (FMF), was passed on Wednesday as part of the broader National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act (NSRP) of 2026.

The legislative approval comes at a time of heightened regional instability, with the Biden administration reportedly considering additional military actions against Iran. This development follows recent hostilities between Israel and Iran, including a 12-day conflict in June that concluded with US airstrikes targeting Tehran’s nuclear infrastructure.

Unlike traditional arms sales where nations use their own funds to purchase American equipment, the FMF program represents direct taxpayer-funded assistance where the US government procures weapons from defense contractors on behalf of recipient countries. Israel remains the largest beneficiary of this program under a decade-long agreement established in 2018, which is scheduled for renegotiation in 2028.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) enthusiastically endorsed the legislation, stating: “The pro-Israel provisions in this bill further reinforce the bipartisan and ironclad support for the US-Israel partnership in Congress. These resources help ensure that our ally can confront shared strategic threats and that America has a strong and capable ally in the heart of the Middle East.”

According to research from Brown University, US military support to Israel has dramatically increased following Hamas’s October 2023 attacks and subsequent hostilities in Gaza, with total defense subsidies reaching approximately $34 billion. This figure encompasses both the standing FMF agreement and supplementary assistance provided during recent conflicts.

The comprehensive NSRP legislation allocates roughly $50 billion for State Department operations, foreign aid, and international security assistance. Notably, the bill also contains provisions prohibiting US funding for several international bodies, including the International Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice, the UN Commission of Inquiry, and completely bans support for the UN agency serving Palestinian refugees.

This latest appropriation builds upon previous defense authorizations, including the 2026 National Defence Authorisation Act passed in December, which provided additional specialized funding including $500 million for missile defense systems, $80 million for counter-tunneling operations, and $70 million for joint drone threat mitigation initiatives.

In a historic move signaling significant cultural and political reform, Syrian President Ahmed Al-Sharaa has enacted a sweeping decree that fundamentally redefines the nation’s linguistic and cultural landscape. The presidential declaration establishes Kurdish as a national language alongside Arabic, marking an unprecedented recognition of Syria’s Kurdish minority.

The comprehensive legislation affirms that citizens of Kurdish origin constitute an essential and integral component of the Syrian populace, acknowledging their cultural and linguistic identity as a vital element within Syria’s diverse national fabric. The state now formally commits to safeguarding cultural and linguistic diversity while guaranteeing Kurdish citizens the right to preserve their heritage, arts, and native language within national sovereignty parameters.

Educational systems will undergo substantial transformation, with Kurdish language instruction permitted in both public and private institutions across regions with significant Kurdish populations. The curriculum integration will occur through optional academic programs or cultural educational activities.

In a profound rectification of historical grievances, the decree nullifies all legislation and exceptional measures stemming from the controversial 1962 census in Al-Hasakah Governorate. This includes granting Syrian nationality to all Kurdish-origin residents previously registered as ‘unrecorded’ (maktoumeen al-qayd), ensuring full equality in rights and responsibilities.

Furthermore, the ancient Kurdish festival of Nowruz, celebrating the spring equinox on March 21st, receives designation as an official paid public holiday throughout the Syrian Arab Republic. This recognition establishes the festival as a national celebration symbolizing renewal and fraternity among all Syrians.

In a perplexing diplomatic development, the Trump administration’s recent suspension of immigrant visas for nationals from 75 countries has placed Kuwait—a wealthy Gulf nation and major non-NATO US ally—alongside nations deemed to have unacceptable welfare dependency rates. This classification has baffled regional experts given Kuwait’s strategic military importance and longstanding cooperation with American interests.

Kuwait stands as a definitive outlier on the restricted list. With a per capita GDP approaching $33,000 and one of the world’s strongest currencies, the Kuwaiti Dinar, the nation possesses considerable wealth. Its social welfare system remains so comprehensive that citizens frequently retire comfortably in their late forties.

The strategic relationship between Washington and Kuwait has deepened significantly since the 1990-1991 Gulf War, when US-led forces liberated the country from Iraqi occupation. Kuwait subsequently served as critical infrastructure for the 2003 invasion of Iraq and became indispensable to counter-IS operations starting in 2014. Currently, approximately 13,500 US troops remain stationed at multiple American-run bases within Kuwait’s borders—making it the fourth-largest host of US forces globally, trailing only Germany, Japan, and South Korea.

On the very day the visa restrictions were announced, the Pentagon notified Congress of an $800 million weapons sale to Kuwait, including Patriot missile system upgrades, spare parts, and training programs. This transaction further underscores the ongoing defense cooperation between the nations.

Regional specialists have proposed multiple theories behind Kuwait’s inclusion. Some suggest it may represent a tactical pressure strategy to extract concessions on issues of regional importance to the United States. Kuwait maintains notably independent foreign policies, including refusal to normalize relations with Israel and maintaining friendly ties with Iran—positions that distinguish it from neighboring Gulf states.

Additional considerations involve Kuwait’s relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, which the Trump administration designated as a terrorist organization in several countries last year. While Kuwait hasn’t aggressively prosecuted the organization, regional powers like the UAE and Saudi Arabia have intensely lobbied for its suppression.

Human rights concerns may also factor into the equation. Since September 2024, Kuwait has revoked citizenship from at least 50,000 people—a figure some activists believe could reach 200,000. These revocations, which the government ceased regularly reporting in September 2025, potentially represent significant human rights violations that past administrations might have addressed more forcefully.

Experts note that unlike Saudi Arabia and Qatar, which have made lavish financial commitments to the Trump administration, Kuwait maintains a quieter relationship with Washington. This diplomatic approach may have left it more vulnerable to such policy decisions despite its strategic importance.

A senior U.S. diplomat has ignited a firestorm of international criticism following inflammatory social media remarks that critics condemn as overtly racist and Islamophobic. Sarah B Rogers, the Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy, faces mounting backlash for comments posted on X (formerly Twitter) that employ dehumanizing language about refugees and invoke antisemitic tropes.

The controversy erupted when Rogers engaged with an unverified screenshot referencing Germany’s migration policies, responding to another user’s provocative comment with her own statement: “Germany infamously retains very few Jews, yet imported barbarian rapist hordes…” This language, directly echoing extremist rhetoric about refugees from predominantly Muslim countries, has drawn condemnation from human rights organizations, political figures, and diplomatic observers worldwide.

The timing and context of the remarks reference the 2015-2016 Cologne New Year’s Eve incidents, where hundreds of women reported assaults by groups of men described as being from North Africa and the Middle East. However, critics emphasize that Rogers’ blanket characterization of refugee populations as “barbarian rapist hordes” represents a dangerous escalation in official discourse.

What makes this incident particularly alarming, according to diplomatic analysts, is Rogers’ specific portfolio as America’s top public diplomacy official. Her position mandates promoting pluralism, countering disinformation, and advancing human rights values globally. Instead, her language mirrors the very extremist narratives U.S. diplomats traditionally oppose.

The episode has triggered broader concerns about the normalization of divisive rhetoric within official U.S. government communications. Observers note an increasing trend of culture-war messaging from official accounts that aligns with domestic political talking points rather than diplomatic language. This shift, experts warn, undermines America’s credibility on human rights issues and emboldens extremist voices worldwide.

Historical parallels have emerged, with some commentators comparing Rogers’ rhetoric to that of Breckinridge Long, the State Department official who blocked Jewish refugees during the Holocaust. This comparison underscores the profound implications when senior officials responsible for refugee and migration policies employ dehumanizing language.

As the international community processes this diplomatic misstep, larger questions emerge about the erosion of diplomatic norms and the weaponization of official communication channels. The incident demonstrates how social media engagement by high-ranking officials can instantly amplify harmful stereotypes and damage years of careful diplomatic work.