Americas

July 11 (UPI) — Protesters rallied outside the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem Friday, calling for an end to American support of Israel amid that country’s continued war against Hamas in Gaza.

Demonstrators chanted and banged drums while “protesting the U.S. funding and support of the genocide,” the group Voice Against War posted on Instagram.

“Today in Jerusalem, activists demonstrated the genocide in Gaza in front of the US consulate, protesting the US funding and support of the genocide,” it said on X.

The protests come the same day an Israeli airstrike in central Gaza killed at least 15 Palestinians, including 10 children and two women.

Earlier this week, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz unveiled plans to eventually move all Palestinians in Gaza into a closed “humanitarian city.”

Katz said the plan was for the Israel Defense Force to construct the camp near the site of Rafah, in the southern tip of the Palestinian enclave, with the hope that Palestinians would then “voluntarily emigrate” from there to other countries.

The plan drew immediate criticism, with critics calling it a “crime against humanity.”

The same day, U.S. State Department officials sanctioned the U.N. special rapporteur for the West Bank and Gaza.

Francesca Paola Albanese recently authored a report, describing Israeli actions as “genocide” of the Palestinian people, calling for punitive measures.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu this week met with U.S. officials while on a visit to Washington, D.C.

Netanyahu continues to try and orchestrate a ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas with the assistance of President Donald Trump.

Masked federal agents are snatching up immigrants. It’s been less than two weeks since the U.S. bombed Iranian nuclear facilities. President Trump’s long-threatened tariffs could finally kick in next week.

Given all that, most people probably aren’t focused on climate change.

But they should be. Because Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” which passed the Senate this week and was poised to clear the House early Thursday, would do more than gut Medicaid, cut student loan relief and increase funding for deportations. It would kill federal support for solar and wind power, undoing President Biden’s historic climate law and punishing Americans with deadlier air, more lethal heat waves and higher electric bills.

I’m usually a climate optimist. But it’s hard to find reasons for hope right now.

The Senate bill would eliminate tax credits for solar and wind farms that don’t come online by the end of 2027 — a brutal deadline for projects that take years to permit, finance and construct. That would slam the brakes on new development and also jeopardize hundreds of projects already in the works — not only solar and wind farms, but also factories to build solar panels, wind turbines, lithium-ion batteries and other clean energy technologies.

Solar and wind farms that start construction by June 2026 would get tax credits no matter when they come online, a last-minute concession to the handful of Republican senators with a modicum of sense.

As if needing to counterbalance that concession, Republican leaders added lucrative tax credits for metallurgical coal, an incredibly dirty fossil fuel that’s mostly shipped to China and other countries to make steel.

The bill would also end tax credits for rooftop solar, electric vehicles and energy-efficient home upgrades — while reducing royalty rates for coal mined on public lands, and requiring more oil and gas leasing on those lands.

“The fossil fuel industry helped pay for this government, and now they’re getting their reward,” Bill McKibben, the preeminent climate author and activist, wrote in his newsletter.

That’s part of the explanation. Another part, I think, is that most voters aren’t paying close attention.

Polls consistently show that an overwhelming majority of Americans want cleaner energy, and climate action writ large. But polls also show that climate ranks low as a priority for most Americans.

Wind turbines in the California desert, seen from Highway 58.

(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

So when it comes time for Trump and his allies to pay for their deficit-ballooning tax cuts — which mostly benefit the rich — clean energy is an easy target. They can tell outrageous lies about solar and wind being unreliable and expensive, and many people will either believe them or not care enough to seek out the truth.

Indeed, Trump wrote on social media last month that renewable energy tax credits are a “giant SCAM.” He claimed that wind turbines “and the rest of this ‘JUNK’” are “10 times more costly than any other energy.”

That’s not even remotely true. Authoritative sources, including the investment bank Lazard, report that solar and wind are America’s cheapest sources of new electricity, even without tax credits. Those low costs help explain why solar, wind and batteries made up 94% of new power capacity in the U.S. last year. Even in Texas, they’re booming.

For now, at least. John Ketchum, president of Florida-based NextEra Energy, warned the Trump administration in March that shelving renewables and battery storage would “force electricity prices to the moon.”

Lo and behold, research firm Energy Innovation estimates the Senate bill would cause average household energy costs to increase $130 annually by 2030. The firm also predicts 760,000 lost jobs by 2030.

“Families will face higher electric bills, factories will shut down, Americans will lose their jobs, and our electric grid will grow weaker,” said Abigail Ross Hopper, president of the Solar Energy Industries Assn.

The point about the grid growing weaker is key. North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, one of three Republicans to vote against the bill, mentioned a global turbine shortage that’s slowing the construction of gas-fired power plants. He stated plainly what energy executives know: that renewables and batteries are needed for a reliable grid.

“What you have done is create a blip in power service,” Tillis told his colleagues.

Here’s a question: If clean energy is so cheap, and in such high demand, why does it need subsidies?

For one thing, solar and wind projects require big upfront investments, after which the fuel, be it sun or wind, is free. Gas plants are often less expensive to build, but they can subject consumers to huge utility bill swings when fuel costs soar — during geopolitical turmoil, for instance, or during climate-fueled weather disasters.

The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s Eland solar and storage plant, located in Kern County, generates electricity for a record-low price.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

Also relevant: Fossil fuel subsidies are so deeply entrenched in the U.S. tax code that they rarely make news. Coal, oil and gas benefit from tens of billions of dollars in subsidies every year, by some estimates.

And that’s without accounting for the bigger wildfires, harsher droughts, stronger storms, hotter heat waves and other harms of fossil fuel combustion, including air pollution that kills millions of people worldwide each year. Oil, gas and coal companies don’t pay those costs. Taxpayers do.

So, yes, solar and wind still need a leg up. But even under Biden’s climate law, the U.S. hasn’t been reducing heat-trapping emissions enough to help keep global warming to less-than-catastrophic levels.

And now, under Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” the U.S. will be moving backward instead of forward.

So if you care about the climate crisis, what can you do?

I wish I could say California was doubling down on climate leadership, like it did during Trump’s first term. Sadly, Gov. Gavin Newsom hasn’t prioritized clean energy as he readies a possible presidential run. Again and again, he and his appointees have yielded to the fossil fuel industry and its allies — on plastics recycling, oil refinery profits, emissions disclosures and more.

Other Golden State leaders are doing no better. This week, lawmakers passed an awful law pushed by Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) that will pause new energy efficiency rules for homes until 2031. Meanwhile, a potentially transformative “climate superfund” bill — which would charge fossil fuel companies for their pollution and use the money to help Californians cope with climate disasters — is languishing in Sacramento.

The landscape is bleak. But we’re not doomed.

The planet will almost certainly warm beyond an internationally agreed upon target of 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels. But 2 degrees is a lot better than 2.5 degrees, and way better than 3 degrees. Climate change isn’t a game we win or lose. Every bit of avoided warming means safer, healthier lives for more people.

Yes, the U.S. is a climate train wreck right now. But global warming is just like immigration or healthcare: Nothing will change if most of us do nothing. So don’t tune out. Don’t surrender to despair. Bring up climate when you talk to your friends and call your representatives. Make protest signs about it. Let it guide your vote.

As McKibben wrote: “Our job from here on out … is to make ourselves heard.”

“It may not work tomorrow. It may not work until we’ve gotten more decent people into office. But it’s our job, and not to be shirked,” he wrote. “And in some sad way it’s an honor: We’re the people who get to make the desperate stand for a country and a planet that works.”

This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our “Boiling Point” podcast here.

For more climate and environment news, follow @Sammy_Roth on X and @sammyroth.bsky.social on Bluesky.

WASHINGTON — As Americans mark the Fourth of July holiday this weekend, the Trump administration is planning ahead for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence next year, a moment of reflection for a nation beset by record-low patriotism and divided by heated culture wars over the country’s identity.

‘A grand celebration’

Fireworks burst over Washington, D.C., landmarks on July 4, 1976, at the nation’s bicentennial celebration.

(Charles Tasnadi / Associated Press)

White House officials are actively involved in state and local planning for the semiquincentennial after the president, in one of his first acts in office, established “Task Force 250” to organize “a grand celebration worthy of the momentous occasion.”

The administration has launched a website offering its telling of the nation’s founding, and Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” — which he had hoped to pass by this Independence Day — includes a provision allocating $40 million to commission 250 statues for a “National Garden of American Heroes,” to be built at an undetermined location.

Trump has been thinking about the 250th anniversary for years. He invoked the occasion in his first joint session to Congress in 2017, stating it would be “one of the great milestones in the history of the world.” And in 2023, campaigning for a second term, he proposed a “Great American State Fair” to take place around the country throughout the year.

But that milestone year comes amid fierce debate over Trump’s attempts to exert government control over the teaching of American history.

In March, Trump signed an executive order aimed at “restoring truth and sanity to American history,” directing public institutions to limit their presentation of the nation’s history without nuance or criticism. “This is not a return to sanity,” the Organization of American Historians responded at the time. “Rather, it sanitizes to destroy truth.”

On the “America 250” website created by the White House, the account of the nation’s founding is outsourced to Hillsdale College, a far-right institution that was a member of the advisory board for Project 2025.

“A question over this coming year is whether the celebrations around the 250th will be used as yet another cudgel in the culture wars where the goal is to divide rather than unite,” said David Ekbladh, a history professor at Tufts University.

“The view Trump’s ‘Task Force 250’ seems to be laying out is comfortable, but doesn’t give us a full view of that historical moment,” Ekbladh said. “And a full view doesn’t reduce things to a story of tragedy or oppression — although there was plenty of both — but can show us the full set of experiences that were the foundations of a dynamic country.”

Dueling celebrations in a divided nation

In 1976, when the United States marked its 200th birthday, the festivities were prolific. Federal government letterhead was decorated for over a year to mark the anniversary. State-sponsored celebrations were designed to revive a national sense of patriotism that had been challenged by a stagflating economy, lingering trauma from the political convulsions of the late 1960s and the Vietnam War.

A full schedule of events has yet to be made public. But scholars expect echoes of 1976, when government efforts to instill pride in a weary nation met with mixed success.

“In 1976, there were dueling celebrations: official, government-sponsored ones, and ‘people’s’ observances organized by progressive groups,” said Michael Kazin, a history professor at Georgetown University. “I expect something of that kind will occur next year too.”

There are significant differences. This time, the nation will celebrate a constitutional system of checks and balances under historic pressure from a president testing the bounds of executive power.

“Two hundred and fifty years of constitutional democracy is well worth honoring,” said Andrew Rudalevige, a history professor at Bowdoin College, “but this particular anniversary is symbolic in ways that resonate exactly opposite to Trump’s vision of governance and history.”

Most of the Declaration of Independence, Rudalevige noted, is dedicated to laying out “how centralized executive authority leads to tyranny, and must be opposed.” And the document’s promise of inalienable rights and the pursuit of happiness have been a beacon of hope and inspiration to immigrants since the founding.

“So the next year will mark a hugely important tension between the version of American history that Mr. Trump and his allies want taught — and actual American history,” Rudalevige said. “We will have a sort of polarized patriotism.”

Patriotism hits new lows

That polarization has already become evident in recent polling.

A survey published by Gallup this week found that a historically low number of Americans feel patriotic, with 58% of U.S. adults identifying as “extremely” or “very” proud to be an American. That is nine points lower than last year, and the lowest figure registered by Gallup since they began polling on the matter in 2001.

Pride among Republicans has stayed relatively consistent, with 92% registering as patriotic. But it has plummeted among Democrats and independents. And pride decreased across parties by age group, with more Democrats in Gen Z — those born between the mid-1990s and mid-2010s — telling Gallup they have “little” or “no” pride in being an American than saying they are extremely or very proud.

If nothing else, historians said, the anniversary is an opportunity for everyday Americans to reflect on the country they want to live in.

“To be sure, for many people the day is just a day off and maybe a chance to go to a parade and see some fireworks,” said Ekbladh, of Tufts. “But the day can and should be a moment to think about what the country is.”

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Even some Orange County Republicans question Trump sweeps targeting immigrant workers
The deep dive: How Trump’s big budget bill would jump-start his immigration agenda
The L.A. Times Special: Trump was winning with Latinos. Now, his cruelty is derailing him

More to come,
Michael Wilner
—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

NEW YORK — In choosing Zohran Mamdani as their candidate for mayor, Democrats in America’s most Jewish city have nominated an outspoken critic of Israel, alarming some in New York’s Jewish community and signaling a sea change in the priorities of one of the party’s most loyal voting groups.

The 33-year-old democratic socialist’s surprisingly strong performance against former Gov. Andrew Cuomo makes clear that taking a stance against Israel is no longer disqualifying in a Democratic primary. The state Assembly member has declined to support the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state, refused to denounce the term “global intifada” and supports an organized effort to put economic pressure on Israel through boycotts and other tactics.

Yet he excelled in the city with the largest Jewish population outside of Israel, and with the support of many Jewish voters.

Mamdani’s success reflects the ideological realignment of many American Jews since the Oct. 7, 2023, attack by Hamas on Israel that led to Israel’s invasion of the Gaza Strip. Many Democratic voters, including Jews, have grown dismayed by Israel’s conduct in the war and are deeply critical of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. That is especially true among younger, more progressive voters, many of whom have rejected the once-broadly accepted notion that anti-Israel sentiment is inherently antisemitic.

For others, Mamdani’s showing has spurred new fears about safety and the waning influence of Jewish voters in a city where anti-Jewish hate crime has surged. Last year, Jews were the target of more than half of the hate crimes in the city.

“Definitely people are concerned,” said Rabbi Shimon Hecht, of Congregation B’nai Jacob in Brooklyn, who said he has heard from congregants in recent days who hope Mamdani will be defeated in the November general election, where he will face Mayor Eric Adams, who is running as an independent, Republican Curtis Sliwa, and possibly Cuomo if he stays in the race.

“I think like every upsetting election, it’s a wake-up call for people,” Hecht said. “I strongly believe that he will not be elected as our next mayor, but it’s going to take a lot of uniting among the Jewish people and others who are concerned about these issues. We have to unify.”

Veteran New York Democratic political strategist Hank Sheinkopf put it more bluntly, predicting a hasty exodus of religious Jews from the city and a decline in long-standing Jewish influence that would be replicated elsewhere.

“It’s the end of Jewish New York as we know it,” he said, adding: “New York is a petri dish for national Democratic politics. And what happened here is what will likely happen in cities across the country.”

Israel was a key campaign issue

Mamdani’s top Democratic rival, the former governor, had called antisemitism and support for Israel “the most important issue” of the campaign.

Mamdani’s backers repeatedly accused Cuomo of trying to weaponize the issue. Many drew parallels to the way President Trump has cast any criticism of Israel’s actions as antisemitic, claiming Jews who vote for Democrats “hate Israel” and their own religion.

For some Mamdani supporters, the election results signaled a rejection by voters of one of Cuomo’s arguments: that an upstart socialist with pro-Palestinian views posed a threat to New York’s Jewish community.

Many were focused on issues such as affordability in a notoriously expensive city, or were flat-out opposed to Cuomo, who was forced to resign amid sexual harassment allegations.

Aiyana Leong Knauer, a 35-year-old Brooklyn bartender who is Jewish and backed Mamdani, said the vote represented “New Yorkers, many of them Jewish, saying we care more about having an affordable city than sowing division.”

“Many of us take really deep offense to our history being weaponized against us,” she said. “Jewish people all over the world have well-founded fears for their safety, but Jews in New York are safe overall.”

Others agreed with Mamdani’s views on Israel.

Beth Miller, political director of Jewish Voice for Peace Action, a progressive anti-Zionist group that worked on Mamdani’s behalf, said the candidate “was actually pretty popular among a lot of Jewish voters.”

“That is not in spite of his support for Palestinian rights. That is because of his support for Palestinian rights,” she said. “There has been a massive rupture within the Jewish community, and more and more Jews of all generations, but especially younger generations,” now refuse to be tied to what they see as a rogue government committing atrocities against civilians, she said.

Polls show support for Israel has declined since the war began. Overall, a slight majority of Americans now express a “somewhat” or “very” unfavorable opinion of Israel, according to a March Pew Research Center poll, compared with 42% in 2022. Democrats’ views are particularly negative, with nearly 70% holding an unfavorable opinion versus less than 40% of Republicans.

Beyond the mayoral race

Mamdani’s wasn’t the only race where Israel was on voters’ minds.

In Brooklyn, City Councilwoman Shahana Hanif, who represents Park Slope and surrounding areas, drew criticism for her Palestinian advocacy. Some said she had failed to respond forcefully to antisemitic incidents in the district.

Yet Hanif, the first Muslim woman elected to the City Council, easily beat her top challenger, Maya Kornberg, who is Jewish, despite an influx of money from wealthy pro-Israel groups and donors.

That outcome dismayed Ramon Maislen, a developer who launched Brooklyn BridgeBuilders to oppose Hanif’s reelection and said antisemitism did not seem to resonate with voters.

“We were very disappointed with our neighbors’ response,” he said.

While campaigning against Hanif, he said he was routinely screamed at by residents and accused of supporting genocide.

“I think that those of us in the Jewish community that are attuned to that are cognizant that there’s been some kind of cultural sea change that’s occurring,” he said. “What we’re seeing is a legitimatization of hatred that isn’t happening in any other liberal or progressive space.”

Mamdani’s record and rhetoric

Mamdani has repeatedly pledged to fight antisemitism, including during an appearance on “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert,” where he was asked about his stance. He was joined on the show by city comptroller and fellow candidate Brad Lander, the city’s highest-ranking Jewish official, who had cross-endorsed him. He has also said he would increase funding for anti-hate crime programming by 800%.

But many of his comments have angered Jewish groups and officials, most notably his refusal to disavow the phrase “globalize the intifada,” which has been used as a slogan in recent protests. Many Jews see it as a call to violence against Israeli civilians. In a podcast interview, Mamdani said the phrase captured a “a desperate desire for equality and equal rights in standing up for Palestinian human rights.”

Given another opportunity to condemn the phrase, Mamdani on Sunday told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that it was not his role to police speech and pledged to be a mayor who “protects Jewish New Yorkers and lives up to that commitment through the work that I do.”

Mamdani also supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, which aims to pressure governments, schools and other institutions to boycott Israeli products, divest from companies that support the country, and impose sanctions. The Anti-Defamation League calls it antisemitic and part of a broader campaign to “delegitimize and isolate the state of Israel.”

Mamdani has also said that, as mayor, he would have Netanyahu arrested if the Israeli leader tried to enter the city.

The ADL in a statement Thursday warned candidates and their supporters not to use “language playing into dangerous antisemitic canards that time and time again have been used to incite hatred and violence against Jews.”

In his victory speech, Mamdani alluded to the criticism he’d received and said he would not abandon his beliefs. But he also said he would “reach further to understand the perspectives of those with whom I disagree and to wrestle deeply with those disagreements.”

Colvin writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Jake Offenhartz contributed to this report.

June 27 (UPI) — Latin America and the Caribbean rank among the regions with the highest rates of criminal activity worldwide, marked by a strong presence of illicit markets and limited institutional capacity to combat them.

Organized crime has become one of the biggest obstacles to economic development in the region, according to a World Bank report. The report points to four main drivers: territorial control, criminal governance, institutional capture and systemic violence.

In addition to producing and consuming large quantities of cocaine, Latin American criminal groups play a central role in trafficking the drug to the United States and the European Union. These networks are tightly linked to criminal organizations around the world and have a significant impact on the region’s economy, according to the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime, or GI-TOC.

Although the region makes up just 9% of the world’s population, it accounts for about one-third of global homicides, with rates up to eight times higher than the global average. Twelve Latin American countries are among the 50 most affected by organized crime, according to GI-TOC.

A study by the Inter-American Development Bank, led by Argentine researcher Santiago Pérez-Vicent, estimates that criminal organizations cause economic losses equal to 3.5% of the region’s gross domestic product. That figure represents 78% of the regional education budget, twice the amount spent on social assistance and 12 times the investment in research and development.

Colombia, Peru and Bolivia dominate global cocaine production, while Mexico, Brazil and several Central American countries serve as key transit and distribution routes to major consumer markets in North America and Europe.

Cocaine’s impact in Latin America goes beyond the global illicit economy, fueling violent clashes among rival cartels across the region.

In Mexico, about 30,000 teenagers are involved in organized crime, according to the Legal Research Institute at the National Autonomous University of Mexico. They engage in 22 types of criminal activity, including drug trafficking and kidnapping, with many recruited as hitmen due to their age and vulnerability.

Alongside major cartels in Colombia and Mexico, new groups have emerged, including Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua and Brazil’s Primeiro Comando da Capital, or PCC. These organizations have developed new strategies to traffic drugs — including substances beyond cocaine — into the United States and the European Union.

Experts and international organizations say organized crime in the region has evolved significantly. Fragmented and diversified networks are expanding through alliances with foreign groups, including Albanian and Italian mafias.

While most governments in the region focus on combating drug trafficking, cocaine production is only one part of a broader criminal economy. According to The Evolution of Organized Crime in Latin America, a report by researchers Lucía Dammert and Carolina Sampó, organized crime also drives illegal mining, migrant smuggling and human trafficking — activities that severely impact communities and threaten regional and global security.

Illicit activities have expanded into markets with direct human impact, including logging, livestock operations, the cultivation of prohibited plant species and large-scale illegal and unregulated fishing, according to the report.

“Human and arms trafficking, prostitution, the spread of synthetic drugs, counterfeit pharmaceuticals, contract killings and illegal mining — which in countries like Peru and Colombia generate as much or more revenue than drug trafficking — are among the criminal enterprises that have taken hold,” said Pablo Zeballos, a former intelligence officer and international organized crime consultant, in an interview with the BBC.

In recent years, several Latin American countries that were once relatively free of gang-led violence have experienced growing insecurity, violence and lawlessness.

Organized crime has shaped life in places like Mexico, Colombia and Brazil for decades, said Jeremy McDermott, co-director of InSight Crime, in a podcast for Americas Quarterly. “Now, historically more peaceful countries such as Chile, Costa Rica and Uruguay are starting to experience rising levels of violence,” he added.

The expansion of organized crime in Latin America has been driven by a lack of effective coordination among regional governments, limiting joint responses to transnational threats such as drug trafficking, arms smuggling and human trafficking, according to reports from GI-TOC and InSight Crime.

This structural weakness is compounded by the steady erosion of institutions in several countries, marked by high levels of corruption, impunity and limited operational capacity within law enforcement.

Together, these conditions have created power vacuums that criminal groups exploit to establish sophisticated networks of territorial control, infiltrate legal economies and overwhelm national response systems.

The image of Donald Trump shaking hands with Ahmad al-Sharaa, Syria’s current leader, in Riyadh is one that, until recently, would have seemed unimaginable. Al-Sharaa, once on the U.S. most-wanted list with a $10 million bounty for information leading to his capture, now stood alongside Trump to discuss Syria’s future. This meeting, along with Trump’s decision to lift sanctions on Syria, raises a fundamental question: Is America’s war on terror a principled, genuine fight—or a tool serving Washington’s shifting political interests?

A Puzzling Encounter
Trump’s meeting with Ahmad al-Sharaa during his highly publicized Middle East tour sparked regional and global astonishment. Al-Sharaa, formerly known as Abu Mohammad al-Julani, was the leader of Jabhat al-Nusra, a group the U.S. designated as a terrorist organization in 2013, offering $10 million for information on him. Following the meeting, Trump announced plans to normalize relations with Syria’s new government and lift sanctions, calling it an opportunity for a “fresh start” for the war-torn nation. This shift stands in stark contrast to the 2013 U.S. stance, when Jabhat al-Nusra was a prime target in the global war on terror.

The White House defended this move as pragmatic, citing al-Sharaa’s role in toppling Bashar al-Assad and his apparent moderation as the leader of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a rebranding intended to distance the group from its al-Qaeda past. Yet the image of Trump shaking hands with a former most-wanted figure—especially in light of past U.S. actions—was deeply unsettling.

The Soleimani Paradox: A Tale of Selective Justice
To understand the implications of Trump’s meeting with al-Sharaa, we must revisit the 2020 assassination of Qassem Soleimani, commander of Iran’s Quds Force. Soleimani played a central role in fighting ISIS, particularly in Iraq and Syria, where his forces aided local militias in retaking territory. Despite this alignment with U.S. priorities, the Trump administration ordered his assassination via drone strike in Baghdad, justifying it by citing his support for groups like Hezbollah and alleged threats to U.S. interests.

The contrast is stark: Soleimani, who battled ISIS and extremist groups, was killed; al-Sharaa, once the head of an al-Qaeda affiliate, is now a diplomatic partner. This contradiction suggests that U.S. counterterrorism policy is less about eliminating extremism and more about advancing strategic interests. Soleimani’s death disrupted Iran’s regional influence—a long-standing U.S. objective—while al-Sharaa’s new role aligns with Washington’s aim to stabilize post-Assad Syria without direct military involvement.

A History of Convenient Alliances
Trump’s meeting with al-Sharaa is not an anomaly but part of a broader pattern in U.S. foreign policy. During the Cold War, the U.S. supported Afghan mujahideen against the Soviets—some of whom, like Osama bin Laden, later formed al-Qaeda. In the 1980s, Washington backed Saddam Hussein in his war against Iran, despite his clear record of atrocities, because Iraq served as a counterweight to Tehran.

In 2025, Trump’s Middle East strategy mirrors this tradition. His visit to Saudi Arabia—where he signed a $142 billion arms deal and emphasized confronting Iran—underscored a focus on strengthening allies like Saudi Arabia and Israel while selectively engaging former foes like al-Sharaa. The lifting of sanctions and talk of normalization signal a pragmatic shift, prioritizing stability and economic opportunity over old terrorist designations. This realpolitik approach aligns with Trump’s deal-making rhetoric, such as his readiness to negotiate with Iran—if it abandoned its nuclear ambitions and support for “terrorism”—even while threatening “maximum pressure.”

The Mask Slips from the War on Terror
America’s war on terror, launched after 9/11, has long been portrayed as a moral struggle against extremism. But the meeting with al-Sharaa exposes its instrumental nature. By engaging with a former terrorist leader, the U.S. reveals that its “terrorist” labels are often temporary, shifting when political or economic interests arise. Trump’s handshake with al-Sharaa sends a message to regional players: the U.S. is willing to overlook past crimes for strategic gain—a signal that may encourage other groups to pursue legitimacy through cosmetic political changes.

By contrast, the assassination of Soleimani shows the other side of that coin. His killing wasn’t just about counterterrorism—it was a strategic blow to Iran, a regional rival. Soleimani’s forces played a key role in defeating ISIS in Iraq, yet the terrorist label overshadowed his contributions to a shared objective.

A Policy of Expedience
The photo of Donald Trump shaking hands with Ahmad al-Sharaa is more than just a diplomatic snapshot—it’s a window into the dual nature of America’s counterterrorism policy. When a former al-Qaeda commander is embraced as a partner, but a general who fought ISIS is eliminated by U.S. drones, the message is clear: terrorism is a label used for convenience, not conviction. It reveals a truth the West rarely admits—principles become negotiable when interests are at stake.

As the Middle East enters a new chapter, the world watches and wonders: Is America’s war on extremism truly about security—or just another move in a geopolitical chess game for regional and global dominance?

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — An unusual request from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights about Cuban medical brigades that operate worldwide and provide much needed help has roiled countries in the Caribbean and the Americas.

In a letter obtained by the Associated Press, the commission asks members of the Organization of American States, OAS, for details including whether they have an agreement with Cuba for medical missions, whether those workers have labor and union rights and information about any labor complaints.

“This was an unprecedented move,” said Francesca Emanuele, senior international policy associate at the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington. “It’s deeply troubling.”

Cuba has more than 22,000 doctors working in more than 50 countries, including in the Caribbean and the Americas, according to its government. A breakdown for the region was not available, but many impoverished nations in the Caribbean rely heavily on those medical professionals.

The commission, an independent body of the OAS, which is heavily funded by the U.S., said it plans to analyze the data collected as well as offer recommendations “given the persistence of reports of rights violations.”

A spokesperson for the commission declined comment, saying the letter is private.

The letter was sent after U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced visa restrictions in late February for Cuban or foreign government officials accused of involvement in Cuba’s medical missions, which he called “forced labor.”

“The timing is really suspicious,” Emanuele said, noting that the information requested “falls squarely” within the member states’ sovereign decision-making. “The role of this organization should not be distorted.”

In June, the administration of U.S. President Trump slapped several unidentified officials from Central America with visa restrictions.

A deadline looms

Silence has prevailed since the human rights commission issued its May 24 letter giving OAS member states 30 days to respond.

“I’m awaiting a regional approach,” said Ralph Gonsalves, prime minister of St. Vincent and the Grenadines.

He said in a phone interview that he would raise the issue next week during a meeting of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States as chairman.

“There are no human rights issues involved here,” he said, noting that St. Vincent is party to several international and labor conventions. “They have not been breached and will not be breached.”

Gonsalves said Cuban doctors run the sole hemodialysis center in St. Vincent that provides free care to 64 patients at a rate of $5 million a year.

“Without the Cubans, that dialysis center will close,” he said.

When asked if he worried about potential visa restrictions, Gonsalves said he met earlier this year with Rubio and provided a lengthy letter that he declined to share detailing the work of Cuban medical professionals in St. Vincent.

“We didn’t scrimp on any of the details,” he said. “I didn’t walk away from that meeting thinking that there was any possibility or threat of sanctions.”

A divided region

Guyana’s foreign minister, Hugh Todd, told the Associated Press on Friday that the government plans to amend its payment and recruitment system involving Cuban medical professionals.

He said their main concern “is to make sure we are compliant with international labor laws.” Todd did not say whether the planned amendments are related to concerns over U.S. visa restrictions.

Late Thursday, Guyanese Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo said the government wants to ensure that “the conditions of work here don’t run afoul of the requirements set by the United States of America.”

Guyana depends heavily on the U.S. for support, especially given an ongoing and bitter border dispute with neighboring Venezuela.

Some Caribbean leaders have said they would risk losing a U.S. visa, noting that Cuban medical professionals provide much needed help in the region.

“If we cannot reach a sensible agreement on this matter… if the cost of it is the loss of my visa to the U.S., then so be it,” Barbados’ Prime Minister Mia Mottley told Parliament in March as legislators pounded a table in support.

No Cuban medical workers are currently in Barbados.

Echoing Mottley’s sentiment was Trinidad and Tobago Prime Minister Keith Rowley.

“I just came back from California, and if I never go back there again in my life, I will ensure that the sovereignty of Trinidad and Tobago is known to its people and respected by all,” he said in March.

In April, Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel criticized what he described as a campaign against the Caribbean country.

“There is no doubt that that desperate campaign to block Cuban cooperation has two clear objectives: to close off any avenue of income for the country, even in an activity as noble and necessary to other nations as healthcare services,” he said.

“The other reason is political and ideological: They want to sweep Cuba away as an example. And they resort to methods as immoral as threatening any foreign official involved in that activity,” he added.

Rubio has defended visa restrictions, saying they promote accountability.

Coto writes for the Associated Press. AP reporters Bert Wilkinson in Georgetown, Guyana, and Andrea Rodríguez in Havana contributed to this report.

On Oct. 29, 2022, the universe told Dr. Casey Means her fate lay in Los Angeles.

President Trump’s new pick for surgeon general wrote in her popular online newsletter of her epiphany, which came during a dawn hike among the cadmium-colored California oaks and flames of wild mustard flower painting the Topanga Canyon: “You must move to LA. This is where your partner is!’”

Los Angeles has been a Shangri-La for health-seekers since its Gold Rush days as the sanitarium capital of the United States.

Today, it’s the epicenter of America’s $480-billion wellness industry, where gym-fluencers, plant-medicine gurus and celebrity physicians trade health secrets and discount codes across their blue-check Instagram pages and chart-topping podcasts.

But by earning Trump’s nod, Means, 37, has ascended to a new level of power, bringing her singular focus on metabolic dysfunction as the root of ill health and her unorthodox beliefs about psilocybin therapy and the perils of vaccines to the White House.

The surgeon general is the country’s first physician, and the foremost authority on American medicine. Means’ central philosophy — that illness “is a result of the choices you make” — puts her in lockstep with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and in opposition to generations of U.S. public health officials.

Means declined to comment. But interviews with friends and her public writings track a metamorphosis since her move to L.A., from a med-tech entrepreneur and emerging wellness guru to the new face of Trump’s “Make America Healthy Again” movement, or MAHA for short.

If confirmed, America’s next top doctor will bring another unconventional addition to the surgeon general’s uniform: a baby bump. Friends told The Times Means and her husband, Brian Nickerson, are expecting a baby this fall.

“[The pregnancy] will definitely empower her,” said Dr. Darshan Shah, a popular longevity expert and longtime friend of Means. “It might create even more of a sense of urgency.”

On this, both supporters and critics agree. Fertility is a primal obsession of the MAHA movement, and a unifying policy priority among otherwise heterodox MAGA figureheads from Elon Musk to JD Vance. In this worldview, motherhood itself is a credential.

“She’s going to say, ‘I’m a mom, and the reason why you can trust me is I’m a mom,’” said Jessica Malaty Rivera, an infectious disease epidemiologist and an outspoken critic of Means.

Mothers have long been the standard-bearers for Kennedy’s wellness crusade. “MAHA moms” flanked him at the White House during a roundtable in March, where they filmed themselves struggling to pronounce common food additives. Many flocked to Trump after the president vowed to put Kennedy in charge of the nation’s healthcare.

Deena Metzger at her Topanga home. Metzger is a poet, novelist, essayist, storyteller, teacher, healer and medicine woman who has taught and counseled for over fifty years.

(Al Seib/For The Times)

“It’s such a radical change that’s required [in medicine],” said the writer and healer Deena Metzger, 88, whom Means has called one of her “spiritual guides.” “It’s wildly exciting that she might be surgeon general, because she’s really thinking about health.”

Her outsider status gives her a clear-eyed perspective, her supporters say.

“The answer to our metabolic dysfunction is through lifestyle,” said Dr. Sara Szal Gottfried, an OBGYN and longtime friend of Means. “Seventy percent of our healthcare costs are due to lifestyle choices, and that’s where she starts.”

Means’ 2024 bestseller “Good Energy” touts much the same message: Simple individual changes could make most people healthy, but the medical system profits by keeping them sick.

“Moms (and families) will not stand anymore for a country that profits massively off kids getting chronically sick,” Means posted on X on Jan. 30. “Nothing can stop the frustration that is leading to this movement.”

Critics say that elides a more complex reality.

“This is what we call terrain theory — it’s the inverse of germ theory,” said Rivera, the epidemiologist. “Terrain theory has a very deeply racist and kind of eugenic origin, in which certain people got sick and certain people didn’t.”

She and others point out that Means is being elevated at the same time the administration guts public health infrastructure, slashing staff and research funding and aiming to cut billions more from public safety net programs.

“MAHA is why we are defunding the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Institutes of Health],” Rivera said. “Thirteen million people could be uninsured because of [Medicaid cuts].”

But trust in those institutions — and in physicians generally — has tanked in the past five years, surveys show.

The blurring of personal pathos and professional authority at a moment of crisis for institutional medicine is central to MAHA’s influence and power, public health experts say. They point to the movement’s broad appeal from cerulean Santa Monica to crimson Gaines County, Texas, as evidence that health skepticism transcends political lines.

“[MAHA] has sucked in a lot of my blue friends and turned them purple,” Rivera said. “I have people doing the mental gymnastics of ‘I’m not MAGA, I’m just MAHA.’ I’m like, ‘I don’t think you realize those two things are one thing now.’”

Means’ own celebrity is similarly vast, uniting Americans fed up with what they see as a sclerotic and corrupt medical system.

Her opposition to California’s stringent childhood vaccine mandates, enthusiasm for magic mushrooms, and obsession with all things “clean” and “natural” have endeared her to everyone from raw milk fans to anti-vaxxers to boosters of Luigi Mangione, the accused killer of a healthcare chief executive who regularly receives fan mail while awaiting trial in Brooklyn’s Metropolitan Detention Center.

“We’ve never had anyone in that role [of surgeon general] who almost anyone knew who they were,” Dr. Joel Warsh, a Studio City pediatrician and fellow MAHA luminary, whose book on vaccines “Between a Shot and a Hard Place” came out this week. “We know the public loves her.”

That adoration may yet outshine concerns over Means’ medical qualifications — despite her elite education, she left just months before the end of her residency as an ear, nose and throat surgeon at Oregon Health & Science University. Her Oregon medical license is current but inactive and her experience in public health policy is limited.

And while the nominee vigorously defends the brand partnerships that often bookend her newsletters and social media posts, others see the dark side of L.A. influence in the practice.

“L.A. is its own universe when it comes to wellness,” Rivera said. “You can convince anybody to buy a $19 strawberry at Erewhon and say it’s worth it, the same way you can sell people colonics and detox cleanses and all kinds of wellness smoke and mirrors.”

Means made her name as CEO of a subscription health tracking service whose distinguishing feature is blood sugar monitoring for non-diabetics — a practice she touts across several chapters of her book. Her newsletter readers are regularly offered 20% off $1.50-per-pill probiotics or individually packaged matcha mix promising “radiant skin” for its drinkers.

More recently, she’s partnered with WeNatal, a bespoke prenatal vitamin company whose flagship product contains almost the same essential molecules as the brands offered through Medicaid — the insurance half of pregnant Californians use. Taking it daily from conception to birth would cost close to $600.

“So many of the companies that she supports, so many of the companies selling snake oil have some connection to or presence in Los Angeles,” Rivera went on. “It is the mecca for that kind of stuff.”

Even some in the doctor’s inner circle have misgivings about the world of influence that launched her, and the administration she’s poised to join.

Deena Metzger is at the center of a web of influence surgeon general nominee Dr. Casey Means found when she moved to L.A.

(Al Seib / For The Times)

“I’m not sure the obsession with wellness is really about wellness,” Metzger said, her husky Gentle Boy lying at her feet in her home in Topanga. “There’s wellness, which is maybe even a social fabrication, and there’s health.”

The writer and breast cancer survivor has spent decades convening doctors and other healers on this mountaintop as part of her ReVisioning Medicine councils, probing the question posed variously by Soviet writer Mikhail Bulgakov and American humanitarian Dr. Paul Farmer, Jewish philosopher-physician Moses ben Maimon and fictional heartthrob Dr. Robby on “The Pitt”: Can we create a medicine that does no harm?

“How do you believe in that? Or associate with it?” she wondered about the MAHA movement her friend had helped to birth. “But If she’s there and she has power to do things, it will be good for us.”

While mainstream medical authorities and wellness gurus agree that pesticides, plastics and ultraprocessed foods harm public health, they diverge on how much weight to give MAHA’s preferred targets and how to enact policy prescriptions that actually affect them.

“We have people forming a social movement around beef tallow — let’s get that focused on alcohol reduction, tobacco reduction,” said Dr. Jon-Patrick Allem, an expert in social media and health communication. “I don’t disagree with reducing ultraprocessed foods. I don’t disagree with removing dyes from foods. But are these the main drivers of chronic disease?”

When Laura Hill told people she was going on a vineyard tour in Washington State, they were surprised — that’s because Washingtonians are keeping their exquisite wines a secret.

When most people think of a wine road trip in the US, they think of California. So when I told people I was going on a vineyard tour in Washington State, they were surprised, with many telling me they “didn’t know they made wine that far north”.

Neither did I, so I packed waterproofs and jumpers for my flight to Seattle expecting typical Pacific Northwest Coast rainy weather. I was pleasantly surprised a few days later to find myself sitting on a sunny terrace overlooking acres of vineyards, with temperatures in the high 20s in mid-October.

Far from being “too far north”, much of Washington State’s wine country is on a latitude of 46 degrees north – similar to regions including Burgundy and Bordeaux, boasted my tour guide. And with an extra two hours of sunlight per day than California on average, the region has perfect conditions. So why is Washington wine not better known worldwide? The answer is partly because Washingtonians are keeping it to themselves.

“Around 75% of wine made here is consumed within the state itself,” Adam Acampora of Woodinville Wines explained. That and the fact many wineries are small, with most making 5,000 cases per year or less.

So for the time being, it seems the best way to sample the wines of this well-kept secret region is to travel there and take a road trip.

It would be criminal to head to Washington and skip over Seattle so my first stop was the famous Space Needle. The 1961 monument is still the city’s tallest building. On a clear day it’s possible to see the surrounding lakes and mountain ranges from the viewing platform. After a pit stop at the Pike Place Market – renowned for fish being thrown to customers – it was time to hit the road in search of Washington’s wine.

The first “wine town” I visited was Woodinville itself, just half an hour from downtown Seattle. It is far from the vineyards, but it’s home to 130 wineries in four “wine districts” with various tasting rooms, restaurants and bars.

The map of the area reminded me of a theme-park guide with a “Downtown” and a “Hollywood District” to explore.

Before I hit the tasting rooms, a huge roaring fire and a complimentary glass of red wine was awaiting me as I checked into Willows Lodge, a boutique hotel, which leans into the cosy woodland lodge style with reclaimed wood furniture and fireplaces.

Rooms overlook tree-lined grounds giving the illusion of a countryside escape, but just on the other side of the car park were warehouse-like buildings housing wineries.

Inside one of the nondescript industrial buildings was Sparkman Cellars, a family-run winery where I tried a variety of reds in the modern tasting room. I quickly realised red is the tipple of choice here in Washington and most of the tastings included three reds with just one rose, white or sparkling.

My usual wine order is a dry white, so I was apprehensive. But I’m pleased to report there were plenty of “white-wine drinker’s reds” – aka light and fruity wines on offer –alongside the punchy, full-bodied Cabernet Sauvignons the area is best known for. Many of Woodinville’s wineries are within walking distance from each other, so across the road is the oldest winery in Washington, Chateau Ste. Michelle which dates back to 1912. If Woodinville is a wine theme park, this is Cinderella’s Castle with a huge chateau-style building surrounded by gardens.

After a day of tasting the end product, it was time to hit the road (with a designated driver) and head east to the vineyards.

In just a two-hour journey from Seattle, the landscape changed from moody, Twilight-style forests to almost desert-like on the other side of the Cascade mountains. The area had a slight Wild West vibe with fruit stands and quaint clapboard farm shops to stop off at along the route for a true all-American road-trip experience. Despite the Wild West appearances, the vineyards I visited on the first stop, Yakima, were 100% Pacific Northwest in laid-back style. I joined a Harvest tour visiting three – Dineen Vineyards, Two Mountain Winery and VanArnam Vineyards – to see how the wine was made and was soon stomping grapes with my feet and tasting wine straight from the barrel.

“There’s no right or wrong, it’s about people having a good time,” said Branden Seymour, the new owner of VanArmen Vineyards as he clambered to the top of a stack of barrels to allow us to sample last year’s vintage unblended.

A short hike through the scenic Cowiche Canyon freshened me up before a two-hour drive east to Walla Walla, a college town near the Oregon border. The cute Main Street was home to half a dozen wine-tasting rooms, boutique bakeries and upmarket restaurants including the Salted Mill where American classics like mac and cheese and burgers are paired with local wines. I stayed at the historic Marcus Whitman hotel, proclaimed to be ‘‘the grandest hotel for at least 150 miles”. Sticking with the theme park idea, I’ll admit the 1928 13-storey property reminded me slightly of Disney’s Tower of Terror.

But newly-renovated chic interiors put a stop to that. This elegant style continued at the nearby vineyards, which I explored on an e-bike with Kickstand Tours (from £132). I enjoyed the driest white wine of the whole trip in the Ibizan-inspired tasting room at Grosgrain Vineyards, before heading to neighbouring Valdemar Estates. The ultra-modern winery was opened in 2019 by a Spanish family who have had vineyards in Rioja for more than 130 years, giving the region a European stamp of approval. Overall I found this wine tasting road trip more relaxed than any previous tours.

Combining a tipple or two with a city stop and a road trip filled with all-American icons means even people who don’t love wine would have a great time exploring the US’s lesser-known vineyard region.

Book the holiday