Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Prime Minister Carney Clinches Majority In Special Election

• Pope Leo XIV Begins Africa Tour

• Analysis: Iran Has A Mine Problem

Prime Minister Carney Clinches Majority In Special Election

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney (Andrej Ivanov - AFP via Getty Images)

_{By: Atlas}

Mark Carney clinched a parliamentary majority for his Liberal government on Monday night, completing one of the most unusual paths to consolidated power in Canadian political history. The rookie prime minister — a private citizen just 16 months ago — assembled his majority not through a single decisive election but through a combination of special election victories and an unprecedented wave of defections from rival parties.

Liberal candidate Danielle Martin claimed victory in the Toronto riding of University-Rosedale around 10 p.m., pushing the party to 172 seats in the 343-seat House of Commons and giving Carney command of Parliament. The Liberals subsequently won a second Toronto seat in Scarborough Southwest, bringing their total to 173 and providing a slightly more comfortable margin. Results in the Quebec riding of Terrebonne — where the Liberals won by a single vote in last year's federal election before the result was overturned by the Supreme Court — remained too close to call late Monday.

No modern Canadian government has ever built a majority this way. Carney fell three seats short of one when he won the federal election last spring, but five opposition lawmakers — four Conservatives and one New Democrat — crossed the floor to join his caucus in the months that followed. Monday's wins finished the job.

"This is not the time for politics as usual, for petty differences, for political point-scoring," Carney told party members at a Liberal convention in Montreal over the weekend. "United, we will build 'Canada strong,' a Canada for all."

What a Majority Means

The practical consequences are substantial. Carney can now pass legislation without negotiating with opposition parties, control the agenda on House committees, and govern without the constant threat of a confidence vote bringing down his government. Minority governments in Canada typically last less than two years. The majority means Carney does not have to call another election until 2029.

"He will be able to pass legislation without having to go to the opposition to secure enough votes," said Andrew McDougall, assistant professor in Canadian politics at the University of Toronto.

The Liberals had relied on selective Conservative support to move economic and trade-related bills through Parliament during the past year. That arrangement worked but was slow. The government introduced 26 bills in the House of Commons since taking office, but only 11 received royal assent — and five of those were routine spending authorizations.

The first move of the majority government, according to two senior officials who spoke on condition of anonymity, will be an announcement Tuesday morning on relief for Canadians facing surging gas and diesel prices driven by the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. Carney has previously said he is considering removing the federal gas tax to "cushion the blow for Canadians."

The Defection Strategy

The floor crossings that brought Carney to the doorstep of a majority were without precedent in their scope and speed. Only the governments of John A. Macdonald, Canada's first prime minister, and Jean Chrétien saw more politicians defect to the ruling party.

The most recent was Marilyn Gladu, a longtime Conservative MP and former chemical engineer, who switched parties last Wednesday. "Canada needs a serious leader who can address the uncertainty that has arrived due to the unjustified American tariffs," she said, thanking Carney for inviting her into "the large Liberal tent."

Gladu's defection was not without controversy. She holds anti-abortion views that clash with longstanding Liberal orthodoxy — under Justin Trudeau, candidates were required to be pro-choice. She also previously supported the "freedom convoy" during the pandemic and opposed a ban on conversion therapy. Carney said Gladu had committed to voting with the government on reproductive rights and that the party's core values had not changed.

Not everyone in the party was satisfied. Supriya Dwivedi, a columnist and former Trudeau adviser, wrote on X: "Guys, maybe we should all re-read Values. It's possible we all missed the part where Carney said we don't need to actually have any."

Scott Reid, a political adviser and former communications director to Liberal prime minister Paul Martin, took a different view. He described the defections as a reflection of the Trump effect on Canadian politics — a desire for stability that has led lawmakers to set aside partisanship. "What we're watching is the quietest assembly of a union government we've ever witnessed," he said.

Poilievre's Problem

The results are a serious blow to Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, who just over a year ago was projected to win a federal election by more than 20 points. He won the election narrowly, then watched four of his own MPs abandon his caucus for the Liberals.

Conservative vote share dropped significantly in all three Monday races. In Scarborough Southwest, the party was on pace for roughly 20 percent — down from 30 percent in the last general election. In University-Rosedale, the Conservative candidate fell from second to third place. In Terrebonne, the party's candidate pulled just 3 percent, compared to over 18 percent in 2025.

Poilievre survived a leadership review in January with strong caucus support, but no challenger has emerged and the losses continue to mount. Liberal MPs have been openly courting additional Conservative defectors. Conservative MP Billy Morin told reporters the Liberals were "trying to poach me."

Reid assessed Poilievre's position bluntly. "If you had said to me two years ago that Pierre Poilievre is going to lose a federal election despite having a 25-point lead, lose his home riding, and then lose four members of parliament and surrender the parliamentary majority to his chief rival — well, you've just described a political dead person."

Recent polling from Nanos shows more than half of Canadians prefer Carney as prime minister, with just 23 percent choosing Poilievre.

The Agenda Ahead

Carney won office on the argument that Donald Trump had upended the world order and that Canada needed to respond with bold economic and security measures. He has announced major increases in military spending, traveled to Asia and Europe seeking trade diversification, and set an ambitious target to double non-U.S. exports to 300 billion Canadian dollars by 2030.

With a majority, the legislative path for those plans clears considerably. Key items on the agenda include new trade agreements with India, Thailand, the Philippines, and Saudi Arabia — all of which could be implemented by year's end. A defense investment agency has been established to expedite procurement, with bids for a new submarine fleet due by the end of April. An AI bill designed to protect Canadian data from foreign tech companies, which the Trudeau government failed to pass for lack of opposition support, can now move forward.

The government also faces a looming NATO summit in Ankara in July, where Carney will need to demonstrate progress toward the alliance's new 5 percent of GDP defense spending target by 2035.

Domestically, the pressure shifts. With no opposition to blame for legislative gridlock, Carney owns the outcomes. Grocery prices are up more than 20 percent since 2022. Unemployment sits at 6.7 percent. Gas prices are climbing because of the Middle East conflict. Opposition parties have already begun arguing that Carney's rhetoric about economic transformation has not translated into relief for ordinary Canadians.

"What a majority does is, it actually gives you time to effectively plan," Liberal MP Jonathan Wilkinson said. "That's what this country needs right now, given what's going on globally."

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Acting President Of Venezuela Remains Despite 90 Day Limit

• Artemis II Crew Make History In Farthest Spaceflight

• South Korean Intel Suggests Kim Jong Un’s Daughter To Be Successor

Acting President Of Venezuela Remains Despite 90 Day Limit

Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez (AP)

_{By: Atlas}

Delcy Rodríguez continued to serve as Venezuela's acting president on Monday, three days after the expiration of the 90-day window that the country's Supreme Court set for her temporary tenure following the U.S. capture of Nicolás Maduro in January.

The National Assembly, which is controlled by Rodríguez's ruling party and presided over by her brother Jorge Rodríguez, has not taken a public vote to extend her term. Nor has the legislature moved to declare the presidency permanently vacant — a step that would trigger a snap election within 30 days under the Venezuelan constitution. The government's press office did not respond to requests for comment on the status of her appointment.

Rodríguez assumed the acting presidency on January 3, hours after a U.S. military operation seized Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, in Caracas. The couple were transported to New York, where they face narco-terrorism charges. Both have pleaded not guilty. At their second hearing last week, a federal judge rejected a defense motion to dismiss the case after Maduro's lawyers argued he could not pay for legal representation because the U.S. Treasury Department had frozen his assets.

The Legal Framework Holding It Together

In the immediate aftermath of the January operation, Venezuela's Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court — long seen as loyal to the ruling party — issued what it called an "urgent and preventive" injunction. The three-page ruling classified Maduro's removal as a "forced absence," a designation that legal scholars have noted does not appear in the Venezuelan constitution.

The court's order stopped short of categorizing the vacancy as either temporary or permanent, a distinction that carries significant constitutional consequences. Under Venezuela's governing charter, a temporary absence can be filled by the vice president — Rodríguez's former role — for up to 90 days. The National Assembly can then extend that period for an additional 90 days, bringing the absolute maximum to 180 days. A permanent vacancy, by contrast, requires elections within 30 days.

Juan Carlos Apitz, dean of the Faculty of Legal Sciences at the Central University of Venezuela, has described the ruling as deliberately evasive. He argues that a permanent vacancy already exists in practical terms, since there is no reasonable expectation that Maduro will return to the country while facing criminal prosecution in the United States.

The Venezuelan human rights organization Provea warned over the weekend that the Supreme Court's silence on Rodríguez's continued tenure beyond the initial 90 days is not a neutral omission but a political decision. The group noted that if the second 90-day period is allowed to run its course, it would expire on July 5, at which point the National Assembly would be constitutionally obligated to declare a permanent vacancy and call elections.

Washington's Role

The Trump administration's approach to post-Maduro Venezuela has defied expectations. Rather than working with the country's political opposition — which Washington had backed for years, including through its recognition of opposition leader Juan Guaidó as interim president from 2019 to 2023 — the administration chose to engage directly with Rodríguez.

That engagement has accelerated in recent weeks. The U.S. State Department last month recognized Rodríguez as the "sole Head of State" of Venezuela in an ongoing federal civil case. The U.S. Treasury Department followed last week by lifting the sanctions that had been imposed on her since 2018 during Trump's first term, when she and her brother were designated for their alleged role in undermining Venezuelan democracy. The delisting allows Rodríguez to work more freely with American companies and investors.

In a statement posted to her Telegram channel, Rodríguez expressed hope that the sanctions relief would lead to broader normalization. The White House called the move a sign of "progress" in bilateral efforts to promote stability and economic recovery.

The administration also formally reopened the U.S. Embassy in Caracas on March 30, the first time it has operated since 2019. Secretary of State Marco Rubio credited the interim authorities with progress but called for an eventual democratic transition, telling Al Jazeera that Venezuela needs "a stable, democratic government" to fulfill its economic potential.

A Familiar Playbook

Ronal Rodríguez, a researcher at the Venezuela Observatory at Colombia's Universidad del Rosario, said the ruling party has a history of using creative legal interpretations to maintain its grip on power. He predicted the government would likely offer an explanation for the lapsed deadline — perhaps citing the Good Friday holiday or disputing how the days were counted — and that any resolution would ultimately be rubber-stamped by the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, Rodríguez has moved to consolidate her position. She has reshuffled more than half of the cabinet she inherited from Maduro, replacing senior loyalists including his defense minister and attorney general. She approved an amnesty law and ordered the release of dozens of political prisoners, though the process remains incomplete. At a public event during Easter Week, she appeared alongside posters bearing the slogan "Delcy, move forward, you have my confidence" — displayed in blue and light tones rather than the red traditionally associated with the Chavismo movement.

The Treasury Department has also issued broad authorizations for Venezuela's state oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela S.A., to sell crude directly to U.S. companies and on global markets, reversing years of restrictions on the country's energy sector. The opening has drawn interest from international investors and oil companies, though analysts note that meaningful capital commitments will likely require greater political and legal certainty than the current arrangement provides.

Elections Nowhere in Sight

Despite street protests by opposition parties demanding a new National Electoral Council and fresh elections, neither U.S. nor Venezuelan officials have publicly addressed a timeline for a vote. The question of when — or whether — elections will be called remains the central unresolved issue in a country whose institutional framework now rests on a three-page court ruling, the acquiescence of a party-controlled legislature, and the implicit backing of Washington.

Apitz, the legal scholar, put it bluntly: elections will happen when the United States decides they should. He noted that oil and mining companies are pushing for political certainty before making the large-scale investments Venezuela needs, and that those companies see a volatile social situation that could deteriorate without a democratic resolution. The constitutional clock, as Provea noted, is ticking — even if no one in power appears to be watching it.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Zelensky Hails Progress In Middle East Visit

• Israeli Gov Passes Death Penalty Law For Palestinians Who Killed Israelis

• Spain Closes Airspace To Any U.S. Military Aircraft

Zelensky Hails Progress In Middle East Visit

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (right) with Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky in Jeddah on March 27, 2026. (Saudi Press Agency - AFP)

_{By: Atlas}

Volodymyr Zelensky flew back to Kyiv on Monday declaring his whirlwind tour of the Middle East a success — and with good reason. In four days, the Ukrainian president visited Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Jordan, signing 10-year defense cooperation agreements with three Gulf states and opening discussions with at least three more. Ukraine, a country still fighting a ground war against Russia, has carved out an unexpected new role for itself: arms exporter and drone defense consultant to some of the wealthiest nations on earth.

"All agreements that will be legally formalized are extremely important for our country," Zelensky told reporters on Sunday. "Ukraine has never had such agreements with this region before."

The trip began Thursday in Saudi Arabia, where the kingdom's Ministry of Defense signed a memorandum of understanding covering defense procurement arrangements. Zelensky then flew to Abu Dhabi to meet UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan, before continuing to Doha for meetings with Qatar's Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani. In Qatar, defense ministers from both countries signed cooperation agreements covering defense industry projects and investment.

The tour concluded Sunday in Jordan, where Zelensky met with King Abdullah II. Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council Secretary, Rustem Umerov, remained in the region to continue negotiations, including fielding new requests from Bahrain and Oman.

What Ukraine Is Selling

The deals revolve around a specific Ukrainian advantage: cheap, battle-tested drone defense. Since Russia began deploying Iranian-designed Shahed drones against Ukrainian cities in 2022, Kyiv has developed a layered system of interceptor drones, electronic jamming equipment, and anti-aircraft guns that can neutralize incoming threats at a fraction of the cost of the Western air defense missiles that Gulf nations currently rely on.

Iran's retaliatory strikes against Gulf Arab states since the war began on February 28 created immediate demand for exactly these capabilities. Zelensky revealed last week that Ukrainian anti-drone specialists have already been deployed to five countries — the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, and Jordan — to help counter Tehran's attacks. A Ukrainian team is also operating in Jordan.

Zelensky pitched the deals as more than simple arms sales. "Simple sales do not interest us," he said during a briefing with reporters. The agreements cover joint production facilities, technological partnerships, electronic warfare systems, software, and naval drones. Each deal runs for at least 10 years.

"We are exporting our defense system, the skills of our warriors, and the knowledge our state possesses," Zelensky said in his nightly video address Monday. "And from these countries — from our partners — we expect reciprocal security engagement."

The Hormuz Angle

Zelensky went further than drone defense, offering Ukrainian expertise on a problem that has rattled global energy markets for a month: the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has effectively shut down shipping through the waterway — which normally carries roughly 20 percent of the world's oil — in retaliation for the U.S.-Israeli air campaign.

Ukraine framed its experience keeping Black Sea shipping lanes open despite Russian attacks as directly relevant to the Gulf crisis. Zelensky said he discussed naval drone cooperation with Gulf partners and presented Ukraine's model for maintaining export corridors under fire.

"The experience of unblocking sea trade routes with the help of, among other things, sea drones — could this experience help unblock the Strait of Hormuz?" Zelensky said. "They know that they can count on our expertise in this area, and we spoke in detail about sharing our experience of the Black Sea corridor and how it functions."

Ukraine's Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha confirmed that Kyiv had received requests from partners specifically on maritime security and strait unblocking.

What Ukraine Wants in Return

The Gulf states possess large stockpiles of high-end Western air defense systems — the Patriot missiles and similar platforms that Ukraine desperately needs to counter Russian ballistic missile attacks. Zelensky has been explicit that the drone expertise going south is meant to bring missile defense capability back north.

Beyond hardware, the agreements include energy cooperation. Zelensky said he discussed diesel supplies with Gulf leaders, fuel that is critical for both Ukraine's military operations and its agriculture sector. "Without a doubt we are talking about energy support from the side of the leaders of Gulf nations," he said. "We are not just counting on this, we have agreements."

Zelensky also told reporters that Ukraine had received "no signals" from the United States about potential diversions of Western weapons from Ukraine to the Middle East — addressing weeks of speculation that the Iran war could drain NATO arsenals and reduce military support for Kyiv.

Russia is already benefiting from the Middle Eastern conflict. Global energy prices have surged since Iran blocked the Strait of Hormuz, filling Moscow's coffers even as its war in Ukraine continues. Russia launched more than 270 drones and an Iskander ballistic missile at Ukraine over the weekend alone, killing at least five civilians.

The Bigger Picture

The Middle East tour positions Ukraine as something it has not been before: a defense partner to Gulf monarchies with resources and influence that Kyiv needs. The agreements give Ukraine revenue, diplomatic leverage, and potential access to energy supplies and advanced weapons systems. For the Gulf states, the deals bring proven drone defense technology at a moment when Iranian Shaheds are landing on their territory daily.

The visit also underscored a growing alignment between countries on the receiving end of Iranian and Russian drone warfare. Iran supplied Russia with the Shahed 136. Russia modified the design, began producing its own copies, and has launched thousands of them at Ukrainian cities over the past four years. Those same drones — or their Iranian originals — are now hitting targets across the Gulf.

Zelensky drew the connection explicitly. "Ukraine is being attacked with essentially the same strike drones as those used against countries in the Middle East and the Gulf region," he said. "The destabilization of global markets and the blocking of maritime routes have not left a single country unaffected."

The trip also raised questions about why the United States treats the Ukraine and Iran conflicts as separate problems. Gulf states appear to see them as linked — and are acting accordingly by partnering with the one country that has the most experience fighting both the drones and the countries that make them.

Israel, notably, has not shown Zelensky the same warmth the Gulf states extended. Despite facing the same Iranian drone threats, Jerusalem has maintained distance from Kyiv throughout the Russian invasion.

Zelensky briefed Finnish President Alexander Stubb on the trip's results Sunday, telling him the agreements could make "a significant contribution to security and stabilization." He said he was preparing communication formats with other European leaders and maintained contact with the American direction — his diplomatic shorthand for the Trump administration.

"For Ukraine, this is not only about prestige and respect for our people," Zelensky said Monday night. "This is a very concrete and practical matter." He said he found "great respect" for Ukraine across the region and a shared vision among Gulf leaders to work with Ukrainian experts. The deals are not yet fully finalized, but the framework is in place — 10-year agreements with three countries, active discussions with four more, and a Ukrainian drone defense network already operating across the Gulf.

Whether the arrangements hold will depend on how the Iran war unfolds, whether the Strait of Hormuz reopens, and whether the Gulf states follow through with the energy and defense reciprocity Zelensky is counting on. For now, Ukraine has turned four years of fighting Russia's drone war into a credential that the Middle East is willing to pay for.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Trump Delays Strikes On Iranian Infrastructure After ‘Positive’ Talks

• Australia Inks Free Trade & Security Deal With The E.U.

• Political Gains Made For Centrist and Right Wing Parties In German Elections

Trump Delays Strikes On Iranian Infrastructure After ‘Positive’ Talks

President Donald Trump (AP)

_{By: Atlas}

President Donald Trump announced Monday morning that the United States would postpone all planned military strikes against Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure for five days, citing what he described as productive conversations with Iranian officials toward ending the three-week-old war. The announcement came hours before his own 48-hour ultimatum — threatening to "obliterate" Iran's power grid unless Tehran reopened the Strait of Hormuz — was set to expire.

In a post on Truth Social written in all capital letters, Trump said the U.S. and Iran had conducted "very good and productive conversations" over the prior two days toward achieving "a complete and total resolution of our hostilities in the Middle East." He added that he had "instructed the Department of War to postpone any and all military strikes against Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure for a five-day period, subject to the success of the ongoing meetings and discussions."

Iran's government denied any such negotiations were underway. Iran's Foreign Ministry told state-run newspaper IRAN that Trump's remarks were "part of efforts to reduce energy prices and buy time to implement his military plans." Parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf posted on social media that "no negotiations have been held with the US" and accused the administration of using "fake news" to manipulate oil and financial markets. Iran's state television declared that the U.S. president had "backed down following Iran's firm warning."

What Trump Said the Talks Produced

Speaking to reporters before boarding Air Force One Monday morning, Trump said his Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law Jared Kushner had conducted talks on Sunday night with unnamed Iranian counterparts, and that further negotiations would continue by phone later in the day. He declined to name the Iranian official involved, saying he did not want to get him killed. "We are dealing with a man that I believe is the most respected," Trump said. "Not the supreme leader — we have not heard from him."

Trump said the U.S. and Iran had reached agreement on several key points: that Iran would not pursue nuclear weapons or enrich uranium; that Iran would hand over its existing stockpile of enriched uranium; that Iran would remain "low-key on the missiles"; and that the Strait of Hormuz would be reopened. He stressed that none of these commitments were guaranteed, adding, "If this happens it is a great start for Iran to build itself back."

Trump acknowledged Iran's denial and attributed the conflicting accounts to the destruction of communications infrastructure inside the country. "The communication, as you know, has been blown to pieces. They were unable to talk to each other," he said. "But we've had very strong talks." He added plainly: "If it goes well, we're going to end up settling this. Otherwise, we'll just keep bombing our little hearts out."

The Diplomatic Picture

According to sources with knowledge of the discussions, Turkey, Egypt, and Pakistan served as intermediaries over the weekend, passing messages between Washington and Tehran. The foreign ministers of all three countries held separate talks with Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. Araghchi separately confirmed a phone conversation with his Turkish counterpart, Hakan Fidan, ahead of Trump's announcement.

An Israeli official told reporters that Witkoff and Kushner had been in contact with Ghalibaf — the Iranian parliamentary speaker, a former IRGC general, former mayor of Tehran, and a close associate of new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei. A separate source familiar with the discussions said there did not appear to have been direct talks between Ghalibaf and the U.S. team at that point; rather, intermediary countries were attempting to set up a direct call on Monday, with a possible in-person meeting in Islamabad potentially to follow later in the week.

Vice President JD Vance spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday to discuss the emerging negotiations, according to a source familiar with the details. Netanyahu separately confirmed in a video statement that Trump had called him and that both men saw "a chance to leverage the tremendous achievements" of the war through an agreement. "We continue to strike in both Iran and Lebanon," Netanyahu said, underscoring that Israeli military operations were not paused.

Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said Sunday that Oman was "working intensively to put in place safe passage arrangements for the Strait of Hormuz." Egypt's President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi said his government had delivered "clear messages" to Iran focused on de-escalating the conflict.

Markets React, Strikes Continue

Financial markets responded sharply to Trump's announcement. Brent crude fell from nearly $109 per barrel before trading hours to below $100 per barrel after the post. The Dow Jones Industrial Average gained more than 800 points in the opening minutes of trading, recovering from weeks of war-related declines.

The International Energy Agency's executive director, Fatih Birol, said the current energy disruption is worse than the 1970s oil crisis when measured by the volume of barrels removed from daily global supply. "The single most important solution to this problem is opening up the Hormuz Strait," he said at an event in Australia. U.S. gasoline prices have risen more than $1 per gallon since the war began on February 28.

Critically, the pause applied only to Iranian energy and power infrastructure. U.S. Central Command confirmed Monday it was continuing to strike Iranian military targets with precision munitions. CENTCOM stated that more than 9,000 strikes have been carried out against Iran since the conflict began, with more than 140 Iranian naval vessels destroyed or damaged. Israel simultaneously launched a "wide-scale wave of strikes" on infrastructure targets in Tehran, including IRGC and Quds Force headquarters, a naval cruise missile manufacturing site, and other facilities — all on the same day Trump announced the pause.

The Stakes and Unresolved Questions

Iran's threat that triggered Trump's original ultimatum remains unresolved. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard had warned that if the U.S. struck Iranian power plants, it would retaliate by targeting power facilities supplying American military bases across the Gulf, as well as "economic, industrial and energy infrastructure in which Americans have shares." Ghalibaf had said Iran would treat desalination facilities critical to drinking water in Gulf nations as legitimate targets. Iran's semiofficial news agencies portrayed Trump's Monday decision as a retreat.

The war's death toll as of Monday stood at more than 1,500 in Iran, more than 1,000 in Lebanon, 15 in Israel, and 13 U.S. service members. More than 32,000 Americans have been evacuated from the region.

Trump's stated objectives — degrading Iran's missile capability, destroying its defense industrial base, preventing nuclear weapons acquisition, and reopening the strait — remain unfulfilled, particularly on the nuclear material question. Approximately 970 pounds of highly enriched uranium is believed to be buried under rubble at Iran's three main nuclear sites. Trump said Monday that the U.S. would "take it ourselves" as part of any agreement, but offered no specifics. He added a characteristic hedge at the end of his Air Force One remarks: "I'm not guaranteeing anything. I'm not going to come out here in a week or two weeks, and have you all say, 'Oh, you said…' I didn't say anything."

Bahrain has separately circulated a draft UN Security Council resolution calling on member states to use "all necessary means" to ensure free passage through the Strait of Hormuz and condemning Iranian attacks on commercial vessels, according to reports from the region.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Nationwide Blackout Hits Cuba

• Appeal Trial Begins For Former French President

• Afghanistan Reports 400 Dead In Pakistan Strike On Kabul

Nationwide Blackout Hits Cuba

Cuban civillians in Havana (Yamil Lage - AFP via Getty Images)

_{By: Atlas}

Cuba's national electric grid went dark Monday in a complete island-wide blackout, leaving approximately 10 million people without power as the country's energy crisis reaches a breaking point. It was the third major blackout in four months — and the most severe sign yet that decades of infrastructure neglect, compounded by a U.S.-imposed oil blockade, are pushing Cuba's power system past the point of manageable failure.

Cuba's Ministry of Energy and Mines posted on X that a "complete disconnection" of the national electrical system had occurred and said it was investigating the cause. Officials noted there were no failures in the units that were operating at the time the grid collapsed, pointing to a transmission problem rather than a generation failure. The ministry later said it had begun restoring power to small clusters of circuits — known as microsystems — across the country, describing it as a necessary early step toward bringing the full grid back online.

Cuban state television separately attributed the collapse to an "unfortunate shutdown" of the Antonio Guiteras power plant, the island's largest generator. A March 4 failure at the same plant triggered a blackout that knocked out power across western Cuba for more than 16 hours.

Three Months Without Oil

Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel confirmed Friday that the island had not received any oil shipments in more than three months and was operating on solar power, natural gas, and thermoelectric plants. The government, he said, had been forced to postpone surgeries for tens of thousands of patients.

Ship-tracking data reviewed by Reuters showed Cuba received only two small vessels carrying oil imports this year. The first discharged fuel in January at the Port of Havana, arriving from Mexico, which had been a regular supplier. The second, from Jamaica, delivered liquefied petroleum gas — commonly used for cooking — in February. No large imports have entered through Cuba's main hubs of Matanzas or Moa, which typically handle crude oil for refining and fuel oil for power generation. The ports of Havana and Cienfuegos had no import activity in more than a month, according to satellite imagery analyzed by “TankerTrackers.com.”

Venezuela, once Cuba's primary oil supplier and responsible for as much as half of its fuel imports, has sent nothing to the island this year. Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA last month loaded gasoline onto a tanker previously used for Cuba shipments, but the vessel had not left Venezuelan waters as of Monday.

The cutoff traces directly to January, when U.S. forces captured then-Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. The interim government of Delcy Rodríguez, which moved quickly to align with Washington's demands, agreed to halt oil shipments to Cuba as part of its cooperation with the Trump administration. Trump also signed an executive order threatening tariffs on any country that sells or provides oil to Cuba, which effectively deterred other potential suppliers — including Mexico — from continuing shipments.

A Grid Long Past Its Limits

Cuba's power infrastructure problems did not start with the oil blockade, though the cutoff accelerated a deterioration that was already well underway. William LeoGrande, a professor at American University who has studied Cuba for decades, said the country's energy grid has not been properly maintained and that its infrastructure is "way past its normal useful life."

"The technicians working on the grid are magicians to keep it running at all given the shape that it's in," LeoGrande said.

He added that thermoelectric plants have been burning heavy oil whose high sulfur content is corroding the equipment from within. The government also lacks the hard currency needed to import spare parts or upgrade its generating capacity. "It's just a perfect storm of collapse," LeoGrande said.

Cuba produces roughly 40 percent of its own petroleum but has been unable to generate enough power to meet demand. Unlike most of the rest of the Western Hemisphere, the island has no connection to international energy grids that could provide backup supply.

The U.S. Embassy in Cuba posted on X Monday that there was "no information on when power would be restored," and advised Americans on the island to conserve fuel, water, food, and mobile phone charge, and to prepare for "significant disruption."

Protests and Political Pressure

The blackouts have begun producing what the Cuban government has long worked to prevent: public unrest. Over the weekend, protesters in Morón torched the local Communist Party office in what was described as a rare violent demonstration. Authorities arrested at least five people. Videos circulated on social media showing residents in Havana and other cities banging pots and pans — a traditional form of public protest known as a cacerolazo — to express anger over the outages, food shortages, and deteriorating living conditions. Similar protests erupted in 2021, 2022, and 2024.

Havana resident Tomás David Velázquez Felipe, 61, said the relentless outages make him feel that Cubans who can leave should do so. "What little we have to eat spoils," he said. "Our people are too old to keep suffering."

LeoGrande outlined the stakes plainly: if Cuba drastically reduces consumption and expands renewables, it can manage for a period. "But it would be constant misery for the general population, and eventually, the economy could collapse just completely and then you would have social chaos and probably mass migration," he said.

Talks With Washington and Trump's Comments

Díaz-Canel confirmed Friday that Cuba had entered into talks with the U.S. government, describing them as aimed at finding solutions "through dialogue to the bilateral differences between the two nations." The Trump administration has previously said it does not seek to trigger a collapse of the Cuban government outright, but rather wants to negotiate a transition away from the country's communist political system, including the release of political prisoners and movement toward economic liberalization.

Trump addressed Cuba directly in remarks at the White House Monday, stating he believed he would have "the honor of taking Cuba." He added: "Whether I free it, take it. I could do anything I want with it. They're a very weakened nation right now." He described Cuba as a "failed nation" with "no money" and "no oil," while also noting it had "nice land" and a "beautiful island."

Trump told reporters Sunday on Air Force One that Cuba "wants to make a deal," and suggested the situation would be addressed once the Iran war concludes. "I think we will pretty soon either make a deal or do whatever we have to do," he said.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Trump: Decision To End Iran War Will Be Mutual With Israel

• Venezuelan Lawmakers Advance Mining Reform Bill Favorable To The U.S.

• Analysis: Questions Arise Around Iranian School Being Possibly Bombed By U.S. Forces

Trump: Decision To End Iran War Will Be Mutual With Israel

Trump aboard Air Force One on March 7th 2026 (AP)

_{By: Atlas}

President Donald Trump said Sunday that any decision to end the war with Iran would be a "mutual" one made jointly with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, while making clear the United States would retain final say over when the military campaign concludes. The comments came as operations against Iran entered their tenth day, the death toll continued to climb on multiple fronts, and Iran's Assembly of Experts named a new supreme leader in open defiance of Trump's stated preferences.

In a brief phone interview, Trump told The Times of Israel that while Netanyahu would have input, the U.S. president would set the terms and timing. "I think it's mutual… a little bit. We've been talking. I'll make a decision at the right time, but everything's going to be taken into account," Trump said. Asked whether Israel could continue its own military campaign against Iran after the United States decides to halt its strikes, Trump declined to engage the hypothetical, adding only: "I don't think it's going to be necessary."

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt had said Friday that the administration expected military operations to last four to six weeks. Trump himself has avoided committing to a fixed timeline.

The Question of Surrender

In a separate interview that aired Sunday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth addressed Trump's earlier demand for Iran's "unconditional surrender," saying the United States would fight until Iran was incapable of continuing. "It means we're fightin' to win. It means we set the terms. We'll know when they're not capable of fighting. There'll be a point where they'll have no choice but to do that," Hegseth said, adding that Trump would set the terms of any end to hostilities regardless of the form they took.

Trump himself, speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, struck a similar tone when asked about negotiations. "At some point, I don't think there will be anybody left, maybe to say 'we surrender,'" he said. The president also asserted that once U.S. military operations were complete, Iran would be left without meaningful offensive capacity against the United States, Israel, or American allies for the foreseeable future.

In his Times of Israel interview, Trump also offered a broader justification for the joint U.S.-Israeli campaign, saying Iran had been on a path to destroy Israel before the operation began. "Iran was going to destroy Israel and everything else around it… We've worked together. We've destroyed a country that wanted to destroy Israel. Would have destroyed Israel if I wasn't around," he said. He added separately that he believed Netanyahu's role had been equally indispensable, stating: "And if Bibi wasn't around, Israel would not exist today."

Iran's Response and the New Supreme Leader

The backdrop to Trump's comments was the announcement earlier Sunday that Iran's 88-member Assembly of Experts had named Mojtaba Khamenei — the 56-year-old son of slain Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei — as the country's third supreme leader. The assembly acted despite Trump having said publicly that Mojtaba was "unacceptable" to him, and despite the Israeli military having warned before the announcement that it would target any successor.

In the assembly's statement, one council member cited Trump's prior objections as a factor in the choice, noting: "Even the Great Satan has mentioned his name." Trump responded to Mojtaba's selection by saying on Monday he was "disappointed" and believed the appointment would lead to "more of the same problem" for Iran. When asked whether the new leader had a target on his back, Trump said it would be "inappropriate" to say whether or not he does.

Iran's Revolutionary Guards quickly pledged allegiance to the new leader and issued a direct counterstatement to Trump's comments that the war would "end soon." "It is we who will determine the end of the war," the Guards said in a statement. "The equations and future status of the region are now in the hands of our armed forces; American forces will not end the war."

Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, also rejected Trump's claim that the United States would play any role in selecting or approving Tehran's leadership. "We allow nobody to interfere in our domestic affairs," Araghchi said in a Sunday television interview. "This is up to the Iranian people to elect their new leader." On the question of a ceasefire, Araghchi said Iran would not consider such a step until the United States explained its justification for launching the war.

Oil Markets and the Economic Toll

The Iran war entered its second week with significant disruption to global energy markets. Brent crude futures briefly touched $119.50 a barrel on Monday — the highest since Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine — before retreating. West Texas Intermediate surged as much as 22 percent in early trading on March 8 before settling back. The benchmark WTI contract had already climbed 12 percent on March 6 and was up 36 percent over the prior week.

The national average gasoline price in the United States rose to $3.45 by March 8, a jump of nearly 16 percent from the day the war began on February 28, as the conflict curtailed shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway that handles an estimated 20 percent of global oil flows. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called on Trump to release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, calling the price increases a result of what he described as a "reckless war of choice."

Trump dismissed those concerns. In a Truth Social post, he wrote that rising oil prices were "a very small price to pay for U.S.A., and World, Safety and Peace." He added that prices would "drop rapidly" once the Iran nuclear threat had been eliminated. Energy Secretary Chris Wright offered a more measured take on the same day, telling CNN that elevated prices and disrupted Strait of Hormuz shipping were "a weeks, not months thing" in a worst-case scenario.

U.S. Casualties and Evacuations

The human costs of the conflict continued to accumulate. As of Sunday, seven American service members had been killed since the war began — the seventh dying from injuries sustained during an Iranian drone and missile attack on U.S. forces stationed in Saudi Arabia on March 1. The State Department on March 8 ordered all nonessential personnel and family members of U.S. government employees to leave Saudi Arabia, citing the ongoing threat of Iranian drone and missile attacks and significant disruptions to commercial aviation.

More than 32,000 American citizens had been evacuated from the broader Middle East and returned to the United States since the war began, the State Department said, with over 19,000 receiving direct U.S. government assistance. More than half of those who requested help chose alternative departure methods over U.S. government-provided transportation.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Rubio: Hardest Hits Are Yet To Come

• Macron Moves To Strengthen Nuclear Weapon Foothold

• Strait Of Hormuz Shipping Traffic Slows To A Crawl Following Middle East Turmoil

Rubio: Hardest Hits Are Yet To Come

Rubio briefs House and Senate leaders on US military action in Iran at the US Capitol in Washington on March 2nd, 2026. (Brendan Smialowski - AFP - Getty Images)

_{By: Atlas}

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Monday that the United States is preparing to intensify its military campaign against Iran, stating that “the hardest hits are yet to come” as administration officials briefed lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

Rubio made the remarks ahead of a closed-door session with congressional leaders, describing the next phase of operations as “even more punishing” than the strikes carried out over the previous two days. The comments followed joint U.S.–Israeli operations that targeted Iranian leadership, missile infrastructure, and naval assets.

He declined to outline specific tactical plans but emphasized that the campaign would continue until defined objectives were met. The administration has projected that operations could last four to five weeks, though officials have indicated the timeline could extend if necessary.

Rubio’s warning came as members of Congress from both parties pressed for clarity on the scope, duration, and legal basis of the operation.

Defined Military Objectives

In his remarks, Rubio reiterated that the mission is focused on dismantling Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities and degrading its naval and drone forces. He said the objective is to eliminate both Iran’s ability to manufacture and launch missiles and to prevent those capabilities from being rebuilt.

Rubio described Iran’s missile program as part of a broader strategy to shield its nuclear ambitions. He stated that regardless of who governs Iran in the future, the country would not retain the ballistic missile and drone capabilities that threaten U.S. forces and regional allies.

He also confirmed there are no active diplomatic exchanges with Tehran at this time. While he did not rule out any options, Rubio said the United States is not currently postured for ground operations and suggested that the stated objectives can be achieved without deploying American boots on the ground.

Pentagon updates released alongside the briefings indicated that more than 1,250 targets inside Iran had been struck in the first 48 hours of the operation, including command centers, missile sites, naval assets, and air defense systems.

Imminent Threat Justification

Rubio defended the timing of the strikes, asserting that there “absolutely was an imminent threat” prior to the operation. He said U.S. intelligence indicated that if Iran were attacked by Israel, it would retaliate immediately against American forces in the region.

According to Rubio, delaying action would have resulted in higher casualties. He argued that preemptive action was taken to reduce risk to U.S. service members and facilities.

The administration has stated that congressional leaders were informed before the strikes and that formal notification under the War Powers Resolution was transmitted within the required 48-hour period. Rubio said the White House complied fully with reporting requirements, while maintaining that prior authorization from Congress was not legally required .

Democratic lawmakers have questioned whether the intelligence presented substantiates the claim of imminence. Some members said the briefings raised additional questions about the long-term objective and exit strategy.

The administration’s messaging has emphasized that the campaign is preventive rather than aimed at transforming Iran’s political system.

Regime Change and Political Boundaries

Rubio denied that regime change is the formal objective of the military campaign. Although strikes reportedly killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other senior figures, Rubio framed the mission as limited to military capabilities.

He stated that while the United States would prefer a different governing structure in Tehran, the central aim is to ensure that Iran cannot use missile and drone forces as leverage against U.S. interests.

President Donald Trump has previously outlined four goals for the campaign, including the destruction of ballistic missile infrastructure, neutralization of naval capacity, prevention of nuclear weapon acquisition, and ending support for proxy forces

Rubio’s remarks aligned with those goals, reinforcing that the focus remains on tangible military assets rather than political restructuring. He added that Congress is free to vote on war powers measures if it chooses, but maintained that the executive branch has acted within its authority.

Broader Implications and Next Steps

The escalation warning came amid continued Iranian retaliation across the region, including reported strikes targeting U.S. facilities and allied infrastructure. U.S. Central Command has confirmed American casualties since hostilities began.

Energy markets have reacted to the expanding conflict, and the administration has indicated that measures will be rolled out to mitigate potential increases in fuel prices.

Rubio said the United States will continue operations “as long as it takes” to achieve its objectives. He did not provide a specific end date but reiterated that the next phase will involve intensified military pressure.

Congress is scheduled to receive additional briefings in the coming days, including sessions with senior defense and intelligence officials. Lawmakers are expected to debate resolutions that could limit the president’s authority to expand the operation without explicit authorization.

For now, the administration’s position is that the campaign remains focused, legally justified, and aimed at eliminating what it characterizes as a direct and developing threat. Rubio’s warning that the “hardest hits” are still ahead signals that the operational tempo is expected to increase in the days to come.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Russia-Ukraine War Enters 5th Year

• Hungary Blocks €90 Billion E.U. Loan To Ukraine

• U.S. & Iran Edge Closer To Kinetic War

Russia-Ukraine War Enters 5th Year

A city street in Kramatorsk, Donetsk region of Ukraine, on February 8, 2026. (Iryna Rybakova - AFP - Press service of the 93rd Kholodnyi Yar Separate Mechanized Brigade)

_{By: Atlas}

Tuesday marked four years since Russian forces crossed into Ukraine. There was no ceasefire to mark the occasion, no deal on the horizon, and no sign that either side is prepared to accept the other's terms. What there was, instead, was another round of drone strikes, another diplomatic statement, and another set of numbers that have grown large enough to be almost incomprehensible.

The war is now entering its fifth year. It remains the deadliest conflict on European soil since World War II.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President Antonio Costa traveled to Kyiv on Tuesday for a commemoration ceremony. They visited an energy facility damaged by Russian strikes and met with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy before joining a videoconference with Britain, France, Germany, and other countries in what has been called the "Coalition of the Willing." German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said from Berlin that the Russian economy was "creaking under the weight of sanctions and of warfare." French President Emmanuel Macron said his country's commitment to Ukraine was continuing.

The statements were notable mainly for what they were not: a breakthrough.

What the Numbers Say

Four years in, the scale of the destruction is documented if not fully measurable.

The United Nations has verified nearly 15,000 civilian deaths in Ukraine since the February 2022 invasion, with the agency noting the real figure is likely considerably higher. It has no access to Russian-occupied areas, including Mariupol, where thousands are believed to have died during a Russian siege. More than 40,600 Ukrainian civilians have been injured. Last year was the deadliest for civilians since the war began — 2,514 killed and 12,142 injured, a 31 percent increase from 2024.

At least 763 children have been killed, according to UN figures. Around 20,000 children have been forcibly displaced or taken from Russian-occupied Ukrainian land, by Kyiv's estimate. Some 5.9 million Ukrainians have left the country entirely; another 3.7 million have been displaced within it.

The military toll on both sides is harder to verify. Neither government releases comprehensive data. Zelenskyy said earlier this month that 55,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed, a figure widely considered an undercount. Russia has not issued an official update on its own losses since September 2022. The Center for Strategic and International Studies estimates Russia has suffered up to 325,000 troop deaths — the highest for any major power in any conflict since World War II, the think tank said. Ukraine's military fatalities are estimated between 100,000 and 140,000. Combined casualties, counting the killed, wounded, and missing on both sides, reach as high as 1.8 million.

Russia currently occupies approximately 19.4 percent of Ukrainian territory, including the roughly 7 percent it held before the full-scale invasion. Over the past year, it gained an additional 0.79 percent. Slow, grinding progress — at enormous cost.

The Economic Picture

Ukraine's economy contracted by nearly a third in the first year of the war. It has recovered partially since, but Kyiv is now dependent on the IMF and other foreign lenders to fund day-to-day government operations. The cost of rebuilding the country is estimated at $588 billion over the next decade, according to a joint assessment by the World Bank, UN, and European Commission released Monday.

Russia's economic picture is more complex. Military spending rose to roughly 9 percent of GDP, producing short-term growth. But that expansion slowed to just 1 percent last year. Oil and gas revenues, which fund approximately a quarter of the Russian state budget, fell to a five-year low as Western sanctions and Ukrainian strikes on Russian energy infrastructure reduced exports. Inflation has pushed up the cost of basic goods for Russian households.

Europe has provided roughly 201 billion euros in combined aid to Ukraine since 2022. The United States contributed $115 billion in total before the Trump administration halted direct weapons transfers after taking office. European countries have since increased their military contributions by 67 percent compared to the prior three-year period, according to Germany's Kiel Institute. North Korea has sent thousands of soldiers to fight alongside Russian forces and is widely reported to have supplied millions of artillery shells. Iran has supplied drone technology. China has become Russia's most significant economic partner.

Talks, and the Lack of Progress

Since Trump returned to the White House, American officials have pursued negotiations with both sides. Talks have been held in Istanbul, Abu Dhabi, and Geneva. The Geneva round concluded on February 17 and 18 without a deal.

The core dispute has not moved. Russia is demanding full control of Ukraine's eastern Donetsk region, including areas it does not yet hold, and wants a ban on Western military support for Kyiv. Ukraine's position is that handing over territory is constitutionally impossible and unacceptable to its population. Zelenskyy has insisted on firm security guarantees from Washington before agreeing to any territorial concessions. Russia has rejected proposals for European troops to be deployed in Ukraine after any ceasefire.

Zelenskyy's chief of staff said another round of talks could take place by the end of this week.

Putin, speaking at a ceremony marking Russia's "Defenders of the Fatherland Day," said his forces were defending Russia's borders and pursuing "strategic parity." He has said repeatedly that Russia will continue by force if diplomacy fails.

On the Ground

Monday brought one unexpected development on the battlefield. Ukraine's armed forces commander-in-chief, Oleksandr Syrskyi, said Ukrainian forces had "restored control" over 400 square kilometers of territory along a stretch of the southern front. It would be the largest Ukrainian territorial gain since December and one of the biggest in many months. Moscow did not immediately respond to the claim.

Meanwhile, the Russian campaign against Ukrainian infrastructure has continued through the winter. The World Health Organization has documented nearly 2,900 attacks affecting medical care in Ukraine since 2022, a nearly 20 percent increase from the year before. About one-fifth of Ukrainian land is contaminated by mines or unexploded ordnance. Two people were killed and three wounded in Russian drone attacks on the Odesa region overnight, Ukrainian emergency services said Tuesday.

A survey conducted in late January by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, while massive Russian strikes were knocking out power and heat during temperatures that dropped to minus 25 degrees Celsius, found that 65 percent of Ukrainians said they were prepared to continue resisting as long as necessary. That figure was up from 62 percent in September and December of last year.

The war that was expected in some quarters to last days is now in its fifth year. Neither side has budged on its fundamental position. The anniversary came and went with speeches, ceremonies, and more fighting.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Iran Holds Talks With UN Nuclear Oversight Head Ahead Of U.S. Negotiations

• French Authorities Raid Arab World Institute As Epstein Crackdown Widens

• U.S. Signals Strong Support For Orban’s Leadership In Upcoming Election In Hungary

Iran Holds Talks With UN Nuclear Oversight Head Ahead Of U.S. Negotiations

International Atomic Energy Agency leader Rafael Grossi (L) with Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Geneva on February 16, 2026. (Source: Getty Images)

_{By: Atlas}

Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi sat down with the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Geneva on Monday, hours before a second round of indirect nuclear negotiations with the United States — talks that President Donald Trump said he would be "indirectly" involved in from Washington.

The meeting with IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi marked the first substantive technical engagement between Tehran and the UN nuclear watchdog since Iran suspended cooperation with the agency following the 12-day war with Israel last June, during which the United States bombed three of Iran's nuclear facilities.

"Just completed in-depth technical discussions with Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in preparation for important negotiations scheduled for tomorrow in Geneva," Grossi wrote on X after the meeting.

Araghchi, for his part, struck a tone that was equal parts diplomatic and defiant. "I am in Geneva with real ideas to achieve a fair and equitable deal," he posted. "What is not on the table: submission before threats."

The Tuesday talks will be mediated by Oman, whose Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi helped broker the first round of indirect negotiations in Muscat on February 6. Switzerland is serving as the neutral venue. The American delegation is again expected to be led by special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner.

What both sides want — and where they diverge

The core dispute has not changed. Washington wants Iran to forgo uranium enrichment entirely and has pushed to expand the scope of negotiations to include Tehran's ballistic missile stockpile and its support for regional armed groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran has flatly refused on both counts.

Tehran says it will discuss curbs to its nuclear program — but only in exchange for the lifting of international sanctions that have strangled its economy. Zero enrichment is a nonstarter, Iranian officials have said repeatedly, and the missile program is what Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi called a defensive matter that is "never negotiable."

"The ball is in America's court," Takht-Ravanchi told the BBC on Sunday. "They have to prove they want to have a deal with us. If we see a sincerity on their part, I am sure that we will be on a road to have an agreement."

Iran's foreign ministry spokesman, Esmaeil Baghaei, said Monday that Washington's position on the nuclear issue "has moved towards a more realistic one" since the Muscat round. He added that the IAEA would play "an important role" in the upcoming mediated talks, though he also renewed Tehran's criticism of Grossi for not condemning the military strikes on Iran's nuclear sites — facilities that are protected under agency safeguards as part of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Trump weighs in from Air Force One

Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on Monday night, Trump confirmed his indirect involvement and said he believed Iran was motivated to negotiate.

"I'll be involved in those talks — indirectly — and they'll be very important, and we'll see what can happen," Trump said.

He described Iran as tough negotiators, then corrected himself. "I would say they're bad negotiators, because we could have had a deal instead of sending the B-2s in to knock out their nuclear potential, and we had to send the B-2s. I hope they're going to be more reasonable."

"I don't think they want the consequences of not making a deal," he added.

The comments came just days after Trump said a change of government in Iran "would be the best thing that could happen" and ordered a second aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford, to the Middle East from the Caribbean to join the existing naval buildup.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking in Budapest on Monday, was more measured but still cautious. "I think that there's an opportunity here to diplomatically reach an agreement that addresses the things we're concerned about," Rubio said. "But I don't want to overstate it either. It's going to be hard. It's been very difficult for anyone to do real deals with Iran, because we're dealing with radical Shia clerics who are making theological decisions, not geopolitical ones."

The missing uranium question

One of the most pressing technical issues hanging over the talks is the fate of Iran's stockpile of approximately 440 kilograms of highly enriched uranium. The IAEA has been unable to verify the status of that material since the June war, when U.S. and Israeli strikes hit facilities at Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan.

Grossi has previously said the stockpile of 60%-enriched uranium — a short technical step from weapons-grade levels — could theoretically allow Iran to build as many as 10 nuclear bombs, though he stressed that does not mean Tehran possesses such weapons.

Iran has offered to consider diluting the enriched uranium or allowing some form of international oversight, but has rejected any proposal to transfer the material out of the country. Mohammad Eslami, the head of Iran's nuclear agency, said Monday that Iran would be willing to dilute the 60% stockpile if all sanctions were removed — but dismissed talk of shipping the uranium abroad as a demand driven by "pressure groups."

Tehran has allowed the IAEA limited access to sites that were not damaged in the June strikes but has blocked inspectors from visiting the bombed facilities, citing radiation concerns. Grossi has said the sites are safe enough to inspect and that inspections are long overdue.

Military posturing on both sides

The diplomatic track is running in parallel with an unmistakable military one. On Monday morning, Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps launched a naval exercise dubbed "Smart Control of the Strait of Hormuz," designed to test the readiness of IRGC naval units to protect the waterway through which roughly 20% of global oil flows.

Sailors passing through the region received radio warnings of a likely live-fire drill in the northern lane of the strait on Tuesday — the same day the Geneva talks are set to begin.

Iran has repeatedly threatened to shut the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation for any attack, a move that would send crude prices sharply higher and roil global energy markets.

On the American side, the military buildup continues to grow. The deployment of the Ford carrier strike group adds to the forces already in the region, and U.S. officials have told multiple outlets that the military is preparing for the possibility of a sustained campaign if diplomacy fails.

Tensions between the two navies flared as recently as February 4, when a U.S. Navy fighter jet shot down an Iranian drone approaching the USS Abraham Lincoln in the Arabian Sea. Iran also harassed a U.S.-flagged merchant vessel in the Strait of Hormuz around the same time.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who met with Trump in Washington last week, has urged the administration to ensure that any deal includes the dismantlement of Iran's nuclear infrastructure — not merely a halt to enrichment. "There shall be no enrichment capability — not stopping the enrichment process, but dismantling the equipment and the infrastructure that allows you to enrich in the first place," Netanyahu said.

Whether the Geneva round produces anything beyond agreement to keep talking remains to be seen. What is clear is that both sides are arriving at the table with significant leverage — and significant red lines — with the window for diplomacy narrowing by the week.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Vance Inks Armenia Nuclear Deal, Becomes First Sitting Oval Office Official To Visit

• Cuba Forces Flight Cancellations As Fuel Rations Go Into Effect

• Ukraine To Open Weapon Export Centers In Policy Pivot

Vance Inks Armenia Nuclear Deal, Becomes First Sitting Oval Office Official To Visit

Armenia’s Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan with VP Vance (Kevin Lamarque - Pool - Getty Images)

_{By: Atlas}

Vice President JD Vance arrived in Yerevan on Monday, becoming the first sitting U.S. president or vice president to visit Armenia. He met with Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan at the President's Residence, where the two completed negotiations on a civil nuclear energy agreement and discussed the status of a U.S.-brokered peace deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Vance and his wife, Usha, were greeted with a red carpet, an honor guard, and a delegation of officials. Armenian and American flags lined the motorcade route into the city. A small number of demonstrators were visible along the road, including one holding a sign that read, "Does Trump support Devils?"

The vice president called Pashinyan "a great friend of ours and a real ally in peace and development in this region of the world." He also referenced Armenia's adoption of Christianity in 301 A.D., calling the country "one of the oldest Christian cultures in the entire world."

Pashinyan described the visit as "of truly historic and symbolic importance" and said it "reflects the depth of the strong and strategic partnership forged between the Republic of Armenia and the United States of America."

The nuclear agreement

The centerpiece of Monday's visit was the completion of what is known as a 123 Agreement — the legal framework that permits the United States to license nuclear technology and equipment to another country. Under the terms, the deal could facilitate up to $5 billion in initial U.S. exports to Armenia, along with an additional $4 billion in longer-term fuel and maintenance contracts.

"This agreement will open a new chapter in the deepening energy partnership between Armenia and the United States," Pashinyan said at a joint press conference.

Armenia is currently reviewing proposals from U.S., Russian, Chinese, French, and South Korean companies to build a new nuclear reactor to replace its sole operating plant, the Russian-built Metsamor facility. No selection has been made, but Monday's signing clears the legal path for an American firm to compete for the project.

Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin told the outlet Izvestia that state nuclear corporation Rosatom was prepared to proceed with its own proposal. "There are no real alternatives in terms of the availability of reliable, proven technologies, as well as the attractiveness of financial parameters," he said.

Narek Sukiasyan, a political scientist in Yerevan, offered a different read. "Considering Armenia's multiplicity of dependencies on Russia, it is a political priority to diversify partners when it comes to nuclear cooperation," he said. "The United States seems to be the preference now."

Defense and economic commitments

Beyond the nuclear deal, Vance announced an $11 million sale of U.S. drone technology to Armenia, a partnership on Nvidia chip exports to the country, and pledged broader American investment in Armenian infrastructure.

"We're not just making peace for Armenia," Vance said. "We're also creating real prosperity for Armenia and the United States together."

He called the agreement a "win-win" that would generate energy exports, economic development, and security benefits for both countries. Pashinyan noted that he and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev had jointly nominated President Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize following the White House peace summit last August, and said he had "great hope" the award would be granted in 2026.

Vance also said he endorsed Pashinyan in upcoming Armenian elections.

The TRIPP corridor and unresolved issues

Vance's visit also served to advance the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity, or TRIPP — a proposed 43-kilometer road-and-rail corridor that would run through southern Armenia to connect Azerbaijan with its Nakhchivan exclave. The route would include updated rail infrastructure, oil and gas pipelines, and fiber-optic cables, and is designed to link Central Asia and the Caspian basin to Europe while bypassing Russia and Iran.

The framework for TRIPP was established in August 2025, when Pashinyan and Aliyev signed an agreement at the White House. Under that deal, Armenia recognized Nagorno-Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan, and Azerbaijan recognized Armenian sovereignty over the Syunik province, through which the corridor would pass. Foreign ministers from both countries initialed the text of a broader peace treaty, but neither leader has formally signed it and neither parliament has ratified it.

"We are very close to that point, if not there yet," Pashinyan said Monday, referring to what he called a point "of no return" in the peace process.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan announced an implementation framework for TRIPP in January. A team of American engineers has already arrived in Armenia to begin surveying work for the project, according to Stepan Sargsyan, a former Armenian governor with close ties to the prime minister.

"Right now, the Americans and Armenians and their Arab counterparts are working very diligently and very expeditiously to bring it into fruition," Sargsyan said.

Not all Armenians welcome the project. Protesters gathered along Vance's motorcade route holding signs that read "Syunik is not for sale" and "The Trap or TRIPP?" More than 20 Armenian human rights organizations sent an open letter urging the vice president to press for the release of Armenian detainees held in Azerbaijani prisons. Last week, an Azerbaijani military court handed lengthy sentences, including life terms, to Armenian separatist leaders in a war crimes trial.

What comes next

Vance arrived in Armenia after spending four days at the Winter Olympics in Milan with his family. He is scheduled to travel to Azerbaijan on Tuesday to continue discussions on the peace process.

Both Pashinyan and Aliyev sit on President Trump's Board of Peace, a body originally established to oversee the Gaza ceasefire plan but which has since expanded in scope. Trump plans to convene the board's first meeting in Washington on February 19.

Armenia has frozen its participation in a Russian-led security pact and has moved to deepen ties with Washington and the European Union. Vance's itinerary does not include a stop in Georgia, once Washington's closest ally in the South Caucasus. U.S. officials have pointed to what they describe as democratic backsliding and a pro-Russian tilt in Tbilisi, and Washington suspended its strategic partnership agreement with Georgia.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Federal Judge Blocks U.S. Attempt To End Temporary Protected Status For Haitians

• Trump: India Agrees To New Tariff & Oil Purchase Terms

• SpaceX Acquires xAI

Federal Judge Blocks U.S. Attempt To End Temporary Protected Status For Haitians

Civilians protesting for protection of Haitians that have legal status. (Lynne Sladky - AP)

_{By: Atlas}

A federal judge on Monday blocked the Trump administration from revoking Temporary Protected Status for more than 350,000 Haitians, halting their potential deportation to a country the U.S. State Department has deemed too dangerous for Americans to visit.

U.S. District Judge Ana C. Reyes issued an 83-page ruling that indefinitely paused the Department of Homeland Security's termination of Haiti's TPS designation, which had been scheduled to expire at 11:59 p.m. Tuesday. The order bars the federal government from invalidating the legal status and work permits of active enrollees and from arresting or deporting them.

"During the stay, the Termination shall be null, void, and of no legal effect," Reyes wrote. "The Termination therefore does not affect the protections and benefits previously conferred by the TPS designation, including work authorization and protection from detention and deportation."

The Department of Homeland Security signaled it would appeal.

"Supreme Court, here we come," Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement. "This is lawless activism that we will be vindicated on."

A Rebuke of Noem's Decision

Reyes, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, issued a forceful critique of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's decision to end the TPS program for Haitians.

The judge concluded that Noem's termination was "arbitrary and capricious" and violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to fully consider "overwhelming evidence of present danger" in Haiti. She found that Noem did not consult with other government agencies as required by federal statute before making her determination.

"The Secretary did not consult," Reyes wrote. "In terminating Haiti's TPS designation without consulting, she acted contrary to law and in excess of statutory authority."

Reyes also found that the decision was rooted "in part" in "racial animus," citing disparaging remarks that both Noem and President Donald Trump have made about Haiti and immigrants. She noted that three days after announcing the end of Haiti's TPS designation, Noem posted on social media referring to nationals of countries in a travel ban as "killers, leeches, and entitlement junkies."

"Kristi Noem has a First Amendment right to call immigrants killers, leeches, entitlement junkies, and any other inapt name she wants," Reyes wrote. "Secretary Noem, however, is constrained by both our Constitution and the APA to apply faithfully the facts to the law in implementing the TPS program. The record to-date shows she has yet to do that."

The judge noted that the five TPS holders who filed the lawsuit are a neuroscientist, a software engineer, a laboratory assistant, a college economics major and a registered nurse.

Conditions in Haiti

Haiti remains one of the most dangerous countries in the Western Hemisphere. Armed gangs control an estimated 95 percent of Port-au-Prince, the capital. Commercial flights from the United States are barred from landing there because gangs have fired military-grade weapons at arriving planes.

The U.S. State Department maintains a Level 4 "Do Not Travel" advisory for the country—its most severe warning.

UNICEF estimated in October that more than 6 million people—over half of Haiti's population, including 3.3 million children—need humanitarian assistance. More than 1.4 million have been displaced by violence.

Reyes cited these conditions in her ruling.

"'Do not travel to Haiti for any reason' does not exactly scream, as Secretary Noem concluded, suitable for return," she wrote.

The Department of Homeland Security had argued in its termination notice that there were "no extraordinary and temporary conditions" in Haiti that would prevent migrants from returning safely. The department contended that ending TPS was in the national interest.

Reyes rejected that reasoning.

"Her 'national interest' analysis focuses on Haitians outside the United States or here illegally, ignoring that Haitian TPS holders already live here, and legally so," the judge wrote.

History of TPS for Haiti

Temporary Protected Status is a federal program that allows foreigners to remain in the United States when conditions in their home countries—such as war, natural disasters or political instability—make return unsafe. It provides eligible migrants with work authorization and protection from deportation.

President Barack Obama designated Haiti for TPS in 2010 after a magnitude-7.0 earthquake killed more than 300,000 people and left 1.5 million homeless. The status has been extended repeatedly as Haiti faced additional natural disasters, the assassination of President Jovenel Moïse in 2021, and escalating gang warfare.

The Biden administration most recently extended TPS for Haitians in July 2024, citing "simultaneous economic, security, political, and health crises" fueled by gangs and the absence of a functioning government.

Shortly after Trump returned to office, Noem moved to truncate the Biden-era extension so it would expire in August 2025. A federal judge in New York ruled in July that she lacked statutory authority to do so. Her department then announced in November that it would terminate Haiti's TPS designation entirely, setting the February 3 deadline.

Trump tried to end TPS for Haitians during his first term as well, but legal challenges prevented the policy from taking effect before he lost re-election in 2020.

What Comes Next

The Trump administration has moved to dismantle TPS programs for about a dozen countries, including Venezuela, Nicaragua, Ethiopia, South Sudan and Myanmar. Officials argue the programs have been abused and extended for too long, and that they attract illegal immigration.

"Haiti's TPS was granted following an earthquake that took place over 15 years ago," McLaughlin said. "It was never intended to be a de facto amnesty program, yet that's how previous administrations have used it for decades. Temporary means temporary."

The ruling provides immediate relief to Haitians who had been preparing for the worst. In Springfield, Ohio, where an estimated 12,000 to 15,000 Haitians live, parents had been securing passports for their U.S.-born children and signing power-of-attorney documents in case they were detained or deported.

Lynn Tramonte, executive director of the Ohio Immigrant Alliance, called the decision a welcome reprieve but warned that uncertainty remained.

"People can't live their lives like this, pegging their families' futures to a court case," she said.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs said they would continue fighting if the government appeals.

"Haiti remains an extraordinarily dangerous place, marked by widespread gang violence, rampant disease, lack of access to clean drinking water, severe housing instability, and the absence of a functioning government," lawyers Geoff Pipoly and Andrew Tauber said in a statement. "This ruling recognizes the grave risks Haitian TPS holders would face if forced to return."

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Trump Renews Tariff Push On South Korea

• U.S. Gov Takes Minority Stake In Rare Earth Miner Company

• Venezuela Releases More Political Prisoners With Hundreds Still Awaiting Release

Trump Renews Tariff Push On South Korea

President Donald Trump (Anthony Wallace - AFP - Getty Images)

_{By: Atlas}

Six months ago, Donald Trump and South Korean President Lee Jae Myung stood together and announced what the White House called a historic trade agreement—$350 billion in Korean investment flowing into American shipyards and factories, in exchange for reduced tariffs on Korean exports. It was the kind of deal Trump loves to celebrate: big numbers, clear winners, a handshake for the cameras.

On January 26, he threatened to tear it up.

Trump announced he was raising tariffs on South Korean automobiles, lumber, pharmaceuticals, and other goods from 15 percent to 25 percent, blaming Seoul's National Assembly for refusing to ratify the framework he and Lee agreed to last July. The move snaps duties back to the punishing rate Trump had threatened before the deal was struck—and serves as a warning to other nations whose legislatures have been slow to formalize agreements with Washington.

"Our Trade Deals are very important to America," Trump wrote on Truth Social. "In each of these Deals, we have acted swiftly to reduce our TARIFFS in line with the Transaction agreed to. We, of course, expect our Trading Partners to do the same."

Seoul said it received no advance warning.

A Deal That Never Quite Closed

The July framework was supposed to work like this: South Korea would invest $350 billion in American strategic industries over several years, with $150 billion designated for shipbuilding. Korean Air would buy $36.2 billion in Boeing aircraft. Seoul would purchase $100 billion in U.S. liquefied natural gas. In return, Trump would cut tariffs on Korean goods to 15 percent, down from the 25 percent he had been threatening.

Both presidents reaffirmed the terms when Trump visited South Korea in late October. The reduced tariff rate took effect November 1.

But the agreement required legislative approval in Seoul, and that's where it stalled.

South Korea's ruling Democratic Party of Korea argues the memorandum of understanding isn't a binding treaty—the document itself states it "does not create legally binding rights and obligations." Party leaders worry that formal ratification would lock Seoul into terms it might later want to renegotiate. They've proposed a separate bill to authorize the investments rather than ratifying the agreement directly.

The opposition People Power Party counters that the National Assembly must vote on any deal involving hundreds of billions of dollars in commitments. Parliament begins a new session February 3, when legislation typically comes up for a vote.

Beyond the political maneuvering lies a harder problem: South Korea may not be able to afford what it promised.

Finance Minister Koo Yun-cheol told reporters earlier this month that the $350 billion investment package was unlikely to begin in the first half of 2026. The won has cratered to levels not seen since the global financial crisis, and the prospect of massive dollar outflows has Seoul's economic policymakers deeply worried. The original deal tried to address this by capping annual cash transfers at $20 billion, but even that may be more than the Korean economy can absorb right now.

Scrambling in Seoul

Trump's announcement landed heavy in South Korea's capital.

The presidential Blue House said there had been "no official notice or explanation about the details" from Washington. Industry Minister Kim Jung-Kwan, who happened to be in Canada, was dispatched to meet with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. Presidential adviser Kim Yong-beom convened an emergency meeting with economic ministries.

Deputy Prime Minister Koo pledged to seek parliamentary support for a major investment bill. "Will request help from the Parliament for swift approval," he said, a notable shift in tone from an administration that had been content to let the ratification process drift.

Markets gyrated. Hyundai Motor shares plunged nearly 5 percent before recovering to close down less than 1 percent. Kia dropped 3.5 percent. The won slid half a percent against the dollar in early trading.

Choi Seok-young, a former South Korean trade negotiator, read Trump's message as "maximum pressure" designed to extract concessions in ongoing talks over non-tariff barriers, including Seoul's recent regulatory actions against Coupang, the U.S.-listed e-commerce giant that has accused Korean authorities of discrimination.

Whatever prompted it, the message was clear enough: Trump expects his deals honored, and he's willing to inflict economic pain on allies who don't deliver.

The Tariff President

South Korea is hardly alone in discovering that a handshake with Trump doesn't guarantee stability.

Just last week, the president threatened tariffs on eight European nations unless the United States gained control of Greenland, then backed off after meetings at Davos. On Saturday, he warned of 100 percent duties on Canada if Prime Minister Mark Carney pursued closer trade ties with China. Carney promptly denied any such intention.

The European Parliament still hasn't ratified its own trade framework with Washington. The USMCA agreement with Canada and Mexico faces renegotiation this year. And the Supreme Court is weighing whether Trump exceeded his authority by declaring tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act—a ruling that could reshape his leverage entirely.

Josh Lipsky, who chairs international economics at the Atlantic Council, said the South Korea move underscores a fundamental reality of Trump's trade policy.

"It's just another reminder that the markets were wrong to believe we were going to get into tariff stability in 2026," he said.

For South Korean automakers, the stakes are enormous. The country shipped $30.2 billion worth of vehicles to the United States last year, accounting for a quarter of all Korean exports to America. Hyundai and Kia have built their North American strategy around competitive pricing—a calculus that falls apart at 25 percent tariffs.

General Motors, which manufactures roughly 500,000 vehicles annually in South Korea and exports most of them stateside, faces similar exposure.

The broader trade relationship is substantial. South Korea sent $122.9 billion in goods to the United States in 2025, making it one of America's largest trading partners. Much of that trade flows through supply chains that have taken decades to build—and that could take years to unwind if the tariff war escalates further.

Trump framed his decision as a matter of reciprocity. He moved fast to lower American tariffs when the deal was announced. Seoul didn't hold up its end.

"Why hasn't the Korean Legislature approved it?" he asked.

The answer involves domestic politics, constitutional debates, currency instability, and genuine uncertainty about whether the terms are even achievable. None of that matters much to a president who measures success in signed agreements and investment announcements.

South Korea now has a choice: find a way to satisfy Washington, or learn to live with tariffs that could reshape its export economy for years to come.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

We are officially on year two of Trump’s second term.

Today’s topics:

• China Reports Lowest Birth Rate Since 1949

• Analysis: The ELN And Venezuela Partnership (Part 2 of 2)

• Syrian Forces Clash Against Kurdish Fighters One Day After Ceasefire Agreement

China Reports Lowest Birth Rate Since 1949

A nurse feeds a newborn baby in Tangshan, Hebei Province of China (Zhu Dayong - Visual China Group - Getty Images)

_{By: Atlas}

China recorded just 7.92 million births last year, pushing its birth rate to the lowest point since Communist Party recordkeeping began in 1949. The figures, released Monday by the National Bureau of Statistics, confirmed what demographers have long warned: a decade of policy reversals and financial incentives has failed to undo the demographic effects of generations spent limiting families to one child.

The country's population dropped by 3.39 million to 1.405 billion, a faster decline than the previous year. It marked the fourth consecutive annual decrease.

The Numbers Behind the Crisis

The birth rate fell to 5.63 per 1,000 people, down from 6.77 in 2024. That brief uptick last year had given some policymakers hope, but it was largely attributed to the Year of the Dragon, traditionally seen as favorable for childbearing. The snake year that followed apparently carried no such appeal.

Yi Fuxian, a demographer at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, put the figures in stark historical terms. Births in 2025, he noted, matched levels last seen in 1738, when China's total population was roughly 150 million.

Deaths outpaced births significantly. The country recorded 11.31 million deaths, producing a mortality rate of 8.04 per 1,000 people—the highest since 1968.

China's fertility rate now hovers around one birth per woman, less than half the 2.1 replacement rate required to maintain population size. The country is hardly alone in this regard. South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore all report fertility rates near 1.1, but none of those nations spent 35 years enforcing a strict one-child limit.

Marriage Rates and Structural Barriers

Fewer people are getting married, and those who do are waiting longer. Marriage registrations fell more than 20 percent in 2024 to 6.1 million couples, down from 7.68 million the year before. In China, where births outside marriage remain relatively uncommon, wedding statistics tend to predict birth trends with reasonable accuracy.

A policy shift in May 2025 offered modest encouragement. Couples can now register to marry anywhere in the country rather than returning to their official place of residence. Third-quarter marriage data showed registrations up 22.5 percent from a year earlier, and several major cities reported gains. Shanghai saw a 38.7 percent increase for the full year.

But economists and demographers remain skeptical that administrative convenience will address the deeper issues.

"It's these big structural issues which are much harder to tackle, whether it's housing, and work and getting a job and getting started in life and expectations around education," Stuart Gietel-Basten, who directs the Center for Aging Science at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, told the Associated Press. He added that workplace policies penalizing women for taking time off to have children require private sector change, not just government mandates.

Su Yue, principal economist for China at the Economist Intelligence Unit, pointed to economic anxiety among young workers. The boost from earlier fertility measures has faded, she said, and couples continue delaying marriage and children as workplace competition intensifies.

Beijing's Growing List of Incentives

The government has thrown considerable resources at the problem. Last July, Beijing announced cash subsidies of 3,600 yuan—about $500—per child for families. Maternity leave was extended to 158 days from 98. Officials pledged that pregnant women would face no out-of-pocket medical expenses starting this year, with costs including in vitro fertilization covered under the national insurance fund.

The total price tag for birth-boosting measures this year runs to approximately 180 billion yuan, or $25.8 billion, by Reuters estimates. Beijing also launched a national childcare subsidy offering up to 10,800 yuan annually for each child under three, the most ambitious such program since the government allowed three children per family in 2021.

Not all measures have been well received. Contraceptives, including condoms, lost their value-added tax exemption last year and now carry a 13 percent levy. Critics raised concerns about unintended consequences for public health.

Kindergartens, daycares, and matchmaking services, meanwhile, were added to the tax-exempt list—an attempt at symmetry that has done little to move the needle.

An Aging Nation Running Out of Time

The economic stakes extend well beyond nurseries and maternity wards. People over 60 now account for 23 percent of China's population, up from 22 percent a year earlier. By 2035, that cohort will reach 400 million—roughly equal to the populations of the United States and Italy combined. Hundreds of millions of workers will exit the labor force as pension budgets stretch thinner.

China has already begun adjusting. Men are now expected to work until 63 rather than 60, women until 58 rather than 55. Urbanization, which reached 68 percent last year compared to 43 percent in 2005, has compounded the challenge. Raising children costs more in cities, and young workers who migrated for jobs often lack the family support networks that helped previous generations.

Gary Ng, senior economist for Asia Pacific at Natixis, told the Associated Press that advances in robotics and high-tech manufacturing could partially offset workforce losses. "The bigger concern," he said, "is whether economic growth can stay afloat with a shrinking population."

China reported 5 percent GDP growth for 2025, but analysts expect that pace to slow in coming years. A shrinking consumer base compounds challenges the government already faces in shifting toward domestic consumption-driven growth.

What Comes Next

India overtook China as the world's most populous nation in 2023 and currently counts approximately 1.464 billion people. United Nations projections suggest China's population could fall to 800 million by century's end at current rates. The pool of women of childbearing age—defined as 15 to 49—is expected to shrink by more than two-thirds to under 100 million over the same period.

Yuan Xin, vice-president of the China Population Association, projected that marriages likely reached around 6.9 million last year, which could push 2026 births above 8 million. But he offered no illusions about the longer trajectory.

"In the early stages of population decline, fluctuations in births are common before the trend stabilises," he told the South China Morning Post. "But despite short-term volatility, a return to positive growth is almost off the table."

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Trump: Any Country Doing Business With Iran Faces 25% Tariff

• Canada PM Seeks To Enhance Ties With China In Upcoming Visit To Beijing

• EU Leverages Trade And Security Cooperation In Bid To Secure India Free Trade Agreement

Trump: Any Country Doing Business With Iran Faces 25% Tariff

U.S. President Donald Trump on Jan. 9, 2026. (Kevin Lamarque - Reuters)

_{By: Atlas}

President Donald Trump on Monday threatened to impose a 25 percent tariff on any country conducting business with Iran, a move that could potentially affect U.S. trade with China, India, the United Arab Emirates, the European Union and other major economies.

"Effective immediately, any Country doing business with the Islamic Republic of Iran will pay a Tariff of 25% on any and all business being done with the United States of America," Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social. "This Order is final and conclusive. Thank you for your attention to this matter!"

However, Trump does not appear to have issued an executive order to back up his statement as of late Monday afternoon. A White House spokesperson did not immediately respond to questions about the social media post.

The announcement comes ahead of a much-anticipated Supreme Court ruling on whether many of Trump's most expansive tariffs are legal. Those tariffs, including his controversial "reciprocal" duties from early April and others related to purported fentanyl trafficking, were invoked using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. It was unclear if Trump's newly unveiled Iran-related tariffs also rest on that law.

Major trading partners potentially affected

The United States has little direct trade with Iran because of steep sanctions on the country imposed in recent decades to punish Tehran for its nuclear program. Last year, the U.S. imported just $6.2 million worth of goods from Iran and exported slightly more than $90 million worth of goods to the country in return, according to Commerce Department statistics.

However, the United States does substantial trade with countries that do business with Iran. China, Brazil, Turkey, India and Russia are Iran's largest trading partners, combining for more than $10 billion in trade annually, according to data from the Observatory of Economic Complexity. Iraq and the United Arab Emirates are also important trading partners, according to the database Trading Economics.

The additional 25 percent tariff hitting Beijing exports, assuming it takes effect, risks upsetting the trade truce Trump negotiated with Chinese President Xi Jinping late last year. China is the world's top buyer of Iranian crude, and the nation's independent refiners were increasing their intake of the oil as of last month.

Michael Singh, former senior director for Middle East affairs at the National Security Council under President George W. Bush, now the managing director at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said the tariff threat appeared to be a mild response.

"For President Trump this seems like a pretty mild response to a very significant situation in Iran and so this will probably disappoint many in the Iranian American community," Singh said. "The problem is that we have sanctions in place against Iran that are quite tough, but they're not being enforced — I mean Iran is selling lots of oil, and so I think the question will be what's new here and is it going to be enforced, unlike the other sanctions that are already in place."

Earlier this year, Trump threatened to impose tariffs on any country that buys Russian oil but so far has only taken that action against India, sparing China in the process. He also threatened in March to impose a 25 percent tariff on any country that buys oil or gas from Venezuela but does not appear to have followed through on that threat.

Hundreds killed in Iran protest crackdown

The tariff threat follows reports from human rights groups that hundreds of people have been killed in a brutal crackdown on protests against the Iranian regime that intensified over the weekend.

In the latest wave of protests, which have gripped the country for roughly two weeks amid worsening economic conditions, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's regime has killed at least 500 people and arrested 10,600 people, according to U.S.-based rights group Human Rights Activists in Iran. The number killed could be as high as 2,000, the Norway-based Iran Human Rights organization said Saturday.

Over the weekend, Iran's state-controlled media aired videos showing mass casualties wrapped in black bags in and outside a morgue. The "majority of them are ordinary people, and their families are ordinary people as well," state media said. It has been difficult for independent sources to verify the numbers, as the internet is down in Iran and phone lines have been cut off.

The unrest began in late December after Iran's currency collapsed, triggering a wave of anger that soon morphed into wider protests against the Islamic regime. Iran's official currency, the rial, has lost half of its value over the past year and fell to a record low of 1 million rials per U.S. dollar last month.

Many protesters are calling for Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of Iran's last shah, to lead the country. Over the weekend, Pahlavi said he stands ready to return to Iran "at the first possible opportunity" should Khamenei be overthrown.

Trump weighs military options alongside tariffs

Trump has previously warned that the U.S. could intervene if Iran's government uses violence against the protesters. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Monday that potential airstrikes and diplomacy were among the options Trump was considering.

"I think one thing President Trump is very good at is always keeping all of his options on the table," Leavitt said. "Airstrikes would be one of the many, many options that are on the table for the commander in chief. Diplomacy is always the first option for the president."

A senior U.S. official told CBS News on Sunday that Trump had been briefed on "new options" for military strikes in Iran, including nonmilitary sites.

"We're looking at it very seriously. The military is looking at it, and we're looking at some very strong options," Trump told reporters on Air Force One late Sunday. "I'm getting an hourly report and we're going to make a determination."

Trump told reporters Sunday that Iran was starting to cross the "red line" in how the country's leadership cracked down on the protests.

"We may have to act before a meeting. ... There seem to be some people killed that aren't supposed to be killed," the president said. "They rule through violence."

Iran says it's ready for war but open to talks

Iran's top diplomat said earlier Monday that his country isn't looking for conflict but is "prepared for war."

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, speaking at an ambassador conference in Tehran, said his country is "even more prepared than the previous war," referring to Iran's 12-day war against Israel in June, which severely damaged the Islamic republic's defense and nuclear infrastructure.

However, he said Iran is open to negotiations with the U.S. and is hoping for a peaceful solution to ongoing tensions.

"We are also ready for negotiations, but negotiations that are fair, with equal rights and mutual respect," Araghchi said.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said Tehran had never left the negotiating table but would not engage in "one-sided negotiations." Baghaei added that communication channels between Araghchi and White House Special Envoy Steve Witkoff remain open.

"The leaders of Iran called," Trump told reporters Sunday, adding that "a meeting is being set up... They want to negotiate."

Iran has warned the U.S. and Israel against any intervention, and President Masoud Pezeshkian is directly blaming both countries for the unrest. Tehran and Washington have not had formal diplomatic ties for decades.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Syria-Israel Peace Talks Resume In Paris

• South Korea & China Pledge To Enhance Ties During Summit In Beijing

• Maduro Pleads Not Guilty On Federal Charges In NYC

Syria-Israel Peace Talks Resume In Paris

Syrian President al-Sharaa (R) meets with US envoy Tom Barrack (2nd L) in Damascus, October 2025. Syrian Presidency - Anadolu)

_{By: Atlas}

Officials from Syria and Israel resumed U.S.-mediated negotiations in Paris on Monday, marking the first high-level talks between the two countries in nearly two months as Damascus seeks the withdrawal of Israeli forces from territory seized after the fall of Bashar al-Assad.

Syria's state news agency SANA reported that the Syrian delegation was led by Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shibani and intelligence chief Hussein al-Salama. The discussions are the fifth round in an ongoing diplomatic track and represent a renewed push by Damascus to reclaim what it describes as non-negotiable national rights.

A French diplomat confirmed to the Associated Press that the Syria-Israel talks would take place in Paris, with the United States mediating. France's foreign minister was also meeting Monday evening with his Syrian counterpart.

The resumption of talks came at the direct request of President Donald Trump during his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Mar-a-Lago last week, according to Axios, which first reported the planned Paris session.

Core issues and demands

Syria is seeking the reactivation of a 1974 disengagement agreement that established a U.N.-monitored buffer zone between Israel and Syria after the 1973 Middle East war.

A Syrian government source told SANA that Damascus is demanding "the withdrawal of Israeli forces to the lines prior to Dec. 8, 2024, within the framework of a reciprocal security agreement that prioritizes full Syrian sovereignty and guarantees the prevention of any form of interference in the country's internal affairs."

Israeli troops advanced deeper across the border after Assad was toppled on December 8, 2024, by rebel fighters who assumed Syria's leadership. Israel declared the 1974 disengagement agreement void following Assad's flight, saying the accord no longer applies.

Israel has said its presence is temporary to clear out pro-Assad remnants and militants in order to protect Israel from attacks. But it has given no indication its forces would leave anytime soon.

A Syrian official told Reuters last month that talks had been stalled since October, but that Syria expected a possible shift following the December 29 meeting between Trump and Netanyahu.

"We're not going to legitimize an Israeli presence in Syria or the Golan Heights for that matter," the official said.

Israeli proposals and negotiating positions

Axios reported that Israel has proposed establishing buffer security zones southwest of Damascus and imposing a no-fly zone on Syrian aircraft near the border, in exchange for an Israeli withdrawal from most territory it recently entered.

The report said Israel would retain what it described as a strategic presence in specific locations, including Mount Hermon.

Israel is also pressing Damascus to prevent a Turkish military buildup in Syria. Israeli officials argue that allowing Turkey to deploy aircraft or radar systems in Syria would effectively turn the country into a forward base for Ankara and create a major security challenge.

Another Israeli demand involves secure passage from the border to the Druze Mountain region, as part of guarantees for the safety of the Druze community. Such a corridor would extend roughly 100 kilometers into Syrian territory, a condition Syria is unlikely to accept, according to Ynet.

Netanyahu said after his meeting with Trump that it is in Israel's interest to have a peaceful border with Syria.

"We want to make sure the border next to us is secure, without terrorists, and to guarantee the safety of Druze and Christians there and across the Middle East," Netanyahu said.

New Israeli delegation

Ahead of the Paris meeting, Netanyahu appointed a new negotiating team after the resignation of Israel's previous top negotiator, Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer.

The Israeli delegation includes Ambassador to Washington Yechiel Leiter, Netanyahu's military adviser General Roman Gofman, who has been nominated to lead the Mossad spy agency, and acting National Security Council head Gil Reich.

Netanyahu decided there would be no single head of delegation, with Gofman handling security issues, Leiter overseeing ties with the United States and Reich responsible for diplomatic coordination, according to Ynet.

U.S. envoy Tom Barrack is mediating the talks. A spokesperson for Barrack declined to comment.

Analysts skeptical of breakthrough

Not all experts are optimistic about the prospects for a deal.

Eyal Zisser, a professor and specialist on Syria and Lebanon, said that while dialogue is preferable to escalation, he doubts Israel currently has a clear policy or genuine desire to reach an agreement.

"There are too many contradictory voices," Zisser said, pointing to calls within Israel to eliminate al-Sharaa, proposals to dismantle Syria and grant autonomy to minorities, and a security establishment that believes continued military presence and strikes are the only way to ensure calm.

Zisser said the gaps remain deep, particularly over Israeli withdrawal, the status of the Druze community and the demand to demilitarize southern Syria.

"If the talks reach a dead end, the United States may try to bridge the gaps," he said. "But at this stage, it appears the sides are talking largely because Washington wants them to. It may well continue without producing results."

Lim Eul-chul, a professor at the Institute for Far Eastern Studies in Seoul, told Al Jazeera the talks represent "a message to deter closer ties" while both sides assess their positions.

Syrian officials, including al-Sharaa and al-Shibani, have repeatedly voiced frustration over Israeli strikes and its presence inside Syria. Speaking at the Doha Forum in early December, al-Sharaa accused Israel of exporting its crises abroad to deflect from the war in Gaza.

He claimed Syria had been subjected to more than 1,000 airstrikes and 400 incursions since its "liberation," and said Damascus was working with influential countries to pressure Israel to withdraw from territory it entered after December 8, 2024.

Over the past year, Israel has launched more than 600 air, drone and artillery attacks across Syria, averaging nearly two attacks a day, according to the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project.

Trump said after his meeting with Netanyahu that he was confident the Israeli prime minister and Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa could reach an understanding.

"We do have an understanding regarding Syria. I'm sure that Israel and al-Sharaa will get along. I will try and make it so that they do get along, I think they will," Trump said.

Syria does not formally recognize Israel and has no interest in joining Trump's Abraham Accords, under which several Arab nations have normalized relations with Israel. Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights is recognized by Washington but rejected by the vast majority of the international community.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• U.S. Military Hit Venezuela Drug Facility ‘Very Hard’ Per President Trump

• Trump Threatens More Strikes Against Iran If Nuclear Program Is Rebuilt

• President Trump Becomes First Non-Israeli To Receive ‘Israel Prize’

U.S. Military Hit Venezuela Drug Facility ‘Very Hard’ Per President Trump

President Donald Trump on Dec. 29th 2025 at his Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida. (Joe Raedle - Getty Images)

_{By: Atlas}

President Donald Trump said Monday that the United States had struck and destroyed a dock facility in Venezuela where he alleged boats were loaded with drugs, marking what would be the first publicly acknowledged land-based U.S. operation inside the country since Washington launched its pressure campaign against the Maduro government four months ago.

Trump made the comments while meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida.

"There was a major explosion in the dock area where they load the boats up with drugs," Trump told reporters. "They load the boats up with drugs, so we hit all the boats, and now we hit the area. It's the implementation area. That's where they implement. And that is no longer around."

The president first referenced the strike during a Friday radio interview with WABC host John Catsimatidis, saying, "I don't know if you read or saw, they have a big plant or a big facility where they send the, you know, where the ships come from. Two nights ago, we knocked that out. So, we hit them very hard."

Trump declined to specify whether the U.S. military or the CIA carried out the operation, or exactly where it occurred.

"I know exactly who it was, but I don't want to say who it was. But you know it was along the shore," Trump said.

Few official details released

The Pentagon on Monday referred questions about the strike to the White House, which did not immediately respond to requests for additional information. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and U.S. military social media accounts have typically announced each boat strike in posts on X, but no such notification has been issued regarding any attack on a land facility.

American officials told The New York Times that the president was referring to a drug facility that had been eliminated. However, the operation has not been officially confirmed by U.S. defense officials, and the White House has issued no formal statement.

The press office of Venezuela's government did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Trump's claims.

In October, Trump confirmed he had authorized the CIA to conduct covert operations in Venezuela. The agency did not respond to requests for comment Monday.

Possible site identified in western Venezuela

While Venezuelan state-controlled media have not reported any U.S. attack, social media users in western Venezuela circulated images and videos over the weekend showing a large fire at what appeared to be a warehouse near the city of Maracaibo.

According to local reports, the blaze erupted early Tuesday morning at the Primazol facility in the city of San Francisco, in Zulia state, approximately 700 kilometers west of Caracas and near Lake Maracaibo, one of the largest bodies of water in South America.

Local authorities rejected any connection to foreign military action. Mayor Héctor Soto, a political ally of President Nicolás Maduro, told local media the fire was caused by an electrical failure. He said no one was injured and dismissed suggestions that the incident was linked to an external attack.

"Let the Americans — the gringos, in this case Donald Trump and all his people — continue to dream," Soto said. "We will defend the homeland of Bolívar."

Primazol dismissed in a statement unofficial reports linking the fire to Trump's statements, calling it an "incident." The cause of the blaze has not been independently verified.

Escalation of pressure campaign

The alleged strike represents a significant escalation in Washington's confrontation with Venezuela. For months, Trump has suggested he may conduct land strikes in South America, and in recent weeks has said the U.S. would move beyond striking boats and would strike on land "soon."

Since early September, the U.S. military has carried out at least 30 strikes against boats accused of smuggling drugs in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, killing at least 107 people, according to numbers announced by the Trump administration. Defense Secretary Hegseth announced Monday that U.S. forces had conducted another strike in the eastern Pacific, killing two additional people described as "male narco-terrorists."

The strikes have been widely criticized by human rights organizations and legal scholars as extrajudicial killings. Several groups have accused the United States of violating both domestic and international law. The administration has rejected those characterizations, insisting all actions comply with international law and are conducted in self-defense.

Along with the strikes, the U.S. has sent warships to the region, including the aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford and several guided-missile destroyers. More than 15,000 troops have been deployed as part of what officials describe as one of the largest U.S. military buildups in the Caribbean in decades.

The administration has also seized two oil tankers and pursued a third as part of a blockade Trump ordered on sanctioned vessels entering and leaving Venezuela.

Administration frames campaign as war on cartels

The Trump administration has said it is in "armed conflict" with drug cartels and seeking to stop the flow of narcotics into the United States. Officials have accused Maduro and senior Venezuelan officials of leading what they call the "Cartel of the Suns," a network of military and political figures allegedly involved in large-scale cocaine trafficking.

U.S. authorities have offered a reward of up to $50 million for information leading to Maduro's arrest on charges including narco-terrorism and conspiracy. The administration has designated the Venezuelan government a "foreign terrorist organization."

Trump said Monday that he had spoken "very recently" with Maduro by phone but characterized the conversation as unproductive. "Not much came of it," he said.

Maduro has insisted the real purpose of the U.S. military operations is to force him from power and seize control of Venezuela's oil reserves, which are the world's largest. Venezuelan officials say the country is the victim of an international disinformation campaign aimed at undermining its sovereignty.

White House chief of staff Susie Wiles said in an interview with Vanity Fair published this month that Trump "wants to keep on blowing boats up until Maduro 'cries uncle.'"

Venezuela produces roughly 1 million barrels of oil per day. The Trump administration has argued that oil revenues are being funneled into drug trafficking, corruption and the financing of armed groups.

"The illegitimate Maduro Regime is using Oil from these stolen Oil Fields to finance themselves, Drug Terrorism, Human Trafficking, Murder, and Kidnapping," Trump wrote on social media earlier this month.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Trump Unveils ‘Golden Fleet’

• Pakistan To Sell $4 Billion In Arms To Libyan Forces

• Russian General Assassinated In Moscow

Trump Unveils ‘Golden Fleet’

Trump unveiling a new battleship class on December 22nd 2025. (Jessica Koscielniak - Reuters)

_{By: Atlas}

Trump unveils 'Golden Fleet' initiative with new battleship class bearing his name

President Donald Trump announced Monday that the Navy will begin construction on a new class of battleships named after himself, marking the first such vessels since World War II and the centerpiece of what the administration has dubbed the "Golden Fleet."

Speaking at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, Trump said the new warships would be "the fastest, the biggest, and by far 100 times more powerful than any battleship ever built." He was flanked by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Navy Secretary John Phelan and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

The first vessel in the Trump-class line will be named the USS Defiant. Trump said construction on two ships will begin "immediately," with plans to eventually build between 20 and 25.

"We haven't built a battleship since 1994," Trump said. "These cutting-edge vessels will be some of the most lethal surface warfare ships... other than our submarines."

According to the president, the new battleships will weigh between 30,000 and 40,000 tons, considerably larger than the Navy's current fleet of destroyers. They will be equipped with hypersonic missiles, electromagnetic rail guns, high-powered lasers and nuclear-capable sea-launched cruise missiles.

Breaking with Navy tradition

The announcement represents a significant departure from the Navy's longstanding ship-naming conventions. Aircraft carriers are traditionally named after presidents, while battleships have historically been named after states.

The Iowa-class battleships of World War II were the last true battleships built by the United States, displacing roughly 60,000 tons. The USS Missouri, the final ship of that class to see active service, was decommissioned in 1992 and converted into a museum at Pearl Harbor.

Trump indicated he will play a personal role in the design process.

"The U.S. Navy will lead the design of these ships along with me, because I'm a very aesthetic person," he said.

The president has long held strong opinions about the appearance and capabilities of Navy vessels. During his first term, he unsuccessfully called for a return to steam-powered catapults on aircraft carriers instead of the electromagnetic systems used on the Gerald R. Ford class. He has also complained about rust on Navy ships, with Phelan telling senators at his confirmation hearing that Trump "has texted me numerous times very late at night, sometimes after one o'clock in the morning" about the issue.

Technical challenges and questions

The Navy has struggled to field several of the technologies Trump says will equip the new battleships.

The service spent hundreds of millions of dollars and more than 15 years attempting to deploy electromagnetic rail guns aboard ships before abandoning the effort in 2021. Laser systems have seen more success in recent years, but deployment remains limited. One system designed to blind or disable drone sensors is now aboard eight destroyers after eight years in development.

Developing nuclear cruise missile capabilities or deploying them on ships may also raise questions under non-proliferation treaties the United States has signed with Russia.

A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss ongoing plans, told the Associated Press that design efforts are underway and construction is planned to begin in the early 2030s. The Wall Street Journal reported that the Navy plans to launch a competition to find a vendor and procure the first ship in 2030.

The announcement comes just weeks after the Navy scrapped its Constellation-class frigate program, citing growing delays and cost overruns. The service decided instead to pursue a modified version of the Coast Guard's Legend-class national security cutter.

Defense industry pressure

Trump said he plans to meet with major defense contractors in Florida next week to address production delays and cost overruns. He indicated the discussions would cover executive compensation, stock buybacks and dividends.

"We don't want to have executives making $50 million a year, issuing big dividends to everybody, and also doing buybacks" while production of F-35s and other aircraft languishes, Trump said.

Reuters reported last week that the administration was planning an executive order to limit dividends, buybacks and executive pay for defense contractors whose projects are over-budget and delayed.

"We're going to be discussing the pay to executives, where they're making $45 and $50 million a year and not being able to build quickly," Trump said. "They're going to make that kind of money. They have to build quickly."

The announcement follows Trump's signing of the fiscal year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act, which unlocks $26 billion in federal funds for shipbuilding, along with $17 billion for Navy aviation procurement and $5.8 billion for Navy weapons procurement.

Broader fleet expansion

The Trump-class battleships are part of a larger Golden Fleet concept that would pair these offensive vessels with smaller unmanned ships and corvettes.

Last week, Phelan announced plans for a separate new class of frigates based on a proven Coast Guard design. The Navy expects the first ship of that class to be in the water by 2028.

"This new class, these new investments, will be the types of things that for decades, for centuries, the American people will look back and thank President Trump for having the vision and the willingness to invest right now in capabilities we need today, tomorrow, and long into the future," Hegseth said.

Phelan described the new battleship as the "largest, deadliest, most versatile, and best looking warship anywhere on the world's oceans." He said the vessels would carry "the biggest guns of our era" designed not to "swat the arrows" from the sky but to "reach out" and eliminate threats at their source.

When asked whether China was the intended adversary for the new ships, Trump said no, citing his relationship with Chinese leader Xi Jinping. He described the expansion as "a counter to everybody."

The Golden Fleet branding aligns with Trump's inauguration-day pledge to usher in a new "Golden Age" for the country. He has similarly branded a new missile defense initiative the "Golden Dome" and redecorated the Oval Office and Cabinet Room with gilded touches.

According to a newly created government website for the Golden Fleet, the new guided missile battleship is designed to carry crews of between 650 and 850 sailors, significantly smaller than the roughly 1,900 required for World War II-era battleships.

Trump said Monday that construction would rely heavily on "robotic factories" alongside traditional workforce, though he emphasized that human workers would still be necessary to operate and improve the automated systems.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Hong Kong Media Mogul Convicted By CCP For Speech Violations, Faces Life In Prison

• Trinidad & Tobago Establish Deeper Ties With The U.S. Military Amidst Deeper Tensions With Venezuela

• Trump Sues The BBC For $10 Billion Dollars

Hong Kong Media Mogul Convicted By CCP For Speech Violations, Faces Life In Prison

Jimmy Lai, newspaper founder, at the Court of Final Appeal ahead a bail hearing in Hong Kong, on Feb. 9, 2021. (Anthony Kwan - Getty Images)

_{By: Atlas}

A Hong Kong court on Monday found Jimmy Lai guilty of sedition and colluding with foreign forces, convicting the 78-year-old newspaper founder on all three charges in a landmark national security trial that has drawn condemnation from Western governments and press freedom advocates.

The verdict, delivered in an 855-page ruling by three government-approved judges, could send the former media mogul to prison for the rest of his life. Two of the charges—conspiracy to collude with foreign forces under Beijing's national security law—carry sentences of up to life imprisonment. A sentencing hearing is scheduled for January 12.

Lai, a British citizen and founder of the now-shuttered Apple Daily newspaper, has been detained since December 2020. He has spent more than 1,800 days in custody, almost all of it in solitary confinement, according to his family and legal team.

Prosecutors alleged Lai used Apple Daily to call for sanctions against Hong Kong and Chinese officials as punishment for cracking down on pro-democracy protests in 2019. They also accused him of funding international campaigns to garner support for such sanctions.

During his 156-day trial, which concluded in August, the court scrutinized Lai's social media posts, interviews and public remarks while probing his ties with political leaders from the United States, the United Kingdom and Taiwan. Prosecutors cited his connections with former Vice President Mike Pence and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo as evidence that Hong Kong's unrest was engineered by outsiders.

The court's reasoning

Judge Esther Toh said the court found Lai had "harbored his resentment and hatred" of the People's Republic of China for many years and never wavered in his intention to destabilize the ruling Chinese Communist Party.

Lai's advocacy for foreign sanctions against China constituted a criminal act that endangered national security, the court ruled. The judge said Lai continued his activities "in a less explicit way" even after the national security law took effect in June 2020.

"There is no doubt that [Lai] had harbored his resentment and hatred of the PRC for many of his adult years," Toh said in delivering the verdict.

Lai had pleaded not guilty to all charges. In testimony late last year, he described the idea that he had been advocating for Hong Kong's independence as "crazy." His defense attorney, Robert Pang, argued during closing arguments in August that it was "not wrong to try to persuade the government to change its policy. Nor is it wrong not to love a particular administration or even the country."

Six former Apple Daily executives testified as prosecution witnesses against Lai.

Health concerns and detention conditions

Lai's family has repeatedly raised concerns about his deteriorating health during his years in detention. His son Sebastien Lai told reporters in London on Monday that his father has lost approximately 10 kilograms—about 22 pounds—over the past year alone.

The elder Lai suffers from diabetes, high blood pressure and heart problems. His daughter Claire Lai said he is losing fingernails and has battled recurring infections, chronic back pain and inadequate medical care. His lawyers in September launched an urgent appeal to the United Nations, saying there was a risk to his life because of his continued detention.

The Hong Kong government has rejected the allegations, saying Lai has received appropriate treatment.

Sebastien Lai called the conviction a demonstration of how the national security law has been "molded and weaponized against someone who essentially said stuff that they didn't like."

"It's time to put action behind words, and make my father's release a precondition to closer relationships with China," he said.

International condemnation

The verdict drew swift criticism from Western governments and human rights organizations.

British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper said Lai had been targeted by Beijing and Hong Kong "for peacefully exercising his right to freedom of expression."

"The UK condemns the politically motivated prosecution of Jimmy Lai that has resulted in today's guilty verdict," Cooper said in a statement. "We continue to call for Mr. Lai's immediate release, for all necessary treatment and for full access to independent medical professionals."

The European Union called the prosecution "politically motivated and emblematic of the erosion of democracy and fundamental freedoms in Hong Kong since the imposition of the National Security Law in 2020."

The Committee to Protect Journalists called the ruling a "sham conviction" that "underscores Hong Kong's utter contempt for press freedom."

"Jimmy Lai's only crime is running a newspaper and defending democracy," said Beh Lih Yi, the group's Asia-Pacific director. "The risk of him dying from ill health in prison increases as each day passes—he must be reunited with his family immediately."

Reporters Without Borders described the conviction as "unlawful," saying it demonstrates "the alarming deterioration of media freedom in the territory."

"Make no mistake: it is not an individual who has been on trial—it is press freedom itself, and with this verdict that has been shattered," said Thibaut Bruttin, the group's director general.

The Congressional-Executive Commission on China said Lai "was found guilty simply for engaging in journalism and for his faith in democracy."

"It is another sad reminder that Hong Kong arbitrarily detains political prisoners at a rate like Venezuela or Burma," the commission said. "That Hong Kong once vaunted rule of law system is gone, is now undeniable."

Beijing and Hong Kong officials respond

Chinese foreign affairs spokesman Guo Jiakun said Beijing expressed "strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition" to attempts by foreign governments to criticize Hong Kong's judiciary.

"We urge the countries concerned to respect China's sovereignty and Hong Kong's rule of law, refrain from making irresponsible remarks on the adjudication of judicial cases in the special administrative region," Guo said at a briefing in Beijing.

The Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office called Lai a "lackey" and "pawn" for external forces who endangered China's national security.

"Jimmy Lai is the main planner and participant in a series of incidents that are anti-China and aim to destabilize Hong Kong," the office said in a statement. "His actions seriously undermined the 'one country, two systems' principle, endangered national security and damaged Hong Kong's prosperity, stability and the well-being of its residents."

Hong Kong Security Secretary Chris Tang said the trial proved Lai had personally colluded with foreign forces and "clearly used journalism as a cover for behavior that would endanger national security."

"I must emphasize, this case involving Lai has absolutely no relation to freedom of the press," Tang said.

From stowaway to media mogul

Born in mainland China in 1948, Lai arrived in Hong Kong as a 12-year-old stowaway and later founded the clothing brand Giordano. He became politically active after the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, printing more than 200,000 T-shirts and banners in support of the pro-democracy demonstrators. Beijing subsequently pressured his business in mainland China.

Lai founded Apple Daily in 1995, two years before Britain returned Hong Kong to Chinese control. The tabloid-style newspaper became one of Hong Kong's most-read publications and was openly critical of the Chinese and Hong Kong governments.

In August 2020, two months after the national security law took effect, 200 police officers raided Apple Daily's headquarters and arrested Lai and several senior managers. The newspaper was forced to shut down within a year after authorities froze its assets and arrested top executives.

President Donald Trump raised Lai's case with Chinese President Xi Jinping during their meeting in October. Before his election in November 2024, Trump pledged to free Lai, telling a podcast host: "100 percent I'll get him out. He'll be easy to get out."

Trump said Monday he had asked Xi "to consider his release."

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in March that getting Lai out of prison was "a priority."

"We've raised it in every possible form and they know that it's important to us," Rubio said. "It's not something we've forgotten about."

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• Thailand-Cambodia Peace Deal Threatened Amidst Renewed Border Attacks

• China Tops $1 Trillion In Trade Surplus For First Time

• EU Tightens Migrant Return Policy, Plan For ‘Return Hubs’

Thailand-Cambodia Peace Deal Threatened Amidst Renewed Border Attacks

A wounded Thai soldier is carried to be transferred to a hospital in Sisaket province, Thailand, Sunday, Dec. 7, 2025 (Royal Thai Army)

_{By: Atlas}

Thailand sent F-16 fighter jets to bomb Cambodian military positions Monday morning after overnight clashes along the disputed border between the two countries. The attacks mark the collapse of a peace deal that President Donald Trump signed with both nations just six weeks ago.

One Thai soldier was killed. Four Cambodian civilians died. Hundreds of thousands of people on both sides packed belongings onto motorcycles, tractors and trucks and fled their homes.

"No more negotiations," Thai Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul said in a televised address. "Thailand has never initiated a fight or an invasion, but will never tolerate a violation of its sovereignty."

Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet responded on Facebook, urging citizens and armed forces to "unite for the cause of the nation and the homeland during this difficult period."

Both governments say the other side shot first.

Sunday's firefight set off the escalation

The trouble started Sunday evening in Thailand's Sisaket province. Thai and Cambodian troops exchanged rifle fire for about 20 minutes. Two Thai soldiers were wounded.

Thailand said Cambodia opened fire. Cambodia said Thailand did.

By 5 a.m. Monday, the situation had deteriorated badly. Fighting broke out in five locations along the frontier. Thai army spokesman Maj. Gen. Winthai Suvaree said Cambodian artillery struck near residential areas in Thai territory. He said Thailand called in air support to hit Cambodian military targets.

The Royal Thai Air Force said it deployed F-16s against three Cambodian artillery positions. Targets included a casino that Thai officials alleged Cambodia was using to launch bomb-carrying drones into Thailand's Ubon Ratchathani province.

"The ultimate goal is to destroy as many of Cambodia's supporting fire systems as possible," Suvaree said.

Cambodia's Defense Ministry spokeswoman Maly Socheata gave a different account. She said Thailand attacked first and Cambodian forces did not retaliate.

Hun Sen, Cambodia's influential former prime minister and father of the current leader, called Thai forces "aggressors" and urged his country's troops to show restraint. He warned that a "red line for responding has already been set" but did not elaborate.

Trump's peace deal is in tatters

Trump presided over the signing of a formal ceasefire agreement on October 26 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. He had pushed both countries to stop fighting after a five-day conflict in July killed at least 48 people and displaced some 300,000.

"We did something that a lot of people said couldn't be done," Trump said at the signing ceremony.

The deal never addressed the core problem: where the border actually runs. Thailand and Cambodia have fought over that question for more than a century. A 1907 map drawn by French colonial authorities forms the basis of modern claims, but Thailand has long argued the map is wrong. The International Court of Justice awarded Cambodia sovereignty over an area including the ancient Preah Vihear temple in 1962. Many Thais still resent that decision.

The October agreement was already wobbling before this week. In early November, four Thai soldiers stepped on land mines while patrolling the border zone. Thailand blamed Cambodia for planting fresh mines and suspended implementation of the peace deal. Cambodia denied responsibility.

Trump said in mid-November he had personally intervened to keep the ceasefire from falling apart.

It fell apart anyway.

Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, who helped broker the original deal, appealed for calm Monday.

"The renewed fighting risks unraveling the careful work that has gone into stabilizing relations between the two neighbors," Anwar said. "Our region cannot afford to see long-standing disputes slip into cycles of confrontation."

Civilians caught in the crossfire

The human cost mounted quickly. Thailand's Defense Ministry said more than 35,000 people had reached temporary shelters by Monday afternoon. Officials said they were evacuating over 385,000 civilians from four border districts.

Across the frontier, Cambodian authorities moved more than 1,100 families out of Oddar Meanchey province. Cambodia's information minister, Neth Pheaktra, said Thai fire killed four Cambodian civilians and wounded nine others.

Phichet Pholkoet, a resident of Thailand's Ban Kruat district near the border, told Reuters he heard gunfire starting early Monday morning.

"It startled me. The explosions were very clear. Boom boom!" he said by telephone. "Some are heavy artillery, some are small arms."

Nearly 650 schools in five Thai provinces shut down for safety. Villagers who stayed behind dug makeshift bunkers and cooked over open fires. Thai armored personnel carriers rolled toward coils of barbed wire along the border in Sakeo province.

Late Monday afternoon, Thailand's Second Army Region issued a public warning: Cambodia was expected to attack again overnight using BM-21 multiple rocket launchers capable of hitting targets 30 kilometers inside Thai territory.

Thailand holds the military edge

The two countries are not evenly matched. Thailand spent $5.73 billion on defense in 2024 and fields more than 360,000 active troops. Its air force operates 28 F-16s and 11 Swedish Gripen jets.

Cambodia's defense budget was $1.3 billion. Its air force has no fighter aircraft—just 16 helicopters.

Thailand is a major non-NATO ally of the United States. Cambodia is one of China's closest partners in Southeast Asia.

That imbalance shapes the conflict. Thailand can strike from the air. Cambodia cannot. But Phnom Penh has options on the ground, including the rocket launchers Thailand warned about Monday evening.

The last major armed clash between the neighbors occurred in 2011, when artillery exchanges lasted a week. Cross-border airstrikes of the kind Thailand launched Monday are rare anywhere in Southeast Asia.

Amnesty International's regional research director, Montse Ferrer, called on both governments to protect civilians.

"The resumption of hostilities around the Thailand/Cambodia border risks civilian lives, mass displacement and the destruction of essential civilian infrastructure," Ferrer said.

Neither side showed signs of backing down as of Monday night.

Good morning everyone,

This is Atlas, and you’re reading the Bottom Line Up Front, where we cover the top geopolitical stories from around the world every Tuesday!

Today’s topics:

• White House: Follow Up Strike On Drug Trafficking Vessel Is Lawful

• Russia Claims Victory In Crucial City Of Pokrovsk

• Canada To Accelerate Defense Spending

White House: Follow Up Strike On Drug Trafficking Vessel Is Lawful

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Monday, Dec. 1, 2025, in Washington. (Evan Vucci - AP)

_{By: Atlas}

The White House said Monday that a Navy admiral acted "within his authority and the law" when he ordered a follow-up strike on an alleged drug-trafficking vessel in the Caribbean Sea on September 2. The statement came as bipartisan lawmakers announced support for congressional investigations into the incident.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had authorized Admiral Frank M. "Mitch" Bradley, then commander of Joint Special Operations Command and now head of U.S. Special Operations Command, to conduct the strikes.

"Secretary Hegseth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes," Leavitt said. "Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the law directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated."

The administration's defense followed a Washington Post report published Friday stating that Hegseth had issued a verbal directive for the September operation: "The order was to kill everybody," the paper reported. According to the Post, U.S. surveillance spotted two survivors clinging to the burning vessel after the first strike. A second strike was then carried out.

Leavitt did not dispute that survivors remained after the initial attack. She said the operation was conducted "in self defense to protect Americans and vital United States interests," took place in international waters, and complied with the law of armed conflict.

Trump distances himself from second strike

President Donald Trump said Sunday that he "wouldn't have wanted that—not a second strike" when asked about the incident. He added that Hegseth denied ordering the deaths of the two men and that he believed him.

"Pete said he did not order the death of those two men," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One. "And I believe him, 100%."

The president said the administration would "look into" the issue. He met Monday evening with his national security team to discuss ongoing operations and potential next steps against Venezuela.

Trump this year designated Venezuelan drug traffickers as narco-terrorists subject to lethal force, resulting in a series of deadly strikes on boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. The administration has disclosed 21 strikes that have killed at least 83 people.

Hegseth responded to the Post's report on social media Friday, calling it "fake news" and "fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting to discredit our incredible warriors fighting to protect the homeland."

On Monday, Hegseth posted his support for Bradley. "Let's make one thing crystal clear: Admiral Mitch Bradley is an American hero, a true professional, and has my 100% support," Hegseth wrote on X. "I stand by him and the combat decisions he has made—on the September 2 mission and all others since."

Bipartisan calls for investigation

Lawmakers from both parties have said the reports warrant scrutiny. The Armed Services Committees in the House and Senate opened formal inquiries over the weekend.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker, a Republican, pledged that his investigation would be "done by the numbers."

"We'll find out the ground truth," Wicker said, adding that the ramifications of the report were "serious charges."

Senator Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the panel, called for the administration to release unredacted video of the strike. "If they've done nothing wrong, then that video should exonerate them completely. Why don't they release it?" he said.

Representative Mike Turner stated that if the reported second strike occurred as described, it would constitute an illegal act.

Some lawmakers went further. Senator Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, told ABC News on Sunday, "I think it's very possible there was a war crime committed." He added that if the administration's legal theory of armed conflict with drug gangs is wrong, "then it's plain murder."

Former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Monday he doesn't "think there's any question" the second U.S. strike was a war crime, according to The Hill.

The U.N. human rights chief, Volker Türk, has called on the U.S. to review the legality of the strikes, stating there is "strong evidence" that the second hit amounted to an extrajudicial killing.

Military personnel raise concerns

The controversy has prompted an uptick in calls to the Orders Project, which provides free legal advice to military personnel, according to Frank Rosenblatt, president of the National Institute of Military Justice.

Rosenblatt told The Hill that calls to the organization were "generally very low until three months ago," when the Trump administration began targeting alleged drug-carrying boats. He described concerns from staff officers and others involved in planning and executing the strikes.

"We had one issue of a person who is going to an upcoming assignment, and wanted to know what their options were, because they thought they may be involved in some of these strikes where the legal basis right now is at best contested," Rosenblatt said. "This person had questions, saying, 'I don't want to be doing something that is illegal, that I could get in trouble for later.'"

Rosenblatt also referenced a staff officer who had been asked to apply expertise to a document designating the individuals being targeted as enemies, which would allow the U.S. to attack under the rules of war. The officer applied their expertise and determined the document did not meet standards. Rosenblatt said the individual felt pressured by senior political appointees afterward.

A classified Justice Department memo from this summer reportedly argued that U.S. troops involved in the strikes would not face legal jeopardy. But Rosenblatt said the existence of such a memo has raised additional concerns among service members.

"No one ever came down and said, 'You're immunized for any potential crimes you commit,'" Rosenblatt said of prior operations during the global war on terror. "So now to have this immunity as part of the discussion really tends to chill people and make them ask, 'What the heck's going on? What is it that I might be asked to do?'"

Venezuela responds

Venezuela's National Assembly announced the launch of an investigation into the lethal strikes carried out by the U.S. Jorge Rodríguez, the Assembly's president and chief negotiator for the Maduro government, said a group of lawmakers would investigate "the serious events that led to the murder of Venezuelans in the waters of the Caribbean Sea."

The announcement marked the first time a Maduro government official explicitly acknowledged that Venezuelans have been killed in the monthslong U.S. military operation.

Trump confirmed Sunday that he had recently spoken by phone with Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro but declined to detail the conversation. The U.S. considers Maduro an illegitimate leader. Maduro has denied links to the illegal drug trade.

Speaking to supporters in Caracas on Monday, Maduro said U.S. pressure has "tested" the country but that Venezuelans are ready "to defend it and lead it to the path of peace."