Marco Rubio

Dec. 24 (UPI) — The United States imposed travel bans on former European Union technology commissioner Thierry Breton and four other campaigners against online hate and disinformation, alleging they had forced U.S. social media platforms to limit Americans’ first amendment rights.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement Tuesday that the five had “led organized efforts to coerce American platforms to censor, demonetize and suppress” the views of Americans with whom they disagreed.

“These radical activists and weaponized NGOs have advanced censorship crackdowns by foreign states — in each case targeting American speakers and American companies,” added Rubio who described the five as “agents of the global censorship-industrial complex.”

Beton was singled out by U.S. Under Secretary of State Sarah Rogers as the “mastermind” of European laws that require social media that operate in the 27-country bloc to adhere to content moderation and other standards to protect users, and children in particular, from harm.

That affects the big U.S. tech players, including Google and Meta, by requiring stricter monitoring of content or face fines up to 1% of global annual turnover.

Rogers named the others banned from entering the United States as Anna-Lena von Hodenberg and Josephine Ballon of Berlin-based non-profit HateAid, Clare Melford, co-founder of the London-headquartered Global Disinformation Index, and Briton, Imran Ahmed, chief executive of the Center for Countering Digital Hate.

Breton, who served as the commissioner for the EU’s internal market from 2019 to 2024, likened the move to McCarthyism in the late 1940s and early 1950s and pointed out that the Digital Services Act was voted into law by 90% of MEPs.

“To our American friends: ‘Censorship isn’t where you think it is,” he said.

Brussels condemned the visa bans, saying Wednesday that freedom of expression was a core value that Europe shared in common with United States, but that the EU had sovereignty in regulating economic activity and that its digital laws were fairly applied without prejudice.

The visa bans also came under strong criticism from French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot, who said that safeguards on Europe’s digital space, which had been adopted by democratic means in Europe, could not be dictated from the outside.

He insisted the legislation contained no extraterritorial provisions and therefore had no impact on the United States.

The dispute dates back to an August 2024 warning Breton issued to Elon Musk that an interview with then presidential candidate Donald Trump that he planned to stream on his X platform must not breach the Digital Services Act.

According to Rogers, Breton’s letter contained a sinister recap of X’s legal duties under the DSA and referenced ‘formal proceedings’ for alleged ‘illegal content’ and ‘disinformation.'”

Dec. 19 (UPI) — U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Friday that U.S. negotiators have made “progress” attempting to end the war between Russia and Ukraine, but ultimately “it’s not our war.”

The Russian invasion of Ukraine was one of several global issues Rubio addressed during his 2-hour year-end news conference with reporters. He said despite the progress in negotiations, “we have a ways to go” to end the nearly four-year war in eastern Europe.

“And obviously, the hardest issues are always the last issues,” he said during the briefing.

“Maybe that happens this week, maybe that happens next month, maybe that’s not ready for a few months,” Rubio said of a deal.

His comments came ahead of a weekend meeting in Miami between U.S. and Russian negotiators. He said that while the United States is trying to work on a deal that would make both parties happy, he’s not willing to force a plan.

“It’s not our war. It’s a war on another continent.

“We can’t force Ukraine to make a deal. We can’t force Russia to make a deal. They have to want to make a deal.”

White House officials said they were optimistic this weekend’s meeting would result in an agreement. Previous talks resulted in about “90%” consensus on terms, the officials told The Hill.

Those terms included a multi-national force deployed to Ukraine to respond to acts of aggression against the country in the future. Earlier this week, European leaders pledged to provide military support to Ukraine in protection against Russia, however Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky conceded over the weekend his country may have to give up its dream of joining NATO to end the war.

As peace talks have gone on, U.S. negotiators have put pressure on Ukraine to make more concessions to Russia, which has remained staunch in its demands, which including giving up land. Politico reported that the Trump administration believes Russia will accept EU membership for Ukraine as well as offers of mutual defense from the United States and European countries.

Dec. 18 (UPI) — Paraguay signed a security cooperation agreement with the United States to strengthen efforts against organized crime, drug trafficking and other transnational threats, as Asuncion seeks to reinforce its role as a strategic partner of Washington in central South America.

The agreement was signed this week by Paraguayan Foreign Minister Ruben Ramirez Lezcano and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The document sets out general guidelines for joint work and must be sent to Paraguay’s Congress for review and approval.

Paraguay is a landlocked country between Brazil, Argentina and Bolivia. Its location has made it a key transit point for drug trafficking and smuggling routes across South America, which has led the government of President Santiago Pena to strengthen international security cooperation.

The agreement covers actions against transnational crime, training of military personnel, information sharing, humanitarian assistance and coordination in response to emergencies and natural disasters.

At the signing ceremony, Ramirez Lezcano highlighted the Paraguayan government’s commitment to shared goals with the United States.

“President Santiago Pena is deeply committed to continuing to work strongly on the relationship between our countries and on shared objectives such as fighting transnational organized crime, drug trafficking, human trafficking and corruption,” the foreign minister said.

He added that what is at stake “is not only security, but the freedom of people,” and said the agreement represents an important step to protect both values.

Rubio said the agreement also creates “the opportunity to train together, cooperate, exchange information directly and quickly, and respond to any humanitarian situation that may arise in the future, not only in Paraguay, but in the region.”

“It is a security agreement, but what also exists here is the opportunity to cooperate at the economic level, where there are many opportunities to use Paraguay’s potential so that it becomes a wealthier country,” Rubio said.

He added that Paraguayans are expected to have greater economic opportunities through cooperation with U.S. companies and interests “that are willing to invest responsibly and effectively in the economy and also help create jobs, work and sources of income for the citizens of your country.”

The United States and Paraguay have maintained decades of cooperation in areas such as security, counter-narcotics efforts, institutional strengthening and humanitarian assistance, according to official records from both governments.

Paraguay’s Foreign Ministry has said the relationship with the United States is strategic and has deepened in recent years amid a regional context marked by the advance of transnational organized crime.

The agreement signed in Washington adds to other bilateral instruments already in force and seeks to update cooperation mechanisms in response to emerging threats in South America.

Dec. 17 (UPI) — There are no legal or national security justifications for the Trump administration’s attacks on ships in the eastern Pacific and Caribbean Sea, Sen. Chris Murphy said following a bipartisan classified briefing on the strikes.

At least 95 people have been killed in 25 military strikes on ships the Trump administration accuses of being used by drug cartels and gangs designated as terrorist organizations since Sept. 2.

The strikes have drawn mounting domestic and international condemnation and questions over their legality by both Democratic and Republican lawmakers.

The administration defends the strikes as legal under both U.S. and international law, arguing the United States is at war with the drug cartels who are flooding the country with deadly substances.

State Secretary Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth held a classified briefing on the strikes with members of Congress on Tuesday, with many Democrats, including Murphy, D-Conn., calling foul.

“While I obviously can’t tell you any classified information I learned, I can tell you this: that the administration had no legal justification for these strikes, and no national justification for these strikes,” Murphy said in a video posted to his X account.

On the national security front, the administration admitted to the lawmakers that there is no fentanyl coming to the United States from Venezuela and the cocaine that is coming from Venezuela is mostly going to Europe, he said.

“And so we are spending billions of your taxpayer dollars to wage a war in the Caribbean to stop cocaine from going from Venezuela to Europe,” he said. “That is a massive waste of national security resources and of your taxpayer dollars.”

On the legal front, the administration is justifying the strikes by stating they are targeting gangs and cartels that the Trump administration has designated as terrorist organizations.

Since February, President Donald Trump has designated 10 cartels and gangs as terrorist organizations, with Clan de Golfo blacklisted on Tuesday.

Murphy said that while the president has the power to designate groups as terrorist organizations, it does not give him the ability to carry out military strikes targeting them.

“A designated ‘terrorist organization’ allows the president to impose sanctions on those organizations and individuals,” he said. “Only Congress, only the American public, can authorize war. And there’s just no question that these are acts of war.”