For decades, men in many countries were expected to spend two or even three months’ salary on a diamond engagement ring. This notion – and the iconic status of this gem – did not come about by accident.
The story goes back to 1870, when an Oxford University dropout named Cecil Rhodes set off to try his luck in the Cape Colony – modern-day South Africa, then a key British domain.
Seeing the burgeoning diamond mining sector there, he began renting water pumps to diamond prospectors to prevent flooding of the mines. Then, over the next 20 years, Rhodes and his partner Charles Rudd proceeded to buy out hundreds, and then thousands, of small mines and “claims” – landholdings believed to contain diamonds – often for a pittance when their owners faced bankruptcy. Most miners were small operators, and Rhodes and Rudd had access to serious financial capital – notably the Rothschild banking empire – through their connections in London. As the two partners combined claims into larger mining units, overhead costs were reduced, and operations became more profitable.
The partners incorporated as De Beers Consolidated Mines, De Beers being the name of one of the mines they took over. By 1888, the company had a near-monopoly of South African claims and active diamond mines. With diamonds making up more than 25 percent of South African exports in 1900, De Beers became a powerhouse of the country’s economy, controlling some 90 percent of the world’s total diamond supply. Rhodes himself became a leading imperial figure, serving as prime minister of the Cape Colony from 1890 to 1896.
De Beers was founded upon the racist policies of South Africa, which at the time was ruled by a white minority. The diamonds were extracted by Black miners earning subsistence wages, while De Beers’s white, European-origin shareholders enjoyed the profits.
Following Rhodes’s death in 1902, control of De Beers ultimately passed to German-born entrepreneur Ernest Oppenheimer. Oppenheimer used a combination of financial incentives, strategic pressure, and diplomacy to persuade diamond suppliers in other countries to sell exclusively through the London-based and De Beers-owned “Central Selling Organization” (CSO), which in the 1930s became the unified sales channel for virtually all the world’s pre-cut diamonds. This enabled De Beers to stockpile diamonds, strictly control the release of stones to the global market, and effectively control prices – thereby creating an illusion of diamond scarcity worldwide.
Meanwhile, De Beers sought to enhance global demand for diamonds. In 1946, the company hired NW Ayer, a Philadelphia-based advertising agency, which one year later came up with the legendary slogan, “A diamond is forever”. This reframed the diamond and, specifically, the diamond engagement ring, as a symbol of “eternal love”. Through mass advertising, product placements in films, and celebrity PR – for example, lending jewellery to actors for major events – the campaign transformed the diamond market in the US, Europe and Japan.
Lasting 64 years, until 2011, this campaign was an astounding global success, with Ad Age magazine naming “A diamond is forever” as the top advertisement slogan of the 20th century. De Beers had manufactured a social norm, with the diamond engagement ring becoming almost mandatory in every developed market. While previously, a fiance might give a locket, a string of pearls, or a family heirloom to his intended, the number of American brides with a diamond ring climbed from 10 percent in 1940 to some 80 percent in 1980. In Japan, this figure rose from less than 5 percent in 1960 to 60 percent by 1981.
By the early 1950s, a diamond ring typically cost about $170 – about $2,300 in today’s money. De Beers advertisements initially suggested spending one month’s salary on an engagement ring, but by the 1980s, they were posing the question: “How can you make two months’ salary last forever?” Consumers appeared undeterred by the fact that a diamond’s resale value was typically just 50 percent of its original retail price (in contrast to gold, which has an “official” benchmark price set twice-daily).
By the time Marilyn Monroe sang “Diamonds are a girl’s best friend” in 1953 and the James Bond film “Diamonds Are Forever” was released in 1971, the diamond had become an icon.
The Kimberley diamond mines in South Africa, to which thousands flocked in the 1870s after the discovery of diamonds on the nearby De Beers farm [Gray Marrets/Getty Images]
‘Cartel behaviour’
By the late 1970s, De Beers was annually distributing some 50 million diamond carats, with sales of more than $2bn in the US alone.
But as the 1980s rolled around, problems started to emerge for the company.
De Beers came under increasing scrutiny as the anti-apartheid movement gained momentum in Europe and the United States. Reports of its working conditions were shocking: low pay for mineworkers, minimum safety training and crowded dormitory housing surrounded by barbed wire and security checkpoints. This negative publicity put De Beers firmly in the spotlight as one of the prime beneficiaries of apartheid.
De Beers had already fought off allegations of “cartel behaviour” from the US Department of Justice. But in 1994, the company was indicted by a US grand jury on price-fixing charges. The company was barred from doing business in the US, where its executives could no longer set foot for fear of arrest.
In the late 1990s, reports that the diamond trade was financing brutal civil wars in Angola, Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of Congo further soured consumer sentiment.
Rebel groups targeted “alluvial” diamond mines – relatively easy-to-extract surface deposits, often in riverbeds – selling stones into the informal “grey” market and using the profits to buy weapons. The phrase “blood diamonds” entered the lexicon as investigative articles depicted enslaved children with pickaxes and shovels. De Beers was accused of turning a blind eye, if not outright complicity. The company’s sales declined more than 20 percent in two years, from about $5.7bn in 1999 to $4.45bn in 2001, with other diamond suppliers such as Angola’s Endiama and Russia’s Alrosa equally affected.
But since the early 1990s, changes had been afoot at De Beers. Facing pressure from South Africa’s newly elected African National Congress (ANC), it had introduced better conditions and wages for its mainly Black mineworkers. At the same time, Black South Africans also began to occupy some management roles.
Meanwhile, the US indictment meant the company had no choice but to terminate its CSO in 2000, ushering in competition from other producers. Diamond prices, no longer set and dictated by the CSO, became more volatile, subject to fluctuating demand, economic cycles, and geopolitical conditions.
To counter the blood diamond backlash, De Beers helped implement the “Kimberley Process” in 2003, through which diamond dealers can trace the origin of diamonds and authenticate “clean’’ diamonds with a microscopic stamp.
A salesperson shows a diamond ring to a prospective buyer at a jewellery shop in Ahmedabad, India, on April 14, 2025 [Ajit Solanki/AP Photo]
Not forever?
Today, natural diamonds may have lost some of their allure with the rise of “lab-grown” stones and “diamond simulants” such as cubic zirconia, which are up to 90 percent cheaper than the mined variety and often distinguishable from the real thing only by experts using specialised equipment.
Over the past two years, the diamond industry has been hit by a “perfect storm” of cheaper synthetic stones, weak consumer demand in the US and China, sanctions against Russia and, more recently, high US tariffs. This has had a widespread adverse impact: the Antwerp World Diamond Centre (AWDC) reported that rough diamond imports dropped 35 percent in 2024, with overall trade declining by 25 percent year-on-year (from $32.5bn to $24.4bn) – and in the Indian gem processing hub of Surat, at least 50,000 diamond workers were rendered jobless in 2024. At least 80 diamond workers in India have died by suicide in the past two years.
In 2011, the Oppenheimer family sold its interest in De Beers to the London-based mining corporation Anglo American, another major shareholder, for just over $5bn. De Beers is now once more up for sale, again with a $5bn price tag, as Anglo American seeks to exit the declining diamond market in favour of copper, iron ore and rare earth minerals.
Despite the volatile market conditions, total global consumer diamond sales were valued at approximately $100bn in 2024, with the average price of $6,750 for a diamond ring in the US, according to the Natural Diamond Council – about 1.3 months’ standard wage in the United States, but about eight months’ worth of the global median income. For those of greater means, London’s Harrods reportedly has a 228.31 carat, pear-shaped diamond available to view by private appointment – with a price estimated to be in excess of $30m.
This article is part of “Ordinary items, extraordinary stories”, a series about the surprising stories behind well-known items.
Lord Palmerston’s maxim that “We have no eternal allies nor perpetual enemies. “Our interests are eternal and perpetual,” aptly describes the rapidly changing nature of India-China relations. Border strife has been the norm between the two nations for decades, shaping their strategic stances. However, October 2024 saw a minor thaw in relations, with New Delhi and Beijing coming to terms with a major agreement on patrolling protocols along the disputed LAC. This breakthrough led to a series of high-level diplomatic engagements in a carefully measured but pragmatic manner. More importantly, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping engaged in direct bilateral talks at the BRICS Summit in Kazan, which was followed by a defense ministers’ conversation during the ASEAN Defense Ministers’ Meeting in November. The momentum then carried over into December in the form of the revival of the India–China Special Representatives Meeting, one of the important strategic platforms that had been asleep for five years. Although these developments do not eliminate deeply ingrained strategic distrust, they demonstrate a realist convergence; both nations are putting national interests ahead of ideological or historical animosities, embracing engagement rather than isolation as a way to manage competition and maintain regional stability.
In August 2025, Mr. Wang Yi, China’s Foreign Affairs Minister, visited India after three years for the improvement of the relationship between the two nuclear and emerging regional states. During his stay in India, Wang Yi co-chaired the 24th round of the Special Representatives’ Dialogue on the Boundary Question between India and China with the National Security Advisor, Ajit Doval. He also had bilateral discussions with Minister of External Affairs S. Jaishankar and met Prime Minister Modi. His visit after the 2020 Galwan clashes between India and China primarily concentrated on bilateral issues like border stabilization, economic cooperation, and regional security.
Therefore, Mr. Wang Yi’s visit to India marks a recalibration of ties based on a healthy and stable India-China relationship that serves the long-term interests of both countries.Secondly, the visit preceded PM Modi’s trip to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin, his first visit in seven years, thereby laying the groundwork for stronger bilateral engagements. Thirdly, the visit came at a crucial time, as both countries face pressure from shifting US trade orientations, resulting in a push for pragmatic recalibration of ties and a strategic embrace on both sides.
However, during the month of February 2025, the Indian government ordered the erasure of 119 Chinese applications from the Google Play Store and, by June, announced a five-year tariff on imports of Chinese industrial inputs, which read as putting up a false facade of resistance against Beijing. However, the most compelling contrast comes from the diplomatic posture of India; calling for normalization with China while acting tough on them quite literally sounded like shouting at a neighbor while still borrowing sugar from them. Abandonment by America becomes evident for Modi; therefore, his choice of dialogue with Beijing reinforces both strategic weakness and duplicitous diplomacy. After many years during which warnings on Chinese expansionism were issued, the border may remain tense, but New Delhi seems determined to maintain good relations with China. This very decision of shaking hands underscored India’s inability to match China on political, strategic, and economic fronts. Meanwhile, Wang Yi’s parallel visits to Pakistan and Afghanistan highlight Beijing’s much broader regional priorities, reminding New Delhi just how far it is from being at the very center of China’s diplomacy.
The SCO Summit in Beijing saw the attendance of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who sought to mend ties between China and India after a period of tension; however, unresolved grievances cast serious doubts on the sustainability of this rapprochement. In the short term, ties may improve, since India has realized how great the necessity for cooperation with China has become in pushing its economic ambitions. This necessity to engage China more aggressively is driven especially in light of strained relations with the US under Trump’s steep tariffs. However, deep sensitivities on sovereignty and territorial integrity argue against any form of a sustainable relationship with China, beginning at the Sino-Indian border conflict and continuing through Arunachal Pradesh and Kashmir to China’s stance on Tibet. Mutual suspicion over regional engagements also exists, fueled by Beijing’s relations with Pakistan and New Delhi’s burgeoning naval cooperation in Asia. Contrasting language in the Modi–Xi meeting readouts, with India stressing a “multi-polar Asia” while China glossed over it, further reflects differing perspectives on the regional order. Through the stopover of Modi in Japan before going to Beijing and participation in the SCO Summit while skipping China’s Victory Day celebrations, it shows India’s cautious attempts to consolidate strategic autonomy, moving closer to both China and Russia while not disturbing the US or the West. If there is not any forward movement on the substantive disputes, the tensions will resurface in time, making any sustainable rapprochement between India and China again very unlikely, even if large-scale conflict does not seem to be a strong possibility.
In short, India and China may converge temporarily out of pragmatism, but without resolving core disputes, trust will remain elusive. New Delhi’s balancing act between Beijing, Washington, and Moscow highlights both its ambitions and vulnerabilities. Lasting peace requires more than symbolic summits—it demands substantive compromises on sovereignty, security, and regional influence. Until then, rapprochement will remain fragile, an uneasy truce rather than a genuine transformation.
It didn’t turn out to be a “Cruel Summer” for singer Taylor Swift: she and Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce, in a continuation of their ongoing “Love Story,” have officially told each other, “You Belong With Me.”
The pop icon, self-made billionaire, and self-described “Anti-Hero” announced her engagement to Kelce in an Instagram post on Tuesday. Sure enough, where there used to be a “Blank Space” on Swift’s ring finger, she was now “Bejeweled” with a large engagement ring (and we hope she doesn’t accidentally “Shake It Off”).
Swift surely knew “All Too Well” that the announcement would make “Sparks Fly” among her legion of fans (to them I say, “You Need to Calm Down”), but even in her “Wildest Dreams,” she probably never expected the news to affect the stock market.
But it did. Here’s how.
Image source: Getty Images.
Look what you made me do…to the market
In the immediate wake of the announcement, as fans were still trying to identify the exact cut of the diamond in Swift’s ring (it was a “cushion cut,” for those who are interested), there was a brief, otherwise-unexplained 1% pop in the stock price of Signet Jewelers Limited(SIG -2.54%), one of the few publicly traded jewelry companies.
As the afternoon wore on, Signet’s shares climbed higher in a rally continued through Wednesday and into Thursday’s premarket trading, when Signet’s stock briefly hit $95/share, up nearly 10% over the pre-“pop star pop” price. The Swift Effect was even more pronounced for Brilliant Earth Group (BRLT 8.55%), which soared from $2.17/share at 12:50 PM on Tuesday to close at $2.82/share, a 30% gain.
Even luxury brands only partially exposed to the jewelry market rose in the wake of the announcement: Movado Group (MOV 2.47%), which is primarily a watchmaker but does sell other jewelry items, and LVMH (LVMHF -1.43%), which owns Tiffany & Co., were both up more than 4% over their pre-engagement price at Thursday’s close.
Today was a fairytale
It’s not the first time that Taylor Swift’s legions of fans — known as “Swifties” — have collectively influenced the financial world. In July 2023, the Federal Reserve’s Beige Book credited Swift’s “Eras” tour as being responsible for the strongest month of hotel revenue in Philadelphia since the pandemic. This mirrored reports from Cincinnati and Chicago, among many other cities, that credited the “Eras” tour for record hotel revenues.
So how did this happen? There was likely a noticeable spike in internet searches for various types of wedding rings in the wake of Swift’s announcement as eager fans tried to identify the exact ring in question (and possibly score one for themselves). That activity may have triggered certain traders’ algorithms to buy jewelry stocks…or perhaps there are just plenty of Swifties among the ranks of hedge fund managers.
The money question is, could this one-time pop in interest translate into a meaningful increase in jewelry sales, or lasting gains for these jewelry stocks?
Is it over now?
Unfortunately, it looks like the rally may already be fizzling. Although Signet Jewelers closed on Thursday at $89.86/share, which is 3.6% above its pre-engagement price, it had fallen significantly from its post-engagement high of $95. Brilliant Earth Group also closed lower on Thursday at $2.69/share, though that was also well above its pre-engagement price.
Getting engaged is a much bigger commitment than buying an album or attending a concert (although the cost of some resold “Eras” tour tickets could have funded an entire wedding and then some). Sure, it might be fun to dream about getting a ring like Taylor Swift, or to shop for one online, but even if you idolize Swift, will her engagement really prompt legions of uncommitted Swifties to propose? (Don’t get me wrong: I know the intensity of Swift’s fandom is strong…but that strong?)
Meanwhile, all of the aforementioned jewelry and jewelry-adjacent companies have significantly lagged the S&P 500 over the past five years: some by a little (Signet is trailing on a total return basis by about 35 percentage points) to a lot (Brilliant Earth is “Down Bad,” by a jaw-dropping 130 percentage points).
I’d classify those returns as not just in the “Red,” but redder than “Bad Blood,” and it’ll take more than a one-time surge of interest from Swifties to make me say anything besides “I Knew You Were Trouble” and “We Are Never Ever Getting Together.”
That said, whichever jeweler can be the first to mass-produce a Taylor Swift-inspired cushion-cut engagement ring will almost certainly have a hit on their hands.
Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s engagement may have kicked off a major earthquake in the real world this week, but it hasn’t put serious seismic activity into the lives of the spouses-to-be: They were spotted out Thursday night in a luxury box catching — wait for it — a college football game, where Swift took her new engagement ring out for a test drive.
It was the first game of the 2025-26 NCAA season for the hometown University of Cincinnati Bearcats, the Kelce brothers’ alma mater, who lost to the University of Nebraska–Lincoln’s Cornhuskers by a field goal at Arrowhead Stadium in Kansas City, Mo. The bros (Jason was there too) were rooting for the Bearcats, obviously, with Travis rocking a street-art emblazoned Cincinnati cap and his older sibling sported a more traditional college typeface on his chapeau.
Swift rocked a denim miniskirt, according to People, with a white sweater, white boots, green nails and, oh yes, that massive engagement ring. The Old Mine Cut diamond ring was designed by Travis Kelce and New York City-based jewelry designer Kindred Lubeck, according to myriad media reports.
Share via
While experts who talked to People put the size of the stone at between 5 and 10 carats and guesstimated its value as anywhere from $125,000 to $5 million — which is quite the range — folks who talked to Page Six said it likely came with a $1-million price tag. Basically, nobody knows the value of a custom-made, vintage-style ring with a one-of-a-kind hand-etched diamond that is currently sitting on the ring finger of a global pop star. Go figure.
“It’s my engraved pieces that put me on the digital map,” Lubeck told VoyageJacksonville in 2024. “I started making reels showcasing my work and people started noticing. Eventually, I started getting requests for me to make engagement rings.”
The Neptune Beach, Fla., native has described herself as a goldsmith specializing in hand engraving who got started working part time with her jeweler dad in her hometown during the pandemic lockdown.
“Basically, I take very small, sharp instruments and cut away bits of metal, usually on the sides of rings, into a particular design,” she said. “People just go crazy for it when I post it online.”
No kidding: On Friday, Lubeck appeared to be sold out of every big-ticket ring she had been offering on her website, though a handful of sub-$20,000 designs were still in stock. (Swifties, where you at? A bunch of them can be had for less than $5,000! And they’re not even “distressed.”)
The Grammy-winning “Love Story” pop icon and the Kansas City Chiefs tight end announced the beginning of their engagement era on Tuesday in a joint Instagram post.
“Your English teacher and your gym teacher are getting married,” Swift captioned photos from the garden engagement, which actually took place a couple of weeks earlier.
Kelce’s dad told a Cleveland news station the same day that Travis had popped the question at home in Lee’s Summit, Mo., after months of planning, right before the two headed out for dinner. Before they left, Travis told Taylor, “‘Let’s go out and have a glass of wine.’ … They got out there, and that’s when he asked her, and it was beautiful,” Ed Kelce said.
He added with a happy shrug, “I don’t know how much I’m supposed to say, but I don’t care!”
But Vice President JD Vance definitely cares — about the effects this pairing might have on the NFL this season.
“I will say as a football fan — as a Cincinnati Bengals fan — I hope that the NFL does not put a thumb on the scale for the Kansas City Chiefs just because Travis Kelce is now getting married to maybe the most famous woman in the world,” the veep told USA Today this week.
“You guys can’t sort of have this, ‘I’m worried they’re going to have a Super Bowl wedding’ thing this season. Can’t do it. The Kansas City Chiefs have to follow the same rules as everybody else.”
So in the case that the NFL’s “deep state” turns romantic and favors the Chiefs in this pigskin-tinted love story, Vance is urging fans to be ready to act.
“I think all football fans should be willing to push back on the NFL,” he said, “and say, ‘Look, you guys got to be fair.’”
Fair enough.
Times staff writer Alexandra Del Rosario contributed to this report.
Kansas City Chiefs fans sure are excited about the upcoming season.
Fanatics, the official online sportswear retailer for the NFL, reports that sales of Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce jerseys jumped a whopping 200% on Tuesday.
Clearly, fans were doing some early packing for the team’s season opener against the Chargers in São Paulo, Brazil, on Sept. 5. Those fans simultaneously realized they didn’t have enough gear to properly represent the reigning AFC champions at Corinthians Arena.
What other possible explanation could there have been?
Haha, wrong — at least, it would seem that way, based on the typical behavioral patterns of Swifties.
Kansas City tight end Travis Kelce kisses pop superstar Taylor Swift after the Chiefs defeated the San Francisco 49ers in Super Bowl LVIII on Feb. 11, 2024, in Las Vegas.
(John Locher / Associated Press)
Kelce and Swift’s romance can be traced back to July 2023, when Kelce was able to pass along a friendship bracelet with his phone number to Swift’s camp at an Eras tour concert in Kansas City. They officially became an item that fall.
Swift attended her first Chiefs game on Sept. 24, 2023. Fanatics reported at the time that sales of No. 87 Chiefs jerseys experienced a 400% boost over the previous day, placing Kelce among the top five NFL players in jersey sales for that day.
On Aug. 13, Swift made her first-ever podcast appearance on “New Heights,” which is hosted by Kelce and his brother Jason Kelce, the former Philadelphia Eagles center. A total of 1.3 million people tuned in simultaneously after the episode dropped, setting a Guinness World Record for most concurrent views for a podcast on YouTube.
Kelce and Swift’s joint Instagram post regarding their upcoming nuptials has received more than 33.4 million likes. Billboard reported Wednesday that it has been reposted more than any other in the site’s history, passing the 1-million mark in its first six hours.
Share via
So, yeah, it would seem pretty on-brand for Swifties to celebrate by purchasing large volumes of Travis gear.
By the way, if you think those numbers are impressive, just imagine what the jersey sales will be like if the couple decides to hyphenate their names after saying “I do.” What self-respecting Swiftie would want to be without a “Kelce-Swift” (“Swift-Kelce”?) jersey as part of their wardrobe?
Nevertheless, the couple confirmed their separation last August following five years as a pair, with booze being disclosed as the reason behind their relationship’s collapse.
Lately, they’ve reignited their romance with Tommy providing an update during Tuesday’s edition of BBC Breakfast, reports OK!.
Tommy appeared on BBC Breakfast on August 19 to promote his new show(Image: BBC)
The 26 year old chatted to Jon Kay and Sarah Campbell regarding the current state of his relationship with Molly-Mae.
He revealed: “Me and Molly are in the best place that we’ve ever been in in our entire lives, even before all this. We’re do good now and it’s so nice to be in a healthy and loving relationship again.
“We’re keeping everything to ourselves and just enjoying what we’ve got and what we’ve created in Bambi.”
Yet the BBC presenter delved deeper into their present relationship circumstances, after Tommy’s proposal back in 2023.
She enquired whether they remained engaged as Tommy playfully responded: “Who knows?”.
Molly-Mae and Tommy are parents to Bambi(Image: Instagram)
Throughout their conversation, Tommy revealed the devastating moment involving Molly-Mae and their daughter Bambi, which made him realise he required assistance with his alcohol consumption.
Jon asked: “You say in the documentary that you don’t really remember the moment when Molly Mae said that she and Bambi were leaving because you’d been drinking.”
Tommy responded: “100 per cent, I was drunk that night and then it wasn’t until I realised I woke up in the morning and the house was empty.
“I thought, ‘right, this is no way to live, this is a serious problem, and if I don’t fix it, it’s going to get worse and worse and worse’.”
However, Tommy admitted that he would’ve done the same thing and doesn’t blame what happened as he pointed out that nobody would want to be around that situation.
Tommy and Molly-Mae shocked fans when they announced their split last year(Image: Instagram)
He added: “That’s not who I am anymore. I don’t have that relationship with alcohol where I want to be like that. It seems like I’m talking about a different person.”
Speaking about his daughter, Tommy told the two presenters that everything he does is for her. He remarked: “The fights that you take, the money that you earn, I’m over that.
“It’s not for me, it’s building the best life I can for that baby and hopefully other children, that’s my motivation now.”
All episodes of Tommy: The Good. The Bad. The Fury is available to stream on BBC iPlayer now and BBC Breakfast continues weekdays on BBC One from 6am
Jacqui Heinrich, senior White House correspondent for Fox News, just vetted the story of her own engagement to U.S. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick on Tuesday. The verdict? It ain’t fake news.
The Pennsylvania Republican asked Heinrich for her hand in marriage in a lavender field in Provence, France, according to People. Promoting that story, the journalist wrote on X, “Fact check: true.” Then she tacked on a couple of appropriately lovey emojis.
“The cooking was the dealmaker. Congrats Jacqui!” Fox News contributor Joe Concha said in comments. Chief foreign correspondent Trey Yingst chimed in with, “Love this news,” while Jessica Tarlov, who speaks for Democrats on “The Five,” wrote, “Ahhhhhh congratulations!!!”
Fitzpatrick popped the question on June 29, People reported, before he had to hustle back to vote on the just-passed One Big Beautiful Bill Act. His inspiration came from something Heinrich told the Boston Globe last summer, ahead of the 2024 election: “I’ve always dreamed of eating my way through the French Riviera and Provence, with sun-drenched days at the lavender fields punctuated by crisp wines and salty butter.”
So Fitzpatrick, 51, booked a summer trip to France as a birthday gift for Heinrich, who turns 37 in November. But the journalist was concerned, she told the celebrity outlet, that her beau would have to cut the trip short to vote against Trump’s bill, which the president signed into law on July 4. Did Fitzpatrick want to postpone the trip, she wondered?
“He was like, ‘We are going. We’re going to the lavender fields. All I want is to see the lavender fields at sunrise,’” she told People. “All the time I’ve known this man, he has never been desperate to see a field of flowers at dawn. So I had a feeling that [a proposal] was the goal.”
What was supposed to be a 10-day trip was whittled down to only a couple of days.
After arriving in Nice, France, they drove two hours in darkness to catch the sunrise in the town of Valensole, known for its lavender and truffles. The town is built into a hill overlooking a small river valley, and a lavender festival is held there annually on the third Sunday in July. But the OBBBA waited for no sweet-smelling shrub, so attending the festival was definitely out.
Fitzpatrick had an agenda. He stopped at one particular lavender field and suggested Heinrich go for a stroll while he took some photos of her, she told People. As she took in the view, a photographer and a drone appeared, she said, and Fitzpatrick was asking her to marry him and presenting a ring he had procured from her family’s longtime jeweler.
The photos, as seen on the outlet’s website, are lovely. Heinrich, who has been dating Fitzpatrick since the 2021 Kennedy Center Honors, said yes.
“I love his brain,” Heinrich told People of her fiance, a five-term congressman who was previously an FBI special agent and federal prosecutor. Fitzpatrick was also embedded with U.S. Special Forces during Operation Iraqi Freedom, according to his biography.
“I love the way he approaches problem-solving and solving complex issues. He’s strong and a man of faith, who brings me closer to God.,” Heinrich said. “He’s sweet and gentle and kind — all of the easy qualities in a person that just make him a joy to be around and life brighter.”
There’s also a handy little bonus in this pairing, as revealed on the congressman’s website: Should Heinrich find herself in need of an attorney, a certified public accountant or an emergency medical technician, she’s definitely covered, because Fitzpatrick is licensed as all three.
Jason Segel and Kayla Radomski are taking their love to a new level: engagement.
“Shrinking” star Segel, 45, popped the question to girlfriend and “So You Think You Can Dance” alumna Radomski, 34, she revealed on Wednesday on Instagram. Radomski shared a carousel of photos from the outdoor proposal, including photos of the actor kneeling as he asks for her hand in marriage.
“FOREVER YES,” Radomski said in her caption, adding emojis of a ring and a heart.
Radomski, whose credits also include “Once Upon a Time…in Hollywood” and TV series “Chasing 8s” and “Winning Time: The Rise of the Lakers Dynasty,” and Segel were first spotted together in October 2023 during a date night at Universal Studios’ Halloween Horror Nights.
The duo made their romance red-carpet official at the 2024 Golden Globe Awards, when Segel was nominated for his work in Apple TV+’s “Shrinking.” The pair continued hitting the red carpet later that year as part of the awards circuit, which included the 75th Primetime Emmy Awards and high-profile parties. Months before their engagement, “How I Met Your Mother” star Segel and Radomski appeared again at the 2025 Golden Globe Awards.
“Nothing makes me happier than to stand by your side and see your light shine so bright!!!” Radomski said of Segel in an Instagram post shared in October amid the Season 2 premiere of “Shrinking. “Not only are you so talented but your kindness and the way you make everyone around you feel seen and loved is unmatched.”
Segel’s marriage to Radomski, who has also shared the stage with Taylor Swift as a backup dancer, will be his first. He previously had relationships with his “Freaks and Geeks” co-star Linda Cardellini and “Dying for Sex” star Michelle Williams.
There was plenty of love going around in Radomski’s Instagram comments section, where fellow entertainers and dancers including Broadway star Jordan Fisher, “Dancing With the Stars” pro Valentin Chmerkovskiy , and fellow “SYTYCD” alums Melanie Moore and Lex Ishimoto congratulated the couple on their engagement.
In late March, a devastating earthquake hit Myanmar’s Mandalay region, claiming thousands of lives and worsening an already severe humanitarian and political crisis. Since the February 2021 military coup, the country has faced escalating insecurity, economic paralysis, and failing healthcare systems. While military leader Min Aung Hlaing has pledged elections by the end of 2025, doubts persist over whether such a vote would be either credible or inclusive.
The catastrophe has drawn comparisons to Cyclone Nargis, which tore through the Irrawaddy Delta in May 2008 and left over 130,000 people dead or missing. Back then, the ruling junta, known as the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), delayed aid, blocked international relief workers, and diverted supplies intended for victims.
The World Food Programme temporarily halted operations after its assistance was seized. Even as the humanitarian emergency deepened, the regime proceeded with a constitutional referendum, prompting widespread condemnation abroad.
Mounting global pressure led to limited concessions. Ban Ki-moon, then Secretary-General of the United Nations, traveled to Myanmar and secured a narrow opening for foreign relief workers. Still, international military or direct emergency teams were barred from operating on the ground. That episode remains a powerful example of how authoritarian systems can worsen natural disasters through political control.
In contrast, the current leadership responded to the 2025 earthquake with a rare public appeal for international help. Governments quickly signaled support, and messages of solidarity circulated on social platforms.
Yet many inside Myanmar, particularly resistance groups and civil society, remain suspicious of any cooperation with the military regime. Carefully coordinated humanitarian aid, if transparent and neutral, might serve as leverage to demand more accountable governance, including fair elections.
However, access to the most affected zones—especially those under opposition control—remains highly restricted. Allegations of aid obstruction continue to surface. Meanwhile, military strikes in quake-stricken regions have drawn sharp rebukes from rights monitors.
The military’s election pledge has raised concern, not least because it maintains limited territorial control. Opposition entities like the National Unity Government (NUG) have rejected any vote managed by the junta as illegitimate.
Within the country, tensions are intensifying. Public distrust of international engagement with the regime is widespread, even when it’s justified by humanitarian intent. For donors and NGOs, the challenge is to support the people without reinforcing military authority.
ASEAN, long hesitant to interfere in member states’ domestic affairs, now faces a pivotal moment. The scale of suffering and regional instability is testing that principle. Frustration with Myanmar’s defiance is growing, particularly in Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia.
Despite the tragedy, the earthquake may present a diplomatic opening—one where humanitarian priorities could help unlock political change. But that opportunity hinges on bold and coordinated pressure by regional and international stakeholders. Myanmar’s suffering demands more than sympathy—it demands strategy.
Washington, DC – Top United States diplomat Marco Rubio has suggested his country’s “engagement” is what led Israel to allow a limited amount of aid into Gaza after a months-long blockade on food, medicine and other basic supplies.
At a Senate committee hearing on Tuesday, Democrat Jeff Merkley pressed Rubio, a Republican, about his stance on Israel’s blockade, which spurred fears of imminent famine in the Palestinian territory.
The secretary of state replied that the US is happy to see humanitarian assistance start to enter the territory.
“Ultimately, I don’t think you would have seen the events of the last couple days without our engagement and the engagement of others,” Rubio said.
Israel allowed several aid trucks to enter Gaza on Monday, and United Nations officials have said that around 100 more were cleared to reach the territory on Tuesday.
But that quantity still represents a fraction of the daily needs of Gaza’s population, which numbers over 2.1 million people.
“Israel remains a strong ally. We’re supportive,” Rubio continued. “We understand why for their security Hamas cannot exist. We are also very happy to see that they have allowed aid to begin to flow, and we hope that that will continue.”
Several Western countries, including close partners of Israel, have recently decried the Israeli siege on Gaza. On Monday, the leaders of the United Kingdom, France and Canada said in a joint statement that they were “horrified” by Israel’s military escalations in Gaza and its blockade on humanitarian aid.
They threatened to pursue “concrete actions” like sanctions if Israel continued to expand its military assault.
The administration of US President Donald Trump, meanwhile, has remained staunchly pro-Israel, but experts say recent moves from the White House signal a growing gap between the US and Israel.
For example, Trump did not include Israel as a stop in his recent trip to the Middle East. He has also initiated diplomatic talks with Iran and declared a ceasefire with Yemen’s Houthi group — both of which are adversaries of Israel in the region.
The Houthis, for instance, continue to launch missiles and drones at Israel in a show of support for the Palestinians in Gaza.
Still, over the past three months, the US has refused to directly criticise Israel’s decision to prevent food and medicine from reaching Gaza.
But last week, at a stop in the United Arab Emirates, Trump indicated he wanted to get the situation in Gaza “taken care of”.
“A lot of people are starving. There’s a lot of bad things going on,” he said.
Also last week, in an interview with the BBC, Rubio said he was “troubled” by the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
UN humanitarian chief Tom Fletcher also told the BBC on Tuesday that as many as 14,000 children in Gaza are at risk of dying in the next 48 hours if food does not reach them.
Last year, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over possible war crimes in Gaza, including the use of starvation as a method of war.
On Sunday, Netanyahu said Israel would only allow a “basic quantity of food” into the Palestinian territory to stave off international pressure.
“Our best friends in the world – senators I know as strong supporters of Israel – have warned that they cannot support us if images of mass starvation emerge,” he said, according to the publication Haaretz.
The Gaza Government Media Office said on Tuesday that at least 58 Palestinians have died of malnutrition over the past 80 days.
At Tuesday’s Senate hearing, Rubio appeared to acknowledge that more aid needs to reach the Palestinians in Gaza.
“I understand your point that it’s not in sufficient amounts,” Rubio told Merkley. “But we were pleased to see that decision was made.”
