Government

White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt has said Iran would be “wise” to make a deal, as the United States surges further military assets to the Middle East.

Her statement came as part of a series of veiled threats from officials under US President Donald Trump, a day after US and Iranian representatives held a second round of indirect talks this month.

The two sides appeared to offer differing accounts of the talks. Iranian officials said both parties had agreed on “guiding principles”, but US Vice President JD Vance said Iran had yet to respond to all of Washington’s “red lines”.

During a news conference on Wednesday, Leavitt articulated the Trump administration’s position that Iran needs to accede to US demands.

“Iran would be very wise to make a deal with President Trump and with his administration,” she told reporters.

Trump, who has repeatedly threatened Iran with military action in response to its crackdown on protests last month, also referenced a possible escalation in a post on Truth Social on Wednesday.

The post warned Prime Minister Keir Starmer of the United Kingdom against a deal agreed to last year that would see London cede control of the Chagos Islands, strategically located in the centre of the Indian Ocean.

The deal nevertheless allows the UK and US to continue to lease and operate a joint airbase on the largest island, Diego Garcia.

“Should Iran decide not to make a Deal, it may be necessary for the United States to use Diego Garcia, and the Airfield located in Fairford, in order to eradicate a potential attack by a highly unstable and dangerous Regime,” Trump wrote.

“An attack that would potentially be made on the United Kingdom, as well as other friendly Countries.”

Meanwhile, speaking from the sidelines of an International Energy Agency (IAE) meeting in Paris, France, US Energy Secretary Chris Wright warned that Washington would deter Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons “one way or the other”.

“They’ve been very clear about what they would do with nuclear weapons. It’s entirely unacceptable,” Wright said.

Military buildup

The threats come as the US appears to be surging more military assets to the Middle East, raising the spectre of escalation.

As of Wednesday, the Pentagon had one aircraft carrier, the USS Abraham Lincoln, nine destroyers and three littoral combat ships in the region, with an anonymous US official telling the AFP news agency more were on the way.

That includes the world’s largest aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R Ford, which is en route from the Atlantic Ocean.

The US has also sent a large fleet of aircraft to the Middle East, according to open-source intelligence accounts on X and flight-tracking website Flightradar24.

That deployment appears to include F-22 Raptor stealth fighter jets, F-15 and F-16 warplanes, and the KC-135 aerial refuelling aircraft that are needed to sustain their operations, according to the trackers.

The US had previously surged aircraft and naval vessels to the region ahead of strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites in June of last year, which came at the end of a 12-day war between Israel and Iran.

Iran does ‘not want war’

For his part, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said on Wednesday that the country did “not want war” but would not give in to US demands.

“From the day I took office, I have believed that war must be set aside. But if they are going to try to impose their will on us, humiliate us and demand that we bow our heads at any cost, should we accept that?” he asked.

Pezeshkian spoke shortly after Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps launched exercises on Monday in the Strait of Hormuz, in a show of military might.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has previously warned that any new US strikes would lead to wider regional escalation.

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement on Wednesday that its top diplomat Abbas Araghchi had spoken by phone with the head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog, Rafael Grossi.

Grossi “stressed the Islamic Republic of Iran’s focus on drafting an initial and coherent framework to advance future talks” on its nuclear programme, according to the statement.

Trump withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which saw Iran curtail its nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief, during his first term in 2018. In the years since, he has imposed a “maximum pressure” campaign that includes new sanctions.

Efforts to strike a new nuclear deal have repeatedly stalled since Trump’s first term.

Tehran has called for the latest round of talks to focus solely on its nuclear programme, which it maintains is used only for civilian purposes. It has also indicated it is willing to make concessions in exchange for the lifting of sanctions.

Washington has pushed for wider demands that are considered non-starters for Iran, including limits on its ballistic missile programme, although its demands during the latest round of talks were not immediately clear.

Brendan Carr, the chair of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the United States, has confirmed that the agency launched an investigation against ABC’s daytime talk show The View over a recent appearance by a politician.

In comments to reporters on Wednesday, Carr indicated the probe would examine whether The View violated a new interpretation of an “equal time” rule implemented under President Donald Trump.

Fox News had been the first to report on the investigation in early February. The segment in question involves an appearance from Texas state Representative James Talarico, a Democrat who is vying for the US Senate.

The confirmation comes as Carr attempted to shut down claims that the government censored an interview between Talarico and late-night talk show host Stephen Colbert.

“There was no censorship here at all,” Carr said.

“Every single broadcaster in this country has an obligation to be responsible for the programming that they choose to air, and they’re responsible whether it complies with FCC rules or not, and it doesn’t, and those individual broadcasters are also going to have a potential liability.”

The controversy with Colbert likewise stems from the Trump administration’s decision to shift definitions under the “equal time” rule.

What is the ‘equal time’ rule?

The rule is part of section 315 of the 1934 Communications Act. Under that law, if a broadcaster allows one candidate for public office to use its facilities, it is required to “afford equal opportunities” to all other candidates in the same race.

But the law includes exceptions for “bona fide newscasts” and “bona fide news interviews”.

For nearly 20 years, talk shows and late-night comedy programmes were included in those categories.

In January, however, the FCC issued new guidance (PDF) that significantly narrows how it interprets the “bona fide news” exemption. In a memo, it described daytime talk shows and late-night comedy as “entertainment programs” that fall outside the exception.

“The FCC has not been presented with any evidence that the interview portion of any late night or daytime television talk show program on air presently would qualify for the bona fide news exemption,” the memo reads.

The commission also suggested that many such programmes are “motivated by partisan purposes” and are therefore not “bona fide” news.

The new interpretation of the “equal time” rule, the FCC argued, is designed to “ensure that no legally qualified candidate for office is unfairly given less access to the public airwaves than their opponent.”

Controversy with Colbert

That new interpretation came roaring into the spotlight on Monday, after a broadcast of the CBS comedy programme The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.

In one of his opening segments, Colbert alleged that the network lawyers barred him from airing a planned interview that night with Talarico.

“Let’s just call it what it is,” Colbert told his audience. “Donald Trump’s administration wants to silence anyone who says anything bad about Trump on TV, because all Trump does is watch TV. OK? He’s like a toddler with too much screen time.”

Trump has previously criticised both Colbert’s show and The View for what he considers a left-wing slant.

Instead of broadcasting his interview with Talarico on network television, Colbert instead posted the segment on the programme’s YouTube page, where it has gained more than 6 million views as of 3:30pm Eastern Time (20:30 GMT) on Wednesday.

According to Carr, Colbert’s show could have aired the Talarico interview if it had complied with the equal time rule.

That would have involved allowing other candidates in Texas vying for the Senate seat to come on the show. Carr also suggested that another solution could have been to restrict the broadcast in Texas.

But the FCC has continued to face criticisms for its actions. In Tuesday’s broadcast, Colbert addressed the issue a second time.

He read aloud a statement from his broadcast channel that read, in part, that The Late Show “was not prohibited by CBS from broadcasting the interview” and that it was instead “provided legal guidance that the broadcast could trigger the FCC equal-time rule”.

CBS added, in the statement, that Colbert could have invited onto the show Talarico’s rivals, including fellow Democrat Jasmine Crockett.

“I am well aware that we can book other guests,” Colbert responded. “I didn’t need to be presented with that option. I’ve had Jasmine Crockett on my show twice. I could prove that to you, but the network won’t let me show you her picture without including her opponents.”

Colbert has been a vocal critic of CBS’s parent company, Paramount Global, particularly after it settled a lawsuit last year with the Trump administration for $16m in the run-up to a critical merger for which it needed government approval.

Talarico, meanwhile, accused the FCC of censoring his interviews. Nevertheless, on Wednesday, he noted that the uptick in media attention from the scandal has helped him gather donations.

“Our campaign raised $2.5 million in 24 hours after the FCC banned our Colbert interview,” he wrote on social media.

Guatemala announced last week that it will begin phasing out its three-decade-old programme, under which Cuban doctors work in its country to fill the gap in the country’s healthcare system.

Communist-ruled Cuba, under heavy United States sanctions, has been earning billions of dollars each year by leasing thousands of members of its “white coat army” to countries around the world, especially in Latin America. Havana has used its medical missions worldwide as a tool for international diplomacy.

So why are some countries withdrawing from the programme that helps the host countries?

Why is Guatemala phasing out Cuban doctors?

Guatemala’s health ministry said in a statement that it would begin a “gradual termination” over this year.

“The phased withdrawal of the Cuban Medical Brigade stems from an analysis of the mission’s completion of its cycles,” the statement, originally in Spanish, said on February 13.

The statement added that the Cuban medical mission was meant to support Guatemala through the 1998 Hurricane Mitch, which devastated parts of Central America, overwhelmed local hospitals and left rural communities with almost no access to medical care.

“The Ministry of Health is developing a phased strategic replacement plan that includes hiring national personnel, strengthening incentives for hard-to-reach positions, strategic redistribution of human resources, and specialized technical support,” the statement said.

The Cuban mission in Guatemala comprises 412 medical workers, including 333 doctors.

The Central American country’s decision comes amid growing pressure from the United States, which wants to stop Cuban doctors from serving abroad.

The move aims to starve Cuba of much-needed revenue as a major share of the incomes earned by doctors goes to government coffers. Cuba has been facing severe power, food and medical shortages amid an oil blockade imposed by the Trump administration since January.

Guatemala is just one country which benefits from Cuban medical missions.

Over the past decades, Cuba has sent medical missions around the world, from Latin America to Africa and beyond. It began sending these missions shortly after the 1959 Cuban revolution brought Fidel Castro to power.

Castro’s communist government reversed many of the pro-business policies of Fulgencio Batista, the dictator backed by the US. The revolution ruptured ties between the two countries, with the US spy agency CIA trying several times unsuccessfully to topple Castro’s government.

Guatemala has moved closer to the US since the election of Bernardo Arevalo as the president in January 2024. He has cooperated with US President Donald Trump’s administration. Last year, Guatemala agreed to ramp up the number of deportation flights it receives from the US. The US has deported thousands of immigrants without following due process to third countries such as Guatemala and El Salvador, which are headed by pro-Trump leaders.

In November 2018, shortly after Brazil elected Jair Bolsonaro as president, Cuba announced its withdrawal from the country’s Cuba “Mais Medicos” (More Doctors) programme. Bolsonaro, who is known as Brazil’s Trump, had criticised the medical mission, deeming it “slave labour”. Bolsonaro is serving a 27-year prison sentence after he was convicted in September 2025 of plotting to stage a coup in order to retain power after his defeat in the 2022 presidential election.

Why is the US targeting Cuba’s global medical missions?

The US has deemed Cuba’s foreign medical missions a form of “forced labour” and human trafficking, without any evidence, and has a goal of restricting the Cuban government’s access to its largest source of foreign income.

US efforts to curb Cuba’s medical missions are not new. Just last year, Washington imposed visa restrictions aimed at discouraging foreign governments from entering into medical cooperation agreements with Cuba.

In February last year, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the US would restrict visas targeting “forced labor linked to the Cuban labor export program”.

“This expanded policy applies to current or former Cuban government officials, and other individuals, including foreign government officials, who are believed to be responsible for, or involved in, the Cuban labor export program, particularly Cuba’s overseas medical missions,” a statement on the US State Department’s website said.

Rubio, who is of Cuban origin, has been a vocal critic of Havana, and has pushed US policies in Latin America, including the military operation to abduct Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on January 3. Under Trump, Washington has pushed its focus on Latin America as part of its Western Hemisphere pivot, which seeks to restore Washington’s preeminence in the region.

Since Maduro’s abduction, the US focus has turned towards Cuba. Senior US officials, particularly Rubio, hinted that Havana could be the next target of Washington’s pressure campaign.

The US, in effect, cut off Venezuelan oil shipments to Cuba as part of a new oil blockade. Havana has faced sweeping US sanctions for decades, and Cuba has since 2000 increasingly relied on Venezuelan oil provided as part of a deal struck with Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chavez.

The blockade has caused a fuel shortage and, in turn, a severe energy crisis in Cuba. President Miguel Diaz-Canel has imposed harsh emergency restrictions as a response.

This has renewed US pressure on countries to phase out Cuban medical missions.

How many Cuban doctors are on missions abroad?

More than 24,000 Cuban doctors are working in 56 countries worldwide. This includes Latin American countries such as Venezuela, Nicaragua and Mexico; Africa, including Angola, Mozambique, Algeria; and the Middle East, including Qatar.

There have been occasional deployments in other countries. For instance, Italy received Cuban doctors during the COVID-19 pandemic to help overwhelmed hospitals in some of its hardest-hit regions.

Cuban doctors are crucial for Caribbean countries. They fill a significant gap in medical care amid a lack of trained medical professionals.

Have countries resisted US pressure in the past?

Caribbean countries hit back in March 2025 against the US threats to restrict visas. “We could not get through the pandemic without the Cuban nurses and the Cuban doctors,” Barbados’s Prime Minister Mia Mottley said in a speech to the parliament.

“Out of the blue now, we have been called human traffickers because we hire technical people who we pay top dollar,” Trinidad and Tobago’s Prime Minister Keith Rowley said back then, adding that he was prepared to lose his US visa.

“If the Cubans are not there, we may not be able to run the service,” Saint Vincent and the Grenadines then-Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves said. “I will prefer to lose my visa than to have 60 poor and working people die.”

In August 2025, the US announced that it was revoking the visas of Brazilian, African and Caribbean officials over their ties to Cuba’s programme that sends doctors abroad.

It named Brazilian Ministry of Health officials, Mozart Julio Tabosa Sales and Alberto Kleiman, who had their visas revoked for working on Brazil’s Mais Medicos, or “More Doctors” programme, which was created in 2013.

Some countries are now finding ways around the pressure from Washington. For instance, this month Guyana announced that it would start paying doctors directly, rather than through the Cuban government.

Syria’s government has been relocating families after announcing the closure of the notorious al-Hol camp for people with suspected links to ISIL fighters. Al Jazeera’s Heidi Pett has been seeing families arrive at a new camp, where the government says conditions will be better.

New York has confirmed that the federal government released another $77m for new tunnels and bridges connecting the state to its neighbour New Jersey, amid a feud with United States President Donald Trump.

On Tuesday, New York Governor Kathy Hochul appeared at a construction site alongside union leaders to push for the release of the remaining funds, which were frozen in October amid a record-breaking government shutdown.

“It cannot continue like this,” Hochul, a Democrat, told workers at the site.

“The workers need to know that that job is going to be there: the one they signed up for, the one they trained for, the one they’re so proud of. It has to be there year after year, until this project is done.”

At stake is the fate of the Northeast Corridor project, a central part of the Gateway Program, an interstate initiative to expand and renovate the aging tunnels that the link metropolitan hubs between New York and New Jersey.

The federal government had pledged billions in support for the project, considered to be vital for transportation and safety reasons.

But on October 1, one day into a historically long government shutdown, the Trump administration announced it would suspend $18bn in funding for the project that had already been granted.

The move was designed to pressure Democrats — and Democrat-aligned jurisdictions — to comply with Republican demands to end the shutdown.

But Trump hinted at the time that some of the programming cuts could be permanent. The shutdown ended after 43 days in November, and still, the funding for the New York City tunnel project remained frozen.

Democrats decried the freeze an act of political revenge. “It should concern every American that the Trump Administration is willing to harm working families and our nation’s economy to punish Democrats,” Representative Jerry Nadler of New York said in response to the funding suspension.

But Trump has continued to withhold the funds. On February 3, the states of New York and New Jersey announced they were suing the Trump administration to release the funds.

“After four months of covering costs with limited operating funds, the states warn that construction will be forced to completely shut down as soon as February 6 unless federal funding resumes,” attorneys general Letitia James of New York and Jennifer Davenport of New Jersey said in a statement at the time.

Three days later, as the states hit that February 6 deadline, a US district judge ordered the funds to be released, citing the potential for irreparable harm to the project.

The ruling required more than $200m in reimbursement funds to be paid out to the states.

Over the last week, the federal government responded by releasing $30m, in addition to the $77m announced on Tuesday. But officials said it was still not enough.

At Tuesday’s news conference, union leader Gary LaBarbera emphasised that new construction was a necessity.

“Let me tell you: The existing tunnels, the trans-Hudson tunnels, are over a hundred years old. Their structural integrity has failed,” he said.

He added that the issue of maintaining safe transportation should be nonpartisan

“This isn’t a Republican tunnel or a Democratic tunnel, right? This should not be a political tug of war,” he said.

Governor Hochul, meanwhile, used part of her speech to address the president. “ Let’s stop the chaos. Let’s stop the insanity. Let them work, Mr President,” she said, in a gesture to the workers around her.

But this week, on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump doubled down on his opposition to the project.

“I am opposed to the future boondoggle known as ‘Gateway,’ in New York/New Jersey, because it will cost many BILLIONS OF DOLLARS more than projected or anticipated,” Trump wrote.

“It is a disaster! Gateway will likewise be financially catastrophic for the region, unless hard work and proper planning is done, NOW, to avoid insurmountable future cost overruns.”

He also denounced reports that he would un-freeze the funding in exchange for renaming New York’s Penn Station after him, as well as Washington’s Dulles airport.

“IT IS JUST MORE FAKE NEWS,” Trump wrote, adding that such a proposal was “brought up by certain politicians and construction union heads”, not him.

Still, his White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt appeared to confirm the reports last week during a news briefing.

“Why not?” she told a reporter. “It was something the president floated in his conversation with [Senate Minority Leader] Chuck Schumer.”

On Tuesday, reports emerged that the Trump Organization had filed trademark claims for any airports bearing the president’s name.

Republicans in Florida’s legislature have already sought to rename the international airport in Palm Beach for Trump, citing his nearby golf courses and residence at Mar-a-Lago.

Mahdawi, a Palestinian student activist, faced deportation proceedings amid a protest crackdown under the Trump administration.

An immigration judge in the United States has ruled against an attempt under President Donald Trump to deport Mohsen Mahdawi, a Columbia University student arrested last year for his protests against Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

The decision, issued on February 13, became public as part of court filings on Tuesday from Mahdawi’s lawyers.

The filing was submitted to a federal appeals court in New York, which has been considering a challenge from the Trump administration against Mahdawi’s release from custody.

In a public statement released through the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Mahdawi thanked the immigration court for its decision, which he framed as a strike in favour of free-speech rights.

“I am grateful to the court for honoring the rule of law and holding the line against the government’s attempts to trample on due process,” Mahdawi said. “This decision is an important step towards upholding what fear tried to destroy: the right to speak for peace and justice.”

But the ACLU indicated that the immigration court’s decision was made “without prejudice”, a legal term that means the Trump administration could refile its case against Mahdawi.

Raised in a Palestinian refugee camp in the occupied West Bank, Mahdawi is a lawful permanent resident who has lived in Vermont for 10 years.

He enrolled at Columbia, a prestigious Ivy League university, to study philosophy. But he was also a visible member of the campus’s activist community, founding a Palestinian student society alongside fellow student Mahmoud Khalil.

Columbia became a hub for pro-Palestinian protests in 2024, and Trump campaigned for re-election, in part, on cracking down on the demonstrations.

Khalil became the first student protester to be detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in March of last year, less than three months into Trump’s second term.

Then, on April 14, Mahdawi was arrested at a meeting set up by the government, allegedly to process his citizenship application.

ICE detained him in “direct retaliation for his advocacy of Palestinian rights”, the ACLU said in a statement at the time.

The Trump administration attempted to transfer Mahdawi out of state to Louisiana, but a court order ultimately blocked it from doing so.

Mahdawi was ultimately released on April 30, after US Judge Geoffrey Crawford accused the Trump administration of doing “great harm” to someone who had committed no crime.

Human rights advocates have described the Trump administration’s attempts to deport foreign-born student activists as a campaign to chill free speech.

After his release last year, Mahdawi walked out of the court with both hands in the air, flashing peace signs as supporters greeted him with cheers.

As he spoke, he shared a message for Trump. “I am not afraid of you,” Mahdawi said to Trump.

He also addressed the people of Palestine and sought to dispel perceptions that the student protest movement was anything but peaceful.

“We are pro-peace and antiwar,” Mahdawi explained. “To my people in Palestine: I feel your pain, I see your suffering, and I see freedom, and it is very soon.”

Mahdawi’s arrest comes as part of a wider push by the Trump administration to target visa holders and permanent residents for their pro-Palestine advocacy.

Trump has also pressured top universities to crack down on pro-Palestine protests in the name of combating anti-Semitism. In some cases, the Trump administration has opened investigations into campuses where pro-Palestinian protests were prominent, accusing them of civil rights violations.

Last July, Columbia University entered into a $200m settlement with the Trump administration, with a further $21m given to end a probe into allegations of religious-based harassment.

The university, however, did not admit to wrongdoing.

Colombia’s largest criminal group paused talks after President Gustavo Petro pledged to target its leader, Chiquito Malo.

Colombia’s government has announced it will resume peace talks with the powerful Gulf Clan, also known as the Gaitanist Self-Defence Forces (ECG), after the criminal group expressed concern about a recent deal with the United States.

Tuesday’s announcement addresses a temporary suspension the Gulf Clan announced earlier this month, in the wake of a meeting between Colombian President Gustavo Petro and his US counterpart, Donald Trump.

Faced with US pressure to crack down on drug cartels, Petro agreed to prioritise three “kingpins” his government considered “high-level targets”.

One of those targets was the leader of the Gulf Clan, Jobanis de Jesus Avila Villadiego, known as Chiquito Malo.

The Gulf Clan responded by pausing talks with the Petro government until it received clarity on the scope of the government’s actions.

In a joint statement on Tuesday, the two parties said they had “overcome” any hurdles to the talks.

They also explained that the ongoing talks would be mediated by the Catholic Church and the governments of Qatar, Spain, Norway and Switzerland.

The Gulf Clan is one of several armed groups that have jostled for control of territory as part of Colombia’s six-decade-long internal conflict, which has pitted criminal groups, left-wing rebels, government forces and right-wing paramilitaries against each other.

With approximately 9,000 fighters, the Gulf Clan is considered one of the country’s largest cartels. The US designated it a “foreign terrorist organisation” in December.

Trump has pushed the Petro government to take more aggressive action against drug trafficking overall. In January, he even threatened to attack Colombia, saying that Petro needed to “watch his a**”.

But relations between the two leaders have warmed in recent weeks, particularly since Petro’s visit to the White House on February 3.

Previously, Colombian governments had taken a more militarised approach to addressing the country’s internal conflict. Colombia has long been considered a top ally in the US’s worldwide “war on drugs”.

But upon taking office in 2022, Petro sought to take a different approach, bringing armed groups and criminal networks to the table for negotiations under a programme called “Total Peace”.

The peace talks, however, have faced a series of setbacks, particularly in the wake of new bursts of violence.

In January, for example, Petro granted himself emergency powers following an outbreak of violence near the border with Venezuela between various armed groups, including the National Liberation Army (ELN).

That violence resulted in the suspension of peace talks with the ELN.

Petro, the country’s first left-wing president, has also faced pressure from the right to assure justice is carried out on behalf of the victims of drug trafficking.

His government has repeatedly rejected allegations that it has not done enough to stem drug trafficking in Colombia, which has historically been the world’s largest producer of cocaine.

Petro has pointed to historic drug busts, including one in November that resulted in the seizure of 14 tonnes of cocaine, as evidence of his government’s efficacy.

Criminal networks and other groups have long jostled to gain control of drug-trafficking routes.

Those clashes saw a spike after a peace deal with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), a leftist rebel group that agreed to disarm in 2016.

The group’s dissolution left a power vacuum that other drug-trafficking organisations have sought to fill.

How to address Colombia’s ongoing internal conflict is set to be a major election issue in May, when the country chooses a new president. Petro is limited by law to a single consecutive term and will therefore not be on the ballot.

Tarique Rahman, leader of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), which swept to a landslide victory in last week’s parliamentary elections, has been sworn in as the country’s first elected prime minister since deadly protests in 2024, which resulted in the ouster of the previous government and its prime minister, Sheikh Hasina.

The political alliance led by Rahman’s party won 212 seats in the Jatiya Sangsad, Bangladesh’s parliament, in Thursday’s elections, leaving its main competitor, the alliance led by Jamaat-e-Islami, with 77.

On Tuesday, Rahman took his oath of office, and newly elected MPs pledged loyalty to their country inside the oath room of the parliament building as they were sworn in by Chief Election Commissioner AMM Nasir Uddin.

Foreign officials, among them Pakistan’s foreign minister and the speaker of India’s Parliament, were also present.

Here is what we know about the people who will be running Bangladesh’s new government:

Who are the new cabinet members?

Twenty-five full ministers in the new cabinet took their oaths during a separate ceremony in Dhaka on Tuesday afternoon. The 25 have been drawn overwhelmingly from the BNP and its close allies.

Among the state (junior) ministers appointed to Rahman’s government are Nurul Haque and Zonayed Saki, first-time parliamentarians, who were prominent voices during the 2024 protests.

While members of the cabinet have been announced, the ministries they will be responsible for have not yet been confirmed. Here’s a look at who some of them are.

Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir

Alamgir, who has served as secretary-general of the BNP since 2016, was elected to his seat in parliament by the constituency of Thakurgaon-1, a district in northwestern Bangladesh.

Alamgir, 78, served as a member of parliament from 2001 to 2006 under the previous BNP government, led by Rahman’s late mother, Khaleda Zia, during which he was also state minister for agriculture and later for civil aviation and tourism.

After the end of that government’s term, a caretaker administration took over until elections in 2008, which Alamgir stood in but did not win. He remained a senior member of the BNP outside parliament.

In October 2023, Alamgir was detained by police the day after mass antigovernment protests swept through Dhaka when Hasina’s Awami League party was in power. The police said he had been detained for questioning in connection with the violence that erupted during those demonstrations.

When the BNP win was announced last week, Alamgir hailed the victory and called the BNP “a party of the people”.

Amir Khasru Mahmud Chowdhury

Chowdhury was elected from the Chattogram-11 constituency, which covers the Bandar and Patenga areas of Chattogram city in southeastern Bangladesh.

From 2001 to 2004, Chowdhury served as minister of commerce under the previous BNP administration. He is a member of the BNP’s standing committee.

Before last week’s vote, Chowdhury said that if elected, the BNP would govern by investing in people, “in health, in education and upskilling” and by supporting “artisans, the weavers” and small industries with credit as well as helping them access international markets, including by helping them with their branding.

Iqbal Hasan Mahmud Tuku

Tuku, 75, has been elected as a member of parliament for the Sirajganj-2 constituency in North Bengal.

Tuku is a member of the BNP Standing Committee, the party’s top policymaking body.

He is a veteran BNP figure who has been elected to parliament multiple times and has held important party roles. From 2001 to 2006, he served as the state minister for power. In 2006, he also briefly served as the state minister for agriculture.

In 2007, during the military-backed interim government, a special anticorruption court in Dhaka sentenced Tuku to nine years in prison in a case filed against him by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC). The ACC accused Tuku of concealing information about assets worth 49.6 million takas (roughly $400,000).

The High Court upheld his conviction and jail sentence in 2023 after a lengthy appeal process. However, in September 2025, a year after the overthrow of the Awami League government, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court acquitted Tuku.

Khalilur Rahman

Khalilur Rahman is a technocratic minister, appointed for his expertise rather than as a party politician. He is not a member of parliament.

He served as national security adviser in the interim administration headed by Muhammad Yunus, which took over to oversee a transition after Hasina’s ouster.

He also served as the government’s representative for the Rohingya issue during Yunus’s tenure. The refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar in southern Bangladesh are sheltering more than one million Rohingya refugees, most of whom fled Myanmar in 2017 to escape a military crackdown.

Afroza Khanam Rita

The only woman cabinet minister, Rita is a first-time member of parliament but comes from a political family: Her late father was a four-times MP. Rita is also the chairwoman of the Monno Group of Industries, a conglomerate whose firms produce ceramic ware, textiles and agricultural machinery – primarily for export.

Asaduzzaman

Asaduzzaman, was elected from the Jhenaidah-1 (Shailkupa) constituency, which covers Shailkupa upazila in Jhenaidah district in southwestern Bangladesh.

Dipen Dewan

Dewan, 62, a Chakma Buddhist leader, is expected to be named minister of Chittagong Hill Tracts affairs. Dewan won from the Rangamati constituency.

Chakma Buddhists are an ethnic group of Tibeto-Burman speaking people. They are indigenous to the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh and parts of northeastern India.

Nitai Roy Chowdhury

Chowdhury, a Hindu leader, is widely expected to become the minister of cultural affairs.

Chowdhury, 77, has served as a senior adviser and strategist for the BNP’s top leaders.

How significant are these appointments?

During campaigning, the BNP pledged to meet the people’s demand for an elected government with real legitimacy. Therefore, ministers and cabinet members can expect a significant amount of scrutiny, experts said.

Khandakar Tahmid Rejwan, lecturer in global studies and governance at the Independent University, Bangladesh, told Al Jazeera: “The appointees in their respective fields will also face an invisible yet significant pressure to prove themselves more effective and distinctive than the previous administrations, both the interim government and, of course, the Awami League-led government under Sheikh Hasina.”

He added: “It will be particularly interesting to observe whether, after a youth-led mass uprising, the core of executive power is taken over by the old guard or by new faces that reflect diversity in terms of age, gender, ethnicity and religion.”

While two prominent figures from the 2024 student uprisings have been named as state ministers – Nurul Haque and Zonayed Saki – Rejwan added that leaders of the student-led National Citizen Party, which was founded after the 2024 uprising, had made a “strategic mistake” by allying with Jamaat instead of the BNP.

“They had the option to form an alliance with the BNP, which they later abandoned in favour of Jamaat. Given these political dynamics, it is unlikely that any student leaders will receive cabinet positions.”

Who attended the ceremony to swear in the new cabinet?

Several foreign delegations were in Bangladesh to attend the ceremony.

They included Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu and Bhutanese Prime Minister Tshering Tobgay.

India was represented by Om Birla, the speaker of its lower house in Parliament. Pakistani Federal Minister for Planning Ahsan Iqbal also attended.

Leaders and representatives from Nepal and the United Kingdom, China, Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Brunei were among those who were invited to attend.

Democrats have called for a ban on immigration agents wearing masks and are pushing for increased oversight of their operations.

The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ran out of funding over the weekend, leading to the third partial government shutdown of President Donald Trump’s second term, as negotiations between Republicans and Democrats remain stalled while Congress is in recess until February 23.

Democrats are calling for changes to the DHS’s immigration operations after two fatal shootings of US citizens in the city of Minneapolis last month. Alex Pretti and Renee Good were shot dead by federal officers from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol during such operations.

On Monday, state officials in Minnesota said that the FBI has refused to share evidence with state law enforcement following Pretti’s killing on January 24.

“This lack of cooperation is concerning and unprecedented,” Minnesota’s Bureau of Criminal Apprehension superintendent, Drew Evans, said in a statement.

DHS entered a shutdown on Saturday, but will continue operations deemed essential. Cuts affect agencies under the DHS, including the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Customs and Border Protection (CBP) – which runs Border Patrol – ICE, and the US coastguard.

At US airports, 2,933 of the TSA’s 64,130 employees have been furloughed for the duration of the shutdown. The remaining 95 percent of staff will remain on duty but will work without pay until the DHS is funded.

Earlier this month, Democrats sent Republicans a list of 10 demands to rein in immigration enforcement. In a letter, authored by House of Representatives Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, the politicians called for increased oversight of the DHS.

The letter called for DHS officers not to enter private property without a judicial warrant and to require verification that someone is not a US citizen before placing them in immigration detention. It also called for DHS to mandate that its officers do not wear masks, have visible identification, and wear clear uniforms.

Democrats are also seeking to prohibit immigration enforcement actions near courts, medical facilities, houses of worship, schools, and polling places.

They further called for increased coordination with local and state agencies after the federal government blocked state and local law enforcement from participating in investigations related to the deaths in Minneapolis.

“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,” Jeffries said in the letter.

“The American people rightfully expect their elected representatives to take action to rein in ICE and ensure no more lives are lost. It is critical that we come together to impose common sense reforms and accountability measures that the American people are demanding.”

Tom Homan, Trump’s border chief, dismissed the calls from Democrats on CBS’s Face the Nation, referring to the requests as “unreasonable”.

Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma, meanwhile, echoed Homan’s stance. On CNN’s current affairs programme, State of the Union, he claimed that Democrats are engaging in “political theatre”.

Iran launched naval drills in the Strait of Hormuz, Persian Gulf and Oman Sea, state TV reports, ahead of US-Iran nuclear talks in Geneva on Tuesday. Video shows Gen. Mohammad Pakpour, the head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, overseeing the drills.

SPRING Break travelers are set to be hit by disruption amid the partial government shutdown.

Major airlines and travel groups have urged Congress to sort out funding for thousands of Transportation and Security Administration workers.

It comes as millions of high school and college students are preparing to travel nationwide for Spring break.

The annual one-to-two-week academic vacation period is kicking off soon.

But, holidaymakers and flyers will be hit by annoying flight delays and longer wait times at security due to the partial US homeland security shutdown, according to travel groups and airlines.

And, TSA staff are likely to suffer financially, reported Simple Flying on Saturday.

“Not again: 50,000 TSA officers face unpaid work as shutdown threatens Spring Break travel,” its headline warned.

“As yet another government shutdown looms, so does one of the busiest travel times of the Year — spring break,” said U.S. Travel, Airlines for America, and the American Hotel & Lodging Association in a joint statement last Friday.

“Travelers and the U.S. economy cannot afford to have essential TSA personnel working without pay.”

They warned that the funding delays raise “the risk of unscheduled absences and call outs, and ultimately can lead to higher wait times and missed or delayed flights.”

The partial government shutdown began on Saturday over money for the Department of Homeland Security.

Congressional Democrats and President Donald Trump’s team failed to reach a deal on legislation to fund the department through September.

And their inability to reach a compromise has sparked huge concern within the travel and hospitality industry – particularly with Spring break looming, plus the FIFA World Cup 2026.

The United States, along with Canada and Mexico, will be hosting the biennial football competition from June 11 through July 20.

Airlines for America also warned that funding uncertainty is “creating lasting damage to the entire travel ecosystem.”

The organization said the damaging interruption would hit “airlines, hotels and thousands of small businesses the travel industry supports.”

Tips on getting through TSA security faster during the 2026 partial shutdown

Funding for the DHS expired at midnight last Friday

The 95% of TSA workers deemed essential personnel will be required to keep working – but without pay.

To minimize delays at the airport:

• Arrive at the airport with ample time to pass through airport security – about 1–2 hours before your flight
• Ensuring you are dressed without excess layers or metal devices
• Slip-on shoes also make the screening at TSA much quicker

Source: Simple Flying

“With America’s 250th anniversary and the 2026 World Cup this summer, the nation should be focused on showcasing the country on the world stage and maximizing the multi-billion-dollar economic opportunity these events bring,” the statement added.

“A lapse in TSA funding will significantly undermine those efforts.

“Last year’s shutdown alone resulted in an economic impact of $6 billion —nearly $140 million per day — and disrupted travel for more than 6 million travelers.”

FATAL SHOOTINGS

It comes days after Delta Air Lines’ boss told international visitors ahead of the World Cup that the U.S. remains a welcoming destination despite the controversial crackdown on immigration.

“Hopefully, the World Cup will bring a lot of Europeans, a lot of international visitors into the US market,” said Ed Bastian last Thursday.

“Yes, the US has a focus on immigration. This is not immigration. This is tourism,” Bastian added.

“And as long as people are coming with the proper credentials, they’re not having any issues.”

Democrats are demanding changes to how immigration operations are conducted after the fatal shootings of U.S. citizens Alex Pretti and Renee Good by federal officers in Minneapolis last month.

Congress is on recess until February 23.

OFF SICK

The longer the shutdown continues, the more likely flyers will be hit with delays as they will have to queue in longer lines at airports if workers call in sick.

Ha Nguyen McNeill, the acting TSA administrator, explained last Wednesday that TSA remained “laser-focused on returning the U.S. back to being the top global travel destination.”

Spring break 2026 – in numbers

• Spring breakers are primarily high school and college students
• 2 million college students travel for the holiday nationwide
• Florida enjoys a $2.7 billion economic windfall from Spring break
• Cancun’s Spring break tourism brings in $300 million yearly
• More than 500,000 students flock to South Beach Miami
• 1.5 million visitors attend Spring break in Panama City Beach
• Only around 30% of bookings are made within 30 days of travel
• The most popular domestic beach destinations this year are: Orlando, Fort Lauderdale, Miami, Los Angeles, and San Diego

Sources: Travel Awaits and Gitnux

However, this can’t happen “in a timely manner if Congress does not fund DHS through the end of Fiscal Year 2026.”

“With the United States hosting the 2026 FIFA World Cup in June of this year, TSA does not have the luxury of time to prepare for the influx of passengers and international travelers,” McNeill warned.

“A lack of funding and predictability will pose significant challenges on our ability to deliver transportation security for the American public with the level of excellence we expect, and the American taxpayer deserves.”

It follows a record 43-day shutdown last fall.

TSA agents fall under the DHS.

Limits to pardon powers

But there are limits to presidential clemency, and already, Trump has brushed against them.

In December, Trump announced that he would pardon Tina Peters, a former county clerk in Colorado who supported Trump’s false claims of voter fraud during the 2020 election.

Peters, however, was also convicted of state-level crimes, after she used her office to allow an unauthorised person to access her county’s election software.

A president may only pardon federal charges, not state ones. Peters continues to serve a nine-year prison sentence. Still, Trump has sought to pressure Colorado officials to release her.

“She did nothing wrong,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “If she is not released, I am going to take harsh measures!!!”

While Trump has argued that presidents have the “complete power to pardon”, legal experts have repeatedly affirmed that clemency is not without bounds.

Pardons, for example, cannot be used to avoid impeachment or to undercut the Constitution, nor can they be used to absolve future crimes.

Still, the question remains how to enforce those limits — and whether new bulwarks should be created to prevent abuse.

Love points to the state pardon systems as models to emulate. Delaware, for example, has a Board of Pardons that hears petitions in public meetings and makes recommendations to the governor. More than half of the petitions are granted.

Like other successful clemency systems, Love said it offers public accountability.

She measures that accountability by certain standards: “Can people see what’s going on? Do they know what the standards are, and is the decider a respected and responsible decision-maker?”

Trump’s sweeping actions, however, have prompted calls for presidential pardons to be limited or eliminated altogether.

Osler cautions against doing so: It would be a “permanent solution to a temporary problem”.

“If we constrain clemency, we’ll lose all the good things that come from it,” Osler said.

The debate comes as Jeri, who is not running for re-election, faces allegations of bribery and influence-peddling.

The head of Peru’s Congress, Fernando Rospigliosi, has announced a special plenary session to weigh the removal of the country’s right-wing president, Jose Jeri.

The session will take place on the morning of February 17, according to a statement Peru’s Congress posted on social media.

The debate comes as Jeri’s short tenure grows mired in scandal, just four months after he took office as interim president.

In October, Jeri — the leader of Congress at the time — took over as president following the unanimous impeachment of his predecessor, Dina Boluarte, on the grounds of “permanent moral incapacity”.

Boluarte herself assumed the presidency after her predecessor, Pedro Castillo, was impeached for attempting a self-coup.

Next week’s debate about Jeri’s future is the latest chapter in the ongoing instability facing Peru’s government. The country has seen eight presidents within the last decade, with several of them impeached or resigning before their term expired.

In recent months, Jeri has become increasingly embroiled in scandal, including one colloquially known as “chifagate”, named for the Peruvian-Chinese fusion cuisine known as “chifa”.

The scandal started when local media outlets obtained video of Jeri arriving late at night at a restaurant to meet with a Chinese businessman, Zhihua Yang, who previously received government approval to build a hydroelectric plant.

Their meeting was not listed in the official presidential agenda, as is required under Peruvian law. Critics have questioned whether Jeri’s outfit — which had a deep hood that rendered him nearly unrecognisable — was meant to be a disguise.

Additional footage placed Jeri at another one of Yang’s businesses days later. Jeri also allegedly met a second Chinese businessman, Jiwu Xiaodong, who was reportedly under house arrest for illegal activities.

Jeri has dismissed some of the off-the-books meetings as planning for an upcoming Chinese-Peruvian friendship event. Others, he said, were simply shopping trips for sweets and other food. He has denied wrongdoing but has acknowledged taking the meetings was a “mistake”.

“I have not lied to the country. I have not done anything illegal,” Jeri told the news outlet Canal N.

But critics have accused Jeri of using his position for influence-peddling at the unregistered interactions.

Similar accusations erupted earlier this month when Peruvian media highlighted the irregular hiring of several women in Jeri’s administration and contracts he awarded as possible evidence of bribery.

The debate over Jeri’s removal comes as Peru hurtles towards a general election on April 12, with the presidency up for grabs. Jeri will not be running to retain his seat.

A United States court has ordered the administration of President Donald Trump to facilitate the return of a Babson College student, Any Lucia Lopez Belloza, who was wrongfully deported last year.

In his ruling on Tuesday, US District Judge Richard Stearns gave the government two weeks to take steps to bring Lopez Belloza back.

He framed the order as an opportunity to correct a “mistake” – but he did not rule out holding the government in contempt if it failed to take the necessary actions.

“Wisdom counsels that redemption may be found by acknowledging and fixing our own errors,” Stearns wrote.

“In this unfortunate case, the government commendably admits that it did wrong. Now it is time for the government to make amends.”

A surprise trip turned deportation

Lopez Belloza, 19, was arrested on November 20 by immigration agents at Boston’s Logan airport.

The college freshman had been preparing to board a flight home to her family in Texas to surprise them for the Thanksgiving holiday.

She has since told The Associated Press news agency that she was denied access to a lawyer after her initial detention at the airport. The immigration agent told her she would need to sign a deportation document first, according to Lopez Belloza, who said she denied the offer.

For the next two nights, she said she was kept by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in a holding room with 17 other women, without enough room to lie down.

Then, she was loaded onto a deportation flight, which took her to Texas, then to her native Honduras, on November 22.

“I was numb the whole plane ride,” Lopez Belloza told the AP. “I just kept questioning myself. Why is it happening to me?”

Her lawyers, however, had obtained during that time a court order barring her removal from Massachusetts for 72 hours. Lopez Belloza’s deportation violated that court order.

She has remained in Honduras for the last two and a half months, while legal challenges over her case proceeded.

A legal battle

In court, the Trump administration has apologised for the error in Lopez Belloza’s case, acknowledging that a mistake was indeed made.

“On behalf of the government, we want to sincerely apologise,” prosecutor Mark Sauter told the court.

But Sauter rejected accusations that the government wilfully defied the 72-hour court order, saying that Lopez Belloza’s deportation was the mistake of one ICE agent and not an act of judicial defiance.

The government has also argued that Lopez Belloza was subject to a removal order before her November 20 arrest and therefore should not be returned to the US.

Lopez Belloza was brought to the US from Honduras when she was eight years old, and in 2016, she and her mother were ordered to be deported.

But the college freshman said she had no knowledge of any deportation order and has told the media that her previous legal representation had assured her there was no removal order against her.

Nevertheless, the Trump administration has rejected efforts to bring Lopez Belloza back to the country, even on a student visa.

In a February 6 court filing, US Attorney Leah B Foley wrote that a student visa “is unfeasible as the Secretary of State lacks authority to adjudicate visa applications and issue visas”.

“In any event,” Foley added, “Petitioner appears ineligible for a student visa.” She explained that Lopez Belloza “would remain subject to detention and removal if returned to the United States”.

The filing ended with a warning to the court to “refrain from ordering Respondents to return Petitioner to the status quo because this Court lacks authority”.

The Trump administration has questioned the authority of federal courts to intervene in immigration-related matters.

A series of mistakes

Critics, meanwhile, have accused the Trump administration of repeatedly failing to heed court orders it disagrees with.

Lopez Belloza’s case is not the first instance of an immigrant being wrongfully deported since the start of Trump’s second term.

Trump had campaigned on a pledge of mass deportation, and he has followed through with that promise, leading a series of controversial immigration crackdowns that have been accused of violating due process rights.

One of the most high-profile cases came in March 2025, when his administration wrongfully deported a Salvadoran father named Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who lived in Maryland with his wife, a US citizen.

Abrego Garcia had been subject to a 2019 court order barring his removal from the US on the basis that he could face gang violence in El Salvador.

But he was nevertheless sent back to the country and was briefly held in El Salvador’s Center for Terrorism Confinement (CECOT), a maximum-security prison.

On April 10, the US Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration must “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return, largely upholding a lower court’s decision.

But the Trump administration initially argued Abrego Garcia was outside of its power. Then, on June 6, it abruptly announced Abrego Garcia had been returned, only to file criminal charges against him and seek his deportation a second time.

Another case involved a Guatemalan man, identified only by his initials OCG.

He had been under a court protection order that barred him from being returned to Guatemala, for fear that his identity as a gay man would subject him to persecution.

But the Trump administration detained and deported him instead to Mexico, which in turn sent him back to Guatemala. He subsequently went into hiding for his safety.

In June, OCG was returned to the US after a court ordered the Trump administration to facilitate his return. It also noted that OCG’s deportation “lacked any semblance of due process”.

Lopez Belloza continues her studies at Babson College remotely from Honduras as she awaits the outcome of her legal proceedings.

WASHINGTON — A dispute over whether federal immigration agents should be allowed to wear masks during enforcement operations has become one of the biggest obstacles to keeping the Department of Homeland Security funded, pushing the government toward a partial shutdown early Saturday.

Democrats have described the practice as corrosive to public trust, arguing that masked agents create the appearance of a “secret police” force. Republican lawmakers, President Trump and his top advisors, meanwhile, have drawn a hard line against requiring officers to remove their face coverings, insisting that doing so would expose them to harassment, threats and online doxxing.

“They want our law enforcement to be totally vulnerable and put them in a lot of danger,” Trump said at a White House event Thursday. He added that it would be “very, very hard to approve” Democrats’ demands, such as unmasking federal officers.

The standoff over masking stalled negotiations as lawmakers raced to meet a funding deadline for the Department of Homeland Security at midnight Friday. Without a deal, key agency functions — from airport security to disaster relief coordination — could be affected if the shutdown drags on.

Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) rides the Senate subway Thursday ahead of the latest partial government shutdown.

(Graeme Sloan / Bloomberg via Getty Images)

As with every shutdown, the agency’s essential functions will continue to operate, Tricia McLaughlin, assistant Homeland Security secretary for public affairs, said in a statement. But employees performing those functions at agencies such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Coast Guard, and the Transportation Security Administration could go without pay if the shutdown stretches for weeks.

The heads of those agencies told the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee on Wednesday that the shutdown is expected to create severe and lasting challenges.

Vice Adm. Thomas Allan, the acting vice commandant of the Coast Guard, said a shutdown would delay maintenance for boats and aircraft, and halt pay for 56,000 active-duty reserve and civilian personnel. Ha Nguyen McNeill, acting administrator of TSA, recounted how the last government shutdown affected her workers and spiked wait times at airports.

“We heard reports of officers sleeping in their cars at airports to save money on gas, selling their blood and plasma and taking on second jobs to make ends meet,” she said, adding that some are still recovering from the financial impact.

Operations within U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection — the agencies that are central to the budget impasse — are likely to be the least affected. That’s because both agencies still have access to $75 billion in funding approved last year as part of Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.”

By midday Friday, it remained unclear when the partial shutdown would end, as lawmakers left Washington for a security conference in Munich and progress between Democratic and White House negotiators remained nebulous.

“We’ll see what happens,” Trump told reporters on Friday when asked about cutting a deal. “We always have to protect our law enforcement.”

The partial government shutdown comes at a moment of acute public anger at the agency’s approach to immigration enforcement, which has included the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, in Minneapolis.

Since the shootings, the Trump administration has tried to quell tensions. Border policy advisor Tom Homan said Thursday that the administration was ending its immigration crackdown in Minneapolis. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced earlier this month that the agency would be acquiring and issuing body cameras to federal agents. Trump also said he wants to employ a “softer touch” to immigration enforcement after the killings of Good and Pretti.

But Democrats maintain that they need reforms written into law. Among their demands is requiring officers to wear and turn on body cameras, banning them from wearing masks, and ending the practice of “roving patrols” and instead requiring that they carry out only targeted operations.

“We will not support an extension of the status quo, a status quo that permits masked secret police to barge into people’s homes without warrants, no guardrails and zero oversight from independent authorities,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said on the Senate floor Thursday.

Todd M. Lyons, the acting director of ICE, told a Senate panel Thursday that he does not want to see federal agents masked either, but said he is hesitant to bar face coverings because the threats to agents are too severe.

“I would work with this committee and any committee to work with holding individuals accountable that doxx ICE agents, because ICE agents don’t want to be masked,” Lyons said. “They’re honorable men and women, but the threats against their family are real.”

Federal immigration officials are more supportive of body cameras.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott told a House committee on Tuesday that he supports expanding the use of body cameras, but said more funding is needed to hire personnel to oversee the rollout.

“Fund the entire program so that we can be transparent and that we can make sure America knows what we’re doing, because that trust is critically important,” he said.

Ben Johnson, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Assn., said that while the White House has made some “tweaks around oversight,” its actions continue to fall short.

The association, which represents 18,000 immigration attorneys, has urged Congress to refuse more funding for ICE and CBP before implementing reforms.

“The American public wants and deserves real, meaningful guardrails that are written into law that ensure this administration — and, quite frankly, any administration — will abide by the Constitution and respect fundamental principles of due process,” Johnson said Wednesday on a call with reporters.

“Congress has a critical opportunity right now to meet that demand,” he added.

Republican Sens. James Lankford of Oklahoma, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Rand Paul of Kentucky talk during a hearing Thursday on oversight of federal immigration agencies.

(Tom Williams / CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images)

So far, Democrats maintain they will continue to bock funding bills without accountability measures in place.

California’s two Democratic U.S. senators, Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, were among the Senate Democrats who helped block passage of funding bills Thursday that would have averted a shutdown because they lacked accountability measures.

“I will not support more funding for ICE until there are new guardrails to rein in its lawless conduct,” Schiff wrote on X. “I’m a no on anything but real reform.”

Padilla said he would be a “firm no” until lawmakers agree that federal immigration officers need to be held accountable.

“Donald Trump and Republicans want Americans to forget about their lawless immigration roundup, but we won’t,” Padilla said.

US President Donald Trump says a second aircraft carrier strike group will deploy to the Middle East, increasing pressure on Iran as negotiations over its nuclear programme continue.

Heads of state are arriving in Addis Ababa for the 2026 African Union Summit, with a water-focused theme centred on climate change. Conflicts in Sudan, South Sudan, DR Congo and the Sahel loom, while Israel’s recognition of Somaliland adds pressure over borders.

The United States has revoked a scientific finding that has long been the central basis for its actions to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change.

The decision on Thursday is the most aggressive move by President Donald Trump to roll back environmental regulations since the start of his second term.

Under his leadership, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalised a rule rescinding a 2009 government declaration known as the “endangerment finding”.

It is the legal underpinning for nearly all climate regulations under the Clean Air Act for motor vehicles, power plants and other pollution sources that are heating the planet.

Established under the presidency of Democrat Barack Obama, the finding establishes that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare.

But President Trump, a Republican, has called climate change a “hoax” and a “con job”. The endangerment finding, he argued, is “one of the greatest scams in history”, adding that it “had no basis in fact” or law.

“On the contrary, over the generations, fossil fuels have saved millions of lives and lifted billions of people out of poverty all over the world,” Trump said at a White House ceremony on Thursday.

He hailed the repeal of the endangerment finding as “the single largest deregulatory action in American history, by far”.

EPA administrator Lee Zeldin, who also attended the ceremony, described the endangerment finding as “the Holy Grail of federal regulatory overreach”.

Rescinding the endangerment finding repeals all greenhouse gas emissions standards for cars and trucks. It could also unleash a broader unravelling of climate regulations on stationary sources such as power plants and oil and gas facilities, experts say.

But Thursday’s new rule is likely to face pushback in the US court system.

Overturning the finding will “raise more havoc” than other actions Trump has taken to roll back environmental rules, environmental law professor Ann Carlson told The Associated Press news agency.

Environmental groups described the move as the single biggest attack in US history against federal authority to address climate change. Evidence backing up the endangerment finding has only grown stronger in the 17 years since it was approved, they said.

As part of Thursday’s decision, the EPA also announced it will end tax credits for automakers who install automatic start-stop ignition systems in their vehicles. The device is intended to reduce emissions, but Zeldin said “everyone hates” it.

Zeldin, a former Republican congressman who was tapped by Trump to lead EPA last year, has criticised his Democratic predecessors, saying that, in the name of tackling climate change, they were “willing to bankrupt the country”.

The endangerment finding “led to trillions of dollars in regulations that strangled entire sectors of the United States economy, including the American auto industry”, Zeldin said, criticising the leadership of Obama and former President Joe Biden in particular.

“The Obama and Biden administrations used it to steamroll into existence a left-wing wish list of costly climate policies, electric vehicle mandates and other requirements that assaulted consumer choice and affordability.”

The endangerment finding had allowed for a series of regulations intended to protect against climate change and related threats.

They include deadly floods, extreme heat waves, catastrophic wildfires and other natural disasters in the US and around the world.

Gina McCarthy, a former EPA administrator who served as the White House’s climate adviser in the Biden administration, called the Trump administration’s actions reckless.

“This EPA would rather spend its time in court working for the fossil fuel industry than protecting us from pollution and the escalating impacts of climate change,” she said.

EPA has a clear scientific and legal obligation to regulate greenhouse gases, McCarthy explained, adding that the health and environmental hazards of climate change have “become impossible to ignore”.

Thursday’s EPA action follows an executive order from Trump that directed the agency to submit a report on “the legality and continuing applicability” of the endangerment finding.

Conservatives have long sought to undo what they consider overly restrictive and economically damaging rules to limit the greenhouse gases that cause global warming.

Democratic Senator Ed Markey said that keeping the endangerment finding should have been a “no-brainer”.

“Trump and Zeldin are putting our lives and our future at risk,” he said in a video statement.

“They have rolled back protection after protection in a race to the bottom. Instead of ‘Let them eat cake,’ Zeldin is saying, ‘Let them breathe soot.’”

A United States judge has granted an injunction preventing the Department of Defense from stripping Senator Mark Kelly, a military veteran, of his retirement pension and military rank.

The Defense Department had taken punitive action against Kelly for critical statements he had made against President Donald Trump.

But on Thursday, Judge Richard J Leon, an appointee of Republican President George W Bush, issued a forceful rebuke, accusing the Trump administration of trying to stifle veterans’ free speech rights.

Leon directed much of his ruling at Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, a senior Trump official who announced on January 5 that Kelly would be censured for what he characterised as “seditious” statements.

“Rather than trying to shrink the First Amendment liberties of retired service members, Secretary Hegseth and his fellow Defendants might reflect and be grateful for the wisdom and expertise that retired service members have brought to public discussions and debate on military matters in our Nation over the past 250 years,” Leon wrote.

“If so, they will more fully appreciate why the Founding Fathers made free speech the first Amendment in the Bill of Rights!”

History of the case

Thursday’s decision comes after Kelly, a Democratic member of Congress, filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on January 12, alleging “punitive retribution”.

He had drawn the Trump administration’s ire with several public statements questioning the president’s military decisions.

Kelly, who represents the swing state of Arizona, had condemned the administration for sending military troops to quell protests in Los Angeles in June 2025.

Then, in November, he was also one of six former members of the US’s military and intelligence communities to participate in a video reminding current service members of their duty to “refuse illegal orders”.

That video quickly attracted Trump’s attention, and the president issued a string of social media posts threatening imprisonment and even the death penalty.

“This is really bad, and Dangerous to our Country. Their words cannot be allowed to stand. SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS!!! LOCK THEM UP?” Trump wrote in one post.

In another, he suggested a harsher punishment: “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

Shortly thereafter, the Defense Department announced it had launched an investigation into the video and Kelly specifically, given his role as a retired Navy captain.

Hegseth accused Kelly of using “his rank and service affiliation” to discredit the US armed forces, and he echoed Trump’s claims that the video was “reckless and seditious”.

His decision to pen a formal letter of censure against Kelly prompted the senator to sue.

Such a letter serves as a procedural step towards lowering Kelly’s military rank at the time of his retirement, as well as curbing his post-military benefits.

But Kelly argued that such punishment would serve to dampen the rights of veterans to participate in political discourse – and would additionally hinder his work as a member of Congress.

An exclamation-filled ruling

In Thursday’s ruling, Judge Leon determined that Kelly was likely to prevail on the merits of his case – and, citing the folk singer Bob Dylan, he added that it was easy to see why.

“This Court has all it needs to conclude that Defendants have trampled on Senator Kelly’s First Amendment freedoms and threatened the constitutional liberties of millions of military retirees,” Leon said in his often quippy ruling.

“After all, as Bob Dylan famously said, ‘You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.’”

Leon acknowledged that granting an injunction against the government is an “extraordinary remedy”. But he argued it was necessary, given the gravity of the case.

The judge conceded that the Defense Department does have the ability to restrict the speech of active-service military members, given the need for discipline among troops.

But the Trump administration argued in its court filings that those restrictions extended to retired military veterans as well.

Leon, however, dismissed that assertion with the verbal equivalent of a snort: “Horsefeathers!”

“Speech from retired servicemembers – even speech opining on the lawfulness of military
operations – does not threaten ‘obedience, unity, commitment, and esprit de corps’ in the same way as speech from active-duty soldiers,” Leon wrote.

“Nor can speech from retired servicemembers ‘undermine the effectiveness of response to command’ as directly as speech from active-duty soldiers.”

Leon also acknowledged that Kelly’s role as a lawmaker in Congress compounded the harms from any attempts to curtail his free-speech rights.

“If legislators do not feel free to express their views and the views of their constituents without fear of reprisal by the Executive, our representative system of Government cannot function!” he wrote, in one of his many exclamatory statements.

The judge was also harshly critical of the Trump administration’s arguments that Kelly’s rank and retirement benefits were solely a military matter, not a judicial one.

Leon described Hegseth’s letter of censure as making Kelly’s punishment a “fait accompli” – a foregone conclusion – given that such a document cannot be appealed and could itself serve as the basis for a demotion.

“Here, the retaliation framework fits like a glove,” Leon said, appearing to validate the crux of Kelly’s lawsuit.

At another point, he rejected the government’s arguments by saying, “Put simply, Defendants’ response is anemic!”

The injunction he offered, though, is temporary and will last only until the lawsuit reaches a resolution.

Trump administration responds

In the wake of the injunction, Kelly took to social media to say the short-term victory was a win for all military veterans.

“Today a federal court made clear that Pete Hegseth violated the Constitution when he tried to punish me for something I said,” Kelly said in a video statement.

“But this case was never just about me. This administration was sending a message to millions of retired veterans that they, too, can be censured or demoted just for speaking out.”

He added that the US faces a “critical moment” in its history, warning of the erosion of fundamental rights.

Kelly then proceeded to accuse the Trump administration of “cracking down on our rights and trying to make examples of anybody they can”. He also acknowledged that the legal showdown had only just begun.

“I appreciate the judge’s careful consideration of this case,” Kelly said. “But I also know that this might not be over yet, because this president and this administration do not know how to admit when they’re wrong.”

Within a couple of hours of Kelly’s post, Hegseth himself shared a message on social media, confirming that the Trump administration would forge ahead with contesting Thursday’s decision.

“This will be immediately appealed,” Hegseth said of the injunction. “Sedition is sedition, ‘Captain.’”

Kelly is considered a Democratic contender for the presidency in 2028.

Police say 18-year-old Jesse Van Rootselaar killed her mother and stepbrother before carrying out mass shooting in BC.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has said he will shortly visit the remote British Columbia town of Tumbler Ridge, where nine people died in one of the country’s worst mass shootings, according to his office.

Police say 18-year-old Jesse Van Rootselaar, who had suffered mental health problems, killed her mother and stepbrother on Tuesday before shooting a teacher and five young students at the local school.

Van Rootselaar, who police say was born a male but began identifying as a woman six years ago, then died by suicide.

“The Prime Minister will be visiting Tumbler Ridge shortly in support of the community … [we are] working closely with the community and local authorities to finalise details based on their own immediate needs,” Carney’s office said on Thursday in a brief statement, which gave no details.

Across Tumbler Ridge, a town of about 2,400 in the Canadian Rockies, flowers and stuffed animals could be seen at unofficial public memorials.

“Hold your kids tight, tell them you love them every day. You never know,” a tearful Lance Young, father of 12-year-old victim Kylie Smith, told reporters on Wednesday.

Carney announced on Wednesday that Canadian flags will be flown at half-staff for seven days on federal buildings following the mass school shooting.

Honouring the victims

Police, who say they still do not have a motive, held a meeting with provincial officials late on Wednesday.

“They are working very hard – they recognise the public does need to hear information to fill that vacuum,” local provincial legislator Larry Neufeld told CBC News on Thursday.

Police said they had visited Van Rootselaar’s house on several occasions to address mental health issues and had twice taken her away for formal assessments.

British Columbia Premier David Eby said on Wednesday he had reached out to local health officials to ask for more details of the interactions.

At one point, police seized guns from the house but returned them after the owner, whose identity they did not disclose, successfully appealed the decision.

British Columbia on Thursday observed an official day of mourning. Provincial Lieutenant-Governor Wendy Cocchia, the personal representative of King Charles, Canada’s head of state, is scheduled to deliver a speech in the legislature to honour the victims.

In Toronto, the iconic CN Tower went dark at the top of every hour on Wednesday to honour the victims of the tragedy.

“Tonight the #CNTower will dim for 5 minutes at the top of each hour in honour of the victims of the attack in Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia,” the CN Tower’s official social media account posted on Wednesday.

Bangladesh’s leading political candidates have voted in a closely contested general election in Dhaka, pitting the Bangladesh Nationalist Party against a Jamaat-e-Islami-led coalition. It’s the country’s first election since the 2024 ousting of long‑time premier Sheikh Hasina in a Gen Z-led uprising.