America

POLITICS

DeSantis signs Florida law to label groups as terrorists and expel student supporters

Apr 7, 2026 Politics Desk

TAMPA, Fla. — Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a measure into law Monday that gives him along with other Florida leaders the ability to label groups as domestic or foreign terrorist organizations and expel state university students who support them.

The law, criticized by free speech advocates, allows a top official at the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to designate a group as a domestic or foreign terrorist organization, with the governor and three other members of the Florida Cabinet approving or rejecting the designation. Besides the governor, the Cabinet is made up of the attorney general, the chief financial officer and the agriculture commissioner, all of whom are elected separately.

Once designated a terrorist organization, a group can be dissolved and it can no longer receive any state funding through school districts or state agencies. Universities also would have to report the status of expelled students attending on visas to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“So this will help the state of Florida protect you. It’ll help us protect your tax dollars,” DeSantis said at a news conference in Tampa. “It’ll help us protect things that should not be happening in the United States of America, but certainly shouldn’t be happening in the free state of Florida.”

DeSantis in December designated the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Muslim Brotherhoods as foreign terrorist organizations. A federal judge last month temporarily blocked the enforcement of DeSantis’ executive order.

PEN America, a free speech advocacy group, said the new law has vague language that could restrict education programs deemed to be “promoting” terrorism and that it could target student protesters who criticize Florida officials.

The new law “could chill education at every level,” said William Johnson, PEN America’s Florida director. “The implications are fraught.”

Source link

SHOW BIZ

Writers Guild forges tentative contract deal with studios

Apr 5, 2026 News Desk

The Writers Guild of America and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers have reportedly reached a tentative four-year deal for a new contract.

Negotiations between the union and film and TV studios began in March, with union leaders prioritizing more robust healthcare benefits, streaming residuals and protections against the misuse of AI tools.

Puck co-founder and reporter Matt Belloni first reported news of the tentative deal Saturday. The agreement represents a departure from standard practice, adding one more year to the WGA’s usual three-year contract. Additionally, it includes health plan and pension increases, bumps in streaming pay and protections that will police licensing for AI training.

The new contract is still subject to ratification following a vote by union members. The WGA and AMPTP did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

This tentative deal is a promising signal that the Writers Guild could avoid a strike after 2023’s historic work stoppage that lasted 148 days.

Separately, the Writers Guild of America West’s staff union has been on strike since mid-February.

The union’s current contract is set to expire May 1. WGA is the first of the Hollywood unions to reach a deal. SAG-AFTRA and the Directors Guild of America still need to reach an agreement with the studios.

The actors’ union began negotiations with the studios in February and extended those talks in March, but paused in order for the AMPTP to finish negotiations with the writers’ union. SAG-AFTRA and DGA’s contracts each expire June 30.

Source link

POLITICS

Trump’s Iran war leaves Republicans adrift ahead of midterms

Apr 3, 2026 Politics Desk

NEW YORK — This is not the run up to the midterm elections that Republicans wanted.

A year and a half after winning the White House by promising to lower costs and end wars, Donald Trump is a wartime president overseeing surging energy costs and an escalating overseas conflict that many in his own party do not like.

He offered little clarity to a nation eager for answers this week during a prime-time address from the White House, his first since the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran more than a month ago, simultaneously suggesting that the war was ending and expanding.

“Thanks to the progress we’ve made, I can say tonight that we are on track to complete all of America’s military objectives shortly, very shortly,” Trump said. “We’re going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks.”

Trump’s comments come roughly six months before voters across the nation begin to cast ballots in elections that will decide control of Congress and key governorships for Trump’s final two years in office. For now, Republicans, who control all branches of government in Washington, are bracing for a painful political backlash.

“You’re looking at an ugly November,” warned veteran Republican pollster Neil Newhouse. “At a point in time when we need every break possible to hold the House and Senate, our edge is being chipped away.”

Republicans confront evolving political landscape

It’s hard to overstate how dramatically the political landscape has shifted.

At this time last year, many Republican leaders believed there was a path to preserve their narrow House majority and easily hold the Senate. Now they privately concede that the House is all but lost and Democrats have a realistic shot at taking the Senate.

Republicans are also struggling to coalesce around a clear midterm message on Iran.

The Republican National Committee has largely avoided the war in talking points issued to surrogates over the last month. The leaders of the party’s campaign committees responsible for the House and Senate declined interview requests. Many vulnerable Republican candidates sidestep the issue, unwilling to defend or challenge Trump publicly.

The president remains deeply popular with Republican voters, and he has vocal supporters like Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.

“That was the best speech I could’ve hoped for,” he wrote on social media after Trump’s address on Wednesday evening. Graham said Trump “gave the American people a clear and coherent pathway forward.”

Trump made little effort to sell the conflict to Americans before the initial attack. Five weeks later, at least 13 U.S. service members have been killed and hundreds more injured. Thousands more troops have converged on the region, and the Pentagon requested $200 billion in new funding.

The Strait of Hormuz, a key passage for a fifth of the world’s oil, remains closed. The average price for a gallon of gasoline in the U.S. was $4.08 on Thursday, according to AAA, almost a full dollar higher than on President Joe Biden’s last day in office.

On Wednesday, Trump insisted that gas prices would fall quickly once the war concluded but offered no solution for reopening the Strait of Hormuz. Instead, he invited skeptical U.S. allies to do it themselves.

He insisted that the war would be worth it.

“This is a true investment in your grandchildren and your grandchildren’s future,” Trump said. “When it’s all over, the United States will be safer, stronger, more prosperous and greater than it has ever been before.”

Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Georgia Republican who was once among Trump’s most vocal allies in Congress, lashed out against his Iran policy.

“I wanted so much for President Trump to put America First. That’s what I believed he would do. All I heard from his speech tonight was WAR WAR WAR,” she wrote on social media. “Nothing to lower the cost of living for Americans.”

Time is not on Trump’s side

About 6 in 10 U.S. adults say the U.S. military action in Iran has “gone too far,” according to AP-NORC polling from March. Roughly a third approve of how he’s handling Iran overall.

The possibility of sending U.S. forces into Iran also appears politically unpalatable.

About 6 in 10 adults are “strongly” or “somewhat” opposed to deploying U.S. troops on the ground to fight Iran. That includes about half of Republicans. Only about 1 in 10 favor deploying troops.

At the same time, Trump’s approval ratings have remained consistently weak. About 4 in 10 Americans approve of how he’s handling the presidency, roughly in line with how it’s been throughout his second term.

Republican strategist Ari Fleischer, a senior aide in former President George W. Bush’s administration, acknowledged that Trump has not received the polling bump in this war that Bush got after invading Iraq.

Bush, of course, worked to build public backing for the Iraq War before going in. Immediately after the 2003 invasion, Bush’s popularity soared, as did the stock market.

Public sentiment and the economy soured only after the conflict stretched on. It ultimately spanned more than eight years, spawning a generation of anti-war Republicans — and sowing the seeds of Trump’s “America First” foreign policy.

“My hope is that the Trump experience is the exact opposite of the Bush experience,” Fleischer said.

He said Trump must win the war decisively and quickly to avoid a further backlash, saying there could be a “very significant political upside if things end well, oil comes down and markets rally.”

Fleischer added that Trump’s actions will matter much more than his words.

“Ultimately, he is not going to get judged on his persuasion or his explanations or his assertions, he’s going to get judged on results,” he said.

Peoples writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Linley Sanders in Washington contributed to this report.

Source link

SPORT

Tiger Woods turns down US Ryder Cup captaincy in 2027, PGA of America says

Apr 2, 2026 Sports Desk

Following last week’s crash, authorities found two white pills in Woods’ pocket, which were identified as hydrocodone – an opioid used to treat pain.

Officers also reported he appeared “lethargic and slow” while “sweating profusely” with “extremely dilated” pupils, and that his “normal faculties were impaired”.

Woods has had multiple surgeries following a serious road accident in 2021 and has played only a limited schedule.

A Florida judge on Wednesday approved Woods’ request to leave the United States to seek treatment at a comprehensive inpatient treatment facility.

Woods’ attorney Douglas Duncan said doctors have recommended an “intensive, highly individualised and medically integrated programme” for the golfer, away from the media and public scrutiny.

Duncan said the urgent level of care Woods needs cannot be safely done within the US, “as his privacy has been repeatedly compromised”.

Source link

POLITICS

Transatlantic rift widens as Trump lashes out at NATO allies over unpopular Mideast war

Apr 1, 2026 Politics Desk

LONDON — President Trump has said he is strongly considering pulling the U.S. out of NATO, ratcheting up his criticism of European allies and exposing a wider rift in the transatlantic alliance — this time over America’s war alongside Israel against Iran.

While Trump’s talk of a possible NATO pullout dates back years, the comments to Britain’s Telegraph newspaper, published Wednesday, were among the clearest and most disparaging yet — suggesting the fracture has deepened perhaps to a point of no return.

Asked whether he would reconsider U.S. membership in the alliance after the war on Iran ends, Trump replied: “Oh yes, I would say (it’s) beyond reconsideration.”

Contacted by The Associated Press, NATO did not provide an immediate comment.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, asked about the comment, said Britain was “fully committed to NATO” and called it “the single most effective military alliance the world has ever seen.”

Many European leaders have felt political pressure over the war, which faces opposition in their countries and has sent petroleum prices soaring as Iran has effectively shut the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway between Iran and Oman through which about one-fifth of the world’s oil passes.

“Whatever the pressure on me and others, whatever the noise, I am going to act in the British national interest in all the decisions I make,” Starmer said Wednesday.

Long-simmering tensions within the alliance have bubbled up again over the war. As energy prices have spiked, Trump has been desperate to get countries to send their ships to the Strait. He’s called his NATO allies “cowards,” pulling at any rhetorical lever he can to get help with the fallout of a war that no ally was consulted on or asked to take part in.

For years, Trump has berated America’s European allies, urging them to assume greater responsibility for their own security and spend more on defense. He has argued that the U.S. has done more for them than the other way around.

A U.S. pullout would essentially spell the end of NATO, which flourished for decades under American leadership.

On Truth Social on Tuesday, Trump lashed out at countries “like the United Kingdom, which refused to get involved in the decapitation of Iran,” and suggested they buy U.S. oil or go to the Strait of Hormuz themselves “and just take it.”

He also wants allies to help fix damage from the war that they had no part in starting.

The U.K. is working on plans that could help assuage Trump.

On Thursday, Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper will host a virtual meeting of 35 countries that have signed up to help ensure security for shipping in the Strait after the war. Starmer said military planners will also work on a postwar security plan for the strait.

The backdrop: NATO not on board to join U.S. in war

NATO is built on Article 5 of its founding treaty, which pledges that an attack on any one member will be met with a response from them all.

As the Iran war has spread, missiles and drones have been fired toward NATO member Turkey and a British military base on Cyprus, fueling speculation about what might prompt NATO to trigger its collective security guarantee and come to their rescue.

The alliance has not intervened or signaled any plan to. Secretary-General Mark Rutte — who has voiced support for Trump and America’s role in the alliance — has been focusing mostly on Russia’s war against Ukraine, which borders four NATO countries.

NATO operates uniquely by consensus. All 32 countries must agree for it to take decisions, so political priorities play a role. Even invoking Article 5 requires agreement among the allies. Turkey or the U.K. cannot trigger it alone.

In the Mideast war, Trump has bristled at the across-the-board rejection from European and other allies, and even rival China, to help secure the Strait of Hormuz.

Many European Union and NATO member country leaders have fumed since the war’s outset on Feb. 28 because they weren’t informed ahead of time, seen as a break with precedent.

Trump insisted he needed the element of surprise, and he spoke out about possible military action and visibly built up U.S. forces in the region in the run-up to the war.

Rising voices, and tougher action, from Europe over the Mideast war

European leaders have called for the war to stop and want the United States and Iran to return to negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear program, which America and Israel see as a threat.

The vocal opposition in Europe to Trump’s war against Iran has started to turn into action.

Spain — the most vocal critic in Europe — on Monday said it closed its airspace to U.S. planes involved in the Iran war.

Early last month, France agreed to let the U.S. Air Force use a base in southern France after receiving a “full guarantee” from the United States that planes not involved in carrying out strikes against Iran would land there.

Other countries have spoken out against it: Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Germany’s largely ceremonial president, last week called the aggression against Iran a “dangerous mistake” in violation of international law.

U.S. relations with Europe had already soured in recent months over Trump’s call for Greenland — a semiautonomous territory of stalwart NATO ally Denmark — to become part of the United States, prompting many EU countries to rally behind Copenhagen.

Lawless and Keaten write for the Associated Press. Keaten reported from Geneva. AP writer Lorne Cook in Brussels contributed to this report.

Source link

POLITICS

A view of America from a train as airports struggle during the shutdown

Mar 30, 2026 Politics Desk

ABOARD THE CRESCENT — There’s something melodic about watching the sun rise over a rural stillness broken only by the rhythms of steel wheels on tracks. Or so we tell ourselves.

In this case, being aboard a train at all owed more to politics than poetry.

Congress and President Trump were mired in their latest budget stalemate, one rooted in his immigration crackdown and the tactics of federal forces he has sent to U.S. cities. But this impasse has upended a foundational constant of American life today: easy air travel.

In Atlanta, my hometown airport, cheerfully marketed as the world’s busiest, had descended into organized chaos. Unpaid federal employees called out from work, leaving a diminished security staff to screen travelers frustrated by hours-long waits in line. I wanted to get to Washington for the NCAA basketball tournament. So I eliminated the risk of a missed flight and booked the train overnight and into game day across a 650-mile route.

In this fraught moment in U.S. politics, I slowed down and thought about things we take for granted. Who ever ponders the conveniences of that 20th century innovation, the airplane, that makes 21st century hustle possible? We book and board. An unconscious, first-world flex of modernity. It’s even rarer to grapple with the inconvenience.

My decision had taken me further back, to the 19th century and another defining innovation: the long-distance train.

A 14½-hour weekend train ride is time aplenty to appreciate how completely politics, economics, social strife and fights over identity and belonging have always affected the order of our lives, including how, when and where we move around in these United States. But Amtrak’s Crescent also allowed me to see the expanse of our collective experience.

I traversed the urban, suburban and rural breadth of East Coast America. I learned how other travelers came aboard. And in that, I found the portrait of people, past and present, who refuse to be as paralyzed as some of their elected leaders.

Convenience on the railways

There is little glamour late night in a crowded Amtrak station. Children are up past bedtime and tended by frazzled parents. Older adults struggle with luggage and stairs.

Airports are not red-carpet affairs either, of course. But there is a certain cache to Delta’s Atlanta-Washington flights. They typically take about two hours gate to gate. They often are slotted at a midpoint gate of the concourse nearest the main terminal. That is almost certainly a nod to members of Congress who use it, but who have lost some airline perks during this extended partial shutdown — which as of Sunday is the longest government shutdown in U.S. history.

In normal circumstances I can get from my front porch to Capitol Hill or downtown in as little as 4½ hours. Security lines these days could at least double my overall air travel time.

The train is still longer, and time is money, we are taught. But certainty has value, too, even if it means an 11:29 p.m. departure. And at the Amtrak station, there were no standstill lines, no Transportation Security Administration agents, no ICE agents as stand-ins.

Passengers who arrived mere minutes before departure made it on board and found seats quickly — assigned in boarding order, not predetermined zones that yield jammed aisles. There’s no in-seat service or satellite TV. But even coach seats, the lowest Amtrak tier, are as spacious as airline first-class — and there is Wi-Fi, so it’s not the 19th century or even 20th century after all.

On board, I heard one crew member joke, “I’m no TSA agent.”

The pathways of history

As a boy in rural Alabama, I counted train cars and wondered where they were headed. I’ve since read diary entries and letters from my grandmother and her sisters recounting World War II-era weekend trips to Atlanta.

The South’s largest city has a historical hook too. Originally named “Terminus,” Atlanta developed in the antebellum era as a critical intersection of north-south and east-west rail routes. That is what drew Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman for one of the Civil War’s seminal campaigns that helped defeat the Confederacy.

A century after the Civil War, Delta chose Atlanta for its headquarters rather than Birmingham, Ala., which was the larger city as of the 1960 census. The company’s decision was tied up in tax breaks for the airline, named for its crop duster origins in the Mississippi Delta region. According to some interpretations, Delta’s decision was made easier because of the more overt racism of Alabama’s and Birmingham’s leaders as they defended Jim Crow — a code that, among other acts, allowed states to segregate the passenger trains that predated Amtrak.

On this night, I heard many languages and accents, notable given the role that immigrant labor played in building the U.S. rail system and especially striking now with immigration — legal and illegal — at the forefront in Washington, my destination. I saw faces that reflected U.S. pluralism, a different mix from what my grandmother and aunts would have seen a lifetime ago.

The array of voices celebrated the freedom and ease of rail travel. So did Agatha Grimes and her friends after they boarded in Greensboro, N.C., as part of a long weekend trip to celebrate her 62nd birthday.

“I got stuck in the Atlanta airport last week,” Grimes said, as her group laughed together in the dining car. “It’s just nuts.”

Beretta Nunnally, a self-described “train veteran” who organized their trip, said, “There’s no worry about parking. No checking bags. You come to the station, you get where you‘re going, and you come home.”

An era for planes, trains and automobiles

Still, that is not as easy in the United States as it once was.

Just as politics, economics and subsidies helped expand U.S. railroads, those factors diminished the network as auto manufacturers, oil companies, road builders and, finally, airline manufacturers and airlines commanded favor from politicians and attention from consumers.

Riding hours across rural areas, I noticed the junkyards where kudzu and chain-link fencing framed rows of rusted automobiles. I saw the farmland and equipment that helps feed cities and the rest of the nation. I awoke to see the night lights of office towers in Charlotte, N.C., and its NFL stadium. I saw vibrant county seats — and I thought of countless other towns like them that are not thriving as they sit disconnected from passenger rail and far from the Eisenhower-era interstate system that we crossed multiple times on our way.

In each setting, voters — conservatives, liberals, the extremes and betweens — have chosen their representatives, senators and a president who now set the nation’s course.

When I arrived in Washington, I paused to enjoy Union Station’s grand hall and its Beaux Arts appeal, and I lamented how much splendor has been lost because so many striking U.S. terminals have been razed. I stepped outside and looked up at the Capitol dome.

While I had slept, the Senate managed a bipartisan deal to fund all of the Department of Homeland Security except immigration enforcement. As I continued northward, House Republican leaders rejected it. The stalemate continued.

The president, however, took executive action to pay TSA workers, and their paychecks may resume within days, though long airport lines may continue awhile longer.

I was a weary traveler but renewed citizen. I had a game to get to. And the train rolled on.

Barrow writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

TOP NEWS

Bank of America agrees to $72.5M settlement with Epstein survivors

Mar 29, 2026 News Desk

Bank of America this week settled a class-action lawsuit brought by a victim of the deceased sex predator Jeffrey Epstein, pictured in a photo issued by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice while he was awaiting trial on charges of sex trafficking. Epstein was found dead in his cell in August 2019 before he could be brought to trial. File Photo by New York State Division of Criminal Justice/EPA-EFE

March 28 (UPI) — Bank of America reached a settlement with a survivor of deceased sex predator Jeffrey Epstein that will distribute $72.5 million to his victims.

The survivor, named in the case as “BOA Jane Doe,” and her attorneys told a federal judge on Friday that a settlement had been reached with the bank on a proposed class-action suit over Epstein’s decades of abuse and trafficking of women and teenage girls, The Charlotte Observer reported.

The suit alleged that the bank ignored signals of Epstein’s crimes by continuing to do business with him while he was committing his crimes.

Doe’s attorneys said they are aware of at least 60 women who were abused or trafficked by Epstein, however the settlement covers all women who experienced either at Epstein’s hands or those “connected to or otherwise associated” with him between June 30, 2008, and July 6, 2019, NBC News reported.

Bank of America, which is the largest bank in the United States, denied liability or wrongdoing in providing Epstein banking services but settled in order to avoid a trial.

“While we stand by our prior statements made in the filings in this case, including that Bank of America did not facilitate sex trafficking crimes, this resolution allows us to put this matter behind us and provides further closure for the plaintiffs,” the bank told The Observer and NBC in a statement.

With the settlement filed, a judge will still have to approve it at a hearing, which is scheduled for April 2.

Bank of America now joins JPMorgan, which settled for $290 million, and Deutsche Bank, which settled for $75 million, in paying what is thought to be more than 1,000 women that Epstein abused in his years-long scheme.

President Donald Trump stands with U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins during an event celebrating farmers on the South Lawn of the White House on Friday. Photo by Aaron Schwartz/UPI | License Photo

Source link

TOP NEWS

France opens probe into suspected attack on Bank of America in Paris | Banks News

Mar 28, 2026 News Desk

Interior minister says ‘vigilance at high level’, after police arrest suspect before setting off explosive device outside US bank’s headquarters.

Published On 28 Mar 2026

French authorities have opened an investigation into a foiled ⁠attack targeting Bank of America’s Paris headquarters after police detained one suspect who was allegedly attempting to ignite an explosive device outside the building.

In a social media post on Saturday, Interior Minister Laurent Nunez said the swift intervention by police had “thwarted a violent terrorist attack” in the French capital the previous night.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

French newspaper Le Parisien cited a police source as saying the suspect was arrested at about 3:25am local time (02:25 GMT) outside the bank’s local headquarters in the city’s 8th arrondissement as he tried to light a device consisting of a five-litre (1.3-gallon) container filled with an unidentified liquid and an explosive charge made up of about 650 grams (23 ounces) of powder.

The suspect was taken into custody, while a second individual who was present fled the scene and remains at large. The device was taken to the Paris police’s forensics lab for full analysis.

The National Terrorism Prosecution Office told the Reuters news agency the suspected offences included attempted destruction by fire or other dangerous means in connection with a “terrorist plot”, as well as ⁠the making, possession ⁠and transport of an incendiary or explosive device with intent ⁠to carry out dangerous damage.

The probe ⁠also includes a ⁠charge of participation in a “terrorist” criminal association, covering potential ‌links to accomplices or a broader network, it said.

“Vigilance remains at a very high level,” said Nunez on X, thanking “security and intelligence forces, who are fully mobilised under my authority” in what he called the “current international context”, seemingly with reference to the escalating situation in parts of the Middle East amid the US-Israeli war on Iran.

Earlier in the week, Nunez had said that authorities had stepped up the personal protection of some figures from the Iranian opposition and increased security around sites that risked being targeted, including sites linked to US interests and to the Jewish community.

A spokesperson for Bank of America told Reuters the organisation was “aware of the situation” and “communicating with the authorities”.

Source link

MONEY

Latin America At A Turning Point

Mar 24, 2026 Finance Desk

Analysts expect continued slow growth this year, with inflation moderating. But the region’s biggest economies present a mixed outlook.

The US operation to capture and oust Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro from power in January put Latin America back in the spotlight. But the surprise intervention has not yet translated into larger political or economic shifts in the region.

Instead, a familiar, business-as-usual outlook appears to be trending: modest growth; economies linked to external demands for commodities; and persistent structural vulnerabilities tied to public debt, infrastructure, and diminishing but persistent legal and political risk. The silver linings: stabilizing macro indicators and a broad trend toward moderating inflationary pressure. The key question is: Which way will the region head?

Sustainable growth and development remain elusive. Upcoming electoral contests in Brazil, Colombia, and Peru add to the backdrop of geopolitical realignment, along with US tariffs and the evolving roles of the US, China, and Europe in the region. Cautious optimism related to economic indicators and innovation remains overshadowed by structural fragility.

The baseline expectation is continuity rather than acceleration, with growth projections by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank converging toward a 2.2%-2.3% average, respectively—positive, but not transformative.

Patricia Krause, chief Latin America economist at Coface, a French trade-credit insurance company, expects regional GDP to grow at 2.3% this year. The figure matches forecasts by the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean and is slightly more optimistic than those announced by Goldman Sachs (1.9%) and Fitch Solutions’ BMI (1.7%).

“We see a more challenging economic environment for the region,” says Ash Khayami, senior country-risk analys for Latin America Country Risk at BMI, “although growth is broadly in line with prepandemic run rates, going from 2.1% in 2025 to 1.7% in 2026, mostly driven by weaker growth in Brazil and Mexico.”

Political volatility remains a central theme in Latin America, and BMI expects a shift toward more conservative or right-of-center governments across the region. “We see a broad turn to right-wing governments in most elections we cover,” says Khayami. “More-conservative governments with stronger fiscal discipline should boost investor sentiment domestically.”

According to a recent study by the Eurasia Group political-risk consultancy, while political volatility has long been considered Latin America’s defining risk, the character of that volatility is now increasingly episodic instead of ideologically linked. For financial markets, this is good, since episodic risk can be priced more easily than structural regime changes.

Perhaps the most underappreciated regional trend—and success story—is inflation normalization as major Latin economies are returning to or remaining within target ranges.

Regional commonalities are only part of the story. The economic outlook for major Latin American economies is varied.

Argentina

“Argentina is entering an investment-driven cycle supported by commodity exports and lower taxes, which underpins our positive outlook,” says Khayami. “The country risk is down 500 base points, the lowest since 2018. Still, the growth rate is slowing down from 4.3% to a consensus rate of approximately 3.2% this year.”

The Central Bank of the Argentine Republic’s hard-currency accumulation and narrowing country-risk spreads are major positives, he adds: “The central bank accumulating over $1 billion in January is a strong signal from an external-accounts perspective.”

Brazil

Brazil’s growth should slow slightly this year compared to last, says Krause, mainly due to still-elevated interest rates. The market expects the central bank’s Selic benchmark interest rate to begin declining: It’s still projected to end the year at 12.25%, down from its current 15%. Household consumption is expected to support growth, helped by labor market resilience, lower inflation, and tax relief measures. “Trade tensions with the US had some impact on Brazilian exports after tariff measures,” Krause observes, “but the effect was mitigated by exemptions and diversification toward other export markets, including Argentina, Canada, and India.”

The country remains a slow-growth anchor economy, according to Khayami’s analysis, saddled by fiscal rigidity and a high tax burden. But a contrary trend may be taking hold, where public spending gradually shrinks as a share of GDP through 2028.

Colombia

Colombia is currently the oddball among major Latin economies, according to BMI, with fiscal concerns and inflation being particular issues.

“As we move toward more conservative presidents, we expect stronger fiscal discipline and more probusiness policy stances to boost investor sentiment,” says Khayami. “Political risk—including relations with the US and also election dynamics—is a major macro driver.”

Colombia’s inflation risk is currently driven by domestic policy decisions rather than external factors, Krause argues. “Inflation was above the 3% target at 5.1% in 2025,” she observes. “The expectations worsened following a sharp minimum wage increase of 23% in December. As a result, [the inflation forecast] is revised upwards to 6.4% this year, and the country moved in the opposite direction of its regional peers by raising interest rates.”

Mexico

Mexico’s economy barely grew in 2025—estimated at between 0.2% and 0.6%—but is expected to expand about 1.5% this year. That affects perception across the region, Khayami observes.

“Mexico, because of its relationship with the US, is a pillar of regional foreign direct investment [FDI],” he says, “and there is a lot of uncertainty surrounding that relationship right now. FDI flows into Latin America last year were approximately $160 billion. Mexico captured 25% of that. If Mexico is not doing well, the regional outlook weakens.”

Khayami describes the local business environment as “uncertain due to overlapping risk factors, including trade-framework uncertainty, potential security escalation tied to cartel violence, and possible US intervention scenarios.”

Peru

Peru’s outlook reflects modest macro stability alongside persistent structural weaknesses, according to independent strategic consultant Andrés Castillo. GDP is expected to grow roughly 2.8% in 2026 with inflation near 2% according to a report by BCP banking group, in line with the central bank of Peru’s targets. Fiscal metrics remain comparatively strong, with the deficit projected near 1.8% of GDP and public debt around 36%, according to Trading Economics, low by regional standards.

But macro stability masks deeper structural risks, Castillo cautions. “Peru’s economy is supported by mining, agriculture, and fishing; but coca production and now illegal mining have also become significant economic forces,” he says. “Mining alone accounts for about 8.5% of GDP and nearly 64% of exports, underscoring commodity dependence.”

Venezuela

Venezuela remains Latin America’s elephant in the room.

Maduro’s ouster sparked hopes of regime change and a new economic lifeline for Venezuelans. Most analysts at the time expected Washington to immediately initiate a transition phase, opening the door to major oil and energy investments. But so far, only a trickle of those expectations are being realized. Oil production is expected to increase in the short term only if sanctions ease and investment resumes. Khayami says that the path to a more robust energy sector will be long.

Jorge Jraissati, a Venezuelan expatriate and president of Economy Inclusion Group, points to two possible scenarios for the country. In the bad-case scenario, reforms exist on paper but political uncertainty persists. In this case, oil recovers modestly but non-oil investment remains minimal, locking the economy into a suboptimal equilibrium, which can deteriorate even more after the next presidential cycle in the US.

“In the ‘good’ scenario,” Jraissati says, “US policy sustains pressure for measurable institutional democratization, market opening, and concrete security guarantees that reduce risk pricing. If these conditions are met, foreign capital—especially in energy and infrastructure—will begin to commit rather than speculate.”

Source link

POLITICS

Democratic Socialists of America won’t endorse in race for L.A. mayor

Mar 22, 2026 Politics Desk

The Los Angeles chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America will not endorse a candidate for mayor.

After City Councilmember Nithya Raman decided at the last minute to run against her former ally Mayor Karen Bass, the group called a vote on whether to reopen the endorsement process, which it had closed without supporting a candidate.

DSA-LA backed Raman’s two successful city council runs, but she has been at odds with the group on some issues.

Also in the mix was another mayoral candidate, community organizer Rae Huang, whose positions align more closely with those of the group.

The two candidates were present for Saturday’s vote at Immanuel Presbyterian Church in Koreatown, though neither spoke.

The left-wing organization, which has about 5,000 members, is known for running strong ground game campaigns that include canvassing, door-knocking and phone banking. In addition to Raman, three other DSA-backed politicians now sit on the 15-member City Council.

Before the vote, DSA-LA members argued for and against reopening the endorsement process.

“The worst thing we can do right now for our movement is to say, ‘Well, actually, we’re not going to endorse Rae or Nithya. We’re going to do a third thing, which is to issue no endorsement.’ Who is the audience for this message?” said Leslie Chang, a co-chair of DSA-LA.

DSA-LA member Anna Gross argued that neither candidate was ideal, with Huang, who has little political experience, being a long shot and Raman hesitating to fully embrace the group.

“I do want a democratic socialist mayor, but as it stands, we have one candidate who is not going to win … and a candidate who will not openly identify as a democratic socialist,” Gross said.

Of the 488 members who voted Saturday, about 55% supported reopening the endorsement process, falling short of the required two-thirds majority.

If the process had been reopened, the group would have then voted on whether to endorse Raman, Huang or neither.

Huang’s earlier attempt to get the endorsement while the window was still open had failed because she did not obtain enough valid member signatures to qualify.

If the race is not decided in the June 2 primary, DSA-LA can still endorse a candidate in the runoff.

Besides Bass, Raman and Huang, the field of 14 candidates includes conservative reality TV star Spencer Pratt and tech entrepreneur Adam Miller.

Some members believed that a mayoral endorsement would take resources away from the slate of six local candidates they have already endorsed.

In city council races, DSA-LA is backing incumbents Hugo Soto-Martínez and Eunisses Hernandez; Faizah Malik, who is running against incumbent Traci Park on the Westside; and Estuardo Mazariegos for an open South L.A. seat.

The group is also backing Marissa Roy, who is challenging City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto, and Rocío Rivas, an incumbent L.A. Unified school board member.

Source link

POLITICS

After judge rules Voice of America be revived, what’s next?

Mar 21, 2026 Politics Desk

NEW YORK — In a strongly worded decision this week, a federal judge ordered that the Voice of America — an international broadcaster with the mission to provide news for countries around the world that was largely shut down for the last year by the Trump administration — come roaring back to life.

Whether or not that actually happens is uncertain.

The government filed notice Thursday to appeal U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth’s order two days earlier to put hundreds of VOA employees who have been on paid leave the last year back to work. Lamberth had ruled on March 7 that Kari Lake, President Trump’s choice to oversee the bureaucratic parent U.S. Agency for Global Media, didn’t have the authority to reduce VOA to a skeleton.

The Voice of America was established as a news source in World War II, beaming reports to many countries that had no tradition of a free press. Before Trump took office again last year, Voice of America was operating in 49 different languages, heard by an estimated 362 million people.

Trump’s team contended that government-run news sources, which also include Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, were an example of bloated government and that it wanted news reporting more favorable to the current administration. With a greatly reduced staff, VOA currently operates in Iran, Afghanistan, China, North Korea and in countries with a large population of Kurds.

Lamberth, in his decision, said Lake had “repeatedly thumbed her nose” at laws mandating VOA’s operation.

Time to turn the page at VOA?

VOA director Michael Abramowitz said legislators in both parties understand the need for a strong operation and have set aside enough funding for the job to be done. “It is time for all parties to come together and work to rebuild and strengthen the agency,” he said.

Don’t expect that to happen soon. “President Trump was elected to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse across the administration, including the Voice of America — and efforts to improve efficiency at USAGM have been a tremendous success,” said White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly. “This will not be the final say on the matter.”

Patsy Widakuswara, VOA’s White House bureau chief and a plaintiff in the lawsuit to bring it back, said that “restoring the physical infrastructure is going to take a lot of money and some time, but it can be done. What is more difficult is recovering from the trauma that our newsroom has gone through.”

It’s an open question whether the administration wants a real news organization or a mouthpiece, said David Ensor, a former Voice of America director between 2010 and 2014. “We don’t know — maybe no one does at the moment — what the future holds,” he said.

The administration’s efforts over the last year to bolster friendly outlets and fight coverage that displeases Trump offer a clue, even though Congress has required that Voice of America be an objective and unbiased news source. This week it was announced that Christopher Wallace, an executive at the far-right network Newsmax who had previously spent 15 years at Fox News Channel, will be the new deputy director at VOA. Abramowitz didn’t know he was getting a new deputy until it was announced.

Widakuswara wouldn’t comment on what Wallace’s appointment might mean. “I’m not going to pass judgment before seeing his work,” she said.

While Lamberth ordered more than a thousand employees on leave to go back to work, it’s not clear how many of them moved on to other jobs or retired in the last year. The judge also said he did not have the authority to bring back hundreds of independent contractors who were terminated.

One employee who left is Steve Herman, a former White House bureau chief and national correspondent at VOA and now executive director of the Jordan Center for Journalism Advocacy and Innovation at the University of Mississippi. Despite the court decisions, he questions whether the Trump administration would oversee a return to what the organization used to be.

“I’m a bit of a pessimist,” Herman said. “I think it’s going to be very difficult.”

An administration loath to admit defeat

Besides fighting to shut it down, Trump is loath to admit defeat. The White House recently nominated Sarah Rogers, the undersecretary of State for public diplomacy, to run the U.S. Agency for Global Media, putting it more firmly within the administration’s control. Her nomination requires Senate approval.

“Is Marco Rubio’s State Department going to allow objective journalism in 49 languages?” Herman asked. “I don’t think so. I would want that to happen, but that’s a fairy tale.”

In the budget bill passed in February, Congress set aside $200 million for Voice of America’s operation. While that represents about a 25% cut in the agency’s previous appropriation, it sent a bipartisan message of support, said Kate Neeper, VOA’s director of strategy and performance evaluation. Besides being a plaintiff with Widakuswara in the lawsuit to restore the agency, she has helped some of her colleagues deal with some of their own problems over the past year, including immigration issues.

“There is a lot of enthusiasm for going back to work,” she said. “People are eager to show up on Monday.”

The hunger for information from Voice of America in Iran when he was director was a clear example of what the organization meant, Ensor said. Surveys showed that between a quarter and a third of Iran’s households tuned in to VOA once a week, primarily on satellite television. Occasionally the government would crack down and confiscate satellite dishes, but Iranians could usually quickly find replacements, he said.

“I believe in Voice of America as a news organization and as a voice of America,” Ensor said. “It was important, and it can be again.”

Bauder writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

POLITICS

Inside Democratic Socialists of America’s decision on whether to endorse for L.A. mayor

Mar 21, 2026 Politics Desk

The same day she announced her surprise bid for mayor, Los Angeles City Councilmember Nithya Raman called a member of the local Democratic Socialists of America chapter.

She wanted to meet with the group’s leadership to explain her late-breaking decision to challenge Mayor Karen Bass, her longtime ally, which took just about everyone in the city by surprise.

Two days later, Raman gathered at her Silver Lake home with leaders of DSA-LA, which has endorsed her two runs for City Council but has been at odds with her on some issues.

Leslie Chang, a co-chair of the 5,000-member chapter, recalled Raman saying, “‘The media is going to paint me as a DSA candidate, and I have a relationship with you, and I’m interested in maintaining that relationship. So let’s talk.’”

DSA-LA, which had declined to endorse in the mayor’s race, will decide on Saturday whether to reopen its endorsement process.

Some members believe that a mayoral endorsement would take valuable phone-banking and door-knocking resources away from the slate of six local candidates they have already endorsed.

If the process moves forward, the question would then be whether to back Raman or Rae Huang, a housing activist viewed by some members as more aligned with socialist principles, while others see her as less electable. The group could also decide not to endorse either candidate.

A woman poses for a portrait in front of Los Angeles City Hall.

Leslie Chang, co-chair for the Los Angeles chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, at a rally at Molina Grand Park in Los Angeles on March 18.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

Going to bat for a mayoral candidate would be the highest-profile drive the local organization has run in a city where its influence has expanded since it knocked on doors for Raman’s first council campaign in 2020. In addition to Raman, three other DSA-backed politicians now occupy seats on the 15-member City Council.

In New York, DSA member Zohran Mamdani was recently elected mayor on a platform of rent freezes and free city buses.

“It would be a major coup for DSA to have one of their candidates be elected mayor [of Los Angeles],” said Sara Sadhwani, a politics professor at Pomona College.

The Rev. Rae Huang

The Rev. Rae Huang, who is running for mayor of Los Angeles, joined the Fair Games Coalition to announce the launch of the Overpaid CEO Tax Initiative in front of the Tesla Diner in West Hollywood on Jan. 14.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

As a city council member, Raman has delivered several major wins celebrated by DSA members, including strengthening renter protections and passing the first reform to the city’s rent stabilization ordinance in decades.

But she has sometimes been out of step with the group, approving budgets that increased police spending and seeking to revise Measure ULA, also known as the city’s “mansion tax,” to offer a 15-year exemption to developers of multifamily and commercial projects.

Raman’s most visible split with DSA occurred over the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack that killed more than 1,200 Israelis.

DSA released a statement saying “this was not unprovoked.” Raman called the statement “unacceptably devoid of empathy for communities in Israel.”

In early 2024, DSA censured Raman for seeking and accepting an endorsement from Democrats for Israel-Los Angeles, a liberal Zionist group, chiding her for “accepting support from [DSA’s] enemies.”

“Why are people wary of endorsing Nithya for mayor? A lot of people who were in leadership at the time are hesitant because of that situation,” said Noah Suarez-Sikes, a member of DSA-LA’s steering committee.

In a statement to The Times, Raman called herself an “independent leader.”

“While I share the DSA’s emphasis on uplifting the working class and those who have been left behind by the political establishment, I don’t always agree with my allies on how to accomplish our goals,” she said.

Some DSA members see Huang, who has little citywide name recognition or political experience, as more connected to the group’s platform than Raman. Huang has called for “Fast and Free Buses” as well as for more public input on the city budget.

Huang highlighted her support for keeping the “mansion tax” as is, also telling The Times that she would reduce the Police Department budget and the number of officers.

Raman has said she believes the Los Angeles Police Department should maintain its current staffing of around 8,700 sworn officers.

Konstantine Anthony, a DSA member and Burbank City Council member who gathered signatures to reopen the endorsement window, is supporting Huang.

“She is the exact candidate DSA across the country should be running for every seat,” he said.

Keshav Kundassery, a DSA member since 2019, supports Raman.

While he called Huang’s campaign for mayor “inspiring,” Kundassery said he does not think that she can get enough support.

“DSA should be in the business of running campaigns to win,” he said.

DSA-LA has already endorsed in four city council races, backing incumbents Hugo Soto-Martínez and Eunisses Hernandez; Faizah Malik, who is running against incumbent Traci Park on the Westside; and Estuardo Mazariegos for an open South L.A. seat.

The group is also backing Marissa Roy, who is challenging City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto, and Rocío Rivas, an incumbent L.A. Unified school board member.

“Any consideration we make now we will make understanding the balance of resources of our six candidates and a potential seventh,” said Chang, the DSA-LA co-chair.

Times staff writer David Zahniser contributed to this report.

Source link

POLITICS

Contributor: The U.S. desperately needs functional counterterrorism

Mar 18, 2026 Politics Desk

On Monday came the latest evidence of dysfunction within the Trump administration’s counterterrorism apparatus, when Joe Kent, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, resigned, citing his opposition to the war in Iran. But the disarray is not new.

In July 2025, Sebastian Gorka, the senior director for counterterrorism on President Trump’s National Security Council, announced that he was “on the cusp of releasing the unclassified new presidential U.S. counterterrorism policy.” Yet eight months later, while America wages war on a notorious state sponsor of terrorism, the strategy has yet to be released.

Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security has not published a National Terrorism Advisory since September and has failed to issue the annual Homeland Threat Assessment report since Trump returned to office. This remains the case, even as counterterrorism experts have warned about the possibility of Iranian-backed sleeper cells being activated because of the current conflict with Iran.

Without a strategy that clearly lays out American priorities and responses, America’s counterterrorism defenses are divided, disorganized and under-resourced. It is this malfunction that left Trump answering a question about whether Americans should expect more violence in the homeland with an effective shoulder shrug: “I guess.”

The homegrown backlash to the Iran conflict began on March 1, when a naturalized U.S. citizen opened fire at a bar in Austin, Texas. The gunman, who was wearing clothing pointing to his support of Iran, killed three before being killed by police gunfire. On March 7, two Islamic State-inspired teens hurled improvised explosive devices at a group of far-right protesters outside the New York City mayor’s mansion. March 12 then saw two attacks. First, a shooting erupted at Old Dominion University, as a former U.S. National Guardsman who had been prosecuted for Islamic State-related plotting killed an ROTC instructor. Then, a U.S. citizen with family ties to Lebanon drove his vehicle into Temple Israel in West Bloomfield, Mich., before dying in an exchange of gunfire with synagogue security officers.

In three of the four attacks, further violence was stopped by heroic takedowns on scene. Perhaps most notably, the Old Dominion attacker was neutralized by students, who stabbed the gunman to death. The heroic stories, while worth uplifting, underscore a bleaker truth: amid war abroad, Americans have been forced to take counterterrorism into their own hands in their own communities, left to fend for themselves against AR-15s, improvised explosive devices and weaponized vehicles.

The diversity of the attacks and the perpetrators makes matters worse. The attackers include a U.S. National Guard veteran who served several years in prison on terrorism charges, two teenagers who traveled to a different state with violent intentions, a man with an apparently long history of mental illness, and a U.S. citizen who lost family members in the latest Israeli-Hezbollah hostilities. Their targets also point to a complex and unpredictable terrorism environment.

Absent more predictable trends, law enforcement will be spread thin, asked to protect an impossible array of locations across the country against an impossible diversity of threats. In this environment, an effective national counterterrorism strategy would likely point to stopping terrorism further upstream, interrupting radicalization and violent mobilization at an earlier stage. Yet the Trump administration has effectively eviscerated its prevention infrastructure, largely dismantling the Department of Homeland Security’s Center for Prevention Programs and Partnerships.

Notably, too, none of the attacks to date seem to be coordinated or directed by the Iranian regime, with the war instead inspiring Western lone actors to attack their own communities. Yet Iran has long engaged in assassination plots in the United States, often by enlisting third-party criminal groups, and may yet seek to activate such a program. As journalists Peter Beck and Seamus Hughes warn: “Iran’s past calculus was low-grade operations in the United States, enough to keep the FBI busy but not large enough to trigger serious military consequences. With the latter now already a reality, the Islamic Republic has less to lose by orchestrating bolder attacks.”

The Trump administration has repeatedly invoked Iran’s history of support for terrorist proxies to justify the conflict: On March 2, for instance, Trump explained that one of the operation’s objectives was “ensuring that the Iranian regime cannot continue to arm, fund and direct terrorist armies outside of their borders.” Indeed, should it follow its historical model, Iran will likely continue to make external operations and inspired violence a significant part of its response, adding sleeper cell activation and sponsored individuals to the ranks of homegrown violent extremists who have so far plagued America’s homeland since hostilities broke out. But without a more defined strategy, America will likely struggle to mount an effective response.

If, as the old saying goes, “all politics is local,” then the modern-day corollary in an era of smartphones is, “all conflict is global.” Whenever there is a war in the Middle East, as kicked off in Gaza following the Hamas terror attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, it exacerbates the terrorism threat landscape around the world, including in the West. When images and videos of the errant U.S. missile attack on a girls’ school flood the internet, it raises the temperature, making attacks by lone actors and other violent extremists with only tangential connections to the conflict more likely.

The breadth of the violence, however, was not guaranteed or pre-ordained. As a Shiite-majority nation, Iran has long held fractious and even hostile relationships with Sunni jihadist actors. The extent of the violence indicates a broader anti-American sentiment prevailing across diaspora communities, likely precipitated by the decades-long war on terror, greatly aggravated by Israeli abuses in Gaza since Oct. 7, 2023, and punctuated by the killings of schoolchildren. The Iran war, in other words, seems to be superseding earlier grievances and instead uniting disparate extremist forces against the United States.

In this environment, the Trump administration needs to stop being so cavalier about counterterrorism. Devoid of an actual strategy and without a director of the National Counterterrorism Center, the United States is even more vulnerable to an attack on the homeland than it would be with those in place. Writing on X, Robert A. Pape, a longtime scholar of terrorism, posted: “After tracking terrorism for 25 years, this is a flashing red light — as bright as I’ve seen prior to a serious attack.”

Only a serious approach to countering terrorism will keep the United States safe, and this is the moment for the Trump administration to demonstrate that it recognizes the stakes. In counterterrorism, inattention can be deadly.

Jacob Ware is a terrorism researcher and the co-author of “God, Guns, and Sedition: Far-Right Terrorism in America.” Colin P. Clarke is the executive director of the Soufan Center. His research focuses on terrorism, counterterrorism and armed conflict.

Source link

POLITICS

Trump’s war rhetoric is coarse. It’s also heard differently, depending on the audience

Mar 15, 2026 Politics Desk

In one of his latest missives on social media, President Trump complained that he wasn’t getting enough credit for “totally destroying the terrorist regime of Iran, militarily, economically, and otherwise.”

“We have unparalleled firepower, unlimited ammunition, and plenty of time,” he wrote of a war that has crippled the global supply of oil, sharply increased gas prices, cost U.S. taxpayers billions, left thousands dead and wounded, and so far defied Trump’s own “short term” timetable.

“Watch what happens to these deranged scumbags today,” Trump added. “They’ve been killing innocent people all over the world for 47 years, and now I, as the 47th President of the United States of America, am killing them. What a great honor it is to do so!”

Again and again in recent days, Trump and other top officials in his administration — notably Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth — have projected confidence and power in Iran in a coarse and triumphant tone that is unprecedented for U.S. wartime presidents and their Cabinet members, according to experts in presidential rhetoric and propaganda.

They have consistently described the war in terms of how hard the U.S. is hitting Iran, rather than why it must do so. They’ve talked of destroying the Iranian navy and air force, wiping out its leadership and making the U.S. “more respected” globally than it has ever been, including by showing no mercy.

“This was never meant to be a fair fight, and it is not a fair fight. We are punching them while they’re down, which is exactly how it should be,” Hegseth said.

Missing is the solemnity of past wartime leaders facing dead U.S. soldiers, a recalcitrant enemy and a precarious tactical position, replaced by a message of U.S. mercilessness — of contempt for Iran rather than concern for its civilians or a focus on the American ideals that U.S. presidents have long tried to rally the world around, especially in times of war.

“At a time when people can see the effects of the war when they fill up their gas tank, and when there have been American casualties, the triumphalist tone is just not something a president normally does,” said Robert C. Rowland, a professor of rhetoric at the University of Kansas and author of the book “The Rhetoric of Donald Trump: Nationalist Populism and American Democracy.”

“Many presidents wouldn’t have that tone for personal moral reasons,” Rowland said, “but they also know that it can backfire when things don’t go well.”

James J. Kimble, a communication professor and propaganda historian at Seton Hall University, said U.S. presidents have “by and large” struck a respectful tone in wartime, though there are some exceptions. President Truman, justifying dropping atomic bombs on Japan, wrote that “when you have to deal with a beast, you have to treat him as a beast,” while the U.S. produced World War II posters designed to “demonize and dehumanize the German enemy,” he noted.

Still, Trump’s messaging — including his “expressing glee at the death of foreign combatants” — has been “much coarser,” Kimble said.

“It’s moving beyond the idea of defeating the enemy on the field of battle, and more into a kind of defeat as humiliation — intentional humiliation,” he said. “It’s schoolyard bullying, along with the physical violence.”

Asked about Trump’s rhetoric, Anna Kelly, a White House spokeswoman, said Trump “will always be proud to recognize the incredible accomplishments of our brave service members.”

“Under the decisive leadership of President Trump, America’s heroic war fighters are meeting or surpassing all of their goals under Operation Epic Fury,” she said. “The legacy media wants us to apologize for highlighting the United States military’s incredible success, but the White House will continue showcasing the many examples of Iran’s ballistic missiles, production facilities, and dreams of owning a nuclear weapon being destroyed in real time.”

Trump has built his political career around blunt rhetoric, and his messaging on Iran has drawn applause from his supporters. Polling has shown the public is heavily divided on the war — drawing far less public support than past wars, but broad support from Republicans.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has accused the media of ignoring “clear” objectives that the president and others have set for the war effort, including wiping out Iran’s missile systems, preventing it from developing a nuclear weapon and stopping what Trump had a “feeling” was a coming attack on the U.S.

However, Trump and Hegseth have themselves strayed from that framework with their brash rhetoric, and their focus on the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other Iranian leaders.

Trump has dismissed reports that the U.S. bombed an Iranian school full of children by suggesting that Iran may actually have been responsible, despite reported findings by U.S. intelligence that it was an American attack.

Hegseth has added to concerns about careless U.S. bombing by expressing disdain for wartime rules designed to limit civilian casualties, calling them “stupid rules of engagement.”

“Our war fighters have maximum authorities granted personally by the president and yours truly,” Hegseth said. “Our rules of engagement are bold, precise and designed to unleash American power, not shackle it.”

The White House has also pushed out a wave of wartime propaganda on social media, often striking the same irreverent, bullish tone, experts noted.

One video interspersed movie clips of superheroes and soldiers with real footage of Iranian targets getting blown up, under the words, “JUSTICE THE AMERICAN WAY.” The clip drew condemnation, including from the actor Ben Stiller, who objected to the inclusion of footage from his film “Tropic Thunder,” saying, “War is not a movie.”

Hegseth’s bravado has also been caricatured on “Saturday Night Live,” which opened two weeks in a row with a satirical portrayal of him as angry, dimwitted and hyped up on the violence of war.

All of it has come against a backdrop of Islamophobic remarks from members of Congress on X, with Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) writing that “Muslims don’t belong in American society” and Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) posting a picture of the 9/11 terrorist attack next to an image of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who is Muslim, and writing “the enemy is inside the gates.”

Certainly Iranian leaders have expressed similar contempt for the U.S. for years. Khamenei, killed at the start of the war, was known for stoking anti-American sentiment, speaking to crowds amid chants of “death to America.”

However, U.S. presidents have traditionally spoken with more reserve. They have slammed U.S. enemies, but often by drawing a contrast between them, the U.S. and the values the U.S. purports to defend globally. They have expressed confidence in past U.S. missions, but been wary of taking a celebratory or triumphant tone — especially at the start of a war, amid intense fighting, as American troops are still dying.

Not so with Trump, who on Wednesday said, “You never like to say too early you won. We won. We won … . In the first hour, it was over.”

He also said, “Over the past 11 days, our military has virtually destroyed Iran,” and “they don’t have anything.”

On Thursday, six U.S. service members were killed when a refueling aircraft crashed in Iraq. On Friday, the U.S. military announced it was sending 2,500 Marines and an additional U.S. warship to the conflict.

Kimble said there are several ways to view Trump’s war rhetoric. One is “through the lens of PSYOPS, or psychological operations” — or intentional messaging aimed at discouraging the enemy, akin to the U.S. dropping leaflets in World War II telling foreign combatants that they must surrender or die. In that view, Trump is speaking directly to the Iranians, trying to get them to “perceive victory as impossible.”

Another is to view Trump and Hegseth as projecting a tough image for their MAGA base, their Democratic rivals and any other nations they might be preparing to challenge, such as Cuba.

Rowland said Trump “always has to be the big dog in the room,” and his war messaging should be viewed in that context.

“A lot of the rhetoric is performative cruelty,” Rowland said. “It’s more about him coming across as dominant than it is about making a case that the war has been good for the U.S. and the region and the West and the world.”

Source link

TRAVEL

California national parks set attendance record, despite controversy

Mar 14, 2026 Travel Desk

Despite morale-sapping staff layoffs, bizarre executive orders and a 43-day federal government shutdown last fall, the grandeur and serenity of national parks in California remain irresistible to outdoors lovers looking to unwind.

The nine national parks in the Golden State — including Yosemite, Death Valley and Joshua Tree — attracted nearly 12 million recreational visits in 2025, according to statistics from the National Park Service.

That’s up more than 800,000 visits from 2024 and up more than 300,000 from the previous record set in 2019, according to the data, which stretches back to 1979.

Nationally, visits were high, at 323 million, but down a couple of percentage points from the record set in 2024, according to a park service press release.

“America’s national parks continue to be places where people come to experience our country’s history, landscapes and shared heritage,” said Jessica Bowron, acting director of the NPS.

“We are committed to keeping parks open, accessible and well-managed so visitors can safely enjoy these extraordinary places today and for generations to come,” Bowron added.

President Trump’s critics beg to differ.

Since Trump resumed office in January 2025, his administration has slashed the NPS workforce by nearly a quarter, buying out or laying off hundreds of rangers, maintenance workers, scientists and administrative staff across the country.

And last year, as part of his war on “woke,” Trump instructed the park service to scrub all signs and presentations of language he would deem negative, unpatriotic or smacking of “improper partisan ideology.”

He also ordered administrators to remove any content that “inappropriately disparages Americans” living or dead, and replace it with language that celebrates the nation’s greatness.

That gets tricky at places such as Manzanar National Historic Site in the high desert of eastern California — one of 10 camps where the U.S. government imprisoned more than 120,000 Japanese American civilians during World War II.

It’s also hard to dance around disparaging details at Fort Sumter National Monument, where Confederates fired the first shots of the Civil War; Ford’s Theater National Historic Site in Washington, D.C., where Abraham Lincoln was assassinated; and Martin Luther King Jr. National Historic Park, which commemorates the assassination of the country’s best known civil rights leader.

“This administration is actively erasing the history, science and culture that our national parks protect,” said Emily Douce, deputy vice president for government affairs for the nonprofit National Parks Conservation Assn.

Douce argued that morale among staff at the parks — a string of 63 federally protected natural wonders often described as “America’s best idea” — has never been lower.

But the fact that employees still showed up, including without pay during last year’s federal government shutdown, demonstrates their commitment to keeping the beloved parks flourishing.

“The enduring popularity of America’s national parks is not surprising,” Douce added. “What’s shocking is this administration’s relentless attacks on these places and their caretakers, which threatens their future.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The National Park Service is routinely ranked among the most admired branches of the large and sprawling federal government. Even Americans who have never watched a minute of C-SPAN, or get a little lost in the alphabet soup of other agencies, will probably never forget standing in Yosemite Valley and admiring a towering waterfall.

There were 4.3 million visits to Yosemite in 2025, 2.9 million to Joshua Tree and 1.3 million to Death Valley, according to the data.

The 323 million visits to America’s national parks in 2025 are more than twice the attendance — 135 million — at professional football, baseball, basketball and hockey games combined.

Of course, it’s a lot cheaper to get into a park. U.S. residents pay between $20 and $35 per vehicle for a day pass, or $80 for an annual pass. The Trump administration recently raised the annual fee to $250 for foreign visitors.

National Park Service officials did not respond to emails requesting comment on California’s 2025 attendance.

Source link

NEWS TODAY

Advocates push for major probe as US boat strikes in Latin America kill 157 | Donald Trump News

Mar 12, 2026 News Desk

Washington, DC – In September, the United States began launching dozens of deadly military strikes against alleged drug-smuggling boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific.

Nearly half a year later, remarkably little is known about the strikes. The identities of the nearly 157 people killed have not been released. Any purported evidence against them has not been made public.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

But a group of United Nations and international law experts are hoping to change that on Friday, when they testify at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR).

The international hearing will be the first of its kind since the strikes began on September 2, and rights advocates hope it can help lead to accountability as individual legal cases related to the strikes proceed.

Steven Watt, a senior staff lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union’s human rights programme, said the goal of the hearing will be threefold.

“Our ask will be to conduct a fact-finding investigation into what’s going on,” Watt said.

The second aim, he continued, would be “to assert or to arrive at a conclusion that there is no armed conflict here”, in what would be a rebuke to US President Donald Trump’s previous claims.

Finally, Watt said, he hopes the proceedings will yield long-sought transparency from the Trump administration on “whether or not they have a legal justification for these boat strikes”.

“We don’t think there are any,” Watt added.

‘We don’t know the names’

The experts set to testify at Friday’s hearing said the IACHR has a unique mandate to uncover the truth behind the US strikes.

The commission, based in Guatemala City, Guatemala, is an independent investigative body within the Organization of American States, of which the US was a founding member in 1948.

While the Trump administration has claimed it has a right to carry out the deadly attacks as part of a wider military offensive against so-called “narco-terrorists”, rights groups have decried the campaign as a series of extrajudicial killings.

They argue that Trump’s deadly tactics deny those targeted of anything that approaches due process.

Legal experts have also dismissed Trump’s claims that suspects in drug-related crimes are equivalent to “unlawful combatants” in an “armed conflict”.

Few details have emerged from the air strikes. Several families have come forward, however, to informally identify the dead as their loved ones.

Victims are said to include 26-year-old Chad Joseph and 41-year-old Rishi Samaroo, who were sailing home to Trinidad and Tobago when they were killed in October, according to relatives.

A complaint filed against the US government said both men travelled often between the islands and Venezuela, where Joseph found work as a farmer and fisherman, and Samaroo laboured on a farm.

The family of Colombian national Alejandro Carranza, 42, have also said he was killed in September when the US military attacked his fishing boat off the country’s coast.

The US has yet to confirm the victims’ identities, and only two survivors have ever been rescued in the 45 reported strikes.

A clearer picture of what happened will be a significant step towards accountability, according to experts like Watt.

“[The IACHR] is uniquely positioned to identify who all these persons are,” Watt said. “We just know the numbers from the United States. We don’t know the names or the backgrounds of these people.”

The IACHR has launched a range of human rights investigations in recent decades, including probes into the 2014 mass kidnapping of 43 students in Iguala, Mexico, and a series of murders in Colombia from 1988 to 1991 dubbed the Massacre of Trujillo.

The commission has also examined US policies, including extrajudicial detentions at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, during its so-called “global war on terror”.

The IACHR has the power to seek resolutions to human rights complaints or refer them for litigation before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Just last week, the court ordered Peru to pay reparations to the family of a woman who died during a government-led forced sterilisation campaign in the 1990s.

The Carranza family has filed its own complaint to the IACHR, and the families of Joseph and Samaroo have also lodged a lawsuit against the US in a federal court in Massachusetts.

Angelo Guisado, a senior staff lawyer at the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), said a fuller accounting of the US actions is needed to prevent future abuses. He is among the experts testifying on Friday.

“You can’t normalise assassinating fishermen off the coast of South America,” Guisado told Al Jazeera. “That’s just sadistic and an abomination to the rules-based order that we’ve created.”

“So we hope that the commission can do some investigation.”

A war against ‘narco-terrorists’?

One of Guisado’s goals for Friday’s hearing will be to unpack the Trump administration’s argument that the attacks are necessary from a national security standpoint.

Even before the US strikes began, the Trump administration began framing the Latin American drug trade as an existential threat to the US.

As part of that re-framing, the administration borrowed messaging from its “global war on terror”, taking the unorthodox approach of labelling several cartels “foreign terrorist organisations”.

Speaking last week at a meeting of Latin American leaders, White House security adviser Stephen Miller maintained there is no “criminal justice solution” to drug cartels.

Instead, he affirmed that the US would use “hard power, military power, lethal force, to protect and defend the American homeland”, even if that meant carrying out deadly operations throughout the Western Hemisphere.

Guisado, however, noted that the administration has admitted that the targeted boats were largely carrying cocaine, not the highly addictive fentanyl responsible for the majority of US drug overdoses.

He explained that the administration has done little to prove its claims that drug traffickers are part of a coordinated effort to destabilise the US.

Such hyperbolic language, Guisado added, could be used as a smokescreen to conceal illegal actions.

“When you invoke national security interest, it seems as if scrutiny and any legitimate analysis or condemnation gets pushed to one side in favour of an ersatz martial law,” Guisado said.

“The idea that you could just proclaim anyone a narcoterrorist and do whatever you want with them is just so repugnant to our system of fairness, justice and law.”

Watt, meanwhile, said he hopes the IACHR will draw a clear “line in the sand”, separating drug crimes from what is conventionally considered an armed conflict.

He also would like to see the IACHR clearly outline the US’s human rights obligations.

“But even if there was an armed conflict — of which there isn’t — the laws of war would prohibit the type of conduct that the United States is engaging in here,” Watt explained.

“It would be an extrajudicial killing. It would be a war crime.”

Transparency or accountability

Friday’s hearing will only be an initial step towards accountability, and critics question how effective the IACHR will ultimately be.

The US has regularly shrugged off human rights probes at international forums, and it is not party to entities like the International Criminal Court in The Hague, raising barriers to the pursuit of justice.

Despite being a member of the OAS, the US has also not ratified the American Convention on Human Rights, one of the organisation’s founding documents.

It is, therefore, unclear how binding any IACHR decisions could be, although Watt argued that it is “longstanding jurisprudence of the commission that the declaration imposes obligations on non-ratifying member states”.

Still, legal experts said Friday’s hearing may yield clarity on the Trump administration’s legal argument for the boat strikes.

The IACHR has said US government representatives are set to appear at the hearing.

To date, the US Department of Justice has not released the Office of Legal Counsel’s official reasoning for the boat strikes, considered the foundational legal document for the military actions.

A separate memorandum from that office addressed the US abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on January 3, which it framed as a drug enforcement action.

That memo touched on the boat strikes, but it only served to raise further questions about Trump’s rationale.

“This will be an opportunity for the United States to put its case before the commission,” Watt said.

“But of course, it depends on US cooperation,” he continued. “They’re going down there, but it’ll be interesting to see what they actually say”.

Source link

MONEY

Sustainable Finance Awards 2026: Latin America

Mar 9, 2026 Finance Desk



Sustainable Finance Awards 2026: Latin America | Global Finance Magazine




























Home Awards Award Winners Sustainable Finance Awards 2026: Latin America

This year’s regional winners advanced sustainability by issuing green, blue, social, and transition bonds while funding renewable energy projects across LatAm.

There has been steady progress in Latin America toward a sustainability agenda. Since the region’s first green bond was issued in 2014, over $164 billion has been raised in international markets, according to the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. Despite these gains, a $650 billion annual funding gap needs to be closed to meet the UN’s SDGs by 2030. Currently, only 23% of these goals appear likely to be achieved, and the remaining goals are stagnating unless accelerated progress is made.

According to the World Economic Forum, 70% of the region’s electricity is supplied by renewables, including solar, wind, and hydropower. Even so, many economies still export fossil fuels and minerals while importing refined fuels and gas, creating a complex landscape.

The region is also becoming a global leader in blue-finance markets, with prominent Latin American banks issuing some of the largest blue bonds and developing frameworks for blue loans, both of which fund clean water and sanitation projects. To enhance the blue economy within the region, the Development Bank of Latin America and the Caribbean plans to invest $2.5 billion in the blue economy through 2030 to boost conservation efforts and encourage economic growth.

Many of this year’s winning banks work with clients to support the transition to clean energy. In this spirit, these banks continue to innovate as Latin America becomes a more sustainable region.

visualization

BTG Pactual

Best Bank for Sustainable Finance

Sustainable Finance Deal of the Year: EcoRioMinas – Green Transition Bonds

Best Bank for Sustainability Transparency

Brazilian-based BTG Pactual is one of the more innovative banks within the sustainable-finance market. In 2020, the bank committed to a tenfold increase in the volume of ESG bonds issued by 2025 and achieved this goal in 2023. Despite high interest rates and corporations revisiting ESG strategies, BTG Pactual structured about $2 billion in eight labeled green, blue, sustainability, and green transition bonds.

Brazil’s infrastructure is increasingly challenged to demonstrate measurable climate commitments, and the rapidly evolving transition-finance market advances credible long-term decarbonization strategies into reality while providing investors with transparency and accountability regarding emissions. BTG Pactual worked with EcoRioMinas to structure one of the first green transition bonds in Brazil.

This 540 million Brazilian real (about $104.4 million) issuance finances transition-oriented projects, like renewable-energy facilities, LED lighting systems, paving-material reuse, and reforestation and landscape restoration initiatives. This transaction addresses a highway’s environmental footprint by expanding energy efficiency and reusing existing resources to reduce consumption.

BTG Pactual also raised 542 million reais for an impact-investing fund for private equity investments in SMEs. The bank launched an ESG bond fund and intends to raise $100 million that will be dedicated to sustainable finance. BTG was also selected to manage the Espírito Santo Decarbonization Fund seeded with 500 million reais from Brazil’s sovereign fund to finance low-carbon projects.

BancoEstado

Best Impact Investing Solution

Best Bank for Sustaining Communities

BancoEstado aims to generate long-term value and help advance Chilean commitments on climate change. Specifically, the bank is working toward net-zero by 2030 for operational emissions and by 2050 for financed emissions.

The bank empowers citizens through its Social Leaders Academy, which provides training to leaders so they can teach communities how to access housing and support microentrepreneurs. This educational model improves living standards throughout Chile by strengthening the right to adequate housing.

BancoEstado’s Impacto Verde initiative promotes inclusive economic development by connecting MSMEs with large corporations. These relationships ultimately bolster Chile’s business ecosystem by strengthening supply chain standards and expanding MSMEs’ access to banking services. The program also promotes shared growth between corporations and MSMEs and offers startups tailored products and services better suited to small businesses.

In its work to sustain communities, the bank has provided financing for infrastructure through transition- and sustainability-linked products. These products have financed electric buses for new public transportation fleets and nonconventional renewable-energy plants, for example. These ESG loans are aimed at companies that measure socioenvironmental factors, and the loan rate is adjusted based on compliance with these indicators. These factors focus primarily on reducing water use and greenhouse gas emissions.

Itau BBA

Best Bank for Sustainable Infrastructure/Project Finance

Best Bank for Blue Bonds

Best Bank for Transition/Sustainability-Linked Loans

Itau BBA recently published its new ESG strategy anchored in climate transition, diversity, development, and sustainable finance. The bank set a new goal in 2024 to mobilize 1 trillion reais in sustainable finance by December 2030. This is aligned with the green taxonomy of the Federation of Brazilian Banks, Febraban, and integrates internal ESG criteria and leading international frameworks.

The bank partnered with Bracell, a global producer of specialty cellulose, in a sustainability-linked loan with targets that must be met by 2030 or a financial penalty will be applied. These targets include a 28% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, a 19.3% reduction in water usage, and an 81.8% reduction in landfill waste. This loan helps Bracell meet broader commitments to reduce its carbon footprint, increase operational efficiency with cleaner technologies, and support biodiversity. This partnership works to highlight an initiative to foster industrial practices that drive economic growth while contributing to environmental preservation.

The bank also acted as joint bookrunner on Aegea’s $750 million blue bond issuance, one of the largest in the international market. The funds are earmarked for infrastructure for water supply, sewage collection, and protection for marine ecosystems. This transaction aims to provide access to water for 99% and sewage systems for 90% of the population by 2033.

Bradesco BBI

Best Bank for Green Bonds

Best Bank for Social Bonds

Best Bank for Sustainability Bonds

IBradesco BBI has been recognized for its diversity, respect and racial equality. The bank initially set a goal to mobilize 250 billion reais in sustainable finance by 2025 and has since increased that goal to 350 billion reais over the same period. This was achieved in September 2025. During the year, the bank completed 17 ESG transactions that included nine green bonds, two social bonds, and five sustainability bonds.

Bradesco has also worked to establish innovative programs, like the Eco Invest Program that is led by the Brazilian National Treasury and aims to attract foreign investment for the country’s ecological transformation projects. The bank and the power utility Neoenergia, Iberdrola’s Brazilian subsidiary, completed one of the first green bond issuances under this program, raising 1 billion reais in transactions. The proceeds will be used to modernize the power infrastructure within Brazil.

This work will include installing smart grids; burying lines underground to protect them from climate risk; and upgrading substations, transmission lines, and distribution networks. Re.green secured 80 million reais from Brazil’s Climate Fund in a landmark biodiversity-labeled transaction in which Bradesco provided a guarantee letter and ESG advisory services. Re.green is focused on restoration efforts that boost an ecosystem’s recovery when that area has been damaged, destroyed, or degraded. These funds will be used to reforest 15,000 hectares in priority areas.


arrow-chevron-right-redarrow-chevron-rightbutton-arrow-left-greybutton-arrow-left-red-400button-arrow-left-red-500button-arrow-left-red-600button-arrow-left-whitebutton-arrow-right-greybutton-arrow-right-red-400button-arrow-right-red-500button-arrow-right-red-600button-arrow-right-whitecaret-downcaret-rightclosecloseemailfacebook-square-holdfacebookhamburger-newhamburgerinstagramlinkedin-square-1linkedinpauseplaysearch-outlinesearchsubscribe-digitalsubscribe-printtwitter-square-holdtwitteryoutube

Source link

MONEY

Sustainable Finance Awards 2026: North America

Mar 9, 2026 Finance Desk

North American sustainable-finance issuance suffered due to ESG backlash and regulatory tensions, but Canada remained resilient and adaptation finance emerged.

visualization

Last year, sustainable-finance issuance in North America fell off a cliff.

According to Moody’s, issuance fell from 2024’s $124 billion to $67 billion—a far cry from the 2021 peak of $175 billion. Almost all the drop was attributable to the US, where prominent banks followed the six big players that withdrew from the UN-convened Net-Zero Banking Alliance beginning in December 2024. This reflects ongoing polarization and growing political scrutiny of ESG, as well as banks shifting focus to areas such as energy security. The sharp drop in ESG issuance was reflected in the paucity of North American entries Global Finance received for this year’s Sustainable Finance Awards.

The pattern looks set to continue into 2026 as the ESG pushback persists. Sustainable Fitch, a Fitch Solutions company, says, “We expect investors to continue to face challenges navigating the North American ESG regulatory environment as diverging pressures persist between state and federal requirements in the US.”

The one bright spot is Canada—admittedly a much smaller player than the US—where leading banks continue to prioritize ESG and increase issuance. “There may be some momentum in late 2026 as Canada finalizes its new green and transition taxonomy,” Sustainable Fitch forecasts.

Generally, the group anticipates that adaptation finance will be a major growth driver “as global attention shifts from mitigation to resilience amid increasingly frequent and severe extreme-weather events, shaping investment strategies and policy frameworks.” Meanwhile, multinational asset management company Schroders anticipates “an increased emphasis on demonstrating the returns and value of sustainability efforts.”

Best Bank for Sustainable Finance

Circular Economy Commitment

Best Bank for Sustaining Communities

Best Bank for Sustainability Transparency

Best Bank for Blue Bonds (New for 2026)

Best Bank for Social Bonds

Best Bank for Sustainability Bonds

Scotiabank

Scotiabank’s deep and extensive commitment to sustainable finance made it an obvious winner of the above eight awards.

In just one of the bank’s circular-economy projects, Scotiabank served as green-loan structuring agent for Diaco’s inaugural green loan. Diaco is a key player in Colombia’s steel industry, and its business model is built on the circularity of steel, extending environmental, economic, and social value throughout the product life cycle.

For blue bonds, Scotiabank helped the Mexican government to issue a blue bond that provides funding for sustainable fishing and aquaculture. Mexico’s fishing industry is one of the largest in the world, making the protection of its coastlines and waterways key. This blue bond, issued in December 2024, amounts to 4.5 billion Mexican pesos (about US$218 million).

In terms of sustainability transparency, the bank says, “We are committed, through our annual Sustainability Report and Public Accountability Statement, to present our activity and performance on environment, social and governance topics that we believe matter to our stakeholders.” Scotiabank releases an annual Sustainability Report and an annual Climate Report, which, since 2026, has been part of the Sustainability Report.

In 2021, as part of its commitment to sustaining communities, the bank launched the ScotiaRISE initiative, a 10-year 500 million Canadian dollar (about US$364.8 million ) community-investment program to strengthen economic resilience. Between 2021 and 2025, the program invested more than CA$210 million across 300 organizations. It also launched the Scotiabank Women Initiative, which it says “aims to help women clients increase their economic and professional opportunities and succeed on their own terms as they grow their businesses, advance their careers and invest in their futures.”

Sustainable Finance Deal of the Year: Nautilus Solar Energy Long-Term Debt Facility

Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation

Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation (SMBC) closed a $275 million long-term debt facility with Nautilus Solar Energy. This financing enables the development of more than 25 community solar projects across five states (Illinois, Maryland, Delaware, New York, and Rhode Island).

The projects add more than 130 MW of renewable capacity to local power grids, delivering clean, affordable energy to more than 11,000 households and small businesses. This expansion boosts Nautilus Solar’s operating and managed portfolio to 700 MW and paves the way for future debt issuances together.

SMBC continues to be a leader in sustainable finance and says, “This transaction is an achievement that reflects both SMBC’s and Nautilus’ deep commitment to sustainability and innovation, making it a standout candidate for recognition in the renewable-energy sector,” adding that it is “a transformative milestone in advancing clean energy access across the United States.”

Best Platform/Technology Facilitating Sustainable Finance

Best Bank for Green Bonds

Best Bank for Transition/Sustainability-Linked Loans

CIBC Capital Markets

In a field where jargon and complexity are commonplace and can inhibit issuance and business growth, CIBC’s Sustainability Issuance Framework, unveiled in March 2024, clearly outlines the eligible issuance categories. It defines 16 distinct areas eligible for bonds and loans, including clean energy and clean fuels (nuclear power is included here, with CIBC the only Canadian bank to do so), pollution prevention and control, green buildings, the promotion of biodiversity, circularity, and affordable housing.

This comprehensive platform has helped CIBC Capital Markets raise US$199.4 billion toward its 2030 target by the end of last year. CIBC has been involved in 303 projects across solar, wind, and green buildings. It has also helped CIBC Capital Markets become a leader in green bonds, issuing its first, for US$500 million, in 2020, and another in January 2024 for €500 million in euro-denominated bonds with a three-year maturity.

In Barbados, CIBC Capital Markets served as sustainability structuring agent alongside CIBC Caribbean, which acted as lead arranger, in one of the first sovereign sustainability loans in the Caribbean.

These roles are part of a broader strategy to mobilize US$300 billion in sustainable-finance projects by 2030.

Best Bank for Sustainable Infrastructure/Project Finance

Societe Generale

As part of its broader sustainability strategy, Societe Generale has focused on sustainability-linked infrastructure and projects, demonstrating the emphasis in 2025. It acted as joint lead arranger of a $424 million green-loan project financing for International Transport Service (ITS), a terminal operator in Long Beach, California.

ITS operates in the San Pedro Bay harbor, the primary gateway for North American trans-Pacific trade and the main US destination for Asian imports. Societe Generale has served as green loan coordinator to advance the University of Iowa’s ESG strategy (€671 million). Last year, the bank was involved in debt financing (for $210 million) of a voluntary carbon-removal afforestation project with Chestnut Carbon, a nature-based carbon-removal entity.

The financing will enable Chestnut to construct Project Megaton, a reforestation/decarbonization project covering some 67,000 acres in the southeastern US.

Source link

You missed

SPORT

F1 Q&A: Aston Martin, McLaren, Mercedes, safety cars and changes to lap times

Apr 7, 2026 Sports Desk
TRAVEL

On the shoulders of giants: roaming among England’s famous chalk figures | Walking holidays

Apr 7, 2026 Travel Desk
TOP NEWS

Democratic lawmakers end Cuba trip, urge U.S. to end ‘economic bombing’

Apr 7, 2026 News Desk
NEWS TODAY

Trump’s threat to strike Iran’s power plants looms | US-Israel war on Iran

Apr 7, 2026 News Desk