The US State Department on Thursday accused a Chinese firm, Chang Guang Satellite Technology, of directly supporting attacks on US interests by Iran-backed Houthi fighters and called this “unacceptable”.
Earlier, the Financial Times cited US officials as saying that the satellite company, linked to China’s military, was supplying Houthi rebels with imagery to target U.S. warships and international vessels in the Red Sea.
“We can confirm the reporting that Chang Guang Satellite Technology Company Limited is directly supporting Iran-backed Houthi terrorist attacks on U.S. interests,” State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce told a regular news briefing.
“China consistently attempts … to frame itself as a global peacemaker … however, it is clear that Beijing and China-based companies provide key economic and technical support to regimes like Russia, North Korea and Iran and its proxies,” she said.
Bruce said the assistance by the firm to the Houthis had continued even though the United States had engaged with Beijing on the issue. “The fact that they continue to do this is unacceptable,” she said.
The spokesperson for China’s Washington embassy, Liu Pengyu, said he was not familiar with the situation, so had no comment. The firm did not immediately respond to a request for comment. China is Washington’s main strategic rival and the latest charge comes as the two economic and military superpowers are in a major standoff over trade in which U.S. President Donald Trump has dramatically ramped up tariffs on Chinese goods.
Prominent Trump supporter Erik Prince has agreed to help Democratic Republic of Congo secure and tax its vast mineral wealth, according to two sources close to the private security executive, a Congolese government official and two diplomats.
The agreement, aimed at reaping more revenue from an industry marred by smuggling and corruption, was reached before Rwanda-backed M23 rebels launched a major offensive in January that has seen them seize eastern Congo’s two largest cities.
The discussions now on implementing the deal with Prince come as the US and Congo explore a broader deal on critical minerals partnerships, after Congo pitched a minerals-for-security deal to US President Donald Trump’s administration.
Prince, a former US Navy Seal, founded Blackwater before renaming the private military company and selling it in 2010 after several employees were indicted on charges of unlawfully killing Iraqi civilians. The men were convicted but later pardoned by Trump during his first term.
The Trump administration has not said how the US might contribute to security in Congo as part of any minerals deal. Analysts and former US officials have said leaning on security contractors such as Prince could be an option.
A Congolese government source told Reuters that any agreement between Congo and Prince would need to be reviewed in light of the push for a deal with the US.
The security deal was agreed with the finance ministry, and Prince’s advisers will focus on improving tax collection and reducing cross-border smuggling of minerals, the two sources close to Prince said. There were no plans to deploy security contractors to areas of active conflict, the sources said.
Prince declined to comment through a spokesperson. The Congo presidency did not respond to a request for comment. The US State Department declined to comment.
Initial focus on copper mines, source says
The DRC has vast reserves of copper, cobalt, lithium and coltan – a mineral used widely in smartphones, computers and electric vehicles – but has been plagued for decades by violence in its eastern region.
The agreement between Congo and Prince initially involved a plan to deploy contractors to Goma, the capital of North Kivu province and the largest city in eastern Congo. But Goma is now under M23 control and that plan has been put on hold. M23 controls tracts of mineral-rich territory.
A source close to the Congolese government told Reuters an initial deployment of Prince’s advisers was expected to start in the south, far from the area controlled by M23 and its allies.
“If you just look at Katanga, if you look at Kolwezi down just off the Zambian-Congo border, they claim that there’s like $40 million a month in lost revenue of what’s going out and what’s coming in,” the source said.
A diplomatic source also told Reuters the first stage of Prince’s effort in Congo would focus on securing mines and tax revenues in copper-producing Katanga province.
One of the sources close to Prince said advisers were expected to deploy with technical experts from a company specialised in testing and inspecting commodities. The advisers would initially target larger mines and expand as revenue collection improved.
The source did not provide details on how the advisers would tackle corruption in the sector that has long drained revenue that would otherwise flow to the state.
A source in the office of Congolese President Felix Tshisekedi said an agreement in principle had been signed with Prince, but the details on where and how many advisers would be deployed remained to be established.
Prince’s work in Africa
Prince has worked in Africa for over a decade, initially providing logistics for oil and mining companies working in remote corners of the continent.
A number of Prince-controlled companies have operatedin Congo since 2015. They have been involved in trucking and have also sought to get involved in the minerals sector.
The two sources close to Prince said the new agreement followed years of talks over how to improve Congo’s control over its mineral resources.
Prince previously proposed sending thousands of contractors to the eastern region during talks with Kinshasa in 2023, a UN expert panel reported that year. Those discussions did not ultimately lead to a deal.
Congo has long accused Rwanda of plundering minerals from the region, a claim supported by independent entities including the United Nations and the non-profit Global Witness. Rwanda denies that.
That loss of mining revenue is one of the key concerns that Prince’s team will seek to address, one of the sources close to Prince said.
The goal is to ensure “that extraction industries and others are operating transparently, and that their production and revenues is properly distributed in accordance with the Congolese mining code”, the source said.
United Nations and Western governments say Rwanda has provided arms and troops to the M23.
Rwanda has denied backing M23. It says its military has acted in self-defence against Congo’s army and a Rwandan militia operating in east Congo that was founded by perpetrators of the Rwandan genocide.
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has accused US special envoy Steve Witkoff of “disseminating Russian narratives” after he appeared to suggest that a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine hinged on the status of five Ukrainian regions.
After holding a five-hour meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday, Witkoff told Fox News that a deal to end the war was “about these so-called five territories”.
“I think that Mr Witkoff has taken the strategy of the Russian side,” Zelensky told a Kyiv press conference on Thursday.
“I think it’s really dangerous, because consciously or unconsciously he is disseminating Russian narratives”.
Witkoff appeared to be referring to the Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions in eastern Ukraine, much of which are under Russian military occupation after Vladimir Putin launched a full-scale invasion in 2022 with the aim of taking control of the whole country.
The fifth region is believed to be Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014 in a move not recognised internationally.
“The territories are ours, they belong to our people and not only us but the future Ukrainian people… So I don’t understand what he’s talking about,” said Zelensky.
In his interview with Fox News, Witkoff said: “This peace deal is about these so-called five territories. But there’s so much more to it… I think we might be on the verge of something that would be very important for the world at large.”
“On top of that, I believe there’s a possibility to reshape the Russian-United States relationship through some very compelling commercial opportunities that I think give real stability to the region too,” he added.
The US and Russia have been holding talks aimed at restoring diplomatic relations.
Zelensky’s intervention is not the first time he has criticised Witkoff.
In March, he said: “He doesn’t look like a military man. He doesn’t look like a general, and he doesn’t have such experience. As far as I know, he is very good at selling and buying real estate. And this is a little different.”
The Ukrainian leader’s comments came after top US, Ukrainian and European diplomats met in Paris to discuss the war – a group that included Witkoff and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Meanwhile Donald Trump renewed his own criticisms of Zelensky on Thursday. He appeared to row back on earlier comments accusing the Ukrainian leader of starting the war but said he was “not a big fan”.
“I don’t hold Zelensky responsible but I’m not exactly thrilled with the fact that that war started,” Trump said.
“I’m not blaming him, but what I am saying is that I wouldn’t say he’s done the greatest job, OK? I am not a big fan.”
Zelensky also told journalists that he had “information” China was supplying weapons to Russia.
“We have finally received information that China is supplying weapons to the Russian Federation,” he said.
“We believe that Chinese representatives are engaged in the production of some weapons on Russian territory,” he added.
China has not yet responded but has previously portrayed itself as a neutral party in the war.
Beijing did respond to an assertion last week by Zelensky that Chinese nationals were fighting for Russia by advising “relevant parties to correctly and soberly understand China’s role and not to make irresponsible remarks”.
The Trump administration is considering shutting down at least 30 embassies and consulates worldwide.
An internal State Department document notes a sweeping plan to shut 10 embassies and 17 consulates, with Africa and Europe bearing the brunt.
The closures are part of a broader campaign spearheaded by the Elon Musk-backed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), to slash the State Department’s budget nearly in half—from Sh7.07 trillion to Sh3.60 trillion next year.
Among the countries hardest hit is South Sudan, which has recently emerged from civil war and remains dependent on international partnerships.
The US embassy in Juba, listed for closure, is one of six African embassies set to be shut, along with those in the Republic of Congo, Eritrea, Lesotho, the Central African Republic, and The Gambia.
Five US consulates in France—located in popular tourist and cultural hubs like Bordeaux, Marseille, and Lyon—are also set to close. Others in Germany, Italy, Greece, Portugal, and the UK could follow.
The planned restructuring includes consolidating larger missions in Japan and Canada, replacing full embassies with “FLEX-style” light posts, and combining leadership roles across missions.
Programs like Fulbright, which support cultural exchange and education, are also set to be eliminated entirely.
So far, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has not publicly endorsed the closures, and State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce declined to comment directly on the leaked document. “I would suggest that you check with the White House,” she said.
Embassies and consulates are eyes and ears for the US in regions critical to counterterrorism, economic diplomacy, and humanitarian aid.
However, critics worry that such cost-cutting may come at the expense of security and strategy.
“If we shut the doors to scholars and diplomats, we are shutting the door to the next generation of global cooperation,” said a Fulbright alumni advisor. “It’s heartbreaking.”
They warn that the human and geopolitical costs may be too steep since they will be closing off relationships, intelligence channels, and trust.
US President Donald Trump’s administration has exempted smartphones and computers from reciprocal tariffs, including the 125% levies imposed on Chinese imports.
US Customs and Border Patrol published a notice late on Friday explaining the goods would be excluded from Trump’s 10% global tariff on most countries and the much larger Chinese import tax.
The move comes after concerns from US tech companies that the price of gadgets could skyrocket, as many of them are made in China.
The exemptions also include other electronic devices and components, including semiconductors, solar cells and memory cards.
Some estimates suggested iPhone prices and other electronic goods in the US would have gone up three times if the costs of the tariffs had been passed on to consumers.
The US is a major market for iPhones, while Apple accounted for more than half of its smartphones sales last year, according to Counterpoint Research.
It says as much as 80% of Apple’s iPhones intended for US sale are made in China, with the remaining 20% made in India.
Along with fellow smartphone giants such as Samsung, Apple has been trying to diversify its supply chains to avoid over-reliance on China in recent years.
India and Vietnam emerged as frontrunners for additional manufacturing hubs.
As tariffs took effect, Apple reportedly looked to speed up and increase its production of India-produced devices in recent days.
Trump had planned a host of steep tariffs on countries around the world set to go into effect this week.
But on Wednesday, he quickly reversed course, announcing that he would implement a 90-day pause for countries hit by higher US tariffs – except China – whose tariffs he raised to 145%. Trump said the Chinese tariff increase was because of the country’s readiness to retaliate with its own 84% levy on US goods.
In a dramatic change of policy, Trump said all countries that had not retaliated against US tariffs would receive a reprieve – and only face a blanket US tariff of 10% – until July.
The White House then said the move was a negotiating tactic to extract more favourable trade terms from other countries.
Trump has said his import taxes will address unfairness in the global trading system, as well as bring jobs and factories back to American shores.
Michelle Obama has spoken out against rumours that her marriage to Barack Obama might be in trouble.
The former first lady has not accompanied her husband to several high-profile events – including Donald Trump’s inauguration and the funeral of former President Jimmy Carter – fuelling speculation that they might be separating.
Without explicitly mentioning these occasions, Ms Obama told the Work in Progress podcast hosted by actress Sophia Bush that she was now in a position to control her own calendar as a “grown woman”.
She said that people were not able to believe that she was “making a decision” for herself and instead “had to assume that my husband and I are divorcing”.
Ms Obama shared that she felt some guilt for stepping back from certain duties.
“That’s the thing that we as women, I think, we struggle with, like disappointing people,” she said.
“I mean, so much so that this year people couldn’t even fathom that I was making a choice for myself, that they had to assume that my husband and I are divorcing.
“This couldn’t be a grown woman just making a set of decisions for herself, right? But that’s what society does to us.”
Ms Obama also said in the podcast, “I chose to do what was best for me. Not what I had to do. Not what I thought other people wanted me to do.”
Her absence from President Trump’s inauguration was seen as a break from tradition.
Despite carving out more time for herself, the former first lady said she still finds time to “give speeches, to be out there in the world, to work on projects. I still care about girls’ education.”
The Obamas celebrated their 32nd anniversary last year in October.
Ms Obama has previously been open about the struggles she faced in her marriage due to Mr Obama’s political ambitions and time in the White House in her best-selling memoir, Becoming.
US tariffs on Chinese imports now total 145% after President Donald Trump dramatically increased import duties this week, a White House official confirmed Thursday.
Trump said Wednesday that Chinese imports would now be subject to a 125% reciprocal tariff, but that did not include a 20% tariff related to fentanyl that he had previously imposed earlier this year.
“When POTUS and we were talking about 125%, that only referred to the total reciprocal tariff. The fentanyl tariffs of 20% tack onto those,” a White House official told Anadolu, referring to Trump by an acronym.
Markets soared Wednesday as Trump granted dozens of nations a 90-day reprieve from tariffs above his 10% baseline that were supposed to go into effect that day. But fears that the US and China, the world’s top two economies, are slipping into an intensifying trade war brought markets lower Thursday.
The tech-heavy Nasdaq was down more than 4.6% while the Dow dipped over 3% in morning trading.
The US will begin screening social media activity of immigrants for “antisemitic” content as part of a new policy that could lead to visa or residency denials, US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced Wednesday.
Effective immediately, the screenings will apply to individuals applying for lawful permanent resident status, foreign students and those affiliated with educational institutions that US authorities say are linked to alleged antisemitic activity.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said the measure is to bolster national security and combat a growing threat from individuals who support “antisemitic” violence or “terrorist organizations”.
“There is no room in the United States for the rest of the world’s terrorist sympathizers, and we are under no obligation to admit them or let them stay here,” said DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin in a statement.
“Sec. (Kristi) Noem has made it clear that anyone who thinks they can come to America and hide behind the First Amendment to advocate for anti-Semitic violence and terrorism – think again. You are not welcome here.”
The department identified groups including Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, and Yemen’s Houthis as “antisemitic” terror organizations. Activity supporting those groups may trigger immigration consequences, it said.
The move follows a series of executive orders issued by President Donald Trump, including one aimed at combating antisemitism, which laid the groundwork for deporting foreign students engaged in pro-Palestinian campus protests.
It also comes amid a wider crackdown by the Trump administration on pro-Palestinian students and academics, including the recent detention of Rumeysa Ozturk, a Turkish PhD student at Tufts University and Fulbright scholar, and Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian activist and recent Columbia University graduate.
Rights groups and legal advocates said the actions violate First Amendment protections, arguing that the administration is targeting individuals for their political speech.
Suddenly, Donald Trump’s trade war is in much sharper focus.
Rather than a fight on all fronts against the world, this now looks far more like a fight on familiar Trumpian territory: America v China.
The 90-day pause on the higher “retaliatory” tariffs levied on dozens of countries still leaves a universal across-the-board tariff of 10% in place.
But China – which ships everything from iPhones to children’s toys and accounts for around 14% of all US imports – has been singled out for much harsher treatment with an eye-watering rate of 125%.
Trump said the increase was due to Beijing’s readiness to retaliate with its own 84% levy on US goods, a move the president described as showing a “lack of respect”.
But for a politician who first fought his way to the White House on the back of an anti-China message, there is much more to this than simple retaliation.
For Trump, this is about the unfinished business of that first term in office.
“We didn’t have the time to do the right thing, which we’re doing now,” he told reporters.
The aim is nothing less than the upending of an established system of global trade centred on China as the factory of the world, as well as the once widely held view that underpinned it – the idea that more of this trade was, in and of itself, a good thing.
To understand just how central this is to the US president’s thinking, you need to go back to the time before anyone ever thought of him as a possible candidate for office, let alone a likely winner.
In 2012, when I first reported from Shanghai – China’s business capital – increased trade with the country was seen by almost everyone – global business leaders, Chinese officials, visiting foreign governments and trade delegations, foreign correspondents and learned economists – as a no brainer.
China now produces 60% of the world’s electric cars – a large proportion of them made by its own homegrown brands
It was boosting global growth, providing an endless supply of cheap goods, enriching China’s army of new factory workers increasingly embedded in global supply chains, and providing lucrative opportunities to multinational corporations selling their wares to its newly minted middle classes.
Within a few of years of my arrival, China had surpassed the US to become the world’s biggest market for Rolls Royce, General Motors and Volkswagen.
There was a deeper justification, too.
As China got richer, so the theory went, Chinese people would begin to demand political reform.
Their spending habits would also help China transition to a consumer society.
But the first of those aspirations never happened, with China’s ruling Communist Party only tightening its grip on power.
And the second one didn’t happen fast enough, with China not only still dependent on exports, but openly planning to become ever more dominant.
Its infamous policy blueprint – published in 2015 and entitled Made in China 2025 – set out a huge state-backed vision of becoming a global leader in a number of key manufacturing sectors, from aerospace to ship building to electric vehicles.
And so it was that just one year later, a complete political unknown began an outsider-run for US president, making the case repeatedly on the campaign trail that China’s rise had hollowed out the American economy, driven rustbelt decline and cost blue-collar workers their livelihoods and dignity.
Trump’s first-term trade war broke the mould and shattered the consensus. His successor, President Joe Biden, kept much of his tariffs on China in place.
And yet, even though they have undoubtedly caused China some pain, they have not done much to change the economic model.
China now produces 60% of the world’s electric cars – a large proportion of them made by its own homegrown brands – and 80% of the batteries that power them.
So, now Trump is back, with this tit-for-tat escalation on levies.
It would, arguably, be the biggest shock ever delivered to the established global trading system, were it not for all the other on-again off-again tariff measures the US president has rolled out in recent days.
What happens next depends on two key questions.
Firstly, whether China takes up that offer to negotiate.
And secondly, assuming it eventually does, whether China is willing to make the kind of major concessions that America is looking for, including a complete overhaul of its export driven economic model.
In answering them, the first thing to say is that we are in completely unchartered territory, so we should be wary of anyone who says they know how Beijing is likely to react.
But there are certainly reasons to be cautious.
China’s vision of its economic strength – one based on strong exports and a tightly protected domestic market – is now closely bound up with its idea of national rejuvenation and the supremacy of its one-party system.
Its tight control over the information sphere means it will be unlikely to drop its barriers to American technology companies, for example.
But there is a third question, and it is one for America to answer.
Does the US still believe in free trade? Donald Trump often suggests that tariffs are a good thing, not merely as a means to an end, but as an end in themselves.
He talks about the benefit of a protectionist barrier for America, in order to stimulate domestic investment, encourage American companies to bring those foreign supply chains back home, and raise tax revenues.
And if Beijing believes that is indeed the primary purpose of the tariffs, it may decide there is nothing to negotiate anyway.
Rather than championing the idea of economic co-operation, the world’s two biggest superpowers may find themselves locked in a fight for winner-takes-all economic supremacy.
If so, that really would mark a shattering of the old consensus, and a very different, possibly very dangerous, future.
South Sudan has said it will now allow the entry of a man deported from the US, in a dramatic climb down aimed at defusing a visa row between the two countries.
On Saturday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the US would be revoking US visas for all South Sudanese. He said it was a response to South Sudan’s refusal to accept the return of its citizens being removed from the US.
In its initial reaction, South Sudan’s foreign ministry said the move was based on a case involving someone who had been incorrectly identified as South Sudanese and was sent back as a result.
The government now says it will allow the man to enter the country “in the spirit of the friendly relations”.
It adds that the deported man, identified as being from the Democratic Republic of Congo, could arrive in the capital, Juba, as early as Wednesday.
“As a result of this decision, the government has instructed the relevant authorities at Juba International Airport to facilitate [his] arrival,” South Sudan’s foreign ministry said in Tuesday’s statement.
Referring to other possible removals, the ministry said the country was committed to supporting the return of its “verified nationals” who are scheduled for deportation from the US.
The US move at the weekend was the first time the US targeted all passport holders from a particular country since President Donald Trump returned to the White House in January, having campaigned on an anti-immigration platform, with the promise of “mass deportations”.
In his statement on Saturday, Rubio said that the US would also block any arriving citizens of South Sudan, the world’s newest country, at US ports of entry.
He blamed “the failure of South Sudan’s transitional government to accept the return of its repatriated citizens in a timely manner”.
“We will be prepared to review these actions when South Sudan is in full cooperation,” he added.
But in a statement on Monday, South Sudan’s foreign ministry said it “deeply regrets” the blanket measure against all of the country’s citizens based on “an isolated incident involving misrepresentation by an individual who is not a South Sudanese national”.
It said the man at the centre of the visa row was a Congolese national and he was returned to the US. It added that all supporting evidence was shared with American officials.
“It is unacceptable and irresponsible for South Sudanese government officials to second guess the determination of their own embassy,” Landau added.
South Sudan’s Information Minister Michael Makuei Lueth told the AP news agency that the US was “attempting to find faults with the tense situation” in the country because no sovereign nation would accept foreign deportees.
This row comes as fears grow that South Sudan may again descend into civil war after the country’s First Vice-President Riek Machar had been placed under house arrest.
South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir accused Machar of stirring up a new revolt.
Last month, the US ordered all its non-emergency staff in South Sudan to leave as fighting broke out in one part of the country, threatening a fragile peace deal agreed in 2018 that ended a five-year civil war.
South Sudanese in the US were previously granted Temporary Protected Status (TPS), which allowed them to remain in the US for a set period of time.
TPS for South Sudanese in the US had been due to expire by 3 May.
The three Americans convicted on charges of participating in a botched coup attempt in Congo last year have been repatriated to the United States days after the country commuted their death sentences to life imprisonment, an official said Tuesday.
The three will serve their sentences in the U.S. following the repatriation done in collaboration with the U.S. Embassy, Congolese presidential spokesperson Tina Salama said on X.
Among them is 21-year-old Marcel Malanga, son of opposition figure Christian Malanga, who led the foiled coup attempt that targeted the presidential palace in Kinshasa.
Also repatriated are Tyler Thompson Jr., 21, a friend of the younger Malanga who flew to Africa from Utah for what his family believed was a free vacation, and Benjamin Reuben Zalman-Polun, 36, who is reported to have known Christian Malanga through a gold mining company.
US President Donald Trump lashed out at China on Monday as a stock market rout deepened after Beijing retaliated against his global tariffs offensive.
European equities were deep in the red but Asia fared worse, with Hong Kong’s Hang Seng index crashing 13.2 percent, its biggest drop since the 1997 Asian financial crisis, and Tokyo’s Nikkei 225 falling an eye-watering 7.8 percent.
A 10-percent “baseline” tariff on imports from around the world took effect on Saturday but a slew of countries will be hit by higher duties from Wednesday, with levies of 34 percent for Chinese goods and 20 percent for EU products.
While other countries weigh their options, Beijing announced last week its 34-percent tariff on US goods, which will come into effect on Thursday.
Trump chastised Beijing early Monday for not heeding “my warning for abusing countries not to retaliate” as he called China “the biggest abuser of them all” on tariffs.
Chinese vice commerce minister, Ling Ji, said the tit-for-tat duties “are aimed at bringing the United States back onto the right track of the multilateral trade system.”
“The root cause of the tariff issue lies in the United States,” Ling told representatives of US companies on Sunday, according to his ministry.
EU trade ministers gathered in Luxembourg on Monday to discuss the bloc’s own response, with Germany and France having advocated a tax targeting US tech giant.
“We must not exclude any option on goods, on services,” said French Trade Minister Laurent Saint-Martin.
The 27-nation bloc should “open the European toolbox, which is very comprehensive and can also be extremely aggressive,” he said.
German Economy Minister Robert Habeck likewise said Europe should be prepared to use its trade “bazooka” — a new anti-coercion mechanism allowing it to punish any country using economic threats to exert pressure on the EU.
But signs of divergence already emerged, with Ireland, whose low corporate tax rate has attracted US tech and pharmaceutical companies, warning against that course of action.
Targeting services “would be an extraordinary escalation at a time when we must be working for de-escalation,” said Irish Trade Minister Simon Harris.
Recession fears
Trump on Sunday doubled down on his demand to slash deficits with trading partners, saying he would not cut any deals unless that was resolved.
“Sometimes you have to take medicine to fix something,” said Trump, whose administration has shrugged off the market panic.
He told reporters aboard Air Force One that world leaders were “dying to make a deal.”
Trillions of dollars have been wiped off stocks worldwide since Trump announced the tariffs last week, and the losses deepened on Monday, with US markets expected to open deep in the red.
JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon warned the tariffs “will likely increase inflation” in a letter to shareholders Monday.
“Whether or not the menu of tariffs causes a recession remains in question, but it will slow down growth,” he said.
Taipei recorded its heaviest loss on record as it sank 9.7 percent.
The Stoxx Europe 600 index was down five percent in early afternoon deals, with more than 1.5 trillion euros of market capitalization going up in smoke over just a few days.
The main US oil contract dropped below $60 a barrel for the first time since April 2021 on worries of a global recession.
“The market’s telling you in plain language: global demand is vanishing, and a global recession is on the cards and coming on fast,” said Stephen Innes at SPI Asset Management.
Status quo ‘gone’
US officials said more than 50 countries have reached out to Trump to negotiate.
Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, whose country faces a 24-percent levy, said Tokyo would present Trump with a “package” of measures to win relief from US tariffs ahead of a mooted call between the leaders.
Benjamin Netanyahu, prime minister of Israel — hit with 17 percent tariffs, despite being one of Washington’s closest allies — was due on Monday to become the first leader to meet Trump since last week’s announcement.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer warned in a newspaper op-ed that “the world as we knew it has gone”, saying the status quo would increasingly hinge on “deals and alliances.”
Vietnam, a manufacturing powerhouse with a big trade surplus with the United States, has already reached out and requested a delay of at least 45 days to thumping 46-percent tariffs.
Ramping up already high stakes in global trade wars, US President Donald Trump on Friday threatened to impose additional 50% tariffs on China on top of the imposed 34% reciprocal tariffs announced last week.
“Yesterday, China issued Retaliatory Tariffs of 34%, on top of their already record setting Tariffs, Non-Monetary Tariffs, Illegal Subsidization of companies, and massive long term Currency Manipulation, despite my warning that any country that Retaliates against the U.S. by issuing additional Tariffs, above and beyond their already existing long term Tariff abuse of our Nation, will be immediately met with new and substantially higher Tariffs, over and above those initially set,” he wrote on social media.
Trump said that if China does not cancel its 34% increase in tariffs by April 8, he would impose 50% additional tariffs on the country.
The additional tariff rate will take effect on Wednesday, the president said.
“Additionally, all talks with China concerning their requested meetings with us will be terminated! Negotiations with other countries, which have also requested meetings, will begin taking place immediately,” Trump added.
Last Wednesday, Trump announced the imposition of sweeping reciprocal tariffs on over 180 countries, ranging from 10% to 50%.
China was subjected to 34% tariffs.
China later imposed a 34% additional tariff on all imports from the US, a move seen as a tit-for-tat against Trump’s levy.
BBC— Crowds of protesters have amassed in cities across the US to denounce President Trump, in the largest nationwide show of opposition since the president took office in January.
The “Hands Off” protest planners aimed to hold rallies in 1,200 locations, including in all 50 US states. Thousands of people turned out in Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York and Washington DC, among other cities, on Saturday.
Protesters cited grievances with Trump’s agenda ranging from social to economic issues.
Coming days after Trump’s announcement that the US would impose import tariffs on most countries around the world, gatherings were also held outside the US, including in London, Paris and Berlin.
Protesters in Paris joined in, holding up signs in English.
In Boston, some protesters said they were motivated by immigration raids on US university students that have led to arrests and deportation proceedings.
Law student Katie Smith told BBC News that she was motivated by Turkish international student Rumeysa Ozturk, whose arrest near Boston-area Tufts University by masked US agents was caught on camera last month.
“You can stand up today or you can be taken later,” she said, adding: “I’m not usually a protest girlie.”
In London, protesters held signs reading, “WTAF America?”, “Stop hurting people” and “He’s an idiot”.
They chanted “hands off Canada”, “hands off Greenland” and “hands off Ukraine”, referencing Trump’s changes to US foreign policy. Trump has repeatedly expressed interest in annexing Canadaand Greenland. He also got into a public dispute with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and has struggled to negotiate a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia.
In Washington DC, thousands of protesters gathered to watch speeches by Democratic lawmakers. Many remarks focused on the role played in Trump’s administration by wealthy donors – most notably Elon Musk, who has served as an advisor to the president and spearheaded an effort to dramatically cut spending and the federal workforce.
Florida Congressman Maxwell Frost denounced the “billionaire takeover of our government”.
“When you steal from the people, expect the people to rise up. At the ballot box and in the streets,” he shouted.
The protests come after a bruising week for the president and his allies. Republicans won a closely watched special Florida congressional election on Tuesday, but with slimmer margins than they had hoped. Wisconsin voters elected a Democratic judge to serve on the state supreme court, roundly rejecting a Musk-backed Republican candidate by almost 10 percentage points.
In both states, Democrats sought to tap into voter anger towards the Trump administration’s policies and Elon Musk’s influence.
Some polls show approval ratings for President Trump to be slipping slightly.
One Reuters/Ipsos poll released earlier this week found that his approval rating had dropped to 43%, its lowest point since Trump began his second term in January. When he was inaugurated on 20 January, his approval rating was 47%.
The same poll found that 37% of Americans approve of his handling of the economy, while 30% approve of his strategy to address the cost of living in the US.
Another recent poll, from Harvard Caps/Harris, found that 49% of registered voters approve of Trump’s performance in office, down from 52% last month. The same poll, however, found that 54% of voters believe he is doing a better job than Joe Biden did as president.
One protester in Washington named Theresa told the BBC that she was there because “we’re losing our democratic rights”.
“I’m very concerned about the cuts they’re making to the federal government,” she said, adding that she is also concerned about retirement and education benefits.
Asked if she thought Trump was receiving the protesters’ message, she said: “Well, let’s see. [Trump has] been golfing just about every day.”
Trump held no public events on Saturday, and spent the day golfing at a resort he owns in Florida. He was scheduled to play golf again on Sunday.
Protesters also gathered in Houston, Texas.
The White House released a statement defending Trump’s positions, saying he would continue to protect programs such as Medicare and pointing to Democrats as the threat.
“President Trump’s position is clear: he will always protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid for eligible beneficiaries. Meanwhile, the Democrats’ stance is giving Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare benefits to illegal aliens, which will bankrupt these programs and crush American seniors.”
One of Trump’s top immigration advisors, Tom Homan, told Fox News on Saturday that protesters held a rally outside of his New York home, but that he was in Washington at the time.
“They can protest a vacant house all they want,” Homan said, adding that their presence “tied up” law enforcement and prevented officials from seeing to more important tasks.
“Protests and rallies, they don’t mean anything,” Homan continued.
“So go ahead and exercise your first amendment [free speech] rights. It’s not going to change the facts of the case.”
In St. Paul, Minnesota, protesters railed against Trump and flew an upside down American flag, a distress message that has become a symbol of protest.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has announced that the US is immediately revoking visas issued to all South Sudanese passport holders due to the African nation refusing to accept its citizens who have been removed from the US.
Rubio, in a statement on Saturday, added that the US will also block any arriving citizens of South Sudan, the world’s newest country, at US ports of entry.
He blamed “the failure of South Sudan’s transitional government to accept the return of its repatriated citizens in a timely manner”.
A cornerstone of President Donald Trump’s immigration policy is removing unlawful migrants from the US, with the promise of “mass deportations”.
“It is time for the Transitional Government of South Sudan to stop taking advantage of the United States,” said Rubio.
“Every country must accept the return of its citizens in a timely manner when another country, including the United States, seeks to remove them,” he added.
It comes as fears grow that South Sudan may again descend into civil war.
On 8 March, the US ordered all its non-emergency staff in South Sudan to leave as regional fighting broke out, threatening a fragile peace deal agreed in 2018.
South Sudanese in the US were previously granted Temporary Protected Status (TPS), which allows them to remain in the US for a set period of time.
TPS for South Sudanese in the US had been due to expire by 3 May.
South Sudan, the world’s newest nation, gained independence in 2011 after seceding from Sudan.
But just two years later, following a rift between President Salva Kiir and Vice-President Riek Machar, the tensions erupted into a civil war, in which more than 400,000 people were killed.
A 2018 power-sharing agreement between the two stopped the fighting, but key elements of the deal have not been implemented – including a new constitution, an election and the reunification of armed groups into a single army.
Sporadic violence between ethnic and local groups has continued in parts of the country.
Since returning to office, the Trump administration has clashed with international governments over deportations of their nationals from the US.
In January, Colombian President Gustavo Petro barred two US military flights carrying deported migrants from landing in his South American country.
Petro relented after Trump promised to place crippling tariffs and sanctions on Colombia.
(Reuters)—Your favorite iPhone could soon become much pricier, thanks to tariffs.
U.S. President Donald Trump imposed a series of sweeping tariffs on countries around the world that could drastically alter the landscape of global trade, and consumer goods like iPhones could be among the hardest hit, analysts said on Thursday, with increases of 30% to 40% if the company were to pass on the cost to consumers.
Most iPhones are still made in China, which was hit with a 54% tariff. If those levies persist, Apple (AAPL.O) has a tough choice: absorb the extra expense or pass it on to customers.
Shares of the company closed down 9.3% on Thursday, hitting their worst day since March 2020.
Apple sells more than 220 million iPhones a year; its biggest markets include the United States, China and Europe.
The cheapest iPhone 16 model was launched in the U.S. with a sticker price of $799, but could cost as much as $1,142, per calculations based on projections from analysts at Rosenblatt Securities, who say the cost could rise by 43% – if Apple is able to pass that on to consumers.
A more expensive iPhone 16 Pro Max, with a 6.9-inch display and 1 terabyte of storage, which currently retails at $1599, could cost nearly $2300 if a 43% increase were to pass to consumers.
Rosenblatt Securities says Apple needs to hike iPhone price by 43% to cover for tariffs.
Trump imposed tariffs on a wide range of Chinese imports in his first term as president to pressure U.S. companies to bring manufacturing either back to the United States or to nearby countries such as Mexico, but Apple secured exemptions or waivers for several products. This time, he has not yet granted any exemptions.
“This whole China tariff thing is playing out right now completely contrary to our expectation that American icon Apple would be kid-gloved, like last time,” Barton Crockett, analyst at Rosenblatt Securities, said in a note.
The iPhone 16e, launched in February as a cheaper entry point for Apple’s suite of artificial-intelligence features, costs $599. A 43% price hike could push that cost to $856. Prices of other Apple devices could jump as well.
Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Many customers pay for their phones over a period of two or three years through contracts with their cellular providers.
However, other analysts noted that iPhone sales have been floundering in the company’s major markets, as Apple Intelligence, a suite of features that helps summarize notifications, rewrite emails and give users access to ChatGPT, has failed to enthuse buyers.
Expert reviews have suggested that the features, while innovative, do not provide enough of a compelling reason to justify upgrading to newer models.
The stagnation in demand could put additional pressure on Apple’s bottom line, especially if costs rise due to tariffs.
Angelo Zino, equity analyst at CFRA Research, said the company will have a tough time passing on more than 5% to 10% of the cost to consumers.
“We expect Apple to hold off on any major increases on phones until this fall when its iPhone 17 is set to launch, as it is typically how it handles planned price hikes.”
Even with some production moving to Vietnam and India, most iPhones are still made in China, and those countries were not spared from tariffs either, with Vietnam getting a 46% levy and India’s coming in at 26%.
Apple would need to raise its prices by at least 30% on average to offset import duties, according to Counterpoint Research co-founder Neil Shah.
A potentially sharp price hike could dampen demand for the smartphone and give South Korea’s Samsung Electronics (005930.KS) an edge, as the Asian country faces lower tariffs than China, where all iPhones sold in the U.S. are made.
This map shows the percentage of reciprocal tariffs imposed by the U.S. administration on each economy.
“Our quick math on Trump’s tariff Liberation Day suggests this could blow up Apple, potentially costing the company up to $40 billion,” Rosenblatt Securities’ Crockett noted, adding that negotiations between Apple, China and the White House are likely.
“It’s hard for us to imagine Trump blowing up an American icon…but this looks pretty tough.”
It took just one 50-minute speech by US President Donald Trump to undermine global economic stability and raise the prospect of a recession, with China’s countermeasures only amplifying the risk of a debilitating tit-for-tat trade war.
The Wednesday White House event, billed by Trump as “Liberation Day”, unveiled levies on dozens of countries including all major US trading partners.
These included the imposition of 20 percent levies on the European Union, 24 percent on Japan and an additional 34 percent on goods from China — bringing the new added tariff rate there to 54 percent.
What have been the first effects?
Trump’s sparked staggering selloffs on global stock markets as investors pulled out of shares of companies which will be strongly impacted by the measures.
The S&P 500 index, which regroups the 500 largest US companies, saw $2.5 trillion in value zapped on Thursday as it sank 4.8 percent in its worst daily loss since the Covid pandemic.
It fell by another five percent in morning trading on Friday.
Shares in certain auto manufacturers have taken a big hit as separate tariffs of 25 percent on car imports into the United States went into effect on Thursday.
Stellantis, which owns the Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep brands, will pause production in certain of its Canadian and Mexican factories.
Nissan went back on its plan to phase out production of its Rogue SUV in South Carolina, and will no longer sell two models of its luxury brand Infiniti that are made in Mexico.
Volkswagen will pass on the cost of the tariffs to consumers by adding an “import fee” to cars it imports into the United States from Europe and Mexico.
Shares in apparel firms also took big hits as they depend heavily on imported goods.
Will this provoke a recession?
“No one wins from a trade war, with the US economy set to be adversely impacted as much as, if not more, than Europe,” said analysts at Barclays bank.
A spike in inflation from the tariffs and a drop in consumption by US consumers could choke off growth, in the United States and elsewhere.
More and more economists and analysts are talking about the possibility of the US economy falling into recession.
The OECD’s March forecasts already forecast a recession for Mexico this year and next. It also sharply lowered its outlook for the Canadian economy.
IMF chief Kristalina Georgieva on Thursday said new US tariffs “clearly represent a significant risk to the global outlook”.
The IMF had until now expected the global economy to expand by 3.3 percent this year and next.
“It’s a major shock for the global economy,” said Antoine Bouet, head of the French economic think tank CEPII.
He expects the tariffs could shave 0.8 percent off global economic output by 2040.
Will global trade contact?
The first signals are worrying, particularly in Asia, which has become the globe’s manufacturing centre.
While China had dominated, the tariffs imposed by Trump during his first stint in the White House encouraged companies to move some manufacturing to countries such as Vietnam, Cambodia and Bangladesh.
Economists at ratings agency Fitch said Trump’s “Liberation Day” measures take US tariffs back to levels last seen in 1909 and would likely sharply affect the economy.
In a sign of fear of a sharp slowdown in trade, the price of transporting shipping containers from China to the United States has tanked since Thursday.
The World Trade Organization said Thursday it estimated that the Trump tariffs would cut global trade by around one percent.
But it said things could get worse if a tit-for-tat trade war began, and on Friday China announced retaliatory tariffs on US goods of 34 percent.
Is it the end of free trade?
The “Liberation Day” tariffs took the average US tariff rate from 4.99 percent to 27.17 percent, CEPII calculated.
The measures are a fresh bump for the global economy that has faced shocks in recent years from the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
But former WTO chief Pascal Lamy sought to put the situation into context.
“Thirteen percent of global imports are affected by Trump’s follies,” he told AFP.
“There’s no reason the other 87 percent become contaminated.”
He said that he expects if the US economy closes up other countries would open theirs.
Numerous nations have sought recently to breathe new life into trade deal talks in the hopes of compensating for lost business in the United States.
Japan, South Korea and China called Sunday for their negotiations for a comprehensive trilateral free-trade agreement to be speeded up, and agreed to create “a predictable trade and investment environment”.
As the weekend deadline for TikTok to find a buyer approaches, bidders for the short-video social media site are piling up.
Amazon and, separately, a consortium led by OnlyFans founder Tim Stokely are the latest to throw their hats into the ring for TikTok. The site faces an April 5 deadline to reach a deal to find a non-Chinese buyer under threat of being banned from the United States.
U.S. officials have raised security concerns over the app’s ties to China, which TikTok and owner ByteDance have denied. Trump administration officials are meeting on Wednesday to discuss the various options for TikTok.
Startup Zoop, which is run by Stokely, founder of adult content social media site OnlyFans, has partnered with a cryptocurrency foundation to submit a late-stage plan to bid for TikTok, the two told Reuters Wednesday.
A U.S. administration official confirmed Amazon had sent a letter to Vice President JD Vance and Department of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. Amazon declined to comment, while TikTok and ByteDance did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Shares of Amazon rose about 2% following news of the last-minute TikTok bid.
Amazon has long harbored ambitions for an in-house social media network that could help it sell more goods and appeal to a younger audience. It bought live video site Twitch in 2014for nearly $1 billion and book review site Goodreads in 2013 as part of its efforts to build a viable social network.
Amazon also developed and tested a TikTok-like short-form video and photo feed called Inspire that it shuttered earlier this year.
Trump said last month his administration was in touch with four different groups about the sale of the platform, without identifying them.
Private equity firm Blackstone (BX.N) is discussing joining ByteDance’s non-Chinese shareholders, led by Susquehanna International Group and General Atlantic, in contributing fresh capital to bid for TikTok’s U.S. business, Reuters reported last week.
U.S. venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz is also in talks to add outside funding to buy out TikTok’s Chinese investors, as part of a bid led by Oracle (ORCL.N) and other American investors to carve it out of ByteDance, the Financial Times reported on Tuesday.
White House-led talks entail plans to spin off a U.S. entity for TikTok and dilute Chinese ownership in the new business to below a 20% threshold required by U.S. law, Reuters reportedlast month.
The New York Times first reported Amazon’s involvement on Wednesday. Various parties who have been involved in the talks do not appear to be taking Amazon’s bid seriously, the Times reported.
The future of the app used by nearly half of all Americans has been up in the air since a 2024 law, passed with overwhelming bipartisan support, required ByteDance to divest TikTok by January 19.
Washington officials have said TikTok’s ownership by ByteDance makes it beholden to the Chinese government, and Beijing could use the app to conduct influence operations against the United States and collect data on Americans.
The free messaging app Signal has made headlines after the White House confirmed it was used for a secret group chat between senior US officials.
The editor-in-chief of the Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, was inadvertently added to the group where plans for a strike against the Houthi group in Yemen were discussed.
It has caused a significant backlash, with Democrat Senate leader Chuck Schumer calling it “one of the most stunning” military intelligence leaks in history and calling for an investigation.
But what actually is Signal – and how secure or otherwise were the senior politicians’ communications on it?
The security app
Signal has estimated 40-70 million monthly users – making it pretty tiny compared to the biggest messaging services, WhatsApp and Messenger, which count their customers in the billions.
Where it does lead the way though is in security.
At the core of that is end-to-end encryption (E2EE).
Simply put, it means only the sender and the receiver can read messages – even Signal itself cannot access them.
Cyber correspondent Joe Tidy explains how end to end encryption works
A number of other platforms also have E2EE – including WhatsApp – but Signal’s security features go beyond this.
For example, the code that makes the app work is open source – meaning anybody can check it to make sure there are no vulnerabilities that hackers could exploit.
Its owners say it collects far less information from its users, and in particular does not store records of usernames, profile pictures, or the groups people are part of.
There is also no need to dilute these features to make more money: Signal is owned by the Signal Foundation, a US-based non-profit, which relies on donations rather than ad revenue.
“Signal is the gold standard in private comms,” said its boss Meredith Whittaker in a post on X after the US national security story became public.
‘Very, very unusual’
That “gold standard claim” is what makes Signal appealing to cybersecurity experts and journalists, who often use the app.
But even that level of security is considered insufficient for very high level conversations about extremely sensitive national security matters.
That is because there is a largely unavoidable risk to communicating via a mobile phone: it is only as secure as the person that uses it.
If someone gains access to your phone with Signal open – or if they learn your password – they’ll be able to see your messages.
And no app can prevent someone peeking over your shoulder if you are using your phone in a public space.
Data expert Caro Robson, who has worked with the US administration, said it was “very, very unusual” for high ranking security officials to communicate on a messaging platform like Signal.
“Usually you would use a very secure government system that is operated and owned by the government using very high levels of encryption,” she said.
She said this would typically mean devices kept in “very secure government controlled locations”.
The US government has historically used a sensitive compartmented information facility (Scif – pronounced “skiff”) to discuss matters of national security.
White House This famous photo taken inside perhaps the most famous Scif – the White House Situation Room – in 2011 shows then-President Barack Obama and his team reacting to an update during the US raid to kill Osama Bin Laden
A Scif is an ultra-secure enclosed area in which personal electronic devices are not allowed.
“To even access this kind of classified information, you have to be in a particular room or building repeatedly swept for bugs or any listening devices,” said Ms Robson.
Scifs can be found in places ranging from military bases to the homes of officials.
“The whole system is massively encrypted and secured using the government’s own highest standards of cryptography,” she said.
“Especially when defence is involved.”
Encryption and records
There’s another issue tied to Signal that has raised concerns – disappearing messages.
Signal, like many other messaging apps, allows its users to set messages to disappear after a set period of time.
The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg said some of the messages in the Signal group he was added to disappeared after a week.
This may violate laws around record-keeping – unless those using the app forwarded on their messages to an official government account.
This is also far from the first row involving E2EE
Various administrations have wanted to create a so-called backdoor into messaging services that use it so they can read messages they think might pose a national security threat.
Apps including Signal and WhatsApp have previously fought attempts to create such a backdoor, saying it would eventually be used by bad actors.
Signal threatened to pull the app from the UK in 2023 if it was undermined by lawmakers.
This year, the UK government became embroiled in a significant row with Apple, which also uses E2EE to protect certain files in cloud storage.
Apple ended up pulling the feature in the UK altogether after the government demanded access to data protected in this way by the tech giant.
The legal case is ongoing.
But, as this controversy shows, no level of security or legal protection matters if you simply share your confidential data with the wrong person.
US President Donald Trump said he believes Lee Harvey Oswald, the man charged with assassinating President John F. Kennedy in 1963, did not act alone, a press report said Sunday.
In an interview with radio host Clay Travis, Trump was asked directly: “Do you think Oswald killed JFK personally?” He replied, “I do, and I always felt that. Of course he was… helped,” according to The Hill newspaper.
Trump also commented on the recent release of declassified files related to the case.
“I don’t think there’s anything that’s earth-shattering,” he said, describing the content as “somewhat unspectacular.”
He added that individuals could make their own “determination” about the events.
The FBI and Justice Department have long maintained that Oswald acted alone, but public skepticism has persisted for decades.
Oswald denied responsibility and was killed two days after the assassination by Jack Ruby.
The Hill also noted that while the newly released files do not confirm any conspiracy, they have reopened the debate surrounding one of the most scrutinized events in American history.
The assassination of former US President John F. Kennedy on Nov. 22, 1963, in Dallas, Texas, remains a defining moment in US history.
Over the decades, the case has fueled widespread speculation and public demand for government transparency.
Last week, the Trump administration released approximately 80,000 pages of previously classified documents related to the Kennedy assassination.
The release aimed to promote transparency and provide the public with a more comprehensive understanding of the events surrounding Kennedy’s death.
However, many historians and experts remain skeptical about uncovering any groundbreaking revelations from these files.
