UN Warns Gaza Ceasefire at Risk Amid Aid Crisis

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced Wednesday that the United States does not anticipate further military action in Venezuela, signaling a shift in policy following the capture of President Nicolas Maduro earlier this month. The statement came during Rubio's first public testimony before lawmakers since the event, as the Trump administration begins to work with Venezuela's new interim government.

President Donald Trump has directed his administration to engage with Delcy Rodriguez, a Maduro ally who assumed the role of interim president after his arrest. While Trump had previously threatened military force if the new government failed to meet U.S. demands, Rubio's testimony suggests a change in posture.

"We are not postured to, nor do we intend or expect to, have to take any military action in Venezuela," Rubio told a packed Senate hearing. He emphasized that the administration is satisfied with the direction of the Rodriguez government. "The only military presence you will see in Venezuela is our Marine guards at an embassy. That is our goal. That is our expectation."

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio details the Trump administration's evolving strategy for Venezuela during a hearing.

Renewed Diplomacy and Shifting Alliances

According to Rubio, communications with Venezuela's new leaders have been "very respectful and productive." He expressed optimism about reopening a U.S. diplomatic presence in the country soon. The U.S. embassy in Caracas has been closed since 2019, but State Department officials have recently been sent to prepare for its reopening.

Rubio framed the policy shift as a strategic victory, suggesting the new government is ready to distance itself from U.S. adversaries.

"For the first time in 20 years, we are having serious conversations about eroding and eliminating the Iranian presence, the Chinese influence, the Russian presence as well," he stated. "In fact, I will tell you that there are many elements there in Venezuela that welcome a return to establishing relations with the United States on multiple fronts."

This optimistic view, however, contrasts with recent U.S. intelligence reports that questioned whether Rodriguez is fully committed to the U.S. strategy or intends to cut ties with American rivals.

Later on Wednesday, Rubio met with Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado. Following the meeting, Machado told reporters she was confident that change was underway. "I know what Venezuela is living through," she said. "But I tell you this: we are going to achieve it. It is happening."

The Rationale for Removing Maduro

In his testimony, Rubio justified the removal of Maduro by arguing that Venezuela had become a base of operations for U.S. adversaries, including China, Russia, and Iran. He also cited Maduro's alleged cooperation with drug traffickers as a destabilizing factor in the Western Hemisphere.

"It was an untenable situation and it had to be addressed," Rubio said.

The Trump administration has established a mechanism to sell Venezuelan oil in the short term. Rubio described the ultimate goal as facilitating a transition to "a friendly, stable, prosperous Venezuela" that selects its leaders through free and fair elections. Venezuela holds the world's largest crude oil reserves, and the administration has stated its intent to control the OPEC nation's oil industry and revenue indefinitely.

Deep Divisions in the U.S. Congress

The administration's Venezuela policy has generated significant friction in Washington. Members of Congress from both parties have voiced frustration over a lack of communication from Trump's aides regarding major operations, including Maduro's capture.

Two weeks ago, a Senate resolution to bar President Trump from further military action in Venezuela without congressional approval was narrowly blocked by Republicans, requiring Vice President JD Vance to cast a tie-breaking vote.

The war powers resolution initially appeared poised to pass after five Republicans sided with Democrats to advance it—a rare break from party lines. However, after Trump publicly criticized the five senators and Rubio promised to testify, two Republicans, Josh Hawley of Missouri and Todd Young of Indiana, reversed their positions, citing assurances from the administration.

Criticism Mounts Over "Unprecedented" Strategy

The close vote highlights growing unease in Congress over Trump's foreign policy and a broader debate about reclaiming legislative authority over the use of military force.

During the hearing, some Democrats warned that the U.S. risked becoming entangled in another prolonged overseas conflict. They also questioned the legality of U.S. strikes on boats suspected of carrying drugs and expressed skepticism about working with Rodriguez, a lifelong socialist.

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut delivered a sharp critique of the administration's approach. "The scope of the project that you are undertaking in Venezuela is without precedent," he said. "You are taking their oil at gunpoint. You are holding and selling that oil, putting for now the receipts in an offshore Middle Eastern account. You're deciding how and for what purposes that money is going to be used in a country of 30 million people. I think a lot of us believe that that is destined for failure."

Meanwhile, a group of 12 Democratic lawmakers also issued a warning Wednesday about the financial risks of investing in Venezuela, noting that the terms offered by the U.S. and Venezuelan governments could be reversed.

On January 27, India and the European Union signed a landmark free trade agreement after two decades of negotiations, a move celebrated for its economic implications. But another deal inked the same day, the Security and Defence Partnership, was largely overlooked—and it may hold far greater strategic significance.

This security pact, aimed at boosting cooperation on maritime security, counterterrorism, and cyberdefense, didn't happen in a vacuum. The disruption caused by the Trump administration's policies has pushed both India and the EU to reconsider their alliances, prompting India, with its $4 trillion economy, to act decisively on both trade and defense.

Urgent Threats Drive India's Military Modernization

India's defense needs are pressing. The country faces tense, adversarial relationships with both Pakistan and China, having engaged in military conflicts with both nations in the last five years. Despite a massive trade relationship with Beijing, the two powers remain locked in an enduring rivalry.

To counter these threats and a growing Sino-Pakistani strategic nexus, India must urgently upgrade its military capabilities. However, decades of investment in building a domestic defense industrial base have failed to produce the necessary results.

This shortfall was publicly acknowledged last February when Indian Air Force chief Amar Preet Singh criticized the state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. for its persistent delays in delivering promised fighter jets. With its domestic industry struggling, India has been forced to look abroad.

Shifting Alliances: Why Old Partners Falter

For decades, India's primary military supplier was the Soviet Union and, later, Russia. Even 30 years after the Cold War, between 60% and 70% of India's military hardware was of Soviet or Russian origin.

That dependency is now changing for two key reasons:

1. Cost: Russia was no longer willing to provide weapons and parts at the concessional rates offered by the Soviet Union.

2. Reliability: Russia's own military needs for its war in Ukraine have led to failures in delivering on existing defense contracts with India.

As a result, Russia's share of India's defense imports has dropped to around 45% in the past five years.

India began diversifying its suppliers, turning increasingly to the United States and European nations like France. Since 2008, India has purchased over $20 billion in military equipment from the U.S. It also bought 36 Rafale jets from France in 2016 and recently signed a $7.4 billion deal for 26 more.

However, the relationship with Washington has hit a snag. The Trump administration's imposition of tariffs up to 50% on certain goods has reportedly stalled major U.S. arms deals, including combat vehicles and anti-tank missiles. With Russia unreliable and the U.S. tangled in trade disputes, New Delhi has limited options for major acquisitions.

The EU Emerges as a Key Defense Partner

Under these circumstances, the European Union has become India's most viable partner for addressing its security needs. The new security agreement builds on existing ties. India already has a strong defense relationship with France and is reportedly close to purchasing a fleet of submarines from Germany to bolster its naval capabilities against China's growing presence in the Indian Ocean.

While the public announcement of the EU partnership focuses on broad cooperation rather than specific hardware purchases, it signals New Delhi's clear intent to partner with the bloc to guarantee its national security. Even after renewing a 10-year defense accord with the U.S. late last year, India is clearly diversifying its strategic options beyond simple procurement.

This move aligns perfectly with India's long-stated foreign policy goal of fostering a multipolar world. Indian policymakers believe such an international order would provide New Delhi with greater flexibility and influence in global politics.

The critical question now is whether India and the EU can translate this agreement into substantive action. Amid global uncertainties, a strong security collaboration between them could restore a degree of stability—but only if they move beyond aspirations and deliver concrete results.

The Federal Reserve has paused its cycle of interest rate cuts, holding the benchmark rate steady in a 3.5%-3.75% range after three consecutive reductions. While the move was widely anticipated by markets, the central bank’s updated economic assessment signals a significant shift in thinking that will shape its policy for the rest of the year.

With the economy on solid ground, the Fed’s primary concern has pivoted from supporting a fragile labor market to taming an inflation rate that remains stubbornly above its target.

Economy Strong, Inflation Now the Top Concern

In its official statement, the Fed upgraded its view on economic activity. Chairman Jerome Powell noted that the economy "expanded at a solid pace last year and is coming into 2026 on a firm footing."

Concerns about the labor market have also eased. While hiring has slowed, unemployment appears stable, leading the Fed to drop previous language that highlighted downside risks to employment over inflation. The central bank now sees the risks as more balanced, reducing the urgency for further rate cuts.

A Divided Committee: Two Governors Voted for a Cut

The decision to hold rates was not unanimous. Governors Stephen Miran and Christopher Waller, both appointees of former President Trump, dissented, voting instead for another cut.

The two were outvoted. Miran’s term ends on Saturday, making this his likely final meeting. He had previously advocated for a half-point cut but moderated his position to a quarter-point for this vote.

Powell Signals a Data-Dependent Pause

Chairman Powell emphasized that future policy is not predetermined. "Monetary policy is not on a preset course," he stated. "We will make our decisions on a meeting-by-meeting basis."

This data-dependent stance leaves traders with little immediate guidance, reinforcing that the Fed will not commit to a path until economic indicators force its hand. Futures markets are currently pricing in the possibility of two rate cuts in 2026 and none in 2027. June is seen as the earliest window for a potential cut, but only if inflation shows clear signs of cooling.

The Path Ahead: Can Inflation Cool Enough for More Cuts?

Major financial institutions are aligning with this cautious outlook. Goldman Sachs Asset Management anticipates an extended pause from the Fed, followed by a resumption of easing later in the year.

"We expect easing to resume later in the year as a moderation in inflation allows for two further 'normalization' cuts," said Kay Haigh, global co-head of fixed income and liquidity solutions at the firm.

This forecast hinges entirely on inflation cooperating. Powell acknowledged that core PCE inflation, the Fed's preferred measure, likely hit 3% in December—well above the 2% target. However, he attributed the elevated readings primarily to tariff effects on goods.

"Disinflation appears to be continuing in the services sector," Powell explained, suggesting he expects the price pressures from tariffs to fade over time.

If he is right, the case for rate cuts will strengthen as 2026 progresses. The key metric to watch will be core PCE. If it begins trending back toward 2.5% by midyear, a rate cut in June becomes a real possibility. If not, the Fed is likely to remain on hold until September at the earliest.

After years of a diplomatic deep freeze triggered by deadly border clashes, a fragile spring is emerging between India and China. High-level visits have resumed, and military commanders are talking again. But the most significant thaw is happening on the economic front, as New Delhi begins a major re-evaluation of its relationship with its giant rival.

India, once one of the most aggressive nations in blocking Chinese economic influence, is signaling a major policy reversal. The comprehensive ban on Chinese investment, enacted in 2020 after 20 Indian soldiers were killed in border skirmishes, now appears set to be relaxed.

Economic Reality Forces a Policy U-Turn

This shift isn't a response to any concessions from Beijing on the border dispute. In fact, India seems to be resigning itself to a new status quo in the Himalayas, one where it has lost key strategic advantages.

The real driver is a growing consensus among Indian officials and business leaders: without access to Chinese capital, technology, and industrial inputs, India’s economy simply cannot achieve global competitiveness. The hardline stance is giving way to economic pragmatism.

This means capital may soon flow across the border again. In a significant move, Chinese companies might even be permitted to bid for government contracts, a major development in a nation where state-sponsored projects drive a huge portion of economic activity.

Supply Chains and State Projects Drive the Shift

Indian companies are not primarily looking at China as a market for their goods, but as an indispensable partner in their supply chains. Key export-oriented sectors are feeling the pressure.

• Clothing manufacturers report they are unable to produce desired textiles without access to specialized Chinese equipment and chemicals.

• Engineering and electronics firms, which are critical sources of export revenue, have voiced similar dependencies.

This pressure isn't limited to the private sector. Officials overseeing India's massive infrastructure build-out, funded by public money, are struggling with costly delays and budget overruns. They argue that allowing efficient and lower-cost Chinese firms to compete in the $700 billion government procurement market would make their jobs significantly easier.

The policy reversal has been influenced by Beijing as well. China only lifted its own restrictions on crucial exports like rare earths and magnets after Prime Minister Narendra Modi agreed to meet President Xi Jinping last August.

US Trade Policy Pushes New Delhi Towards Beijing

Adding to the pressure on New Delhi are President Donald Trump's chaotic trade policies. The United States continues to target India with a 50% tariff rate, the highest it has applied to any country. Facing constant threats of further increases, Indian exports to the U.S. have started to fall.

As a result, China has now replaced the U.S. as India's largest trading partner. In December alone, Indian exports to China surged by 67%, though this growth has yet to make a significant impact on the massive bilateral trade deficit.

An Uneasy Partnership with an Uncertain Future

This pivot toward economic re-engagement is not without internal opposition. Indian heavy engineering companies, which have thrived without competition from some of the world's most experienced builders, will face new challenges. National security strategists in New Delhi are also finding their arguments increasingly drowned out by a powerful "growth-first" lobby.

India’s shift is part of a broader global trend. With the U.S. seen as a less reliable partner and the West fracturing, countries from Canada to the UK are reconsidering China's economic importance. At Davos, French President Emmanuel Macron called for more Chinese investment in Europe, while others have noted that Beijing appears more predictable than it once was.

If India truly relaxes its investment curbs, a "peace dividend" could follow. Many Chinese companies, especially in the new energy sector, have been eyeing the Indian market. State-backed investment funds are also reportedly planning to apply for licenses to operate in the country.

However, this thaw is fragile. A renewed flare-up on the border could instantly bring back winter. Furthermore, the relationship remains fundamentally imbalanced. As Vice Premier He Lifeng stated at Davos, China is willing to be the "world's market." For now, India seems willing to be China's market once more, but it will never be comfortable in that role until Beijing becomes its market in turn.

The European Union is on the verge of designating Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization, a move that gained critical momentum after France reversed its previous opposition. This decision would align the EU's stance with that of the United States and marks a significant hardening of policy toward Tehran.

EU foreign ministers, set to meet in Brussels on Thursday, are expected to give the political green light for the designation. The meeting was already scheduled to approve new sanctions against Iran in response to its violent crackdown on widespread protests, which has led to thousands of deaths and arrests.

A demonstrator in Paris shows support for the Iranian people, whose widespread protests have prompted a major EU policy shift.

France's Policy Shift Paves Way for EU Action

The breakthrough came after France announced it would now support blacklisting the IRGC. "France will support the designation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps on the European Union's list of terrorist organisations," stated French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot on X.

With France joining key members like Germany and Italy, the measure is highly likely to be approved. However, the decision requires unanimous consent from all 27 EU member states.

Barrot explained the shift was a necessary response to the regime's actions. "The unbearable repression of the peaceful uprising of the Iranian people cannot go unanswered," he said. "The extraordinary courage they have shown in the face of the blind violence unleashed upon them cannot be in vain."

The Diplomatic Tightrope: Risks vs. Accountability

Until Wednesday, France had been hesitant to back the move. Paris and other cautious member states feared that designating the IRGC could lead to a complete rupture of diplomatic ties with Iran. Such a break could impact diplomatic missions and complicate sensitive negotiations to release European citizens held in Iranian prisons.

Specifically, Paris has been concerned for two of its citizens who were released from prison last year and are currently living at the French embassy in Tehran.

However, proponents of the designation argue that the scale of Iran's crackdown demands a powerful political response. They point to the IRGC's central role not only in suppressing domestic dissent but also in activities abroad that they classify as terrorism.

"If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it's probably a duck and it's good to call that out," commented one senior EU diplomat, summarizing the growing consensus.

What is the IRGC and Why Does It Matter?

Established after Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was created to protect the country's Shi'ite clerical ruling system. Over the decades, its power has expanded dramatically. Today, the IRGC holds immense influence over Iran's economy and armed forces and was given control over the nation's controversial ballistic missile and nuclear programs.

The ongoing anti-government protests, which began in December, have prompted the most severe crackdown by Iranian authorities since the 1979 revolution, drawing widespread international condemnation and forcing a tougher line from European governments.

Chevron is planning a major increase in its Venezuelan crude oil exports to the United States, targeting 300,000 barrels per day (bpd) by March. This represents a significant ramp-up from 100,000 bpd in December and the current rate of approximately 230,000 bpd this month, according to two sources familiar with the company's plans.

Logistics Behind the Export Surge

To manage the higher volume, the U.S. energy giant and key partner of Venezuela's state-run firm PDVSA has chartered around a dozen tankers. The move is designed to clear out inventories that built up after a U.S. blockade impacted the country's exports in December, trapping millions of barrels in storage tanks and on ships.

The company's four joint ventures with PDVSA are currently producing between 240,000 and 250,000 bpd of heavy crude, a grade highly sought after by U.S. Gulf Coast refiners. According to other sources, these joint ventures were unaffected by production cuts that PDVSA implemented at other oilfields in early January.

A New Competitive Landscape

For months, Chevron operated as the sole company authorized by Washington to ship Venezuelan oil to the U.S. under a sanctions exemption. However, the market is changing as Chevron now faces competition from trading giants Vitol and Trafigura.

Earlier this month, both trading houses were granted U.S. licenses to export Venezuelan oil and fuel to the U.S. and other markets as part of a $2 billion supply deal.

Chevron's Long-Term Vision for Venezuela

During a recent meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump, Chevron's Vice Chairman Mark Nelson outlined an ambitious growth plan. He stated the company could immediately double its crude loading capacity in Venezuela and increase production by 50% over the next two years.

When asked about the company's plans, Nelson explained that the strategy involves a mix of building new infrastructure and upgrading existing equipment to meet Chevron's operational standards.

"Most of the investments that we've been making are about getting it up to our standards," Nelson said.

Political Tailwinds for Oil Investment

This potential investment aligns with a broader U.S. strategy, as President Trump is promoting a $100 billion reconstruction plan for Venezuela's oil industry following the capture of President Nicolas Maduro.

The initiative is further supported by political developments within Venezuela. An interim government led by President Delcy Rodriguez is reportedly working to fast-track a major reform of the country's primary oil law, aiming to create a legal framework that makes large-scale investment possible.

In a statement, Chevron said it remains "committed to its present as well as its future, while strengthening U.S. energy and regional security." PDVSA did not provide an immediate reply to a request for comment.