Top World News

On Oct. 29, just before meeting China’s President XI Jinping, Donald Trump posted on his social media network Truth Social that “because of other countries [sic] testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis.”The US stopped testing nuclear weapons in 1992 — that is, detonating nuclear warheads. It regularly tests “delivery vehicles,” the missiles that would be used to carry the nuclear weapon to its intended target. The most recent of these tests took place early on Wednesday, Nov. 5, when an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) was launched from Vandenberg Space Force Base, on the coast of California. It’s possible that Trump simply does not understand the difference between these two things.Observers speculated that Trump’s nuclear test announcement was a response to Russia’s recent test of its Burevestnik missile, which is nuclear-capable — meaning it could carry a nuclear warhead, though it did not during the test — and powered by nuclear energy. Some pointed out that it would be the Department of Energy, rather than the Pentagon, that would carry out a test detonation of a nuclear weapon. Trump’s use of the phrase “on an equal basis,” given that China and Russia are not detonating nuclear weapons, was comforting to some.Whatever he meant, it’s worth considering how this latest episode of existential terror imposed from above highlights what depths of apocalyptic misbehavior are now considered normal when it comes to how nuclear weapons countries behave toward one another.The missile Russia tested was designed to deliver a nuclear weapon without being intercepted by missile defense systems, using nuclear power to extend its flight time much longer than non-nuclear powered missiles. The Russian government also claimed to have tested its Poseidon torpedo, also nuclear-capable and nuclear-powered, and designed to be used in coastal waters to create a huge wave of irradiated water that would wash ashore.Neither of these, nor the ICBM test, amount to a “nuclear test.” But, should the US conduct a test explosion of a nuclear warhead, it would be adding to the environmental burden that has led to nearly half a million deaths, by one scholarly estimate, from the over 1,000 test nuclear detonations the US has carried out. (This is about half of the over 2,000 total tests carried out worldwide between 1945 and 2017.) The health and environmental effects of this testing are ongoing, and the United States hasn’t come close to cleaning up after its earlier nuclear tests.To take just one example, waste from tests conducted in the Marshall Islands is still sitting in the Runit Dome, a cracking concrete structure on Runit Island in the Enewetak Atoll that is under constant threat from worsening storms as a result of climate change. US nuclear testing has rendered Marshallese ways of life untenable for the long term, with no real prospects for full remediation on the horizon. (ICBM tests launched from Vandenberg are aimed at the Marshall Islands’ Kwajalein Atoll, a less dramatically destructive but still significant burden on a place that has long paid a high price for the maintenance of US nuclear weapons.)Still, even if Trump is responding to recent nuclear tests that didn’t happen, this is largely in keeping with how nuclear-armed countries tend to justify changes in their nuclear policy as reciprocal responses to unprovoked aggression, no matter what the facts are. What’s more certain, however, is that if the US tests a nuclear weapon, Russia and China are far more likely to begin testing nuclear weapons of their own, as Russia has already threatened. This would lead to more environmental damage, more health consequences across the globe, and more normalization of nuclear explosions as part of the business of doing politics.It seems as if much of the press has lost sight of the actual stakes here. The Washington Post‘s coverage of Trump’s announcement, for one, skipped over all the reasons a nuclear test might actually be undesirable and instead merely named “far-reaching consequences for relations with adversaries” as the real thing its readers should be worried about. If that is indeed the main concern, conducting multiple missile tests a year that signal the US’s willingness to use ICBMs should be viewed for what it is — a gesture that keeps nuclear war on the mind of governments around the world as a real possibility, a norm of global politics rather than a collective fate that must be avoided at all costs.The reality is, Americans share the unfortunate situation of everyone else in the world of being first and foremost potential victims of nuclear weaponry, vulnerable to the whims of the leaders they have theoretically empowered to control the country’s thousands of nuclear weapons, nearly all of which are much, much more powerful than those dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Nuclear arsenals have been maintained using advanced computer modeling for decades. The fact that nuclear test explosions have entered even the far reaches of possibility, even for an administration which embraces brutal violence with such open enthusiasm, is cause for alarm and collective action against the threat that nuclear weapons pose to human life.It’s easy to dismiss a “test” as something less than the full terrifying reality of nuclear weapons use. In some cases, this is true. Underground nuclear tests are less immediately hazardous to human and environmental health than atmospheric tests, which the US stopped conducting in 1962. An ICBM test does not involve the detonation of a nuclear weapon.But the scale and political importance of a nuclear weapon test means any indication of a willingness to use it under any circumstances has political significance. Historians have noted that one of the main reasons the United States ultimately decided to use nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was to test whether they would work as expected.We should not let nuclear testing once again become part of nuclear-armed countries’ business as usual. A nuclear explosion is a nuclear explosion, and the fallout will be all of ours to deal with.Emma Claire Foley is a Program Associate at Global Zero. She runs the Global Zero Military Incidents Project, which collects and analyzes open-source data to track the risk of conflict involving nuclear-armed states. She received her A.M. in Russian and Eurasian Studies from Harvard University's Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies.

“Russia unleashed a massive combined attack on Kyiv” last night, The Guardian reports. “Five people were hospitalized, including one man in critical condition and a pregnant woman, after a series of powerful explosions sounded in the city and air defenses were activated. …“Pictures posted on social media showed different sites in flames and residents gathering in rubble-strewn streets outside apartment buildings.”The child victims of Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes are apparently not the only ones who‘ve paid the price for Donald Trump’s long relationship with that notorious pedophile.Epstein’s “partying” with Trump has apparently also led to thousands of civilian deaths abroad, the collapse of America’s credibility around the world, and a serious threat to the future of democracy in Europe.Trump’s coverup may well represent a form of treason, the aid and comfort to an enemy attacking an ally during time of war. It should lead, at the very least, to impeachment.Right now, the largest nation in Europe, a democracy and an ally, is under violent attack by a brutal dictator intent on reestablishing the Soviet empire. In a threat to European democracy itself, Ukraine is getting pummeled every day because Donald Trump refuses to respond in a meaningful way.But why?In Epstein’s emails, he boasts of offering to advise Russia’s senior-most officials about how to manipulate Trump:“I think you might suggest to putin that [Russian Foreign Minister Sergey] lavrov can get insight on [Trump by] talking to me…”Consider Trump’s secretive and beta-submissive behavior toward Vladimir Putin, especially in Helsinki when he trashed our intelligence agencies and sucked up to Putin, and more recently with his red carpet in Alaska, and it’s impossible to ignore what this newest Epstein revelation implies.If Trump’s betrayal of Ukraine is a direct or indirect result of things Trump did with Epstein, it’s naked treachery. Consider the pattern: ever since Trump came back into the White House, Russia’s attacks on Ukraine have exploded in their ferocity and brutality.Recently, a missile strike by Russian forces hit the city of Kryvyi Rih in Ukraine and killed at least 20 people including nine children. Apartments collapsed around weeping parents who pulled bodies from the rubble; a baby only a few months old was among the victims.In another attack, a children’s hospital in southern Ukraine was struck, shattering windows, strewing blood-soaked medical stretchers across the grounds, all while about a hundred people were inside.Schools, kindergartens and residential buildings have been leveled in multiple towns, as the Russian military targets civilian infrastructure with vicious abandon. They’re daily destroying Ukraine’s fuel and electric grids with the goal of freezing that country’s people into submission as winter approaches.These are not accidents of war. They’re the deliberate targeting of civilians, children, doctors, classrooms, apartment buildings, homes, and hospitals. Russian drones hunt civilians down the streets of Ukrainian cities, sometimes smashing the windows of their homes as they chase people indoors to kill them.And all of this — the horror of what’s happening in plain sight that’s the clear result of Trump’s repeated and pathetic kowtowing to Putin — appears, from the Epstein emails, that it may be getting so much worse over the past 10 months because Putin took Epstein’s advice and threatened Trump with exposure.We still don’t know what was said in that room in Helsinki because Trump covered it up, making sure we’d never know. He ordered his American interpreter to move away from his private conversation with Putin, and afterward seized and destroyed her notes.Similarly and more recently, in Alaska, Trump dismissed his aides and rode with Putin privately in his car where they engaged in another lengthy, secretive conversation.That’s the behavior of a man with something to hide, who’s terrified by some horrible secret; it’s not the behavior of a leader defending the national interest of the United States or our European allies.On top of that, Trump has been placing private phone calls to Putin repeatedly ever since he was reinstalled in the Oval Office.No previous American president throughout our 249-year history had ever conducted such meetings and repeated communications in secret with the murderous leader of a hostile foreign power. None has ever tried to cover up meetings with such men.When we place Trump’s bizarre, unprecedented secrecy next to Epstein’s emails in which the billionaire pedophile tells European and Russian contacts that he could offer “insight” into Trump, the outlines of a deeply troubling possibility emerge.At this moment, it’s only speculation, but it’s one hell of a big if. Because Trump himself keeps doing things — including trashing NATO and betraying Ukraine in ways that only benefit Putin — and therefore demand a serious, honest investigation.We now know — from the emails released this week — that Epstein wrote that Sergei Lavrov could “get insight” from him and that Russian Ambassador Churkin “understood Trump” after their talks.And the Russians, as the world knows, never, ever let such juicy material go to waste. Former KGB senior intelligence officer Vladimir Putin is a man trained to find the soft spot in any opponent and apply the exact right pressure to make them bend to his will, and it’s looking more every day like that’s exactly what’s happening here.Trump was “best friends” with Epstein for more than a decade. They lived near each other in both New York and Palm Beach, and partied publicly together. They traveled on Epstein’s jet repeatedly. They allegedly shared women.These don’t prove blackmail, but the possibility that Epstein passed along compromising details to Lavrov or even Putin is staggering.Imagine Putin, alone with Trump in Helsinki way back in 2018, quietly signaling that he knew more about Epstein, Trump, and underage girls than Trump could survive being exposed.A soft whisper. Perhaps simply sliding a note card to Trump with the words “Epstein, girls” on it.And then Trump goes out to meet the press after their meeting, shoulders down looking beaten, and lavishes Putin with praise while trash-talking his own intelligence and military officials. What the hell?Even former Harvard President Larry Summers was horrified, writing to his friend Jeffrey Epstein on July 16, 2018, moments after the Helsinki meeting:“Do the Russians have stuff on Trump? Today was appalling even by his standards.”Epstein replied to Summers the next day:“My email is full with similar comments. wow. Im sure his view is that it went super well. he thinks he has charmed his adversary.. Admittedly he has no idea of the symbolism. He has no idea of most things.”The idea that Putin threatened Trump in that first private meeting is only a hypothesis, of course. But the secrecy Trump immediately imposed — and his repeatedly whipped-dog-like servile behavior to this murderous dictator in the years since — makes such a moment impossible to rule out.If something like that did occur, if Putin delivered even the hint of a threat and Trump immediately bent over and bowed down and has ever since, it would explain Trump’s world-changing behavior and why he’s so seriously damaged the interests of America while abandoning our European allies.Is there anything else that could possibly explain why Trump has spent years refusing to confront Putin for anything, no matter how shocking or monstrous the Russian dictator’s behavior?It would also explain his silence in the face of Russian assassinations, Putin’s bounties on American soldiers in Afghanistan, and now the horrific nightly devastation of Ukraine and Putin‘s kidnapping of tens of thousands of Ukrainian children.If Trump was intimidated in that private moment, if Putin used Epstein’s information as a weapon, then the cost of Trump’s fear of exposure has been measured in thousands of Ukrainian civilian deaths, including far more children then even Epstein himself victimized.It’s been measured in the suffering of the millions of Ukrainians now facing the possibility of freezing to death this winter without power, as Putin relentlessly and nightly targets their energy grid while Trump plays golf, bulldozes the White House, and throws elaborate parties.It’s measured in America’s humiliation on the world stage and in the bone-deep terror felt across Europe as Putin tests the resolve of NATO and his officials explicitly threaten the Baltics.The sheer scale of harm that could have flowed from this one corrupt, degenerate, perverted man’s desperation to protect himself is absolutely breathtaking.If it turns out that this is what actually happened, it would make historic betrayals like Benedict Arnold, Vidkun Quisling, Robert Hanssen, and even the petty treacheries that toppled ancient republics look small by comparison, because none of them placed the survival of modern, worldwide democracy itself at risk.This isn’t an accusation: it’s the unavoidable suspicion forced upon us by Trump’s own secrecy.He hid his conversations with Putin from his own government and even from the American people. He created a vacuum where certainty should exist. And now, into that vacuum, flows Epstein’s boast that he was willing to provide Russia with usable, exploitable insights into Trump’s vulnerabilities and psychology.Trump has refused the basic transparency required of every president who interacts with a hostile foreign leader. If he’d behaved like every president before him, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.But he didn’t.Instead, he has bizarrely, inexplicably kissed Putin‘s ass repeatedly and publicly in ways that have astonished and horrified our intelligence and military officials, as well as those of our allies.And now he’s in the process of purging any among our military ranks and intelligence services who he appears to suspect may not go along with his inexplicable behavior.Because Trump’s so frequently surrendered America’s, Ukraine’s, and NATO’s best interests to Putin’ s desires — and now we learn Epstein offered to advise Putin on how to blackmail (or at last control) him — we must now investigate every plausible explanation for his actions, no matter how disturbing.Just releasing Epstein’s emails isn’t even close to enough to answer these questions.Congress, what’s left of our independent media, and the FBI must investigate not only Epstein’s crimes and connections but the terrifying possibility that American foreign policy has been warped by a president desperately trying to shield himself from the exposure of unforgivable behavior.That investigation must be thorough, public, and relentless; it must meet the high standards of the internal and public investigations into Richard Nixon‘s criminality in 1974, at the very least.If true, the possibilities raised by Trump’s betrayal of Ukraine and kowtowing to Putin are far worse than anything Nixon could have conceived in his wildest fantasies.If Republicans have an ounce of integrity left they’ll not only sanction investigations that could lead to criminal prosecutions; they’ll convene impeachment proceedings.The American people deserve to know whether blackmail, intimidation, and Trump’s personal vulnerability have cost thousands of Ukrainian lives and shaken the foundations of Western democracy. As well as ignoring — or participating in — the destruction of the lives of hundreds of young girls.The stakes are too high, the damage too great, and the possible treason too severe to accept anything less.

The Associated Press investigated the identities of those killed in President Donald Trump’s military strikes on boats in the Caribbean and found that many were not the hardened criminals Trump claimed."One was a fisherman struggling to eke out a living on $100 a month. Another was a career criminal. A third was a former military cadet. And a fourth was a down-on-his-luck bus driver," the report said. Senators were given a classified briefing on Thursday, where Senate Intelligence Vice Chairman Mark Warner (D-VA) expressed confidence that the intelligence being used to justify the bombings was legitimate. Nonetheless, the Pentagon’s secrecy has fueled concern and skepticism among the public, CNN reported. AP conducted dozens of interviews in Venezuelan coastal towns, finding families who dispute Trump’s portrayal of their loved ones as “narco-terrorists.” Most were “low-level” laborers taking dangerous jobs for $500 per trip. “They were laborers, a fisherman, a motorcycle taxi driver. Two were small-time criminals,” the report said. Only one was linked to a crime boss providing smuggling services.The boats weren’t carrying fentanyl or heading to Florida; they shipped cocaine to nearby Trinidad and other islands, and then to Europe. The bulk of Colombian cocaine for the U.S. typically leaves Colombia via the Pacific. The boats appeared to be carrying cocaine instead of the deadlier opioids, which kill tens of thousands in America each year.The families complain that their relatives should have been given "due process" rather than what Venezuela's ambassador to the U.N. called “extrajudicial executions.”As the AP explained, "In the past, their boats would have been interdicted by the U.S. authorities and the crewmen charged with federal crimes, affording them a day in court."Since September, at least 69 people have been killed by the strikes. Read the complete profiles of the men here.

Five-year-old Luz spent 72 days separated from her father, Julio Rodriguez, after they were detained at the U.S.-Mexico border in 2018.Escaping extortion and violence in Guatemala, Julio was detained in Texas while Luz was sent to a shelter in New York. Eventually, they reunited in Atlanta and joined family in Massachusetts.Melanie Hernandez left Guatemala in the middle of the night in 2019 with her 14-year-old son, Lucas, fleeing an abusive husband. She left behind an adult daughter and five-year-old son with severe heart disease. Melanie spent several days away from Lucas when detainees were separated by gender at the U.S. border.The Rodriguez and Hernandez families are just two of 16 that experienced family separation under the first Trump administration, and who are now the subjects of a book by Gabrielle Oliveira, Now We Are Here: Family Migration, Children’s Education, and Dreams for a Better Life.The families from Brazil, Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador all came to the U.S. with children, the youngest four months old. Some mothers were pregnant. The parents and children faced significant trauma that lingers though they are settled in the U.S., pursuing asylum cases, Oliveira writes.Oliveira observed the children in school as much as twice a month over two to three years. Gabrielle Oliveira (provided photo)She observed families at home and engaged in communities, from meetings with lawyers to trips to the grocery store and church, for more than 2,500 hours. She interviewed parents and some children twice a month. “I think if we have children as our North Star for policymaking, it would change everything,” Oliveira, a Harvard professor, told Raw Story.‘More tragedy’From being mugged to paying bribes, the families encountered numerous dangers on their way to the U.S., Oliveira writes.One family traveled in a windowless truck with 50 other people, including babies, pregnant women and elderly folks.Julio Rodriguez paid a smuggler $7,000 to help him and Luz get to the U.S., traveling for 12 days from Guatemala to Ciudad Juárez in Mexico.Diana López, from Guatemala, recalled crossing the Rio Grande with her two-year-old in her arms. When her daughter fell into the river, Lopez grabbed her from underwater.López told Oliveira: “When I was leaving the water with Belén in my arms I was relieved that we survived the river … But when I looked up what I saw were these electric pistols … the next thing I know I felt it in my arm, stinging, and I fell to the ground.” "Now We Are Here" book coverWhile the parents were often fleeing unsafe situations, the ultimate motivation in risking all to cross the border came down to seeking better education for their children, Oliveira writes.Melissa Santos, a mother from Brazil, told Oliveira: “It’s one of those things: do you stay and let your children not have a chance, become drug addicts, and get shot by a stray bullet, or do you travel north and risk being arrested, shot, and deported. It’s more the same … more tragedy.” ‘Did I make a mistake?’Oliveira learned that many parents questioned whether the trek was worth it, then found themselves separated and exposed to inhumane treatment after reaching U.S. soil.The families encountered another hurdle: COVID-19, which stopped children attending school in person. Julio told Oliveira how he would comfort Luz, who was missing her mom and home: “I used to tell her about the good life we would have and that she would not believe the schools … I was just trying to have her not be sad all the time … But I kept thinking about the mistakes I made … Did I make a mistake bringing her?”Oliveira, who immigrated to the U.S. herself, from Brazil, said parents saw children having nightmares, seeming detached, or struggling in school. Some parents were diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder but had to keep moving forward."That's why the title is Now We Are Here,” Oliveira said. “The counter mantra to the ‘What if, what if, what if, what if’ is ‘Now we're here,’ so this is the shot that we have. That kind of stabilized the doubts of being worthy or not.” ‘They're going to grow up with this trauma’President Donald Trump was in the White House for his first term when the 16 families came to the U.S. With the second Trump administration employing even harsher immigration enforcement tactics, Oliveira imagines families such as those she writes about now being unable to reach the U.S.“So many of them were escaping life-and-death moments, so not being able to ask for asylum, not being able to do that, I think it would be extremely, even more dangerous than what it was a few years ago, just because of how the border is right now,” Oliveira said.With the Trump administration aggressively detaining and deporting immigrants — and encouraging unaccompanied children to self-deport — Oliveira said another form of family separation is happening. “It's going to be forever with them. They're going to grow up with this trauma, and it's not an easy one to address,” she said. Oliveira has stayed in touch with those she interviewed. Some, she said, have been afraid to leave their homes for doctor’s appointments, psychological treatment or speech therapy, due to the wave of deportations and detentions.“It was a real chilling effect,” Oliveira said. Still, the children she followed remained in school, with six teens having graduated high school. Oliveira has mixed feelings about her book being published at this moment.“I'm happy that at least there are these stories in this moment right now, and they're needed,” she said. “Let's think about the well-being of children. We can come together on this one.“It also makes me nervous … that it could be misplaced or misused, or in any of these ways that it wasn’t intended … the moment that we're living, it's a delicate one to tell stories."