General

Feb. 17 (UPI) — Human rights experts from the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner expressed concern about the possible link between Guatemala’s attorney general, Consuelo Porras, and alleged illegal adoptions of disappeared Indigenous children.

According to investigators, led by Special Rapporteur Margaret Satterthwaite, the adoptions would have occurred between 1968 and 1996 during Guatemala’s armed conflict — a period marked by human rights violations that particularly affected Indigenous communities.

The allegations refer particularly to 1982, when Porras headed the Elisa Martínez Temporary Home and allegedly acted as the “legal guardian” of minors who were later placed in irregular international adoptions.

“We are particularly concerned that a prompt, thorough, independent and impartial investigation has not been carried out into the alleged involvement of certain state authorities in these processes and that the mothers affected by these illegal adoptions have apparently received neither recognition nor adequate reparations,” the U.N. experts said in a statement.

The Elisa Martínez Home operated as a center under the Directorate of Child and Family Welfare with the authority to oversee national and international adoptions.

Once children entered the home, the director or person in charge became their legal guardian, allowing them to process adoption proceedings in Guatemala and abroad under the adoption regulations in force at the time, Prensa Libre reported.

The controversy arose as Porras sought to become a magistrate of the Constitutional Court, the country’s highest court, once her term at the Public Ministry ends in May.

According to analysts, the attorney general was seeking refuge in the high court to obtain the protection granted by immunity, and submitted her candidacy to the Superior University Council of the University of San Carlos of Guatemala, digital outlet LaHora.gt reported.

However, after the report was made public, the university excluded her from the list of candidates for the court, determining that she did not meet the requirements of suitability and integrity.

The Public Ministry reacted strongly to the U.N. report. In an official statement, it described the allegations as “spurious, malicious and biased,” arguing they are based on unverified information intended to interfere in the country’s sovereign processes.

In a post on X, Porras rejected the accusations against her as “false and politically instrumentalized.” She said they lack evidentiary support and “are completely malicious, and far from protecting human rights, they violate and distort them.”

Porras’ defense maintains that her role at the Elisa Martínez Temporary Home was administrative and that she had no legal authority over the final destination of the minors. The attorney general also announced she is weighing legal action against the U.N. experts, arguing that her presumption of innocence has been violated.

While the experts insist on the need for independent and thorough investigations, Porras maintains that she is facing “international political persecution” aimed at weakening her position at the head of the Public Ministry.

Consuelo Porras was appointed in 2018 and ratified in 2022 as attorney general and head of Guatemala’s Public Ministry. Although her mandate is focused on criminal prosecution, her tenure has been internationally questioned and sanctioned by more than 40 countries, including the United States and the European Union, over allegations of corruption and undermining democracy.

Porras has been accused of using the justice system as a political weapon to protect corruption networks and pursue independent prosecutors, judges and journalists, triggering repeated citizen protests that demand her resignation.

After the election of President Bernardo Arévalo in 2023, the Public Ministry under Porras initiated a series of legal actions to attempt to annul the election results and cancel the ruling party, Semilla.

Since Arévalo took office, the relationship between him and Porras has been marked by constant confrontation.

Arévalo has sought legal mechanisms and legislative reforms to remove her, while Porras has refused to attend Cabinet summonses and has kept multiple investigations open against the president’s inner circle, generating institutional paralysis and a deep political crisis in the country.

The head of U.S. Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) has downplayed the current significance of Chinese efforts to develop new long-range strike aircraft with more global reach. He said that China remains, at best, a regional bomber force, though it continues to “aggressively” pursue new capabilities in this regard, like the long-awaited H-20 stealth bomber.

AFGSC commander Gen. Stephen Davis talked about Chinese bombers and other aviation developments with TWZ‘s Howard Altman last month. In that same interview, he also discussed his command’s role in any future conflict in the Pacific region, as well as new U.S. strategic capabilities that are in the works now, such as the B-21 Raider stealth bomber and the LGM-35A Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), among other topics. This was Davis’ first interview since taking command of AFGSC in November 2025.

The Chinese People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) recruitment video below from 2021 includes a teaser for the H-20 at the very end.

中国空军2021年度招飞宣传片完整版震撼发布！易烊千玺 吴京倾情加盟演绎强军路上精彩人生！「逐梦青春」| 军迷天下

“I can certainly understand their [the Chinese] desire to have a long-range strike capability like the United States, and I know that they’re pursuing it aggressively,” Davis said when asked for his thoughts on the H-20, as well as two very large stealthy flying wing-type drones that emerged in China last year. TWZ was first to report on the emegence of both of these designs, which appear to be at least in the initial flight test phase of development.

The H-20 is understood to be a stealthy flying wing-type bomber, very roughly analogous to the U.S. B-2 Spirit, and its development is said to trace back to the early 2000s. The U.S. military has previously estimated that it could have a maximum unrefueled range of close to 6,214 miles (10,000 kilometers), and noted that its reach could be further extended through aerial refueling. Past reports have also said that it might be able to carry up to 10 tons of ordnance, including land-attack and anti-ship cruise missiles.

“What I can tell you is they’re just not there yet,” Davis continued. “I think our adversaries look at our long-range strike capabilities, and … want to mimic them, but they can’t.”

“There’s no other country in the world [besides the United States] that can take and deliver a long-range strike platform pretty much on any day, in any time and place that they’re choosing, right?” he added. “Really, China is a regional bomber force at best. I think they’re trying to continue to develop that.”

China’s bomber force currently consists of variants of the H-6, the core design of which was originally derived from the Soviet Tu-16 Badger. The H-6N version, which made its official debut in 2019, has enabled the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to re-establish a strategic nuclear triad. The N model is primarily designed to carry a single very large air-launched ballistic missile (ALBM) under its fuselage and is one of the H-6 types that is capable of being refueled in flight. How many different types of missiles have been integrated onto the H-6N to date is unclear, but its arsenal does include the nuclear-capable Jinglei-1 (JL-1), as you can read more about here.

Gen. Davis’ comments are in line with past statements from U.S. officials on the H-20, specifically.

In 2024, an unnamed U.S. intelligence official said the H-20 Stealth Bomber was “not really” a concern, according to a report at the time from Breaking Defense.

“The thing with the H-20 is when you actually look at the system design, it’s probably nowhere near as good as U.S. LO [low-observable] platforms, particularly more advanced ones that we have coming down,” the same official said. “They’ve run into a lot of engineering design challenges, in terms of how do you actually make that system capability function in a similar way to, like, a B-2 or a B-21.”

“The H-20 … may debut sometime in the next decade,” the Pentagon subsequently wrote in its annual report to Congress on Chinese military developments later in 2024. That report also highlighted ongoing efforts in China to develop a stealthy medium-range bomber, which has been referred to in the past as the JH-XX.

The Pentagon’s most recent annual China report, published in December 2025, notably makes no mention at all, directly or indirectly, of the H-20 or JH-XX. That report did note that “of China’s currently fielded systems, the DF-26 IRBM [intermediate range ballistic missile and the H-6N’s ALBM are both highly precise theater weapons that would be well suited for delivering a low-yield nuclear weapon.” This underscores Gen. Davis’ comments about the continuing regional limitations of the Chinese bomber force.

Despite past PLA pronouncements that the program is on track, the current status of the H-20 is unclear. The present state of work related to the JH-XX, and whether it may have carried over into other programs, like the J-36 advanced tailless tactical combat aircraft, is also unknown. Starting in the late 2010s, there had been a surge in official and semi-official statements about how the H-20 was ‘coming soon,’ but this looks to have largely subsided in the past year or so.

This is despite a flurry in other very high-profile Chinese military aviation developments, including the aforementioned large flying wing-type drones, as well as the J-36 and J-XDS sixth-generation stealth fighters, the GJ-11 uncrewed combat air vehicle (UCAV), the KJ-3000 airborne early warning and control aircraft, and more. The PLA Navy (PLAN) has also made major strides in advancing its carrier-based aviation capabilities in the past year or so.

As TWZ has noted in the past, a platform like the H-20 would give the PLA the ability to hold entirely new swaths of the Indo-Pacific region, including in parts of the continental United States, at risk. An expanded long-range strike aviation force would also expand China’s ability to target highly strategic outlying areas, including the U.S. island territory of Guam and Hawaii, as well as threaten regional competitors like Japan and India. If fielded, the aforementioned JH-XX could also have an important role in future regional operations.

The PLA has already been working to expand its routine bomber operations in the Western ends of the Pacific, especially around Taiwan and in the hotly contested South China Sea. Chinese bombers also now regularly integrate with their Russian counterparts and have made use of bases in that country for joint patrols. H-6K missile carrier aircraft flew in international airspace near Alaska for the first time ever during one of these joint operations back in 2024.

China and Russia conduct joint air strategic patrol over Bering Sea on July 25. This marks the eighth air strategic patrol organized by the two militaries since 2019.

Photos from China PLA Air Force Weibo accounthttps://t.co/g9w27FRnnM pic.twitter.com/oeZA4cUQR9

— Ryan Chan 陳家翹 (@ryankakiuchan) July 25, 2024

In his recent interview with TWZ, AFGSC commander Gen. Davis similarly highlighted the continued importance of American bombers in the Pacific.

“We have a requirement to be able to do that, day-to-day, for the President. We have to be able to penetrate adversary air defenses and deliver capabilities as directed,” Davis said when asked about the ever-growing threats posed by Chinese anti-access and area-denial capabilities. “We’ll continue to do that, as I said, by essentially, you know, taking all the information we can get, and integrating the B-21. Obviously, one of the great things about the B-21 is it’s going to be much more capable, it will have more sensors, it will have more inputs to it that will make it even stronger and more capable as a penetrating bomber.”

“Long-range strike, I think, contributes to every important mission set that we have in the Department of War,” the AFGSC commander also said when asked about how bombers could be employed against Chinese naval forces, specifically. “Obviously, one of the attributes of the modern force is the weapons they can carry, the variety of weapons they can carry, and the number and types of targets they can attack.”

“I think in any major confrontation that the U.S. would find itself in, you’re going to find your bomber forces are participating in bringing those skill sets to bear,” he added.

With this in mind, China is also still pursuing new long-range strike aviation capabilities, though it remains to be seen when the H-20 might finally emerge.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

With 30 percent of polling stations reporting results, Anutin’s Bhumjaithai Party has a commanding lead.

Thailand’s ruling Bhumjaithai Party has taken an early lead in general elections, according to a preliminary vote count.

With around 30 percent of polling stations reporting results, the party, led by Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul, took a commanding lead over the progressive People’s Party, showed partial results released by the country’s election commission.

The populist Pheu Thai Party, backed by the billionaire former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who was jailed last year, was in third place, the results showed.

People’s Party leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut appeared to concede defeat as the results came in, telling reporters, “We acknowledge that we did not come first.”

“We stand by our principle of respecting the party that finishes first and its right to form the government,” said Ruengpanyawut.

Nevertheless, the three-way battle is unlikely to see any single party win a clear majority, meaning parties will likely have to resort to coalition-building to form the next government.

Bhumjaithai, seen as the preferred choice of the royalist-military establishment, centred its campaign on economic stimulus and national security, tapping into nationalist fervour stoked by deadly border clashes with neighbouring Cambodia.

Its leader, caretaker premier Anutin, stepped in as prime minister last September, after his predecessor, Paetongtarn Shinawatra, was forced out of office for an ethics violation.

Threatened with a no-confidence vote, Anutin dissolved the National Assembly or parliament in December to call a snap election.

The rival People’s Party, which many had expected to win a plurality of seats, had promised to curb the influence of the military and the courts, as well as break up economic monopolies. Pheu Thai campaigned on economic revival and populist pledges like cash handouts.

Al Jazeera’s Tony Cheng, reporting from Bangkok, said there was a sentiment of “political fatigue” in the run-up to elections, but voters turning out Sunday were still hopeful about the prospect for change.

Constitutional referendum

Thai voters were also ‌asked during the vote to decide if a new constitution should replace a 2017 charter, a military-backed document that critics say concentrates power in undemocratic institutions, including a powerful Senate that is chosen through an indirect selection process with limited public participation.

The election commission’s early count showed voters backing constitutional change ‌by a margin of nearly two to one.

Thailand has had 20 constitutions since the end of absolute monarchy in ⁠1932, with most of the changes following military coups.

If voters back the drafting of a new national charter, the new government and lawmakers can start the amendment process in parliament with two more referendums required to adopt a new constitution.

“I believe that the party that wins in the next election will have an outsized influence on the direction of constitutional reform, whether we move away from the junta-drafted constitution or not,” said Napon Jatusripitak of the Bangkok-based Thailand Future think tank.

After a tumultuous month of continued national immigration raids and the ICE shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, nationwide protests are set to occur today amid calls for a general strike. Small businesses across the L.A. area announced Friday closures in observation of the strike, while others who voiced support said the decision to close is impossible — especially for independent restaurants, which suffered an outsized string of hardships through 2025, causing a growing number of permanent closures.

Many operators who say they are unable to close are donating a portion or all profits from Friday’s business to immigrant rights causes. Some say they’ve left the decision up to their staff, who rely on the day’s wages. One restaurateur, who requested anonymity for fear of ICE retaliation, said their employees’ earnings regularly pay for undocumented staff’s private transportation to and from work, and they cannot afford to close for even a single night.

Some of L.A.’s restaurants, bars and cafes closed in observance of the strike and protests include Proof Bakery, Wilde’s, South LA Cafe, Lasita, Bar Flores, Canyon Coffee, Chainsaw, Yellow Paper Burger, Kitchen Mouse, Bacetti and Civil Coffee.

Guelaguetza‘s co-owner and Independent Hospitality Coalition member Bricia Lopez took to social media Thursday afternoon to provide tips for fellow restaurateurs who can’t afford to close their businesses today. They included donating to immigrant rights organizations or spotlighting specific fundraising dishes, as many across the county now are.

Some local restaurants are opting to remain open but are donating the day or the weekend’s proceeds to nonprofits and legal funds, or they’re temporarily flipping their dining rooms to centers for community action such as making protests signs.

Guelaguetza is offering free horchata and cafe de olla for protesters or those who can provide proof of donations to immigrant communities through 3 p.m. In Glassell Park, a pop-up tonight will raise funds for street vendors currently avoiding work for fear of ICE. Taiwanese chef Vivian Ku is fundraising at her downtown and Highland Park restaurants, while she closes Silver Lake’s Pine & Crane to the public in order to use it as a staging ground for aid groups today.

“For a lot of restaurants, coffee shops, etc., they’re just a few bad days from being upside down for the month, and a few bad months from having no business at all,” an owner of Highland Park’s Santa Canela posted to Instagram on Thursday. “We understand the weight and power of collective action, but plain and simple: We didn’t feel comfortable making financial decisions on behalf of our entire team as to whether or not they could afford to lose another shift at the end of the month at a time when cost of living has never been higher.”

Home-style Chinese restaurant Woon, with locations in Historic Filipinotown and on the edge of Pasadena bordering Altadena, will remain open, too.

“I wish we had the luxury of closing our doors, but we will keep them open as we stand in solidarity with our community and neighbors,” chef-owner Keegan Fong posted to Instagram. “We’ve given our staff the option to take the day off while also allowing those who need the hours to continue to work.”

Even those who are closing today have stressed the importance of supporting local restaurants.

Historic Filipinotown bar Thunderbolt posted its decision to close on Friday morning, with a statement on Instagram that read, “This strike isn’t about small businesses, but they will bear the weight of it…For small business in the food and beverage industry, closing the doors on a Friday night — during an already brutal January — can be catastrophic.”

Here are some L.A.-area restaurants remaining open today but fundraising for immigrant rights.

The B-21 Raider stealth bomber is one of the Air Force’s most ambitious weapons programs, designed to carry out deep-penetrating nuclear and conventional strikes over heavily defended skies and other missions its predecessor, the B-2, was never envisioned as doing. As the head of the U.S. Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC), one of Gen. Stephen L. Davis’s main tasks is guiding the development of the Raider, of which 100 are currently slated for procurement and that number could grow substantially larger in the coming years.

In his first interview since taking command on Nov. 4, 2025, from Gen. Thomas Bussiere, Davis offered The War Zone exclusive insights about the B-21 and what it can bring to the table in a future high-end fight. As the leader of AFGSC, Davis also oversees B-1B Lancer, B-2A Spirit, and B-52 Stratofortress strategic bombers and all U.S. Air Force intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). During his Monday morning conversation with us, Davis talked about a host of other topics beyond just the Raider, including the future of the E-4C “Doomsday Plane,” the way forward for the troubled Sentinel ICBM program, and challenges posed by China and Russia.

You can read the first part of our interview here.

Some of the questions and answers have been lightly edited for clarity.

Q: What capabilities will the B-21 have by the time it achieves initial operating capability (IOC), and what will come later?

A: Right now, I’m focused on delivering the initial capability. And unfortunately, I can’t talk too much about the capabilities of the bomber. They are significant, and they are impressive. From the command’s perspective, we’re concentrating on getting everything in place up at Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota to bed down that capability. Really, it’s the acquisition community that’s still delivering that plane, and I’m certainly interested in that, but I’m probably more focused on the bed down and getting those things right.

Q: Can you provide an update on the Raider’s Initial Operating Capability (IOC)?

A: As for IOC, we are thinking of it in an OPSEC framework. We are not building prototypes, and the infrastructure to support the B-21 is on time. The program remains a benchmark of acquisition and has validated the value of the digital engineering that went into it from the beginning; I can tell you that the penetrating global strike platform we are building and will get with the Raider is amazing.

Q:  Will the B-21 still be optionally manned?

A: That’s a future capability for the aircraft. Right now, we’re planning for the manned implementation of that aircraft and getting the crews ready to be at Ellsworth when the plane arrives.

Q: What roles will the B-21 be capable of executing beyond the standard deep strike mission set of the B-2? Will they be able to defend themselves kinetically from air threats as well as ground threats?

A:  I really don’t want to talk about those specific attributes of the B-21 because some of those are classified. What I can say is that it will continue to build on the capabilities of the B-2. As you know, in the environment and the places where it might operate, those people are improving their defenses, and likewise, we have to improve the capabilities so we can deliver for the president and the nation a penetrating bomber. Clearly, with a nuclear mission, there are places that we’re going to have to go to deliver nuclear weapons, if ever called upon by the president of the United States, and that’s something that I have to provide to the Department of War and to the president.

Q: We have heard so much about the Long-Range Strike family of systems, but so far, we only know of two members of that family, the B-21 and the Long-Range Stand-Off Weapon (LRSO). What other types of systems make up this family and when will we be able to meet them in the future? 

A: Well, once again, you hit me on all the classified aspects of the program. I would say any platform operating today is in a family of systems that’s connected to other things within the Department of the Air Force, and the Department of War, and that’ll continue to be the case of the B-21. And, as a matter of fact, we’re going to extend those, and it will be more connected than the B-2 in order to do its penetrating global strike mission. I think one thing you could add to family systems is the F-47 6th-generation fighter. You know, it’s going to be paired with the F-47 under certain circumstances. So we certainly consider that new 6th-generation stealth fighter as part of the family of systems that might be employed with the B-21.

Q: Any update on that program?

A: Nothing other than I believe it still remains on track. I was recently out of St. Louis, and they got a chance to take a look at the work that they were doing out there. As you know, Air Force Gen. Dale White has just been announced as the Direct Reporting Portfolio Manager for Critical Major Weapon Systems, leading the F-47 and the B-21 programs, so that will create some integration there as well. I know Dale. He’s a very talented acquirer, so I think that bodes well for both those programs.

Q: How will unmanned systems, specifically aerial drones, be paired with the future bomber force? What capabilities are you looking at in this regard? 

A: In terms of what we might incorporate into both the B-21 and the B-52 in future environments, we’re going to take every bit of information we get on board that aircraft to improve situational awareness. So I’m agnostic on where that comes from, whether that’s overhead capabilities, whether that’s remotely piloted capabilities, or UASs. Our plan is to integrate as much information as we can of that platform.

Q: Will B-21s be able to control collaborative combat aircraft (CCAs) or longer-range drones? What about the B-52J?

A: In terms of CCAs, I think where the Air Force is right now is that they’re building those to be incorporated into the F-47 primarily in fighter aircraft. That’s the first step. It’s certainly possible in the future that they might become part of that family of systems. When you think about long-range strike, when we’re doing [continental U.S.] CONUS-based missions, it really would limit the ability to use some of those platforms as they don’t quite have the extended flight envelopes that the B-21 and the B-52 have.

Q: And with the B-52, as far as working with CCAs, is that still to be determined?

A: I would say yes. I would think that the B-21 would be the more logical partner for that. But once again, we have to deliver that capability that the Air Force does and integrate with fighters. That’s the first step. Assuming that goes well. I think we’ll look at the next steps.

Q: What will it take to pierce China’s A2AD [anti-access/area denial] umbrella? What capabilities do you need to do the job, from a [ground moving GMTI/AMTI target indicator/air moving target indicator] space layer to drones to accompany B-21s? What is your vision?

A: We have a requirement to be able to do that day-to-day for the president. We have to be able to penetrate adversary air defenses and deliver capabilities as directed. And we’ll continue to do that, taking all the information we can get and integrating it into the B-21. Obviously, one of the great things about the B-21 is that it’s going to be much more capable. It will have more sensors. It will have more inputs to it that will make it even stronger and more capable as a penetrating bomber.

Q: What role will your bombers play in taking down the Chinese Navy?

A: That’s an operational plan. I really can’t talk much about it, other than to say that long-range strike contributes to every important mission set that we have in the Department of War. Obviously, one of the attributes of the modern force is the variety of weapons they can carry, and the number and types of targets they can attack. I think in any major confrontation that the U.S. would find itself in, you’re going to find your bomber forces are bringing those skill sets to bear.

Q: What makes the move to put a single pilot onboard the B-21, along with a weapon systems officer (WSO) instead of two pilots, possible, and why is that the right call? 

A: In terms of the crew complement for the B-21, that’s an ongoing discussion within the Department of the Air Force. No final decision has been made. Frankly, we had the same discussion on the B-2 on how it would be manned. And ultimately, they went with two pilots, in part because of the cost of the platform and the number they were producing. Actually, at the time, it was a requirement to have navigator or WSO experience to be a B-2 pilot. We went away from that over time, but that was one of the initial requirements. With B-21 pilots, it’s a different plane, as it has a number of different capabilities. So we think that the right thing to do is look carefully at that crew complement and decide how to best make that the most capable combat platform we can.

Q: Will the B-21 have creature comforts that the B-2 doesn’t have to help the crew out during long missions?

A: I think the B-21 is going to be largely like the B-2 in how it supports the crews. There’s enough room for crew members to go on rest status. There’s a place to go to the bathroom, obviously, and to prepare food. All those things will exist in the B-21.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com