Top World News

Designer Olivier Rousteing is stepping down as creative director of the Balmain fashion house after 14 hugely visible years

Indians have lit up social media to celebrate Zohran Mamdani’s election victory as New York City mayor

The Bolivian Supreme Court of Justice has annulled the 10-year prison sentence against former interim President Jeanine Áñez, ordering her immediate release

Cheney, who served under presidents from Nixon to George W Bush, will be remembered for controversial role after 9/11Dick Cheney created the ground for Trump’s excesses, despite their differencesDick Cheney, the divisive US vice-president under George W Bush who helped lead the country into a disastrous invasion of Iraq, died on Monday, his family has said. He was 84.Cheney at various times held the roles of member of Congress, White House chief of staff and secretary of defense, but it was as one of the country’s most powerful vice-presidents that he had the biggest impact, wielding great influence over the less experienced Bush. Continue reading...

By Robert Muggah, Princeton The U.S. military buildup along South America’s northern rim is, Washington insists, aimed at “narco-terrorists.” A growing chorus of analysts aren’t convinced; they suspect what the Trump administration is really after is regime change in Venezuela.Nicolás Maduro, the country’s leader since 2013, is taking no chances. In recent weeks, he responded to the Trump administration’s moves as if invasion were imminent. After a September emergency decree and martial rhetoric about a “republic in arms,” the Venezuelan president says militias and reservists are now mobilized nationwide.The leftist leader has ordered armed forces, police and militia to deploy across 284 battlefronts — a national defense posture that surges troops on sensitive borders. He has also massed 25,000 soldiers near Colombia, a likely vector for infiltration.In addition, roughly 4.5 million members of the National Bolivarian Militia, an auxiliary force created in 2005 and made up of civilian volunteers and reservists, have reportedly mobilized. Civilians are being trained by the armed forces in weapons handling and tactics sessions to knit local “people’s defense” committees into the defense architecture.This placing of Venezuela on a war footing follows months of U.S. military buildup in the Caribbean. And there is no doubt that should it come to it, the U.S. boasts a far larger and more sophisticated military than Venezuela.But as an expert on Latin American politics, I suspect that might not be enough to remove Maduro from power — or encourage opposition figures in Venezuela on Washington’s behalf. In fact, any direct attempt to do so might only lead to a slow process that risks entrenching Maduro’s position.Powerful friends Alongside nationwide domestic mobilization, the Venezuelan leader still has some pretty powerful international friends. Maduro boasts some 5,000 Russian Igla-S, man-portable anti-aircraft missiles positioned at key air-defense points. While unverified, these reports are indicative of the short-range air defense and anti-ship capabilities being supplied by nations friendly to the Maduro regime.On Oct. 28, a Russian Il-76 heavy cargo plane, operated by a sanctioned carrier tied to Russian military logistics, landed in Caracas after a multi-stop route through the Caucasus and West Africa. If not an outright sign of solidarity, this is a signal that Russia can airlift advisers, parts and munitions at will.Iran’s long, quiet hand is visible in Venezuela’s drone program. It was reportedly seeded with Mohajer-2 kits and expanded over the years into armed and surveillance platforms assembled at state plants by Tehran-trained technicians.Cuba, for its part, has for more than a decade embedded intelligence and internal security advisers across Venezuela’s military services, an underdiscussed force multiplier that helps the regime police dissent and maintain loyalty.Although Russia, Cuba and Iran may help Maduro survive, they are unlikely to save him from any determined American campaign.Cautious oppositionIf Washington is hoping that its military squeeze may encourage Venezuelans to take matters into their own hands, the domestic scene is less favorable. The opposition to Maduro is fragmented and vulnerable after being deprived, fraudulently by most accounts, victory in a 2024 vote and a subsequent year of repression.The Democratic Unitary Platform remains split between a pressure wing and a participation wing after the disputed vote. The jolt of morale handed to the opposition on Oct. 10, when the de facto 2024 opposition candidate María Corina Machado won the Nobel Peace Prize, has yet to move the needle.There is a low probability, in my opinion, that the opposition can forcibly remove Maduro without a trigger, such as a major split within the security services, sustained mass mobilization with elite defections, or a massive U.S. intervention.The regime’s domestic security architecture and control of courts, prosecutors and the electoral council make a sudden elite split unlikely. Electoral displacement is also unpromising given that the official opposition is split on tactics, faces daily repression, and Maduro has repeatedly signaled he will not accept a loss — even if he loses.Street power, backed by sustained international leverage and U.S. military threats, are arguably the opposition’s best asset.Diaspora politics are febrile. South Florida’s large Venezuelan exile community reads the naval buildup as a potential turning point and lobbies accordingly, even as U.S. immigration and travel policies cut against their interests. The opposition’s mainstream leaders still mouth the catechism that change should come by Venezuelan hands, but more are openly courting external pressure to tilt the balance.What Washington might do nextThe Trump administration has certainly shown willingness to mount pressure on Maduro and encourage his opponents. Since August, the Pentagon has surged forces, destroyers and amphibious ships into the U.S. Southern Command’s patch. Then, on Oct. 24, Washington redirected the USS Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group to the Caribbean.Meanwhile, attacks against suspected drug vessels will likely continue.The campaign has already resulted in at least 13 strikes and 57 killed in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific. And President Donald Trump has been consistent in linking the targeted cartels to Venezuela’s government and Maduro directly. Should the U.S. wish to escalate further, precision strikes on Venezuelan territory are not out of the question. With an aircraft carrier nearby and F-35s staged in Puerto Rico, the Pentagon has options.Meanwhile, covert actions will accompany any overt military posturing. The White House has openly declared that the CIA has authority to operate inside Venezuela. A U.S. Homeland Security agent reportedly tried to recruit Maduro’s chief pilot to fly the president into U.S. custody, a plot that fizzled but hints at the psychological ops now in play. Venezuela, meanwhile, has condemned “military provocation” by the CIA and others.It is worth recalling past attempts to unseat Maduro, including a 2018 drone attack at a Caracas parade and a failed freelance operation in 2020 that ended with deaths and dozens captured, including two former U.S. soldiers. The U.S. has denied any connection to both incidents.In any event, such operations seldom topple strongmen – but they do seed paranoia and crackdowns as regimes chase ghosts.Possible endgamesIf Washington’s real objective is regime change, the plausible outcomes are sobering. To be sure, a quick collapse of Maduro’s government is unlikely. A short, sharp campaign that dismantles the regime’s coercive tools could trigger elite defection. Yet Cuba-hardened internal security, patronage over the generals and years of sanctions-induced siege mentality make a palace coup improbable on a timetable that suits Washington.In my view, a slow squeeze is likelier.A hybrid strategy involving maritime and air pressure, covert agitation and inducements, targeted strikes to degrade regime capacity, and political, legal and cyber warfare to isolate Caracas and split the officer corps is realistic. But that path risks entrenching the regime’s hard-liners and worsening a humanitarian crisis even as it degrades Maduro’s capacity.Analysts warn that the regime change logic, once engaged, is hard to calibrate, especially if strikes kill civilians or hit national symbols.A boomerang is always possible. Military action will very likely rally nationalist sentiment in Venezuela, fracture hemispheric consensus and drag the U.S. into a longer confrontation with messy spillovers, from uncontrolled migration to maritime security threats.It is worth recalling that approximately 7.9 million migrants and refugees have already left Venezuela, with over 6.7 million residing in Latin American and Caribbean countries. Even the successful decapitation of Maduro’s regime would not guarantee a successor able to govern the country.At least three signposts matter in determining what happens next.The first is airlift cadence: More Russian cargo flights into Caracas point to accelerated military and technical aid. A second is the expansion of U.S. targets — a strike on a military installation or a presidential bunker would cross a political Rubicon, even if framed as a counter-narcotics operation. The third is opposition mobilization. If there are credible signs of Venezuelan demonstrations, protests and action, this will shape Washington’s appetite for escalation.But even if the White House clings to its current counter-drugs and counterterrorism narrative, all evidence points to the trajectory as an incremental regime change push with less than certain outcomes.

President Donald Trump has reportedly decided to order attacks on Venezuela's military installations.Sources told the Miami Herald that the strikes could come at any moment. The Trump administration has suggested that it is opposing the Sóles drug cartel.According to the paper, the targets "could be struck by air in a matter of days or even hours" in an effort to destroy the cartel hierarchy.Trump has been clear that he wants Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro out of power. Earlier this month, the U.S. president reportedly ordered covert CIA operations in Venezuela. The Herald's sources "declined to say" if Maduro was a target.On Friday, Trump denied that he had decided on strikes inside the country. The president's remarks came as the FAA issued flight restrictions over Ceiba, Puerto Rico, a potential refueling site for U.S. military airstrikes.

President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. will resume testing its nuclear weapons, stating that the move is necessary because America's adversaries have done so.While the U.S. has the top military equipment in the world, spending several times more than other countries, Trump wants the U.S. to start blowing things up again. The problem, however, is that the government shutdown means the people who deal specifically with nuclear issues are furloughed. Speaking to MSNBC on Thursday, Ian Bremmer, founder and president of the Eurasia Group, said that the tit-for-tat between Trump and Putin can't start right away. "Well, they can't start nuclear testing now because the officials that would be in charge of that have mostly been furloughed," said Bremmer. "So, you have to get the government started. I guess that's an irony."He noted that it appears to be a direct response from Trump to Russian President Vladimir Putin's threats to begin nuclear testing. Trump withdrew the United States from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty with Russia in August 2019.Bremmer noted that it was revealed that Russia had a successful test of a nuclear-powered cruise missile, "which had the ability to hit the United States easily. And a torpedo, but that was not a nuclear test. It appears the president was confused about that and responded by saying, 'Yeah, we're gonna start doing nuclear testing.'"The U.S. joined the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty in 1996, and Bremmer thinks if the U.S. began testing again, then the Russians and Chinese would quickly follow.

When President Donald Trump was in China, he left Xi Jinping with very little. But one reporter noticed it was similar to what Trump got with Russian President Vladimir Putin."I mean, look, it's the old diplomatic strategy, right? Take what you get, declare victory, and go home," said New York Times reporter Peter Baker, speaking to MSNBC's Katy Tur. "Whether it is a victory or not, beyond being able to say you've got one is the bigger question." At this point, however, Baker said that Trump's wins look "modest." "I was struck when the president said that he gave this a 12 on a scale of 10 for being a great meeting, and that they made a lot of progress and 'We're very close on some important things,'" Baker quoted. "That's almost word-for-word the things he said when he met in Alaska with Vladimir Putin. I was there in the room for that, he said. It was a 10 out of 10, not 12, but it was a 10 out of 10. 'And they made a lot of progress. And we're very close on some really important things.'"Trump visited Alaska to meet with Putin and lobby for an end to the war in Ukraine."And of course, we all know what happened after Alaska, which is nothing," said Baker. "So, you know, you've got to be careful about overevaluating how much this will be worth. If it means, though, that there is sort of a, kind of a truce in a way, that there is a less hostile relationship for them now."The exchanges, he said, are less hostile and less volatile, and that's the only real progress.