Donald Trump

BREAKINGBREAKING,

US says two people were killed in strike on a vessel in the Pacific Ocean, continuing a campaign denounced as illegal.

The United States military has said that it killed two people in its latest attack on a vessel in the eastern Pacific Ocean.

US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), which oversees US military operations in Latin America, said on Thursday that “two narco-terrorists were killed during this action”.

SOUTHCOM did not provide any evidence to support its claim that the vessel and the two victims were involved in drug trafficking.

US strikes on vessels in the Pacific and Caribbean, which have killed at least 126 people in 34 attacks since the first recorded incident in September 2025, have been widely denounced as illegal under international law.

The latest strike appears to be the first conducted by the Trump administration in 2026, according to records of the strikes tabulated by the watchdog group Airwars.

This is a breaking news story. More to follow shortly.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is facing the possibility it could run out of funding next week, as Democrats press for reforms to its immigration enforcement tactics.

But Republican leaders on Thursday pushed back against the Democratic proposals, rejecting them as moot.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, for instance, called the demands “unrealistic and unserious”.

“This is not a blank check situation where Republicans just do agree to a list of Democrat demands,” Thune said, adding that the two parties appeared to be at an impasse.

“We aren’t anywhere close to having any sort of an agreement.”

Congress needs to pass funding legislation for the DHS by February 13, or else its programmes could be temporarily shuttered.

Ten demands from Democrats

Currently, Democrats are focused on changes to DHS’s immigration operations, particularly through programmes like Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

But any funding shortfall stands to affect other Homeland Security functions as well, including the services offered by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which conducts security screenings at airports.

Top Democrats, however, have argued that a Homeland Security shutdown is necessary, given the abuses that have unfolded under President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Just last month, two US citizens, Alex Pretti and Renee Nicole Good, were killed at the hands of immigration agents in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in incidents that were caught on bystander video.

Their shooting deaths have since gone viral, prompting international outrage. Other footage shows masked agents deploying chemical agents and beating civilians who were documenting their activities or protesting – activities protected under the US Constitution.

To protect civil liberties and avoid further bloodshed, Democrats on Wednesday night released a series of 10 demands.

Many pertain to agent transparency. One of the demands was a ban on immigration agents wearing face masks, and another would require them to prominently display their identification number and agency.

Body cameras would also be mandated, though the Democrats clarified that the footage obtained through such devices should only be used for accountability, not to track protesters.

Other proposed rules would codify use-of-force policies in the Homeland Security Department and prohibit entry into households without a judicial warrant, as has been common practice under US law. They would also outlaw racial profiling as a metric for conducting immigration stops and arrests.

Political battle over funding

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said he was “astounded to hear” that Republicans considered the demands to be unreasonable.

“It’s about people’s basic rights. It’s about people’s safety,” Schumer said. He called on Republicans to “explain why” they objected to such standards.

In a joint statement with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Schumer appealed to members of both parties to coalesce around what he described as common-sense guardrails.

“Federal immigration agents cannot continue to cause chaos in our cities while using taxpayer money that should be used to make life more affordable for working families,” Schumer and Jeffries wrote.

“It is critical that we come together to impose common sense reforms and accountability measures that the American people are demanding.”

Already, Democrats succeeded in separating Homeland Security funding from a spending bill passed on Tuesday to prevent a partial government shutdown.

Some Democrats and Republicans have pushed for a second split in order to vote on funding for ICE and CBP separately from FEMA and TSA spending.

But Republican leaders have opposed holding separate votes on those agencies, with Thune arguing it would amount to giving Democrats the ability to “defund law enforcement”.

Thune added that he would encourage Democrats to submit their reforms in legislation separate from Homeland Security funding.

It remains to be seen whether the two parties can agree to a compromise before the February 13 deadline. Democrats, meanwhile, have continued to push for other measures, including the removal of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

Despite calling it earlier an ‘act of great stupidity’, Trump signals support of Starmer’s Chagos deal.

United States President Donald Trump appears to have endorsed the deal struck by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer to hand over the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, weeks after calling it a “great stupidity”.

Trump had last month described the United Kingdom’s decision to cede sovereignty of the Indian Ocean archipelago, which includes a joint US-UK military base on the island of Diego Garcia, as an “act of great stupidity”.

The US president said he held productive talks with Starmer on Thursday and that the UK leader had made the “best deal he could make”.

But he also warned in a post on Truth Social that the US would retain the right to “militarily secure and reinforce” the US presence on the island of Diego Garcia if it were threatened.

The British government said in a statement that “the leaders agreed their governments would continue working closely to guarantee the future operation of the base and speak again soon”, the AFP news agency reported.

Under a deal agreed last May, the governments of the UK and Mauritius jointly announced that full sovereignty of the Chagos, a remote group of more than 60 islands, would again belong to Mauritius in exchange for guarantees that the US military base could continue operating there for the next 99 years.

Last year’s announcement stirred a range of emotions among the Chagossians, who were forced from their island home in the 1960s and 1970s and resettled in Mauritius, the Seychelles and the UK. For decades, they have campaigned to return to their ancestral lands freely, without any restrictions.

The Chagos Islands have been under British control since 1814. In the 1960s and 1970s, Britain forcibly evicted nearly 2,000 locals to make way for the US military base, which played a pivotal role in US military operations in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. In 2008, the US also acknowledged that the base had been used for covert rendition flights of “terrorism” suspects.

Feb. 5 (UPI) — The White House is expected to launch its new prescription drug platform, TrumpRx, on Thursday evening, showcasing the president’s new “most favored nation” drug pricing policy.

President Donald Trump initially announced his plan in September with the launch of the TrumpRx website.

The idea is to sell prescription drugs at lower prices via the website, so that people without insurance can pay less. But users have to pay in cash because the site will not accept insurance.

The White House said at the time in a fact sheet, “foreign nations can no longer use price controls to freeride on American innovation by guaranteeing MFN prices on all new innovative medicines Pfizer brings to market.”

At the time, Pfizer was the only company on board. Since then, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Amgen, Gilead, GSK, Sanofi, Roche’s Genentech, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, EMD Serono and Novartis have joined.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt announced the event on X.

“TONIGHT AT 7PM: President Trump, Dr. Oz, and National Design Studio Director Joe Gebbia will be officially unveiling TrumpRx — a state of the art website for Americans consumers to purchase low cost prescription drugs. This historic announcement will save millions of Americans money. You won’t want to miss it! Tune in.”

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has faced questions from the United States Senate about President Donald Trump’s ongoing campaign to slash interest rates, despite concerns that such a move could turbo-charge inflation.

Bessent appeared on Thursday before the Senate’s Financial Stability Oversight Council.

There, he received a grilling from Democrats over rising consumer prices and concerns about Trump’s attempts to influence the Federal Reserve, the US central bank.

One of his early clashes came with Senator Elizabeth Warren, who sought answers about a report in The Wall Street Journal that indicated Trump joked about suing his nominee for the Federal Reserve chair, Kevin Warsh, if he failed to comply with presidential demands.

“Mr Secretary, can you commit right here and now that Trump’s Fed nominee Kevin Warsh will not be sued, will not be investigated by the Department of Justice, if he doesn’t cut interest rates exactly the way that Donald Trump wants?” Warren asked.

Bessent evaded making such a commitment. “That is up to the president,” he replied.

Pressure on Federal Reserve members

Last week, Trump announced Warsh would be his pick to replace the current Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell, who has faced bitter criticism over his decision to lower interest rates gradually.

By contrast, Trump has repeatedly demanded that interest rates be chopped as low as possible, as soon as possible.

In December, for instance, he told The Wall Street Journal that he would like to see interest rates at “one percent and maybe lower than that”.

“We should have the lowest rate in the world,” he told the newspaper. Currently, the federal interest rate sits around 3.6 percent.

Experts say a sudden drop in that percentage could trigger a short-term market surge, as loans become cheaper and money floods the economy. But that excess cash could drive down the value of the dollar, leading to higher prices in the long term.

Traditionally, the Federal Reserve has served as an independent government agency, on the premise that monetary decisions for the country should be made without political interference or favour.

But Trump, a Republican, has sought to bring the Federal Reserve under his control, and his critics have accused him of using the threat of legal action to pressure Federal Reserve members to comply with his demands.

In August, for instance, he attempted to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook based on allegations of mortgage fraud, which she has denied.

Cook had been appointed to the central bank by Trump’s predecessor and rival, Democrat Joe Biden, and she has accused Trump of seeking her dismissal on political grounds. The Supreme Court is currently hearing the case.

Then, in early January, the Department of Justice opened a criminal investigation into Powell, echoing accusations Trump made, alleging that Powell had mismanaged renovations to the Federal Reserve building.

Powell issued a rare statement in response, accusing Trump of seeking to bully Federal Reserve leaders into compliance with his interest rate policy.

“The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the President,” Powell wrote.

Bipartisan scrutiny of Powell probe

Given the string of aggressive actions against Powell and Cook, Trump’s joke about suing Warsh fuelled rumours that the Federal Reserve’s independence could be in peril.

Within hours of making the joke on January 31, Trump himself faced questions about how serious he might have been.

“It’s a roast. It’s a comedy thing,” Trump said of his remarks as he spoke to reporters on Air Force One. “It was all comedy.”

Warren, however, pressed Bessent about Trump’s remarks and chided the Treasury chief for not rejecting them.

“I don’t think the American people are laughing,” Warren told Bessent. “They’re the ones who were struggling with the affordability.”

The prospect of Trump exerting undue influence over the Federal Reserve even earned a measure of bipartisan criticism during Thursday’s council meeting.

Senator Thom Tillis, a Republican from North Carolina, opened his remarks to Bessent with a statement denouncing the probe into Powell, even though he acknowledged he was “disappointed” with the current Fed chair.

Still, Tillis emphasised his belief that Powell committed no crime, and that the investigation would discourage transparency at future Senate hearings.

He imagined future government hearings becoming impeded by legal formalities, for fear of undue prosecution.

“They’re going to be flanked with attorneys, and anytime that they think that they’re in the middle of a perjury trap, they’re probably just going to say, ‘I’ll submit it to the record after consultation with my attorneys,’” Tillis said, sketching out the scenario.

“Is that really the way we want oversight to go in the future?”

For his part, Bessent indicated that he backed the Federal Reserve’s long-term goal to keep interest rates at about 2 percent.

“It is undesirable to completely eliminate inflation,” Bessent said. “What is desirable is to get back to the Fed’s 2 percent target, and for the past three months, we’ve been at 2.1 percent.”

Scrutinising the lawsuit against the IRS

As Thursday’s hearing continued, Bessent was forced to defend the Trump administration on several fronts, ranging from its sweeping tariff policy to its struggle to lower consumer prices.

But another element of Trump’s agenda took centre stage when Democrat Ruben Gallego of Arizona had his turn at the microphone.

Gallego sought to shine a light on the revelation in January that Trump had filed a lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) — part of his own executive branch.

Trump is seeking $10bn in damages for the leak of his tax returns during his first term as president. The IRS itself was not the source of the leak, but rather a former government contractor named Charles Littlejohn, who was sentenced to five years in prison.

Bessent was not named as a defendant in the lawsuit, though he currently serves both as the Treasury secretary and the acting commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service.

Critics have argued that Trump’s lawsuit amounts to self-dealing: He holds significant sway over the Justice Department, which would defend the federal government against such lawsuits, and he could therefore green-light his own settlement package.

In Thursday’s exchange with Gallego, Bessent acknowledged that any damages paid to Trump would come from taxpayer funds.

“ Where would that $10bn come from?” Gallego asked.

“ It would come from Treasury,” Bessent replied. He then underscored that Trump has indicated any money would go to charity and that the Treasury itself would not make the decision to award damages.

Still, Gallego pressed Bessent, pointing out that the Treasury would ultimately have to disburse the funds — and that Bessent would be in charge of that decision.

That circumstance, Gallego argued, creates a conflict of interest, since Bessent is Trump’s political appointee and can be fired by the president.

“Have you recused yourself from any decisions about paying the president on these claims?” Gallego asked.

Bessent sidestepped the question, answering instead, “I will follow the law.”

Friedrich Merz said concerns about a further escalation with Iran have dominated his trip to the Gulf region.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has warned of the threat of a military escalation in the Middle East before talks between Iran and the United States in Oman on Friday.

Speaking in Doha on Thursday, Merz said that fears of a new conflict had characterised his talks during his trip to the Gulf region.

“In all my conversations yesterday and today, great concern has been expressed about a further escalation in the conflict with Iran,” he said during a news conference.

Merz also urged Iran to end what he called aggression and enter into talks, saying Germany would do everything it could to de-escalate the situation and work towards regional stability.

The warning came in the run-up to a crucial scheduled meeting between officials from Tehran and Washington in Muscat.

Mediators from Qatar, Turkiye and Egypt have presented Iran and the US with a framework of key principles to be discussed in the talks, including a commitment by Iran to significantly limit its uranium enrichment, two sources familiar with the negotiations have told Al Jazeera.

Before the talks, both sides appear to be struggling to find common ground on a number of issues, including what topics will be up for discussion.

Iran says the talks must be confined to its long-running nuclear dispute with Western powers, rejecting a US demand to also discuss Tehran’s ballistic missiles, and warning that pushing issues beyond the nuclear programme could jeopardise the talks.

Reporting from Washington, DC, Al Jazeera’s Kimberly Halkett said the US is eager for the talks to follow what they see as an agreed-upon format.

“That agreed-upon format includes issues broader than what the US understands Iran is willing to discuss in this initial set of talks,” she explained.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Wednesday that talks would have to include the range of Iran’s ballistic missiles, its support for armed groups around the Middle East and its treatment of its own people, in addition to its nuclear programme.

A White House official has told Al Jazeera that Jared Kushner, US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and a key figure in his Middle East policy negotiations, and Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy, have arrived in the Qatari capital, Doha, in advance of the talks.

Halkett said that Qatar is playing an instrumental role in trying to facilitate these talks, along with other regional US partners, including Egypt.

“We understand, according to a White House official, that this is perhaps part of the reason for the visit – to try and work with Qatar in an effort to try and get Iran to expand and build upon the format of these talks.”

Pressure on Iran

The talks come as the region braces for a potential US attack on Iran after US President Donald Trump ordered forces to amass in the Arabian Sea following a violent crackdown by Iran on protesters last month.

Washington has sent thousands of troops to the Middle East, as well as an aircraft carrier, other warships, fighter jets, spy planes and air refuelling tankers.

Trump has warned that “bad things” would probably happen if a deal could not be reached, ratcheting up pressure on Iran.

This is not the first time Iranian and US officials have met in a bid to revive diplomacy between the two nations, which have not had official diplomatic relations since 1980.

In June, US and Iranian officials gathered in the Omani capital to discuss a nuclear agreement, but the process stalled as Israel launched attacks on Iran, killing several military leaders and top nuclear scientists, and targeting nuclear facilities. The US later briefly joined the war, bombing several Iranian nuclear sites.

Feb. 5 (UPI) — Chinese leader Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump had a lengthy, far-reaching telephone conversation on Wednesday, in which the Asian leader warned his American counterpart that “the Taiwan question” was the most pressing issue in their countries’ relationship.

The self-governing, democratic island has increasingly become a focal point in U.S.-China relations amid growing concerns about an eventual Beijing invasion that have only been amplified since the Trump administration’s military operation last month in Venezuela that removed its authoritarian leader, Nicolas Madura.

Both Xi and Trump confirmed the Wednesday call, with the U.S. leader describing the conversation in a statement on his Truth Social platform as “excellent” and his relations with the Chinese head as “an extremely good one.”

He said they discussed the military, trade, the situation in Iran and the Russia-Ukraine war as well as Beijing considering buying U.S. agricultural products, including soybeans, which have been a sticking point for American farms. According to Trump, Beijing is considering increasing its U.S. soybean imports to 20 million metric tons.

A readout of the call from China’s foreign ministry made no mention of soybeans, but emphasized its claim to Taiwan in direct terms.

According to the ministry, Xi told Trump “the Taiwan question is the most important issue in China-U.S. relations.”

“Taiwan is China’s territory. China must safeguard its own sovereignty and territorial integrity and will never allow Taiwan to be separated,” Xi said, according to the ministry.

Despite Taiwan never having been part of the People’s Republic of China, which was founded in 1949, Beijing claims sovereignty over the island of some 23 million people under its One China policy. China views Taiwan as a rogue province that it has vowed to take by force if necessary.

The United States formally recognizes China’s claim to Taiwan, but maintains informal relations with Taipei, which has grown deeper over the last few years amid the Chinese threat of invasion.

Washington sells weapons to Taiwan. In December, the U.S. Congress approved a massive $11.1 billion arms deal with Taiwan, the largest ever between their two governments.

A Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson sternly rebuked the arms deal in a statement that announced sanctions against 20 American military-related companies and 10 senior executives who have participated in arming Taiwan while warning that “anyone who attempts to cross the line and make provocations on the Taiwan question will be met with China’s firm response.”

The readout of the Xi-Trump call on Wednesday warned that “the U.S. must handle the issue of arms sales to Taiwan with prudence.”

According to Beijing, Trump told Xi that he understands how China feels about Taiwan.

Taiwan was only mentioned by Trump in a list of the “many important subjects” he discussed with Xi.

Trump is to visit Xi in Beijing in April.

Worries about a potential Chinese move against Taiwan have increased in recent weeks following the U.S. military abduction of Maduro, which some have suggested could be used by Beijing to support its claims to Taiwan.

In an interview with The New York Times last month, Trump, pressed on the issue, disregarded the comparison, stating China isn’t experiencing the same threat from Taiwan that the United States faced from Venezuela.

“It’s a source of pride for him. He considers it to be a part of China, and that’s up to him, what he’s going to be doing. But, you know, I’ve expressed to him that I would be very unhappy if he did that, and I don’t think he’ll do that. I hope he doesn’t,” he said.

Asked if he set a precedent with the military action in Venezuela, Trump replied: “He may do it after we have a different president, but I don’t think he’s going to do it with me as president.”

The world’s most popular cryptocurrency has fallen nearly 20 percent in value since the start of 2026.

Bitcoin has dropped below $71,000, adding to a week of losses that have wiped out all of its gains since United States President Donald Trump’s re-election in 2024.

The world’s most popular cryptocurrency fell more than 7 percent on Thursday, continuing a steep downward slide that began in mid-January.

Bitcoin, which is famed for its wild price swings, was trading at about $70,900 as of 04:30 GMT.

The latest slide takes the value of the digital asset down by nearly 20 percent since the start of the year.

Bitcoin hit $100,000 for the first time in December 2024 and breached that level again in February and May 2025. But the asset has largely been on a downward trajectory since October, when it hit an all-time high of more than $127,000.

Bitcoin and other digital currencies racked up explosive gains after President Trump’s re-election raised expectations of Washington adopting a light touch to regulating digital assets after years of regulatory crackdowns.

Trump had pledged to turn the US into the world’s cryptocurrency capital during his re-election campaign, and launched his own crypto firm, World Liberty Financial, along with his sons, before winning the vote.

Shortly after taking office, Trump announced the establishment of a strategic crypto reserve that would include Bitcoin and four other cryptocurrencies.

But a Trump-backed bill to regulate the trading of cryptocurrency has stalled in the US Senate amid disagreement between banks and cryptocurrency firms, casting doubt over the industry.

US Democratic Party lawmaker Ro Khanna said on Wednesday that he would investigate World Liberty Financial after The Wall Street Journal newspaper reported that representatives of an Abu Dhabi official signed a $500m deal to buy a 49 percent stake in Trump’s fledgling cryptocurrency venture.

Equities and commodities markets also saw losses on Thursday, with silver dropping as much as 16 percent and benchmark stock indexes in Hong Kong and Japan down about 1.3 percent and 0.7 percent, respectively.

Kremlin spokesperson says Russian forces would continue fighting until Kyiv makes necessary ‘decisions’ to end the war.

The number of Ukrainian soldiers killed on the battlefield as a result of the country’s war with Russia is estimated to be 55,000, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said, adding that a “large number” were also missing.

President Zelenskyy’s remarks on Wednesday came in the run-up to the fourth anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and amid crucial ceasefire talks in Abu Dhabi, where negotiators are trying to end Europe’s largest conflict since World War II.

“In Ukraine, officially the number of soldiers killed on the battlefield – either professionals or those conscripted – is 55,000,” said Zelenskyy, in a prerecorded interview with France 2 TV.

Zelenskyy, whose comments were translated into French, added that on top of that casualty figure was a “large number of people” considered officially missing.

The Ukrainian leader did not give an exact figure for those who are still missing.

Zelenskyy had previously cited a figure for Ukrainian war dead in an interview with the United States television network NBC in February 2025, saying that more than 46,000 Ukrainian service members had been killed on the battlefield.

In the middle of 2025, the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC, estimated that close to 400,000 Ukrainian troops have been killed or wounded since the war began.

Last month, the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine reported that Russian attacks had killed 2,514 civilians and injured 12,142 in Ukraine in 2025, almost a third higher than the number of casualties in 2024.

Russia has also incurred heavy losses in the ongoing war.

In January, Ukraine’s military commander, Oleksandr Syrskii, was quoted as saying that in 2025 alone, almost 420,000 Russian soldiers were killed and wounded while fighting against Ukrainian forces.

An October 2025 estimate by British defence intelligence put the overall number of Russian soldiers killed or wounded in the war at 1.1 million.

Both Ukraine and Russia rarely disclose their own casualty figures in the war, though they actively report enemy losses on the battlefield.

Analysts say both Kyiv and Moscow are likely underreporting their own deaths while inflating those of the other side.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on Wednesday that Russia would keep fighting until Kyiv made the “decisions” that could bring the war to an end, while in Abu Dhabi, Ukrainian and Russian officials wrapped up a “productive” first day of new US-brokered talks, Kyiv’s lead negotiator Rustem Umerov said.

US President Donald Trump’s administration has been pushing both Kyiv and Moscow to find a compromise to end the fighting, although the two sides remain far apart on key points despite several rounds of talks.

The most sensitive issues are Moscow’s demands that Kyiv give up land it still controls and the fate of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, Europe’s largest, which now sits in a Russian-occupied area of Ukraine.

Moscow has demanded that Kyiv pull its troops out of all the Donbas region, including heavily fortified cities regarded as one of Ukraine’s strongest defences against Russian aggression, as a condition for any deal to end the fighting.

Ukraine said the conflict should be frozen along current front lines and rejects any unilateral pullback of its forces from territory it still controls.

Russian forces occupy about 20 percent of Ukraine’s territory, including Crimea and parts of the eastern Donbas region seized before the 2022 invasion.

Feb. 4 (UPI) — Savannah Guthrie, a Today show co-host, and her two siblings said Wednesday night that they are “willing to talk” to the person who may have taken their 84-year-old mother, as authorities search for a suspect.

In a video posted on Instagram, Savannah, reading a prepared statement flanked by her two siblings, Annie and Camron, said they are aware of a ransom letter sent to media outlets, but they need proof that the person has their mother, Nancy.

“We need to know without a doubt that she is alive and that you have her. We want to hear from you, and we are ready to listen,” she said. “Please reach out to us.”

Savannah thanked the public for its support and prayers, describing her mother as “a kind, faithful, loyal and fiercely loving woman of goodness and light” who has “grandchildren who adore her and cover her in kisses.”

She said her mother’s “health, her heart, is fragile” and she lives in “constant pain,” requiring medicine that she now doesn’t have.

Speaking directly to Nancy, Savannah said that people are looking for her and will not rest until “we are together again.”

“We love you, Mom,” she said.

President Donald Trump, in a statement published after the video from the Guthries went public, said on his Truth Social platform that he spoke with Savannah and told her “I am directing ALL Federal Law Enforcement to be at the family’s, and Local Law Enforcement’s, complete disposal IMMEDIATELY.”

“We are deploying all resources to get her mother home safely,” the president said. “The prayers of our Nation are with her and her family.”

Law enforcement officials in Arizona said earlier Wednesday that they have not identified a suspect as they enter the fourth day of the search for Nancy.

In a statement posted to X, Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos said investigators also haven’t identified any people of interest in the case. Officials believe Nancy was kidnapped from her Tucson-area home in the early hours of Sunday. She was last seen around 9:45 p.m. MST Saturday and was reported missing after she failed to attend church the next day.

“Detectives continue to speak with anyone who may have had contact with Mrs. Guthrie,” Nanos said in the statement.

“Detectives are working closely with the Guthrie family. While we appreciate the public’s concern, the sharing of unverified accusations or false information is irresponsible and does not assist the investigation.”

NBC News reported that the FBI joined about 100 detectives from the Pima County Sheriff’s Office in the search for Nancy. Trump earlier committed to sending additional federal agents to participate in the investigation.

Federal officials were assisting by analyzing cellphone data and cell towers in the area. Investigators said there was a technical problem with the surveillance cameras at Nancy’s home and they were trying to determine if neighbors had any footage of her abduction on their cameras.

Three media outlets reported they received ransom notes asking for millions of dollars in cryptocurrency for Nancy’s safe return. TMZ said the note it received mentioned a specific item damaged at the woman’s home. KOLD-TV in Tucson said it forwarded the email it received to the sheriff’s office and KGUN-TV, also in Tucson, said the note it received threatened to kill Nancy.

The sheriff’s department said it was aware of the alleged ransom notes and that it’s investigating their validity.

Nanos said that while Nancy does have difficulties with mobility — making it unlikely she wandered off by herself — she does not have any mental or memory issues that may explain her disappearance.

Investigators said Nancy has a pacemaker that last connected to her iPhone around 2 a.m. Sunday. The phone was left behind at her home, CNN reported.

Savannah issued a statement thanking supporters.

“Thank you for lifting your prayers with ours for our beloved mom, our dearest Nancy, a woman of deep conviction, a good and faithful servant,” she said. “Raise your prayers with us and believe with us that she will be lifted by them in this very moment.”

US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s probe seen as latest effort by Trump administration to roll back diversity and inclusion policies.

Nike is being investigated in the United States over claims that it discriminated against white workers through its diversity and inclusion policies.

The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) said on Wednesday that it had filed a court motion to compel Nike to produce information related to allegations of “intentional race discrimination” against white employees.

The allegations relate to a suspected pattern of discrimination in “hiring, promotion, demotion, or separation decisions, including selection for layoffs; internship programs; and mentoring, leadership development and other career development programs”, the US government agency said.

The agency said it took the action after Nike had failed to respond to a subpoena for various information, including the criteria used in selecting employees for redundancies and setting executives’ pay.

EEOC chair, Andrea Lucas, an ardent critic of racial diversity initiatives who was appointed last year by President Donald Trump, said US anti-discrimination law is “colour-blind” and protects employees of “all races”.

“Thanks to President Trump’s commitment to enforcing our nation’s civil rights laws, the EEOC has renewed its focus on even-handed enforcement of Title VII,” Lucas said in a statement, referring to a section of the 1964 Civil Rights Act that prohibits employment discrimination based on race, colour, religion or sex.

Nike, based in Beaverton, Oregon, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The EEOC’s action is seen as the latest move by the Trump administration to roll back policies promoting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) in the workplace.

In one of his first acts upon returning to the White House, Trump signed an executive order to abolish “radical” and “wasteful” DEI initiatives introduced under his predecessor, Joe Biden.

Like many corporate giants in the US, Nike publicly backed social justice causes such as Black Lives Matter prior to Trump’s re-election in 2024.

Between 2020 and 2021, Nike’s share of non-white employees rose more than four percentage points, the most among firms apart from healthcare provider Danaher, according to a Bloomberg analysis of company data reported to the EEOC.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled in favour of a California redistricting measure meant to net the Democratic Party more congressional seats, rejecting a challenge from the state Republican Party.

There was no dissent in Wednesday’s decision, and the conservative-majority court did not offer any explanation for its decision.

Instead, its order was comprised of a single sentence, stating that the Republican application “is denied”.

Previously, in December, the Supreme Court had allowed a similar redistricting measure, designed to benefit Republicans in Texas, to move forward.

Democratic officials in California have applauded Wednesday’s decision as fair, given that Republican President Donald Trump has led a nationwide push to redraw congressional districts in his party’s favour.

“Donald Trump said he was ‘entitled’ to five more Congressional seats in Texas,” California Governor Gavin Newsom said in a written statement.

“He started this redistricting war. He lost, and he’ll lose again in November.”

California’s Attorney General Rob Bonta echoed Newsom’s remarks, blaming Trump for launching a kind of redistricting arms race that threatened to disenfranchise Democratic voters.

“The US Supreme Court’s decision is good news not only for Californians, but for our democracy,” Bonta said in the statement.

The Supreme Court’s decision marks a win for Democratic efforts to counter the Trump-led redistricting efforts, which began last year in Texas.

In June last year, reports emerged that Trump had personally called Texas state politicians to redraw their congressional districts to give Republicans a greater advantage in Democrat-held areas.

Each congressional district elects one person to the US House of Representatives, which has a narrow Republican majority. Out of 435 seats, 218 are held by Republicans, and 214 by Democrats.

Texas, a Republican stronghold, proceeded to approve a newly revamped congressional map in August, overcoming a walkout by Democratic legislators.

That, in turn, prompted Newsom to launch a ballot initiative in California to counteract the Texas effort.

Just as the new Texas congressional map was designed to increase Republican seats by five, the California ballot initiative, known as Proposition 50, was also positioned to increase Democratic representation by five.

Voters in California passed the initiative overwhelmingly in a November special election, temporarily suspending the work of an independent redistricting commission that had previously drawn the state’s congressional maps.

Newsom, a possible 2028 presidential contender, framed Proposition 50 as a means of fighting “fire with fire”.

The new map approved under Proposition 50, however, will only be in place through the 2030 election, and Newsom has pledged to repeal it, should Republicans in Texas do the same with their new map.

The push to redistrict for partisan gain — a process known as gerrymandering — has long faced bipartisan pushback as an attack on democratic values.

Normally, redistricting happens every 10 years, after a new census is taken, to reflect population changes.

But this mid-decade redistricting battle comes before the pivotal 2026 midterm elections, which are slated to be a referendum on Trump’s second term as president. Trump has already expressed fear that he might be impeached, should Congress switch to Democratic control.

Partisan gerrymandering is not necessarily illegal, unless it purposefully disenfranchises voters on the basis of their race. That, in turn, is seen as a violation of the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act, an important piece of civil rights legislation from 1965.

In response to the passage of Proposition 50, Republicans in California sued Newsom and other state officials in an effort to overturn the new congressional map.

They argued the new map was created “specifically to favor Hispanic voters” and would dilute the representation of Republican voters in the state.

The Trump administration joined the lawsuit on November 13, backing the state Republicans.

But Bonta, the California attorney general, argued the redistricting process was legal. In court filings, he also maintained that Trump’s backing of the lawsuit was driven by self-interest.

“The obvious reason that the Republican Party is a plaintiff here, and the reason that the current federal administration intervened to challenge California’s new map while supporting Texas’s defense of its new map, is that Republicans want to retain their House majority for the remainder of President Trump’s term,” his court filing said.

Bonto also called on the Supreme Court not to “step into the political fray, granting one political party a sizeable advantage” by overturning Proposition 50.

The victory for California Democrats on Wednesday comes as redistricting fights continue across the country.

Already, states like North Carolina, Ohio and Missouri have adopted new congressional maps to favour Republicans. There has been pushback, though.

In December, Indiana’s Republican-led legislature voted down a partisan redistricting measure, despite pressure from Trump to pass it.

The Gaitanist Army of Colombia (EGC), the country’s largest criminal organisation, has announced it will temporarily suspend peace talks in Qatar after Colombian President Gustavo Petro reportedly pledged to target its leader.

In a social media post on Wednesday, the EGC, sometimes referred to as the Gulf Clan, indicated the suspension would continue until it received updates from the Petro administration.

“By order of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the EGC delegation at the negotiating table will temporarily suspend talks with the government to consult and clarify the veracity of the information,” the group wrote in a statement on X.

“If the media reports are true, this would be a violation of good faith and the Doha commitments.”

Colombia’s Defence Minister Pedro Sanchez confirmed the reports later on Wednesday, sharing a list of three drug “kingpins” that Petro’s administration would prioritise as “high-level targets”.

Among the three targets was the EGC’s leader, Jesus Avila Villadiego, alias Chiquito Malo. A reward for his capture was set at 5 billion Colombian pesos, equivalent to $1.37m.

The other two “kingpins” included top rebel commanders identified only by their aliases: Ivan Mordisco and Pablito.

The public announcement echoes a private one cemented during a closed-door meeting on Tuesday at the White House, when Petro met United States President Donald Trump in person for the first time.

For months, Trump has pressured the Petro administration to take more “aggressive action” to combat narcotics trafficking out of Colombia.

In response, Petro and his team presented the Trump administration on Tuesday with a dossier on their counter-narcotics operations titled, “Colombia: America’s #1 Ally Against Narcoterrorists”.

The presentation featured statistics on cocaine seizures, programmes to eradicate coca crops, and the high-level arrests and killings of drug lords.

But the commitment to collaborate with the US in the pursuit of Chiquito Malo’s arrest has thrown negotiations with the EGC into peril.

It has also raised questions about the future of Petro’s signature policy, “Total Peace”, which was designed to open talks with rebel groups and criminal networks in an effort to halt Colombia’s six-decade-long internal conflict.

The EGC is a major criminal group with almost 10,000 members, according to a recent report by the Ideas for Peace Foundation.

In December, the US also designated the group as a “foreign terrorist organisation”, as part of its ongoing efforts to crack down on drug trafficking.

The EGC has been engaged in high-level discussions with the Colombian government in Doha since September 2025. The two parties signed a “commitment to peace” on December 5, which outlined a roadmap to the EGC putting down arms.

The first step towards demobilisation was for the group to gather its forces in temporary zones, beginning in March. The government had suspended arrest warrants in December for EGC commanders, including Chiquito Malo, who were due to move to these areas.

But the government’s plans to detain the drug lord, declared yesterday at the White House, destabilised this process, according to analysts.

“[The EGC] interpret this as a direct threat where, if any commander who has arrest warrants … goes to the temporary zones, he runs a high risk,” said Gerson Arias, a conflict and security investigator at the Ideas for Peace Foundation, a Bogota-based think tank.

The Colombian Supreme Court in January approved Chiquito Malo’s extradition to the US in the eventuality of his capture, but the final decision to extradite him resides with the president.

By declaring the drug lord a “target” at the White House, Petro signalled support for capturing and extraditing the EGC commander.

Potential US involvement in the operation also appears to have unsettled the criminal organisation, according to experts.

“It is very different for Chiquito Malo to be pursued solely by the Colombian government than for him to become a target of joint strategic value involving US intelligence,” said Laura Bonilla, a deputy director at the Peace and Reconciliation Foundation, a Colombian think tank.

Although the EGC suspended its peace talks on Wednesday, it stressed that it remained open to resuming negotiations.

“It should be clarified that the suspension is temporary, not permanent, which indicates that they [the talks] will resume shortly,” a lawyer for the group told Al Jazeera, on condition of anonymity.

The representative added that, for talks to continue, the EGC requires that “legal and personal security guarantees” and “the commitments agreed upon in Doha, Qatar, are fulfilled”.

As the prospect of a conflict between the United States and Iran looms, analysts within Israel have questioned the country’s capacity to determine the outcome of a confrontation in a region that, just months ago, it had regarded itself as on the brink of dominating.

“The [Israeli] opposition are accusing [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu of giving in to [US President Donald] Trump and ending the war on Gaza too soon,” said Israeli political analyst Ori Goldberg. “[Israel is] being hounded out of Lebanon, [its] freedom to operate within Syria has been halted. All that’s left to [Israel] is the freedom to kill Palestinians, and with Qatar, Turkiye and Egypt now being involved in Gaza, over Israel’s objection, it won’t be allowed to do that for much longer.”

While senior Israeli figures including Netanyahu are liaising directly with the Trump administration over a possible attack on Iran, analysts say it is increasingly clear that Israel’s ability to shape regional developments is diminished.

After two years of genocide in Gaza, where Israel has killed more than 71,800 Palestinians, the US now appears to have taken the lead and has overruled Israel when it objected to the admission of Turkiye and Qatar to the board that will oversee the administration of Gaza.

In Syria, Israeli ambitions to hobble the new government of President Ahmed al-Sharaa also appear to have fallen foul of Trump’s White House, which is actively pushing the Netanyahu government to reach an accommodation with Damascus. In Lebanon, too, the US continues to play a defining role in determining Israeli actions, with any possible confrontation between Hezbollah and Israel said to be dependent upon Washington’s green light.

What influence Israel could wield over US action in Iran, according to many, is uncertain, even to the point that Washington could enter negotiations with no regard for Israeli concerns.

“There’s a worry that Donald Trump will not strike in Iran, which will continue to endanger Israel, and instead negotiate a conclusion that’s good for him as a peacemaker and leave the regime in place,” Netanyahu’s former aide from the early 90s and political pollster, Mitchell Barak, told Al Jazeera from West Jerusalem. “He’s transactional. That’s what he does. It’ll be like Gaza. Israel will secure their ultimate victory, then lose control to the US, whose interests – under Trump – don’t always align with ours.”

‘Big Bad Wolf’

While analysts’ expectations that Netanyahu could influence Trump’s actions in Iran may be limited, their sense that a fresh war would buy the Israeli prime minister relief from his current difficulties seems universal.

“Iran is Israel’s ‘Big Bad Wolf’,” Chatham House’s Yossi Mekelberg said of the geopolitical opponent that many in Israel believe exists only to ensure Israel’s destruction.

Mekelberg added that a war with Iran would serve as a useful distraction from Netanyahu’s domestic troubles, such as an inquiry into government failures related to the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, his attempt to weaken the oversight powers of the judiciary, and his ongoing corruption trials.

“There’s a saying in Hebrew: ‘the righteous have their work done by others.’ I’m not for a moment saying that Netanyahu is righteous, but I’m sure he’s keen on having his work done by others,” Mekelberg said.

War fears

How much public appetite there may be for a confrontation with Iran is unclear.

Israel was able to heavily damage Iran during the conflict it started in June last year. But Iran was also able to repeatedly pierce Israel’s defences, making it clear that the Israeli public is not safe from the wars its state pursues in the region.

The threat – rather than the reality – of a confrontation with Iran also serves the prime minister’s ends, Goldberg noted. “Netanyahu has no need for a war. He doesn’t really need to do anything other than survive, which he’s proven adept at,” the analyst said, referring to the absence of any credible political rival, as well as the risk that an actual war may highlight Israel’s diplomatic weakness in its dealings with the US.

“There’s this joke phrase that became popular with those resisting Netanyahu’s judicial reform: ‘This time he’s done’,” Goldberg said. “Netanyahu’s never done. He committed a genocide, and all people in Israel can object to is the management of it. He’s currently losing military and diplomatic influence across the region, and few are noticing. I can’t imagine that this will be ‘it’ either.”

Feb. 4 (UPI) — Ryan Routh, who was convicted for an attempted assassination attempt on President Donald Trump in Florida, was sentenced to life in prison plus seven years Wednesday.

Before announcing the sentence, Judge Aileen Cannon called Routh an “evil” man.

Routh, 60, was convicted of hiding in the bushes at Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach in September 2024. He pointed a military-grade SKS rifle toward Trump, who was then a candidate running for his second term, and a Secret Service agent.

He defended himself in the trial that ended in September. When the verdict was read, he stabbed himself in the neck with a pen.

Prosecutors argued in a court filing that Routh deserved a life sentence.

“Routh’s crimes undeniably warrant a life sentence — he took steps over the course of months to assassinate a major presidential candidate, demonstrated the will to kill anybody in the way, and has since expressed neither regret nor remorse to his victims.

“Routh’s crimes of conviction reflect careful plotting, extensive premeditation, and a cowardly disregard for human life,” prosecutors wrote. “Routh’s motive for his crimes was unconscionable — preventing the American people from electing the candidate of their choice for President. Routh’s gloss on his crimes has always been that anything he may have done was justified by events in Ukraine or American domestic politics.”

Since the conviction, Routh has been represented by court-appointed attorney Martin Roth. He requested a 27-year sentence and argued that he didn’t get a fair trial because he represented himself.

“Defendant recognizes that he was found guilty by the jury but asserts that the jury was misled by his inability to effectively confront witnesses, use exhibits, or affirmatively introduce impeachment evidence designed to prove his lack of intent to cause injury to anyone,” Roth wrote.

Routh had a psychiatric evaluation before the trial, which showed he had bipolar disorder and narcissistic personality disorder.

His family submitted letters of support to the court.

Routh’s son Adam wrote that his father “wants to move forward in the right way and continue to be someone who contributes to our family and his community.” He said, “we still need him, and he still has people who love and support him.”

Routh’s sister Nancy Meyers asked the court to consider placing her brother in a prison in North Carolina. She said the family was devastated by his actions but “committed to assisting him with his rehabilitative efforts.”

Feb. 4 (UPI) — Fulton County, Georgia, filed a motion in federal court on Wednesday demanding the return of election materials taken from the county by the FBI.

The motion was filed under seal, said Jessica Corbitt, a spokesperson for the county, to The New York Times. It also asks for the affidavit filed in support of the search warrant to be unsealed.

Robb Pitts, chair of the Fulton County Board of Commissioners, said at a press conference Wednesday that the motion was a way to uphold the Constitution and the rights of Fulton County voters.

“We will fight using all resources against those who seek to take over our elections,” he said. “Our Constitution itself is at stake in this fight.”

Fulton County Commissioner Marvin Arrington Jr. said the motion is important to the people of his county because “actions like this mass seizure risk sowing seeds of distrust in the election process.”

“This morning’s filing could not have come fast enough; justice delayed is justice denied,” Arrington said in a statement to USA Today. “The people of Fulton County deserve justice now, and that’s why I pushed so hard to get this motion filed as soon as possible.”

On Jan. 28, the FBI seized large quantities of materials from the Election Hub and Operations Center in Union City, Ga., just outside of Atlanta. They specifically took items from the 2020 election, which President Donald Trump has claimed he won, despite a lack of evidence.

Fulton County, which makes up a large portion of Atlanta, is a strongly Democratic county and is the most populous in the state.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was present at the raid, and lawmakers have demanded to know why. She responded that Trump had requested that she be there.

In a letter to Rep. James Himes, D-Conn., and Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., Gabbard defended her presence.

“My presence was requested by the President and executed under my broad statutory authority to coordinate, integrate and analyze intelligence related to election security, including counterintelligence, foreign and other malign influence and cybersecurity,” she said.

The Times reported that a day after the raid, Gabbard facilitated a phone call between her, Trump and the FBI agents involved.

“Tulsi Gabbard has no legal role in domestic law enforcement, yet 5 days ago she participated in an FBI raid of Fulton County, Georgia’s, election office — the center of Trump’s 2020 election conspiracy theories,” Warner said on X on Monday.

“And now we find out that she orchestrated a call between Trump and the FBI agents conducting the raid? Something’s not passing the smell test …,” he said.

Trump has recently said that he wants to “nationalize” the upcoming midterm elections, though he has no legal authority to do so.

The FBI agents loaded three box trucks of evidence from the election facility. Fulton County officials said that more than 20 pallets of ballots, election tape and equipment were taken, but they don’t have a list of items from the Department of Justice, The Times reported.

“We don’t even have copies of what they took, so it’s a problem,” Pitts said. He added that the county wants the items back “so we can take an inventory” of what was taken.

“We don’t know where they are. We don’t know, really, who has them,” The Times reported he said. “We don’t know what they’re doing with them. Are they being tampered with? I can use my imagination, and I would certainly hope not. But we just – we don’t know.”

Pitts mentioned Trump’s comments about taking over the elections in about 15 states.

“We’ll be the test case,” he said. “If they’re successful in Georgia — Fulton County, Georgia, in particular — the others on that list of 15 plus states, they should be aware.”

He said the raid was “probably the first step in whatever they’re going to do in order to depress voter participation, voter registration, making whatever changes they think are necessary to help their case in 2026, but more importantly, in 2028.”

New Delhi, India – When US President Donald Trump announced a trade deal with India on Monday this week, he declared that New Delhi would pivot away from Russian energy as part of the agreement.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Trump said, had promised to stop buying Russian oil, and instead buy crude from the United States and from Venezuela, whose president, Nicolas Maduro, was abducted by US special forces in early January. Since then, the US has effectively taken control of Venezuela’s mammoth oil industry.

In return, Trump dialled down trade tariffs on Indian goods from an overall 50 percent to just 18 percent. Half of that 50 percent tariff was levied last year as punishment for India buying Russian oil, which the White House maintains is financing Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine.

But since Monday, India has not publicly confirmed that it has committed to either ceasing its purchase of Russian oil or embracing Venezuelan crude, analysts note. Dmitry Peskov, a Kremlin spokesperson, told reporters on Tuesday that Russia had received no indication of this from India, either.

And switching from Russian to Venezuelan oil will be far from straightforward. A cocktail of other factors – shocks to the energy market, costs, geography, and the characteristics of different kinds of oil – will complicate New Delhi’s decisions about its sourcing of oil, they say.

So, can India really dump Russian oil? And can Venezuelan crude replace it?

What is Trump’s plan?

Trump has been pressuring India to stop buying Russian oil for months. After Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, the US and European Union placed an oil price cap on Russian crude in a bid to limit Russia’s ability to finance the war.

As a result, other countries including India began buying large quantities of cheap Russian oil. India, which before the war sourced only 2.5 percent of its oil from Russia, became the second-largest consumer of Russian oil after China. It currently sources around 30 percent of its oil from Russia.

Last year, Trump doubled trade tariffs on Indian goods from 25 percent to 50 percent as punishment for this. Later in the year, Trump also imposed sanctions on Russia’s two biggest oil companies – and threatened secondary sanctions against countries and entities that trade with these firms.

Since the abduction of Maduro by US forces in early January, Trump has effectively taken over the Venezuelan oil sector, controlling sales cash flows.

Venezuela also has the largest proven oil reserves in the world, estimated at 303 billion barrels, more than five times larger than those of the US, the world’s largest oil producer.

But while getting India to buy Venezuelan oil makes sense from the US’s perspective, analysts say this could be operationally messy.

How much oil does India import from Russia?

India currently imports nearly 1.1 million barrels per day (bpd) of Russian crude, according to analytics company Kpler. Under Trump’s mounting pressure, that is lower than the average 1.21 million bpd in December 2025 and more than 2 million bpd in mid-2025.

One barrel is equivalent to 159 litres (42 gallons) of crude oil. Once refined, a barrel typically produces about 73 litres (19 gallons) of petrol for a car. Oil is also refined to produce a wide variety of products, from jet fuel to household items including plastics and even lotions.

Has India stopped Russian oil purchases?

India has reduced the amount of oil it buys from Russia over the past year, but it has not stopped buying it altogether.

Under increasing pressure from Trump, last August, Indian officials called out the “hypocrisy” of the US and EU pressuring New Delhi to back off from Russian crude.

“In fact, India began importing from Russia because traditional supplies were diverted to Europe after the outbreak of the conflict,” Randhir Jaiswal, India’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, said then. He added that India’s decision to import Russian oil was “meant to ensure predictable and affordable energy costs to the Indian consumer”.

Despite this, Indian refiners, currently the second-largest group of buyers of Russian oil after China, are reportedly winding up their purchases after clearing current scheduled orders.

Major refiners like Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPCL), Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd (MRPL), and HPCL-Mittal Energy Ltd (HMEL) halted purchasing from Russia following the US sanctions against Russian oil producers last year.

Other players like Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), Bharat Petroleum Corporation, and Reliance Industries will soon stop their purchases.

What happens if India suddenly stops buying Russian oil?

Even if India wanted to stop importing Russian oil altogether, analysts argue it would be extremely costly to do so.

In September last year, India’s oil and petroleum minister, Hardeep Singh Puri, told reporters that it would also sharply push up energy prices and fuel inflation. “The world will face serious consequences if the supplies are disrupted. The world can’t afford to keep Russia off the oil market,” Puri said.

Analysts tend to agree. “A complete cessation of Indian purchases of Russian oil would be a major disruption. An immediate halt would spike global prices and threaten India’s economic growth,” said George Voloshin, an independent energy analyst based in Paris.

Russian oil would likely be diverted more heavily towards China and into “shadow” fleets of tankers that deliver sanctioned oil secretly by flying false flags and switching off location equipment, Voloshin told Al Jazeera. “Mainstream tanker demand would shift toward the Atlantic Basin, most likely increasing global freight rates as a result,” he noted.

Sumit Pokharna, vice president at Kotak Securities, noted that Indian refineries have reported robust margins in the last two years, majorly benefitting from the discounted Russian crude.

“If they move to higher-costing, like the US or Venezuela, then raw material cost would increase, and that would squeeze their margins,” he told Al Jazeera. “If it goes beyond control, they may have to pass the excess onto consumers.”

Can India stop buying Russian oil altogether?

It may not be able to. One of India’s two private refiners, Nayara Energy, is majority-Russian-owned and under heavy Western sanctions. The Russian energy firm Rosneft holds a 49.13 percent stake in the company, which operates a 400,000-barrel-per-day refinery in India’s Gujarat, PM Modi’s home state.

Nayara is the second-largest importer of Russian crude, buying about 471,000 barrels per day in January this year, accounting for nearly 40 percent of Russian supplies to India.

Its plant has relied solely on Russian crude since European Union sanctions were imposed on the company last July.

Nayara is not planning to load Russian oil in April as it shuts its refinery for more than a month for maintenance from April 10, according to Reuters.

Pokharna said the future of Nayara hangs in the balance, with the US unlikely to grant India an overt exemption for the Russia-backed company to import crude.

Can India switch to Venezuelan oil?

India has been a major consumer of Venezuelan oil in the past. At its peak, in 2019, India imported $7.2bn of oil, accounting for just under 7 percent of total imports. That stopped after the US slapped sanctions on Venezuelan oil, but some officials of the government-owned Oil and Natural Gas Corporation are still stationed in the Latin American country.

Now, major Indian refiners have said they are open to receiving Venezuelan oil again, but only if it is a viable option.

For one thing, Venezuela is roughly twice as far from India as Russia and five times further than the Middle East, meaning much higher freight costs.

Venezuelan oil is more expensive as well. “Russian Urals [a medium-heavy crude blend] has been trading at a wide-ranging discount of about $10-20 per barrel to Brent, while Venezuelan Merey currently offers a smaller discount of around $5-8 per barrel,” Voloshin told Al Jazeera.

“Importing from Venezuela and forgoing the Russian discount would be a costly affair for India,” said Pokharna. “From transportation cost to forgoing discounts, it could cost India $6-8 more per barrel – and that is a huge increase in the importing bill.”

Overall, a complete pivot away from Russia could raise India’s import bill by $9bn to $11bn – an amount roughly equal to India’s federal health budget – per year, according to Kpler.

“Venezuelan crude must be discounted by at least $10 to $12 per barrel to be competitive,” argued Voloshin. “This deeper discount is necessary to offset the much higher freight costs, increased insurance premiums for the longer Atlantic voyage, and the somewhat higher operational expenses required to process Venezuela’s extra-heavy high-sulfur crude.”

Without deeper discounts, the longer journey and complex handling make Venezuelan oil more expensive on a delivered basis, he added.

Another major issue is that many Indian refiners simply do not have the facilities to process very heavy Venezuelan oil.

Venezuelan crude is a heavy, sour oil, thick and viscous like molasses, with a high sulphur content requiring complex, specialised refineries to process it into fuel. Only a small number of Indian refineries are equipped to handle it.

“[Venezuelan oil’s heaviness] makes it an option only for complex refineries, leaving out older and smaller refineries,” Pokharna told Al Jazeera. “The shift is operationally difficult and would require blending with more expensive light crudes.”

Then there is the question of availability. Today, Venezuela produces barely a million barrels per day when pushed to its limit. Even if all production was sent to India, it would not match the total Russian oil import.

Where else could India buy oil?

India’s Minister Puri has said that New Delhi is looking to diversify sourcing options from nearly 40 countries.

As India has reduced Russian imports, it has increased them from Middle Eastern nations and other countries in the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). Now, while Russia accounts for nearly 27 percent share in India’s oil imports, OPEC nations, led by Iraq and Saudi Arabia, contribute 53 percent.

Reeling from Trump’s trade war, India has also increased purchases of US oil. American crude imports to India rose by 92 percent from April to November in 2025 to nearly 13 million tons, compared to 7.1 million in the same period in 2024.

However, India would be competing for these supplies with the European Union, which has pledged to spend $750bn by 2028 on US energy and nuclear products.

Meanwhile, for Venezuela to return to higher production, Caracas needs political stability, changes in foreign investment and oil laws, and to clear debts. That will take time, experts say.

United States border security chief Tom Homan has announced that the administration of President Donald Trump will “draw down” 700 immigration enforcement personnel from Minnesota while promising to continue operations in the northern state.

The update on Wednesday was the latest indication of the Trump administration pivoting on its enforcement surge in the state following the killing of two US citizens by immigration agents in Minneapolis in January.

Homan, who is officially called Trump’s “border czar”, said the decision came amid new cooperation agreements with local authorities, particularly related to detaining individuals at county jails. Details of those agreements were not immediately available.

About 3,000 immigration enforcement agents are currently believed to be in Minnesota as part of Trump’s enforcement operations.

“Given this increase in unprecedented collaboration, and as a result of the need for less law enforcement officers to do this work in a safer environment, I have announced, effective immediately, we will draw down 700 people effective today – 700 law enforcement personnel,” Homan said.

The announcement comes after Homan was sent to Minnesota at the end of January in response to widespread protests over immigration enforcement and the killing of Renee Nicole Good on January 7 by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent and Alex Pretti on January 24 by a US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officer, both in Minneapolis.

Homan said reforms made since his arrival have included consolidating ICE and CBP under a single chain of command.

He said Trump “fully intends to achieve mass deportations during this administration, and immigration enforcement actions will continue every day throughout this country”.

Immigration rights observers have said the administration’s mass deportation approach has seen agents use increasingly “dragnet” tactics to meet large detention quotas, including randomly stopping individuals and asking for their papers. The administration has increasingly detained undocumented individuals with no criminal records, even US citizens and people who have legal status to live in the US.

Homan said agents would prioritise who they considered to be “public safety threats” but added, “Just because you prioritise public safety threats, don’t mean we forget about everybody else. We will continue to enforce the immigration laws in this country.”

The “drawdown”, he added, would not apply to what he described as “personnel providing security for our officers”.

“We will not draw down on personnel providing security and responding to hostile incidents until we see a change,” he said.

Critics have accused immigration enforcement officers, who do not receive the same level of crowd control training as most local police forces, of using excessive violence in responding to protesters and individuals legally monitoring their actions.

Trump administration officials have regularly blamed unrest on “agitators”. They accused both Good and Pretti of threatening officers before their killings although video evidence of the exchanges has contradicted that characterisation.

Last week, the administration announced it was opening a federal civil rights investigation into the killing of Pretti, who was fatally shot while he was pinned to the ground by immigration agents. That came moments after an agent removed a gun from Pretti’s body, which the 37-year-old had not drawn and was legally carrying.

Federal authorities have not opened a civil rights investigation into the killing of Good, who they have maintained sought to run over an ICE agent before she was fatally shot. Video evidence appeared to show Good trying to turn away from the agent.

On Friday, thousands of people took to the streets of Minneapolis and other US cities amid calls for a federal strike in protest against the Trump administration’s deportation drive.

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison and other state and local officials have also challenged the immigration enforcement surge in the state, arguing that the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE and the CBP, has been violating constitutional protections.

A federal judge last week said she will not halt the operations as a lawsuit progresses in court. Department of Justice lawyers have dismissed the suit as “legally frivolous”.

On Wednesday, a poll released by the Marquette Law School found wide-ranging disquiet over ICE’s approach, with 60 percent of US adults nationwide saying they disapproved of how the agency was conducting itself. The poll was conducted from January 21 to January 28, with many of the surveys conducted before Pretti’s killing.

The poll still found widespread support for ICE among Republicans, with about 80 percent approving of its work. Just 5 percent of Democrats voiced similar approval.

Perhaps most worryingly for Republicans ahead of the 2026 midterms in November, just 23 percent of independents – potential swing voters in the upcoming vote – approved of ICE’s actions.

US President Donald Trump lashed out at a journalist, calling her the ‘worst reporter’, after she questioned him about survivors of the late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Trump’s name appears in the Epstein files. He has not been accused of any crimes by Epstein’s victims and has denied any wrongdoing.

US President Donald Trump has said that talks with Iran are continuing to try to de-escalate tensions in the Gulf, even as the US military announced shooting down an Iranian drone that approached its aircraft carrier in the Arabian Sea.

Thousands of people marched through Venezuela’s capital, Caracas, demanding the release of President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, exactly one month since US forces abducted the couple in a bloody nighttime raid.

“Venezuela needs Nicolas!” the crowd chanted in Tuesday’s demonstration, titled “Gran Marcha” (The Great March).

Thousands carried signs in support of the abducted president, and many wore shirts calling for the couple’s return from detention in a US prison.

“The empire kidnapped them. We want them back,” declared one banner carried by marchers.

Nicolas Maduro Guerra, the detained president’s son and a member of Venezuela’s National Assembly, addressed the crowds from a stage, stating that the US military’s abduction of his father on January 3 “will remain marked like a scar on our face, forever”.

“Our homeland’s soil was desecrated by a foreign army”, Maduro Guerra said of the night US forces abducted his father.

The march, called by the government and involving many public sector workers, stretched for several hundred metres, accompanied by trucks blaring music.

Local media outlet Venezuela News said the march was part of a “global day of action” to demand the couple’s release. Protesters showed their solidarity around the world, demonstrating under banners with slogans like “Bring them back” and “Hands off Venezuela”.

The international event united voices “from diverse ideological trends”, who agreed “that the detention of President Maduro and Cilia Flores represents a flagrant violation of international law and a dangerous precedent for the sovereignty of nations”, the news outlet said.

“We feel confused, sad, angry. There are a lot of emotions,” said Jose Perdomo, a 58-year-old municipal employee, who marched in Caracas.

“Sooner or later, they will have to free our president”, he said, adding that he also backed Venezuela’s interim leader, Delcy Rodriguez.

Rodriguez has been walking a thin line since taking over as acting president, trying to appease Maduro’s supporters in government and accommodating the demands being placed on Caracas by US President Donald Trump.

Trump has said he is willing to work with Rodriguez, as long as Caracas falls in line with his demands, particularly on the US taking control of Venezuela’s vast oil reserves.

Striking a conciliatory tone with Washington, and promising reform and reconciliation at home, Rodriguez has already freed hundreds of political prisoners and opened Venezuela’s nationalised hydrocarbons sector to private investment.

Earlier on Tuesday, hundreds of university students and relatives of political prisoners also marched in the capital, calling for the quick approval of an amnesty law promised by Rodriguez that would free prisoners from the country’s jails.

Legislation on the amnesty has not yet come before parliament.

For months, United States President Donald Trump has called him a “sick man” and an “illegal drug leader”.

But on Tuesday, Trump welcomed his Colombian counterpart, Gustavo Petro, to the White House for their first face-to-face meeting in Washington, DC.

Both leaders hailed the meeting as productive, while acknowledging the lingering tensions that divide them.

At a news conference after their meeting, Petro waved away questions about his rocky history with Trump, whom he has publicly accused of human rights violations.

Instead, he called the interaction “ a meeting between two equals who have different ways of thinking”.

“He didn’t change his way of his thinking. Neither did I. But how do you do an agreement, a pact? It’s not as between twin brothers. It’s between opponents,” Petro said.

Separately, Trump told reporters from the Oval Office that he felt good about the meeting. “I thought it was terrific,” he said.

On the agenda for the two leaders were issues including the fight against transnational drug trafficking and security in Latin America.

Here are five takeaways from Tuesday’s meeting.

A White House charm offensive

Over the past year, Trump has invited the media to participate in his meetings with foreign leaders, often holding news conferences with the visiting dignitaries in the Oval Office.

Not this time, however. The meeting between Trump and Petro lasted nearly two hours, all of it behind closed doors.

But the two leaders emerged with largely positive things to say about one another.

In a post on social media, Petro revealed that Trump had gifted him several items, including a commemorative photograph of their meeting accompanied by a signed note.

“Gustavo – a great honor. I love Colombia,” it read, followed by Trump’s signature.

In another post, Petro showed off a signed copy of Trump’s book, The Art of the Deal. On its title page, Trump had scrawled another note to Petro: “You are great.”

“Can someone tell me what Trump said in this dedication?” Petro wrote jokingly in Spanish on social media. “I don’t understand much English.”

A turning point in a tense relationship?

Petro’s joke appeared to be a cheeky nod to his notoriously rocky relationship with Trump.

It was only six days into Trump’s second term, on January 26, 2025, that he and Petro began their feud, trading threats on social media over the fate of two US deportation flights.

Petro objected to the reported human rights violations facing the deportees. Trump, meanwhile, took Petro’s initial refusal to accept the flights as a threat to US “national security”. Petro ultimately backed down after Trump threatened steep sanctions on imported Colombian goods.

They continued to trade barbs in the months since. Petro, for instance, has condemned the deadly US attacks on boats in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean, comparing the strikes with murder.

He has also criticised Trump for carrying out a US military offensive in Venezuela to abduct then-President Nicolas Maduro. That attack, Petro said, was tantamount to “kidnapping”.

Trump, meanwhile, stripped Petro of his US visa following the Colombian leader’s appearance at the United Nations General Assembly, where he criticised the US and briefly joined a pro-Palestinian protest.

The Trump administration also sanctioned Petro in October, blaming the left-wing leader for allowing “drug cartels to flourish”.

After removing Maduro from power on January 3, Trump offered a warning to Petro: he had better “watch his a**”. The statement was widely interpreted to be a threat of military action against Colombia.

But Trump and Petro appeared to have reached a turning point last month. On January 7, the two leaders held their first call together. Tuesday’s in-person meeting marked another first in their relationship.

Agreeing to disagree

Despite the easing tensions, the two leaders used their public statements after the meeting to reaffirm their differences.

Trump was the first to speak, holding a news conference in the Oval Office as he signed legislation to end a government shutdown.

The US president, a member of the right-wing Republican Party, used the appearance to reflect on the political tensions the two leaders had in the lead-up to the meeting.

“He and I weren’t exactly the best of friends, but I wasn’t insulted, because I’d never met him,” Trump told reporters.

He added that Tuesday’s meeting was nevertheless pleasant. “I didn’t know him at all, and we got along very well.”

Petro, meanwhile, held a longer news conference at the Colombian Embassy in Washington, DC, where he raised some points of divergence he had with Trump.

Among the topics he mentioned was Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, which the US has supported, and sustainable energy initiatives designed to be carbon neutral. Trump, in the past, has called the so-called green energy programmes a “scam”.

Petro, Colombia’s first left-wing leader, also reflected on his region’s history with colonialism and foreign intervention. He told reporters it was important that Latin America make decisions for itself, free from any outside “coercion”.

“ We don’t operate under blackmail,” he said at one point, in an apparent reference to Trump’s pressure campaigns.

Differing approach to combating drug trafficking

One of the primary points of contention, however, was Petro’s approach to combating drug trafficking.

Colombia is the world’s largest producer of cocaine, responsible for 68 percent of the global supply.

The Trump administration has used the fight against global drug trafficking as a justification for carrying out lethal military strikes in international waters and in Venezuela, despite experts condemning the attacks as illegal under international law.

It has also stripped Colombia of its certification as an ally in its global counter-narcotics operations.

Trump’s White House has said it will consider reversing that decision if Petro takes “more aggressive action to eradicate coca and reduce cocaine production and trafficking”.

But Petro has rejected any attempt to label him as soft on drug trafficking, instead touting the historic drug busts his government has overseen.

He made this argument yet again after Tuesday’s meeting, claiming that no other Colombian administration had done as much as his to fight cocaine trafficking.

Rather than take a militarised approach to destroying crops of coca, the raw ingredient for cocaine, Petro argued that he has had more success with voluntary eradication programmes.

This push, he said, succeeded in “getting thousands of peasant farmers to uproot the plant themselves”.

“These are two different methods, two different ways of understanding how to fight drug trafficking,” Petro said. “One that is brutal and self-interested, and what it ends up doing is promoting mafia powers and drug traffickers, and another approach, which is intelligent, which is effective.”

Petro maintained it was more strategic to go after top drug-ring leaders than to punish impoverished rural farmers by forcibly ripping up their crops.

“I told President Trump, if you want an ally in fighting drug trafficking, it’s going after the top kingpins,” he said.

A Trumpian note

Tuesday’s meeting ultimately marked yet another high-profile reversal for Trump, who has a history of shifting his relationships with world leaders.

Last year, for instance, he lashed out at Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a public Oval Office clash, only to warm to the wartime leader several months later.

But Colombia is quickly approaching a pivotal presidential election in May, which will see Petro’s left-wing coalition, the Historic Pact, seek to defend the presidency against an ascendant far right.

Petro himself cannot run for consecutive terms under Colombian law. But there is speculation that Tuesday’s detente with Trump may help Petro’s coalition avoid US condemnation ahead of the vote.

Colombia, after all, was until recently the largest recipient of US aid in South America, and it has long harboured close ties with the North American superpower. Straining those ties could therefore be seen as an election liability.

While Petro acknowledged his differences with Trump during his remarks, at times he expressed certain views that overlapped with the US president’s.

Like Trump has in the past, Petro used part of his speech on Tuesday to question the role of the UN in maintaining global security.

“ Did it not show incapacity? Isn’t a reform needed?” Petro asked, wondering aloud if there was “something superior to the United Nations that would bring humanity together better in a better way”.

But when it came to donning Trump’s signature “Make America Great Again” baseball cap, Petro drew a line – or rather, a squiggle.

On social media, he shared an adjustment he made to the cap’s slogan. A jagged, Sharpie-inked “S” amended the phrase to include the entire Western Hemisphere: “Make Americas Great Again.”