On Thursday in Istanbul, the empty seat reserved for Vladimir Putin perfectly symbolized Russia’s unwillingness to end the war in Ukraine. Putin’s counterpart in the negotiations, Volodymyr Zelensky, had spent days calling on him to show up and face him. "We are ready to talk," the Ukrainian President said. "To end this war." But Putin stayed away, demonstrating his disdain for the peace process and handing Zelensky a tactical victory. For the Russians, it was the latest in a string of diplomatic stumbles. President Donald Trump and his envoys have tried for months to engineer a ceasefire in Ukraine. Along the way, they have given Putin plenty of chances to steer the Americans into his corner. But the Russian leader missed every one of them. Advertisement The most valuable opportunity landed in Putin's lap on the last day of February, when Trump and Zelensky engaged in a bitter shouting match in the Oval Office. Relations between the U.S. and Ukraine faced a crisis after that, and Trump briefly cut off U.S. aid to Ukraine. His overtures to Moscow grew friendlier than ever. In the middle of March, Trump held what he described as a “very good and productive” phone call with Putin. His lead envoy in the peace talks, Steve Witkoff, visited Putin in Moscow and, upon his return, publicly echoed many of the Kremlin’s arguments about the war. Watching from Kyiv, Zelensky grew worried that Putin had won over the Americans. “I think Russia managed to influence some members of the White House team through information,” Zelensky told TIME in an interview in Kyiv on March 21. “Their signal to the Americans was that the Ukrainians do not want to end the war, and something should be done to force them. Of course, that was disinformation. It’s not true.”But Trump appeared to be buying it. In early April, his administration welcomed Putin’s envoy, Kirill Dmitriev, who became the first senior Russian official to visit the White House in more than three years. Dmitriev, a former investment banker, offered the U.S. a series of lucrative mining deals and access to Russian natural resources in exchange for the lifting of U.S. sanctions. Trump seemed impressed. “Europe has not been successful in dealing with President Putin,” he told reporters after the visit from Dmitriev. “I think I will be successful.” To all appearances, Putin was outwitting Zelensky in their competition for Trump’s good graces. But on April 13, just a few days after Dmitriev’s visit to Washington, the tide abruptly turned. Two Russian ballistic missiles struck the Ukrainian city of Sumy that morning, killing at least 34 people and wounding another 117, including 15 children. Television broadcasts around the world showed the bloodied bodies of the victims strewn across one of the city’s central squares, near the university. Less than two weeks later, as Trump and his team continued pushing for a peace deal and promising results, the Russians launched one of the deadliest bombing raids against the Ukrainian capital since the start of the war. Around 70 missiles and 150 drones struck Kyiv on the night of April 24, killing at least a dozen people and wounding scores of others. That wave of attacks made Trump look naive, even foolish, for claiming that Russia was serious about the peace process, and his tone toward the Kremlin sharply changed. “Not necessary, and very bad timing,” Trump wrote on social media the day of the Kyiv bombings, adding a direct appeal to Putin: “Vladimir, STOP!” The attacks against Kyiv and Sumy seemed wholly unnecessary, even for the advancement of Putin’s war aims. Striking civilians in northern Ukraine, far behind the frontlines, did nothing to help Russian forces advance in the east and south of the country, where they have been desperately fighting for years to seize more Ukrainian territory. It would have cost Putin nothing to halt the attacks against civilians and focus on military targets along the front lines, at least until he could cement his rapprochement with the Trump administration. But the Russians couldn’t help themselves. Even as Trump and Zelensky called for a ceasefire of 30 days to clear the way for peace negotiations, Putin blew apart any semblance of good faith by continuing to massacre civilians. On the diplomatic front, the decision has cost him dearly. It created an opportunity for Zelensky to win Trump back to his side, and the Ukrainian leader seized it on April 26.

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. Citizen Donald Trump made a whole lot of promises about what he would do if returned to the White House. President Trump has not yet delivered on so, so much of that wish list, and, in some cases, almost certainly never will. He promised he would end the war in Ukraine even before he took office. He similarly promised to end the war in Gaza. He promised to cut federal spending by $2 trillion. He promised to eliminate the so-called Deep State, end taxes on Social Security, and make IVF free. Advertisement Failed. On every single one of them. At least to this point. There’s the tired cliche that campaigns are fought in poetry and government is conducted in prose, but Trump’s clash with reality has been more stark than his more recent predecessors. His tax-cut agenda is on shaky ground at the Capitol as his demands are running head-first into the challenges of a narrow Republican governing majority. His other campaign promises are stuck in park as he is finding even his considerable bullying power has its limits. The tape on Trump’s list of guarantees is a long one. Take, for instance, his insistence that the Russian aggression against Ukraine would melt immediately if he were elected. “Before I even arrive at the Oval Office, shortly after I win the presidency, I will have the horrible war between Russia and Ukraine settled,” Trump told an audience in Detroit in August of last year. But speaking to TIME last month, Trump brushed off that bold prediction: “Obviously, people know that when I said that, it was said in jest, but it was also said that it will be ended.”These days, it’s a much different tune, as he’s expressed frustration and even some surprise at Vladimir Putin’s unwillingness to compromise. On Wednesday, as he was flying to Qatar on a tour of the Middle East, Trump told reporters he was considering attending peace talks this week that Putin hasn’t committed to attending; Trump also didn’t commit to joining the session that has been proposed by Moscow. While Trump does deserve credit for progress in Gaza—the last living U.S. hostage this week found freedom after intense lobbying from Washington—the occupied territories remain a mess. Overnight airstrikes there killed at least 50 civilians, and the United Nations continues to warn that the Israeli actions risk becoming a genocide. And Israel is threatening to flatten and occupy Gaza if all of the other hostages aren’t freed by the time Trump returns to Washington from his current trip. And while it’s easy to post all-caps pledges of a balanced budget on social media, it’s another to deliver. Despite aggressive efforts to shrink federal spending through the new Department of Government Efficiency, DOGE has actually not delivered anything close to the cost-cutting promises laid out by billionaire presidential adviser Elon Musk. In fact, as The New York Times recently reported, tens of millions of dollars in canceled federal contracts were later resurrected, in some cases because they had been required by law. And now, the remainder of those trims have run into the reality of a Trump agenda that could explode the red ink on the federal ledger by anywhere from $5 to $11 trillion over the next decade.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Health and Human Services (HHS) Director under the Trump Administration, told Congress on Wednesday that he believes people “shouldn’t be taking medical advice from [him]”. The comments were made at a House Appropriations Committee hearing on May 14, as the committee reviewed the Trump Administration’s 2026 budget request, which was released on May 2. During the hearing, Wisconsin Rep. Mark Pocan asked Kennedy whether, if he had a child now, he would vaccinate them for measles. “Probably for measles,” Kennedy said before backtracking. “I don’t think people should be taking advice — medical advice — from me….I think if I answer that question directly, it will seem like I'm giving advice to other people, and I don't want to be doing that.” Kennedy has been known for his controversial stances on vaccines, raising questions about vaccine safety. Since being tapped to lead HHS, he has tried to distance himself from the anti-vaccine movement and recently backed vaccination as a preventive tool during a measles outbreak. He still maintains however, that vaccines should be left to parents’ discretion, and has continued to spread misinformation about the measles vaccine. “Okay, but that’s kind of your jurisdiction, because the CDC [Center for Disease Control] does give advice,” Pocan responded. The CDC provides guidance on disease prevention, the development of best health practices, and providing access to immunizations. The hearing focused on proposed deep cuts to health services in the Administration's “Skinny Budget,” seeking $94 billion for the HHS agencies— a reduction of about 26% from the 2025 level. The budget also aims to cut programs and staff at several HHS agencies, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the CDC. The budget also proposes $500 million for Kennedy’s “Make America Healthy Again” initiative, which includes downsizing the HHS from 82,000 to 62,000 full-time employees, and focusing on “ending America’s epidemic of chronic illness.”

President Donald Trump's announcement that he plans to end the U.S. sanctions imposed on Syria, which have been in place for over 45 years, was met with jubilant celebrations in the Syrian capital of Damascus. People in the streets cheered and waved Syrian flags. Disclosing the news on the first leg of his Middle East tour, during the U.S.-Saudi Investment Forum in Riyadh on Tuesday, Trump said he would be lifting sanctions “in order to give them [Syria] greatness.” Advertisement He described the sanctions as “brutal and crippling,” but also noted their important function before the collapse of the Bashar Assad regime in December 2024. On Wednesday morning, before departing for Doha, Qatar, Trump met with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa. They were accompanied by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, while Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan joined remotely via telephone. While travelling to Doha on Air Force One, Trump shared with reporters his impression of al-Sharaa, calling him a "young, attractive guy. Tough guy. Strong past. Very strong past. Fighter… He’s got a real shot at holding it together.” Read More: Trump Meets With Syria’s President After Announcing Plans to Lift U.S. Sanctions on Country Shiraz Maher, a writer and lecturer of war studies at King’s College London, says that Trump’s announcement shows “an explicit vote of confidence in the new Administration. It gives Syria a new opportunity.”I see this as something that Obama tried to do, leading from behind, removing obstacles, and giving Syria an opportunity to do it their way.” In a post-meeting update shared on X, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that Trump urged al-Sharaa to sign the Abraham Accords to normalize relations with Israel. He also encouraged al-Sharaa to remove foreign terrorists from Syria and help the United States prevent the resurgence of ISIS. The Abraham Accords, established during Trump’s first term, involve a number of Arab and Muslim states normalizing diplomatic and economic ties with Israel. Since the collapse of the Assad regime in December, Israel has conducted airstrikes within Syria, recently near Damascus, citing violence in Druze areas. Israeli forces have also reportedly expanded military operations beyond the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights in the southwest corner of Syria.

Judges across the country have intervened to single-handedly block some of President Trump’s most aggressive policies using nationwide injunctions, sweeping rulings that order the federal government to change its behavior across the country. Mr. Trump’s executive order to restrict birthright citizenship, which triggered three judges to issue nationwide injunctions, will be argued before the Supreme Court on Thursday. The court could use the case to set new limits on the power of federal judges to issue nationwide rulings. But the impact of nationwide injunctions on Mr. Trump’s second-term agenda extends far beyond the birthright citizenship debate. As of late March, judges had issued 17 nationwide injunctions against the Trump administration, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service. Here are some of the most consequential: A White House effort to revoke Temporary Protected Status for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans, which allowed them to legally work and remain in the United States, was blocked by Judge Edward Milton Chen of the Northern District of California on March 31. After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit declined to stay Judge Chen’s ruling, the government asked the Supreme Court to intervene. It has not yet done so. That means Judge Chen’s nationwide injunction remains in effect, though the Homeland Security Department says it still has “every intention” of moving forward with the initial plan “as soon as it obtains relief from the court order.” Judge Loren L. AliKhan of the District of Washington ordered the administration not to cut off billions of dollars in federal funding to the states. The Trump administration had attempted to freeze the spending under a memo issued by the Office of Budget and Management that has now been rescinded. Judge AliKhan said the funding could not be cut by that memo or any other broad directive. A similar injunction by Judge John J. McConnell Jr. of Rhode Island was limited to the 22 states who sued. The government has appealed both rulings. In late April, three district court judges in New Hampshire, Maryland, and Washington, D.C., blocked an effort by the Trump administration to cut off funding for public schools with diversity and equity initiatives. Their orders constrain the Education Department across the country, not just in the judges’ respective districts. The government has not appealed those rulings.

Shabbos Kestenbaum, a Harvard Divinity School graduate who became a public figure as a fiery speaker at the Republican National Convention, on Thursday settled his lawsuit accusing Harvard of allowing antisemitism to fester on its campus. The terms of the settlement are confidential, but in a lengthy statement, Mr. Kestenbaum said he was “so proud to help lead the student efforts combating antisemitism within institutions of higher learning across the country, including by suing my alma mater.” He said that his lawsuit “drew the nation’s attention to the scourge of antisemitism at Harvard and other campuses, and it also caught the attention of President Trump and his Department of Education.” Harvard released a statement saying that the university “and Mr. Kestenbaum acknowledge each other’s steadfast and important efforts to combat antisemitism at Harvard and elsewhere.” It said that both sides were “pleased to have resolved the litigation.” Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT In recent weeks, Harvard has gone to court to fight a Trump administration freeze on billions of dollars in federal research funding to the university. The freeze came after Harvard refused to comply with demands from the administration that Harvard do more to combat antisemitism — including by allowing the government to be involved in admissions, hiring and instructional decisions, among other things. The litigation and his outspokenness made Mr. Kestenbaum the face of the Republican-led campaign against antisemitism in universities, and something of a polarizing figure on Harvard’s campus. He graduated from the divinity school in May 2024, and in July he spoke at the Republican National Convention. “My problem with Harvard is not its liberalism but its illiberalism,” Mr. Kestenbaum said in his convention speech. “Too often students at Harvard are taught not how to think but what to think. I found myself immersed in a culture that is anti-Western, that is anti-American and that is antisemitic.” He has been in demand since then as a speaker for Jewish groups across the country. In his statement following the settlement, Mr. Kestenbaum said he had campaigned with Mr. Trump because the president planned to hold universities accountable.Mr. Kestenbaum, an Orthodox Jew, was a second-year divinity school student when the campus became the site of protests over the war in Gaza. Some Jewish students accused protests of veering into antisemitism, a charge that protesters, some of them Jewish themselves, have strongly denied. In January 2024, Mr. Kestenbaum and five other Jewish students sued the university, accusing it of becoming “a bastion of rampant anti-Jewish hatred and harassment.” That case was settled the day after Mr. Trump’s inauguration. Harvard agreed to take a number of steps, including adopting a strict definition of antisemitism. But Mr. Kestenbaum refused to go along with the settlement and continued to litigate on his own, culminating in Thursday’s agreement.

President Donald Trump has doubled down on his highly-criticized plan to accept a luxury Boeing jet from Qatar, claiming that the “free” gift will save the United States money that can instead be spent to “Make America Great Again.” “The Boeing 747 is being given to the United States Air Force/Department of Defense, NOT TO ME! It is a gift from a Nation, Qatar, that we have successfully defended for many years,” Trump said in a post on his social media platform, Truth Social, late on Tuesday, May 13. Advertisement “Only a FOOL would not accept this gift on behalf of our country,” he added, after stating that the gifted jet—a Boeing 747-8 worth an estimated $400 million—will be used as a “temporary Air Force One” whilst the U.S. waits for its official jet to be ready. Trump further explained his stance during an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, which aired on Tuesday night. He said he’s still waiting to receive the Air Force One jet that he signed off on during his first term—a wait he predicts will last another two years—and that Qatar offered to help provide a plane in the interim. He claimed that other countries have far superior planes to the current Air Force One: “We’re the United States of America and I believe we should have the most impressive plane.” "Some people say you shouldn't accept gifts for the country, my attitude is: 'Why wouldn't I accept a gift? We're giving to everyone else,’” Trump argued. “I get nothing, I get to fly it like any other President would," he added, stating the Qatar-gifted jet will be "decommissioned" once the U.S.-ordered Air Force One plane is ready. (Two modified Boeing 747 planes serve as Air Force One.)Of the pre-ordered jet that’s currently under construction, Trump said: “We’re painting it red, white, and blue. Just like the American flag.” Trump’s planned acceptance of this gift has raised legal and ethical concerns from both Democrats and Republicans. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said on Tuesday that he would be placing a blanket hold on Justice Department nominees awaiting Senate confirmation until the White House provides a full accounting of the deal. “This is not just naked corruption, it’s the kind of thing that even Putin would give a double take,” Schumer said on the Senate floor. Democratic Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts told TIME: “He’s going to turn Air Force One into Bribe Force One. Congress has to be involved with such a clear threat to our national security.” Republicans such as Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas also voiced their concerns over the gift from the Qatari royal family, highlighting the security risks of accepting the jet and the potential high costs of checking the Boeing for foreign surveillance devices.

The daffodils have peaked in Central Park, and the Yankees and Mets are weeks into their seasons. Spring is in full swing across New York City, but the usual warm, sunny weather that leads people to mob the streets and outdoor cafes at this time of year has yet to arrive. The rain just keeps coming. “There have only been four days that we haven’t gotten any rain in the month,” said Jim Connolly, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service. In the first two weeks of May, the gauge in Central Park has recorded at least a trace amount of rain on 10 days. The rain has been light and drizzly most days, lending the city a swampy, gray vibe. On Wednesday, heavier showers led to a recorded 1.22 inches of rain. And yes, it rained again on Thursday, ever so slightly: LaGuardia Airport received a sprinkling, and John F. Kennedy International Airport 0.01 inches. All the rain has added up, with 4.17 inches measured since the start of the month, as of 4 p.m. on Thursday. The amount is a lot when you consider that the city records about four inches across the entire month in a typical May, but is not extreme when compared with the rainiest May ever (10.24 inches in 1989). There’s not much of an end in sight. Thunderstorms are in the forecast for Friday and Saturday. Sunday into early next week could offer some relief, but Mr. Connolly said another storm could arrive as early as Wednesday. The soggy weather is starting to get people down. Clement Oladipo works outdoors as a backyard gardener in Brooklyn and Manhattan. “I don’t want to say I hate the rain because it’s obviously good for the plants,” he said. “But it’s an inconvenience.” Spring is the busiest season for Mr. Oladipo’s company, the Bed-Stuy Garden Guy, as people begin to spend more time outside. Typically, he reschedules when it rains. “It’s a lot more work going in and out of the house when it’s wet, and you’re dragging wet bags into the house,” he said. “There’s so much cleanup that you have to do after.” This year, there have been far too many rainy days to reschedule, and he’s working through the wet weather. “It’s not the end of the world,” he said.

Health is multifaceted, a fact that was reflected in the industry-spanning community gathered Tuesday night at the TIME100 Health Impact Dinner honoring some of the most influential people leading this fast-moving field. The latest annual TIME100 Health list, which debuted in 2024, highlights scientists, doctors, advocates, educators, and other changemakers working to navigate a year unlike any other in global health, punctuated by conflict and upheavals, while gazing into an uncertain future. Advertisement TIME CEO Jessica Sibley kicked off dinner by announcing the launch of a new coverage initiative, TIME Longevity, which aims to capture the people, institutions, and innovations redefining what it means to live longer and age healthier. TIME senior correspondent Alice Park then led a panel discussion on the next era of cancer treatment and diagnosis. As the dinner wrapped up, four TIME100 Health honorees gave toasts about fighting to restore respect for science, making innovations in public health accessible to those who most need it, supporting the mental wellness of LGBTQ+ youths, and turning a personal near tragedy into nationwide impact.

Jane Fonda has always been one to stand up for what she believes in. With a lifetime of activism under her belt, the Oscar-winning actress has turned her attention to the climate crisis—choosing action over despair. In 2019, she started Fire Drill Fridays, as a way to inspire people to participate in non-violent direct action in support of the climate movement, and created her own climate PAC in 2022 to help elect politicians that prioritize the climate. Now Fonda is turning her attention to the Amazon, partnering with Amazon Frontlines, a non-profit organization working with Indigenous peoples to defend their land rights. Together, they are urging Ecuador’s Constitutional Court to create a national framework that enshrines the rights of Indigenous people to decide what happens in their home—guarunteeing the right to free, prior, and informed consultation and consent. To this end, on May 13 several hundred Indigenous people delivered an open letter to the Constitutional Court in Ecuador. On the same day Fonda is also delivering a printed copy to the Ecuadorian embassy in Los Angeles—which includes signatures from a number of organizations, including Greenpeace and Amazon Watch, as well as advocates like Lupita Nyong’o, Emma Thompson, and Mark Ruffalo. The campaign comes as Ecuador’s President, Daniel Noboa, announced plans last year to auction off 8.7 million acres of Indigenous territory in the Amazon rain forest to oil companies—despite Ecuadorians voting to stop oil drilling in the region. Time spoke with Fonda ahead of planned actions in Quito and in Los Angeles on May 13 with Amazon Frontlines. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. TIME: How did you get involved with Amazon Frontlines? Fonda: I don't think it's a secret that I'm a climate activist. I'm very concerned about what burning oil, gas, and coal has done to our climate. It's created a pollution blanket around the planet that's heating the climate, such that ecosystems that are critical to our survival are risking collapse. The rain forests in South America determine a lot about the welfare of the entire world, not just the people who live there. A number of tribes that live in that northern forest have created an organization called Ceibo Alliance [to defend their community and culture]. This is really the first time that this has happened where not just one tribe of Indigenous peoples, but many tribes have come together in an organization to save their forest. The Amazon Frontline is the outward looking arm of the Ceibo Alliance. It is the people who live outside the forest who are helping Ceibo succeed. I’m part of that group now. Advertisement [Last year] I met an Indigenous woman named Nemonte Nenquimo, whose ancestral lands are in the northern part of the Ecuadorian rain forest. I asked if [Ceibo] would invite me to the rain forest. I had two reasons for going. I wanted to just experience the forest and understand it and feel it. And then I wanted to find out what I could do to help them save the forest. Can you tell us a bit about the open letter you signed with the Amazon Frontlines? What is the action about? Indigenous peoples in Ecuador are leaving their forest today and traveling by canoe, by foot, to get to Quito on the other side of the Andes, to deliver a letter and a message to the Constitutional Court of Ecuador saying, “Give us our rights. We need to have a voice in what happens to our land, informed prior consent.” This is a really important case, because the prior victories that the Indigenous peoples have had didn't lock this into law. The informed prior consent in this case is not only to save the forest, but is to lock in the law that they have to be informed before any action is taken on their homelands. Advertisement Why is Amazon preservation a critical part of the climate fight? The Amazon, along with all the other rain forests in the world, but the Amazon happens to be the biggest, does two things for us.… The forests absorb a whole lot of the carbon that we burn, which reduces the pollution, and that is critical. Also, there are species that still exist in the forest that we don't know, that we've never discovered. So many cures, so many solutions to problems exist in the rain forests that we haven't discovered yet. So it's a fountain of information, of knowledge, of cures, of medicines. Those creatures and plants, the flora and fauna that live there, are part of the fabric of life that is required for human beings to survive on the planet. It would be a critical blow to the fight against the climate crisis if 8.7 million acres of ancient rain forests are cut down for oil. Advertisement You recently traveled to the Amazon. What did you learn about the grassroots work happening in Ecuador? It's unprecedented. [The place where we stayed] was a series of very beautiful thatched buildings, including a seven story high tower with thatched roofs all the way down. It was gorgeous. [The Indigenous people] run it, they own it, and they benefit from it. We stayed there, and it's incredible. They're working on ways to create eco-tourism that they can benefit from. I was shown what plants heal toothaches, what plants heal broken bones. The forest becomes a pharmacy. They listen to the plants, they talk to the animals. It made me very sad, because I realized how much we've lost our connection to nature. They understand that we're part of nature. For many people, tackling climate change feels like an insurmountable task. What advice do you have for people who want to take action but don’t know how to? Advertisement The vast majority of Americans are really concerned about climate, and they don't do anything because they don't know what to do. First of all, talk about it. Talk about your concerns. We have to make people understand that the natural world is why we are alive, and that we have to care about it. Number two, be sure you're not invested in fossil fuels. Trillions have been taken out of banks and investment companies by people who are concerned about the climate crisis. If you're disinvested, think about your city, your school, all the organizations that you know, and start to build support for getting them to divest from fossil fuels. Third, vote for climate champions. Find out if the people you're thinking of voting for take money from the fossil fuel industry. Most of them do, and vote for people who don't, because if they do, they're going to be supporting legislation that helps the corporations, not you as a citizen.