united states

Washington, DC – Requests for legal support related to pro-Palestine advocacy remained high in the United States last year, as President Donald Trump threatened activists and universities with penalties.

In an annual report released on Tuesday, Palestine Legal, an organisation that “supports the movement for Palestinian freedom in the US”, said it received 1,131 queries for legal support in 2025.

The figure is below the record 2,184 requests the group received in 2024, when pro-Palestine protests swept US campuses — and were regularly met with crackdowns from both school administrators and law enforcement.

Despite universities enacting new restrictions on protests across the country, the figures from 2025 show that pro-Palestine advocacy has persisted, according to Dima Khalidi, the executive director of Palestine Legal.

“Our 2025 year-end report shows that while universities have largely cowered and caved to coercive pressure from the Trump administration and its pro-Israel supporters, student activists for Palestinian and collective freedom remain a model of moral conviction and courage,” Khalidi said.

“Even when facing punitive consequences for speaking out, they are holding the line of dissent against injustice from the US to Palestine, because they understand the cost of surrender for all of us.”

Palestine Legal said that the “overwhelming majority of requests” for legal support came from university students and faculty in 2025, but a growing number, 122, were categorised as “immigration and border-related”.

The group received 851 requests from people or organisations targeted for their Palestine-related advocacy, as well as 280 more asking for legal guidance on conducting advocacy.

Despite the drop from 2024, the rate of complaints last year remained 300 percent higher than in 2022, the year before Israel began its genocidal war in Gaza on October 7, 2023.

Since then, at least 72,560 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza.

Pressure campaigns

In 2024, Trump campaigned for a second term in the White House in part on a pledge to crack down on the pro-Palestinian protest movement, which sought to shine a light on the human rights abuses unfolding during the war.

He has framed such protests as anti-Semitic, and since his inauguration in 2025, he has led a campaign to penalise schools that played host to pro-Palestinian activism.

To date, five universities have struck deals with Trump after he threatened to withhold billions in federal funding. They include Columbia University, where a pro-Palestine encampment and resulting police crackdown drew international attention.

Columbia eventually reached a $200m settlement with the Trump administration and moved to make several policy changes it said were aimed at combatting anti-Semitism.

Rights groups have condemned such policies as conflating pro-Palestine advocacy with anti-Jewish sentiment. They also warn that Trump’s actions risk dampening free speech, a protected right under the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

All told, nearly 80 of the students who took part in Columbia’s protests faced serious academic discipline, including expulsions, suspensions, and degree revocations, as of July 2025.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration used immigration enforcement to target pro-Palestine protesters and advocates, including scholars like Rumeysa Ozturk, Mohsen Mahdawi, Badar Khan Suri and Mahmoud Khalil.

To date, the deportation proceedings against Ozturk, who was in the US on a student visa, and Mahdawi, a US permanent resident detained at his citizenship hearing, have been abandoned.

Ozturk has since voluntarily returned to her native Turkiye after completing her doctoral studies at Tufts University.

The government is still proceeding with deportation efforts against Khan Suri, a Georgetown University researcher, and Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University graduate and permanent US resident.

Separately, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) raided five homes connected to pro-Palestine activists at the University of Michigan in April 2025, sparking outrage. Federal authorities seized properties, but no arrests were made.

Legal victories

Despite the restrictive climate across the country, Palestine Legal hailed a string of legal victories in 2025 that upheld the right to pro-Palestinian protest.

Last August, for instance, a federal court dismissed a complaint that sought to penalise UNRWA USA, a non-profit that supports the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), under the Antiterrorism Act of 1990.

A separate lawsuit launched by Palestine Legal and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) charged that the University of Maryland had tread on the free speech rights of students by banning Students for Justice in Palestine (UMD SJP). That case resulted in a $100,000 settlement.

Meanwhile, federal judges have sided with Harvard University and the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), in their challenges to the Trump administration’s defunding efforts.

“The fights that Palestine Legal and our partners have waged affirm that the Trump administration, universities, and Israel advocacy groups cannot, without consequence, run roughshod over growing demands to respect and protect Palestinian rights,” Palestine Legal said at the conclusion of its report.

“The developments throughout 2025 made crystal clear that if we allow our right to stand for Palestinian freedom to be trampled, all of our fundamental rights will be in jeopardy in the face of an authoritarian slide.”

Kevin Warsh, United States President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Federal Reserve, has addressed concerns about his independence pending his appointment to the bank amid fears that Trump could sway his decisions on monetary policy.

On Tuesday, Warsh — who served on the central bank’s Board of Governors from 2006 to 2011 — faced waves of criticism during a confirmation hearing of the Senate Banking Committee where Democrats voiced concerns about the Fed’s independence should he be appointed to lead the organisation.

Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the committee, questioned Warsh’s independence, alleging that he would be a “sock puppet” for Trump, concerns he pushed back against and addressed in his opening testimony.

“I do not believe the operational independence of monetary policy is particularly threatened when elected officials — presidents, senators, or members of the House — state their views on interest rates,” Warsh said.

“Monetary policy independence is essential. Monetary policymakers must act in the nation’s interest . . . their decisions the product of analytic rigour, meaningful deliberation, and unclouded decision-making.”

Warsh, 56, also called for “regime change” at the US central bank, including a new approach for controlling inflation and a communications overhaul that may discourage his colleagues from saying too much about the direction of monetary policy.

Warsh blamed the central bank for an inflation surge after it slashed interest rates to nearly zero in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, a move that continues to hurt US households.

Concerned by the implications of artificial intelligence for jobs – expected to increase productivity – and prices, he said he would move quickly to see if new data tools could provide better insight on inflation, and would also discourage policymakers from saying too much about where interest rates might be heading.

“What the Fed needs are reforms to its frameworks and reforms to its communications,” the former Fed governor said. “Too many Fed officials opine about where interest rates should be … That is quite unhelpful.”

Warsh has also long been an advocate for shrinking the Fed’s $6.7 trillion balance sheet. In the Tuesday hearing, he said any such plans would take time and must be publicly discussed well in advance.

Jai Kedia, a research fellow at the Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives at the libertarian Cato Institute, told Al Jazeera that there were many “encouraging” signs in Warsh’s candidacy.

“Warsh is presenting himself as a regime change candidate at a time when the Fed needs serious reform,” Kedia noted. “Particularly encouraging was his understanding of the negative effects of QE and his focus on reducing the balance sheet. He also correctly criticised mission creep and acknowledged that the Fed did better when it kept its focus on the dual mandate [of keeping inflation at 2 percent and increasing employment].”

Quantitative easing or QE is an unconventional monetary policy under which a central bank lowers interest rates, among other measures, to boost the economy, a step taken by central banks in several developed countries during the pandemic.

Warsh’s private investments, at well over $100m, are also under scrutiny. Among them are two holdings in the Juggernaut Fund LP, apparently part of his work advising for the Duquesne Family Office, the private investment firm of Stanley Druckenmiller.

Warsh’s nearly 70-page financial disclosure also showed that his other holdings include investments in Elon Musk’s SpaceX and the prediction trading platform Polymarket.

“I agreed to divest virtually all of my financial assets, the large majority of which will be divested” before taking office, Warsh said without giving any details.

Warsh noted that selling his holdings comes with challenges. He said that when that process is completed, he would have “virtually no financial assets” and “we’ll be sitting in something like cash”.

Warren, however, questioned him about the divestment plan. “Do we have any way to verify that, in fact, these sales will occur if we have no idea what’s in them?” she asked.

Political hurdles

The hearing quickly turned contentious, and the pace of Warsh’s confirmation process through the Senate remained in doubt.

He would not directly say that Trump lost the 2020 election – a statement of fact that Senator Warren said was a litmus test of Warsh’s independence from the Republican president who nominated him for the top Fed job.

Yet even amidst the focus on independence, Warsh needs 13 votes to clear the 24-member Senate Banking Committee.

North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis said he would vote against Trump’s nominee and join Democrats, which would create a 12–12 split. The committee has 13 Republican members and 11 Democrats.

Tillis said he would not vote for any Trump nominee until an investigation into current Fed Governor Jerome Powell, whose term ends May 15, is either concluded or called off. Last month, federal prosecutors said they found no evidence of wrongdoing. But Jeanine Pirro, the US Attorney for the District of Columbia, has not indicated that the investigation will be dropped.

Tillis said on Tuesday that he would support Warsh’s nomination once the probe into Powell is dropped.

“Today’s confirmation hearing underscored that Warsh is aiming for independence with guardrails,” noted Selma Hepp, chief Economist of Cotality, a market analytics company. “He rejected being a political ‘sock puppet’ and argued the Fed protects its autonomy by ‘staying in its lane.’ He offered no pre-commitment on rates, while emphasising inflation discipline, a large balance sheet, and a desire for clearer Fed communication.”

Noel Dixon, senior macro strategist at State Street, said that with Warsh, the US would have a “dovish-leaning Fed”.

“When a senator asked him if he would lower rates to 1 percent – I guess Trump had indicated that he would like to have rates below 2 percent – Warsh didn’t really say no to that,” Dixon noted. “He didn’t say that it would increase prices. He kind of leaned on it and said there would be a lagged effect, and he was just very noncommittal to that. So it’s almost like – just reading between the lines – he’s giving himself space to maintain possible justification for rate cuts by the end of the year.”

Trump has continued to pressure the central bank.

On Tuesday, he said he would be “disappointed” if the Fed did not lower interest rates.

Tuesday’s remarks follow comments in December, when the US president said he would not appoint anyone to lead the central bank unless they agreed with him.

“The public needs to know whether Mr. Warsh will have the courage of his convictions or if he’s willing to compromise his independence and accommodate more Wall Street deregulation,” Graham Steele, an academic fellow at the Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford University, told Al Jazeera in an email.

Warsh has praised the administration for its push for increased bank deregulation. In a November 2025 op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, Warsh claimed that Trump’s “deregulatory agenda” is “the most significant since President Ronald Reagan’s”.

Pete Hegseth says the decision is based on the principle of ‘medical autonomy’ and criticises the mandate as ‘overreaching’.

United States Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has said that the flu vaccine will no longer be obligatory for members of the country’s military, the latest step under President Donald Trump to shift vaccine policy in the federal government.

Hegseth said in a video shared on social media on Tuesday that the decision was based on principles of “medical autonomy” and religious freedom.

“We’re seizing this moment to discard any absurd, overreaching mandates that only weaken our warfighting capabilities. In this case, this includes the universal flu vaccine and the mandate behind it,” said Hegseth.

“The notion that a flu vaccine must be mandatory for every service member, everywhere, in every circumstance at all times is just overly broad and not rational.”

The Trump administration has framed vaccine refusal as a matter of personal moral and religious principle, rolling back some policies meant to safeguard against preventable diseases.

Hegseth’s directive allows various military services to request that the mandate be kept in place, giving them a window of 15 days to do so.

The announcement comes after what health officials described as a particularly severe flu season when infections surged in the US. Public health experts have recommended that everyone aged six months or older get an annual flu vaccine.

The second Trump administration has reflected some of the backlash to public health guidelines and mandates that were implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hegseth himself has called that period an “era of betrayal” for the country’s armed forces. More than 8,400 members of the military were ejected for failure to abide by a 2021 mandate to take the COVID-19 vaccine.

The Trump administration has also rolled back vaccine recommendations in other areas, announcing earlier this year that it would not recommend flu shots and other forms of vaccines for all children. A lawsuit was filed challenging that effort, and the policy was temporarily blocked by a federal judge as the legal challenge plays out.

The Department of War has released a video it says shows US forces boarding a sanctioned tanker in the Asia Pacific region as part of their efforts to disrupt vessels providing support to Iran.

United States President Donald Trump has said a nuclear agreement currently being negotiated with Iran will be “far better” than the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which he withdrew from in 2018 during his first term in office.

The original 2015 accord took roughly two years of negotiations to reach and involved hundreds of specialists across technical and legal fields, including multiple US experts. Under it, Iran agreed to restrict the enrichment of uranium and to subject itself to inspections in exchange for the relaxation of sanctions.

But Trump took the US out of that pact, calling it the “worst deal ever”. Before the initial US-Israeli strikes on Iran at the end of February, the US had made new demands – including additional restrictions on Tehran’s nuclear programme, the restriction of its ballistic missiles programme and an end to its support for regional armed groups, primarily in Lebanon, Yemen and Iraq.

Trump’s latest remarks come amid growing uncertainty about whether a second round of talks will proceed in the Pakistani capital Islamabad, as a two-week ceasefire between the US-Israel and Iran approaches the end in just a day.

So, what was the JCPOA, and how did it compare to Trump’s new demands?

What was the JCPOA?

On July 14, 2015, Iran reached an agreement with the European Union and six major powers – China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, the US, and Germany – under which these states would roll back international economic sanctions and allow Iran greater participation in the global economy.

In return, Tehran committed to limiting activities that could be used to produce a nuclear weapon.

These included reducing its stockpile of enriched uranium by about 98 percent, to less than 300kg (660lb), and capping uranium enrichment at 3.67 percent – far below weapons-grade of 90 percent, but high enough for civilian purposes such as power generation.

Before the JCPOA, Iran operated roughly 20,000 uranium-enriching centrifuges. Under the deal, that number was cut to a maximum of 6,104, and only older-generation machines confined to two facilities, which were subject to international monitoring.

Centrifuges are machines which spin to increase the concentration of the uranium-235 isotope – enrichment – in uranium, a key step towards potential bomb-making.

The deal also redesigned Iran’s Arak heavy water reactor to prevent plutonium production and introduced one of the most intrusive inspection regimes ever implemented by the global nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

In exchange, Iran received relief from international sanctions which had severely damaged its economy. Billions of dollars in frozen assets were released, and restrictions on oil exports and banking were eased.

The deal came to halt when Trump formally withdrew Washington from the nuclear deal in 2018, a move widely criticised domestically and by foreign allies, and despite the IAEA saying Iran had complied with the agreement up to that point.

“The Iranian regime supports terrorism and exports violence, bloodshed and chaos across the Middle East. That is why we must put an end to Iran’s continued aggression and nuclear ambitions. They have not lived up to the spirit of their agreement,” he said in October 2017.

He reimposed crippling economic sanctions on Tehran as part of his “maximum pressure” tactic. These targeted Iran’s oil exports, as well as its shipping sector, banking system and other key industries.

The goal was to force Iran back to the negotiating table to agree to a new deal, which also included a discussion about Tehran’s missile capabilities, further curbs on enrichment and more scrutiny of its nuclear programme.

What has happened to Iran’s nuclear programme since the JCPOA?

During the JCPOA period, Iran’s nuclear programme was tightly constrained and heavily monitored. The IAEA repeatedly verified that Iran was complying with the deal’s terms, including one year after Trump announced the US’s withdrawal from the agreement.

Starting in mid-2019, however, Iran began incrementally breaching the deal’s limits, exceeding caps on uranium stockpiles and enrichment levels.

In November 2024, Iran said it would activate “new and advanced” centrifuges. The IAEA confirmed that Tehran had informed the nuclear watchdog that it planned to install more than 6,000 new centrifuges to enrich uranium.

In December 2024, the IAEA said Iran was rapidly enriching uranium to 60 percent purity, moving closer to the 90 percent threshold needed for weapons-grade material. Most recently, in 2025, the IAEA estimated that Iran had 440kg (970lb) of 60-percent enriched uranium.

What are Trump’s latest demands for Iran’s nuclear programme?

The US and its ally, Israel, are pushing Iran to agree to zero uranium enrichment and have accused Iran of working towards building a nuclear weapon, while providing no evidence for their claims.

They also want Iran’s estimated 440kg stock of 60pc enriched uranium to be removed from Iran. While that is below weapons-grade, it is the point at which it becomes much faster to achieve the 90 percent enrichment needed for atomic weapons production.

Iran has insisted its enrichment effort is for civilian purposes only. It is a signatory to the 1970 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

In March 2025, Tulsi Gabbard, the US director of national intelligence, testified to Congress that the US “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon”.

On Sunday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, in a strongly worded statement, said Trump had no right to ⁠⁠”deprive” Iran of its nuclear ⁠⁠rights.

What else is Trump asking for?

Restrictions on ballistic missiles

Before the US-Israel war on Iran began, Tehran had always insisted negotiations should be exclusively focused on Iran’s nuclear programme.

US and Israeli demands, however, extended beyond that. Just before the war began, Washington and Israel demanded severe restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile programme.

Analysts say this demand was at least partly triggered by the fact that several Iranian missiles had breached Israel’s much-vaunted “Iron Dome” defence system during the 12-day war between the two countries in June last year. While Israel suffered only a handful of casualties, it is understood to have been alarmed.

For his part, Trump has repeatedly warned, without evidence, about the dangers of Iran’s long-range missiles, claiming Iran is producing them “in very high numbers” and they could “overwhelm the Iron Dome”.

Iran has said its right to maintain missile capabilities is non-negotiable. The JCPOA did not put any limits on the development of ballistic missiles.

However, a United Nations resolution made when adopting the nuclear agreement in July 2015 did stipulate that Iran could not “undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons”.

Ending support for proxy groups

The US and Israel have also demanded that Iran stop supporting its non-state allies across the Middle East, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen and a number of groups in Iraq. Together, these groups are referred to as Iran’s “axis of resistance”.

In May last year, Trump said Tehran “must stop sponsoring terror, halt its bloody proxy wars, and permanently and verifiably cease pursuit of nuclear weapons”, during a GCC meeting in Riyadh.

Three days before the war on Iran began in February, during his State of the Union address to Congress, Trump accused Iran and “its murderous proxies” of spreading “nothing but terrorism and death and hate”.

Iran has refused to enter a dialogue about limiting its support for these armed groups.

Can Trump really get a new deal that is ‘much better’ than the JCPOA?

According to Andreas Kreig, associate professor of Security Studies at King’s College, London, Trump is more likely to secure a new deal that closely resembles the JCPOA, with “some form of restrictions on enrichment, possibly with a sunset clause, and international supervision”.

“Iran might get access to frozen assets and lifted sanctions much quicker than under the JCPOA, as it will not agree to a long drawn-out, gradual lifting of sanctions,” Krieg pointed out.

However, he warned that the political landscape in Tehran has hardened. “Iran now is a far more hardline and less pragmatic player that will play hardball at every junction. Trump cannot count on any goodwill in Tehran,” he said.

“The IRGC is now firmly in charge… with likely new powerful and tested levers such as the Strait of Hormuz,” he said, referring to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which operates as a parallel elite military force to the army and has a great deal of political and economic power in Iran. It is a constitutionally recognised part of the Iranian military and answers directly to the supreme leader.

Overall, Krieg stressed, the US-Israel war on Iran “leaves the world worse off than had Trump stuck to the JCPOA”, even if a new compromise is eventually reached.

Moreover, since the revocation of the JCPOA, the US and Israel have waged two wars on Iran, including the current one. The 12-day war in June last year included attacks on Iran’s nuclear sites and killed more than 1,000 people.

Attacks on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure have continued since the latest war began on February 28, including on the Natanz enrichment facility, Isfahan nuclear complex, Arak heavy water reactor, and the Bushehr nuclear power plant.

Nevertheless, King’s College’s Krieg said there is still room for a negotiated outcome if Tehran and Washington scale back their demands.

“Both sides can compromise on enrichment thresholds, and on temporary moratoriums on enrichments. But Iran will not surrender its sovereignty to enrich altogether, and the Trump administration will have to meet them halfway,” he said.

“While the Iranians will commit on paper not to develop a nuclear weapon, they will want to keep R&D [research and development] in this space alive.”

Economic incentives will be central, he added. “Equally, Iran would want to get immediate access to capital and liquidity. Here, the Trump administration is already willing to compromise.”

Voters in Virginia head to the polls on Tuesday to decide on a measure that could redraw the state’s congressional map and potentially shift the balance of power in Washington.

Major political figures, including former President Barack Obama and House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson, have weighed in on the high-stakes vote, with nearly $100m spent on campaigning around it.

Part of a broader redistricting battle that began in Texas and spread nationwide, the vote may be the Democrats’ last chance this year to gain seats by changing district maps. The vote comes about six months before the 2026 midterm elections.

Here is what we know:

What is Virginia voting on?

Virginia currently sends 11 members to the House. At the moment, six of them are Democrats, and five are Republicans, reflecting the state’s balance.

Democrats now want to redraw the map to favour them in a way that could help them win up to 10 of the 11 seats. Under the proposal, most districts would be safely Democratic or lean towards the party, with only one strongly Republican.

A breakdown would be:

• Eight districts would be safely Democratic
• Two would be competitive but lean Democratic
• Only one would be safely Republican

If approved, this could give the Democrats several extra seats in Congress, helping them win back or strengthen control of the House in Washington, where majorities are often decided by just a few seats.

That would be a big political shift for the state, which was once closely contested but has become more Democratic-leaning in recent years.

How would the vote work?

Voters in Virginia can cast their ballots either early or on Election Day.

Polling stations will be open across the state on Tuesday:

• Polls open at 10:00 GMT
• Polls close at 23:00 GMT

Votes will be counted after polls close, with early results expected later that evening and fuller results overnight or the next day.

What are voters being asked to decide?

The proposed constitutional amendment is the only statewide contest on the ballot.

It reads:

“Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General Assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections, while ensuring Virginia’s standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census?”

A “yes” vote would support allowing the General Assembly to redraw congressional districts before the midterms.

A “no” vote would leave current boundaries unchanged until the next round of regularly scheduled redistricting after the 2030 census.

What do the latest polls suggest?

The result is expected to be close.

A recent poll by State Navigate, a nonpartisan research group, suggests a small lead for supporters, with about 53 percent in favour and 47 percent against.

Why do district lines matter so much?

District lines decide how voters are grouped, which can shape who wins elections.

Moving the lines can make a district more favourable to a Democratic or Republican win, by adding or removing neighbourhoods and communities that lean one way or the other.

It can turn a close race into a safe seat, or the other way around. It affects which communities are kept together and who represents them.

This process, often called gerrymandering, allows parties to draw maps that benefit them.

In a closely divided state like Virginia, even small changes to the map can shift several seats and influence who holds power in Congress.

A 2023 study by Harvard University researchers found that gerrymandering often creates “safe” seats for politicians, meaning their races are less competitive.

In turn, those politicians become less responsive to the needs of their constituents, who become discouraged about voting as a result.

When could new maps take effect?

If approved, the new map could be used as early as the next election cycle, including the upcoming midterms, depending on legal approval.

However, the plan could face legal challenges. Critics have questioned the ballot wording and the process used by lawmakers.

The Virginia Supreme Court has allowed the vote to go ahead while reviewing those concerns.

If it later finds that rules were broken, the results could be overturned, and the current maps would remain.

Why this vote could shape power in Washington?

A handful of seats could decide control of the US House.

Republicans currently hold a narrow 218–213 majority, but Democrats are seen as competitive heading into the midterms.

Political leaders have underscored the stakes.

Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic Party’s leader in the House, has pointed to Virginia as a crucial battleground, while Mike Johnson has said the result will be closely watched across the country.

What it means to control the US House

The party with the majority (more seats) in Congress can:

• Set the agenda, deciding which bills are brought up for debate
• Control committees, including investigations and hearings
• Pass legislation more easily (if they stay united)
• Block bills from the minority party.

The majority party also chooses the speaker of the House, who has major influence over what reaches the floor.

Where else has this happened?

Virginia’s redistricting vote is part of a larger political battle playing out in the US. Republicans in Texas, encouraged by Donald Trump, have redrawn district maps to strengthen their advantage, prompting similar efforts in other states.

In rare cases, voters have been asked to decide directly, including in California last year and now in Virginia.

In California, voters backed the changes despite concerns about fairness. Now it’s Virginia’s turn to decide.

What Democrats are saying, and why?

Democrats argue the plan is a response to Republican actions in other states, not just a power grab.

Leaders like Obama had long opposed gerrymandering in principle, but have now backed the Virginia move, even releasing a video asking voters to go out and vote for the constitutional amendment.

The US tech giant Palantir Technologies has posted what it terms a summary of Palantir CEO Alex Karp and head of corporate affairs Nicholas Zamiska’s book, The Technological Republic, on social media.

Many of the positions articulated in the book go far beyond what would normally be expected of a tech company: calling for the introduction of national service, the “moral” duty of technology companies to participate in defence, the necessity for hard power if what it calls free and democratic powers are to prevail, and an embrace of religion in public life.

The publication of what appears to be a 22-point manifesto comes at a critical time for Palantir, which faces global criticism for its support of US President Donald Trump’s controversial immigration crackdown and its backing of the Israeli military’s actions in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

Many have expressed alarm at the book’s emphasis on cultural hierarchies and what it calls “regressive” cultures.

Eliot Higgins, the founder of the online investigations platform Bellingcat, sarcastically pointed out how “completely normal” it was for a tech company to post what he said was a manifesto attacking democratic norms. “It’s also worth being clear about who’s doing the arguing,” Higgins added. “Palantir sells operational software to defence, intelligence, immigration & police agencies. These 22 points aren’t philosophy floating in space, they’re the public ideology of a company whose revenue depends on the politics it’s advocating.”

So, what is Palantir, why is it so controversial, and why has it posted the “manifesto” now?

What does the book say?

As well as referring to the hard power needed to replace the “soaring rhetoric” previously used to defend “free and democratic societies”, the book rails against what it calls the “psychologization of modern politics”, which appears to criticise anyone the authors feel has become too emotionally invested in their political representatives and identity.

The call for people to care less about politics appears to critics as a way of deflecting from Palantir’s own controversial political positions and its openness to working with government policies that clamp down on liberty. Worryingly for some is also the book’s emphasis on what it calls the technology sector’s “obligation to participate in the defence of the nation”, and on the supposed inevitability of developing AI weapons.

Among other points, the writers appear to defend billionaires, such as Elon Musk, whose achievements, they say, are not met with “curiosity or genuine interest” but are instead dismissed by those who “snicker” at the South African-born businessman. Musk was heavily criticised for his role as the head of DOGE, or the US Department for Government Efficiency, which scrapped several government agencies without much regard for the roles those agencies played, or the legal and political process necessary to shut such agencies down.

Palantir’s post concludes by criticising “the shallow temptation of a vacant and hollow pluralism”. It argues that an unthinking commitment to inclusivity and pluralism “glosses over the fact that certain cultures and indeed subcultures… have produced wonders. Others have proven middling, and worse, regressive and harmful”.

How have people reacted?

Not well.

Mark Coeckelbergh, a Belgian philosopher of technology who teaches at the University of Vienna, described Palantir’s messaging as an “example of technofascism”, while Greek economist and former Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis said Palantir had effectively signalled a willingness “to add to nuclear Armageddon the AI-driven threat to humanity’s existence”.

Posting on social media, Arnaud Bertrand, the entrepreneur and geopolitical commentator, claimed that Palantir had revealed a dangerous “ideological agenda”.

“They’re effectively saying ‘our tools aren’t meant to serve your foreign policy. They’re meant to enforce ours’,” he wrote.

What is Palantir?

Palantir Technologies is widely regarded as one of the world’s most influential data analytics firms, securing major contracts with governments, militaries and global corporations.

Founded in 2003 by Alex Karp and Peter Thiel, with support from In-Q-Tel, the CIA’s venture capital arm, it built its early business on post-9/11 intelligence work and has since expanded internationally, with contracts across Europe, the Middle East, and beyond.

While retaining his shares in Palantir, Thiel is understood to no longer play an active role in its day-to-day operations. Karp has positioned himself as the public face of the company.

Under Karp’s leadership, Palantir has drawn heavily on the expertise of former members of Israel’s cyber-intelligence unit, 8200. After the company announced a “strategic partnership” with Israel in January 2024, its involvement in Gaza and the occupied West Bank expanded considerably. Using a mix of intercepted communications, satellite material and other digital data sources, Palantir began integrating these inputs to help produce targeting databases – effectively, “kill lists” – for the Israeli military.

It has also cultivated close ties with US security agencies, particularly during the Trump administration, of which Thiel has been an enthusiastic backer, and has also worked with Israel in its occupation of the West Bank and genocide in Gaza.

According to its critics, including the rights group Amnesty International, “Palantir has a track record of flagrantly disregarding international law and standards, both in the violations of the human rights of migrants in the United States, to which it risks contributing to, and its ongoing supply of artificial intelligence (AI) products and services to the Israeli military and intelligence services that are linked to Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza.”

What exactly has Palantir been accused of in Israel and the US?

Palantir Technologies has faced criticism across the world for its enabling of government surveillance and military systems in the US and Israel.

In the US, it has been accused of supporting immigration enforcement and policing tools that aggregate vast personal datasets, including medical information, enabling profiling and raising due process and privacy concerns. In Israel, critics allege that its AI and data platforms have been used in military operations in Gaza, potentially contributing to the targeting decisions that have underpinned Israel’s genocide there.

Responding to questions from Al Jazeera earlier this year, a spokesperson for Palantir said, “As a company, Palantir does support Israel. We’ve chosen to support them because of the appalling events of October 7th. And more broadly, we’ve chosen to support them because we believe in supporting the West and its allies – and Israel is an important ally of the West.” The spokesman was referring to the Hamas-led October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, after which Israel launched its genocidal war on Gaza.

Why post the ‘manifesto’ now?

Palantir’s politics and alarm over its influence are growing and gaining traction across much of the West.

As well as concern among US Democrats, politicians in Germany, Ireland, and in the European Parliament have criticised the tech giant, whose products, according to one German lawmaker and cyber security expert, have fallen short of security standards across the bloc.

In the UK, the row over the National Health Service’s adoption of Palantir technology has led to some of the fiercest criticism yet. MPs calling for the UK to take advantage of an early break in the tech giant’s 330 million-pound ($446.4m) contract with the health service labelled Palantir “dreadful” and “shameful” in a debate last week, after which even the government conceded that it was “no fan” of the US company’s politics.

Louis Mosley, the head of Palantir Technologies UK, defended the company by arguing that it had no interest in patient data and existed only as a tool to better manage health service resources.

Dozens of US veterans and family members of military personnel have been arrested while staging a protest in the US Capitol building in opposition to the war on Iran.

A Cuban Foreign Ministry official said the exchange with Washington was ‘respectful and professional’ and devoid of threats.

The Cuban government has confirmed that it held recent talks in Havana with officials from the United States, as tensions remain high between the two countries over Washington’s energy blockade of the Caribbean country.

Alejandro Garcia del Toro, deputy director general in charge of US affairs at the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said on Monday that the US delegation included assistant secretaries of state, and the Cuban delegation included representatives at the level of deputy foreign minister.

Garcia de Toro said that the US delegation did not issue any threats or deadlines as had been reported by some US media outlets.

“The entire exchange was conducted with respect and professionalism,” he said.

In comments reported by Cuba’s Communist Party newspaper Granma, Garcia del Toro emphasised that ending the three-month-old US oil blockade was “a top priority” for the Cuban government in the talks, and accused Washington of “blackmail” for threatening countries that export oil to Cuba with tariffs.

“This act of economic coercion is an unjustified punishment for the entire Cuban population,” he said.

“It is also a form of global blackmail against sovereign states, which have every right to export fuel to Cuba, in accordance with the principles of free trade,” he added.

US news outlet Axios reported on Friday that officials from US President Donald Trump’s administration held multiple meetings in Havana on April 10, including with Raul Guillermo Rodriguez Castro, grandson of former President Raul Castro. The meetings marked the first time that American diplomats had flown into Cuba since 2016 in a new diplomatic push.

According to reports, US officials laid out several conditions for negotiations with Cuba to continue, including the release of prominent political prisoners, an end to political repression, and liberalising the island’s ailing economy.

The Reuters news agency said that US proposals for Cuba also include allowing Elon Musk’s Starlink internet terminals into the country and providing compensation for Americans and US corporations for assets confiscated by Cuba after the 1959 revolution. Washington is also concerned about the influence of foreign powers on the island, a US official told the news agency.

Trump has hinted at military intervention in Cuba and warned of tariffs on any country that sells or supplies oil to Cuba. The fuel blockade has aggravated Cuba’s economic and energy crisis, leading to warnings of a humanitarian disaster.

Cubans have also braced for a possible attack following Trump’s repeated warnings that the country will be “next” after his war on Iran and the US military’s abduction of Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro in January.

Last week, Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel said that his country was prepared to fight if the US carried through on its threats.

The leaders of Mexico, Spain and Brazil on Saturday voiced concern over the “dramatic situation” in Cuba and urged “sincere and respectful dialogue”.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Monday there was no evident justification for the US to attack Cuba.

“The ability to defend oneself does not mean the right to intervene militarily in other states when their political systems do not match what others might have in mind,” he said.

Chavez-DeRemer is the third high-profile female official to leave the Trump administration after recent departures of Kristi Noem and Pam Bondi.

US Secretary of Labour Lori Chavez-DeRemer will be leaving her post in the administration of President Donald Trump, the White House has said.

Chavez-DeRemer is the third woman to leave the Trump administration since March, when the president fired Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in the wake of federal immigration raids in Minnesota that led to the deaths of two protesters. Trump also ousted Attorney General Pam Bondi earlier this month.

Chavez-DeRemer has done a “phenomenal job” protecting American workers and is set to “take a position in the private sector”, White House Director of Communications Steven Cheung said in a post on X late on Monday, announcing the labour secretary’s departure.

“Keith Sonderling will take on the role of Acting Secretary of Labor,” Cheung added, referring to the current deputy labour secretary.

While Cheung did not give a reason for Chavez-DeRemer’s departure, the New York Post reported in January that she was under investigation for “pursuing an ‘inappropriate’ relationship with a subordinate” and drinking in her office during the work day.

Al Jazeera was unable to independently verify the allegations.

From the beginning of her tenure, Chavez-DeRemer had some notable differences with other members of Trump’s inner circle.

She had voiced support for the pro-union Protecting the Right to Organize Act (PRO Act), earning support for her nomination from some Democrats.

Her appointment was also seen as favoured by Sean O’Brien, the president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, who notably spoke in support of Trump’s re-election campaign at the Republican National Convention in July 2024.

However, as the labour secretary, Chavez-DeRemer’s positions have more closely aligned with the Trump administration’s overall anti-regulatory policies, according to US media outlets. During her tenure as secretary, the Labor Department stalled on responding to calls for limits on silica exposure from Appalachian coal miners suffering from the occupational black lung disease.

Chavez-DeRemer is not the first top official to leave the Labor Department during Trump’s second term.

In August 2025, Trump fired the director of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Erika McEntarfer, who was appointed by previous President Joe Biden, after a report showed that hiring had slowed in July and was worse in May and June than had previously been reported.

Chavez-DeRemer had supported the president’s move at the time.

“I support the President’s decision to replace Biden’s Commissioner and ensure the American People can trust the important and influential data coming from BLS,” Chavez-DeRemer said in a post on X following McEntarfer’s removal.

Daniel Benaim, the former US Deputy Assistant Secretary for Arabian Peninsula Affairs, says the US missed the early off-ramps to declare victory over Iran, and now finds itself behind where it began on all its objectives.

First all-women cohort of winners hails from Colombia, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, South Korea, the UK and the US.

This year’s prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize has been awarded to six grassroots environmental activists from around the world for their efforts to fight climate change and save biodiversity.

For the first time since the prize was created in 1989 by philanthropists Richard and Rhoda Goldman, all recipients of the award are women: Iroro Tanshi, from Nigeria; Borim Kim, from South Korea; Sarah Finch, from the United Kingdom; Theonila Roka Matbob, from Papua New Guinea; Alannah Acaq Hurley, from the United States; and Yuvelis Morales Blanco, from Colombia.

Sometimes described as the “Green Nobel”, the Goldman Prize recipients are chosen from each of the world’s six primary regions. They each receive $200,000 in prize money.

“While we continue to fight uphill to protect the environment and implement lifesaving climate policies – in the US and globally – it is clear that true leaders can be found all around us,” said John Goldman, vice president of the Goldman Environmental Foundation.

“The 2026 Prize winners are proof positive that courage, hard work, and hope go a long way toward creating meaningful progress.”

Morales Blanco, the winner for the region of South and Central America, fought some of the world’s biggest oil companies to successfully stop the introduction of commercial fracking into Colombia.

The 24-year-old grew up in a family of fishermen along the banks of the Magdalena River in the Afro-Colombian community of Puerto Wilches. “We had nothing but the river – she was like a mother who took care of me,” she said.

She began organising protests after a major oil spill in 2018, which forced the relocation of dozens of local families and killed thousands of animals. Her activism, which made her a target for intimidation and forced her to temporarily relocate, helped halt projects and elevate fracking as an issue in Colombia’s 2022 election.

Two of the other five recipients of this year’s prize have also focused their efforts on fighting fossil fuels, which are causing both global climate change and more localised pollution around the world.

Borim, the winner for Asia who started the Youth 4 Climate Action organisation, won a ruling from South Korea’s Constitutional Court that the government’s climate policy violated the constitutional rights of future generations, the first successful youth-led climate litigation in the continent.

Finch, Europe’s winner, told The Times newspaper she will use her prize money to keep fighting fossil fuels.

Together with the Weald Action Group, she fought oil drilling in southeastern England for more than a decade, securing the “Finch ruling” from the Supreme Court in June 2024, stating that authorities must consider fossil fuels’ impacts on the global climate before granting permission to extract them.

Two other recipients have fought against the destructive environmental impact of mining projects.

Papua New Guinea’s Roka Matbob, winner for Islands and Island Nations, led a successful campaign that saw the world’s second-largest mining company, Rio Tinto, agree to address environmental and social devastation caused by its Panguna copper mine, 35 years after it was closed following an uprising.

And the award recipient for North America, Acaq Hurley, from the Yup’ik nation in the US, successfully fought alongside 15 tribal nations to stop a mega- copper and gold mining project that threatened ecosystems in Alaska’s Bristol Bay region, including the largest wild salmon runs in the world.

Meanwhile, Nigeria’s Tanshi, Africa’s winner, rediscovered the endangered short-tailed roundleaf bat and has been working to save its refuge, the Afi Mountain Wildlife Sanctuary, from human-induced wildfires.

A photo of an Israeli soldier smashing a statue of Jesus Christ in Lebanon has sparked outrage in the United States, adding to the anger Israel is facing, including from parts of US President Donald Trump’s base.

Although the incident is only one among a broad range of atrocities that Israel is accused of committing in the region in recent years, it garnered condemnations across the world and prompted a response from Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In the US, where support for Israel was once unchallenged – especially in right-wing circles that purport to espouse Christian values – the desecration of the Christian religious symbol added fuel to the criticism that the Israeli government is facing from some Republicans.

“You would never know it by consuming American corporate media, but this kind of incident is not rare,” said right-wing commentator Tucker Carlson, a former Trump ally.

“The Israeli government has permitted its soldiers to behave like barbarians for decades, all while sucking up generous funding from the United States. The only difference between now and the past is that social media has exposed Israel’s behavior for the world to see,” Carlson wrote in his newsletter on Monday.

‘Horrific’

Former Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene – who fell out with Trump over his hawkish foreign policy – highlighted that Israel receives billions of dollars in US military aid annually.

“‘Our greatest ally’ that takes billions of our tax dollars and weapons every year,” she wrote in a comment on X in response to the photo showing an Israeli soldier taking a sledgehammer to the head of the statue of Jesus.

Matt Gaetz, another former Republican congressman and Trump ally, said, “Horrific”.

For his part, independent journalist Glenn Greenwald mocked how Christian Zionists may defend Israel over smashing the statue.

“Christian Zionists: This Israeli soldier was absolutely justified in smashing the head of the Jesus Christ statue because Hezbollah and Hamas were hiding inside. We owe him our gratitude,” Greenwald wrote on X.

The anger echoed growing scepticism of the close alliance with Israel in Trump’s “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) constituency.

Trump is already facing pressure over joining Israel in starting a war against Iran, which sent oil prices soaring. Earlier on Monday, the US president addressed and denied claims that Netanyahu dragged the US into the conflict.

Support for Israel in the US is at a historic low, recent public opinion polls show.

While Israel still enjoys near-unanimous Republican support in Congress, that consensus is starting to fray, with dissent being expressed by the likes of Carlson, in part due to prolonged wars in the Middle East and attacks on Christians.

Israel says it will investigate

The desecration of the statue, which took place near the town of Debl in south Lebanon, according to local reports, prompted an unusually swift response from the highest level of the Israeli government.

“I condemn the act in the strongest terms. Military authorities are conducting a criminal probe of the matter and will take appropriately harsh disciplinary action against the offender,” Netanyahu said in a statement on Sunday.

Israel rarely holds its soldiers accountable for well-documented abuses in Gaza, the occupied West Bank and Lebanon, including sexual violence.

Netanyahu, who has been evading an arrest warrant by the International Criminal Court (ICC) over war crimes charges in Gaza since 2024, went on to argue that Israel treats Christians better than any other country in the region.

“While Christians are being slaughtered in Syria and Lebanon by Muslims, the Christian population in Israel thrives unlike elsewhere in the Middle East,” the Israeli prime minister claimed.

“Israel is the only country in the region that the Christian population and standard of living is growing.”

Lebanon has the largest per capita Christian population in the Middle East, and its president is a Maronite Catholic.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar joined Netanyahu in denouncing the desecration of the statue, saying that it is “entirely contrary” to Israeli values.

But while Israel’s supporters tried to portray smashing the statue as an isolated mistake by one soldier, the incident reflects a pattern of Israeli attacks against houses of worship, including churches.

In 2024, Israeli troops filmed a mock wedding between two soldiers at a church in Deir Mimas in Lebanon and vandalised the building.

An Israeli tank demolished a statue of Saint George in the southern Lebanese village of Yaroun last year, as well.

Israel has bombed Palestinian churches several times in Gaza since the start of its genocidal war in the enclave, including an attack that killed at least 18 people in 2023.

Israel destroyed more than 1,000 mosques and three churches in Gaza during the war, according to local officials.

Catholic leaders respond

The Assembly of Catholic Ordinaries of the Holy Land denounced the attack on the statue on Monday.

“This act constitutes a grave affront to the Christian faith and adds to other reported incidents of desecration of Christian symbols by [Israeli] soldiers in southern Lebanon,” it said in a statement.

“It further reveals a disturbing failure in moral and human formation, wherein even the most elementary reverence for the sacred and for the dignity of others has been gravely compromised.”

The incident came as Israeli soldiers pushed to completely destroy homes and civilian infrastructure in dozens of Lebanese villages in order to prevent residents from returning to them.

“The outrage shouldn’t be about a destroyed statue of Jesus – abhorrent as that is,” Palestinian pastor Munther Isaac wrote in a social media post on Monday.

“The real outrage is the targeting of civilians, the assault on human dignity, the devastation in Gaza and Lebanon. War is evil. We need Accountability.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) called on Trump and Congress to intervene and end Israeli violations after the destruction of the statue.

“For years, our government has ignored and enabled persistent Israeli attacks on churches and Christians in Lebanon, Gaza, and elsewhere,” CAIR said.

“Our message to American public officials is simple: If you continue sending more weapons and provide political cover for Israel’s rogue actions, you own what you see in this picture.”

Singer faces first-degree murder and additional charges that could lead to life without parole or the death penalty.

Singer D4vd has been charged in the United States with murder in the death of Celeste Rivas Hernandez, a 14-year-old girl who was last seen alive nearly a year ago.

The 21-year-old musician, whose legal name is David Burke, ⁠faces first-degree murder and additional charges, including lewd acts with a minor and mutilation of a body. D4vd pleaded not guilty on Monday.

The prosecutor said Rivas Hernandez’s dismembered and decomposed body was discovered in September inside an apparently abandoned Tesla linked to the singer.

Authorities said the case includes special circumstances – lying in wait, committing crime for financial gain and the alleged killing of the witness in an investigation – making Burke eligible for life without parole or the death penalty.

Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman said prosecutors would decide later whether to seek the ‌death penalty.

Burke was arrested at a home in Hollywood on Thursday and was being held without bail.

The witness he is alleged to have killed is Rivas Hernandez, who could have given testimony about the sex crime allegations.

Rivas Hernandez had disappeared in 2024, when she was 13. That was her age when, according to an allegation in a criminal complaint, the singer engaged in continuous sexual abuse of her for at least a year from September 2023 to September 2024.

Hochman said authorities believed the girl went to D4vd’s Hollywood Hills home on April 23, 2025, and “was never heard from again”.

Burke’s lawyers said on Monday that the evidence would show he is innocent.

“The actual evidence in this case will show that David Burke did not murder Celeste Rivas Hernandez and he was not the cause of her death,” they said. “We will vigorously defend David’s innocence.”

Court documents outline secret probe

The singer had been under investigation by a Los Angeles County grand jury looking into the death.

The probe was officially secret, but its existence, and his designation as its target, was revealed in February when his mother, father and brother objected in a Texas court to subpoenas demanding they testify.

The 2023 Tesla Model Y was registered in the singer’s name at their address, according to court filings. Authorities did not publicly acknowledge him as a suspect until his arrest.

Police investigators searching the Tesla in a tow yard found a cadaver bag “covered with insects and a strong odor of decay”, court documents said.

Detectives partially unzipped a bag and found a head and torso.

Investigators from the Los Angeles County Medical Examiner’s Office removed the bag and “discovered the arms and legs had been severed from the body”, according to court documents.

A second black bag was found under the first, and dismembered body parts were inside it. No cause of death has been publicly revealed, and police got a judge to block the release of details of the autopsy.

The court order was expected to be lifted after the charges.

Rising to fame

D4vd gained popularity among Gen Z for his blend of indie rock, R&B and lo-fi pop. He went viral on TikTok in 2022 with the hit Romantic Homicide, which peaked at number 4 on Billboard’s Hot Rock & Alternative Songs chart.

He then signed with Darkroom and Interscope Records, and released his debut EP, Petals to Thorns and a follow-up, The Lost Petals, in 2023.

When the body was discovered, the singer continued his North American tour, but when reports of his possible involvement spread widely, he cancelled the final two shows and a European tour that was to follow.

VANCOUVER — Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said in a video address released Sunday that Canada’s strong economic ties to the United States were once a strength but are now a weakness that must be corrected.

In the 10-minute address, Carney spoke about his government’s efforts to strengthen the Canadian economy by attracting new investments and signing trade deals with other countries.

“The world is more dangerous and divided,” Carney said. “The U.S. has fundamentally changed its approach to trade, raising its tariffs to levels last seen during the Great Depression.

“Many of our former strengths, based on our close ties to America, have become weaknesses. Weaknesses that we must correct.”

Carney said tariffs imposed by President Trump have affected workers in the auto and steel industries. He added that businesses are holding back investments “restrained by the pall of uncertainty that’s hanging over all of us.”

Many Canadians have also been angered by Trump’s comments suggesting Canada become the 51st state.

Carney said he plans to give Canadians regular updates on his government’s efforts to diversify away from the U.S.

“Security can’t be achieved by ignoring the obvious or downplaying the very real threats that we Canadians face,” he said. “I promise you I will never sugarcoat our challenges.”

It’s not the first time Carney, who served as a central bank governor, first at the Bank of Canada and later with the Bank of England, has spoken about a shift in world power.

During a speech in January at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, he received widespread praise for condemning economic coercion by great powers against small countries.

His remarks brought a rebuke from Trump.

“Canada lives because of the United States,” Trump said after the speech. “Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements.”

There was no immediate White House reaction Sunday to the address.

Carney’s comments came days after securing a majority government following special election wins and as the opposition Conservatives push him to deliver a U.S. trade deal, which was among his promises in last year’s election.

A review of the current version of the North American Free Trade Agreement among Canada, the U.S. and Mexico is scheduled for July.

In his address, Carney said he wants to attract new investments into Canada, double the size of clean energy capacity and reduce trade barriers within the country. He also emphasized Canada’s increased defense spending, reduction in taxes and efforts to make housing more affordable.

“We have to take care of ourselves because we can’t rely on one foreign partner,” he said. “We can’t control the disruption coming from our neighbors. We can’t control our future on the hope it will suddenly stop.

“We can control what happens here. We can build a stronger country that can withstand disruptions from aboard.”

Carney said simply hoping the “United States will return to normal” is not a feasible strategy.

“Hope isn’t a plan and nostalgia is not a strategy,” he said.

Carney said Canada has “been a great neighbor,” standing with the U.S. in conflicts including Afghanistan, plus two World Wars.

“The U.S. has changed and we must respond,” he said. “It’s about taking back control of our security, our borders and our future.”

Morris writes for the Associated Press.

Donald Trump has denied being dragged into war with Iran by Israel, as the United States president faces increasing criticism over the conflict, including from segments of his own base.

“Israel never talked me into the war with Iran, the results of Oct. 7th, added to my lifelong opinion that IRAN CAN NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON, did,” Trump wrote in a social media post on Monday.

There is no public evidence linking Iran directly to Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack against Israel. Trump’s own intelligence chief Tulsi Gabbard also testified to Congress in March that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon.

For eight months prior to the war, Trump had been saying repeatedly that the June 2025 US strikes on Iranian facilities “obliterated” the country’s nuclear programme.

Many of Trump’s critics have argued that Iran did not pose an imminent threat to the US, and that the war only advances the interests of Israel at the expense of the safety and prosperity of Americans.

Iran responded to the joint US-Israeli strikes – which killed the country’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, other top officials and hundreds of civilians on February 28 – by blocking the Strait of Hormuz, sending oil prices soaring.

In the US, energy costs have skyrocketed, fuelling inflation. The price of one gallon (3.8 liters) of petrol has remained over $4 – up from less than $3 before the war, more than a week after the truce between Washington and Tehran came into effect.

A recent poll by NBC News suggested that two-thirds of Americans disapprove of Trump’s handling of the war.

With dissatisfaction growing, many of the president’s critics have pointed to Israel as the real power behind the war – portraying Trump as a weak leader following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“He entered a war – got pulled into it by Bibi Netanyahu, let’s be clear about that – entered a war that the American people do not want,” Kamala Harris, Trump’s 2024 Democratic opponent, said last week.

Harris served as vice president in the Joe Biden administration, which provided diplomatic and military support for Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza for more than two years.

During the 2024 campaign, Trump presented himself as the “peace” candidate, promising to end wars that were started under the Biden administration.

Trump’s National Security Strategy, released last year, also said that Washington would pivot its foreign policy and military resources from the Middle East to the Western Hemisphere.

But Netanyahu, who has visited Trump in the US six times in one year, has continued to push for a hardline against Iran. The most vocal supporters of the war in Washington have also been Israel’s closest allies.

On Monday, Trump renewed his attacks on the mainstream media for its coverage of the war with Iran.

“I watch and read the FAKE NEWS Pundits and Polls in total disbelief. 90% of what they say are lies and made-up stories, and the polls are rigged, much as the 2020 Presidential Election was rigged,” the US president wrote.

He also touted his policies in Venezuela, where the country has remained stable and become more friendly to Washington after US forces abducted President Nicolas Maduro in January.

In Iran, however, the US-Israeli strikes led to the closure of Hormuz and sustained Iranian attacks across the region for nearly six weeks.

The conflict is now paused, and further talks between US and Iranian officials could take place in Pakistan this week. But both sides have threatened to renew the fighting if a deal is not reached.

“Just like the results in Venezuela, which the media doesn’t like talking about, the results in Iran will be amazing – And if Iran’s new leaders (Regime Change!) are smart, Iran can have a great and prosperous future!” Trump wrote.

US forces have released video appearing to show the capture of an Iranian-flagged ship near the Strait of Hormuz, which President Donald Trump says was attempting to breach its naval blockade. Iran has condemned the operation as ‘maritime piracy,’ warned of retaliation, and cast doubt on new talks with the US. Here’s what we know.

US band The Strokes used their Coachella set to showcase the US-Israeli destruction of universities in Gaza and Iran, including Gaza’s al-Israa University.

New video from the US military is said to show an operation by its forces to seize an Iranian-flagged ship which attempted to bypass the US blockade of Iranian ports. The US says the cargo ship Touska was linked to a sanctioned company, while Iran condemned the move as ‘piracy’ and a violation of the ceasefire.

Islamabad, Pakistan – Pakistan is gearing up to host the second round of talks between the United States and Iran aimed at ending their war, but rising tensions in recent hours have cast uncertainty over Tehran’s participation, as the deadline nears for the end of the two-week ceasefire.

Unlike the first round of talks held in Islamabad on April 11, the upcoming negotiations could last for multiple days until a temporary deal – mediators are calling it a memorandum of understanding – is signed, effectively extending the ceasefire, sources close to these efforts have told Al Jazeera. If the MoU is agreed, it would give negotiators a longer window – even up to 60 days – to secure a longer peace deal.

But all of that hinges on the participation of Iran, which – as of Monday morning – has not confirmed that it will be sending its negotiators to Islamabad. That follows a rapid escalation in tensions over the past 24 hours.

US President Donald Trump announced on Sunday that his representatives were heading to Pakistan for a second round of negotiations with Iran, as a fragile ceasefire, due to expire on Wednesday, edges towards its deadline.  But Trump accompanied his announcement with a revival of earlier pre-ceasefire threats to bomb Iran’s energy and power facilities.

“My Representatives are going to Islamabad, Pakistan. They will be there tomorrow evening, for Negotiations,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. He accused Iran of a “Total Violation of our Ceasefire Agreement” after Iranian gunboats fired on vessels in the Strait of Hormuz on Saturday, hitting ships including a French vessel and a British freighter.

“We’re offering a very fair and reasonable DEAL, and I hope they take it because, if they don’t, the United States is going to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge, in Iran,” Trump wrote. “NO MORE MR. NICE GUY!”

The tensions did not ease overnight. In the early hours of Monday, Trump announced on Truth Social that the US Navy guided missile destroyer USS Spruance had intercepted an Iranian-flagged cargo ship, the Touska, nearly 900 feet (274 metres) long, in the Gulf of Oman after its crew refused to heed warnings to stop.

“Our Navy ship stopped them right in their tracks by blowing a hole in the engine room,” Trump wrote. US Marines have now taken charge of the vessel, which Trump alleged was under US Treasury sanctions for prior illegal activity.

Iran has described the seizure of the ship as “piracy”.

Pakistan’s preparations

Amid those military and social media exchanges between Iran and the United States, Pakistan has been busy getting ready to host talks that it – as the principal mediator between Washington and Tehran – hopes will yield a deal to end the war, now into its eighth week.

Islamabad’s Marriott Hotel asked guests to vacate by Sunday afternoon. The Serena Hotel, just a few kilometres away and the venue for the first round of talks a week earlier, soon issued the same order and stopped taking reservations.

Roads into the Red Zone, the capital’s most heavily fortified area, were sealed. The district houses key government buildings, including the National Assembly, foreign embassies and both five-star hotels. Thousands of additional police and paramilitary personnel arrived from across the country.

Barbed wire and barricades lined the streets, and most access routes were shut.

But even before Trump’s latest threat to blow up Iranian energy and power facilities, and the subsequent hijacking of the Iranian ship, Tehran was unclear about whether it would join the talks.

Minutes before Trump’s Truth Social message, Iran’s ambassador to Pakistan, Reza Amiri Moghadam wrote on his social media that violations of international law, the continuation of the US naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, threats of further strikes, and what he described as unreasonable demands could not be reconciled with a genuine pursuit of peace.

“As long as the naval blockade remains, faultlines remain,” he added.

The negotiators: The US and Iranian teams

Trump first said on Sunday that Vice President JD Vance, who had led the US team in the first round of Islamabad talks, would not visit the Pakistani capital this time around, because of security concerns.

But White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt later said that Vance would join the US delegation, alongside special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, the same team that led the first round.

Flight tracking data showed at least four US government aircraft carrying communications equipment and motorcade support landed on Sunday at PAF Base Nur Khan in Rawalpindi, the primary VIP entry point for Islamabad.

However, by late night, sources close to mediators told Al Jazeera that it was once again unclear whether Vance would travel to Islamabad on Monday. They said that the US might now send Witkoff and Kushner to Islamabad first, and if the talks actually happen, Vance might join them.

Amid Iranian hesitation over whether to join the Islamabad talks, Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif spoke with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. The call lasted about 45 minutes, the Pakistan PM’s office said.

Sharif briefed Pezeshkian on his recent visits to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkiye, where he met with their leaders, describing those engagements as helpful in “building consensus in support of a sustained process of dialogue and diplomacy”.

But by early Monday morning, Trump’s revived threats and the capture of the Iranian cargo ship have left the prospects of talks in Islamabad even more on edge than before.

Iran pushes back

Tehran pushed back sharply against Trump’s flurry of social media posts on Sunday.

Iran’s state news agency IRNA said reports of a second round of talks in Islamabad were “not correct”, and blamed the lack of progress on what it described as American “greed”, unreasonable demands, shifting positions and “continuous contradictions”.

According to IRNA, the naval blockade – imposed by Trump last Monday, two days after the first round of Islamabad talks – violated the ceasefire understanding and had “so far prevented progress in negotiations”.

It added that “no clear prospect for productive negotiations is foreseen” under current conditions and dismissed US statements on talks as “a media game”, aimed at pressuring Iran through a “blame game”.

In a post on X, foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei went further, describing the US naval blockade as “unlawful and criminal” and saying it amounted to “war crime and crime against humanity”.

Despite the public denials, Iranian sources earlier on Sunday indicated a delegation was expected in Pakistan on Tuesday. It could include Parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who led Tehran’s team in the first round, and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who had joined him then.

Pakistan’s foreign ministry said Araghchi and his Pakistani counterpart Ishaq Dar spoke by phone on Sunday and discussed “the need for continued dialogue and engagement as essential to resolving the current issues as soon as possible”.

Analysts say the gap between Iran’s public stance and private signalling reflects a deliberate strategy.

“This gap reflects a dual-track negotiation strategy,” Seyed Mojtaba Jalalzadeh, an international relations analyst based in Tehran, told Al Jazeera. “At the public level, Iran maintains a hardline position to preserve domestic legitimacy and increase its leverage; at the non-public level, by dispatching a team to Islamabad, it signals that it has not abandoned diplomacy but is instead testing its conditions.”

Fahd Humayun, an assistant professor of political science at Tufts University, agreed.

“When warring parties come to the table to negotiate, they come with the understanding that there is occasionally a gap between public posturing and private positions,” he told Al Jazeera. “My sense is that they will pick up from where they left off, rather than getting too caught up in the rhetoric that has emerged since”.

That divergence extends to the pace of negotiations.

Washington has pushed for a rapid resolution, with Trump repeatedly declaring the war “close to over” even as fighting continues. Tehran, by contrast, has shown little inclination to be rushed.

A diplomat in Islamabad, who has followed the talks closely, described the contrast.

“The previous round of talks is a great example. It appeared as if the Americans brought a stop-watch, whereas the Iranians came armed with a calendar,” the diplomat said on condition of anonymity.

What is achievable?

Officials do not expect a final deal this week.

The immediate goal is likely to be a ceasefire extension, with both sides in Islamabad working towards a limited understanding.

Pakistani officials expressed cautious optimism, saying the process was moving in a positive direction while stressing that a final agreement would require sustained engagement and compromise.

Unlike the first round, talks could run for several days, with the aim of agreeing on a framework for broader negotiations in the coming weeks and months.

Humayun cautioned against viewing the first round as a failure.

“I wouldn’t characterise the first round as having failed, that assumes expectations of resolving the most difficult issues early on, which is unlikely in talks of this nature where the issues are so complex,” he said.

For this round, a ceasefire extension would be “a meaningful outcome in itself”, while both sides would likely be “probing for any shifts or flexibility in positions since they last spoke”.

It is that movement, he added, that would allow both sides to “politically sanction an extension of the ceasefire”.

“A ceasefire extension could represent the most minimal form of agreement achievable in this round,” Jalalzadeh said, adding that the deal Washington seeks is “far broader in scope and is rooted in a history stretching back 47 years”.

Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Saeed Khatibzadeh, speaking on the sidelines of the Antalya Diplomacy Forum in Turkiye over the weekend, said “significant progress” had been made in the previous round but stressed that a framework must be agreed upon before talks could advance.

He described US demands on Iran’s nuclear programme as “maximalist”.

Ghalibaf was more direct. “There are many gaps and some fundamental points remain,” he said in televised remarks on Saturday night. “We are still far from the final discussion”.

The core sticking points, Iran’s nuclear programme and control of the Strait of Hormuz, remain unresolved since the first round, held on April 11, which lasted 21 hours and ended without agreement.

A separate Israel-Lebanon ceasefire is now in place, removing one of Tehran’s stated conditions for talks.

But Jalalzadeh said the ceasefire fell well short of satisfying Iran’s demands. “The current Israel-Lebanon ceasefire is temporary, fragile, and incomplete,” he told Al Jazeera, noting that Hezbollah – Tehran’s most powerful regional ally – was absent from the agreement, which the Lebanese government negotiated with Israel.

“This ceasefire is a tactical palliative, not a substitute for Iran’s strategic demand,” he said, adding that Tehran’s insistence on Lebanon being part of any broader deal, rather than handled through a separate arrangement, remained unchanged.

Humayun said Iran would want the Israel-Lebanon truce to hold and ideally include “some form of assurance against violations”.

The broader question, he said, is “whether Iran can secure at least some degree of US pressure on Israel to adhere to the ceasefire and to refrain from further escalation”.

The Sharif-Pezeshkian call capped an intensive week of Pakistani diplomacy.

Field Marshal Asim Munir travelled to Tehran last Wednesday, carrying what officials described as a new message from Washington.

Iranian Ambassador Reza Amiri Moghadam said last week in Islamabad that Tehran would “do talks in Pakistan and nowhere else, because we trust Pakistan”.

Analysts say Pakistan’s value as a mediator lies in the rare credibility it holds with both sides.

Humayun said that even if this round produces no breakthrough, it would not necessarily erode trust in Islamabad.

“All parties understand how difficult these issues are and that, without Pakistan’s facilitation, they may not have reached this point at all,” he said.

Jalalzadeh offered a more cautious assessment, saying Pakistan’s role ultimately depends on results.

“If this round also fails, its standing as an effective mediator will be weakened, even if it continues to function as a minimal communication channel,” he said.

Still, he noted, Islamabad has already distinguished itself among countries that have attempted mediation, filling a gap left by others and establishing itself as a credible host.

Trump, however, insisted a deal would come regardless.

“It will happen. One way or another. The nice way or the hard way,” he told ABC News. “You can quote me.”

Islamabad talks in limbo as Tehran says it will retaliate after US marines capture an Iranian-flagged ship near the Strait of Hormuz.

Donald Trump announced on Sunday that a second round of US-Iran talks is to be held in Pakistan on Monday – but Tehran has not confirmed participation, two days before a ceasefire deal expires.

The capture by US Marines of an Iranian-flagged container ship near the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday has further clouded the Islamabad talks, as Tehran has pledged to retaliate.

The attack came hours after President Trump announced he is sending a team to Islamabad for talks, while once again threatening to knock out Iran’s power plants and bridges if there is no deal. The ceasefire, which ended more than a month of war, expires on Wednesday.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister, Shehbaz Sharif, spoke on Sunday with Iranian President, Masoud Pezeshkian, as he reaffirmed his government’s readiness to mediate the conflict.

Here is what we know:

In Iran

• ⁠Iran’s top ⁠joint ⁠military command, Khatam al-Anbiya, accused the US of ⁠violating the ceasefire by shooting at ⁠an Iranian ship in the Gulf of Oman and vowed ‌to retaliate.
• President Trump ⁠posted on Truth ⁠Social on Sunday that US Marines ‌captured a vessel that tried to get past ⁠the American blockade on ⁠Iranian ports, adding that ⁠US forces ⁠stopped the ⁠ship by blowing a hole in ‌its engine room.
• Iran ⁠executed ⁠two men convicted of cooperating with Israel’s Mossad ⁠intelligence service and planning attacks inside the ⁠country, the judiciary’s news outlet Mizan reported on Sunday.
• French ⁠shipping ⁠company, CMA CGM, confirmed on Sunday that “warning shots” were fired at one ⁠of its ships in the Strait of Hormuz on Saturday. 
• ⁠Iran’s ⁠armed forces turned back two tankers attempting ⁠to transit the Strait ⁠of Hormuz on Sunday after issuing warnings. The semi-official Tasnim ‌news agency said that was a result of the continuing US maritime ⁠blockade on Iran.
• International flights from Mashhad airport in northeast Iran will resume on Monday, the civil aviation authority said.

War diplomacy

• Iranian state media reported that Tehran had rejected new peace talks, citing the ongoing blockade, threatening rhetoric, and Washington’s shifting positions and “excessive demands.”
• Iranian state media reported on Sunday that Tehran was not planning to take part in talks with the United States, hours after Trump said he was dispatching negotiators to Islamabad.
• The US president posted on Truth Social ⁠on Sunday that representatives are going to Islamabad “tomorrow night” for Iran negotiations. “We’re offering a very fair and reasonable deal, and ⁠I hope they ⁠take it because, if they don’t, ⁠the United States ⁠is going to ⁠knock out every single power plant, ‌and every single bridge, in Iran,” ‌Trump ‌wrote.
• Pakistan’s Prime Minister ⁠Sharif ⁠said on Sunday that he spoke with ⁠Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian about the conflict ⁠in the Gulf.
  Sharif posted on X that he shared insights with Pezeshkian regarding his recent ‌conversations with the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkiye.
• “I appreciated ⁠Iran’s engagement, including ⁠its high-level delegation to Islamabad for the historic talks, and ⁠recent discussions with Field Marshal Syed ⁠Asim Munir in ⁠Tehran,” Sharif said.
• Turkiye’s Foreign Minister, Hakan Fidan, said on Sunday he was “optimistic” that a two-week ceasefire between Iran and the United States, which expires on Wednesday, would be extended, allowing more time for talks between the sides.
  

  

In the US

• Trump said on Sunday that the guided-missile destroyer, USS Spruance, fired on and seized the Iranian-flagged cargo ship, Touska, in the Gulf of Oman, and US Marines were “seeing what’s on board!”
• The US president said Iran has committed a “serious ⁠violation” of the ceasefire ⁠but still thinks he can get a peace deal, ABC ‌News reporter Jonathan Karl posted on X on Sunday. Trump added that a peace deal “will happen. ⁠One way or another”.

In Israel

• Argentine President Javier Milei, has reaffirmed his country’s support for the campaign against Iran, citing his government’s earlier decision to designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a “terrorist organisation”.
• Milei, who is visiting Israel for the third time since taking office, declared on Sunday that the joint US-Israel war against Iran was the “right thing to do”, as he signed on to the so-called Isaac Accords aimed at deepening bilateral ties between Israel and Latin American countries.

In Lebanon

• ⁠The Israeli ⁠military on Monday warned residents in southern ⁠Lebanon not to move ⁠south of a specified line of villages or approach areas ‌near the Litani River, saying its forces remain deployed in the area during a ceasefire ⁠due to what ⁠it described as continued Hezbollah activity.
• The Israeli army also said it had determined that an image circulating on social media showing a soldier in south Lebanon hitting a statue of Jesus Christ is authentic and depicts one of its troops.
• The viral photo of the Israeli soldier hitting the Jesus statue with a sledgehammer has sparked outrage.
• French President Emmanuel Macron is due to meet Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam in Paris on Tuesday. The announcement follows the killing of a French peacekeeper in Lebanon during the fragile 10-day ceasefire between Israel and Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah.
• Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz said the military will use “full force” in Lebanon – even during the ongoing ceasefire – should Israeli troops face any threat from Hezbollah.
• Lebanon’s military said it has reopened a road and bridge between Nabatieh and Khardali, which were damaged by Israeli strikes in the south.

Oil prices rise

• Oil prices surged on Monday following the re-escalation of hostilities in the Middle East war However, lingering hopes that a deal to end the seven-week crisis continued to support equities, despite Tehran saying it was not planning to attend peace talks.

Victor Wembanyama set a new San Antonio record for the most points in an NBA playoff debut as the Spurs outlast Portland.

Victor Wembanyama scored 35 points in his postseason debut as ‌the host San Antonio Spurs used a fourth quarter run to create separation in a 111-98 win over the Portland Trail Blazers on Sunday in Game ⁠1 of their Western Conference first-round ⁠playoff series.

The Spurs took a 1-0 lead in the best-of-seven series with Game 2 on Tuesday in the Alamo City before switching to Portland for Games 3 and 4.

Wembanyama broke Tim Duncan’s franchise record (32 in 1998) for most points in a playoff debut. He led ⁠all first-half scorers with 21 points – a league record for most in the first half of an NBA playoff debut going back to 1997, the start of the play-by-play era.

“It’s good to get this one out of the way,” Wembanyama said. “We just tried to do the things we’ve been doing all year and stay ⁠solid. There was pressure on us to win the first game, but it wasn’t that much pressure if we just stayed to the plan.”

San Antonio, the second seed in the West, led by 10 at halftime and by 15 after three quarters before all but cementing the win by scoring the first six points of the fourth quarter to go up 93-72.

The seventh-seeded Trail Blazers clawed their way back to within 11 via a 13-3 run capped by Deni Avdija’s dunk with 4:27 to play, ‌but San Antonio held strong down the stretch.

“Something that we learned is that every possession matters,” Scoot Henderson said. “Next game I think we are all gonna be more aggressive defensively. I feel like I could be more aggressive. Defensively I think there could be something more in the tank.”

Stephon Castle and De’Aaron Fox added 17 points apiece for the Spurs, with Devin Vassell scoring 15 and Luke Kornet hitting for 10.

Avdija racked up 30 points and 10 rebounds to lead the Trail Blazers. Henderson scored 18, Robert Williams III had 11, Shaedon Sharpe hit for 10 and Jrue Holiday distributed 11 assists along with nine points.

The Spurs jumped to the front in the game’s early moments, building a nine- point lead on Fox’s stepback 3-pointer at the 2:35 mark ⁠of the first quarter and jumping out to a 30-21 advantage after 12 minutes of play.

San Antonio stoked the margin ⁠to 50-34 when Kornet threw down an alley-oop dunk from Castle with 5:24 to play in the second quarter. Avdija’s three-point play with 2:28 left culled the deficit to seven points before Wembanyama poured in a layup and then a 3-pointer on back-to-back possessions to push the lead back to a dozen points. The Spurs led 59-49 at the break.

“(Wembanyama) has lofty expectations and goals ⁠for himself, and being in the playoffs is squarely a part of a lot of that,” Spurs coach Mitch Johnson said. “So it’s good to get the first one and kind of get that experience under your belt.”

Avdija paced the Trail ⁠Blazers with 19 points over the opening two periods.

The Trail Blazers reeled off the first eight ⁠points of the third quarter and had four chances to tie the game or go in front but committed three turnovers and missed a shot over that stretch.

“It’s hard to say,” said Portland coach Tiago Splitter when asked if the team’s lack of playoff experience played a role in the loss. “It’s the first time we’ve played against Wemby this season so there’s a lot to learn. It wasn’t our ‌best night. It’s really hard to take him out of the paint. Those five threes really hurt us.”

San Antonio regained its stride and built the lead to a game-high 17 points on Julian Champagnie’s 3-pointer with 53 seconds to play in the period before settling for an 87-72 lead heading into the final ‌12 ‌minutes.

“Our first timeout, in the first quarter, I think it took everybody a minute to kind of settle in,” Vassell said. “Even in the second half, it took a minute when (Portland) went on a run. Basketball is a game of runs, so if we can withstand that, get some stops and start getting some good looks we knew we’d be all right.”