分类： politics

A fresh diplomatic row has erupted between the United States and India after former President Donald Trump shared an incendiary social media post that branded India a “hellhole” and attacked Indian immigrants to the U.S. The controversy comes just weeks ahead of a planned official visit to New Delhi by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, whose trip was already framed as an effort to de-escalate recent bilateral tensions between the two long-time strategic partners.

The inflammatory post, shared by Trump late Wednesday, targets the long-standing U.S. constitutional principle of birthright citizenship, echoing decades of far-right anti-immigration rhetoric. Beyond attacking birthright citizenship, the post spread two false and harmful claims about Indian immigrants working in the U.S. technology sector: first, that they systematically refuse to hire white, American-born workers, and second, that they lack adequate English language proficiency. The post went on to generalize its attack, claiming that birthright citizenship allows immigrants to bring entire family chains into the U.S. from what it called “hellhole” countries including China and India.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs issued a swift and sharp rebuke of the comments on Thursday. Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal dismissed the remarks as “obviously uninformed, inappropriate and in poor taste,” emphasizing that they do not align with the long-standing foundation of the India-U.S. relationship, which is built on mutual respect and overlapping strategic and economic interests.

The post has also drawn widespread condemnation from American political and advocacy groups. Democratic Congressman Ami Bera, whose parents immigrated to the U.S. from India, called the comment “offensive, ignorant and beneath the dignity of the office” of the U.S. presidency. He added that Trump, who was born into immense wealth and privilege, has never experienced the daily struggles that shape the lives of millions of immigrant families across the United States.

The Hindu American Foundation, a leading advocacy group representing Indian-American communities, also issued a statement saying it was deeply disturbed by the “hateful, racist screed.” The organization noted on social media platform X that the president’s endorsement of such bigoted rhetoric fuels rising xenophobia and racism already at record levels in the U.S., putting Indian-American and other immigrant communities at direct risk of harm.

Cracking down on illegal and legal immigration has been a signature policy priority for Trump throughout his political career, and he has repeatedly targeted the H-1B temporary work visa program that is widely used by skilled Indian technology workers. This is not the first public friction between Trump and the Indian government: for months, Trump maintained steep punitive tariffs on Indian imports after taking offense to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s muted response to his offer of mediation during a military conflict between India and Pakistan.

Trump’s confrontational approach to India marks a clear break from decades of policy pursued by successive U.S. administrations of both major political parties. For decades, U.S. policymakers have prioritized building cooperative bilateral ties with the world’s largest democracy, framing New Delhi as a key strategic counterweight to an increasingly assertive China in the Indo-Pacific region.

The U.S. Department of Justice announced criminal charges Thursday against a 38-year-old active-duty Army soldier accused of exploiting classified access to a secret U.S. military operation to illegally profit hundreds of thousands of dollars via an online prediction betting platform.

Gannon Ken Van Dyke, a resident of Fayetteville, North Carolina, faces five felony counts stemming from his alleged bets on Polymarket, a popular crypto-based prediction market. Court documents allege Van Dyke, who participated in planning and executing the U.S. mission to capture former Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, placed wagers on two key outcomes: that U.S. forces would enter Caracas and that Maduro would be removed from power. When the operation launched on January 3, which resulted in Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores being arrested and transferred to New York to face federal drug trafficking charges, Van Dyke walked away with more than $400,000 in illicit winnings, prosecutors say.

Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche emphasized the gravity of the alleged misconduct in an official statement. “Our men and women in uniform are entrusted with classified information solely to carry out their national security missions,” Blanche said. “They are strictly prohibited from exploiting this highly sensitive data for personal financial gain.”

In a response to the charges, Polymarket officials confirmed they had proactively flagged the suspicious betting activity to the Department of Justice and fully cooperated with the ongoing investigation. “Insider trading has no place on Polymarket,” the company said in a statement. “Today’s arrest is proof the system works.”

The indictment against Van Dyke is not an isolated incident: it represents the latest confirmed case of insiders leveraging nonpublic information about the second Trump administration’s policy and military actions to profit from prediction market bets. Earlier this year, six unidentified Polymarket accounts netted a combined $1.2 million by correctly betting the U.S. would launch a military strike against Iran on February 28, the exact date open hostilities in the Middle East began. No arrests have been made in that case, and investigators have not uncovered any evidence linking President Donald Trump or senior White House staff to those transactions.

Speaking to reporters Thursday, Trump distanced himself from the unregulated prediction betting industry. “The whole world, unfortunately, has become somewhat of a casino… in Europe and every place, they’re doing these betting things,” Trump said. “I was never much in favor of it.”

The charges have reignited long-simmering accusations of systemic conflicts of interest plaguing Trump’s second term in office, particularly centered on connections between Trump’s family and Polymarket itself. Progressive Democratic Senator Bernie Sanders highlighted these concerns in a post Thursday on the social platform X, arguing that the Trump family has amassed $4 billion in unethical income during his time in office, calling the situation an “unprecedented kleptocracy.”

Previous incidents have already raised alarms about potential insider trading tied to the White House: in March, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that talks with Iran were “very productive,” a statement that triggered a drop in global oil prices and a surge in equity markets. Market analysts calculated that traders who placed positioned in oil and stock futures in advance of the post earned tens of millions of dollars in profits. The Trump family has also earned hundreds of millions of dollars from cryptocurrency investments, a sector Trump has moved to deregulate since returning to office. Most notably, Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., is a partner at private equity firm 1789 Capital, which made a multimillion-dollar investment in Polymarket in 2024. Following the investment, Polymarket named Trump Jr. as a company advisor.

If convicted on all five charges — one count of wire fraud, one count of unlawful monetary transaction, and three counts of violating the Commodity Exchange Act — Van Dyke faces a maximum sentence of 50 years in federal prison.

Australia’s largest ASX-listed energy firm Woodside Energy has found itself at the center of a fiery senate inquiry, where executives defended the nation’s existing gas taxation framework amid intense scrutiny over the company’s decade-long $2.5 million in political donations to Australia’s three major parties: the Liberals, Nationals, and Labor.

The hearing, focused on reviewing gas resource taxation rules, was led by Greens committee chair Steph Hodgins-May, who pressed Woodside representatives hard over the nature of their political giving. Hodgins-May challenged the company to disclose what policy access the donations secured, questioning whether corporate funding should even buy entry into policy discussions. “As a Greens senator I could never ever imagine taking money in exchange for a meeting with a stakeholder,” she stated during the session. She further pressed for details on private communications between Woodside executives and Western Australian Premier Roger Cook ahead of Cook’s public stance opposing new gas taxes ahead of the upcoming federal budget, a question Woodside officials declined to answer immediately, saying they would respond to the query on notice.

The inquiry comes amid growing public and political pressure to implement a new 25% minimum tax on gas exports, a push Hodgins-May has publicly backed. She has pushed back against industry warnings that the time is not right for such a reform, arguing that energy giants have long delayed sharing their extraordinary windfall profits with the Australian public, the rightful owners of the nation’s natural resources. This momentum for higher gas taxes has built following a global energy price surge triggered by ongoing geopolitical conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, which has delivered Australian gas exporters a combined $149 billion in export profits since 2022. Over that same period, Australia’s national debt has swelled to nearly $1 trillion, with economic analysts projecting a 25% export tax would add roughly $17 billion in annual government revenue.

In his opening testimony before the committee, Woodside Chief Financial Officer Graham Tiver defended the company’s record and the current taxation structure. Tiver emphasized that Woodside already makes a massive contribution to Australian public finances and the national economy, noting that over the past four years, the company has paid roughly $13.8 billion in taxes, royalties, Petroleum Resource Rent Taxes, and other levies, equal to around 44% of revenue from its gas projects being returned to government. “Each year Woodside makes a very substantial contribution back to the Australian community through tax, royalties and other levies. When Woodside succeeds, Australian workers, community and shareholders share in that success, and governments receive the revenue needed to fund essential services such as hospitals, schools and roads,” Tiver said.

Tiver added that Australia’s existing tax framework strikes the right balance between generating public revenue and supporting the stable, competitive investment environment needed to maintain domestic energy security, create jobs, and keep local energy prices affordable. He noted that Woodside invests more than $10 billion in upfront capital for new projects, and that effective tax rates increase naturally over the lifecycle of gas developments as upfront costs are depreciated.

Market analysts have noted that the debate over windfall gas taxes brings legitimate arguments on both sides. Morningstar market strategist Lochlan Halloway explained that it is understandable for Australians to feel frustrated by the sudden surge in gas producer profits at a time of broader cost of living pressures. He acknowledged that as the collective owners of Australia’s natural resource endowment, the Australian public currently receives a smaller share of windfall profits than resource holders in comparable nations such as Norway or Qatar. However, Halloway warned that retroactively imposing a new windfall tax carries long-term economic risks. Unlike Norway, where the government is not just a tax collector but also an equity participant that shares upfront project costs and downside risks, a unilateral windfall tax in Australia would shift all asymmetric risk to private investors: the public would collect gains during price booms, but private capital would still bear all losses during price downturns. Halloway noted that the United Kingdom implemented a similar unbalanced windfall levy, and the policy has already led to a complete halt in new offshore North Sea oil and gas exploration, a situation not seen since 1964. Such an outcome in Australia would risk deterring future energy investment and undermining long-term energy security, he argued.

After months of diplomatic gridlock driven by Hungarian opposition, European Union leaders have formally given final approval to a €90 billion ($105 billion) aid package for Ukraine, paired with a new round of anti-Russia sanctions. The breakthrough comes as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky arrived in the Cypriot coastal resort of Ayia Napa for talks with EU leaders, where he immediately shifted the conversation to advancing Kyiv’s long-held ambition of full European Union membership.

Zelensky opened his remarks by expressing profound gratitude for the long-delayed financial support, noting that the funds would be critical to keeping Ukraine’s military equipped and sending a clear, unified message to Moscow that European backing for Kyiv remains unshaken. But speaking to reporters outside the seaside conference venue, the Ukrainian leader made clear that his priority now is moving accession talks forward, stating bluntly: “We will push everybody.” He added that his ultimate goal is securing full Ukrainian membership in the bloc by 2027.

The path to membership talks has recently cleared significantly, following the electoral defeat of Hungarian nationalist leader Viktor Orban earlier this month, who had spent months blocking progress on both the aid package and the opening of accession negotiating clusters. Orban, who skipped what would have been his final EU summit before leaving office, had wielded his veto over the €90 billion loan as leverage to force Ukraine to repair a pipeline damaged in a Russian strike. With repair work completed this week, Russian oil has resumed flowing through the pipeline to both Hungary and Slovakia, resolving the last sticking point for the aid package.

European Council President Antonio Costa, who represents the bloc’s 27 member states, signaled openness to moving forward, saying the EU must “look forward and prepare the next step”, which would include formally opening the first negotiating clusters for Ukraine’s accession. However, not all EU capitals are on board with accelerating the process. Several senior leaders have pushed back against a fast track, arguing that accession must follow a strict merit-based system that requires Ukraine to meet all membership criteria before advancing. “Fast tracks are not possible,” Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever said. Luxembourg Prime Minister Luc Frieden echoed that stance, noting that “you simply cannot become a member of a club without meeting the conditions.”

French President Emmanuel Macron declined to take a position on accelerated membership, but called on the EU executive branch to draft a clear timeline and outline next steps to be completed in the coming weeks. For his part, Zelensky has rejected calls for a lesser, symbolic membership status, reiterating that Ukraine will accept nothing less than full membership in the bloc. Zelensky also outlined plans for the aid, saying the €90 billion will go toward strengthening Ukraine’s military, expanding domestic air defense production, and shoring up the country’s damaged energy grid. He expects the first disbursement of funds to arrive by late May or early June at the latest.

Beyond Ukraine, the summit in Cyprus, which currently holds the rotating EU presidency, will tackle a range of pressing global and internal issues. EU leaders will turn their attention to the ongoing Middle East conflict and its economic fallout, which has driven sharp spikes in global energy prices. The island nation was drawn into the conflict in March when a drone struck a British military base located on Cypriot territory. On Friday, EU leaders will be joined by their counterparts from Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan for what a senior EU official described as “intensive dialogue” on regional stability.

A top economic priority for the bloc is addressing disruption to global energy supplies linked to tensions around the Strait of Hormuz. A de facto partial closure of the key shipping route has already pushed oil prices sharply higher and reduced jet fuel supplies across Europe. Leaders will also hold their first discussion on the EU’s 2028-2034 multi-year budget. The European Commission has proposed a expanded two trillion euro ($2.3 trillion) budget to account for new priorities including aid for Ukraine and defense spending, but many national governments have already pushed back against calls to increase their national contributions to the bloc.

A high-profile immigration initiative launched by US President Donald Trump has marked its first formal approval, with only one applicant successfully clearing the process for the administration’s signature $1 million ‘gold card’ residency visa to date, the nation’s top commerce official told lawmakers this week.

US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick made the disclosure Thursday during a hearing before the US House of Representatives, updating Congress on the status of a program that has sparked intense debate since its unveiling last year. First ordered into creation by Trump in September 2024, the gold card scheme offers permanent US residency in exchange for a flat entry fee. It opened its application portal to prospective candidates in December 2024.

Beyond the single completed approval, Lutnick confirmed that hundreds of additional candidates are currently moving through the multi-stage review pipeline. All applicants face not just the steep financial cost, but also rigorous background screening. The program sets a $1 million fee for individual applicants, while corporate sponsorship of candidates carries a $2 million price tag. Applicants must also cover a separate $15,000 processing fee charged by the US Department of Homeland Security, and all submissions undergo what Lutnick described as ‘most serious vetting and analysis.’

The gold card program was paired with another Trump immigration policy: a new $100,000 annual fee added to the popular H-1B skilled worker visa program for foreign employees. When first announcing the initiative, Trump framed it as a measure that would attract high-impact job creators to the US while generating new revenue to help cut the federal national deficit.

The update on the gold card program comes amid broader shifts in US immigration policy under Trump’s second term. Since returning to the presidency in 2025, the administration has pushed for stricter immigration controls and carried out a series of large-scale, aggressive deportation raids across the country.