Global Pulse

分类： politics

  • Rising US fuel prices risk sparking domestic wildfire for Trump

    Rising US fuel prices risk sparking domestic wildfire for Trump

    American consumers are confronting a sharp increase in fuel costs as geopolitical tensions in the Middle East trigger a chain reaction affecting household budgets nationwide. The recent U.S.-Israel military action against Iran has provoked Tehran to effectively blockade the Strait of Hormuz, causing global oil prices to spike dramatically. This development has translated into an 11% surge in average U.S. gasoline prices within just one week, according to the latest data from the American Automobile Association.

    In Washington D.C., educator Sean Robinson expressed shock upon encountering the $3.27 per gallon price at his local station. “This significant jump will force me to reconsider my daily routines,” Robinson noted, indicating he would limit non-essential travel and entertainment expenses. This sentiment echoes across income brackets, with finance professional Toloria Washington describing the situation as pushing households into “survival mode” as families reassess spending priorities.

    The timing presents considerable political challenges for the Trump administration with midterm elections approaching. President Trump, who previously celebrated declining energy costs during his tenure, now faces voters grappling with renewed inflationary pressures. The Republican Party’s narrow congressional majority appears increasingly vulnerable as economic concerns mount.

    Economists warn that sustained energy price increases could compel the Federal Reserve to maintain elevated interest rates, potentially slowing economic growth. KPMG chief economist Diane Swonk characterized the situation as a “dueling mandate” for the central bank, balancing inflation control against employment objectives. While Fed Governor Christopher Waller suggested energy price impacts might be transient, many Americans already feel besieged by consecutive economic shocks.

    As November elections approach, analysts suggest voter frustration over diminishing purchasing power and shrinking middle-class stability could significantly influence political outcomes. The convergence of geopolitical conflict, economic pressure, and electoral politics creates a volatile landscape for both policymakers and citizens alike.

  • Muted Iran war stance fits concerned onlooker China’s priorities

    Muted Iran war stance fits concerned onlooker China’s priorities

    As Middle East hostilities escalate, China has adopted a position of deliberate detachment, maintaining strategic distance from the regional conflict while carefully assessing implications for its global interests. Situated over 4,200 miles from the turmoil and without direct involvement, Beijing enjoys relative flexibility in calculating how U.S.-Israeli operations against Iran might affect its economic and security priorities.

    This conflict represents the most significant military campaign by China’s primary strategic rival since the Iraq War, unfolding in a region critical to China’s energy security and commercial expansion. Despite these high stakes, Beijing’s response has been notably measured—a reflection of both limited regional leverage and the fundamentally transactional nature of its relationship with Tehran.

    China’s doctrinal opposition to foreign intervention and regime change shaped its initial diplomatic response. In late February 2026, Beijing joined Moscow in requesting an emergency UN Security Council session, expressing ‘serious concern’ over missile strikes while urging respect for Iran’s territorial integrity. Concurrently, China implemented precautionary measures, advising its citizens in Iran to evacuate and warning nationals in Israel to enhance emergency preparedness.

    This combination of diplomatic protest and risk mitigation suggests Beijing prioritized contingency planning over conflict resolution. Unlike its strong support for Pakistan during the 2025 border conflict with India—where Chinese-supplied fighter jets and missiles were deployed—China maintains a more limited security relationship with Iran. While providing selective military and dual-use support including air defense systems, drone technology, and surveillance assistance over time, Beijing has carefully avoided formal security guarantees.

    The current conflict offers China valuable intelligence-gathering opportunities. With U.S. forces concentrated around Iran, Chinese satellites and intelligence platforms have actively monitored American and allied deployments near the Gulf of Oman—information potentially more valuable for China’s long-term Indo-Pacific strategy than for immediate battlefield impact.

    This pattern reveals China’s consistent approach: supporting partners within strict limits while avoiding entanglements. Despite rhetoric of ‘comprehensive partnership,’ China has never made decisive strategic investments in Tehran. Bilateral trade remains modest within China’s global portfolio, Iranian oil imports are useful but replaceable, and Belt and Road Initiative investments flow more substantially toward Gulf nations like Saudi Arabia and the UAE—economies now vulnerable to Iranian retaliation.

    The asymmetry is clear: Iran has long needed China more than China needed Iran. A weakened Iran—or even one with Western-aligned leadership—poses limited direct concern to Beijing. However, the broader strategic environment presents challenges as multiple Chinese partners face instability: Russia remains mired in Ukraine, Pakistan and Afghanistan confront escalating instability, and U.S. interventionism has intensified in Venezuela and Cuba.

    China’s response highlights its regional constraints: limited force projection, no defense commitments, and consistent avoidance of security guarantor responsibilities. Nonintervention represents not merely tactical caution but a defining feature of Beijing’s diplomatic identity.

    Looking ahead, Beijing will likely calibrate limited, deniable support to a weakened Iranian regime while avoiding overcommitment. Should the regime fall, China would probably pursue pragmatic engagement with whatever authority emerges, safeguarding economic interests through transactional relationships.

    The anticipated late-March U.S.-China meeting now carries added significance, though the atmosphere remains uncertain. President Xi Jinping would enter discussions amid large-scale U.S. military operations and while multiple Chinese strategic partners face challenges across various theaters.

    Ultimately, China positions itself as neither Iran’s patron nor a passive bystander, but rather a cautious opportunist operating within clear constraints—preserving flexibility while avoiding entanglement in a conflict beyond its control.

  • Ex-rapper’s political party leads early results in Nepal’s first election since 2025 youth revolt

    Ex-rapper’s political party leads early results in Nepal’s first election since 2025 youth revolt

    KATHMANDU, Nepal — Nepal’s political landscape is undergoing a dramatic transformation as partial election results reveal a stunning lead for the Rastriya Swatantra Party (National Independent Party), headed by former rapper Balendra Shah. The preliminary counts released Saturday by Nepal’s Election Commission show the insurgent party has secured 27 of the 165 directly elected parliamentary seats and maintains commanding leads in 90 additional constituencies.

    The election represents Nepal’s first parliamentary contest since last year’s youth-led uprising that unseated former Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Oli. Shah, the party’s prime ministerial candidate who previously won Kathmandu’s mayoral race in 2022, has emerged as the symbolic leader of the political revolution. The 35-year-old politician has built his campaign around addressing healthcare and education disparities for impoverished Nepalis, channeling widespread public discontent with established political institutions.

    In a particularly symbolic contest, Shah is directly challenging Oli in a southeastern district, where he currently holds a substantial lead over the former prime minister as vote counting continues.

    The election has evolved into a three-way competition, largely driven by voter frustration over systemic corruption and demands for greater governmental accountability. Despite being founded only in 2022, the Rastriya Swatantra Party has mounted a formidable challenge to Nepal’s two traditionally dominant parties: the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist), which have collectively secured only six declared seats thus far.

    The political upheaval traces back to the 2025 protests, initially triggered by a social media ban before escalating into a widespread revolt against government corruption and poor governance. The demonstrations turned violent when protesters attacked government buildings and police responded with lethal force, resulting in dozens of fatalities and hundreds injured.

    Voters are directly electing 165 members to the House of Representatives, with the remaining 110 seats in the 275-member parliament to be allocated through proportional representation. Election officials are employing helicopters to collect ballot boxes from remote mountain villages in northern regions, with final results anticipated within the coming days.

  • Trump looks to turn attention to Western Hemisphere, at least for a moment, at Americas summit

    Trump looks to turn attention to Western Hemisphere, at least for a moment, at Americas summit

    President Donald Trump convened Latin American leaders at his Trump National Doral Miami golf resort on Saturday for the “Shield of the Americas” summit, aiming to reaffirm U.S. commitment to hemispheric priorities despite escalating global conflicts. The gathering occurred against the backdrop of multiple international crises, including the recent U.S.-Israel military campaign against Iran that has destabilized Middle Eastern security and roiled worldwide markets.

    The summit represents a strategic effort to reorient American foreign policy toward what the administration terms “America First” regional engagement. This initiative follows Trump’s audacious military operation two months prior that captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro on drug conspiracy charges. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth articulated the administration’s position, criticizing previous U.S. leadership for “benign neglect” of hemispheric affairs while focusing excessively on other global theaters.

    Attendance included leaders from twelve nations: Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guyana, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, and Trinidad and Tobago. Notably absent were regional powers Brazil and Mexico, along with Colombia—traditionally a key U.S. partner in anti-narcotics strategy.

    The administration’s renewed focus includes countering Chinese economic influence, described in security documents as the “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine. This approach has manifested through pressure on Panama to withdraw from China’s Belt and Road Initiative and reviews of Chinese-controlled port contracts. The capture of Maduro further disrupts Beijing’s energy imports from Venezuela, one of China’s closest regional allies.

    Despite these efforts, regional experts note that many nations maintain pragmatic relationships with China due to its trade-focused diplomacy addressing critical development needs. The U.S. currently offers increased militarization and immigration enforcement while reducing foreign assistance, creating complex diplomatic calculations for hemispheric partners.
    President Trump’s participation was abbreviated due to his required attendance at Dover Air Force Base for the dignified transfer of six U.S. troops killed in a Kuwait drone strike during the ongoing Iran conflict.

  • Trump’s ‘fine’ with another religious leader ruling Iran

    Trump’s ‘fine’ with another religious leader ruling Iran

    In a revealing interview with CNN, former US President Donald Trump articulated an unconventional perspective on Iran’s political future, stating he would welcome continued religious leadership provided such figures demonstrate fairness and align with American interests. Trump emphasized that democratic governance isn’t essential for Iran, contradicting traditional US foreign policy approaches.

    “The crucial factor isn’t the system but the individual’s character,” Trump stated. “I maintain excellent relationships with numerous religious leaders. What matters is selecting a leader who will govern justly, perform effectively, and maintain positive relations with the United States, Israel, and our Middle Eastern partners.”

    These comments followed Trump’s social media demand for Iran’s “unconditional surrender” after coordinated US-Israeli airstrikes eliminated Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Despite Trump’s public encouragement for Iranians to overthrow their government, no significant uprising has materialized.

    The White House subsequently clarified that “unconditional surrender” would be determined unilaterally by Trump as commander-in-chief upon assessing that Iran no longer poses threats and Operation Epic Fury objectives are fully achieved.

    This stance appears inconsistent with previous administration actions, including support for Kurdish uprisings and justification of military interventions based on Iran’s human rights record during recent inflation protests. Trump additionally referenced Venezuela as precedent, noting his administration’s direct involvement in selecting leadership after Nicolás Maduro’s removal, while maintaining control over oil resources.

    Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has meanwhile declared preparedness for potential ground invasion, asserting confidence in Iran’s defensive capabilities despite reduced long-range missile deployments in favor of targeted drone and short-range missile strikes against US bases and Gulf states.

  • UK accused of ‘collective punishment’ over Sudanese students ban

    UK accused of ‘collective punishment’ over Sudanese students ban

    In a controversial immigration policy shift, the UK government has imposed a sweeping ban on student visas for nationals from Sudan, Myanmar, Afghanistan, and Cameroon—countries grappling with severe internal conflicts. The measure, announced by Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, aims to prevent international students from seeking asylum after completing their degrees in Britain.

    The decision has drawn sharp criticism from educational advocates and human rights organizations who argue it penalizes vulnerable populations. Among those directly affected is Ibrahim Dafallah, a 23-year-old Sudanese student who secured admission to the University of Oxford’s master’s program in health service improvement. Having survived multiple displacements and family tragedies during Sudan’s devastating civil war, Dafallah viewed overseas education as crucial for rebuilding his nation’s shattered healthcare system.

    Home Office data reveals that asylum claims from Sudanese students remain exceptionally low, with only 120 applications in the 2024-25 academic year—representing less than half of all Sudanese study visa holders. Myanmar nationals showed even lower rates, with just 16% of student visa holders seeking asylum.

    The policy aligns with recent US restrictions under the Trump administration, which banned student visas for 19 countries including Sudan. Migrant charities warn this approach eliminates one of the few legal pathways to safety for conflict-zone residents. Dr. Abeer Abdoon, another Sudanese academic offered placement at Oxford, emphasized the generational impact: ‘This suspension prevents us from acquiring skills desperately needed for our country’s recovery.’

    Experts including Robert Yates, former global health director at Chatham House, condemned the move as counterproductive to international development goals. ‘These countries desperately need to extend health coverage to their populations,’ Yates noted, highlighting how the ban undermines capacity-building in critical sectors.

    The Labour government’s broader asylum overhaul includes temporary protection measures and stricter family reunification rules, signaling a hardened stance despite Britain’s traditional role as an educational haven for conflict-affected scholars.

  • Nepal’s rapper-turned-politician looks set for landslide win

    Nepal’s rapper-turned-politician looks set for landslide win

    Early electoral returns from Nepal’s parliamentary elections indicate a potential political earthquake as Balendra Shah’s centrist Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) surges toward a supermajority victory. With counting operations continuing across the Himalayan nation, preliminary data from Nepal’s Election Commission reveals Shah’s party leading in 99 of 165 direct election constituencies while securing over half of proportional representation votes tallied thus far.

    The 35-year-old musician-turned-politician has achieved a remarkable political ascent, currently outpacing veteran Marxist leader KP Sharma Oli in his own constituency. This electoral contest symbolizes a generational clash between Nepal’s political establishment and youth-driven demands for systemic change. The high-stakes November election followed deadly anti-corruption protests six months earlier that resulted in 77 fatalities and toppled the previous government.

    Election Commission spokesperson Narayan Prasad Bhattarai confirmed that while only 24 seats had been formally declared by Saturday morning—with RSP capturing 18—the emerging pattern suggests a potential two-thirds majority in the 275-member House of Representatives. The proportional representation counting process, determining 110 additional seats, may require approximately one week for completion according to commission estimates.

    Despite enthusiastic celebrations by RSP supporters in Kathmandu streets, party leadership has urged restraint pending final results. Deputy Chairman DP Aryal emphasized via social media that while electoral trends appear favorable, official celebration should await conclusive outcomes. The electoral process continues unimpeded from high-altitude mountain regions to southern plains bordering India, with full direct election results anticipated by Monday.

  • Canada’s Mark Carney tries to strike a balance on Iran

    Canada’s Mark Carney tries to strike a balance on Iran

    Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney finds himself navigating intense domestic criticism while attempting to maintain a delicate diplomatic equilibrium regarding U.S.-Israeli military operations in Iran. As Canada urgently works to evacuate its citizens from the escalating conflict zone, the nation confronts the unsettling possibility of being drawn into a broadening regional war.

    Carney initially voiced robust support for the strikes when they commenced one week ago, emphasizing the imperative of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear capabilities and curbing the regime’s capacity to “further threaten international peace and security.” However, within days, the Prime Minister characterized his position as one adopted “with regret,” acknowledging that the military action appeared “inconsistent with international law.”

    During meetings with Australian counterpart Anthony Albanese, Carney jointly advocated for “rapid de-escalation” of hostilities. While Canada’s initial response demonstrated greater firmness than European allies including the UK, France and Germany—who collectively condemned Tehran while urging renewed negotiations—Carney now appears to be steering toward a more nuanced diplomatic course.

    This recalibration mirrors evolving positions among Western nations. France has augmented its regional military presence following Iranian strikes on its facilities in the United Arab Emirates. The United Kingdom has authorized American utilization of British bases for defensive operations, evidenced by the arrival of a U.S. B-1 Lancer bomber capable of delivering 24 cruise missiles. Germany has positioned its forces for potential defensive measures, though Chancellor Friedrich Merz has cautioned against entanglement in “endless wars.”

    Carney has refrained from unequivocally excluding Canadian military involvement, stating the nation “will stand by our allies, when it makes sense.” This ambiguity has provoked substantial dissent within his Liberal Party. Former Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy published a scathing critique in the Toronto Star, contrasting current policy with Canada’s refusal to endorse the 2003 Iraq invasion, noting “we are embracing the very doctrine we used to reject.”

    Liberal MP Will Greaves denounced endorsing “unilateral and illegal use of military force” while simultaneously defending national sovereignty—an apparent reference to former President Donald Trump’s suggestions regarding Canadian statehood. Opposition Conservatives have dismissed Carney’s approach as “contradictory” and “incoherent.”

    University of Ottawa Professor Roland Paris observed that Carney’s stance proved “difficult to decipher,” suggesting the controversy demonstrates the implementation challenges of the pragmatic international vision the Prime Minister outlined in his January Davos address. That speech, which garnered global attention, urged middle powers to unite against great power dominance while advocating UN Charter-aligned principled foreign policy.

    Professor Thomas Juneau posited that Carney’s positioning likely reflects necessary management of relations with the Trump administration, given Canada’s substantial economic dependence on U.S. trade and impending high-stakes negotiations. Juneau noted that while Canada gains nothing from endorsing the conflict, it risks significant losses by opposing an “easily irritated Trump.”

    Foreign Minister Anita Anand subsequently clarified that Canada has “no intention to participate in Operation Epic Fury,” emphasizing diplomatic efforts prioritizing de-escalation and civilian protection. Defence Staff Gen Jennie Carignan simultaneously indicated that “Gulf partners may require defence and support,” leaving military options theoretically available.

    Anand welcomed diverse perspectives within Liberal ranks ahead of caucus discussions on the crisis, acknowledging respectful disagreement while coordinating evacuation efforts for Canadians in the region. Recent polling by Angus Reid indicates a divided populace, with 48% opposing the strikes, 35% supporting, and 17% remaining uncertain.

  • Swiss to vote on right-wing push to slash licence fee for public broadcaster

    Swiss to vote on right-wing push to slash licence fee for public broadcaster

    Switzerland faces a pivotal moment in its media landscape as citizens head to the polls this weekend to determine the funding future of their national broadcaster. The referendum centers on a proposal to slash the annual license fee for Swiss Broadcasting Corporation (SBC) from 335 Swiss francs (£320; $435) to 200 francs (£190; $260) per household, while completely exempting businesses from the charge.

    The initiative, championed by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party, argues that the current fee represents an unjustified financial burden during a cost-of-living crisis. Party parliamentarian Manfred Bühler contends that modern production technologies enable cheaper programming than decades ago, making the reduced amount sufficient. The proposal has gained traction among younger demographics who increasingly favor streaming services over traditional broadcasting.

    Opposition forces, including all political parties except the People’s Party, warn that funding cuts would devastate Switzerland’s unique multilingual broadcasting model. The SBC maintains separate services in all four national languages—German, French, Italian, and Romansh—which critics say is essential for national cohesion in the linguistically diverse nation. Social Democrat MP Fabian Molina emphasizes that these services ensure equal treatment of all regions and linguistic communities.

    The debate took an unexpected turn when Russian state-backed outlet RT published an article under a likely pseudonym urging Swiss voters to support the fee reduction while accusing SBC of ‘Russophobia’ and ‘manipulation.’ This intervention backfired dramatically, with many Swiss perceiving it as foreign interference in their direct democracy system. Anti-populist groups responded with posters featuring images of Vladimir Putin, Viktor Orbán, and Donald Trump alongside the message: ‘Don’t do autocrats any favours.’

    The SBC has warned that approval of the measure would result in hundreds of job losses, reduced international coverage from its correspondents worldwide, and diminished sports programming—including the UEFA Champions League and winter sports where Switzerland excels. Recent opinion polls indicate 54-57% of voters now oppose the cut, suggesting the RT intervention may have swayed undecided voters toward preserving the current funding model.

  • China spent years building ties in Latin America. Can Trump make room for the US?

    China spent years building ties in Latin America. Can Trump make room for the US?

    In a strategic move to reassert U.S. influence across the Western Hemisphere, former President Donald Trump is convening a high-profile gathering of Latin American and Caribbean leaders at his golf club this Saturday. Dubbed the ‘Shield of the Americas Summit,’ this event marks a concerted effort to rally regional allies around U.S. national security interests while actively countering China’s expanding economic and political footprint.

    The geopolitical landscape has shifted dramatically over the past decade, with China emerging as the region’s predominant trading partner and infrastructure financier. From the massive $3.5 billion Chancay megaport development in Peru to Bogotá’s metro system in Colombia, Beijing has cemented its presence through substantial investments totaling approximately $153 billion between 2014-2023—triple the U.S. contribution during the same period.

    Trump’s diplomatic offensive features Kristi Noem as special envoy, despite her recent dismissal as Homeland Security Secretary. She will engage with conservative leaders from eight nations including Argentina, Paraguay, El Salvador, and Ecuador—all sharing ideological alignment with Trump’s administration. Notably absent are regional heavyweights Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia.

    According to security analysts, the summit agenda will prioritize combating drug trafficking, managing migration flows, counter-terrorism cooperation, and most significantly, curbing Beijing’s hemispheric influence. Professor Evan Ellis of the U.S. Army War College characterizes the event as essentially ‘a Latin American CPAC,’ referencing the Conservative Political Action Conference that gathers right-leaning U.S. politicians.

    The Trump administration has explicitly stated its objectives: to ‘enlist and expand’ U.S. partnerships while limiting Chinese engagement throughout the Americas, including preventing strategic military footholds. This approach has already yielded tangible results, from Venezuela’s political upheaval to Panama’s Supreme Court revoking a Hong Kong company’s canal contracts earlier this year.

    However, experts caution that meaningful relationship-building requires more than military posturing and economic pressure. Enrique Dussel Peters, economics professor at Mexico’s National Autonomous University, notes that U.S. policies like ‘America First,’ foreign aid reductions, and tariffs have inadvertently driven regional governments closer to China, which has pursued a decades-long strategic vision for Latin America.

    China’s economic penetration extends beyond traditional infrastructure into next-generation technologies including 5G networks, electric vehicles, and artificial intelligence. Twenty nations have joined Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative, while free trade agreements with Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and Peru have fueled commercial exchanges that skyrocketed from under 2% of regional exports in 2000 to over $450 billion by 2021.

    Despite concerns about debt diplomacy and lower environmental standards, China continues investing strategically in resources like the ‘lithium triangle’ spanning Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile—home to 56% of global lithium reserves. President Xi Jinping recently announced a 9 billion yuan credit line for this mineral-rich corridor.

    As regional nations attempt to balance relationships between competing powers, Professor Facundo Robles of Argentina’s National Defense University suggests the optimal outcome would be diversified economic partnerships rather than binary alignment. With Trump scheduled to meet Xi Jinping on March 31st, Latin American countries hope to avoid becoming casualties in a great-power competition that constrains their strategic options.