troops

Aug. 9 (UPI) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel rejects a U.S.-backed 15-point plan to disarm Gaza.

Last month, President Donald Trump‘s Board of Peace created the plan for the gradual disarmament of Gaza and withdrawal of Israeli troops from the territory.

But in a cabinet meeting Sunday, a readout from Netanyahu’s office from a meeting of government ministers said, “I want to be clear here — Israel is ruling out the 15-point plan.”

He said he has told the Trump administration about his concerns.

The Israeli military “will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is genuinely disarmed and will continue to thwart threats against our forces and our citizens,” Netanyahu said.

“We are now discussing this with the Americans,” he said. “They have ideas, some of which are acceptable to us and some are not, and we know how to stand up to those things.”

He reiterated his opposition to a two-state solution.

“As long as I am prime minister, no Palestinian state will be established — not in Gaza and not in the West Bank,” Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu and his coalition are facing a difficult re-election vote in late October.

“Contrary to all those who preach to us, we do what must be done for Israel’s security and we can and will stand our ground even against our best friends when necessary,” Netanyahu added.

Hamas has said that handing over its heavy weapons was contingent on Israel ending “all forms of aggression” and withdrawing from Gaza.

“We expect the mediators and the American guarantor to pressure Netanyahu and his government to adhere to the roadmap and not obstruct the process for internal political and electoral reasons,” Bassem Naim, a member of Hamas’ politburo, said on X Sunday.

Since the cease-fire last October, Israel has continued to strike Gaza.

Israel’s military occupies more than half of Gaza, and Netanyahu’s far-right allies have implied that they want to expand the control. They lauded Netanyahu’s comments.

“The [Israeli military] cannot retreat one millimeter in the Gaza Strip,” Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said.

Mexico deployed more than 1,500 troops to its main avocado-producing state after the US suspended export inspections over security concerns. The halt has frozen shipments to Mexico’s biggest market, threatening thousands of jobs and a multibillion-dollar industry.

Footage shows some of the more than 200 Bolivian police and military officers patrolling its border with Brazil. A wave of violence linked to clashes between Brazilian criminal groups fighting to control drug routes has left at least nine dead.

Europe is rearming for a new era of conflict. European Commissioner for Defence and Space Andrius Kubilius calls for a “big bang” increase in defence spending, warning the continent must be ready for a potential Russian attack by 2030. He explains how Ukraine is reshaping modern warfare, why drones, satellites and space capabilities are now as vital as tanks and troops and why Europe must achieve greater defence independence. For Kubilius, only strength can preserve peace.

Some Palestinians in Gaza and Israelis have been giving their reaction to the plan to the BBC.

Tala, an 18-year-old who has been living in a tent in Gaza since her home was destroyed in air strikes, said “every time people hear about a possible ceasefire, we hope that it will finally end”.

“But when these promises are broken, it creates more fear,” she told BBC Newsbeat.

The university student said daily life remains “very challenging”, adding: “Every day comes with a new difficulty, and we are constantly thinking about safety and basic needs.”

“What matters most is stopping the fighting, protecting civilians and setting a new chapter of re-building,” she said.

In Israel Jonny said he “prays” that the ceasefire in Gaza can work. “I don’t see an ending to this cycle, but I pray it’s the case,” he told the BBC.

Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, told CNN that Israel is “looking forward to implementing” the deal, but added: “We have to verify what they [Hamas] are doing, not what they are saying.”

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres described the proposed agreement as “the only good news in recent days”.

UK Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband said the focus must be on implementing the full 20-point peace plan, including “withdrawal of the IDF from Gaza and respect for the ceasefire by all parties”.

He added that conditions “remain appalling” in Gaza and said Israel “must immediately end the unacceptable restrictions on aid”. Israel denies it is restricting the entry of aid.

The war in Gaza was triggered by the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.

Israel responded to the attack by launching a military campaign in Gaza, during which more than 73,290 people have been killed, according to the territory’s health ministry whose figures are considered reliable by the UN.

The country that in 2008 heard then-President Hugo Chávez say, “Go to hell,  damn Yankees,” as he expelled the U.S. ambassador, today watches hundreds of U.S. soldiers patrol the streets of La Guaira, which was devastated by the two earthquakes a month ago. The soldiers distribute meager humanitarian aid in small boxes bearing U.S. flag stickers while filming for publicity spots.

The U.S. has promised $386 million to help Venezuela recover, but it and its allies continue to hold more than $22 billion in frozen Venezuelan assets. Washington’s actions demonstrate, once again, that its priority is oil, not the well-being of Venezuelans. Meanwhile, U.S. real estate developers are also visiting La Guaira, treating the devastation as yet another business opportunity.

Whole areas lie in ruins in La Guaira, where 82-year old Erminia Hernández lives. She was born in La Guaira, the coastal gateway to Venezuela that hosts the country’s main airport, and where residents of nearby Caracas go to sunbathe. She says she remembers the many tragedies that have struck this area, having lived through the 1967 earthquake, the Vargas mudslide in 1999, and the COVID-19 pandemic. However, she doesn’t remember anything as devastating as the double earthquakes of June 24. 

The 1967 quake stopped her as she was making majarete, a typical Caribbean dessert, she says. But last month’s earthquakes knocked her and her sister flat to the ground, face down in the hallway of their house, where she then knelt to pray as everything rocked violently. She says she does not remember who helped her stand up, but she is certain she will never forget the moment she thought she was about to die. 

“The 1967 earthquake was nothing compared to this,” Hernández tells Truthdig. “And during the mudslide, I only heard about one neighbor who died. But now, every day I learn about someone I know who has died or is missing. In my immediate family alone, we lost six people, and two more are hospitalized.”

She is right. In 1967, fewer than 300 people died. After the mudslide, some sources put the death toll at 700, with thousands more missing. The coronavirus claimed 5,856 lives across the entire country over several years. But these earthquakes have killed more than 5,270 people, left 16,700 injured and 18,000 displaced. The numbers rise daily. The government puts the number of rescued at 7,000 but does not mention how many are still missing. 

Jofram Gallipoli, his wife Oriana and their 4-year-old son Luciano were among those rescued. Seven floors collapsed on top of them in the Tanaguarenas neighborhood of La Guaira. They are alive today because Jofram’s father, José Alberto Gallipoli, owns a hardware store in Caracas, where he gathered crowbars, chisels, picks, a cordless drill, hacksaws and gloves so that relatives, friends, neighbors and police officers — none of them equipped with specialized rescue machinery — could dig a tunnel through the rubble.

During the 27 hours that the rescue took, Jofram Gallipoli tells Truthdig he communicated with the outside by banging an air conditioning grate with a ceramic tile every time he heard his name. 

“When we were under the rubble, we thought only our building had collapsed. Coming out was a shock. We lost all our material possessions, but we are alive, and I, who have emigrated before, want to stay here this time,” Jofram Gallipoli says.

According to official figures, nearly 200 buildings collapsed entirely and at least 900 were severely damaged. Structural engineers are now conducting inspections on thousands of homes in the seven states affected by the earthquakes. For Jofram’s father, “the physical structures fell, but we, the true architects of life, are ready to rebuild, from scratch, on a stronger foundation.”

José Alberto’s words are hopeful, but how much will this reconstruction actually cost? How will we carry it out? What intentions lie behind much of the “humanitarian aid” that countries like the U.S. are sending?

What is needed now

Preliminary assessments from the U.N. Development Program estimate direct physical damages at $6.7 billion, a figure that focuses on housing and does not include the full extent of infrastructure damage or the cost of long-term reconstruction.

The U.N. Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, meanwhile, puts the full reconstruction cost at $37 billion: $24 billion for lost buildings — homes, schools, stores and hospitals — and $13 billion for damage to critical infrastructure such as roads and power grids. That represents nearly one-third of Venezuela’s current gross domestic product.

For now, however, the country that has promised the most economic “aid” to Venezuela is the United States, with its much-publicized $386 million.

But if the Trump administration released the Venezuelan funds it continues to block via sanctions, the country would not need these handouts: 31 tons of gold — valued at roughly $4.2 billion — remain frozen in London. The international financial system, including private banks and multilateral organizations, has blocked more than $22 billion in Venezuelan assets. At the same time, Venezuelan oil revenue is now deposited into an account at the U.S. Treasury. “We … control the dispersal of the money,” U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in January.

Washington’s double standards

One day after the double earthquake, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control issued General License 60, which authorizes transactions related to humanitarian assistance in Venezuela but does not include the unfreezing of assets subject to sanctions or “any other transactions or activities prohibited by any other Executive Order.”

The United States acts this way because the architecture of punitive sanctions against Venezuela is the “legal foundation” for control over the Venezuelan oil industry, says William Serafino, a political scientist from the Central University of Venezuela. In 2017, the Trump administration imposed sanctions on Venezuela that prohibited access to U.S. financial markets, and in 2018, expanded them to block purchasing of Venezuelan debt.

“With the issuance of licenses, Washington is able to modify certain aspects of its economic and financial coercion policy, always in the interest of U.S. companies, but without altering the overall sanctions framework,” Serafino tells Truthdig. “The sanctions are what guarantees U.S. appropriation of Venezuelan resources at a clear disadvantage to Venezuela.” 

These licenses are official documents issued by the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control that allow American individuals and companies, or those with U.S. ties, to carry out very specific and limited transactions with the Venezuelan state or the state oil company PDVSA. 

Serafino says that such exemptions and the small amount of funds provided after the earthquakes are intended to “whitewash this illegal sanctions policy” in order to undermine the broad consensus across Venezuelan society in favor of lifting all measures that hinder the normal development of Venezuela’s economy. 

The U.S. has similarly just provided $100 million in aid to Cuba, after sanctioning the country since 1962. United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres says the sanctions violate international law — which U.N. human rights experts say could also be true of the Venezuela sanctions. U.N. human rights experts describe the latest trade tariffs that block oil from getting to Cuba as “an extreme form of unilateral economic coercion” that violates self determination.

Venezuelans aren’t the only ones rejecting the U.S. sanctions against their country. After the earthquakes, 13 prominent economists, including Isabella Weber, Jeffrey Sachs and James K. Galbraith, signed a letter calling for the lifting of sanctions. Likewise, the U.N.’s humanitarian chief, Tom Fletcher, warned that such coercive measures directly affect the delivery of aid and recovery plans.

“Fletcher’s statement shows that temporary exemptions are insufficient,” Serafino says, “Financial institutions, even when they theoretically have ‘permission’ from the Treasury Department to operate, are very cautious about expediting transactions related to supplies, donations and the transfer of aid funds between multilateral institutions and humanitarian organizations, due to fear of penalties and fines.”

Transactions that under normal circumstances “would take a few days,” he says, are subjected to a bureaucratic morass because of the sanctions, because “banks must constantly consult their legal departments and steer clear of red lines.”

At the same time, the United States is also using the tragedy to ramp up its military intervention in Venezuela through a “humanitarian support” operation coordinated by the U.S. Southern Command and the State Department, under the Department of Defense. That has included moving the warships USS Fort Lauderdale and USS Billings toward the coast of La Guaira, flying helicopters over devastated areas and deploying surveillance drones such as the MQ-9 Reaper.

“It is extremely serious that, taking advantage of a tragedy and under the pretext of humanitarian aid, the United States has not only taken over the country’s main airport and seaport but also deployed 900 Marines in La Guaira and 2,000 across the entire operation,” former Vice President Elias Jaua, who also held multiple Cabinet posts during the Chavez government, tells Truthdig. 

“Moreover, we have seen the mapping they have done of the entire Venezuelan coastline with drones and helicopters. This is another escalation in the military occupation,” he says, adding that the deployment also imposes strict military monitoring and de facto control over Venezuela’s skies and coastline from U.S. bases in Puerto Rico, Panama and Trinidad and Tobago.

Jaua, who now works as a university professor, says the measures openly violate Article 13 of Venezuela’s Constitution, which bars foreign military bases or installations with military purposes by any country or coalition of countries in Venezuelan maritime, air and land territory.

Asked what will happen to the U.S. military presence in Venezuelan territory once the emergency ends, Jaua only comments that “a civic, political and grassroots movement must be built to defend Venezuela’s right to remain a republic. Otherwise, it will end up as a North American [i.e. U.S.] colony annexed to the United States or a protectorate administered from the north.”

Serafino, on the other hand, questions why Washington would want to flood Venezuela with Marines and other military forces when it has already managed to gain control over the country’s resources without a large and sustained presence since Jan. 3, when it launched airstrikes on the country and seized the president.

“It seems like an unnecessary and politically contentious measure, especially with U.S. midterm elections around the corner and a strong chance [President Donald] Trump could lose them,” Serafino says. 

“I think the military presence will be limited to solidifying U.S. influence over oil and other strategic resources, mapping migration flows from the air and conducting permanent flyovers and naval patrols to signal to Russia and China that both Venezuela and the Caribbean Basin fall under Trump’s purview.”

Economic interests

But U.S. interests in Venezuela go beyond the military. Global Empowerment Mission (GEM), a company led by Miami luxury homebuilder Michael Capponi, along with other real estate developers and a network of corporate interests with ties to Trump, are already seeing the earthquakes’ devastation as a business opportunity.

While the State Department has announced that it is working with U.S. corporations including Walmart and Amazon to bolster the “humanitarian” response in Venezuela, Serafino views GEM’s presence as more important and “pervasive.” He does not rule out that Pentagon-affiliated contractors could become involved in projects to refurbish Maiquetia International Airport, the Port of La Guaira and the management of shelters.

Recent precedents such as Iraq after the 2003 U.S. invasion and Haiti after the 2010 earthquake saw Beltway contractors — defense, technology and consulting firms based in Washington, D.C. — securing big business opportunities. In Iraq, they obtained lucrative reconstruction contracts. In Haiti, the pattern repeated through the privatization of security, logistics management and international aid programs.

This aligns with complaints from social activists in La Guaira including José Félix Valera, who tells Truthdig that some contractors, mainly U.S. ones, are already demolishing and clearing land where people are still trying to recover the bodies of their relatives. 

“There have been serious confrontations because people want to recover the bodies,” Valera says. “I saw people stop a building from being demolished, and three days later they found a young man alive. Still, the contractors with machinery take advantage of the early morning hours to demolish.” 

While a desire to rebuild quickly is understandable, Valera, who apart from his activism is also a leader at community radio station Voces in La Guaira, believes other interests are at play. The demolishing is taking place at “the largest flat plots [of land] facing the Caribbean Sea in the region, and that has a lot of implications from a geopolitical standpoint but also for tourism,” he says. “For example, this is one of the best places for international events like Grand Slam tournaments or deep-sea fishing.”

“But the U.S. is also interested in the real estate possibilities,” he says.

Valera also wonders why there are so many U.S. troops in La Guaira. “Two thousand arrived, of which only 300 are rescue workers — the other 1,700 are soldiers, and at the moment they are guarding these demolition operations.”

The U.S. did not come to Venezuela alone; Israeli officials from the Israel Defense Forces’ Home Front Command are also coordinating the supposed recovery of 14 sectors of La Guaira. In fact, they have already delivered a six-phase plan for the state’s recovery to the Venezuelan government. All of this comes despite Venezuela having broken diplomatic relations with Israel 17 years ago. Over those nearly two decades, Venezuelan officials have frequently issued harsh criticism and accusations against Tel Aviv over its genocidal actions in Palestine and the region.

Yet today, the same army that has killed more than 73,000 Palestinians since 2023 is now in Venezuela, claiming to want to help recover the bodies of our dead and rebuild our homes. Many Venezuelans are deeply distrustful and worried about what such “humanitarian aid” will mean for them in coming months.

“The future of La Guaira and the practical debate over the use of this land must involve the people of La Guaira, because this is our land and our economic livelihood,” Valera says.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Venezuelanalysis editorial staff.

Source: Truthdig

July 25 (UPI) — President Donald Trump said Friday that he’s ready to continue talks with Iran or escalate fighting, but an Iranian general said it’s ready to fight.

Trump met with top advisors and cabinet members on Friday to make a decision on whether to escalate attacks on Iran, The New York Times reported. Friday night, no attacks on Iran from the United States or on U.S. military sites were reported after 13 straight nights of fighting.

The White House hasn’t said if the president decided what to do, but Trump said the military is ready for a heavier attack if Iran doesn’t want to resume talks.”Look, we’re locked and loaded,” Trump told reporters on Friday. “We’re ready to go, but we’re talking to them, so maybe there will be, maybe there won’t be a tipping point. Maybe they will cry uncle, or maybe they’ll just give up, or maybe they’ll just go into a cave and hide.”

He told reporters that Iran is getting more serious about talks to end the fighting.

“We are talking to them. I think they’re getting more and more serious as the days go by, for maybe the obvious reason, but we are talking to them right now,” Trump said Friday.

He said that Iran would “love to make a deal” but he didn’t “think they’re ready to.”

But an Iranian general pushed back Saturday, even suggesting that Tehran welcomed a ground invasion by American troops.

“Our war with the enemy is a war of attrition, one that will not end,” the official whom Iranian media named General Asadi said Saturday, CNN reported. “We ask God that the ground forces of the aggressor American army find themselves in a position where we can engage them on the ground.”

In an interview with Axios on Thursday, Trump said he was considering a “massive attack” on Iran.

“Bigger than ever before. I am close to making a decision. We are all set for it,” he said. But he said that decision would have consequences, and he hadn’t decided on it yet.

He told Axios that the Iranians “want to negotiate” but aren’t ready to make a deal.

“They haven’t received enough pain yet,” he said.

Two regional sources with knowledge of mediation efforts told Axios that Iranian leadership hasn’t accepted the latest proposal.

One of the sources said, “We are trying, but the Iranians are not being helpful.”

Two U.S. troops were killed in action and one remains missing in Jordan on Friday while defending against Iranian ballistic missile and drone attacks, U.S. Central Command announced on X. Another “four American service members were medically evacuated to Jordanian hospitals. They have since been discharged. Other personnel who were evaluated for minor injuries have returned to duty.”

“Out of respect for the families, CENTCOM is withholding additional information, including the identities of the fallen warriors, until 24 hours after the next of kin have been notified,” the command added.

CENTCOM did not say where in Jordan, however, yesterday, CBS News reported that “Iran attacked at least two Jordanian bases this week, resulting in several American service members being injured in the attack after their facility was struck.”

We noted yesterday that data from NASA’s Fire Information for Resource Management System (FIRMS) at 10:59 PM EDT indicated a fire adjacent to the runway near an area where aircraft are parked at Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan. However, TWZ cannot independently verify what happened at the base and if any equipment was destroyed or damaged and how personnel there were affected. We’ve reached out to CENTCOM for answers.

We reached out to CENTCOM for confirmation.

Video emerged on social media purporting to show attacks on the base.

Muwaffaq Salti, as we have frequently reported, has come under attack numerous times. In March, CNN obtained imagery from Planet Labs showing an AN/TPY-2 radar damaged, or even possibly destroyed, following an Iranian attack there.

The air base has long been a major regional hub for U.S. operations, and is being very actively utilized in the current conflict. It hosts the greatest concentration of U.S. tactical aircraft in the region, and thus is an extremely important target, where, as we pointed out last night, even one ballistic missile landing on an apron could destroy multiple prized aircraft and take the lives of U.S. service members or cause injuries.

Iran also hit Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia yesterday, Axios reporter Barak Ravid stated on X.

In addition, officials in Kuwait yesterday said one of the country’s power and water desalination plants “was attacked as a result of the Iranian aggression…leading to a fire and damage to the plant’s facilities and several electricity generating units.”

“The fire is now under control and repairs are ongoing,” the Kuwait government added.

The two deaths and the injuries came as the conflict between the U.S. and Iran is escalating rapidly, with each side now attacking critical infrastructure and Iran intensifying strikes on U.S. bases across the region.

Amid the fighting, “Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and International Affairs Kazem Qaribabadi stated that Tehran has suspended its commitments under the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed with Washington as United States attacks continue,” the official Fars News Agency reported.

Military and defence analyst Alex Alfirraz Scheers says the US risks falling into an ‘escalation trap’ if it launches a ground assault in Iran because Tehran still retains a large number of ballistic missiles.

U.S. Navy sailor Chase Humes is moving back to his dad’s house in Texas.

Last month, the 25-year-old was notified that his “voluntary separation” from the Navy, which he’d applied for in May 2025, had been approved — he would be released from service. He and his wife must be out of their military housing in San Diego by mid-July.
Humes, a transgender man who’s been taking testosterone for seven years, was among at least 1,000 service members who chose to leave on their own terms rather than face involuntary separation following the military’s February 2025 ban on transgender service members. By choosing a voluntary separation, he’s been approved for an “honorable discharge,” which preserves access to benefits like Veterans Affairs healthcare that others worry they might not have access to.
Humes is one of about 4,200 transgender service members the Department of Defense estimates have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria and could be subject to the policy. Advocates say the transgender service member population could exceed 15,000, according to a UCLA study from 2014.
A new California bill, Assembly Bill 1775, is intended to assist people who don’t have the certainty of Humes’s honorable discharge and worry about their future prospects if they were forced out of the military. Proponents say the bill, by San Diego Democratic Assemblymember Chris Ward, could help people who are given less than honorable discharge for hiding their transgender identity by helping them restore access to services.

In the meantime, service members like Humes are scouting their next move. The sailor and his wife have been searching for jobs near his dad’s house outside Houston. They can’t afford to start their life in San Diego, despite having fallen in love with the city’s accepting atmosphere.
“The whole reason I joined was for a better future for myself and my family, and it just got torn away,” Humes said of the separation.

Over a year in limbo

Among the flurry of executive orders President Trump issued at the start of his second term was the Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness order.

It rescinded President Biden’s policy permitting transgender people to openly serve in the forces, and asserted that gender dysphoria and using pronouns different than one’s biological sex at birth were inconsistent with the country’s “high standards for troop readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity.”

What followed the Jan. 27, 2025 order was a series of legal challenges, some of which are still ongoing. Last month, a federal appeals court ruled that Trump’s ban on transgender people in the military was likely unconstitutional, allowing a group of 28 plaintiffs from across the country to continue serving while their case proceeds.
Transgender troops were faced last spring with the choice of either voluntarily leaving the military, and in some cases receiving separation pay, or saying nothing and hoping they were not found out and “involuntarily separated” from the forces.

Humes is choosing to voluntarily leave the Navy after the Trump administration announced a policy banning transgender troops.

(Adriana Heldiz / CalMatters)

Kat Koehlmoos, who was in active duty for eight years and is now in an inactive Army Reserve status, said the military chain of command does not know she is transgender.
“Anyone could use my testimony today to report me to the Army Reserves here, and they would be required to take action to involuntarily discharge me from the U.S. military,” she told lawmakers during a hearing on the legislation last month.
Koehlmoos is a board member for SPARTA Pride, which advocates for transgender service members and co-sponsored the legislation. She said the bill came about in part because supporters are concerned the federal government might replicate the actions it took during its “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, which allowed gay, lesbian and bisexual troops to serve if they concealed their sexual orientation. Some 2,000 troops were given less than honorable discharges in connection to the policy, and were shut out of some veterans’ benefits, according to a class-action lawsuit that was settled in 2025.

Koehlmoos said the group anticipates some people who are “involuntarily separated” under the 2025 transgender ban will be punished by the Department of Defense for not complying with the law.

“They may pursue other charges: accusing them of falsifying records or lying on federal documents, and attempt to get them a less than honorable discharge because of that,” she said, although SPARTA Pride does not know of any such cases so far.
If that happened in California, Ward’s bill would help those people qualify for expedited professional licensing in civilian careers like contracting and nursing and prioritize them for discharge upgrades as well as housing and support services.

Ward said he believes the benefits of all service members should be secured, whether they leave voluntarily or involuntarily.

“They have served honorably, and this was a separation that was involuntary, and they would deserve the full benefits that they otherwise would have been due had they been cisgender,” he said.

Unknown number affected

It’s unclear how many people could be affected by the legislation. Ward has repeatedly told fellow lawmakers that 2,900 of the federal government’s estimated 4,200 transgender troops — 69% — are either from California or are currently stationed in California. In an emailed statement in response to a question from CalMatters, Ward said the figures were mistakenly adopted after conversations with veterans’ advocates, and he would no longer use them to describe the number of affected California service members.
The bill would also require the state’s Department of Veterans Affairs to create a new housing and supportive services grant for veterans, which Ward said would fill a gap in existing housing support for veterans experiencing imminent homelessness. But the budget Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Monday does not include funding for that program.
Instead, it directs $2 million toward the state’s existing Veteran’s Military Discharge Upgrade Grant Program, which provides legal assistance for veterans fighting for a discharge upgrade.
As Humes prepares to leave San Diego, Ward’s bill is still pending in Sacramento. The legislation has cleared policy committees in both houses and awaits a hearing in the Senate appropriations committee.
Koehlmoos said the moment is stressful for most transgender troops — those being removed voluntarily, who have few options; the people who haven’t notified the chain of command, who may be living in fear; and the service members who will delay their transition, or never transition, because of the federal government’s ban on transgender troops.

“For me that’s heartbreaking, because that really is putting your life on hold,” she said.

Kate Wolffe writes for CalMatters.

June 18 (UPI) — Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., introduced a bill Thursday called the Protect Our Polls Act that would block the president from sending soldiers or federal agents to voting sites during elections.

The bill comes after President Donald Trump said he wouldn’t rule out sending the National Guard or Immigrations and Customs Enforcement to polling places in November.

“I’d do anything necessary to make sure we have honest elections,” The Hill reported Trump told reporters in May.

Slotkin said the bill would prevent Trump from “weaponizing our military and armed federal officers to interfere in our elections.”

The legislation, if passed, would require approval from Congress before a president could send uniformed military or federal law enforcement to polling sites. It would also require 48 hours’ notice to lawmakers, intel, legal justification and evidence that proves a state can’t handle a threat on its own.

The bill is backed by senators Tammy Baldwin, Wis.; Ruben Gallego, Ariz.; Mark Kelly, Ariz.; Amy Klobuchar, Minn.; Alex Padilla, Calif.; Jacky Rosen, Nev.; and Raphael Warnock, Ga.

In a statement, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson told NBC, “If Democrats really cared about securing our elections, they would pass the SAVE America Act which includes commonsense election integrity measures supported by the vast majority of Americans.”

Federal and state laws already ban deployment of troops and agents from elections, except “to repel armed enemies of the United States.”

“The idea that a president would send troops or armed agents to polling places to intimidate voters is un-American and illegal,” Kelly said in a statement. “Federal law has protected polling places from military interference since the Civil War for a reason. President Trump has made clear he thinks he can ignore those limits. We’re making sure he can’t.”

Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin said in March that he wouldn’t send agents to polling places without good reason.

“The only reason why my officers would be there is if there was a specific threat for them to be there, not for intimidation,” Mullin said. “There will be a reason for us to be there, and it’ll be known why we’re there.”

It was midnight on April 12 when Modu Baluye woke to the sound of gunfire.

He was asleep with his family inside a classroom at Government Girls’ Secondary School (GGSS), in Monguno, Borno’s north, in northeastern Nigeria, which now serves as a temporary displacement camp, when the first shots rang out. Then came another burst, and another, cutting through the night in rapid succession.

“These people are attacking again,” he remembered saying.

He whispered a prayer and stayed awake. Around him, other displaced families were stirring as well. In the darkness, people listened without speaking, measuring the distance of the violence by the sound of the guns. The attack went on for hours.

By Modu’s account, the gunshots lasted about four hours. He later learned it was a gun battle between terrorists and military officers at the nearby Sector 3 base. As the troops pursued the terrorists along the exit route between Gana Ali, another displacement shelter, and the GGSS, they drove over buried explosives, which detonated and killed the commanding officer and six other soldiers.

By morning, fear had settled over the communities.

The military, residents said, became suspicious of the settlements around the base. The attackers had entered on foot under the cover of darkness, and the communities were not far from the military formation.

“They suspected we were hiding some of them,” Modu said. In the days that followed, soldiers raided Gana Ali and the GGSS camp. Residents told HumAngle that five suspected informants in the communities were arrested, and weapons were recovered. Then came an order for the communities to leave.

“They told us: leave or we will kill you all and burn down your houses,” Modu recounted. Within two days, families began dismantling their makeshift shelters. They packed what they could carry and left. Some were moved to a government settlement on the outskirts of Monguno, along the Monguno-Gajiram road, which is about a 30-minute walk from town.

“It is two weeks today,” Modu said when he spoke to HumAngle on May 10. “The place was torched after we left. I am not sure who torched the buildings.”

For Modu, displacement is not new. He fled Ala, his village in the Marte Local Government Area (LGA) of the state, in 2016 as insurgent violence spread across northern Borno. At the time, he was unmarried and found refuge with his parents at the ‘Water Board’ displacement camp in Monguno, where they lived for about six months. He later moved to the GGSS settlement after securing his own shelter and spent nearly a decade there. In 2024, he got married. By the time soldiers ordered residents to leave the community in April, he had begun building a mud house on a piece of land he purchased the previous year. It was there, in the unfinished house, that he and his family began rebuilding their lives after years of displacement.

A war returning to the bases

The Monguno attack came during a renewed wave of terror assaults on military formations and rural settlements across Borno.

In recent months, terrorists from Jama’atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda’awati wal-Jihad (JAS), commonly known as Boko Haram, and the Islamic State West Africa (ISWAP) have repeatedly targeted troops, bases, weapons, and supply routes. The attacks have killed soldiers, including senior military officers, and Civilian Joint Task Force (CJTF) members. 

In Nov. 2025, terrorists ambushed a military convoy along the Damboa-Biu road. Two soldiers and two CJTF members were killed. Brigadier-General M. Uba, commander of the 25 Task Force Brigade, was abducted and later killed.

On Jan. 26, terrorists attacked a military base in Damasak, killing seven soldiers and capturing 13 others, including the commanding officer. Eleven later escaped. Five days later, on Jan. 31, another terror attack on an army base in Sabon Gari killed nine soldiers and two CJTF members; about 16 injured security personnel were evacuated for treatment.

On March 10, a military base in Kukawa came under attack; the commanding officer, Lt. Col. Umar Farouq, and several of his soldiers were killed. 

On April 9, three days before the Monguno attack, terrorists launched a joint assault on the headquarters of the 29 Task Force Brigade in Benisheikh, killing its brigade commander, Brigadier-General Oseni Braimah.

The attacks have already weakened the military formations in rural areas. In some places, troops have withdrawn or consolidated around larger garrison towns, leaving smaller settlements more exposed. But when soldiers are killed, residents say the anger does not end on the battlefield. It returns with the troops.

The trails of suspicion

In rural Borno, civilians are often trapped between two armed powers. Terrorists demand information about troop movements, military positions, and security operations. Soldiers, in turn, demand information about insurgent hideouts, movements, and informants. Refusing either side can be deadly.

Those suspected of helping the military may be abducted or killed by the terrorists. Those suspected of helping terrorists may be arrested, detained, displaced, or punished by security forces. As a result, civilians often face impossible choices, with serious consequences regardless of whom they cooperate with.

Despite these risks, communities have at times provided intelligence to the military. In March, for example, residents of Doro, a rural community in Kukawa LGA on the shores of Lake Chad, reportedly alerted troops after observing suspicious insurgent movements, helping security forces prepare for an attack.

The consequences of such actions can be severe. In March 2022, ISWAP executed four civilians in communities within the same local government area after accusing them of spying for government troops. Residents said the killings were intended to deter others from sharing information with security forces. For many civilians, the message was clear: speaking to the military could carry a death sentence. 

The Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), Gen. Olufemi Oluyede, recently argued that residents in Borno and Yobe knew some of those behind the attacks during an operational visit to Maiduguri in March, reflecting a long-held security assumption that residents in affected communities often know more than they admit. The CDS said communities must take ownership of the crisis, citing Kukawa, where he claimed two of the attackers were from within the village.

But for many civilians, knowing does not mean consenting. They say  in places where terrorists move freely, buy food, collect supplies, and threaten residents, silence is often a currency for survival.

Professor Abubakar Mu’azu, former director of the Centre for Peace, Development, and Diplomatic Studies at the University of Maiduguri, said this suspicion has existed since the early years of the insurgency.

“Right from the start, there was suspicion by the security agencies that the people who are living in areas where these terrorist activities were happening are also supporting the terrorists,” he said. “They never considered the fact that there is a majority of people who disagree with these terrorists’ activities.”

Mu’azu said the reactionary nature of security operations has prevented the military from building a reliable system of trust with local communities.

“They assume that the locals are giving information to the terrorists willingly,” he said. “But they keep saying they want the people to give them information about the terrorists.”

For him, this contradiction is at the heart of the crisis.

The military needs civilian intelligence to fight terrorism, but if civilians fear that any contact with terrorists, even under duress, will be treated as collaboration, they may stop speaking altogether.

Life under duress

In Monguno, residents say terrorists still move in and out of town despite the presence of security forces.

Koso Abubakar, a displaced farmer, said the terrorists often enter on motorcycles, buy food items, and leave.

“They come and leave at will,” he said. “Sometimes, they come to kidnap people. They don’t attack the military, and the military does not confront them. But on other days, they attack the military. That is when the military retaliates.”

According to Koso, most residents live with the knowledge that they can be accused by either side at any time.

“People are living in fear because everyone is a potential target,” he said.

In many rural communities, even work has become dangerous. A farmer going to his field, a fisher heading towards the water, or a trader moving goods through bush paths may first have to pay those who control the routes. The payments are called taxes, levies, or sometimes simply “settlement”, but residents understand what they are: money paid under fear. To refuse is to risk punishment, in lighter cases, or killing and abduction, in extreme cases, from terrorists. To pay is to risk being seen by soldiers as someone sustaining the insurgency. In this way, even the small acts people perform to feed their families can become evidence against them.

Professor Mu’azu said this fear terrorists use violence to discipline communities.

“They are very good at setting a very deadly example by killing or eliminating people, with or without evidence,” he said. “If they are attacked by security agencies and they did not hear anything from people living in these settlements, they would assume the people gave information about their positions.”

This was what many residents believe happened in Ngoshe in March, when terrorists attacked the community, killed many residents, and abducted others, including women and children. The attack was suspected to be retaliation for a previous military operation in the Mandara Mountains that killed some terrorist commanders. The terrorists reportedly believed residents had given up their location.

For civilians, the lesson is brutal: giving information can kill you. Not giving information can also kill you.

When protection becomes punishment

The military has long accused some civilians of aiding terrorists.  In the early years of the war, many young men were arbitrarily detained. Some disappeared. Some were killed. In April 2014, soldiers arrested 42 adult men from Gallari, a village in the Konduga LGA of Borno, on suspicion of links to the insurgency. They were taken to the Giwa Barracks detention facility in Maiduguri. Twelve years later, only three have regained their freedom after years in detention and alleged torture. Through months of on-the-ground investigation and analysis of satellite imagery, HumAngle has also previously reported on disappearances and mass graves linked to military operations, while the wives of detained and disappeared men later formed the Knifar Women movement to demand justice.

For communities already carrying the memory of those years, new raids and forced evacuations reopen old wounds.

Mu’azu said security forces should approach communities with more care, especially when allegations of collaboration arise.

“One would assume that when security forces are dealing with situations like this, they would not come with the mindset that the people are sympathetic to the terrorists, or that all the people are giving information to the terrorists,” he said.

He added that soldiers have a difficult job and deserve sympathy for the burden they carry. But he argued that this does not justify indiscriminate punishment.

“They are the ones who are supposed to protect the civilians,” he said. “If there are people they suspect, they should arrest them and hand them over to the police for proper investigation, without compromising the little support they have in the community.”

When communities are burned or displaced after attacks, the consequences go beyond the immediate loss of shelter. Food stocks disappear. Children are pulled out of school. Families scatter. People who had already fled violence once are forced to flee again.

In resettled or displaced communities, where people have spent years coping, another displacement can mean the collapse of everything they had slowly rebuilt.

A dangerous silence

After the Monguno raid, Koso said some residents became so afraid of the military that they fled into the bush.

“Many people, about 30, also left for the bush,” he said. “Most of them fear the military. The military does not trust them.”

Mu’azu warned that this kind of fear can damage counterterrorism efforts.

“They will lose trust, respect, and block chances of receiving information,” he said. “This could also push them to be recruited by the terrorists.”

For Mu’azu, the solution is not to abandon intelligence work, but to make it safer and more systematic. He said the military should cultivate trusted informants within communities, create secure channels of communication, and protect residents when terrorists retaliate.

“This is the gap,” he said. “Oftentimes, communities are attacked after successful military operations. The patterns should be studied. They should do a statistical analysis. They should be mindful of the time and be prepared against such actions.”

He also called for stronger collaboration among the military, DSS, police, civil defence, and intelligence agencies in neighbouring countries such as Cameroon, Chad, and Niger, because terrorists move across borders.

But for Modu and others displaced from Gana Ali and the GGSS, these policy questions remain distant. What they know is simpler: they fled one danger and met another. They were told to leave the place they had made into a home. Then they watched, or heard, that what remained had been burned.

In Borno’s war, civilians are often asked to prove their loyalty to the state while surviving under the shadow of terrorists, and in that narrow space between fear and suspicion, many are losing everything.

New law grants president power to use military to clear roadblocks set up amid weeks of anti-government demonstrations.

Bolivia’s legislature has passed a law granting President Rodrigo Paz the authority to use the military to clear roadblocks set up by antigovernment protesters.

The legislation passed in Bolivia’s Chamber of Deputies on Sunday following an overnight debate. It had previously been approved by the Senate and was expected to be signed into law by Paz.

“This law is hereby passed,” announced Roberto Castro, President of the Chamber of Deputies.

The military has so far only been used in support roles for anti-riot police during weeks of demonstrations calling for Paz, the centre-right leader backed by the US, to step down.

About 100 roadblocks have been set up across the country in recent weeks. Authorities have said the road blockades have led to food and medicine shortages.

On Saturday, dozens of riot police backed by military vehicles fired tear gas as they attempted to clear a road in the town of San Julian.

Protesters threw stones and burned tyres to try to halt the police advance, said an AFP reporter at the scene.

The new law would allow soldiers to use force against protesters, and also grants them a “presumption of legality” in conflict situations. That means their actions will be deemed lawful unless proven otherwise.

It comes after Bolivia’s legislature voted last month to repeal a 2020 law that restricts the use of the military to crack down on protests.

Farmers, miners and transportation unions have been among those leading the protests. The demonstrations come amid widespread unrest over rising inflation, low wages and Paz’s move to abolish fuel subsidies.

Paz, who was elected last year, has charted a course as a pro-business leader, vowing to guide the country through an ongoing economic crisis.

He has received the backing of the US, with the administration of the US President Donald Trump’s so-called “Shield of the Americas” regional coalition vowing support during protests..

“We stand with Paz’s democratic government as it fights back against attempts to drag Bolivia backwards through cynical efforts to prevent the delivery of food, medicine and other vital supplies to the Bolivian people through fake road blockades,” said the alliance members, who have vowed to take a militaristic response to crime in Latin America

WASHINGTON — A Trump administration policy illegally banned transgender troops from military service, a divided panel of federal appeal court judges ruled on Monday.

The majority opinion by a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit largely upholds a March 2025 ruling by U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes in Washington, D.C. Reyes concluded that President Trump’s executive order to exclude transgender troops from military service likely violates their constitutional rights.

The administration appealed after Reyes issued a preliminary injunction requested by attorneys for six transgender people who are active-duty service members and two others seeking to join the military. The appeal court’s majority decided that the injunction should be narrowed to the plaintiffs currently serving in the military but not those seeking to join.

The ruling won’t immediately go into effect, allowing the administration time to ask the full appeals court to hear the case.

The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the transgender military ban to go into effect last year, as litigation continues to play out. Another lawsuit challenging the ban was filed in Washington state and led to a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs challenging the policy in that case.

In January 2025, Trump signed an executive order that claims the sexual identity of transgender service members “conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life” and is harmful to military readiness.

In response to the order, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a policy that presumptively disqualifies people with gender dysphoria from military service. Gender dysphoria is the distress that a person feels because their assigned gender and gender identity don’t match. The medical condition has been linked to depression and suicidal thoughts.

The policy “appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender,” Judge Robert Wilkins wrote for the majority. Wilkins was nominated to the court by Democratic President Obama.

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Justin Walker said judges lack the power to second-guess the decision to exclude transgender troops.

“We have neither the expertise nor the authority to decide whether the military can exclude the plaintiffs from its ranks. The Constitution assigns that authority to Congress and the Commander in Chief,” wrote Walker, who was nominated by Trump, a Republican.

Judge Judith Rogers, who was nominated by Democratic President Clinton, joined Wilkins’ opinion but also partially dissented.

Kunzelman and Whitehurst write for the Associated Press.

For more than 2,000 years, fishermen in Israel’s Sea of Galilee were famous for using nets to catch St. Peter’s Fish, a form of tilapia with a biblical backstory. Now these anglers have gained new notoriety, helping keep some Israeli troops safe from Hezbollah first-person view (FPV) kamikaze drones. TWZ was among the first to highlight the danger these weapons have posed to Israeli forces in southern Lebanon and how the IDF was racing to install passive defenses, including nets, on its combat vehicles for protection.

The threat is so great and countermeasures so far limited, that some IDF troops are resorting to obtaining nets on their own from fishermen for protection, a senior IDF official confirmed to TWZ on Monday. The issue was first reported by Israel’s KAN public broadcasting network. This is in addition to netting the IDF itself is working to procure, which we will talk more about later in this story.

“Indeed, IDF soldiers are equipping themselves with fishing nets, most of which are being purchased in the city of Tiberias on the shores of the Sea of Galilee,” a senior IDF official told us. The troops are also buying nets from fishermen at Akko and Haifa on the Mediterranean, the official added.

“The drone threat has become a nightmare for the fighters on the ground,” the high-ranking official explained.

Fishing on the Sea of Galilee! Joshua Aaron / Rather Be in the Galilee

In our past reporting, we explained that the idea behind netting is that drones will get caught up in these barriers and become disabled, or, in some cases, the nets will help keep the drones far enough from the troops or equipment before exploding to keep personnel within the vehicles from being killed.

Israel, as we have previously noted, started using netting on vehicles and other equipment as the FPV threat grew.

You can see one example of this in the following video.

The use of nets as a defensive measure was first employed in Ukraine as FPV drones became the ubiquitous weapon of choice for both sides.

You can see an early example of Russians using netting in the video below.

In our initial stories about Hezbollah’s FPV arsenal, we noted that the Iranian-backed proxy group was adding a challenge to the IDF by increasing the percentage of FPV drones guided by fiber optic cables. These wires mitigate the effect of electronic warfare efforts to jam radio signals as well as some of the limitations imposed by geographical features that can impede the line-of-sight radio connection between drone and operator.

Videos of these attacks began to emerge online last month, which you can see below.

Now there’s a new problem for Israel to solve when it comes to FPV drones. Hezbollah has begun using thermal cameras on these munitions so they can be deployed in night attacks, the IDF official told us. Thermal cameras register heat signatures, turning them into thermal images using differences in temperature.

By adding thermal cameras to the FPV drone, Hezbollah “severely restricts [our] movement both during the day and at night,” he postulated.

Combined with fiber-optic guidance, the use of thermal cameras on FPV drones “creates an extraordinary level of deterrence against the forces operating inside Lebanon and along the border,” the senior IDF official bemoaned. “It is terrifying, dangerous, and frightening in equal measure.”

“The forces are essentially static,” the official added. “They cannot advance toward the drone-launch areas, nor can they effectively target the drone logistics and operational chain extending through the Beqaa Valley, Tyre, Sidon, and even Beirut.”

“Our operational doctrine must change,” he added. “We need to shift from completely exposed operations, where our soldiers become easy targets for Hezbollah, to covert and concealed activity.”

Making matters worse, “the political-security cabinet, and more specifically [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu, is pushing for overt operations in order to demonstrate an Israeli presence in southern Lebanon,” the senior IDF official posited. “At the same time, due to commitments and demands made by [U.S. President Donald] Trump, the operational freedom of the forces is being heavily restricted. It is a classic Catch-22 situation.”

“The result is severe harm to our soldiers and a weakening of the IDF against an enemy that is bound by no rules or constraints,” our source continued. “This is a dangerous and absurd asymmetry – sheer recklessness.”

His comments came a day before Netanyahu officially ordered a much larger Israeli push into southern Lebanon, despite the ongoing ceasefire, which you can read more about in our story from earlier today here.

The IDF says about 158,000 square meters of protective nets have already been distributed to units in the field, Israel’s I24 News reported.

“The army says it is in the process of acquiring an additional roughly two million square feet of netting,” the outlet added. “Altogether, the total area ordered is equivalent to roughly 20 football fields, highlighting the scale of Israel’s efforts to adapt its defenses to a rapidly evolving battlefield threat along the northern front.”

Even that much netting does not appear to be enough, given the scope of Israel’s push into southern Lebanon. That may be way some soldiers are looking to fishing nets to fill in the gaps.

Since the war in Ukraine began, troops have done whatever they could, often out of desperation, to develop improvised workarounds to protect against drones, from stacking logs on their vehicles to welding on layers of steel to create so-called “turtle tanks.” These and many other ad-hoc improvements have led to major innovations and a long list of dead-ends. Often times, even simple solutions can be hard to realize due to bureaucracy. Israel’s troops are no different, and their work to find their own solutions is yet another example of even the world’s most capable militaries underestimating and being unprepared for the realities of drones on the modern battlefield.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

US President Donald Trump has announced that the United States will send an additional 5,000 troops to Poland, a surprise move that has deepened uncertainty about Washington’s military posture in Europe.

In a post on his Truth Social platform on Thursday, Trump linked the decision directly to his relationship with Poland’s right-wing President Karol Nawrocki.

“Based on the successful Election of the now President ⁠of Poland, Karol Nawrocki, who I was proud to Endorse, and our relationship with him, I am pleased to announce that the United States will be sending an additional 5,000 Troops to Poland,” Trump wrote.

But the move comes just days after the Pentagon cancelled the deployment of about 4,000 troops to Poland as part of a wider reduction of US forces in Europe.

The abrupt reversal has fuelled questions about what exactly Trump has ordered – and whether the deployment is driven by military strategy with Europe, or by the US president’s increasingly transactional approach to alliances.

What has Trump ordered and which troops are involved?

While Trump described the move as a new deployment, reports from US media suggest the announcement may actually amount to a reversal of an earlier Pentagon decision.

Last week, the Pentagon abruptly halted the deployment of the 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team of the 1st Cavalry Division – a Texas-based unit of more than 4,000 troops that had been preparing to rotate into Poland and Eastern Europe.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Trump later questioned Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth about why the deployment had been cancelled, telling him the US should not “treat Poland poorly” given its close ties to Washington.

Several reports said some parts of the brigade – known as the “Black Jack Brigade” – had already begun moving equipment and personnel when the deployment was stopped.

The Pentagon has not confirmed whether Trump’s newly announced 5,000 troops are the same soldiers whose deployment was cancelled earlier this month, or whether they will be redeployed from elsewhere in Europe, such as from Germany.

The White House and Pentagon have so far released few other details about this latest deployment.

Poland currently hosts about 10,000 US troops, largely on a rotational basis, according to the Polish government. Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the country has become one of Washington’s most important military partners on NATO’s eastern edge and a key hub for Western military aid to Kyiv.

In 2020, Poland and the US signed the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, expanding military cooperation and helping to formalise a longer-term American military presence in the country.

How has Poland responded?

Nawrocki welcomed Trump’s announcement, calling the Polish-American alliance “a vital pillar of security for every Polish home and for all of Europe”.

“Good alliances are those based on cooperation, mutual respect, and a commitment to our shared security,” he wrote on social media.

Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski also welcomed the news, saying the deployment would ensure that “the presence of American troops in Poland will be maintained more or less at previous levels”.

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul also welcomed the move.

“It serves not only for Poland’s security, but for the security of the whole alliance and so also for us,” he told reporters. “So, this is absolutely in our interest.”

Why is Trump doing this?

The announcement appears to mark a sharp reversal from recent signals that the Trump administration was preparing to reduce the US military’s footprint in Europe.

Earlier this month, Washington announced plans to withdraw 5,000 troops from Germany after a public row between Trump and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz over the US-Israeli war on Iran. Trump later suggested the cuts could go even further.

At the same time, Trump has repeatedly accused European NATO allies of failing to spend enough on defence and of not doing enough to support US policy in the Middle East.

Analysts say the decision over Poland also reflects Trump’s increasingly transactional approach to alliances – punishing governments he sees as hostile or unhelpful while rewarding leaders and countries more closely aligned with his brand of right-wing politics.

Germany and Spain have both faced criticism from Trump administration officials in recent weeks over their positions on Iran and defence spending, while Poland’s nationalist government has cultivated close ties with Trump and the wider MAGA movement.

Before meeting NATO counterparts in Sweden, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said: “Like any alliance, it ⁠has to be good ⁠for everyone who’s involved. There has to be a clear ⁠understanding of what the expectations are.”

“The president’s views, frankly disappointment, at some of our NATO allies and their response to our operations in the Middle East – they’re well documented – that will have to be addressed,” Rubio added. “That won’t be solved or addressed today.”

Poland, by contrast, has emerged as one of NATO’s highest defence spenders, allocating about 4.5 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) to defence. It has also remained one of Ukraine’s strongest backers and has consistently pushed for a larger US military presence on its territory.

The deployment, therefore, appears both strategic and political – reinforcing NATO’s eastern flank while rewarding one of Trump’s closest allies in Europe at a time when he is openly questioning relationships with other partners on the continent.

But the confusion surrounding the announcement has also highlighted a broader uncertainty hanging over Washington’s Europe policy, with allies still trying to determine whether the administration is reducing its commitment to NATO overall, or simply reshaping it around governments Trump sees as more loyal.

United States President Donald Trump has announced plans to deploy an additional 5,000 troops to Poland.

Trump announced the surprise deployment on social media late on Thursday, citing his friendship with right-wing Polish President Karol Nawrocki.

The move came days after a planned deployment to Poland was apparently scrapped and will deepen uncertainty surrounding the Trump administration’s approach to NATO allies and its long-term commitment to maintaining a military presence in Europe. It leaves European partners increasingly unclear about which areas they should prioritise as they formulate defence strategies.

“Based on the successful Election of the now President ⁠of Poland, Karol Nawrocki, who I was proud to Endorse, and our relationship with him, I am pleased to announce that the United States will be sending an additional 5,000 Troops to Poland,” Trump wrote.

Nawrocki welcomed the announcement on social media.

“Good alliances are those based on cooperation, mutual respect, and a commitment to our shared ‌security,” he wrote on Thursday evening.

Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski also welcomed the news on Friday, saying it ensures that “the presence of American troops in Poland will be maintained more or less at previous levels”.

About-face

The announced deployment is a sudden about-face from US declarations of plans to reduce military support to Europe under Trump’s “America First” doctrine.

The US president has for years been lambasting European NATO partners for failing to spend enough on defence. His opprobrium has risen in recent weeks as European states have criticised the US-Israeli war on Iran and refused to join the conflict.

The Pentagon abruptly announced a week ago that it was scrapping the planned deployment of 4,000 troops to Poland.

Earlier this month, Trump announced he was withdrawing 5,000 troops from Germany following a spat with Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who said Washington had been “humiliated” by Iranian negotiators.

The US president later said that he would be “cutting a lot further than 5,000”.

Polish officials have noted that Warsaw pays significant sums towards the cost of US troop deployments. The suggestion of a pullback has caused concern over security in Poland and elsewhere in Europe, as Russia’s war on neighbouring Ukraine continues, with the Trump administration largely ceasing efforts to mediate a ceasefire.

European states report that they are getting to grips with the need to replace US defence capabilities, albeit slowly. However, sources suggest that the erratic policies emerging from the White House are creating confusion over which elements should be prioritised.

“It is confusing indeed, and not always easy to navigate,” Swedish Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard told reporters ahead of hosting a meeting of NATO foreign ministers on Friday, which will be attended by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

US defence officials are also confused, according to the AP news agency.

“We just spent the better part of two weeks reacting to the first announcement. We don’t know what this means either,” said one official.

‘America First’

The US president has lashed out at fellow NATO members in recent months for failing to support the US-Israeli war on Iran, suggesting Washington could withdraw from the military alliance as a result.

State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said Rubio would discuss the need for NATO allies to increase defence spending and shoulder greater responsibility at Friday’s meeting of NATO foreign ministers.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, who has worked hard in recent months to attempt to soothe the US president’s displeasure with his alliance peers, welcomed Trump’s deployment to Poland and cautioned that Europe must become less reliant on the US.

Rubio said before meeting his NATO counterparts in Sweden: “Like any alliance, it ⁠has to be good ⁠for everyone who’s involved. There has to be a clear ⁠understanding of what the expectations are.” ⁠

He also suggested, however, that the meeting is likely to prove less than comfortable.

“The president’s views, frankly disappointment, at some of our NATO allies and their response to our operations in the Middle East – they’re well documented – that will have to be addressed,” he insisted, before adding “that won’t be solved or addressed today”.

While Rubio meets with NATO counterparts, senior Pentagon officials will brief partners at the alliance’s headquarters in Brussels about Washington’s commitment to European defence.

On Tuesday, the Pentagon announced it plans to reduce the number of combat brigades based in Europe from four to three.

Many of Washington’s allies in Europe remain frustrated with Trump’s handling of the war with Iran, which has damaged their economies and prompted some European leaders to question the reliability of the US.

European NATO countries also remain concerned about Trump’s threats to annex Greenland, which is an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark, a NATO ally.

It remains unclear whether the deployment to Poland announced on Thursday includes the same soldiers as those the Pentagon said would no longer be deployed to the Central European country, or if they will include redeployments from Germany.