标签： Oceania

For a U.S. leader famous for his bombastic, high-profile approach to global affairs, Donald Trump’s newest strategy on Iran marks a striking departure. The American president has confirmed he is prioritizing sweeping economic sanctions over direct military strikes or high-stakes diplomatic negotiations, leaning on financial pressure to weaken Iran’s position amid the ongoing regional conflict.

“We are low-keying it,” Trump told news outlet Axios in a phone interview Sunday. “We are only semi-negotiating with them. We are just watching Iran with its huge inflation and the fact they have no money.” Though the president has repeatedly insisted he is keeping all options on the table—including the possibility of targeted military action against Tehran—he has centered his public messaging on the deep economic harm U.S. sanctions have inflicted on the Islamic Republic.

Speaking from the Oval Office Monday, Trump claimed “Iran is broke, totally broke and they’re not paying their soldiers.” In a recent post to his Truth Social platform Wednesday, he doubled down on assertions that Iran’s annual inflation rate has surged past 300 percent. He also argued there is no immediate need for military intervention, asserting that the U.S. maintains “total control” over the Strait of Hormuz—the critical global oil shipping chokepoint that has emerged as the central flashpoint in U.S.-Iran tensions during the ongoing Israel-Hamas war.

Independent experts broadly agree that U.S. sanctions have taken a heavy toll on Iran’s economy, even if they dispute some of Trump’s more dramatic claims. “Iran is in terrible shape economically. It can’t ship oil at any meaningful level. And it still labors under sanctions and still can’t access its overseas assets,” explained Michael O’Hanlon, a senior foreign policy expert at the Washington-based Brookings Institution. “The question is, do its leaders really care? I think they care some, but not a lot.”

The shift to a low-key sanctions-focused approach marks a notable change for Trump, who just weeks ago threatened to launch the most devastating military strikes against Iran since World War II. For the past five months, as the Israel-Gaza conflict has drawn in regional actors, Trump has alternated between apocalyptic threats of military action and vague promises of imminent diplomatic breakthroughs. Now, he appears to have put both on hold.

At the end of July, the Trump administration rolled out new sanctions targeting Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the ideological backbone of Iran’s military apparatus. According to reporting from The Wall Street Journal, Trump’s national security advisors have presented him with detailed data on the impact of existing sanctions, and the president is currently weighing both tightening current restrictions and imposing new, stricter measures.

Analysts suggest the strategic shift also reflects growing constraints on U.S. military capabilities. Multiple U.S. media outlets have reported that American conventional munitions stockpiles have been severely depleted after months of resupplying Israel and supporting ongoing operations in the Middle East, leaving fewer military options ready for immediate deployment against Iran.

Iranian officials have dismissed Trump’s new sanctions push as a sign of U.S. weakness. “Whenever Washington proves itself incapable of pursuing diplomacy it retreats into sanctions; and whenever those sanctions fail to produce results, it simply increases the dose,” Esmaeil Baqaei, spokesman for Iran’s foreign ministry, wrote in a post on X this week. Baqaei noted that Iran has withstood decades of U.S. sanctions, adding that the new pressure campaign “strangle their own remaining chances of a less humiliating exit from a crisis of their own making.” Responding to Trump’s comparison of the conflict to a chess match, Baqaei told reporters “Iranians have shown they are professional chess players.”

The biggest open question remains whether Trump—an notoriously impulsive leader known for preferring the spectacle of high-profile confrontation and flashy policy wins over slow, incremental pressure—will stick to this new long-term strategy.

U.S. President Donald Trump announced Wednesday that 28-year-old White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, the youngest person to ever hold the top presidential spokesperson role in American history, will depart her post at the end of this month. In a social media statement confirming the move, Trump confirmed that Leavitt will transition to a new position as one of his top senior outside advisors, and highlighted her ongoing influence within the Republican Party. The announcement comes just weeks after Leavitt returned to her White House duties following the birth of her second child, and comes amid sinking approval ratings for Trump and growing concerns that the Republican Party could lose control of Congress in the upcoming November midterm elections.

Widely known for her sharp, often confrontational retorts to journalists during daily press briefings, Leavitt has built a reputation as one of Trump’s most fiercely loyal allies. Over her tenure in the press secretary role, she delivered sharp, quick-witted and unapologetically aggressive performances during the regular, often combative briefings that she revived after the practice faded during Trump’s first presidential term between 2017 and 2021.

Leavitt explained her decision to step down in a concurrent social media post, noting that after returning to work following her daughter Viviana’s birth in May, she realized she could not meet the intense demands of the press secretary role while also being the attentive parent her two young children need. Trump echoed that framing in his announcement, saying Leavitt was leaving her current role to prioritize more time with her young family.

Leavitt’s personal connection to the Trump movement stretches back nearly a decade. A veteran of Trump’s first White House term, she served as a junior member of the press office before his 2021 departure, then stepped into the role as national spokesperson for his 2024 presidential re-election campaign. She earned Trump’s public praise for her unflinching, steely performances in cable news interviews during that campaign, which helped cement her status as a rising star in pro-Trump conservative circles.

During her time as press secretary, Leavitt oversaw a fundamental shift in how the White House interacts with the national press corps. In February 2025, she drew widespread shock and criticism from journalists when she announced the White House would take over control of selecting which reporters receive access to close-up coverage of Trump, including in the Oval Office and on Air Force One — a responsibility that had previously been held by the independent White House Correspondents’ Association. She also oversaw a major shift in press credentialing, approving access for dozens of right-wing, pro-Trump outlet while reducing the presence of traditional mainstream news organizations that regularly ask critical questions of the administration in press briefings.

The move to delay Leavitt’s maternity earlier this year came amid extraordinary circumstances. Just days before Viviana’s scheduled birth in May, an assailant attempted to storm the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in an alleged assassination attempt targeting Trump. Leavitt chose to delay her leave to manage the administration’s response to the incident before stepping away for maternity leave.

Before her rise to national politics, Leavitt grew up in New Hampshire, where her family owned and operated a local ice cream shop. She first emerged as a public pro-Trump voice in 2017, when she wrote a letter to her university campus newspaper protesting a professor who had publicly criticized Trump during a lecture. After Trump’s 2020 re-election defeat, she launched an unsuccessful bid for a U.S. House seat in New Hampshire in 2022, running on a staunchly pro-Trump, pro-gun platform.

Leavitt made clear Wednesday that her exit from the press secretary role does not mark the end of her political work. “My fight is entering a new phase, but it is far from over,” she wrote, adding that she believes “our country is facing an existential threat from an increasingly extremist Democrat Party that seeks to destroy everything great about America.” In her statement, she also expressed gratitude for the opportunity to serve as press secretary, noting she was proud of her work holding what she called “the liberal media” accountable and sharing what she frames as the truth of the Trump administration’s policy successes with the American public.

Former Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji, whose bold market-oriented reforms reshaped China’s economy and set the foundation for its decades-long rapid expansion, has passed away at the age of 96. Official state news agency Xinhua announced that Zhu died Wednesday morning in Beijing following a prolonged illness, after medical interventions were unsuccessful.

Zhu assumed the office of Premier in 1998, and quickly cemented his reputation as a decisive, results-driven advocate for free-market adjustments to China’s previously state-dominated economic system. Among his most impactful policy overhauls was a large-scale privatization initiative for unprofitable state-owned enterprises, the end of decades of state-provided urban housing, and the rollout of a national private home ownership system.

His reforms triggered an unprecedented boom in China’s real estate and construction sectors, which eventually grew to account for nearly a quarter of the country’s total gross domestic product ahead of the 2020 national property debt crisis. Beyond domestic restructuring, Zhu’s leadership is widely credited with shielding China from the most severe damage of the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, when most regional economies suffered crippling downturns. He also spearheaded years of grueling negotiations that culminated in China’s historic accession to the World Trade Organization in 2001, a milestone that cemented China’s transition from a largely closed, centrally planned economy to a central player in global trade.

A joint obituary issued by China’s highest ruling political bodies, carried by Xinhua, hailed Zhu as a revolutionary leader whose lifetime of service was dedicated entirely to the Communist cause and the Chinese people. “The life of comrade Zhu Rongji was a life of revolution, a life of struggle, a life of glory,” the obituary stated. “It was a life dedicated wholeheartedly to serving the people, one given to the communist cause. His passing is a major loss for the Party and the country.” The obituary also characterized Zhu as “an outstanding member of the Communist Party of China, a long-tested and loyal communist fighter… an outstanding leader of the Party and the state.”
While Zhu’s reforms lifted hundreds of millions of Chinese citizens out of poverty, they also introduced new levels of economic inequality across the country. In the years following Xi Jinping’s rise to China’s top leadership in 2012, Zhu’s unapologetic market-first approach fell out of step with the current policy direction. Under Xi, Beijing has cracked down on unregulated capitalist expansion, moved to address wealth inequality, reined in monopolistic private firms, and pursued a more balanced development model. The obituary emphasized that the public should channel grief into strength, carry forward Zhu’s revolutionary spirit, and rally more closely around the Party Central Committee headed by Xi Jinping.

News of Zhu’s death quickly dominated domestic social media, rising to the number one trending spot on Weibo within hours of the official announcement. By midday, the top trending topic had accumulated more than 190 million views, with thousands of users leaving tributes. One top comment reading “The people’s good premier, rest in peace” earned more than 17,000 likes, while countless users shared candle emojis to express their remembrance.

CANBERRA – The Australian federal government is moving forward with a revised set of rules aimed at compelling global tech and social media giants to compensate local news publishers for their journalistic content, bringing the long-awaited News Bargaining Incentive and accompanying News Journalism Payments Bill to parliament on Thursday. The legislation marks the final step in a months-long consultation and amendment process that has split the government and leading Australian media industry figures, who warn the changes weaken the core purpose of the original policy.

First drafted in April, the bill has undergone multiple rounds of revision following negotiations between Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s Labor government and opposition leader Angus Taylor. The final version, tabled on the closing day of Canberra’s first spring sitting week, includes several key shifts from earlier proposals. Most notably, the maximum tax penalty for platforms that refuse to strike voluntary deals with local media outlets has been lifted from 2.25% to 2.5% – but the penalty will now only apply to Australia-attributed digital advertising revenue, rather than a company’s total domestic revenue. Industry analysts say this change effectively reduces the total potential financial penalty for non-compliant platforms.

Other adjustments include a steady increase in the minimum number of deals a tech company must sign to clear its legal liability: up from four in the April draft to six in an August iteration, and now to eight in the final bill. The government has also reinstated a 25% cap on the total levy that can be allocated to any single media outlet, a change the government says will ensure fairer distribution of funds to outlets of all sizes. Additionally, 5% of all revenue raised through the incentive scheme will be earmarked for Australian Associated Press, the country’s national newswire.

Communications Minister Anika Wells defended the revisions, framing them as a targeted adjustment to better serve underrepresented outlets in the Australian media ecosystem. “Australians access news in different ways, from different sources,” she said. “Which is why we made changes to the distribution scheme to better support smaller and diverse media organisations.”

Assistant Treasurer Daniel Mulino added that the policy’s core goal remains strengthening Australia’s entire media sector, from large national publishers to small community outlets, recognizing the critical role independent journalism plays in Australian communities. “We also want to ensure the media sector is strengthened from large companies to small ones, recognising the significant benefits strong journalism brings to communities across the nation,” he said.

But leading media industry executives have pushed back hard against the changes, arguing that the revisions water down the scheme’s ability to force large tech platforms to negotiate fairly, effectively gutting the incentive for platforms to strike deals at a time when regulation needs to be tightened, not relaxed.

Michael Miller, executive chairman of News Corp Australasia, one of Australia’s largest media groups, warned that the changes undermine the core purpose of the legislation. “On an already uneven playing field, getting this wrong won’t just hurt Australian media. It will erode the quality and independence of news every Australian relies on,” he said. “Tech giants cannot keep dodging their obligations. Australia deserves full revenue transparency, backed by severe, non-negotiable penalties for any platform that flouts local law.”

Matt Stanton, chief executive of Nine Entertainment, another major Australian media company, echoed those concerns, noting that foreign tech giants already exert massive influence over how Australian audiences access news content. “Independent journalism plays a fundamental role in democracy, holding governments, institutions and businesses to account. In this rapidly changing world this is more important than ever,” he said. “These significant changes, made late in this process, require closer scrutiny to ensure it continues to meet its fundamental purpose: compelling these platforms to negotiate fairly for the journalism they benefit from.”

A new controversy has engulfed Australia’s One Nation party after a resurfaced video showed one of its former electoral candidates making inflammatory and discriminatory claims that homosexuality constitutes a mental illness, prompting senior party figure Barnaby Joyce to mount an unusual defense of the party’s record on LGBTQ+ inclusion.

The comments came from Parminder Singh, who ran unsuccessfully for One Nation for a seat in Western Australia’s Legislative Council during the 2021 state election. The footage of his remarks was captured in a recorded interview with Perth-based comedian Jasky Singh, who operates online under the persona Mr Sikkant, and was recently circulated widely on social media.

In the clip, Singh went beyond his core claim that being gay is a mental illness, also arguing that animals are morally superior to humans because they do not engage in same-sex relationships. He additionally asserted that any woman who has experimented with a same-sex relationship never returns to heterosexual partnerships, claiming women leave men because they feel used and find same-sex relationships more fulfilling. When directly asked by the interviewer whether he believed people are born gay, Singh firmly rejected the idea, repeating his assertion that same-sex orientation is a mental health disorder.

In the wake of the video going public, Barnaby Joyce, One Nation’s senior federal parliamentary representative, stepped forward to defend the party against accusations of systemic homophobia. In an interview with ABC’s Afternoon Briefing, Joyce made the surprising claim that One Nation is “one of the gayest parties in Australia”, arguing the party counts a large share of openly LGBTQ+ members among its ranks.

Joyce condemned Singh’s remarks as highly offensive, noting that LGBTQ+ members of One Nation, like all people, simply want to be accepted rather than glorified or vilified, and contribute meaningfully to the party’s work. While he stopped short of explicitly confirming that Singh had been formally disendorsed by the party, Joyce confirmed that Singh’s profile had been removed from One Nation’s official website as of Wednesday, adding that removing a former candidate’s profile from the party’s online platform sends a clear signal that his views do not align with the party’s position.

Joyce further framed the incident as a matter of adhering to Australian social norms, arguing that all public expression must stay within the “guardrails” of modern Australian culture, which he described as inherently tolerant and egalitarian. “That’s one of our key policies, we believe in an Australian culture that is tolerant, egalitarian, and has things that are inside the guardrails,” Joyce said, adding that the party rejects any views that fall outside these widely accepted standards.

The opposition Labor Party has been quick to condemn both the remarks and One Nation’s response. Patrick Gorman, a federal Labor MP, took to social media to argue that homophobia has no place in Australian public life, calling Singh’s comments “deeply offensive” and rejecting the hate and discrimination the remarks promote. Gorman noted that Western Australia’s Perth electorate has hosted an annual Pride Parade since 1990, an event he has joined multiple times, framing the parade as a celebration of the region’s long-standing culture of kindness and inclusion for LGBTQ+ people.