agreement

Negotiations to secure a global treaty to combat plastic pollution were in limbo as talks entered their final day after dozens of countries rejected the latest draft text.

With time running out to seal a deal among the 184 countries gathered at the United Nations in Geneva, the talks’ chair, Luis Vayas Valdivieso, produced a draft text based on the few areas of convergence, in an attempt to find common ground.

But the draft succeeded only in infuriating virtually all corners, and the text was immediately shredded as one country after another ripped it to bits.

For the self-styled ambitious countries, it was an empty document shorn of bold action like curbing production and phasing out toxic ingredients, and reduced to a waste management accord.

And for the so-called Like-Minded Group, with Gulf states leading the charge, it crossed too many of their red lines and did not do enough to narrow the scope of what they might be signing up for.

The talks towards a legally binding instrument on tackling plastic pollution opened on August 5 and were scheduled to close on Thursday, the latest attempt after five previous rounds of talks over the past two and a half years which failed to seal an agreement.

Valdivieso’s draft text does not limit plastic production or address chemicals used in plastic products, which have been contentious issues at the talks.

About 100 countries want to limit production as well as tackle cleanup and recycling. Many have said it’s essential to address toxic chemicals. Oil-producing countries only want to eliminate plastic waste.

The larger bloc of countries seeking more ambitious actions blasted what they consider a dearth of legally binding action. But oil-producing states said the text went too far for their liking.

Lowered ambition or ambition for all?

Panama said the goal was to end plastic pollution, not simply to reach an agreement.

“It is not ambition: it is surrender,” their negotiator said.

The European Union said the proposal was “not acceptable” and lacked “clear, robust and actionable measures”, while Kenya said there were “no global binding obligations on anything”.

Tuvalu, speaking for 14 Pacific island developing states, said the draft risked producing a treaty “that fails to protect our people, culture and ecosystem from the existential threat of plastic pollution”.

Britain called it a text that drives countries “towards the lowest common denominator”, and Norway said it was “not delivering on our promise … to end plastic pollution”.

Bangladesh said the draft “fundamentally fails” to reflect the “urgency of the crisis”, saying that it did not address the full life cycle of plastic items, nor their toxic chemical ingredients and their health impacts.

Oil-producing states, which call themselves the Like-Minded Group – and include Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran – want the treaty to focus primarily on waste management.

Kuwait, speaking for the group, said the text had “gone beyond our red lines”, adding that “without consensus, there is no treaty worth signing”.

“This is not about lowering ambition: it’s about making ambition possible for all,” it said.

Saudi Arabia said there were “many red lines crossed for the Arab Group” and reiterated calls for the scope of the treaty to be defined “once and for all”.

The United Arab Emirates said the draft “goes beyond the mandate” for the talks, while Qatar said that without a clear definition of scope, “we don’t understand what obligations we are entering into”.

India, while backing Kuwait, saw the draft as “a good enough starting point ” to go forward on finalising the text.

The draft could now change significantly and a new version is expected on Thursday, the last scheduled day of the negotiations.

With ministers in Geneva for the final day of negotiations, environmental NGOs following the talks urged them to grasp the moment.

The World Wide Fund for Nature said the remaining hours would be “critical in turning this around”.

“The implications of a watered-down, compromised text on people and nature around the world is immense,” and failure on Thursday “means more damage, more harm, more suffering”, it said.

Greenpeace delegation chief Graham Forbes called on ministers to “uphold the ambition they have promised” and address “the root cause: the relentless expansion of plastic production”.

The Center for International Environmental Law’s delegation chief David Azoulay said the draft was a “mockery”, and as for eventually getting to a deal, he said: “It will be very difficult to come back from this.”

More than 400 million tonnes of plastic are produced globally each year, half of which is for single-use items.

Nearly half, or 46 percent, ends up in landfills, while 17 percent is incinerated and 22 percent is mismanaged and becomes rubbish.

KIGALI, Rwanda — Rwanda on Tuesday became the third African nation to agree to accept deportees from the United States under the Trump administration’s plans to send migrants to countries they have no ties with to get them off American soil.

Rwandan government spokesperson Yolande Makolo told The Associated Press in a statement that the East African country would accept up to 250 deportees from the U.S., with “the ability to approve each individual proposed for resettlement” under the agreement.

Makolo didn’t provide a timeline for any deportees to arrive in Rwanda or say if they would arrive at once or in several batches. She said details were still being worked out.

The U.S. sent 13 men it described as dangerous criminals who were in the U.S. illegally to South Sudan and Eswatini in Africa last month and has said it is seeking more agreements with African nations. It said those deportees’ home countries refused to take them back.

The U.S. has also deported hundreds of Venezuelans and others to Costa Rica, El Salvador and Panama under President Trump’s plans to expel people who he says entered the U.S. illegally and are “the worst of the worst.”

Rwanda attracted international attention and some outrage when it struck a deal in 2022 with the U.K. to accept migrants who had arrived in the U.K. to seek asylum. Under that proposed deal, their claims would have been processed in Rwanda and, if successful, they would have stayed there.

The contentious agreement was criticized by rights groups and others as being unethical and unworkable and was ultimately scrapped when Britain’s new Labour government took over. Britain’s Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that the deal was unlawful because Rwanda was not a safe third country for migrants.

The Trump administration has come under scrutiny for the African countries it has entered into secretive deals with to take deportees. It sent eight men from South Sudan, Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar and Vietnam to South Sudan in early July after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling cleared the way for their deportations.

They were held for weeks in a converted shipping container at an American military base in Djibouti as the legal battle over their deportations played out. South Sudan, which is tipping toward civil war, has declined to say where the men are being held or what their fate is.

The U.S. also deported five men who are citizens of Vietnam, Jamaica, Cuba, Yemen and Laos to the southern African kingdom of Eswatini, where the government said they will be held in solitary confinement in prison for an undetermined period of time.

A human rights lawyer in Eswatini said the men are being denied access to legal representation there and has taken authorities to court. Eswatini is Africa’s last absolute monarchy, and the king rules over government and political parties are effectively banned.

Both South Sudan and Eswatini have declined to give details of their agreements with the U.S.

Rwanda, a relatively small country of some 15 million people, has long stood out on the continent for its recovery from a genocide that killed over 800,000 people in 1994. It has promoted itself under longtime President Paul Kagame as an example of stability and development, but human rights groups allege there are also deadly crackdowns on any perceived dissent against Kagame, who has been president for 25 years.

Government spokesperson Makolo said the agreement with the U.S. was Rwanda doing its part to help with international migration issues because “our societal values are founded on reintegration and rehabilitation.”

“Those approved (for resettlement in Rwanda) will be provided with workforce training, healthcare, and accommodation support to jumpstart their lives in Rwanda, giving them the opportunity to contribute to one of the fastest-growing economies in the world over the last decade,” she said. There were no details about whether Rwanda had received anything in return for taking the deportees.

Gonzaga Muganwa, a Rwandan political analyst, said “appeasing President Trump pays.”

“This agreement enhances Rwanda’s strategic interest of having good relationships with the Trump administration,” he said.

The U.K. government estimated that its failed migration deal with Rwanda cost around $900 million in public money, including approximately $300 million in payments to Rwanda, which said it was not obligated to refund the money when the agreement fell apart.

Ssuuna and Imray write for the Associated Press. Imray reported from Cape Town, South Africa.

Aug. 3 (UPI) — Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir visited the al-Aqsa Mosque compound in Jerusalem and prayed there over the weekend, breaking a longstanding agreement that allows Jews to visit the site, but not pray.

The site, located in occupied East Jerusalem, is known by Jews as the Temple Mount, and Ben–Gvir’s prayer prompted a statement from the Israeli prime minister’s office affirming that there has been no change in the decades-old agreement.

Jordan, the site’s custodian, called Ben-Gvir’s actions “an unacceptable provocation.” Hamas called it a “deepening of the ongoing aggressions against our Palestinian people.” A spokesman for Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said the visit “crossed all red lines.”

During his visit, Ben-Gvir called for Israel to “conquer” Gaza and encouraged Palestinians to leave the embattled region.

Temple Mount is the most holy place for Jews as it is the site of two Biblical temples. It is the third most holy site for Muslims, who claim it is where the Prophet Muhammad ascended to heaven.

The Waqf, the Islamic endowment that runs this site, said Ben-Gvir was one of 1,250 Jews who visited the compound Sunday morning.

Ben-Gvir has been convicted of supporting terrorism and inciting anti-Arab racism in Israel in the past.

SEOUL — President Trump announced on Wednesday that the U.S. had struck a trade deal with South Korea, which will now face a 15% tariff on its exports.

Under the deal, South Korea will invest $350 billion in key U.S. industries and purchase $100 billion worth of its liquified natural gas, Trump wrote on social media on Wednesday. He added that further investments would be announced when South Korean President Lee Jae Myung visits Washington in the next two weeks.

The new rate is a significant reduction from the 25% Trump had announced via a letter earlier this month, but still a blow to the longstanding free trade regime that had, for years, kept duties on goods from either country close to zero. Trump has long decried this arrangement as unfair to the U.S., which last year recorded a $66 billion trade deficit with South Korea.

“We are seeing that the negotiations happening in many countries since April are unfolding in a way that is very different from the principles of the WTO or FTA,” said Kim Yong-beom, a senior policy official for South Korea’s presidential office, at a press conference on Thursday. “It is regrettable.”

Kim said that South Korean negotiators had pushed for a 12.5% rate on automobiles — one of the country’s most important exports to the U.S. — but that they had been rebuffed, with Trump firm on his stance that “everybody gets 15%.”

U.S. and South Korean officials appear to be interpreting the deal — whose details are still scant — in different ways.

New cars for export on a car carrier trailer arrive at a port in Pyeongtaek, South Korea, on April 15, 2025.

(Lee Jin-man / Associated Press)

Calling it an “historic trade deal,” commerce secretary Howard Lutnick wrote on social media that “90% of the profits” of South Korea’s $350 billion investment would go “to the American people,” a claim that has immediately raised eyebrows in South Korea.

Trump said something similar about the $550 billion investment package included in the trade deal struck with Japan earlier this month. Japanese officials, on the other hand, have said the profits would be split proportionately, based on the amount of contribution and risk from each side.

At the press conference, Kim said that Seoul is operating under the assumption that 90% of the profits will be “re-invested” — not unilaterally claimed. He added that the specific terms still need to be laid out on a “per-project basis.”

“In a normal civilized country, who would be able to accept that we invest the money while the U.S. takes 90% of the profits?“ he asked.

South Korean President Lee Jae Myung has framed the $350 billion investment as a boost to South Korean shipbuilding, semiconductor and energy companies trying to make inroads into the U.S. markets.

“This agreement is the meeting of the U.S.’ interest in reviving manufacturing and our intention to make South Korea companies more competitive in the U.S. market,” he said in a social media post on Thursday. “I hope that it will strengthen industrial cooperation between South Korea and the U.S. as well as our military alliance.”

While Trump also said that “South Korea will be completely OPEN TO TRADE with the United States, and that they will accept American product including Cars and Trucks, Agriculture, etc,” Kim said that agriculture was not part of the deal and that no concessions on U.S. rice or beef — two major points of contention between Seoul and Washington — were given.

South Korea, which is the world’s top importer of American beef, currently bans beef from cattle that are older than 30 months on concerns it may introduce bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease.

Given its status as a staple crop and a critical source of farmers’ livelihoods, rice is one of the few agricultural goods heavily protected by the South Korean government. Seoul currently imposes a 5% tariff on U.S. rice up to 132,304 tons, and 513% for any excess.

“We were able to successfully defend a lot of our positions in those areas,” Kim said.

July 28 (UPI) — The Trump administration finalized a plan Monday that will help Argentina reinstate visa-free travel for its citizens.

Argentina’s re-entry to the Visa Waiver Program, which is expected to take up to three years before Argentine passport holders can travel without a visa to the United States, was announced Monday by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem following meetings in Buenos Aires.

“Under President Javier Milei’s leadership, Argentina is becoming an even stronger friend to the United States — more committed than ever to border security for both of our nations,” said Noem.

“Argentina now has the lowest visa overstay rate in all of Latin America and 25% more Argentines traveled to the United States in the first four months of this year compared to last year — the biggest jump of any of the top international arrivals,” she added. “That is why we are now taking steps to allow Argentina back into the Visa Waiver Program.”

While Argentina was removed from the Visa Waiver Program in 2002, Monday’s intent to reinstate the country shows a growing support between the two nations and between President Donald Trump and Milei.

The Argentine government called Monday’s signing a “clear demonstration of the excellent relationship” between President Milei and Trump. Last week, a report from J.P. Morgan found a “deep and surprising” recovery in Argentina’s economy under Milei, as the country’s president has managed to lower inflation, secure fiscal balance and strengthen foreign reserves.

Noem signed the agreement along with Argentine Foreign Minister Gerardo Werthein and Argentine Minister of National Security Patricia Bullrich.

“This statement of intent I signed alongside Minister Werthein and Minister Bullrich highlights our strong partnership with Argentina and our mutual desire to promote lawful travel while deterring threats,” Noem said. “This kind of diplomatic leadership, spearheaded by President Trump, will help increase the safety of both countries.”

The Visa Waiver Program requires Argentina meet strong security requirements before final reinstatement, including revised travel policies, enhanced border security and data sharing.

The U.S. Visa Waiver Program allows citizens from certain counties to travel to the United States for business or pleasure for up to 90 days without needing a visa. More than 40 countries, including in Europe and Asia, are already part of the program. Argentina’s inclusion could benefit the country, politically and economically, and raise its global standing.

The United States and the European Union have reached a wide-ranging trade agreement, ending a months-long standoff and averting a full-blown trade war just days before President Donald Trump’s deadline to impose steep tariffs.

The EU will pay 15 percent tariffs on most goods, including cars. The tariff rate is half the 30 percent Trump had threatened to implement starting on Friday. Brussels also agreed on Sunday to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on US weaponry and energy products on top of existing expenditures.

Speaking to reporters at his Turnberry golf resort in Scotland, Trump hailed the agreement as the “biggest deal ever made”. “I think it’s going to be great for both parties. It’s going to bring us closer together,” he added.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the agreement would “bring stability” and “bring predictability that’s very important for our businesses on both sides of the Atlantic”.

Von der Leyen defended the deal, saying the aim was to rebalance a trade surplus with the US. Trump has made no secret of using tariffs to try to trim US trade deficits.

Sunday’s agreement capped off months of often tense shuttle diplomacy between Brussels and Washington although neither side disclosed the full details of the pact or released any written materials.

It follows preliminary trade pacts the US signed with Japan, the United Kingdom, Indonesia, Vietnam and the Philippines and a 90-day trade truce with China.

So how will the deal impact the two sides, which account for almost a third of global trade, and will it end the threats of a tariff war?

What was agreed?

At a news event at Trump’s golf resort, von der Leyen said a 15 percent tariff would apply to European cars, pharmaceuticals and semiconductors – all important products for Europe’s economy.

For his part, Trump said US levies on steel and aluminium, which he has set at 50 percent on many countries, would not be cut for EU products, dashing the hopes of industry in the bloc. Elsewhere, aerospace tariffs will remain at zero for now.

In exchange for the 15 percent tariff rate on EU goods, Trump said the bloc would be “opening up their countries at zero tariff” for American exports.

In addition, he said the EU would spend an extra $750bn on US energy products, invest $600bn in the US and buy military equipment worth “hundreds of billions of dollars”.

Von der Leyen confirmed that the EU would seek to buy an extra $250bn of US energy products each year from now until 2027.

“With this deal, we are securing access to our largest export market,” she said.

At the same time, she acknowledged that the 15 percent tariffs would be “a challenge for some” European industries.

The EU is the US’s largest trading partner with two-way trade in goods and services last year reaching nearly $2 trillion.

How have European leaders responded?

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz welcomed the agreement, saying it avoids “an unnecessary escalation in transatlantic trade relations”.

He said a trade war “would have hit Germany’s export-oriented economy hard”, pointing out that the German car industry would see US tariffs lowered from 27.5 percent to 15 percent.

But French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou called the deal a “dark day” for Europe, saying the bloc had caved in to the US president with an unbalanced deal that spares US imports from any immediate European retaliation.

“It is a dark day when an alliance of free peoples, brought together to affirm their common values and to defend their common interests, resigns itself to submission,” Bayrou wrote on X of what he called the “von der Leyen-Trump deal”.

Wolfgang Niedermark, a board member of the Federation of German Industries trade body, called the deal “an inadequate compromise” with the EU “accepting painful tariffs”.

A 15 percent tariff rate “will have a huge negative impact on Germany’s export-oriented industry”, he said.

Earlier, Benjamin Haddad, France’s European affairs minister, said: “The trade agreement … will bring temporary stability to economic actors threatened by the escalation of American tariffs, but it is unbalanced.”

Echoing that sentiment, Dutch Foreign Trade Minister Hanneke Boerma said the deal was “not ideal” and called on the commission to continue negotiations with Washington.

The European Commission is responsible for negotiating trade deals for the entire bloc.

EU ambassadors will be discussing the agreement with the commission this week.

How was trade conducted before the deal?

On July 12, Trump threatened to impose 30 percent tariffs on EU goods if the two sides couldn’t reach a deal before this Friday, the day a suspension expires on the implementation of what Trump calls his “reciprocal tariffs”, which he placed on nearly all countries in the world.

Those “reciprocal tariffs” are due to come into effect in addition to the 25 percent tariffs on cars and car parts and the 50 percent levy on steel and aluminium products Trump already put in place.

On the European side, it is understood that Brussels would have pushed ahead with a retaliatory tariffs package on 90 billion euros ($109bn) of US goods, including car parts and bourbon, if talks had broken down.

The EU had been a frequent target of escalating trade rhetoric by Trump, who accused the bloc of “ripping off” the US.

In 2024, the US ran a $235.6bn goods deficit with the EU. Pharmaceuticals, car parts and industrial chemicals were among Europe’s largest exports to the US, according to EU data.

How will the deal impact the US and EU?

Bloomberg Economics estimated that a no-deal outcome would have raised the effective US tariff rate on European goods to nearly 18 percent on Friday.

The new deal brings that number down to 16 percent, offering a small reprieve to European exporting firms. Still, current trade barriers are much higher than before Trump took office in 2025.

According to Bruegel, a research group, the average US tariff rate on EU exports was just 1.5 percent at the end of 2024.

William Lee, chief economist at the Milken Institute, told Al Jazeera: “I think the [Trump] strategy has been clear from the very beginning. … It’s brinkmanship. … Either partner with the US or face high tariffs.”

Meanwhile, US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said: “President Trump just unlocked one of the biggest economies in the world. The European Union is going to open its $20 trillion market and completely accept our auto and industrial standards for the first time ever.”

July 25 (UPI) — Britain and Australia confirmed Friday that they would proceed with a $245 billion nuclear-powered submarine deal as part of a defense pact between the two countries and the United States — despite Washington rethinking its involvement.

Following a meeting, Australian Defense Secretary Richard Marles said he and British Defense Secretary John Healey would sign a 50-year cooperation treaty on Saturday to deliver an Australian fleet of submarines, powered by British nuclear reactors.

Marles hailed the deal, part of a trilateral security pact signed in 2021, as the most significant U.K.-Australian treaty signed in the 124-year history of modern Australia.

The AUKUS alliance, aimed at countering China’s military rise in the Asia-Pacific, called for Australia to be armed with eight nuclear submarines, three repurposed from the United States’ existing fleet and the remainder a new SSN-AUKUS submarine that Australia and Britain would build together.

However, concerns were raised that the first U.S. submarines wouldn’t be handed to Australia within the timeline of the early 2030s because U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is reviewing the Biden administration-brokered AUKUS and the U.S. submarine pipeline was behind time.

Healey said they welcomed Hegseth’s review as a chance for the new administration of U.S. President Donald Trump to “renew their commitment,” which he said he fully expected to happen.

Marles said last month that he was “very confident” the United States would remain in AUKUS because of its strategic benefit to all three countries.

The pact came into force three days before Trump was sworn in as the 47th president of the United States in January, triggering a review to ensure it is a fit with his “America First” policy.

In a meeting in Singapore in June, Hegseth told Marles that Australia should increase defense spending to 3.5% of GDP.

Elbridge Colby, the U.S. defense official carrying out Hegseth’s review, has said AUKUS could compromise national security if the United States were to begin selling its Virginia-class submarines to Australia in the early 2030s, as per the original agreement.

Neither Healey nor Marles would say whether the two countries would go it alone with building the submarines if the United States opted to withdraw.

The Australia-U.K. treaty encompasses a comprehensive framework to develop the necessary infrastructure and workforce in Australia to build, operate and support the submarine program, with the deal providing a boost to British exports of more than $26 billion by 2050.

“Through the treaty, we are supporting high-skilled, well-paid jobs for tens of thousands of people in both the U.K. and Australia,” said Healey.

Australian Strategic Policy Institute senior analyst Euan Graham said the new treaty was not sending a message to the Trump administration but was “more of a reflection that AUKUS has always been a 3-way arrangement, and that the U.K.-Australia side of the triangle is vital to its success.”

He said the program would also produce economies of scale, allowing Britain’s Royal Navy to increase its nuclear fleet from seven to 12 submarines.

India and Britain are set to sign a major free trade deal to cut tariffs on goods and increase market access for the two countries.

India will lower tariffs on British goods, including whisky, gin and other drinks as well as cars. The UK, in turn, will import more of India’s textiles, gemstones and other goods.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is in the UK to sign the deal. He will also hold talks with Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and meet King Charles during his brief stay.

The UK government says the deal – announced in May after years of negotiations – will boost the British economy by £4.8bn a year. It comes after nearly three years of negotiations.

Negotiations on the deal concluded in May and the pact is expected to boost bilateral trade by an additional £25.5bn a year by 2040. Last year, trade between the UK and India totalled £42.6bn.

But it might take at least a year for the deal to come into effect after it is approved by the UK parliament. The deal was okayed by the Indian cabinet earlier this week, news agency PTI reported on Tuesday.

In May, Modi said the deal was a historic milestone that was “ambitious and mutually beneficial”.

The pact would help “catalyse trade, investment, growth, job creation, and innovation in both our economies”, he said in a post on social media platform X.

It’s his fourth visit to the UK since becoming India’s prime minister in 2014.

On Wednesday, Sir Keir called the “landmark” deal a major win for Britain.

“It will create thousands of British jobs across the UK, unlock new opportunities for businesses and drive growth,” he said.

Indian manufacturers are also expected to gain access to the UK market for electric and hybrid vehicles.

The two leaders are also expected to discuss last month’s crash of an Air India jet in which 260 people died when a London-bound flight crashed in Ahmedabad in Gujarat in western India.

ATLANTA — Major League Baseball will not cancel its 2028 All-Star Game in order to participate in the Los Angeles Olympics, Commissioner Rob Manfred said Tuesday.

Manfred said representatives of the league and LA28 met Monday, with both sides hoping to work toward an agreement in which major leaguers would play in the Olympics. MLB has declined to stop its season for previous Olympic baseball tournaments, so minor leaguers and college players have participated in those Games.

But Manfred also warned that any agreement likely would apply only to the L.A. Games, where major leaguers could be done in a week. If baseball remains on the Olympic schedule for Brisbane in 2032, MLB would remain reluctant to shut down for the extended period needed to get players to Australia, allow them to prepare and play, and then return to their major league teams.

“I think that the idea of playing in L.A. in ‘28, regardless of the possibility of ongoing Olympic participation in another location, that there is some merit to it,” Manfred said at a meeting of the Baseball Writers Assn. of America.

“I think it is an opportunity to market the game on a really global stage. I think, obviously, because it is in the U.S., the logistics of it are easier.”

On Monday, LA28 announced that baseball would be played July 15-20, 2028, intended as an inducement for MLB to minimize schedule disruption by skipping the All-Star Game for that year and switching to the Olympics in the same week.

Manfred indicated the league’s preference would be to play the All-Star Game in its usual window, then compete in the Olympics and resume the regular season.

“It’s doable,” Manfred said. “They put out a schedule. They tell you it’s not going to move. We’ll see whether there is any movement on that.

“It is possible to play the All-Star Game in its normal spot, have a single break that would be longer, but still play 162 games without bleeding into the middle of November. It would require significant accommodations, but it is possible.”

WASHINGTON — A divided federal appeals court on Friday threw out an agreement that would have allowed accused Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to plead guilty in a deal sparing him the risk of execution for al Qaeda’s 2001 attacks.

The decision by a panel of the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., undoes an attempt to wrap up more than two decades of military prosecution beset by legal and logistical troubles. It signals there will be no quick end to the long struggle by the U.S. military and successive administrations to bring to justice the man charged with planning one of the deadliest attacks ever on the United States.

The deal, negotiated over two years and approved by military prosecutors and the Pentagon’s senior official for Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a year ago, stipulated life sentences without parole for Mohammed and two co-defendants.

Mohammed is accused of developing and directing the plot to crash hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Another of the hijacked planes flew into a field in Pennsylvania.

The men also would have been obligated to answer any lingering questions that families of the victims have about the attacks.

But then-Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin repudiated the deal, saying a decision on the death penalty in an attack as grave as Sept. 11 should only be made by the defense secretary.

Attorneys for the defendants had argued that the agreement was already legally in effect and that Austin, who served under President Joe Biden, acted too late to try to throw it out. A military judge at Guantanamo and a military appeals panel agreed with the defense lawyers.

But, by a 2-1 vote, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found Austin acted within his authority and faulted the military judge’s ruling.

The panel had previously put the agreement on hold while it considered the appeal, first filed by the Biden administration and then continued under President Donald Trump.

“Having properly assumed the convening authority, the Secretary determined that the ‘families and the American public deserve the opportunity to see military commission trials carried out.’ The Secretary acted within the bounds of his legal authority, and we decline to second-guess his judgment,” Judges Patricia Millett and Neomi Rao wrote.

Millett was an appointee of President Barack Obama while Rao was appointed by Trump.

In a dissent, Judge Robert Wilkins, an Obama appointee, wrote, “The government has not come within a country mile of proving clearly and indisputably that the Military Judge erred.”

Sherman writes for the Associated Press.

TEL AVIV — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Trump might look to take a victory lap on Monday after their recent joint strikes on Iran, hailed by both as an unmitigated success.

But as they meet for the third time this year, the outwardly triumphant visit will be dogged by Israel’s 21-month war against Hamas in Gaza and questions over how hard Trump will push for an end to the conflict.

Trump has made clear that following the 12-day war between Israel and Iran, he would like to see the Gaza conflict end soon. The meeting between Trump and Netanyahu could give new urgency to a U.S. ceasefire proposal being discussed by Israel and Hamas, but whether it leads to a deal that ends the war is unclear.

“The optics will be very positive,” said Michael Oren, a former Israeli ambassador to Washington. “But behind the victory lap are going to be some very serious questions.”

Before departing for Washington on Sunday, Netanyahu praised the cooperation with the U.S. for bringing a “huge victory over our shared enemy.” He struck a positive note on a ceasefire for Gaza, saying he was working “to achieve the deal under discussion, on the terms we agreed to.”

“I think that the discussion with President Trump can certainly help advance that result, which all of us hope for,” Netanyahu said.

‘It changes from day to day’

Israel and Hamas appear to be inching toward a new ceasefire agreement that would bring about a 60-day pause in the fighting, send aid flooding into Gaza and free at least some of the remaining 50 hostages held in the territory.

But a perennial sticking point is whether the ceasefire will end the war altogether. Hamas has said it is willing to free all the hostages in exchange for an end to the war and a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. Netanyahu says the war will end once Hamas surrenders, disarms and goes into exile — something it refuses to do.

Trump has made it clear that he wants to be known as a peacemaker. He has repeatedly trumpeted recent peace deals that his administration facilitated between India and Pakistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda, and Israel and Iran, and for years has made little secret of the fact that he covets a Nobel Peace Prize.

He has been pressuring Israel and Hamas to wrap up their own conflict, which has killed tens of thousands of Palestinians, ravaged Gaza, deepened Israel’s international isolation and made any resolution to the broader conflict between Israel and the Palestinians more distant than ever.

But the precise details of the deal, and whether it can lead to an end to the war, are still in flux. In the days before Netanyahu’s visit, Trump seemed to downplay the chances for a breakthrough.

Asked on Friday how confident he was a ceasefire deal would come together, Trump told reporters: “I’m very optimistic — but you know, look, it changes from day to day.”

On Sunday evening, he seemed to narrow his expectation, telling reporters that he thought an agreement related to the remaining hostages would be reached in the coming week.

Leaders are more in sync than ever

Those mood swings also have embodied Trump’s relationship with Netanyahu.

After Trump’s decision to get involved in Israel’s war in Iran with strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, the two leaders are more in sync than ever. But that’s not always been the case.

As recently as Netanyahu’s last visit to Washington in April, the tone was markedly different.

Trump used the photo-op with Netanyahu to announce that the U.S. was entering into negotiations with Iran over its nuclear deal — appearing to catch the Israeli leader off guard and at the time, slamming the brakes on any Israeli military plan.

He also praised Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a fierce critic of Israel’s, in front of Netanyahu, and the two made no apparent progress on a trade deal at the height of Trump’s tariff expansion.

Trump, whose policies have largely aligned with Israel’s own priorities, pledged last week to be “very firm” with Netanyahu on ending the war, without saying what that would entail. Pressure by Trump has worked on Netanyahu in the past, with a ceasefire deal having been reached right as the president was taking office again.

Netanyahu has to balance the demands of his American ally with the far-right parties in his governing coalition who hold the key to his political survival and oppose ending the war.

But given the strong U.S. support in Israel’s war against Iran, highlighted by joint airstrikes on a fortified underground Iranian nuclear site, Netanyahu may have a tough time saying no.

On Sunday evening, Trump said one of the matters he expected to discuss with Netanyahu “is probably a permanent deal with Iran.”

Trump also may expect something in return for his recent calls for Netanyahu’s corruption trial to be canceled — a significant interference in the domestic affairs of a sovereign state.

“Trump thinks that Netanyahu owes him,” said Eytan Gilboa, an expert on U.S.-Israel affairs at Bar-Ilan University near Tel Aviv. “And if Trump thinks that he needs to end the war In Gaza, then that is what he will need to do.”

Trump’s regional vision

The two men will likely discuss the ceasefire with Iran and how to respond to any perceived violations.

But beyond Iran is Trump’s grand vision for a new Middle East, where he hopes that additional countries will join the Abraham Accords, a series of agreements normalizing relations between Arab countries and Israel brokered during Trump’s first term.

Netanyahu and Trump are likely to discuss how to bring Syria into the fold. The country, a longtime enemy of Israel’s, has new leadership after the fall of President Bashar Assad, and experts say conditions might be ripe for some kind of nonbelligerency agreement.

But Trump’s ultimate goal is to include regional powerhouse Saudi Arabia.

The Saudis, whose clout could open the door for other Arab or Muslim countries to join, have expressed interest in normalizing ties with Israel but only if it is accompanied by serious steps toward resolving Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians. For starters, that would seem to require action in Gaza.

“The most important thing [for Trump] is to end the war in Gaza,” Gilboa said. “That is the key to all the regional peace in the Middle East.”

Goldenberg and Price write for the Associated Press. Price reported from Washington.

WASHINGTON — President Trump announced a trade deal with Vietnam on Wednesday that would allow U.S. goods to enter the country duty-free.

Vietnamese exports to the United States, by contrast, would face a 20% levy.

On his Truth Social platform, Trump declared the pact “a Great Deal of Cooperation between our two Countries.’’

In April, Trump announced a 46% tax on Vietnamese imports — one of his so-called reciprocal tariffs targeting dozens of countries with which the United States runs trade deficits. Trump promptly suspended the reciprocal tariffs for 90 days to allow for negotiations like the one with Vietnam. The pause expires Tuesday, but so far the Trump administration has reached a trade agreement with only one of those countries — the United Kingdom. (Trump has also reached a “framework’’ agreement with China in a separate trade dispute.)

“Vietnam has been very keen to get out from under this,’’ said Mary Lovely, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. “This is forcing a smaller country to eat it, basically. We can do that. It’s the big countries that everybody’s keeping their eyes on.’’ She doubts that Trump will be able to impose such a lopsided agreement on big trading partners such as the European Union and Japan.

The United States last year ran a $122-billion trade deficit with Vietnam. That was the third-biggest U.S. trade gap — the difference between the goods and services it buys from other countries and those it sells them — behind the ones with China and Mexico.

In addition to the 20% tariffs, Trump said the U.S. would impose a 40% tax on “transshipping’’ — goods from another country that stop in Vietnam on their way to the United States. Washington complains that Chinese goods have been dodging higher U.S. tariffs by transiting through Vietnam.

A February study in the Harvard Business Review found that there was “much less rerouting than previously believed.’’

In May, Vietnam approved a $1.5-billion project by the Trump Organization and a local partner to build a massive golf resort complex near Hanoi, covering an area roughly the size of 336 football fields.

Vietnam was a beneficiary of American efforts to counter China’s influence. Companies looking to diversify supply chains away from China flocked to Vietnam.

In 2023, it became the only country to host both former President Joe Biden and Chinese leader Xi Jinping on state visits. That year, the U.S. upgraded Vietnam to its highest diplomatic status — comprehensive strategic partner — placing it on par with China and Russia.

Wiseman and Ghosal write for the Associated Press. Ghosal reported from Hanoi, Vietnam.

GUATEMALA CITY — Guatemala President Bernardo Arévalo said Friday he has not signed an agreement with the United States to take asylum seekers from other countries, pushing back against comments from U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

Noem and Arévalo met Thursday in Guatemala and the two governments publicly signed a joint security agreement that would allow U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers to work in the capital’s airport, training local agents how to screen for terrorism suspects.

But Noem said she had also been given a signed document she called a safe-third-country agreement. She said she reached a similar deal in Honduras and said they were important outcomes of her trip.

Asked about Noem’s comments Friday during a news conference, Arévalo said that nothing new was signed related to immigration and that Guatemala was still operating under an agreement reached with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio in February. That agreement stipulated that Guatemala would continue accepting the deportation of its own citizens, but also citizens of other Central American nations as a transit point on their way home.

Arévalo said that when Rubio visited, safe third country was discussed because Guatemala had signed such an agreement during President Trump’s first term in office. But “we made it clear that our path was different,” Arévalo said.

He did add that Guatemala was willing to provide asylum to Nicaraguans who have been unable to return to their country because of the political situation there out of “solidarity.”

The president’s communications office said Noem had been given the ratification of the agreement reached through diplomatic notes weeks earlier.

During Trump’s first term, the U.S. signed such safe-third-country agreements with Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala. They effectively allowed the U.S. to declare some asylum seekers ineligible to apply for U.S. protection and permitted the U.S. government to send them to those countries deemed “safe.”

Perez writes for the Associated Press.

An EU diplomatic service audit report, seen by Reuters and AFP, looked at Israel’s actions in Gaza and occupied West Bank.

There are indications Israel may have breached its human rights obligations under the terms of a pact governing its ties with the European Union, a review of the agreement shows.

According to an EU document seen by the Reuters and AFP news agencies on Friday, the European External Action Service said that Israel’s actions in Gaza were likely not in line with rules laid out in the EU-Israel Association.

“On the basis of the assessments made by the independent international institutions … there are indications that Israel would be in breach of its human rights obligations,” the audit drafted by the EU’s diplomatic service read.

The report comes after months of deepening concern in European capitals about Israel’s operations in Gaza and the humanitarian situation in the enclave.

“Israel’s continued restrictions to the provision of food, medicines, medical equipment, and other vital supplies affect the entire population of Gaza present on the affected territory,” it said.

The document includes a section dedicated to the situation in Gaza – covering issues related to denial of humanitarian aid, attacks with a significant number of casualties, attacks on medical facilities, displacement and lack of accountability – as well as the situation in the occupied West Bank, including settler violence, Reuters reported.

The document said it relies on “facts verified by and assessments made by independent international institutions, and with a focus on most recent events in Gaza and the West Bank”.

The audit was launched last month in response to the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza, in a push backed by 17 states and spearheaded by the Netherlands.

The EU’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, is expected to present the findings of the report to the bloc’s foreign ministers in Brussels on Monday.

EU-Israel agreement

Under the EU-Israel agreement, which came into effect in 2000, the two parties agreed that their relationship would be based on “respect for human rights and democratic principles”.

Suspending the agreement would require a unanimous decision from the bloc’s 27 members, something diplomats have said from the beginning was virtually impossible.

According to AFP, diplomats have said that they expect Kallas to propose options on a response to the report during the next foreign ministers’ meeting in July.

“The question is … how many member states would still be willing not to do anything and still keep on saying that it’s business as usual,” an unnamed diplomat told the news agency ahead of the review’s findings.

“It’s really important to not fall into the trap of Israel to look somewhere else,” they said.

The EU is Israel’s largest commercial partner, with 42.6 billion euros ($48.2bn) in goods traded in 2024. Trade in services reached 25.6 billion euros ($29.5bn) in 2023.

Israel’s mission to the EU did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment about the contents of the document.

The US and China are finalizing a trade agreement, according to US President Trump.

The deal is said to include the US being able to access Chinese rare earth minerals, while Chinese students can study in the United States.

“Our deal with China is done, subject to final approval from President Xi and me,” Trump wrote.

The US-China trade war tensions were one of several macroeconomic headwinds that have suppressed crypto prices in recent weeks. This new trade agreement could mark the beginning of a new chapter in which the world’s superpowers cooperate rather than oppose one another, thus bolstering economic prosperity.

US inflation data came in yesterday at a lower level than expected, providing another tailwind for crypto prices in the coming weeks.

As more of these catalysts stack up, the potential for crypto prices to explode amplifies. So, what is the best crypto by now?

Solaxy

However, this raises a pressing issue: congestion. During periods of peak network activity, wait times extend and transaction failure rates increase. That’s why Solaxy could be a smart buy. It’s the world’s first Solana layer 2 blockchain.

While Solana can compute 6,500 transactions per second (TPS), Solaxy aims for 10,000. This doesn’t just mean it’s faster; it’ll also be cheaper and more reliable than Solana.

The project is currently undergoing a presale and has raised $47 million to date.

With the market appearing ready for a breakout, Solaxy’s use case firmly positions $SOLX for big price growth. Visit Solaxy.

Snorter

Snorter is another project set to directly benefit from the bullish market conditions.

It’s an automated trading bot that enables users to capitalize on explosive projects, even while they sleep.

Snorter supports Solana, Ethereum, BSC, Base, and Polygon. It offers features such as automated token sniping, copy trading, honeypot detection, and dynamic stop-losses.

Imagine being able to outline trading parameters, and a bot monitors the market 24/7, buying and selling based on your requirements. Or imagine following the moves of the most successful on-chain traders.  Or a tool that automatically detects scam tokens. It’s all possible with Snorter.

It’s also undergoing a presale and has raised $600K so far.

However, with a use case that helps users maximize their profit-making abilities, there’s every chance the $SNORT price will explode after it hits exchanges, especially considering the bullish market outlook. Visit Snorter.

SPX6900

According to SPX6900’s most famous proponent Murad, SPX6900 addresses these issues.

It offers an alternative path, filled with laughter, community, and huge potential for gains. That’s why it’s outperforming the market.

Uniswap

Uniswap is the top decentralized exchange (DEX) on Ethereum and the industry’s leading DEX coin by market cap.

While there’s no doubt that Solana leads the way in terms of active users, Ethereum  remains the go-to chain for crypto whales.

It has a total value locked of $65 billion, over 7 times more than Solana. This is why Uniswap has real growth potential.

But Uniswap is more than a DEX; it also has its own crypto wallet app and even its own Ethereum layer 2 blockchain, Unichain.

It’s a multifunctional ecosystem built on top of Ethereum’s robust liquidity infrastructure. As the Ethereum ecosystem heats up in the bull market, Uniswap will likely soar.

Uniswap is also one of the better-performing altcoins this week, with a 26% gain.

Best Wallet Token

Best Wallet Token is the new cryptocurrency that powers Best Wallet. It offers trading fee discounts, higher staking yields, governance rights, and access to promotions on partner projects.

Best Wallet is quickly making a name for itself in the cryptocurrency industry, thanks to its comprehensive range of features and cross-chain functionality, with support for over 90 different blockchains.

Some of Best Wallet’s features include a cross-chain DEX, derivative trading, a crypto debit card, a presale aggregator, an NFT gallery, and much more.

It’s the first crypto wallet to boast such an extensive ecosystem, so it certainly has a lot of potential.

It is currently available to buy via a token presale, where it has raised over $13 million so far.

The project’s early stage, combined with the powerful use case, is a setup that could result in huge gains for $BEST.Visit Best Wallet.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not provide financial advice. Cryptocurrencies are highly volatile, and the market can be unpredictable. Always perform thorough research before making any cryptocurrency-related decisions.

Marseille have reached an agreement in principle to sign England midfielder Angel Gomes on a free transfer.

The French club had been in talks to sign the 24-year-old, who announced in May that he would leave Lille when his contract expires this summer.

Premier League clubs Tottenham and West Ham were also linked with Gomes, but he has chosen to remain in Ligue 1.

Since joining from Manchester United in 2020, Gomes has scored 10 goals and provided 19 assists in 134 appearances for Lille.

He earned his first four senior caps for England under interim manager Lee Carsley last year, but has yet to feature under current boss Thomas Tuchel.

The United States and China say they’ve reached in principle a framework to roll back some of the punitive measures they have taken against each other’s economies.

That means Washington could ease restrictions on selling chips to China if Beijing agrees to speed up the export of rare earths.

Whether that happens depends on the approval of presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping.

The plan reached after talks in London marks the latest twist in a trade war that has threatened to disrupt global supply chains.

Also, what’s behind the surge in Russia’s rouble?

Plus, are nations choosing warfare over welfare?

WASHINGTON — President Trump said Thursday that his first call with Chinese leader Xi Jinping since returning to office was “very positive,” announcing that the two countries will hold trade talks in hopes of breaking an impasse over tariffs and global supplies of rare earth minerals.

“Our respective teams will be meeting shortly at a location to be determined,” Trump wrote on his social media platform after the call, which he said lasted an hour and a half.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer will represent the U.S. side in negotiations.

The Republican president, who returned to the White House for a second term in January, also said Xi “graciously” invited him and First Lady Melania Trump to China, and Trump reciprocated with his own invitation for Xi to visit the United States.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry said Trump initiated the call between the leaders of the world’s two biggest economies.

The ministry said in a statement that Xi asked Trump to “remove the negative measures” that the U.S. has taken against China. It also said that Trump said “the U.S. loves to have Chinese students coming to study in America,” although his administration has vowed to revoke some of their visas.

Comparing the bilateral relationship to a ship, Xi told Trump that the two sides need to “take the helm and set the right course” and to “steer clear of the various disturbances and disruptions,” according to the ministry statement.

Trump had declared one day earlier that it was difficult to reach a deal with Xi.

“I like President XI of China, always have, and always will, but he is VERY TOUGH, AND EXTREMELY HARD TO MAKE A DEAL WITH!!!” Trump posted Wednesday on his social media site.

Craig Singleton, senior director of China program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the phone call “simply paused escalation on trade” but “didn’t resolve core tensions” in the bilateral relations.

With the White House still weighing more punitive measures, the current calm could be upended as Beijing also is prepared to fight back the moment Washington escalates, Singleton said. “We’re likely one competitive action away from further confrontation,” he said.

In his note, Gabriel Wildau, managing director at the consultancy Teneo, wrote that the call “prevented derailment of trade talks but produced no clear breakthroughs on key issues.”

Trade negotiations between the United States and China stalled shortly after a May 12 agreement between the two countries to reduce their tariff rates while talks played out. Behind the gridlock has been the continued competition for an economic edge.

The U.S. accuses China of not exporting critical minerals, and the Chinese government objects to America restricting its sale of advanced chips and access to student visas for college and graduate students.

Trump has lowered his 145% tariffs on Chinese goods to 30% for 90 days to allow for talks. China also reduced its taxes on U.S. goods from 125% to 10%. The back and forth has caused sharp swings in global markets and threatens to hamper trade between the two countries.

Bessent had suggested that only a conversation between Trump and Xi could resolve these differences so that talks could restart in earnest. The underlying tension between the two countries may persist, though.

During the call, Xi said that the Chinese side is sincere about negotiating and “at the same time has its principles,” and that “the Chinese always honor and deliver what has been promised,” according to the Foreign Ministry.

Even if negotiations resume, Trump wants to lessen America’s reliance on Chinese factories and reindustrialize the U.S., whereas China wants the ability to continue its push into technologies such as electric vehicles and artificial intelligence that could be crucial to securing its economic future.

The United States ran a trade imbalance of $295 billion with China in 2024, according to the Census Bureau. Although the Chinese government’s focus on manufacturing has turned it into a major economic and geopolitical power, China has been muddling through a slowing economy after a real estate crisis and COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns weakened consumer spending.

Trump and Xi last spoke in January, three days before Inauguration Day. The pair discussed trade then, as well as Trump’s demands that China do more to prevent the synthetic opioid fentanyl from entering the United States.

Despite long expressing optimism about the prospects for a major deal, Trump became more pessimistic recently.

“The bad news is that China, perhaps not surprisingly to some, HAS TOTALLY VIOLATED ITS AGREEMENT WITH US,” Trump posted last week. “So much for being Mr. NICE GUY!”

Weissert and Megerian write for the Associated Press.

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass won’t be called as a witness in a multiday federal court hearing that could determine whether the city’s homelessness programs are placed in receivership.

Matthew Umhofer, an attorney for the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights, told U.S. District Judge David O. Carter on Tuesday that he and his legal team were withdrawing subpoenas issued in recent weeks to Bass and City Councilmembers Monica Rodriguez and Traci Park. Battling over the appearances, which were opposed by the city, would have delayed the proceedings for several months, he said.

The alliance, which sued the city in 2020 over its response to the homelessness crisis, originally sought testimony from the three politicians as part of an evidentiary hearing focused on whether the city failed to comply with the terms of a settlement agreement on homelessness programs.

The agreement, reached in 2022 between the city and the alliance, requires the city to provide 12,915 beds for its unhoused population by June 2027. The alliance contends that the city already is failing to meet the milestones of the agreement and has no clear path to that goal. City officials say they fully intend to comply by the deadline.

The possibility that Bass could testify in Carter’s courtroom provided a rare source of drama for the past week of hearings, which have focused on such granular issues as the definition of a homeless encampment.

Umhofer, in an interview, said he dropped Bass and the others because the city’s lawyers had threatened to pursue an appeal to block the three politicians from testifying, which would have triggered a delay of at least two to three months.

“I think it’s cowardly for the mayor to not testify,” he said. “She’s come in to court on multiple occasions and and shared talking points, but has never undergone cross-examination. For her to resist a subpoena is the definition of avoiding accountability and transparency.”

Umhofer argued that the testimony provided over the last week is already enough to show that the city’s homelessness programs should be overseen by a third-party receivership appointed by the court.

A Bass spokesperson did not immediately respond to Umhofer’s remarks. Theane Evangelis, an attorney for the city, said Umhofer’s description of Bass as cowardly — made in front of the judge during Tuesday’s hearing — was “uncalled for.”

“The Alliance lawyers apparently recognized that there was no legal basis for their subpoenas,” Evangelis said later in a statement. “They should never have issued them in the first place. The City is complying with the agreement settling a 2020 lawsuit, and it is indisputable that thousands of new housing units have been built and homelessness is down in LA for the first time in years.”

Bass declared a state of emergency on homelessness in 2022, on her first day in office, securing additional power to award contracts and sign off on lease agreements for interim housing and other facilities. That same year, she launched Inside Safe, which has been moving thousands of unhoused Angelenos into hotels, motels and other interim housing. She also created a program to accelerate the approval of certain types of affordable housing.

The alliance has portrayed the city’s homelessness response programs as irrevocably broken, arguing that the only recourse is for the judge to turn them over to a third-party receiver. During six days of testimony, lawyers for the alliance repeatedly highlighted the findings of a consulting firm that the programs lack adequate data systems and financial controls, leaving them vulnerable to fraud.

Lawyers for the alliance also pointed out that the city has repeatedly missed the quarterly milestones established in its settlement agreement.

Over the last week, lawyers for the city argued that their client has made “best efforts” to comply with the settlement agreement. They also contended that the milestones are not mandatory. And they said the alliance is the party that’s “flat-out ignoring” the terms of the agreement.

Evangelis said the agreement allows for the city’s obligations to be paused, and the terms to be renegotiated, if an emergency takes place. The Palisades fire broke out in January, destroying thousands of homes.

“Instead of recognizing the enormous stress that our city is under and honoring its promise to meet and confer … the alliance ran to court the month after those fires and sought sanctions against the city’s supposed breaches,” Evangelis told the court last week.

The alliance placed Bass on its witness list last month, saying she has “unique knowledge” of the facts — and had put herself at the center of the debate by promising to lead on homelessness.

Lawyers for the city argued that putting Bass and the two council members on the stand would place “an undue burden” on them as elected officials. They instead presented as witnesses City Administrative Officer Matthew Szabo, who is the city’s top budget official, and Deputy Mayor Etsemaye Agonafer, calling them the most knowledgeable about the settlement agreement.

Last week, Carter delayed ruling on whether Bass and the council members should testify, saying he first wanted to hear from Szabo and Agonafer, who handles homelessness issues for Bass.

Agonafer testified for about four hours Thursday. Szabo, who has overseen the city’s compliance with the settlement agreement, was questioned off and on during four hearing days. In multiple exchanges, he said he was confident the city would comply with the terms of the settlement by June 2027.

The two council members sought as witnesses by the alliance have been highly critical of the city’s homelessness programs.

Rodriguez, who represents the northeast San Fernando Valley, frequently uses the phrase “merry-go-round from hell” to describe the city’s struggle to get accurate data from the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, a city-county agency.

Park, who represents part of the Westside, said during the council’s budget deliberations last month that the city had wasted billions of dollars on homeless programs. Before casting her vote, she also said the city is “unable to manage” its own homeless affairs.