Donald Trump said he planned to hit goods from China with a new 10% tariff, the latest salvo in the US president's steadily escalating trade fights. Imports from China already face taxes at the border of at least 10%, after a Trump tariff order that went into effect earlier this month. China's ministry of foreign affairs said it "strongly" expressed its "dissatisfaction and resolute opposition" to the plans. Trump also said on Thursday he intended to move forward with threatened 25% tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico, which are set to come into effect on 4 March. Trump's comments came as officials from Mexico and Canada were in Washington for discussions aimed at heading off that plan. Trump had announced the plans for 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada for 4 February unless the two nations increased border security. He paused the measures for a month at the last minute after the two countries agreed to increase border funding and talk more about how to combat drug trafficking. On social media on Thursday, Trump wrote that he did not think enough action had been taken to address the flow of fentanyl to the US. "Drugs are still pouring into our Country from Mexico and Canada at very high and unacceptable levels," he wrote, adding that "a large percentage" of the drugs were made in China. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, at a press conference from the country's National Palace, said in response: "As we know, [Trump] has his way of communicating." She added: "I hope we can reach an agreement and on 4 March we can announce something else." Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau also said his country was working hard to reach a deal, warning tariffs from the US would prompt an "immediate and extremely strong response". Trump's threats against Mexico and Canada have raised widespread alarm, as the North American economy is closely connected after decades of operating under a free trade agreement. Leaders of the two countries have previously said they would impose retaliatory tariffs on the United States if the White House went ahead with its plans. Tariffs are a tax collected by the government and paid for by the business bringing the goods into the country. China, Mexico and Canada are America's top three trade partners, together accounting for more than 40% of imports into the US last year. Economists have warned tariffs on goods from the three countries could lead to higher prices in the US on everything from iPhones to avocados. Trump's call for an additional 10% levy on goods from China - which he said would also go into effect on Tuesday - had not been previously announced, though during his presidential campaign he backed border taxes on Chinese products of as much as 60%. A spokesperson for China's ministry of foreign affairs, Lin Jian, said that Trump was using the issue of the drug fentanyl entering the US from China as an "excuse" to threaten tariffs, adding it had one of the "strictest" drug control policies in the world. "Pressure, coercion, and threats are not the correct way to deal with China," he said. Liu Pengyu, spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy, had earlier said that his country was already working with the US to address the concerns about fentanyl, and had made "visual progress" in areas such as information exchange, case cooperation and online advertisement cleanup. "Reducing domestic drug demand and strengthening law enforcement cooperation are the fundamental solutions," he said in a statement, which warned that Trump's tariff moves were "bound to affect and undermine future counternarcotics cooperation between the two sides". "The unilateral tariffs imposed by the US will not solve its own problems, nor will it benefit the two sides or the world." Trump's comments, which called for drug flow to stop or be "severely limited", seemed to set the stage for Mexico and Canada to negotiate, said trade expert Christine McDaniel, a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. On Thursday, as tariff talks intensified, two imprisoned alleged leaders of the violent Zetas cartel long sought by the US - Miguel Angel Trevino Morales and his brother Oscar - were extradited. Mexican media said they were part of a larger group of drug lords sent from Mexico to the US - a major step in terms of US-Mexico security relations. Ms McDaniel said Trump's demands of China were less clear, raising the likelihood that those measures will come into effect. Trump's initial round of tariffs on China was eclipsed by his threats against Canada and Mexico. But the potential for further duties raises questions about how businesses will respond. Ms McDaniel said she expected the hit to be felt more in China. "It's not costless for the US, but so far it seems more costly for China," she said. The impact of tariffs, if they go into effect, is expected to be felt more in the Canadian and Mexican economies, which count on the US as a key export market. But analysts have warned that the threat of the levies, even if they are never imposed, is still likely to have a chilling effect on investment, including in the US. China has already responded to the first round of tariffs from the US with its own tariffs on US products, including coal and agricultural machinery. Trump has dismissed fears about damage to the American economy.
More than half of sleep sessions end with the snooze button, with people sneaking in an extra 11 minutes on average, a new study reveals — but experts say it may not be a good idea. Researchers from Mass General Brigham analyzed data from the Sleep Cycle app, which included sleep habits from more than 21,000 people globally. Among the more than three million sleep sessions tracked, nearly 56% ended with the snooze button. MOST SLEEP-DEPRIVED CITIES IN US REVEALED IN REPORT: WHERE DOES YOURS RANK? The heaviest users of the snooze button — who used it for more than 80% of the mornings included in the study — slept an average of 20 extra minutes. These heaviest snoozers were also shown to have "more erratic sleep schedules" than those who used the snooze button less often, the researchers found."Unfortunately, the snooze alarm disrupts some of the most important stages of sleep," said lead author Rebecca Robbins, PhD, in the Division of Sleep and Circadian Disorders Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, in a press release. "The hours just before waking are rich in rapid eye movement sleep. Hitting the snooze alarm will interrupt these critical stages of sleep and typically only offer light sleep in between snooze alarms."
Proper handwashing could save a million lives a year, according to an expert — and yet many people are doing it improperly, often due to misconceptions surrounding the practice. Doctors recommend washing with soap and water for at least 20 seconds to reduce the spread of infectious diseases. The NFID 2025 State of Handwashing Report, recently released by the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases, provides details on Americans' handwashing habits (and mistakes). WHY YOUR LAUNDRY COULD BE MAKING YOU SICK AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT The report is based on a survey of 3,587 U.S. adults, conducted in November and December 2024 and March 2025."We have to recognize that there are a number of important infections that hand sanitizers are not effective at preventing," Hopkins said. One example is norovirus, a highly contagious stomach virus that is common on cruise ships and is also spread seasonally. The virus cannot be killed with hand sanitizer, but is "easily destroyed" with soap and water, according to Hopkins.Certain viruses are "encapsulated" and can be destroyed with either soap and water or hand sanitizer, the expert said. However, there is also an "unencapsulated" type of virus, which has an outer coat that does not break down from the alcohol in hand sanitizer. Using soap and water is a more effective way to kill the germs, the doctor noted. 2. Just coughing into your sleeve When people cough or sneeze into their sleeve, they could still spread germs afterward. "If you cough into your sleeve … go ahead and wash your hands with soap and water as well," Hopkins advised. COMMON MEDICAL TEST LINKED TO 5% OF CANCERS, STUDY SUGGESTS: ‘USE THEM WISELY’ "We also have to recognize that we often bring our hands up close to our face, touch our nose, our glasses, other parts of our face," noted the doctor, who is based in Arkansas. "If we have bacteria or viruses on our hands, we can introduce them into our mucous membranes, where we can get infections."
Note the time delay "The [cortisol] decline is different for everyone but typically occurs one-and-a-half to two hours after you wake," Zumpano said. That's the best time to have coffee, Zumpano said. SLEEP EXPERT REVEALS TOP FOODS AND DRINKS KEEPING YOU UP AT NIGHT That way, "you can rely on your body's natural alert system - cortisol - and when it declines, then you use caffeine to provide the boost.""There is no specific time that's best to drink caffeine," the dietitian added. "[It's] based on when you wake and your natural rise and drop in cortisol." Yet adhering to the body's natural wake-up processes can help sustain energy levels by avoiding one big cortisol, caffeinated crash. COFFEE CREAMER HEALTH RISKS: WHAT TO KNOW, WHAT TO CHOOSE INSTEAD Fox News Digital previously reported on smart ways to consume coffee, with an expert noting that coffee drinking should be tailored to each individual. "For some people, waking up and having a glass of water to rehydrate and then having coffee works well – but for others the morning ritual of having a cup of coffee first thing upon awakening is just too good to give up," said Wendy Troxel, a Utah-based sleep expert and senior behavioral scientist at the RAND Corporation.
The Pandemic Agreement, just adopted by the World Health Organization (WHO), is a landmark for global public health. Had such an agreement been in place before 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic would have looked very different. The agreement now means that when the next pandemic begins brewing, the world will be much better equipped to mitigate or even prevent it. What exactly will the agreement do? In a nutshell, 124 countries have pledged to prevent, prepare for, and respond to future pandemics. The countries that formally ratify the agreement will be bound to uphold a number of commitments including investing in health infrastructures, sharing intellectual property, and engaging in technology transfer. Advertisement One of the biggest benefits promises to be the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System. This will require U.N. member states to share information and data about potential pandemic viruses, including sequencing of new viruses or variants, as well as share relevant vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostic technologies. Vaccine manufacturers in participating countries will be expected to provide 20% of pandemic vaccines in real time to the WHO to distribute globally, including to poorer countries and those most in need of them. Of these vaccines, member countries will donate 10% of them for free. Such an arrangement would have saved many lives during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the first few years, the unequal access to vaccines was one of the biggest challenges, with one study finding that up to half the COVID-19 deaths in many lower income countries could have been avoided with a more equitable supply of vaccines. Read More: Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus: Global-Health Architect Conspicuously absent from the agreement is the U.S., which has historically played a key role in global health, from HIV/AIDS to malaria and beyond. Although 11 countries abstained from voting, the U.S.'s omission due to its decision to withdraw from the WHO is notable. COVID-19 taught us that the health of people on the other side of the world is inexorably tied to our own. Isolationism doesn't work when it comes to infectious disease. Even countries that took the most drastic measures to contain COVID-19, like China, eventually succumbed to rapid and extensive spread of the virus when they relaxed international travel or strict lockdowns and social-distancing measures. Preventing the next pandemic will require us to ensure that all countries, including low- and middle-income ones, have the necessary resources to prevent outbreaks from happening and to quash them before they spread. Advertisement The agreement also proves that multilateralism and a desire for global cooperation are still shared goals among most countries. Some critics of the agreement, including U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr, have argued that it would be a threat to national sovereignty or freedom, in that it would compromise countries’ ability to make pandemic-related health policy decisions. This is not the case. The agreement states that it “does not prejudice the sovereign right” of countries to consider it in accordance with their own national constitutions. Global agreements or treaties of this nature are rare. But when they do come about, they are far from being tokenistic documents full of legalese. Although the Pandemic Agreement is less formal and legally binding, several U.N. global treaties have already saved millions of lives. The Framework Convention for Tobacco Control, the first WHO treaty, has reduced tobacco use by one-third over the past 20 years and has saved lives with policies like indoor smoking bans.
The Israeli military fired warning shots at a large delegation of European and Arab diplomats on an official visit near the Jenin refugee camp in the occupied West Bank on Wednesday, drawing swift international condemnation. Delegations from more than 20 countries, including the United Kingdom, France, Canada and others, were on an official mission to see the humanitarian situation around the besieged camp, according to the Palestinian Authority’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which called the incident a “deliberate and unlawful act.” Video from the incident shows Israeli soldiers firing toward the delegation as it backs away from a gate blocking the road. At least seven shots can be heard in the video. One member of the delegation cautions the group, “be close to the wall, be close to the wall,” as they walk away from the scene. “The ministry holds the Israeli occupying government fully and directly responsible for this criminal assault and affirms that such acts will not pass without accountability,” the Palestinian Authority’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said the visit to the camp - the site of a major ongoing military operation that has destroyed more than 100 buildings and impacted thousands of families - was coordinated in advance. The military said it launched an initial investigation once it became clear that the group was a diplomatic delegation. “The delegation deviated from the approved route and entered an area where they were not authorized to be,” the military said in a statement Wednesday. “IDF soldiers operating in the area fired warning shots to distance them away.” The IDF said it will reach out to the delegations about the findings of the initial inquiry and “regrets the inconvenience caused.” The Palestinian Authority said the visit was announced 10 days in advance and that the group had been at the gate for more than 15 minutes before Israeli soldiers started shooting. Roland Friedrich, the director of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency in the West Bank, refuted the Israeli military’s version of events, saying that its explanations “do not fully capture the severity of today’s event.” “This incident is a stark reminder of the lax use of excessive force routinely deployed by Israeli security forces in the West Bank, often with lethal consequences,” Friedrich said. “This raises serious concerns over the way rules of engagement are applied to unarmed civilians.” Kaja Kallas, the European Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs, said after the incident that “any threats on diplomats’ lives are unacceptable.” “We definitely call on Israel to investigate this incident and also hold those accountable who are responsible for this,” Kallas said at a press conference Wednesday. Italy’s foreign ministry summoned Israel’s ambassador in Rome for an official clarification. “The threats against diplomats are unacceptable,” the country’s Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani added in a social media post on X. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said that Israel’s ambassador to France would also be summoned following the incident, calling it “unacceptable,” while Spain’s Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares said that his government summoned the head of the Israeli embassy in Madrid. Canada’s Foreign Minister Anita Anand confirmed on social media that four Canadian personnel were part of the delegation that was shot at, adding that she has asked officials to summon Israel’s Ambassador to convey “Canada’s serious concerns.” Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney told a news conference in Ottawa that Canada expected a full and immediate explanation of what happened. “It’s totally unacceptable,” he said. “It’s some of many things that are totally unacceptable that’s going on in the region.” On Wednesday evening, Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen told CNN’s Isa Soares that her country will be summoning the Israeli ambassador to Finland in response to the military’s actions. “Any deviation of any route – it is not an excuse,” Valtonen said. “It is prohibited to open fire against civilians, even under the laws of war. And, of course, these people were also under diplomatic protection.” A host of officials from other European nations condemned the shooting, including representatives from Ireland, Belgium, Slovenia, Portugal, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark and the United Kingdom. Foreign ministries from countries including Jordan, Egypt, Turkey and Qatar also strongly condemned the incident. “This attack, which endangered the lives of diplomats, is yet another demonstration of Israel’s systematic disregard for international law and human rights,” Turkey’s foreign ministry said. “The targeting of diplomats constitutes a grave threat not only to individual safety but also to the mutual respect and trust that form the foundation of inter-state relations. This attack must be investigated without delay, and those responsible must be held accountable,” it added. Clarification: This story has been updated to reflect the shooting incident occurred near the Jenin refugee camp, not within the camp.
Britain’s government has been temporarily blocked from concluding its deal to transfer the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, PA Media reported, after an 11th-hour injunction by a High Court judge. Prime Minister Keir Starmer intends to return the islands to the African country, while maintaining control of the US-UK Diego Garcia military base, and it had been expected that the deal would be signed off on Thursday.
It’s axiomatic that you can’t solve a problem if you don’t admit it exists—and the best way to admit it exists is to talk about it. That’s particularly true when it comes to climate change. For more than four decades, the state of the climate has been part of the national conversation—especially when severe weather events linked to a warming world such as droughts, floods, heat waves, and hurricanes occur. Between those emergencies, climate often retreats to a secondary issue—or less. A pair of studies—one from 2015, one from 2021— found that only 35% of Americans discuss climate change even occasionally. Since 2009, respondents to surveys have been more likely to say they discuss climate “rarely” or “never” than “occasionally” or “often.” Now, a new study in PLOS Climate explores what the authors term the “climate silence” and offers insights into how to break it. Any public discussion of a political or social issue can be subject to what’s known as a "spiral of silence.” The less people hear a topic talked about, the less likely they are to bring it up themselves, which just leads to even fewer people discussing it and fewer still to raise the issue. The opposite is also true: the more that people discuss and debate a topic, the likelier it is that other people will join the conversation. In the case of climate change, the latter leads to what the researchers call a “proclimate social feedback loop.” It’s that loop—or lack of it—that the authors of the PLOS One paper were looking for. To conduct their research, they analyzed three existing studies by different research teams conducted in 2020 and 2021 in which a total of more than 3,000 people were asked for their beliefs and feelings about climate change. Across the surveys, the subjects responded to questions about whether they believe there is a scientific consensus that global warming is happening; how certain they themselves are that global warming is real; assuming they accept that it is indeed real, whether they believe humans are responsible for it; how much they worry about global warming; how much of a risk global warming poses to themselves, their families, and their communities; whether they think global warming is a bad or good thing; how much of an effort their families and friends make to combat the problem; how important it is for their family, friends, and, significantly, themselves to take such action; and how often they hear about global warming in the media. Finally, they were asked how often they discuss global warming with family and friends. What the surveys didn’t address was whether it was all of the initial variables that led to the discussions—an important measure of causation—or if they just existed side by side. The new study conducted statistical analyses of the surveys to make that determination. “Those surveys did not analyze how much the independent variables influence climate discussion,” says Margaret Orr, a PhD student in George Mason University’s department of communications and the lead author of the paper. “They just report survey results without looking at any interactions between variables.” Across the entire sample group, the researchers found that all but three of the variables led to increased discussions about climate change. Those three that sparked little or no conversation were: how convinced the respondents themselves were that climate change is happening; belief in a scientific consensus that it is; and belief that humans are causing the problem. Those are three pretty powerful factors—ones that ought to spark concern and conversation. The researchers have some idea about why they don’t. “One potential reason for these [variables] not being significant predictors of climate discussion is the potential for indirect effects,” says Orr. Each of the three factors that don’t directly lead to climate conversations, she says, may nonetheless lead to worry, which in turn may spark conversations. The more of those conversations that happen, the better. “Previous research has shown that people are more likely to take actions if asked to do so by someone they like and respect," says Orr. “Climate conversations will help reverse the spiral of silence: the more people realize that others are concerned about climate change and support climate action, the more people will talk about it.” This story is part of The 89 Percent Project, an initiative of the global journalism collaboration Covering Climate Now.
Two court rulings on Tuesday unfroze hundreds of millions of dollars in federal climate funds, a win for nonprofit groups that have been denied access to money they were promised under the Biden administration. Judge Tanya S. Chutkan of the federal court for the District of Columbia on Tuesday ordered the immediate release of up to $625 million in climate grants that have been frozen since mid-February under the $20 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. The fund is also known as the “green bank” program and has been a major target of Lee Zeldin, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Separately, Judge Mary S. McElroy of the federal court for the District of Rhode Island ordered five federal agencies to unfreeze environmental and infrastructure funding that had been awarded to nonprofits during the Biden administration. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT In her ruling, Judge McElroy said the nonprofits had demonstrated in court that the indefinite freeze, put in place by the Trump administration, “was neither reasonable nor reasonably explained.” She added that the nonprofits were likely to be able to prove that the freezes were “fundamentally arbitrary.” The lawsuits are among many filed against the Trump administration’s moves to freeze billions of dollars in funding that had been awarded through two laws passed in 2021 and 2022, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act. Various judges have ordered the administration to unfreeze funds, but the administration has cited legal loopholes to avoid doing so. Administration officials have said the pauses are necessary to align with executive orders President Trump has issued since taking office. The $20 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, which was authorized under the Inflation Reduction Act and finalized before last November’s presidential election, represents roughly twice the E.P.A.’s budget for 2025. Mr. Zeldin seized on the program early in his tenure, citing a hidden-camera video filmed in December in which an E.P.A. staffer likened the outgoing Biden administration’s efforts to spend federal money to tossing gold bars off the Titanic. The video was released by Project Veritas, a conservative group known for using covert recordings to embarrass its political opponents. Mr. Zeldin called for the funds to be returned to the federal government. Citibank, which holds the money on behalf of the grant recipients, froze the accounts. The nonprofit grant recipients then sued the E.P.A. and Citibank last month. The bank declined to comment on Wednesday. The E.P.A. has notified that court that it will appeal. “The D.C. District Court does not have jurisdiction to reinstate the $20 billion Biden-Harris ‘Gold Bar’ scheme,” an E.P.A. official said Wednesday. “These grants are terminated, and the funds belong to the U.S. taxpayer.” The E.P.A. is allowed to freeze the grants if it uncovers evidence of waste, fraud or abuse. Judge Chutkan, who was nominated by President Barack Obama, asked the agency to produce evidence of that, but it has not offered anything concrete, despite investigations by the Department of Justice, the F.B.I. and the agency’s Office of Inspector General. Judge Chutkan’s order, which was released late Tuesday, calls for the release of funds that were “properly incurred before the mid-February suspension of plaintiffs’ funds.” A court filing from the E.P.A. estimated the total withdrawal requests at up to $625 million. On Wednesday morning, grant recipients were still trying to figure out exactly which transaction requests would be honored. Beth Bafford, chief executive of Climate United, one of the nonprofits that sued, said that the decision “gives us a chance to breathe after the E.P.A. unlawfully, and without due process, terminated our awards and blocked access to funds that were appropriated by Congress and legally obligated.” The group, a national investment fund based in Maryland, said it intended to use the grants for projects in solar energy in Arkansas and hydropower in Alaska. In the Rhode Island lawsuit, filed in March, the named defendants include the departments of Agriculture, Energy and Interior, as well as the E.P.A., the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Office of Management and Budget, and the agency heads. None of the agencies immediately commented on the ruling. Six nonprofits had filed the suit. They argued that their work had been hamstrung by the uncertainty created by the funding freeze. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT Examples of harm cited in the lawsuit included nonprofits having to furlough employees and pause projects, with no ability to plan for the future. “We are pleased that a federal court has seen the Trump administration’s freeze of congressionally approved funds for what it is, another abuse of executive power,” said Skye Perryman, chief executive of Democracy Forward, a legal group focused on challenging the Trump administration. It worked with co-counsel DeLuca, Weizenbaum, Barry & Revens, a firm based in Providence, R.I., on the case. Judge McElroy, who was appointed by President Trump in 2018, imposed a deadline of 5 p.m. on Wednesday in Rhode Island for the agencies to report back on their compliance with the order.
This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME’s politics newsletter. Sign up here to get stories like this sent to your inbox. The new Pope is an American. Do not for a minute think he wants to Make America Great Again. Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost on Thursday became leader to the world’s 1.4 billion Catholics and took the name Leo XIV. But the former missionary stands to be an ideological check on a certain breed of American-styled Catholicism, which in recent years has been ascendant in Washington yet has drifted into more conservative lanes than its global brethren. With Vice President J.D. Vance and six of the nine Supreme Court Justices as part of his flock, Leo becomes the most powerful Catholic both in the world and among Americans. And Leo, known in Rome as “The Latin Yankee,” clearly represents a rejection by the Vatican of the intense lobbying from rich Americans to install a pontiff sympathetic to President Donald Trump, who went so far as to joke he should be a simultaneous Pope and President.“Congratulations to Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, who was just named Pope,” Trump posted to his social media site. “It is such an honor to realize that he is the first American Pope. What excitement, and what a Great Honor for our Country. I look forward to meeting Pope Leo XIV. It will be a very meaningful moment!” Perhaps. But like his predecessor, Pope Francis, there’s a very good chance that Leo and Trump will clash on serious issues like immigration, human rights, and the environment. The new Pope has a history of amplifying messages in support of racial justice and gun safety, and against capital punishment. Read More: Where Pope Leo Stands on Specific Issues Another collision between the civic leader of the United States and the sacred leader of the Catholic Church seems inevitable, especially given Trump’s obsession with a nationalistic agenda that would co-opt Christianity in service of his political goals. Within hours of his election, the MAGAverse seemed to be gunning for the new pontiff in nakedly political terms. While Trump rushed to the White House driveway to praise the Chicago-born and Villanova-educated Leo, his legion of fans were less laudatory. “WOKE MARXIST POPE,” tweeted far-right activist and Trump ally Laura Loomer, who also called Leo “just another Marxist puppet in the Vatican.”
Lebanon’s government has opposed any further delay in the Israeli pullout under the ceasefire agreement that ended fighting with Hezbollah. Israeli forces will remain in five strategic locations in southern Lebanon near the border after Tuesday’s deadline for their full withdrawal, an Israeli official said Monday. The official spoke on condition of anonymity in line with regulations. Lebanon’s government has opposed any further delay in the Israeli pullout under the ceasefire agreement that ended fighting with the Hezbollah militant group. There was no immediate comment from Lebanese or Hezbollah officials. Earlier on Monday, an Israeli strike in Lebanon killed a senior Hamas leader. The news came as Israelis were marking the 500th day since Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack, which ignited the war in the Gaza Strip and rippled across the region, eventually setting off a full-blown war between Israel and Hezbollah. The war in Gaza was paused last month when a fragile ceasefire took hold. The first phase of the truce is set to end in early March, and it’s unclear whether it will be extended to allow the release of dozens more hostages, or if Israel will renew its military offensive against Hamas with U.S. support. Separately, an anti-settlement watchdog said Monday that Israel has issued a tender for the construction of nearly 1,000 additional settler homes in the occupied West Bank. Peace Now says the development of 974 new housing units would allow the population of the Efrat settlement to expand by 40% and further block the development of the nearby Palestinian city of Bethlehem. Hagit Ofran, who leads the group’s settlement monitoring, said construction can begin after the contracting process and issuing of permits, which could take another year at least. There was no immediate comment from the Israeli government. Israel captured the West Bank, along with the Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem, in the 1967 Mideast war. The Palestinians want all three territories for their future state and view the settlements as a major obstacle to peace, a position with wide international support. Settlement expansion President Donald Trump lent unprecedented support to the settlements during his previous term. Israel has also steadily expanded settlements during Democratic administrations, which were more critical but rarely took any action to curb them. Israel has built well over 100 settlements across the West Bank, ranging from hilltop outposts to fully developed suburban communities, with apartment blocks, malls and parks. Over 500,000 settlers live in the occupied West Bank, which is home to some 3 million Palestinians. The settlers have Israeli citizenship, while Palestinians live under military rule with the Western-backed Palestinian Authority administering population centers. The Israeli government views the West Bank as the historical and biblical heartland of the Jewish people and is opposed to Palestinian statehood, while human rights groups have accused Israel of discrimination against and oppression of Palestinians in the West Bank. Peace Now, which favors a negotiated two-state solution to the conflict, accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government of pressing ahead with settlement construction while dozens of hostages captured in Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack languish in captivity in the Gaza Strip. “The Netanyahu government is operating ‘on steroids’ to establish facts on the ground that will destroy the chance for peace and compromise,” it said in a statement. 500 days Israelis held protests across the country on Monday calling for the ceasefire to be extended so that more hostages can be released. Demonstrators blocked a main intersection in Tel Aviv, and some protesters planned to fast for 500 minutes in a show of solidarity with the captives. “All I care about, all I want, is for my friends to return. There were six of us living in unbearable conditions, in a six-square-meter (65-square-foot) space. I got out, but they are still there,” Ohad Ben Ami, a hostage who was released a week and a half ago, told Israeli President Isaac Herzog on Monday. He added that hostages don’t count days while in captivity, they count minutes and seconds. Hamas is set to continue the gradual release of 33 hostages during the current phase of the truce in exchange for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners. Israeli forces have pulled back from most parts of Gaza and allowed a surge of humanitarian aid. But the two sides have yet to negotiate the second phase, in which Hamas would release more than 70 remaining hostages — around half of whom are believed to be dead — in exchange for more Palestinian prisoners, a full Israeli withdrawal and a lasting ceasefire. Netanyahu and the Trump administration have given conflicting signals over whether they want to continue the ceasefire or renew the war. Both they say are committed to the eradication of Hamas and the return of all the hostages, but those goals are widely seen as incompatible. Hamas-led militants killed some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, in the Oct. 7, 2023, attack and abducted around 250. More than half of the hostages have been returned in agreements with Hamas or other deals, while just eight have been rescued in military operations. The militant group, though weakened, remains in full control of the territory. Hamas has said it is willing to relinquish power to other Palestinians but will not accept any occupying force. Israel’s air and ground war has killed over 48,000 Palestinians, more than half of them women and children, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry, which does not say how many were combatants. The war destroyed vast areas of Gaza and at its height had displaced around 90% of the population of 2.3 million. Trump has called for Gaza’s population to be permanently relocated to other countries and for the United States to take ownership of the territory and rebuild it for others. Israel has welcomed the plan, while Palestinians and Arab nations have universally rejected the idea. Rights groups and experts say the proposal, if implemented, would likely violate international law. The proposal has meanwhile cast further doubt over the future of the ceasefire. Hamas may be unwilling to release the remaining captives — its only bargaining chips — it if believes Israel is going to resume the war with the goal of expelling the Palestinian population. Hamas official killed An Israeli drone strike targeted a car in Lebanon’s southern port city of Sidon, the deepest strike since the ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel took effect in November. Israel said it targeted Muhammad Shaheen, the head of Hamas’ operations in Lebanon. Footage circulating online showed a car engulfed in flames. The strike occurred near a Lebanese army checkpoint and Sidon’s municipal sports stadium. The original withdrawal deadline was in late January, but under pressure from Israel, Lebanon agreed to extend it to Feb. 18. It remains unclear whether Israeli troops will complete their withdrawal by Tuesday. Since the ceasefire, Israel has continued airstrikes in southern and eastern Lebanon, saying it is targeting military sites containing missiles and combat equipment. Each side has accused the other of violating the truce.
“It remains to be seen if this will result in charges,” said Khalid Abdalla, who also starred in “United 93” and “The Day of the Jackal.” LONDON — The British actor who played Princess Diana’s love interest in the Netflix series “The Crown” said he had been summoned for questioning by police after he attended a pro-Palestinian rally in central London. Khalid Abdalla, who played Dodi Fayed in the popular show, said in a statement posted to his social media channels that London's Metropolitan Police Service had sent him a letter requesting he attend “a formal interview,” in relation to “the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign protest” Jan. 18. “It remains to be seen if this will result in charges,” added Abdalla, who also starred in “United 93” and “The Day of the Jackal.” He added that the right to protest was “under attack” in the the United Kingdom. Abdalla was among tens of thousands of people who attended the demonstration, which was held the day after Israel and Hamas agreed to a ceasefire deal to pause the war in the Gaza Strip, which has claimed the lives of more than 48,000 people, according to health officials in the Palestinian enclave. Israel launched its military campaign after the Hamas terrorist attacks Oct. 7, 2023, which killed 1,200 people and saw around 250 taken hostage, according to Israeli officials. The Metropolitan Police confirmed to NBC News via email that it had arrested 77 people on suspicion of breaching protest conditions after some of them broke through a police line that day. It added that 21 people had been charged so far. As part of the “ongoing investigation,” the force said it had “invited a further eight people to be interviewed under caution at a police station.” British police typically do not confirm the identity of anyone under investigation. Abdalla, 44, has attended several pro-Palestinian rallies in the past and has publicly called for a permanent ceasefire in the Gaza Strip. Addressing the crowds at the Jan. 18 rally, Abdalla said, “Tomorrow phase one of this ceasefire begins. It remains to be seen if the ceasefire will hold, or if the blood shed since it was announced augurs what it will become.” In February, he was one of the signatories to an open letter written to the BBC by the advocacy group, Artists for Palestine UK, which criticized the broadcaster for pulling a documentary on Gaza’s children. The Palestine Coalition, the activist group that organized the rally, condemned the letter sent to Abdalla in a statement issued Monday, accusing police of carrying out an “apparently coordinated attack against the Palestine solidarity movement.” The force, it said, was “endeavoring to halt public protest on the issue through harassment of those involved in the movement, and through increasingly draconian restrictions on demonstrations.”
With hours to go until the U.S. raises tariffs on goods imported from dozens of countries—including a 104% tax on Chinese imports—world leaders were still scrambling Tuesday to understand President Donald Trump’s tariff strategy and reach the right people in the Administration to secure an exemption. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told Congress on Tuesday that “nearly 50” countries have approached him to address Trump’s blanket of new tariffs. Argentina, Vietnam and Israel have “suggested they will reduce their tariffs and non-tariffs barriers,” Greer said in testimony to the Senate Finance Committee. But Trump isn’t budging anytime soon, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday. Trump is open to talking to countries on a case-by-case basis, she told reporters, but those negotiations wouldn’t stop the across-the-board 10% tariff on all imports that went into effect over the weekend. Higher tariff rates targeting dozens of countries are set to take effect at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday. That includes a 104% tariff on China, the top supplier of U.S. imports. "Trump has a spine of steel. He will not break. America will not break under his leadership,” Leavitt said. Administration officials continued to stress the prospect of the U.S. making new “deals” with other countries, but the timeline for such negotiations were murky. Leavitt confirmed that Trump insists on putting himself at the center of the negotiations, and is willing to consider offers unrelated to trade in exchange for reducing U.S. tariffs, including having countries cover the costs of hosting U.S. military troops and other foreign policy objectives.. "All options are on the table for each country but again these are going to be tailor-made deals,” Leavitt said. During his visit to the Oval Office on Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu offered to remove Israel’s trade barriers. “Israel’s proactive approach should serve as a model for the rest of the world,” Leavitt said. The U.S. tariff on Israel is still set to increase to 17%. Trump’s approval ratings have declined in recent weeks, as dissatisfaction with his handling of the economy has risen. A Reuters/Ipsos poll found his approval rating was at 43% last week, 4 points lower than when he took office in late January. A Wall Street Journal poll published Friday found that 54% of voters opposed Trump’s tariff plans. In his testimony to Congress on Tuesday, Greer, Trump’s top trade negotiator, said the new tariffs are an effort to move the U.S. economy toward producing “real goods and services.” and less dependent on the financial sector and government spending. Greer acknowledged that the country was in the midst of a dramatic shift. “It is a moment of drastic, overdue change, but I am confident the American people will rise to the occasion as they have done before,” Greer said.
