united states

MILAN — Believe in the Quad God.

Ilia Malinin’s clutch free skate that scored 200.03 points gave the United States its second consecutive team figure skating gold medal Sunday at the Milan-Cortina Olympic Games.

After Amber Glenn fought through a shaky free program that finished third and lost the United States its two-point lead, Malinin stepped up as only he could. He executed five quad jumps and won by nearly six points, even if he did not perform his signature quad axel. He even put his hand down after a jump, but the mistake only seemed to fuel him as he finished with a flourish, changing the back-half of his program to earn back extra points.

His U.S. teammates, cheering from the sideline box rose to their feet and pumped their fists after each of Malinin’s jumping passes. When he landed his back flip, skating flawlessly through one foot, the packed crowd at Milano Ice Skating Arena roared.

While Japan’s Shun Sato scored a season’s best to finish the competition, he could not match the technical prowess of Malinin, who is also the favorite to win individual gold this week.

In front of a raucous home crowd, Italy held off Georgia for the bronze medal behind a dazzling free skate from Matteo Rizzo, who dropped to his knees on the ice and cried after his performance had fans chanting “Italia!” before he even finished. He cried into the Italian flag in the kiss-and-cry after his season’s best 179.62 points.

With the first figure skating medal of the Milan-Cortina Games on the line, every skater fought for every fraction of a point. U.S. pairs skater Ellie Kam went deep into a one-legged squat to hold on to the first throw jump. The United States led by five points entering the final day, but still had no room for error as Japan finished first in qualifying in all of Sunday’s disciplines. With the dominance of Japan’s Riku Miura and Ryuichi Kihara in pairs, Kam’s partner Danny O’Shea knew the strategy for the U.S. pair was to simply try to stay as close as possible.

Ellie Kam and Danny O’Shea perform in pairs figure skating during the team competition at the Milan-Cortina Games on Sunday.

(Stephanie Scarbrough / Associated Press)

Kam fought for the landing on a throw loop so hard that she could feel her leg cramping.

“I was like, ‘I’m not going down,’” Kam said, “I got this. We got this.”

They looked at each other before their next element and said “calm.” Their message cut through the energized crowd that cheered louder and louder with each jump. At the end, Kam’s and O’Shea’s celebratory screams simply joined the crowd’s roar. As they saluted the crowd, O’Shea pointed toward Kam to acknowledge her effort.

The pair’s fourth-place finish in the free program was a one-point improvement from their qualifying spot, earning a slim, but vital cushion entering the men’s and women’s free skates.

Instead of sending world champion Alysa Liu back for the free skate after she performed the short program, the U.S. selected the three-time national champion Glenn. The 26-year-old was making her Olympic debut.

On the Olympic stage for the first time, Glenn has tried to embrace the opportunity while treating the competition as if it were any other one. But the larger stage has created additional stress for Glenn after she was asked in a news conference about President Trump’s approach to the LGBTQ+ community in recent years and how it’s affected her personally.

U.S. figure skater Amber Glenn competes during the team competition on Sunday at the Milan-Cortina Games.

(Ashley Landis / Associated Press)

Glenn, who identifies as bisexual and pansexual, encouraged people in the queer community to “stay strong in these hard times” and recognized that it wasn’t the first time the community had to unite to “fight for our human rights.” Glenn then received threats on social media after the news conference and posted on Instagram that she would be taking a break from social platforms to focus on the competition.

But it wasn’t the social media hate that rattled Glenn, she insisted. She was simply tired, sore and disoriented from the unfamiliar Olympic team competition format.

All of Glenn’s other competitors did the short program portion of the competition on Friday. She came in with several good days of training at the venue, but did not get the same kind of opportunity to get used to the stage. Glenn fought through a shaky triple axel to open her program and stepped out of a triple flip that prevented her from completing a planned combination for her second jumping pass.

Waiting in the kiss-and-cry, Glenn bowed her head and stared at the ground. She struggled to muster even a fake smile.

“I’m grateful that the team is so supportive.” said Glenn, who finished behind Japan’s Kaori Sakamoto and Italy’s Lara Naki Gutmann. “But I do feel guilty that I could be the reason that we don’t win the gold, and I don’t know how I will ever apologize for that.”

Glenn clasped her hands in her lap waiting for Sato’s score after the Japanese skater performed a clean program that had his teammates in tears. But his technical score was about five points less than Malinin’s. Glenn was the first skater to hug Malinin in the United States’ team celebration, lifting him off the ground as he extended arms out wide.

Tehran, Iran – Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian has called on the United States to respect his country as the two nations look ahead to another round of nuclear negotiations next week following mediated discussions in Oman.

“Our reasoning on the nuclear issue is based on rights stipulated in the Non-Proliferation Treaty,” he wrote in a post on X on Sunday. “The Iranian nation has always responded to respect with respect, but cannot withstand the language of force”.

Pezeshkian described the indirect talks held in Oman on Friday as a “step forward” and said his administration favours dialogue.

Iranian officials are highlighting sovereignty and independence and are signalling eagerness for nuclear-only negotiations, while rejecting a military build-up in the region by the US.

Speaking at a forum hosted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Tehran, the country’s chief diplomat Abbas Araghchi pointed out that the Islamic Republic has always emphasised independence since overthrowing US-backed Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi in a 1979 revolution.

“Before the revolution, the people did not believe their establishment to have possessed true independence,” Araghchi said.

The messaging comes as the anniversary of the revolution approaches on Wednesday, when state-organised demonstrations have been planned across the country. Iranian authorities have in previous years exhibited military equipment, including ballistic missiles, during the rallies.

Araghchi said during the event in the capital that Iran is unwilling to forego nuclear enrichment for civilian use even if it leads to more military attacks by the US and Israel, “because no one has the right to tell us what we must have and must not have”.

However, the diplomat added that he told US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner in Muscat on Friday that “there is no way but negotiations”. He said China and Russia have also been informed of the content of the talks.

“Being afraid is lethal poison in this situation,” Araghchi said about Washington amassing what US President Donald Trump has called a “beautiful armada” near Iran’s waters.

‘Push the region back years’

Iran’s top military commander on Sunday issued a new warning that the entire region will be engulfed in conflict if Iran is attacked.

“While being prepared, we genuinely have no desire to see the outbreak of a regional war,” Major General Abdolrahim Mousavi told a gathering of air force and air defence commanders and personnel.

“Even though aggressors will be the target of the flames of regional war, this will push back the advancement and development of the region by years, and its repercussions will be borne by the warmongers in the US and the Zionist regime,” he said in reference to Israel.

According to Mousavi, Iran “has the necessary power and preparedness for a long-term war with the US”.

But many average Iranians are left in limbo without much hope that the talks with the US will lead to results, including for the country’s heavily declining economy.

“I was 20 when the first negotiations with the West over Iran’s nuclear programme were held about 23 years ago,” Saman, who works at a small private investment firm in Tehran, told Al Jazeera.

“Our best years are behind us. But it’s even more sad to think that some of the youth who were born at the start of the negotiations were killed on the streets during the protests last month with many hopes and dreams.”

‘They never returned’

Iran is witnessing tense time and threats of a massive US military strike. But the Islamic Republic has not overcome anti-government protests that shook the nation, denouncing the collapse of the national currency, soaring prices and economic hardship.

State television continues to broadcast confessions of Iranians arrested during the nationwide protests, many of whom are accused by the state of working in line with the interests of foreign powers.

In a report aired late on Saturday, a woman and multiple men with blurred-out faces and in handcuffs could be seen saying they were led by a man who allegedly received weapons and money from Mossad operatives in neighbouring Iraq’s Erbil.

“He only wanted more people to die; he shot at everyone,” one of the confessing men said about what allegedly transpired during unrest in the Tehranpars district in the eastern part of the capital, backing the state’s claim that “terrorists” are responsible for all deaths.

Iranian authorities have accused the US, Israel and European countries of instigating the protests.

But international human rights organisations and foreign-based opposition groups accuse state forces of being behind the unprecedented killings during the protests, which were carried out mostly on the nights of January 8 and 9.

The Iranian government claims 3,117 people were killed, but the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) says it has documented nearly 7,000 fatalities and is investigating more than 11,600 cases. The United Nations special rapporteur on Iran, Mati Sato, said more than 20,000 may have been killed as information trickles out despite heavy internet filtering.

Al Jazeera cannot independently verify these figures.

Amid numerous reports that dozens of medical staff were arrested for treating wounded protesters and remain incarcerated in harsh conditions, Iran’s judiciary issued a rejection of the allegations late Saturday. It claimed that only “a limited number of medical personnel were arrested for participating in riots and playing a role in the field”.

A large number of schoolchildren and university students were also reportedly among tens of thousands arrested during and in the aftermath of the nationwide protests. The Ministry of Education claimed last week that it did not know how many schoolchildren were arrested, but could confirm that all have since been released.

The Coordinating Council of Iranian Teachers’ Trade Associations on Sunday released the four-minute video below, titled “200 empty school desks”, which shows the schoolchildren and teenagers confirmed killed during the protests. Many were accompanied by their parents when killed.

One month after the killings, countless families are left grieving and continue to release videos commemorating their loved ones online.

A message on Instagram calling on the international community to keep talking about the people of Iran has now been shared more than 1.5 million times.

“One month ago today, thousands woke up and ate breakfast for the last time without knowing it, and kissed their mother for the last time without knowing it,” the message reads. “They lived for the last time and never returned.”

President Trump’s administration can continue to detain immigrants without bond, marking a major legal victory for the federal immigration agenda and countering a slew of recent lower court decisions across the country that argued the practice is illegal.

A panel of judges on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday evening that the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to deny bond hearings to immigrants arrested across the country is consistent with the Constitution and federal immigration law.

Specifically, Circuit Judge Edith H. Jones wrote in the 2-1 majority opinion that the government correctly interpreted the Immigration and Nationality Act by asserting that “unadmitted aliens apprehended anywhere in the United States are ineligible for release on bond, regardless of how long they have resided inside the United States.”

Under past administrations, most noncitizens with no criminal record who were arrested away from the border had an opportunity to request a bond hearing while their cases wound through immigration court. Historically, bond was often granted to those without criminal convictions who were not flight risks, and mandatory detention was limited to recent border crossers.

“That prior Administrations decided to use less than their full enforcement authority under” the law “does not mean they lacked the authority to do more,” Jones wrote.

The plaintiffs in the two separate cases filed last year against the Trump administration were both Mexican nationals who had lived in the United States for more than 10 years and weren’t flight risks, their attorneys argued. Neither man had a criminal record, and both were jailed for months last year before a lower Texas court granted them bond in October.

The Trump White House reversed that policy in favor of mandatory detention in July, reversing almost 30 years of precedent under both Democrat and Republican administrations.

Friday’s ruling also bucks a November district court decision in California, which granted detained immigrants with no criminal history the opportunity to request a bond hearing and had implications for noncitizens held in detention nationwide.

Circuit Judge Dana M. Douglas wrote the lone dissent in Friday’s decision.

The elected members of Congress who passed the Immigration and Nationality Act “would be surprised to learn it had also required the detention without bond of two million people,” Douglas wrote, adding that many of the people detained are “the spouses, mothers, fathers, and grandparents of American citizens.”

She went on to argue that the federal government was overriding the lawmaking process with the Department of Homeland Security’s new immigration detention policy that denies detained immigrants bond.

“Because I would reject the government’s invitation to rubber stamp its proposed legislation by executive fiat, I dissent,” Douglas wrote.

Douglas’ opinion echoed widespread tensions between the Trump administration and federal judges around the country, who have increasingly accused the administration of flouting court orders.

U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi celebrated the decision as “a significant blow against activist judges who have been undermining our efforts to make America safe again at every turn.”

“We will continue vindicating President Trump’s law and order agenda in courtrooms across the country,” Bondi wrote on the social media platform X.

Riddle writes for the Associated Press.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s chief of staff has quit over the appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the United States after files revealed the extent of Mandelson’s relationship with the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

“After careful reflection, I have decided to resign from the government. The decision to appoint Peter Mandelson was wrong. He has damaged our party, our country and trust in politics itself,” Starmer’s top aide Morgan McSweeney said in a statement on Sunday.

“I advised the Prime Minister to make that appointment and I take full responsibility for that advice,” he added.

Labour members of parliament had called for McSweeney’s resignation after new evidence about Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein was revealed in the latest tranche of documents and photos from the investigation into the American financier were released by the US Department of Justice. The lawmakers blamed McSweeney for the appointment of Mandelson and the damage caused by the publication of the crude exchanges between him and Epstein.

McSweeney, 48, who was a protege and friend of Mandelson, was accused by some Labour lawmakers and his political opponents of failing to ensure that there were proper background checks when the ambassador was appointed.

In a statement on Sunday, Starmer said it had been “an honour” to work with McSweeney, who had held the role of chief of staff since October 2024.

Mandelson’s payout

Mandelson was sacked by Starmer in September over his friendship with Epstein and last week also quit the Labour Party and House of Lords, the upper chamber of the UK Parliament. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office said it is reviewing an exit payment made to him after he was fired.

Mandelson, a pivotal figure in British politics and the Labour Party for decades, received an estimated payout of between 38,750 pounds and 55,000 pounds ($52,000 to $74,000) after only seven months in the job, according to a report in the Sunday Times newspaper.

Documents released on January 30 by the US Justice Department appeared to show that Mandelson had also allegedly leaked confidential UK government information to Epstein when he was a British minister, including during the 2008 financial crisis.

The Foreign Office said in a statement that it has launched a review into Mandelson’s severance payment “in light of further information that has now been revealed and the ongoing police investigation”.

Mandelson’s lawyers have said he “regrets, and will regret until his dying day, that he believed Epstein’s lies about his criminality”.

“Lord Mandelson did not discover the truth about Epstein until after his death in 2019,” said a spokesperson for the law firm Mishcon de Reya, which represents Mandelson.

“He is profoundly sorry that powerless and vulnerable women and girls were not given the protection they deserved,” the law firm added.

Starmer’s political future in peril?

The departure of McSweeney has thrown the future direction of the government into doubt, less than two years after the Labour Party won one of the largest parliamentary majorities in modern British history.

With polls showing Starmer is already hugely unpopular with voters, some in his own party are openly questioning his judgement and future, and it remains to be seen whether McSweeney’s exit will be enough to silence his critics.

Cabinet minister Pat McFadden earlier insisted Starmer should remain in office despite his “terrible mistake” in appointing Mandelson.

The close Starmer ally told broadcasters the party should stick with the prime minister.

“He [Starmer] should be realistic and accept that this has been a terrible story, that this appointment was a terrible mistake,” McFadden, the work and pensions secretary, told BBC television.

He said the real blame lay “squarely with Peter Mandelson”, who put himself forward for the job despite knowing the extent of his relationship with Epstein.

But according to a report by the Sunday Telegraph, Starmer’s deputy, David Lammy, has become the first cabinet minister to appear to distance himself from Starmer.

The deputy prime minister had not been in favour of appointing Mandelson due to his known links to Epstein, the report quoted friends of Lammy as saying.

Leqaa Kordia, a 33-year-old Palestinian woman detained in the United States by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency since March, has been rushed to a hospital after a medical episode, according to media reports.

Kordia is being held in Texas after being detained as part of US President Donald Trump’s crackdown on pro-Palestine protests on college campuses across the country.

Her legal team said she was targeted for her protest against Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza near Columbia University in New York in 2024, but the federal government said she was arrested for allegedly overstaying her student visa.

Since her hospitalisation on Friday, Kordia’s legal team and family said they have not been able to speak with her and do not know her whereabouts.

Here is everything we know about Kordia and why she continues to remain in detention:

Who is Kordia?

Kordia grew up in the occupied West Bank city of Ramallah before coming to the US in 2016. She arrived on a visitor’s visa, staying with her mother, a US citizen, in Paterson, New Jersey, home to one of the largest Arab communities in the country.

She later transitioned from a tourist visa to a student visa, according to her habeas corpus petition.

After her mother applied for Kordia to remain in the US as the relative of a citizen, her green card application was approved in 2021. However, she received incorrect advice from a teacher that led to her student visa expiring in 2022, according to her lawyers.

Before her arrest, Kordia worked as a server at a Middle Eastern restaurant on Palestine Way in New Jersey and helped to care for her autistic half-brother.

Kordia was moved to protest against Israel’s war due to personal loss. Since the start of the war in October 2023, Kordia said, more than 200 of her relatives have been killed.

Israel has killed more than 71,000 Palestinians in Gaza and wounded more than 170,000 in a war that human rights groups, a United Nations commission and a growing number of scholars said amounts to genocide. Since a “ceasefire” began in October, Israel has killed more than 500 Palestinians and continues to impose curbs on the entry of aid into Gaza.

If deported, Kordia would be handed over to the Israeli government.

Why was Kordia arrested?

She was first arrested in April 2024 during a protest outside the gates of Columbia University, but the case was soon dropped.

On March 13, 2025, Kordia showed up at the ICE headquarters in Newark, New Jersey, for what she believed to be routine immigration questions. She was detained there, “thrown into an unmarked van and sent 1,500 miles [more than 2,400km] away”, Kordia wrote in the USA Today newspaper last month.

Kordia was neither a student at Columbia University nor a part of political circles.

“Though I was not a student, I felt compelled to participate. After all, Israel, with the backing of the United States, has laid waste to Gaza, forcibly displacing my family, killing nearly 200 of my relatives,” she wrote in USA Today.

Today, Kordia is the only person who remains in detention from the Columbia campus demonstrations. She has been held at Prairieland Detention Center in Alvarado, Texas.

A leader of the protests, Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian student with Algerian citizenship and a US green card, and others have been released. Khalil, however, is still in a legal battle to remain in the US with his American wife and child. Last month, an appeals court panel dismissed a lawsuit Khalil filed challenging his detention and deportation order. The judges concluded that the federal court that ordered Khalil’s release last year lacked jurisdiction over the matter.

What are the charges against Kordia?

The US government has called Kordia’s money transfers to relatives in the Middle East evidence of possible ties to “terrorists”.

Kordia’s lawyers have continuously argued for her release, saying she was targeted by federal officials for her participation in pro-Palestinian protests.

The federal government has maintained that the case against Kordia is of overstaying a student visa.

“Her arrest had nothing to do with her radical activities,” the Department of Homeland Security said in April. “Kordia was arrested for immigration violations due to having overstayed her F-1 student visa, which had been terminated on January 26, 2022, for lack of attendance.”

Writing in USA Today last month, Kordia said she does not consider herself either a leader or an activist.

“I am a devout Muslim who is deeply committed to my faith and community. I’m a Palestinian woman who enjoys playing the oud, making pottery and hiking,” Kordia wrote. “Speaking out against what rights groups and experts have called a genocide is my moral duty and – I thought – a constitutionally protected right for all in this country. Except, it seems, when that speech defends Palestinian life.”

An immigration judge has called for Kordia’s release twice. However, it has been repeatedly blocked through a series of procedural and administrative moves.

“[The] Trump administration has exploited rarely used procedural loopholes to keep me confined, a practice now being challenged in federal district courts across the country, with many finding the practice unconstitutional,” Kordia wrote.

How has Kordia lived in ICE detention?

Since Kordia was moved to the ICE detention facility in Alvarado in March, she has been facing a range of issues, from sleeping on a bare mattress on the floor to being denied religious accommodations, including halal meals.

“Inside the ICE facility where I’m being held, conditions are filthy, overcrowded and inhumane,” Kordia wrote in her piece for USA Today. “For months, I slept in a plastic shell, known as a ‘boat,’ surrounded by cockroaches and only a thin blanket. Privacy does not exist here.”

Last year, when Kordia’s cousin Hamzah Abushaban visited her a week after her arrest, he told The Associated Press news agency in an interview that he was taken aback by the dark circles under her eyes and her state of confusion.

“One of the first things she asked me was why she was there,” Abushaban said. “She cried a lot. She looked like death.”

Rights groups and some Democratic Party leaders have called her a “political prisoner”, condemning the way her case has proceeded.

State Representative Salman Bhojani said the conditions at the detention facility were “suffocating”.

Kordia’s dorm, he said, had 60 mattresses crammed into a space designed for 20 women.

“She does not even have clothing that fully covers her body. Community organizations have tried to provide more appropriate clothing and have been turned away,” Bhojani said. “Male staff enter the dorm at any time, leaving her body exposed in violation of her religious obligations.”

Calling for her release, Amnesty International noted that ICE has “repeatedly violated” Kordia’s religious rights. “She has been served almost no halal meals, forcing her to eat food that doesn’t meet her dietary requirements and causing significant weight loss,” the human rights group said in a statement.

“During Ramadan, staff refused to let her save food for when she could break her fast, forcing her either to go hungry or to break her fast early,” Amnesty said. “She has not been provided with clothing suitable for prayer or a clean prayer space.”

Why was Kordia hospitalised?

On Friday, Abushaban said he heard about Kordia’s hospitalisation in the morning from a person formerly detained with his cousin.

Kordia had fallen, hit her head and suffered a seizure in a bathroom at the Prairieland Detention Center, he told The Dallas Morning News newspaper.

In a statement on Saturday, Kordia’s attorneys and family members demanded answers from the Department of Homeland Security and Prairieland Detention Center regarding her health and whereabouts.

“[Kordia] was reportedly hospitalised yesterday morning after fainting and having a seizure at the Prairieland Detention Center,” the statement said, adding: “Neither her legal team nor family have been provided answers about where she has been hospitalised, the specifics of her health status, and whether and how ICE will ensure her health upon discharge from the undisclosed, off-site hospital.”

“We have since learned that she is expected to spend another night there, but we still have not been able to speak with her directly or have any confirmation of what brought her to the hospital in the first place,” the statement said.

The family members told US media that they called all hospitals in the vicinity but could not locate Kordia.

What were the Columbia protests about?

In 2024, pro-Palestinian student encampments at Columbia University helped ignite a global movement against Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

The protest sites, however, were broken up after Columbia University allowed hundreds of New York City police officers on campus, leading to dozens of arrests.

The student protesters demanded an end to Israel’s war in Gaza and the university’s divestment from companies linked to the Israeli military.

Columbia University imposed severe punishments, including expulsion and revocation of academic degrees, on dozens of students who participated in the protests. University President Nemat “Minouche” Shafik, who was criticised for the handling of the student protests, stepped down.

The protests also put Columbia at odds with the Trump administration, whose officials alleged anti-Semitism on campus. Campaigners said the campus crackdown violated US free speech rights.

Trump also cancelled millions of dollars in federal funding for the university, accusing it of failing to protect Jewish students. Later, Columbia settled and agreed to pay $200m to the government over three years. In exchange, the Trump administration agreed to return parts of the $400m in grants it froze or terminated.

The US president praises his newly inaugurated ‘friend’ and hails strong US-Honduras security ties.

Donald Trump has met with Honduran President Nasry Asfura in Florida, with the US president hailing what he described as a growing alliance aimed at curbing drug trafficking and irregular migration.

Trump said he met with his “friend” Asfura, a conservative businessman, at his Mar-a-Lago resort on Saturday. Asfura took office last week after a razor-thin election victory.

“Tito and I share many of the same America First Values,” said Trump, using Asfura’s nickname. Trump had strongly backed Asfura during his campaign, even threatening to cut off aid to Honduras if he lost.

“Once I gave him my strong Endorsement, he won his Election!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

Following the meeting, Trump praised what he described as a close security partnership between the US and Honduras, saying they would collaborate to “counter dangerous Cartels and Drug Traffickers, and deporting Illegal Migrants and Gang Members out of the United States”.

Asfura is expected to brief Honduran media about the meeting on Sunday, “detailing the issues discussed, the tone of the conversation, and the possible outcomes of the dialogue”, according to Honduras’s El Heraldo newspaper.

The Honduran president’s meeting with Trump comes less than a month after a January 12 meeting with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, after which the two countries announced plans for a free trade deal.

Asfura’s rise to power gives Trump another conservative ally in Latin America, following recent electoral shifts in countries including Chile, Bolivia, Peru and Argentina, where leftist governments have been replaced.

Just before the Honduran election, Trump pardoned the country’s former President Juan Orlando Hernandez, a fellow member of Asfura’s party who was serving a 45-year prison sentence in the US for drug trafficking.

That pardon “was widely seen as a gesture of solidarity with the new president’s [Asfura’s] party”, said Al Jazeera’s Phil Lavelle, reporting from Palm Beach, Florida.

The decision drew major backlash, particularly as Trump’s administration invoked the fight against drug trafficking to justify aggressive actions abroad. They include a string of bombings of alleged drug boats in the Caribbean and later the abduction of Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro, now facing charges including those related to drug trafficking in the US.

‘This is not law enforcement, this is animal cruelty.’

A Tennessee woman says her dog suffered a broken rib after being kicked by a federal officer while agents arrested her boyfriend. The US Marshals Service said the kick was ‘unfortunate’ but done to ‘mitigate a dangerous situation’.

A US oil blockade is causing a severe energy crisis in Cuba, as the government has been forced to ration fuel and cut electricity for many hours a day, paralysing life in the communist-ruled island nation of 11 million.

Bus stops are empty, and families are turning to wood and coal for cooking, living through near-constant power outages amid an economic crisis worsened by the Trump administration’s steps in recent weeks.

President Miguel Diaz-Canel has imposed harsh emergency restrictions – from reduced office hours to fuel sales – in the backdrop of looming threats of regime change from the White House.

The Caribbean region has been on edge since the US forces abducted Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro last month and upped the pressure to isolate Havana and strangle its economy. Venezuela, Cuba’s closest ally in the region, provided the country with the much-needed fuel.

So, how dire is the situation in Cuba? What does United States President Donald Trump want from Havana? And how long can Cuba sustain?

What are Cuba’s emergency measures?

Blaming the US for the crisis, Cuba’s Deputy Prime Minister Oscar Perez‑Oliva Fraga appeared on state television on Friday to inform the millions of the emergency steps “to preserve the country’s essential functions and basic services while managing limited fuel resources”.

Now, the Cuban state companies will shift to a four‑day workweek, with transport between provinces dialled down, main tourism facilities closed, shorter schooldays and reduced in‑person attendance requirements at universities.

“Fuel will be used to protect essential services for the population and indispensable economic activities,” said Perez-Oliva. “This is an opportunity and a challenge that we have no doubt we will overcome. We are not going to collapse.”

The government says it will prioritise available fuel for essential services – public health, food production and defence – and push the installation of solar-based renewable energy sector and incentives therein. It will prioritise shifting energy to selected food production regions and accelerate the use of renewable energy sources, while cutting down on culture and sport activities and diverting resources towards the country’s early warning systems.

Why has the US blocked oil to Cuba?

Decades of strict US economic sanctions against Cuba, the largest island nation in the Caribbean, have destroyed its economy and isolated it from international trade. Cuba relied on foreign allies for oil shipments, such as Mexico, Russia, and Venezuela.

However, after the US forces abducted Venezuelan President Maduro, Washington blocked any Venezuelan oil from going to Cuba. Trump now says the Cuban government is ready to fall.

Under Trump, Washington has pivoted to the Western Hemisphere, which it wants to dominate. The military actions in Venezuela, the pledge to take over Greenland and changing the government in Cuba are part of the new policy.

Last month, Trump signed an executive order – labelling Cuba a threat to national security – imposing tariffs on any country that sells or provides oil to the island nation. Further pressure on the Mexican government reportedly led to oil stocks reaching a record low in Cuba.

“It looks like it’s something that’s just not going to be able to survive,” Trump told reporters last month, when questioned about the Cuban economy. “It is a failed nation.”

Havana has rejected accusations that it poses a threat to US security. Last week, the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement calling for dialogue.

“The Cuban people and the American people benefit from constructive engagement, lawful cooperation, and peaceful coexistence. Cuba reaffirms its willingness to maintain a respectful and reciprocal dialogue, oriented toward tangible results, with the United States government, based on mutual interest and international law,” a statement from the ministry said on February 2.

Trump’s goals in Cuba remain unclear; however, US officials have noted on multiple occasions that they would like to see the government change.

Responding to a question during a US Senate hearing on Venezuela, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said, “We would like to see the regime there change. That doesn’t mean that we’re going to make a change, but we would love to see a change.”

Rubio, who is of Cuban descent, is one of the most powerful figures in Trump’s administration.

“The Cuban-American lobby, which Rubio represents, is one of the most powerful foreign policy lobbies in the United States today,” Ed Augustin, an independent journalist in Havana, told Al Jazeera’s The Take.

“In the new Trump administration, [with] an unprecedented number of Cuban Americans, the lobbyists have become the policymakers,” he said, adding that Rubio has built firm control over the lobby.

On January 31, Trump told reporters, “It doesn’t have to be a humanitarian crisis. I think they probably would come to us and want to make a deal. So Cuba would be free again.”

He said Washington would make a deal with Cuba, but offered no clarity on what that means.

History of US-Cuba relations

Since Fidel Castro overthrew the pro-US regime in the Cuban revolution in 1959, the country has been under US embargo. Decades of sanctions have denied Cuba access to global markets, making even supply medicines difficult.

Castro nationalised US-owned properties, mainly the oil sector, and Washington responded with trade restrictions that soon became a full economic embargo that continues to this day, undermining Cuba’s economy.

The US also cut diplomatic ties with Havana, and three years later, a missile crisis almost brought Washington and the erstwhile USSR, an ally of Cuba, to the brink of nuclear war.

In 2014, Washington and Havana restored ties after 50 years. Two years later, US President Barack Obama travelled to Havana to meet Raul Castro.

However, during his first term as president, Trump reversed the historic move in 2017. Since then, the US has reimposed a raft of sanctions against Cuba, especially economic restrictions, leading to one of the worst economic crises in the island nation’s history. Within hours of his inauguration in January 2025, Trump reversed the previous administration’s policy of engagement with Havana.

How long can Cuba sustain?

Until last month, Mexico reportedly remained Cuba’s major oil supplier, sending nearly 44 percent of total oil imports, followed by Venezuela at 33 percent, while nearly 10 percent was sourced from Russia and a smaller amount from Algeria.

According to Kpler, a data company, by January 30, Cuba was left with oil enough to last only 15 to 20 days at current levels of demand.

Cuba currently needs an estimated 100,000 barrels of crude oil per day.

What has the UN said about the Cuban crisis?

United Nations spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters on Wednesday that “the secretary-general is extremely concerned about the humanitarian situation in Cuba, which will worsen, and if not collapse, if its oil needs go unmet”.

Dujarric said, for more than three decades, the UN General Assembly has consistently called for an end to the embargo imposed by the US on Cuba, adding that the UN urges “all parties to pursue dialogue and respect for international law”.

Francisco Pichon, the senior-most UN official in Cuba, described “a combination of emotions” in the country – “a mix of resilience, but also grief, sorrow and indignation, and some concern about the regional developments”.

The UN team in Havana says the vast majority of Cubans are hit by rolling blackouts, with the number of people in vulnerable situations increasing significantly.

“The last two years have been quite tough,” Pichon said, adding that urgent changes are needed to sustain Cuba “in the midst of the severe economic, financial and trade sanctions”.

Skiing icon Vonn cried in anguish and pain after her awful fall high up the course days after sustaining an ACL injury.

Lindsey Vonn’s Winter Olympic dream ended in screams of pain after she crashed out of the women’s downhill, failing in her audacious bid to medal in her favoured discipline at the Milan-Cortina Games.

Vonn’s United States (USA) teammate and world champion Breezy Johnson won the race to claim gold on Sunday.

Germany’s Emma Aicher took the silver medal, 0.04 of a second slower, and Italy’s home ‌favourite Sofia Goggia had to settle for bronze, according to ‌provisional results.

Johnson’s Olympic title, ‌on Cortina d’Ampezzo’s ⁠sunlit Olimpia delle Tofane piste, came exactly a year ‌after she won world championship gold at Saalbach, Austria.

American star Vonn had been trying to claim her fourth Olympic medal despite suffering a ruptured anterior cruciate ligament in her left knee just over a week ago, but her race ended early in Cortina d’Ampezzo.

She cried in anguish and pain after her awful fall high up the course, medical staff surrounding the distraught 41-year-old on the Olimpia delle Tofane piste where she has enjoyed much success in the past.

The 2010 Olympic downhill champion hit the firm snow face first after just 13 seconds of her descent. She then rolled down the slope with her skis still attached, which could likely cause further serious damage to her knee.

Vonn’s Olympic dream now lies in tatters after her brave effort to achieve the seemingly impossible, an attempt which ended with her being taken away in a helicopter as fans in the stands saluted her with loud applause.

One of world sport’s most recognisable faces and an alpine skiing icon, Vonn has insisted that she could not only compete but win against the world’s best women skiers, some of whom like Aicher are nearly half her age.

Vonn said ahead of the Games that she was planning on also competing in the team combined event on Tuesday and the super-G two days later.

But that now looks unlikely, a potential long lay-off perhaps heralding the end of her comeback to skiing in her early 40s.

Vonn retired in 2019 but returned to competition in November 2024 following surgery to partially replace her right knee to end persistent pain.

Vonn had finished on the podium in every previous World Cup downhill race this season, including two victories in St Moritz and Zauchensee, and claimed two more top-three finishes in the super-G.

But retirement looms for Vonn following a disastrous end to one of the biggest stories of the Winter Olympics.

The first round of Iran-US talks in Muscat produced no breakthrough. The next few weeks will determine whether they laid foundations or merely bought time before escalation.

When Iranian and American negotiators concluded several hours of talks in Muscat on February 6, publicly, neither side signalled any shift from its opening position. Iran insisted the discussions focus exclusively on the nuclear file. The United States arrived seeking a comprehensive framework that would also cover ballistic missiles, regional armed groups, and more broadly, issues Washington has raised publicly, including human rights concerns. Neither prevailed. Both agreed to meet again.

On the surface, this looks like a non-event. It was not.

The Muscat round was the first high-level diplomatic engagement between the two countries since the joint US-Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June 2025, an escalation that Iran later said killed more than 1,000 people and involved strikes on three nuclear sites. That the two sides returned to the same palace near Muscat’s airport where previous rounds were held in 2025, and agreed to return again is significant.

But continuation is not progress. The distance between what happened in Muscat and what a deal requires remains vast.

Diplomacy conducted under military escort

The most striking feature of the Muscat round was not what was said, but who sat in the room. The American delegation was led by Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law. It also included, for the first time, Admiral Brad Cooper, the commander of US Central Command, in full dress uniform.

His presence at the negotiating table was not incidental. It was a signal. The USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group was operating in the Arabian Sea as the talks unfolded, and days earlier, US forces had shot down an Iranian drone that approached the carrier.

An Iranian diplomatic source told the Reuters news agency that Cooper’s presence “endangered” the talks. Another, quoted by Al-Araby TV, warned that “negotiations taking place under threat” could impose strategic costs rather than advance them. For Tehran, the message was unmistakable: This was diplomacy conducted in the shadow of force, not as an alternative to it.

Washington, for its part, sees this as leverage. President Trump, speaking on board Air Force One after the talks, described them as “very good” and said Iran wants a deal “very badly”, adding: “They know the consequences if they don’t. They don’t make a deal; the consequences are very steep.”

This is diplomacy framed as an ultimatum. It may create urgency. It is unlikely to create trust, and trust is what this process most desperately needs.

The structural problem

The US withdrew from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018, despite international verification that Iran was meeting its obligations. That decision shattered Iranian confidence in the durability of US commitments. Tehran’s subsequent incremental breaches of the agreement, steadily increasing enrichment levels from 2019 onwards, weakened its credibility, in turn.

This mutual distrust is not a negotiating obstacle that can be resolved with creative diplomacy alone. It is the defining condition under which any agreement must be built. The US has the capacity to impose enormous economic and military costs on Iran. But power does not automatically produce compliance. For commitments to hold, Iran must believe concessions will bring relief rather than new demands. That belief has been badly damaged.

Consider the sequence of events surrounding the Muscat round itself. Hours after the talks concluded, the US State Department announced new sanctions targeting 14 shadow fleet vessels involved in transporting Iranian petroleum, alongside penalties on 15 entities and two individuals. The Treasury Department framed the action as part of the administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign. Whether preplanned or timed for effect, the message was clear: Washington intends to negotiate and squeeze simultaneously.

For Tehran, which has consistently demanded that sanctions relief be the starting point for progress, this sequencing confirms precisely the pattern it fears. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi identified this dynamic explicitly, telling Iranian state television that “the mistrust that has developed is a serious challenge facing the negotiations.”

What actually happened in Muscat

Beneath the competing narratives, the outlines of the substantive discussion have begun to emerge. Iran reportedly rejected a US demand for “zero enrichment”, a maximalist position it was never going to accept in a first meeting. The two sides instead discussed the dilution of Iran’s existing uranium stockpile, a more technical and potentially more productive avenue.

Meanwhile, Al Jazeera reported that diplomats from Egypt, Turkiye and Qatar had separately offered Iran a framework proposal: Halt enrichment for three years, transfer highly enriched uranium out of the country, and pledge not to initiate the use of ballistic missiles. Russia had reportedly signalled willingness to receive the uranium. Tehran has signalled both the enrichment halt and uranium transfer would be nonstarters.

Perhaps the most important development was the least visible. According to Axios, Witkoff and Kushner met directly with Araghchi during the talks, breaking from the strictly indirect format that Iran had demanded for most of last year’s rounds of negotiations. Iran had previously insisted on communicating with the US only through Omani intermediaries. Crossing that barrier, even partially, suggests both sides recognise the limits of indirect talks once bargaining becomes technical.

Oman’s framing was arguably the most honest assessment of the day. Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi described the talks as aimed at establishing “appropriate conditions for the resumption of diplomatic and technical negotiations”.

What the next few weeks will decide

Trump said a second round of talks would take place soon. Both sides indicated to Axios that further meetings were expected within days. The compressed timeline is notable. During last year’s rounds, weeks separated each session. The pace suggests Washington believes the diplomatic window is narrowing, and Tehran is at least willing to test that claim.

Several tests will show whether urgency produces substance or merely speed.

First, the scope question. The fundamental dispute over what the talks are about remains unresolved. Iran won the first procedural battle: The venue moved from Turkiye to Oman, regional observers were excluded, and Araghchi claims only nuclear issues were discussed. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said before the talks that the agenda needed to include “all those issues”. If the second round begins with the same fight over scope, it will signal that even the basics remain unsettled.

Second, Iran’s enrichment posture. Before the June 2025 war, Iran had been enriching uranium to 60 percent purity, a short technical step from weapons-grade. Tehran has said enrichment stopped following the strikes. But Iran has also conditioned International Atomic Energy Agency inspections of the bombed sites on new inspection arrangements, raising concerns among non-proliferation experts. Conversely, reports of enrichment resumption or acceleration would likely end the diplomatic track.

Third, the military environment. The US naval build-up in the Arabian Sea is not decorative. The drone shootdown near the Abraham Lincoln and Iran’s attempted interception of a US-flagged vessel in the Strait of Hormuz in the days before the talks show how quickly signalling can slide into miscalculation. Whether the carrier group is reinforced, maintained or gradually drawn down in the coming weeks will reveal more about Washington’s assessment of diplomacy than any press statement.

Fourth, the sanctions rhythm. The same-day announcement of shadow fleet sanctions establishes a pattern. If Washington continues to layer new economic penalties between rounds of talks, Tehran will treat it as evidence that diplomacy is performance rather than process.

Fifth, backchannel activity. The most consequential diplomacy over the next few weeks may not occur in formal settings. Oman, Qatar, Egypt and Turkiye have been working behind the scenes to sustain dialogue. If those intermediary contacts remain active, space for de-escalation persists. If they fall silent, the margin for error narrows.

A managed deadlock is not a strategy

The most probable short-term outcome remains neither breakthrough nor war, but a managed deadlock in which both sides maintain maximal public positions while avoiding steps that would make future talks impossible. In practice, this is a pause sustained by caution rather than a settlement anchored in confidence.

For the broader region, the distinction matters urgently. Gulf states have no interest in becoming staging grounds for escalation. Public statements across the region have consistently emphasised de-escalation, restraint and conflict avoidance. But regional actors can facilitate, host and encourage; they cannot impose terms on either Washington or Tehran.

The Muscat talks did not fail. Neither did they succeed. They established that a channel exists, that both sides are willing to use it, and that direct contact between senior officials is possible.

But a channel is not a plan. The absence of war is not the presence of a deal. The period between Muscat and whatever comes next is a window in which miscalculation remains close to the surface, sustained only by the assumption that both sides are reading each other’s signals correctly.

The next round of talks will not produce an agreement. But it may show whether the two sides are building a floor beneath the standoff or simply postponing the moment when that floor gives way.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

MILAN — Ilia Malinin leaned his head back and wagged his tongue. This perhaps wasn’t the start to his Olympic career that he wanted.

The 21-year-old took it easy in the short program of the team figure skating competition Saturday, forgoing his signature quad axel, but even with a watered-down routine, the “Quad God” looked shockingly mortal.

He finished second in the short program after struggling on multiple jumps, trailing Japan’s Yuma Kagiyama’s electrifying performance by almost 10 points. The United States still enters the final day of the team competition with a five-point lead after Madison Chock and Evan Bates dazzled in the free dance with 133.23 points that earned first place.

The three-time reigning world champions swept both dance programs in the team event to pace the United States to a 44-point team total. The Americans lead second-place Japan (39 points) and third-place Italy (37) before Sunday’s medal event that will feature men’s, women’s and pairs free programs. The United States has not named the skaters who will perform Sunday’s long programs.

Ilia Malinin said he simply was managing his energy to prepare for the individual event, which begins Tuesday.

(Matthew Stockman / Getty Images)

Bates pumped his fist at the end of the free dance. The seven-time U.S. champions have increased their scores for the bull and matador-themed program at each international competition they’ve performed at this season. Malinin, sitting in the U.S. box on the side of the rink, high-fived his teammates at the end of the stellar program and waved a large American flag along with singles skaters Alysa Liu and Isabeau Levito.

Almost as much as his own performances, the unique environment of an Olympic Games is what he has been dreaming about since he started his rise to the top.

“It was such an unreal moment coming to the Olympics,” Malinin said. “Everyone has been talking about the Olympics for years, ever since I started skating from a young age. … Really just being out there on that Olympic ice was just the best moment of itself.”

Malinin, who earned nine team points for his second-place finish in the short program, entered his first Olympics as the overwhelming favorite to win individual gold. With his unmatched technical skill, it likely would take multiple mistakes from Malinin and perfect performances from his competitors for him not to claim the United States’ second consecutive men’s singles gold medal.

But to become just the second skater to win two golds in the same Games, Malinin may need help from his teammates after he fell short of the lofty expectations Saturday.

Malinin planned to open with his quad axel in combination with a triple toe loop but settled only for a quad flip. He got a negative grade of execution on his triple axel. He underrotated a quad lutz that he connected to the previously left out triple toe loop.

“Of course, it wasn’t the perfect ideal 100% skate that I would [have] wanted to have,” Malinin said, “but for the standard I set myself today, I think I achieved that.”

Malinin’s Olympic standard is a slow-play progression, he said. He wanted to be at about 50% of his capacity in the team event to manage his energy to prepare for the individual event, which begins Tuesday.

Kagiyama highlighted Japan’s performances Saturday, pumping both fists after his program. As the crowd showered him with applause, he spread his arms wide and threw his head back. When he looked at his teammates cheering from the sideline he jumped in excitement. He stood up in shock when his score of 108.67 flashed across the screen.

Waiting for his turn to finish the competition, Malinin appreciated Kagiyama’s moment. He wasn’t intimidated by his opponent’s success.

“So inspired,” Malinin said. “He just went out there. He looked so happy. He looked like he was enjoying every single moment. I’m so happy for him. It’s just so unreal that all of us come out here on this Olympic stage and really feel so much energy, so much excitement.”

While Malinin is undefeated in individual events since November 2023, he hasn’t been perfect. He was third after the free program in the Grand Prix Final in December, the last major international competition before the Olympics.

He answered in the free skate by becoming the first person to land seven clean quad jumps in a single program.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says he hopes talks with the United States will resume soon, while US President Donald Trump pledged another round of negotiations next week following mediated discussions in Oman.

Araghchi told Al Jazeera on Saturday that Iran’s missile programme was “never negotiable” in Friday’s talks, and warned Tehran would target US military bases in the Middle East if the US attacks Iranian territory.

He added that despite the negotiations in Muscat being indirect, “an opportunity arose to shake hands with the American delegation”. The talks were “a good start“, but he insisted “there is a long way to go to build trust”.

Iranians in the capital, Tehran, however, seemed less positive.

“In my opinion, like previous times, negotiations will end without results because both sides are sticking to their own positions and not willing to back down,” a woman who asked to remain anonymous told Al Jazeera.

Abdullah al-Shayji, a US foreign policy expert at Kuwait University, said he hopes for a new deal between the two foes but is not feeling optimistic.

“There is a strong position” from the US and “being provoked by” Israel to “clamp down on the Iranians because they feel that Iran is at its weakest point” so that it will be easy to extract concessions from it, especially after last month’s antigovernment demonstrations, al-Shayji said from the Al Jazeera Forum in Qatar’s capital Doha.

‘Inalienable right’

Despite calling the talks “very good” on Friday, Trump signed an executive order effective from Saturday that called for the “imposition of tariffs” on countries still doing business with Iran.

The US also announced new sanctions against numerous shipping entities and vessels aimed at curbing Iran’s oil exports.

More than one-quarter of Iran’s trade is with China, including $18bn in imports and $14.5bn in exports in 2024, according to World Trade Organization data.

Nuclear enrichment is Iran’s “inalienable right and must continue”, Araghchi said, adding, “We are ready to reach a reassuring agreement on enrichment. The Iranian nuclear case will only be resolved through negotiations.”

Iran’s missile programme is non-negotiable because it relates to a “defence issue”, he said.

Washington has sought to address Iran’s ballistic missile programme and its support for armed groups in the region – issues that Israel has pushed to include in the talks, according to media reports.

Tehran has repeatedly rejected expanding the scope of the negotiations beyond the nuclear issue.

“The Iranians are vehemently opposed to any concessions,” said al-Shayji, as is the US, which makes it extremely hard for countries leading mediation efforts to “get them closer together”.

Friday’s negotiations were the first since nuclear talks between Iran and the US collapsed last year following Israel’s unprecedented bombing campaign against Iran, which triggered a 12-day war.

Following widespread antigovernment protests in Iran last month, Trump ramped up threats against the country, deploying the USS Abraham Lincoln to the Middle East.

‘Peace through strength’

Trump’s lead negotiators in Oman, special envoy Steve Witkoff and presidential adviser Jared Kushner, visited the aircraft carrier stationed in the Arabian Sea on Saturday.

In a social media post, Witkoff said the aircraft carrier and its strike group are “keeping us safe and upholding President Trump’s message of peace through strength.”

Witkoff said he spoke with the pilot who downed an Iranian drone that approached the carrier “without clear intent” on Tuesday.

“Proud to stand with the men and women who defend our interests, deter our adversaries, and show the world what American readiness and resolve look like, on watch every day,” said Witkoff.

While Trump has sought to use the aircraft carrier’s deployment as a means to exert pressure on Iran, al-Shayji said this cannot be a long-term strategy.

“He [Trump] can’t keep his forces at alert stage for too long. This would really discredit Trump’s administration regarding being very harsh and hard-liners on Iran,” he said.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is set to meet Trump on Wednesday to discuss the Iran talks, his office said in a statement.

Netanyahu “believes any negotiations must include limitations on ballistic missiles and a halting of the support for the Iranian axis”, it said, referring to Iran’s allies in the region.

During the 12-day war, US warplanes bombed Iranian nuclear sites.

Araghchi expressed hope that Washington would refrain from “threats and pressure” so “the talks can continue”.

One year into Donald Trump’s return to office, a wave of hardline actions – from volatile ICE raids to growing concern over political pressure on the media – has raised alarm about the expansion of the president’s power.

Then with US midterms approaching, attention is turning to whether there is any meaningful challenge to Republican grip on Congress.

So what happens next?

This week on UpFront, Marc Lamont Hill speaks with journalist and author Chris Hedges about Trump’s second presidency and whether US democracy is on the decline.

WASHINGTON — Ever since a racist video was posted on President Trump’s social media account, the White House has offered shifting responses.

First it dismissed “fake outrage” by those denouncing it as racist, then it deleted the post and blamed a staff member.

Trump later told reporters Friday that “I didn’t make a mistake.” The Republican president claimed that before the video was posted, he did not see the part that depicted former President Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama as apes.

The chair of the Congressional Black Caucus was unsparing in her criticism when she spoke to the Associated Press.

“It’s very clear that there was an intent to harm people, to hurt people, with this video,” Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) said.

The AP interviewed Clarke, who leads the group of more than 60 Black House and Senate members, hours after the video was deleted Friday.

Here is an interview transcript, edited for length and clarity.

What was your reaction when you saw that the post?

We’re dealing with a bigoted and racist regime. … Every week we are, as the American people, put in a position where we have to respond to something very cruel or something extremely off-putting that this administration does. It’s a part of their MO at this point.

Do you buy the White House explanation that this was an aide’s mistake?

They don’t tell the truth. If there wasn’t a climate, a toxic and racist climate within the White House, we wouldn’t see this type of behavior regardless of who it’s coming from…. Here we are, in the year 2026, celebrating the 250th anniversary of the United States of America, the 100th anniversary of the commemoration of Black history, and this is what comes out of the White House on a Friday morning. It’s beneath all of us.

Has there been any contact between the White House and the Congressional Black Caucus on this? Could there be any good-faith exchange?

There has been no outreach from the White House. We certainly didn’t expect there to be. The outreach has to happen prior to these type of juvenile antics.

Republican criticism built more quickly Friday than it has during previous Trump controversies. What do you make of that?

It’s not lost on them, our communities that we represent, that elections are coming up. So it’s not lost on my colleagues, either. If they want to align themselves with this type of really profane imagery, this type of bigoted and racist attack on a former sitting president and his wife, they are throwing their lot in with an individual who has shown himself to be a disgrace.

It’s not common for President Trump to retract anything. What does that indicate to you that he did?

I think it’s more of a political expediency than it is any moral compass. … As my mother would say, “Too late. Mercy’s gone.”

What more do you hope to see from the White House about this?

My hope is that we can contain the harm that they’re doing. There are Black children who are listening to their president … seeing what he’s posting on Truth Social, [and] it will have an impact on how they view leadership of their own country. … I think that this administration has an opportunity to change course. They always do. We leave room for that. But, unfortunately, Donald Trump is hardwired this way.

Is there anything else you’d like to add?

As a democracy, we have to stand up together against this type of racism, this type of bigotry, this kind of hatred that is coming from the president of the United States and those who surround him. … It’s very clear that there was an intent to harm people, to hurt people, with this video. Otherwise, it wouldn’t have stayed up for 12 hours.

Barrow and Zhang write for the Associated Press and reported from Atlanta and Washington, respectively.

India recover from 77-6 as captain Suryakumar Yadav hits an unbeaten 84 in 29-run World Cup win against United States.

India captain Suryakumar Yadav led ‌by example as the tournament co-hosts began their Twenty20 World Cup title defence with a 29-run victory against the United States in a group A contest on Saturday.

India recovered from a dire 77-6 to post a decent 161-9 with Suryakumar hitting a scintillating 84 not out off 49 balls.

The US managed 132-8 in reply, putting up a decent fight but never really coming ⁠close to chasing down the target.

Earlier, the predominantly Indian fans at the Wankhede Stadium probably expected sixes and fours to rain down after US captain Monank Patel elected to field.

Instead, it was a long procession of India’s top-order batters returning to the pavilion after a spectacular meltdown of the world’s top-ranked T20 team.

Opener Abhishek Sharma, currently the world’s number one T20 batter, fell for a first-ball duck in perhaps an inkling of what was in ⁠store for the home side.

The real nightmare unfolded in the final Powerplay over when Shadley van Schalkwyk claimed three wickets in five deliveries to leave India reeling on 46-4.

Ishan Kishan (20) and Tilak Varma (25) could not convert their starts, while Shivam Dube departed with a golden duck against his name in that eventful over from van Schalkwyk.

It could easily have been worse, but bowler Shubham Ranjane could not hold onto a return catch from Suryakumar when the batter was on 15.

Wickets kept tumbling at the other end though.

Rinku Singh, Hardik Pandya and ‌Axar Patel perished trying to swing their way out of trouble.

Suryakumar responded to the crisis with a captain’s knock as he raced to a 36-ball fifty before plundering 21 runs from the final over from Saurabh Netravalkar.

India’s pace spearhead Jasprit Bumrah missed ‌the match due to illness, and they were also forced into replacing Harshit Rana, who was ruled out of the tournament barely 24 hours before ‌their opening match with a thigh injury.

Mohammed Siraj (3-29) vindicated his last-minute ⁠inclusion as Rana’s replacement with a two-wicket burst, while Arshdeep Singh also tasted success as they reduced the US to 31-3 in the six Powerplay overs.

Sanjay Krishnamurthi (37) and Milind Kumar (34) defied India for a while with a 58-run stand, but once the partnership ‌ended, India were firmly in charge.

In Colombo, the Netherlands nearly pulled off a major upset before Faheem Ashraf’s breezy cameo secured Pakistan’s nervy three-wicket win with three balls to spare in another group A contest.

In a group C match in Kolkata, West Indies fast bowler Romario Shepherd claimed four wickets in five balls, including a hat-trick, as the twice champions thumped Scotland by 35 runs.

A proposed new consensus between sports leaders across the globe about gender policy would be a first uniform criteria.

Global sports leaders ‌have reached consensus on a new set of eligibility criteria for transgender athletes, with the new policy expected to be announced within the first half of this year, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) said on Saturday.

It would be the first uniform policy adopted by the IOC and international sports federations, applying to major events in dozens of sports, including the Games and world championships. Currently, federations have ⁠their own rules, which can vary.

Details of the new policy are unclear, but it is expected to severely restrict the participation of transgender athletes who compete in women’s categories if they have undergone full male puberty before any subsequent medical transition.

The IOC, under its first female president, Kirsty Coventry, took the lead in June, opting for a uniform approach.

“Protecting the female category is one of the key reforms she wants to bring in,” IOC spokesman Mark Adams ⁠told a news conference at the Milan-Cortina Winter Games on Saturday.

“I would say it is going to happen shortly, within the next few months.

“It has been out to consultation phase and we had the ‘pause and reflect’ (period) on it,” Adams said. “Generally speaking, there is consensus within the sporting movement. I think you will have a new policy in the first half of this year. Don’t hold me to it, but that is roughly the timescale.”

In September, Coventry set up the “Protection of the Female Category” working group, made up of experts as well as representatives ‌of international federations, to look into how best to protect the female category in sport.

Before Coventry’s decision, the IOC had long baulked at any universal rule on transgender participation for the Games, instructing international federations in 2021 to come up with their own ‌guidelines. Under current rules, still in force, transgender athletes are eligible to take part in the Olympics once cleared by their respective federations.

Only a handful of openly ‌transgender athletes have taken part in the Games. New Zealand’s Laurel ⁠Hubbard became the first openly transgender athlete to compete in a different gender category to that assigned at birth when the weightlifter took part in the Tokyo Olympics in 2021.

Currently, for example, World Aquatics allows transgender athletes who have transitioned before the age of ‌12 to compete. World Rugby bans all transgender athletes from elite-level competitions.

United States President Donald Trump has banned transgender athletes from competing in school, college and pro events in the female category in the US, as Los Angeles prepares to host the 2028 Summer Olympics.

Trump, who signed the “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports” order in February, has said he would not allow transgender athletes to compete at the LA Games.

The Super Bowl, the biggest event in American football, is set for Sunday with the Seattle Seahawks facing the New England Patriots at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, California.

The massive sporting event is set to energise fans in both cities and will send thousands this year to the San Francisco Bay Area. Those unable to make the trip are still expected to spend heavily on food, drinks and watch parties across the United States.

Historically, the Super Bowl has been a major economic boon for host cities. For the Bay Area, the event is part of a stretch of three major sporting spectacles lifting the regional economy.

A local boost?

In 2024, the Bay Area Host Committee commissioned a report forecasting the economic impact of the 2025 NBA All-Star Game, the 2026 Super Bowl, and the FIFA World Cup, all taking place in the region. The report estimated that Sunday’s game alone would generate between $370m and $630m in economic output for the Bay Area.

Last year’s Super Bowl was hosted in New Orleans, Louisiana. State officials reported the event brought in 115,000 visitors who spent $658m in the city.

For consumers, Bank of America estimates a 77 percent jump in spending near the stadium. A study analysing spending patterns from Super Bowl games between 2017 and 2025 found that, on game day, spending surged in the postal code closest to the stadium, with the biggest surge in food and parking costs.

Hosting the game does come with its own expenses for cities.

In the case of Santa Clara, it is small compared with the forecasted output. Last year, it was projected the city would cost them $6.3m, which includes training personnel for the influx of visitors and other logistical needs. However, other games have cost municipalities much more. When Atlanta hosted the Super Bowl in 2019, it cost the city an estimated $46m.

In 2023, the day after the game, which was played in Glendale, Arizona, outside of Phoenix, was the single busiest at Phoenix Sky Harbor international airport in its history, with more than 200,000 passengers passing through the airport, which is a hub for American Airlines and where budget carriers Southwest Airlines and Frontier maintain a large presence.

Other cities have used major sporting events to kick off large-scale infrastructure projects. In 2004 – ahead of the Super Bowl in Houston, Texas – METRO, the city’s transit authority, launched its first light rail line just a month before the game. The line, now one of three in the system, runs from downtown Houston to the city’s football stadium.

Prior to its launch, Houston was the only major metropolitan city in the US without a rail system.

But not all infrastructure projects paid off. Las Vegas built Allegiant Stadium in the neighbouring suburb of Paradise when the city acquired the Raiders football team from Oakland during the 2020 season. A year later, in 2021, Las Vegas won the bid to host the 2024 Super Bowl. The stadium cost $1.9bn. Nearly $750m came from hotel taxes, but the rest was shouldered by local taxpayers.

“The economic benefits are relatively short-term, not just in duration, but also in scope. They’re limited to certain industries and specific locations,” Michael Edwards, a professor of sport management at North Carolina State University, told Al Jazeera.

“The NFL [National Football League] often uses the Super Bowl as a carrot to encourage cities to invest taxpayer money in new stadiums. You’re seeing that dynamic play out in places like Chicago and Cleveland, where officials are considering domed stadiums. Part of that push is almost certainly driven by the possibility of hosting a Super Bowl, which the league dangles as an incentive,” Edwards said.

Food spending

For those who can’t make it to the game itself, there is still a surge in Americans heading to bars and restaurants to watch the game or spending money throwing a watch party.

The National Retail Federation, which has been tracking Super Bowl spending for the last decade, expects that Americans will spend a record $20.2bn, or $94.77 per person, on the big game with 79 percent of that on food.

Spending has skyrocketed since 2021 when consumers spent $13.9bn, or $74.55 per person. However, that dropped from $17.2bn in 2020 when the Super Bowl happened about a month before the COVID-19 lockdowns in the US began.

For those hosting a Super Bowl watch party at home, it will cost more than last year to stock up on the quintessential game-day foods. Wells Fargo estimates that hosting 10 people will cost about $140 per person, up from $138 last year.

Chicken wings, a staple for football fans, are a bright spot for wallets; prices are down 2.8 percent compared with this time last year. Potato chip prices are flat, but dips like salsa have jumped 1.7 percent.

Healthier options are getting more expensive as well for those opting for a veggie platter. Cherry tomatoes are up 2 percent, celery has risen 2.6 percent, and both broccoli and cauliflower are up 4 percent. Beer prices are also climbing, up 1.3 percent from a year ago.

Advertising hits records

The Super Bowl is airing on NBC with the network getting a boost in advertising spending for the big game. NBC sold out of advertising spots for the Super Bowl in September for a record $10m on average for a 30-second spot – up from $8m on average last year when the games aired on Fox.

NBC also benefits from a collection of sporting events all taking part in February that drive up advertising revenue, including from the Winter Olympics. The opening ceremony is on Friday and will run until February 22. NBC has exclusive broadcasting rights for the Olympics in the US.

“With the resurgence of the Olympic movement, our strongest Sports Upfront in history, the early sell-out of Super Bowl LX, and the remarkable return of the NBA, NBCUniversal has solidified itself as a sports powerhouse, and brands have taken notice,” Mark Marshall, chairman of NBCUniversal’s global advertising and partnerships, said in a release.

The last time the games were in the same year, back in 2024, the two events were the most-watched events on linear television.

On Wall Street, the looming sporting events set to air on NBC have sent parent company Comcast’s stock surging up more than 4 percent over the past five days.

Washington wants Beijing to join a new nuclear weapons treaty after expiration of the New START accord between the US and Russia.

An international monitor said it has seen no evidence to support the claim by a senior United States official who accused China of carrying out a series of clandestine nuclear tests in 2020 and concealing activities that violated nuclear test ban treaties.

US Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Thomas DiNanno made the assertions about China at a United Nations disarmament conference in Geneva, Switzerland, on Friday, just days after a nuclear treaty with Russia expired.

“I can reveal that the US government is aware that China has conducted nuclear explosive tests, including preparing for tests with designated yields in the hundreds of tonnes,” DiNanno said at the conference.

China’s military “sought to conceal testing by obfuscating the nuclear explosions because it recognised these tests violate test ban commitments,” he said.

“China conducted one such yield-producing nuclear test on June 22 of 2020,” he said.

DiNanno also made his allegations on social media in a series of posts, making the case for “new architecture” in nuclear weapons control agreements following the expiration of the New START treaty with Russia this week.

“New START was signed in 2010 and its limits on warheads and launchers are no longer relevant in 2026 when one nuclear power is expanding its arsenal at a scale and pace not seen in over half a century and another continues to maintain and develop a vast range of nuclear systems unconstrained by New START’s terms,” he said.

Robert Floyd, executive secretary of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, said in a statement on Friday that the body’s monitoring system “did not detect any event consistent with the characteristics of a nuclear weapon test explosion” at the time of the alleged Chinese test, adding that that assessment remains unchanged after further detailed analyses.

China’s ambassador on nuclear disarmament, Shen Jian, did not directly address DiNanno’s charge at the conference but said Beijing had always acted prudently and responsibly on nuclear issues while the US had “continued to distort and smear China’s national defence capabilities in its statements”.

“We firmly oppose this false narrative and reject the US’s unfounded accusations,” Shen said.

“In fact, the US’s series of negative actions in the field of nuclear arms control are the biggest source of risk to international security,” he said.

Later on social media, Shen said, “China has always honored its commitment to the moratorium on nuclear testing”.

Diplomats at the conference said the US allegations were new and concerning.

China, like the US, has signed but not ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which bans explosive nuclear tests. Russia signed and ratified it, but withdrew its ratification in ⁠2023.

US President Donald Trump has previously instructed the US military to prepare for the resumption of nuclear tests, stating that other countries are conducting them without offering details.

The US president said on October 31 that Washington would start testing nuclear weapons “on an equal basis” with Moscow and Beijing, but without elaborating or explaining what kind of nuclear testing he wanted to resume.

He has also said that he would like China to be involved in any future nuclear treaty, but authorities in Beijing have shown little interest in his proposal.

Lawyers for the Ecuadorian asylum seeker have speculated the Trump administration is seeking ‘retaliatory’ actions.

The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has revealed it will continue to seek the deportation of five-year-old Liam Conejo Ramos and his father Adrian Conejo Arias, after their recent return to Minnesota.

The department, however, denied it is seeking their expedited removal, as the family’s lawyer claimed.

“These are regular removal proceedings,” DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said on Friday. “This is standard procedure, and there is nothing retaliatory about enforcing the nation’s immigration laws.”

Conejo Ramos’s case has drawn nationwide attention since his initial detention on January 20.

Photos went viral of Conejo Ramos standing in the snow, dressed in floppy blue bunny ears, with an immigration agent grabbing onto his Spiderman backpack.

Officials in Minnesota’s Columbia Heights Public School District accused immigration officials of using the preschool student as “bait” for his father. DHS, meanwhile, has claimed that his father abandoned the child when approached by immigration authorities.

Each side has denied the other’s account of the January 20 arrest.

Since December, the administration of President Donald Trump has led an immigration crackdown in Minnesota known as Operation Metro Surge. As many as 3,000 agents were deployed to the state at the operation’s height.

But bystander videos and photos have raised questions about the heavy-handed tactics being used, particularly in the Minneapolis-St Paul metropolitan area.

There, two US citizens were shot dead by immigration agents in the last month alone: Renee Nicole Good on January 7 and Alex Pretti on January 24.

The outcry over the shooting deaths, as well as other reports of violence against bystanders and warrantless arrests, has prompted the Trump administration to announce this week the withdrawal of nearly 700 immigration agents.

The detention of Conejo Ramos and his father had been among the high-profile flashpoints during the crackdown.

The five-year-old and his father were detained as they were coming home from preschool. They were quickly transported from Minnesota to Dilley, Texas, where they were kept in an immigration processing centre while Trump officials sought their expulsion.

But on January 27, Judge Fred Biery ruled that the two should be released while they challenged their expulsion.

“They seek nothing more than some modicum of due process and the rule of law,” Biery wrote in his brief but cutting decision.

Conejo Ramos and his father arrived in the US from Ecuador. Their legal team has said the pair entered the country legally and were in the midst of their asylum proceedings at the time of their detention.

Lawyer Danielle Molliver told Minnesota Public Radio this week that DHS had filed documents to expedite the father and son’s removal, speculating that the action was “retaliatory”.

“It’s really frustrating as an attorney, because they keep throwing new obstacles in our way,” she told the public broadcaster. “There’s absolutely no reason that this should be expedited.”

The president of the United States posted a racist video Thursday night depicting Barack and Michelle Obama as apes. On Friday, the White House dismissed criticism — but the president deleted the post. Was this episode disappointing? Yes. Surprising? Not anymore.

Last spring, after Pope Francis had died, Donald Trump posted an AI image of himself as the pope just days before cardinals convened to elect a successor.

So, no — it is not surprising that the president would choose to post virulent anti-Black imagery during Black History Month.

But it is disappointing here in 2026 that an occupant of the Oval Office is still thinking like that.

Back in 1971, the president of the United States laughed when the governor of California referred to the African delegates at the United Nations as monkeys. Less than 10 years later, that governor became the president of the United States. And here we are, half a century later, and yet another president has amplified that racist trope.

Meaning white supremacy is still on the ballot.

That Nixon-Reagan-Trump throughline isn’t tightly wound around policy or principle, but simply that shared worldview. After all, Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency and Reagan offered amnesty to immigrants — highly un-Trump-like moves. No, their commonality is best revealed in the delight each man took in an old racist attack against Black people.

For Americans who are 50 and older — roughly a third of the nation — this worldview has been the architect responsible for White House policy for most of our lives. And yet, when Kamala Harris lost the 2024 election, the forensic investigation focused on grocery prices and her absence from Joe Rogan’s podcast. Some — in trying to explain why Harris lost — mischaracterized her role at the border or inflated her influence on the war in Gaza.

For some reason, race did not seem to receive the same level of scrutiny.

This factor was slighted despite decades of data, such as the wave of white nationalists endorsing Harris’ opponent and the birther movement questioning President Obama’s citizenship. The trio of presidents who are on the record as enjoying depictions of Black people as monkeys — Nixon, Reagan and Trump — all used racist dog whistles in their combined 10 presidential campaigns. Their administrations have tended to be more anti-civil-rights movement than post-civil-rights movement.

Our nation’s attempts at understanding ourselves are continuously undercut by the denial that for some single-issue voters, race is their single issue. Not the price of bacon or their religious convictions. Not Gaza. Just the promise of having a safe space for prejudice. And when the president of the United States entertains racist jokes as Nixon did in the 1970s or shares racist videos as Trump continues to do, undoubtedly there is a sense among the electorate that such prejudice has a home in the White House.

Before Trump used social media to push yesteryear’s ugliness, earlier in the week Harris relaunched her 2024 social media campaign account, calling it a place where Gen Z can “meet and revisit with some of our great courageous leaders, be they elected leaders, community leaders, civic leaders, faith leaders, young leaders.” She exhorted: “Stay engaged. I’ll see you out there.”

Whether she plans to run again in 2028 is unclear. What we do know is she would not have posted an AI picture of herself as the new pope while Catholics were mourning Francis (or any other time). We know she would not have advocated for immigration officers to racially profile Black and brown Americans or disregard the 14th Amendment to detain children. We do not know how many of her policy proposals she would have been able to get across the finish line in Congress, but we do know her record of public service to the American people, in contrast with the current president who is suing the American people for $10 billion.

There is nothing wrong with revisiting Harris’ missteps on the campaign trail or debating her electability as she reemerges in the public spotlight. But now that Trump has resorted to posting monkey jokes about Black people, perhaps updated forensics will consider our well established history of racism among the factors in the 2024 election.

It is not a shock that a president of the United States thinks poorly of Black people. Not when you know that more than 25% of those who have held the office were themselves enslavers. But it is disappointing that 250 years into our nation’s story, some of us still deny the role that racism plays in shaping our politics and thus all of our lives.

YouTube: @LZGrandersonShow

United States President Donald Trump has again stoked outrage over his online posts, this time for sharing a video depicting former President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle Obama, as apes.

The reposted clip came as part of a flurry of late-night messages on Trump’s Truth Social account.

By midday on Friday, the video had been removed — but not after an outpouring of bipartisan condemnation, slamming the post as blatantly racist.

In a post on the social media platform X, Tim Scott, the only Black Republican currently serving in the Senate, said he was “praying” that the video “was fake because it’s the most racist thing I’ve seen out of this White House”.

“The president should remove it,” he added.

Another Republican, Representative Mike Lawler, also called on Trump to delete the post, calling it “incredibly offensive — whether intentional or a mistake”.

Democrats, meanwhile, sought to tie the video to Trump’s history of insensitive remarks, and they called on Republicans to condemn this latest episode.

“President Obama and Michelle Obama are brilliant, compassionate and patriotic Americans. They represent the best of this country,” said Hakeem Jeffries, the top Democrat in the US House of Representatives.

“Donald Trump is a vile, unhinged and malignant bottom feeder. Why are GOP leaders like John Thune continuing to stand by this sick individual?”

The White House, for its part, initially defended the post as an “internet meme”. Later, it said the post had been shared “erroneously” by a White House staffer, not by the president.

Stoking outrage

Trump has long had an adversarial relationship with the Obamas, who became the first Black couple in US history to serve as president and first lady.

One of Trump’s first forays into national politics came during Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign, when he pushed false claims that the Democratic leader had not been born in the US.

Trump, a Republican, is known to be a prolific social media user, and he co-founded Truth Social in February 2022 after being temporarily banned from other major social media sites.

There, he often reposts memes and videos generated through artificial intelligence that promote his public image and political platform.

The video that includes the Obamas came at 11:44pm Eastern US time (04:44 GMT) as part of a series of shared clips.

The image of the Obamas as apes comes about 59 seconds into a video that only lasts one minute and two seconds.

It appears dropped into a documentary-style segment that pushes baseless claims that the 2020 presidential election was marred by malfeasance involving electronic voting machines. Trump has repeatedly spread lies denying his loss to Democrat Joe Biden in that race.

The video, which bears the watermark of a site called Patriot News Outlet, briefly pairs the doctored image of the Obamas with the 1961 song The Lion Sleeps Tonight.

Critics have regularly accused Trump of intentionally stoking outrage to distract from politically damaging domestic issues, including the recent release of millions of files related to disgraced financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Trump’s name has featured in those files.

Midterms ahead

Some Republicans, like Lawler in New York, also face punishing re-election campaigns ahead as the country nears its November midterm elections.

Trump has warned that, if Republicans lose control of Congress, he could face new impeachment proceedings.

Initially, in the hours after the video was reposted on Trump’s Truth Social account, the White House dismissed the backlash as overblown.

White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt told several US news outlets that the image of the Obamas was excerpted from an “internet meme video depicting President Trump as the King of the Jungle and Democrats as characters from ‘The Lion King’”, a 1994 animated feature film.

“Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public,” she said in a statement to ABC News.

But that explanation did not dampen the bipartisan push for Trump to renounce the video.

Republican Senator Pete Ricketts of Nebraska was also among those calling for the post to be taken down.

“Even if this was a Lion King meme, a reasonable person sees the racist context to this,” Ricketts wrote on X.

“The White House should do what anyone does when they make a mistake: remove this and apologize.”

Democrats, meanwhile, questioned Trump’s fitness for the presidency. In a social media post, Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi drew a line between the video and the long history of racist depictions of Black people in the US.

He pointed to similarly dehumanising illustrations that were shared during the Jim Crow era, a period from 1865 to the mid-20th century when Black people faced segregation and unequal rights following the abolishment of slavery.

“This kind of Jim Crow-style dehumanisation is pathetic and a disgrace to the office,” he wrote.

Najaf, Iraq – Leaders of Iraq’s Coordination Framework – the Shia political coalition that came out on top in November’s parliamentary elections – are adamant that Nouri al-Maliki will be their candidate for the Iraqi premiership, even after threats from United States President Donald Trump.

Trump warned in late January that if al-Maliki, who previously served as Iraq’s prime minister between 2006 and 2014, returned to the role, then the US would cut off aid to Iraq.

“If we are not there to help, Iraq has ZERO chance of success, prosperity or freedom,” the US president wrote in a post on his Truth Social website.

Trump, and the US administration, view al-Maliki as part of Iran’s direct network of influence in Iraq, and fear that his return would undermine American efforts to weaken Iran’s power in its western neighbour, including limiting the reach of Iran-backed armed groups.

But, even with pressure ramping up, it appears that a majority of the Coordination Framework’s most influential actors are not willing to give up on al-Maliki, and are determined to find a way to push his candidacy forward.

Coordination Framework divided

The Coordination Framework (CF) is a coalition of Shia political parties established in 2021. It represents the biggest Shia bloc in the Iraqi parliament.

The loose nature of the coalition that makes up the CF means that opinions on al-Maliki’s candidacy are varied, with some opposing it, others willing to bend to Trump’s will and switch their backing, and still others who are adamant that they will push forward.

And it seems as though the majority are in the latter camp.

The CF issued a statement on Saturday reiterating its support for al-Maliki. “Choosing the prime minister is an exclusively Iraqi constitutional matter … free from foreign interference,” the statement added.

The statement reflects the position of various pro-Maliki forces in the CF, including former deputy parliament speaker Mohsen al-Mandalawi; the Badr Organization, led by Hadi al-Amir; and the Islamic Supreme Council, led by cleric Humam Hamoudi.

Current Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, whose party received the most votes in the elections but who did not receive the CF nomination despite his membership within it, is also officially supportive of al-Maliki’s nomination, even if he has not abandoned the possibility of continuing as prime minister himself.

Several of these factions did well in last year’s parliamentary elections, including al-Maliki’s own State of Law Coalition, as well as Badr and al-Sudani’s Reconstruction and Development Coalition.

But, with support from Kurdish and Sunni parties, the Shia al-Maliki sceptics have enough seats, and enough of a voice, to block the nomination if they desire to do so.

These include important Shia figures such as Qais al-Khazali, the leader of the Asaib Ahl al-Haq group; Ammar al-Hakim, the leader of the National State Forces alliance; and former Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi.

Al-Hakim, whose parliamentary bloc has 18 seats, warned that there would be “incoming economic repercussions” if al-Maliki was chosen, and added that “public interest must be prioritised over private interests”.

Meanwhile, the Victory Alliance, led by al-Abadi, issued a statement calling for “[the prioritisation of] the people’s vital interests given the exceptional circumstances Iraq and the region are experiencing”. Al-Abadi’s group has no seats in parliament, but retains an important voice within the CF.

Both statements contain a tacit acknowledgment of Iraq’s inability to withstand US pressure and the need for an alternative candidate suited to the current reality.

Other roadblocks

The CF, therefore, still has an uphill battle to confirm al-Maliki as prime minister. Outside of the Shia political groups, there is also opposition to al-Maliki, a divisive figure remembered negatively by many Iraqis, particularly Sunnis.

And there are also divisions within the non-Shia groups that are also slowing down the nomination process.

Under the Iraqi Constitution, parliament must first elect a president for Iraq, who then mandates the nominee of the largest parliamentary bloc to form the government. According to Iraq’s post-2003 “muhasasa” system of dividing political offices by sect and ethnicity, the prime minister must be a Shia, the president a Kurd, and the parliamentary speaker a Sunni.

To date, the main Kurdish factions – the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) led by Masoud Barzani and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) led by Bafel Talabani – have failed to agree on a consensus candidate for the presidency.

The CF is attempting to broker an agreement between the Kurds. Recent efforts included a delegation led by al-Sudani meeting with both parties, and a personal visit by al-Maliki to Barzani. But these initiatives have not yet succeeded, and without a political agreement on the presidency, the process of designating a prime minister cannot proceed.

And even if the Kurds reach an agreement and don’t stand in the way of al-Maliki, the CF must persuade a long list of the former prime minister’s opponents.

Among them is Mohammed al-Halbousi, former speaker of parliament and leader of the Takadum Party, who issued a statement prior to the US veto implicitly rejecting al-Maliki’s candidacy.

Collectively, the anti-al-Maliki groups could gather roughly a third of the seats in parliament, enough to prevent a presidential election session due to a lack of quorum.

To avoid that scenario, the CF would have to either reset internal negotiations regarding the next prime minister, or nominate al-Sudani for a second term.

Al-Sudani’s party issued a statement on January 28 calling for “positive relationships with the United States” – a move interpreted as an indirect pitch for his renewal, leveraging his proven track record of managing relations with Washington during his tenure.

US leverage

The US may no longer be the occupying power in Iraq, but it still has enormous economic leverage over the country.

The revenue from Iraq’s main export – oil – is routed through the US Federal Reserve Bank in New York.

Trump may decide not to renew a presidential executive order, issued originally by President George W Bush in the wake of the Iraq War, that grants legal protection for the oil revenue funds and prevents them from being frozen by Iraq’s creditors. The order had been expected to be renewed as a formality upon its expiration in May.

If the US president decides against renewal, creditors will seek to claim their funds, and New York courts may issue rulings to freeze the Iraqi assets. This would disrupt the transfer of funds necessary to pay public salaries and sustain the economy for months or even years. In practical terms, the Iraqi economy would grind to a halt.

That therefore explains why the pro-al-Maliki bloc in the CF is attempting to persuade the US to change its position, rather than simply ignore Trump.

A high-ranking source in the CF’s State of Law coalition, who wished to remain anonymous in order to speak freely on the topic, told Al Jazeera there are “ongoing attempts to convince the US administration to lift the veto on al-Maliki”.

Aqeel al-Fatlawi, the State of Law spokesperson, also said he was hopeful that the US “will change its stance in the coming period”.

While blaming regional states, including Turkiye and Syria, for the US position towards him, al-Maliki himself has sought to soften his positions.

Syria has been one of the main points of difference between al-Maliki and the US, which has backed Syria’s President Ahmed al-Sharaa, even as the former Iraqi prime minister has denounced him for his past membership of al-Qaeda.

In a televised interview on Tuesday, al-Maliki used al-Sharaa’s full name, rather than the Syrian leader’s nom de guerre of “al-Jolani”, an attempt to emphasise that he was willing to move on from the past. Al-Maliki also attempted to soften his stance towards the Syrian government, directing his criticism towards the former regime of ousted President Bashar al-Assad and its role in supporting “terrorism” in Iraq.

Whether these attempts will go far enough to placate the US remains to be seen.

Reports indicate that US Special Envoy to Iraq Mark Savaya may have been removed from his position, although there is no official confirmation. His replacement would likely be Tom Barrack, currently the US ambassador to Turkiye and special envoy to Syria.

The CF favours Savaya, who has proven to be more supportive of using a more gradual approach in reducing the power of Iraq’s Shia militias, versus Barrack, who is viewed by the CF more negatively for his role in weakening Hezbollah in Lebanon and his support for Syria’s al-Sharaa.

An official announcement of a change could indicate where Trump’s thoughts are in the critical next few weeks – and whether the president will choose to not renew the US guarantee to protect Iraq’s oil revenue in May.