Category World News

A recent United States ambassador to Ukraine has published an opinion column explaining her decision to resign her post, and criticising President Donald Trump for siding with Russia over Ukraine.

On Friday, former diplomat Bridget Brink published an article in the Detroit Free Press, a newspaper in her home state of Michigan, expressing concern about current US foreign policy.

The US has long been an ally of Ukraine, and since 2014, it has provided the war-torn country with military assistance, as it fends off Russia’s attempts at invasion and annexation.

But Brink wrote that there has been a shift since President Trump returned to office for a second term in January.

“I respect the president’s right and responsibility to determine U.S. foreign policy,” she wrote.

“Unfortunately, the policy since the beginning of the Trump administration has been to put pressure on the victim, Ukraine, rather than on the aggressor, Russia.”

Brink pointed out that her time at the US Department of State included roles under five presidents, both Democrat and Republican. But she said the shift under the Trump administration forced her to abandon her ambassadorship to Ukraine, a position she held from 2022 until last month.

“I cannot stand by while a country is invaded, a democracy bombarded, and children killed with impunity,” she said of the situation in Ukraine.

“I believe that the only way to secure U.S. interests is to stand up for democracies and to stand against autocrats. Peace at any price is not peace at all ― it is appeasement.”

Brink’s position as ambassador has spanned much of the current conflict in Ukraine. After annexing Crimea and occupying other Ukrainian territories starting in 2014, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of the country in February 2022. Brink assumed her post that May.

But the slow-grinding war in Ukraine has cost thousands of lives and displaced many more. While campaigning for re-election in 2024, Trump blamed the war’s eruption on the “weak” foreign policy of his predecessor, Democrat Joe Biden.

He also pledged to end the war on his first day back in office, if re-elected. “I’ll have that done in 24 hours. I’ll have it done,” Trump told one CNN town hall in 2023.

Since taking office, however, Trump has walked back those comments, calling them an “exaggeration” in an interview with Time Magazine.

Still, his administration has pushed Ukraine and Russia to engage in peace talks, as part of an effort to end the war. How those negotiations have unfolded under Trump, however, has been the source of scrutiny and debate.

Ukraine and its European allies have accused Trump of sidelining their interests in favour of his one-on-one negotiations with Russian President Vladimir Putin. They also have criticised Trump and his officials for seeming to offer Russia concessions even before the negotiations officially began.

On February 12, for instance, his Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told an international defence group in Brussels that Ukraine may never regain some of its occupied territory.

“We must start by recognising that returning to Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective,” he said, adding that membership in the NATO military alliance was also unlikely. “Chasing this illusionary goal will only prolong the war and cause more suffering.”

Trump has gone so far as to blame Ukraine’s NATO ambitions as the cause of the war, something critics blast as a Kremlin talking point.

Amid the negotiations, the relationship between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has grown increasingly testy. Already, during his first term, Trump faced impeachment proceedings over an alleged attempt to pressure Zelenskyy by withholding military aid.

During his second term, though, Trump upped the ante, calling the Ukrainian president a “dictator” for not holding elections, something prohibited under Ukraine’s wartime laws.

One public display of frustration came in the White House on February 28, when Trump shouted at Zelenskyy, calling him “disrespectful” during a gathering with journalists.

The US president also used the appearance to defend his warm relationship with Russia’s president. “ Putin went through a hell of a lot with me,” Trump told Zelenskyy.

The shouting match led to a brief suspension of US aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine.

In the months since, their two countries have agreed to a deal that would establish a joint investment fund that would allow Washington access to Ukraine’s mineral resources — a long-desired Trump goal.

The US president has voiced concern about the amount of money invested in Ukraine’s security, with Congress appropriating more than $174bn since the war began in 2022. He has also argued that a US mining presence would help deter foreign attacks in Ukraine.

But peace between Russia and Ukraine has remained elusive. Talks between the two warring parties on Friday ended after less than two hours, though they did agree to an exchange of 1,000 prisoners each.

In her op-ed column, Brink was clear that she held Russia responsible for the ongoing aggression.

“Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, it has done what can only be described as pure evil: killed thousands of civilians, including 700 children, with missiles and drones that hit their homes and apartments in the dead of night,” she wrote.

She added that Europe has not experienced “violence so systematic, so widespread and so horrifying in Europe since World War II”.

Brink warned that, if the US did not stand up to Russia, a domino effect could occur, paving the way for military assaults on other countries.

An aide worker in Gaza who has witnessed Israel’s increased bombardment of the enclave calls it “shocking,” as Palestinians struggle with a lack of food and medical supplies. Afeef Nessouli with Gila International tells Al Jazeera Israel is also keeping medical workers from coming in or out.

Ukraine and Russia agreed to a 1,000-for-1,000 prisoner swap — the war’s largest — during their first direct peace talks in three years, in Istanbul. Kyiv is now pushing for a Zelensky-Putin summit and a clear ceasefire plan.

The FA Cup was not Manchester City’s top priority this season, but now that they are in a third straight final, the club will go all out to win the trophy at Wembley, manager Pep Guardiola said.

City have had a “horrific season” in the words of striker Erling Haaland, with Guardiola’s side falling by the wayside in the Premier League title race while they were also eliminated in the Champions League knockout phase playoffs.

City are fourth in the Premier League and yet to secure Champions League qualification for next season – winning the FA Cup when they face Crystal Palace on Saturday may not be enough to salvage their campaign.

“That is the problem, right? The FA Cup now is not the first choice. Of course, we want it. Once we are here, of course, we want the trophy. It is massively important,” Guardiola told reporters on Friday.

“It was a disappointment last season [losing in the final to Manchester United]. But I’m pretty sure we’ll perform well, and we are going to compete against them.

“It’s the final of the FA Cup, it’s an honour and a privilege. Third time in a row being there, and we have to perform well. We travel to London to win the title.”

Guardiola also praised Oliver Glasner’s Palace, who knocked out fellow Premier League sides Fulham and Aston Villa to reach the final.

Palace, who are 12th in the league table, are seeking their first major trophy, having fallen in the final in 1990 and 2016, losing to Manchester United on both occasions.

“It is a fantastic team. They have had a really good second part of the season. They have had more than a year with Oliver working with the same players,” Guardiola said.

“They are a threat because they have quality. [Striker Jean-Philippe] Mateta is strong and the quality in [Eberechi] Eze is obvious and, of course, the pace from [fellow forward Ismaila] Sarr … [Adam] Wharton is a really good holding midfielder.

“They are well structured defensively and their set-pieces are one of the best in the Premier League.”

It’s 90 percent about us, says Palace manager

The quiet confidence seeping out of Crystal Palace’s training ground before the final against Manchester City was summed up by manager Oliver Glasner on Friday.

“We’re focused on what we want to do at Wembley. We analysed Man City, but 90 percent, we were talking about us,” Glasner, who will become the first Austrian to lead a team in an FA Cup final, told reporters.

“This is what we can influence. We can influence our performance. We can influence what we want to do in and out of possession. And the focus was on our game. We have a lot of confidence and looking forward to the final.”

Palace may be 12th in the Premier League, but have matched their record points tally with two games still to play.

In the FA Cup, they have clicked impressively, winning 3-0 at Fulham in the quarterfinals and then beating Villa by the same margin at Wembley in the semis.

Now, they have one last obstacle to get over and claim the south London club’s first major trophy in its 120-year history.

Palace drew 2-2 with City at Selhurst Park in the league and led 2-0 in the return fixture, only to lose 5-2. They also lost 4-2 last April, a couple of months after Glasner took charge.

Scoring goals against Pep Guardiola’s team has not been a problem, but Glasner knows they will need to adjust defensively to give themselves the best possible chance at Wembley.

“In every single game [against City] we scored two goals, but we just had one draw, because we conceded four, two and five, so we have to make a few adjustments in our defending,” he said. “Because when you concede five, it’s tough to win, but when you score two, you should be able to win.

“So, we have confidence that we will create our chances, we will create our situations to score goals, but we have to do better in defence, and I don’t mean the back three or the back five. So as a team, maybe we have to adjust a few things, and this is what we want to do tomorrow.”

Palace fans, hoping it will be third time lucky in Cup finals after defeats in 1990 and 2016, produced a wall of sound and colour in the semifinal against Villa and are bound to give their side passionate support again on Saturday.

Goalkeeper Dean Henderson was one of several Palace players to donate to a fundraising campaign for a giant “tifo” against Villa, and another 45,000 pounds has been raised for one to be unfurled before Saturday’s Wembley showdown.

United States House Republicans’ “big, beautiful bill”, a wide-ranging tax and spending legislation, is at a crucial moment.

The nearly 400-page legislation proposes sweeping changes which include extending the 2017 tax cuts, slashing taxes for businesses and individuals, and enacting deep cuts to social programmes like Medicaid and SNAP.

While Republicans tout the bill as a boon for economic growth and middle-class relief, nonpartisan analysts warn it could add trillions to the national debt and strip millions of Americans of medical and food assistance.

The bill will be voted on by the House Budget Committee today and, if passed, will be voted on the floor next week.

The most substantive part of the bill is an extension of the 2017 tax cuts. The tax bill would add at least an additional $2.5 trillion to the national deficit over the next 10 years and decrease federal tax revenue by roughly $4 trillion by 2034.

Passing the legislation will also raise the debt ceiling, which sets the amount of money the government can borrow to pay for existing expenditures, by $4 trillion, a sticking point for hardline Republicans who want deeper cuts.

Here are some of the key measures in the proposed bill in its current form.

Changes for households

The bill increases standard deductions for all Americans. Individual deductions will increase by $1,000, $1,500 for heads of households, and $2,000 for married couples.

The bill extends the child tax credit of $2,000, which would otherwise have ended with the expiration of the 2017 tax cuts at year’s end.

It bumps up the child tax credit by $500 per child for this tax year and runs through the end of 2028. It also includes a $1,000 savings account for children born between December 31, 2024 and January 1, 2029. The legislation would also allow families to annually contribute $5,000 tax-free.

There is a new tax deduction for Americans 65 and older. The new bill would give a $4,000 annual deduction starting this year for people making a gross income of $75,000 for a single person and $150,000 for a married couple. If passed, the rule would take effect for the current tax year and run until the end of 2028.

“It will just make tax paying more complicated and more uncertain when a lot of these things ultimately expire,” Adam Michel, director of tax policy studies at the right-leaning Cato Institute, told Al Jazeera.

Another provision in the bill modifies state and local tax (SALT) deductions. It allows filers to be able to write off some of what they paid in local and state taxes from their federal filings.

Under the 2017 tax act, that was capped at $10,000, but the new legislation would raise that to $30,000. Some Republicans, particularly those in states with higher taxes like New York and California, have been pushing to raise the cap or abolish it altogether. However, they have faced fiscal hawks and those who see the increases as relief for those already wealthy.

The bill includes an increased benefit for small businesses that allows them to deduct 23 percent of their qualified business income from their taxes, up from the current 20 percent.

There is also a call for no taxes on overtime pay for select individuals. It would not apply to people who are non-citizens, those who are considered “highly compensated employees,” and those who earn a tipped wage.

The bill, however, also eliminates taxes on tips, a critical campaign promise by both Donald Trump and his Democratic rival Kamala Harris. The bill would allow people who work in sectors like food service, as well as hair care, nail care, aesthetics, and body and spa treatments, to specifically deduct the amount of tipped income they receive.

At the federal level, employers will still not be required to pay tipped workers more than the subminimum wage of $2.13 hourly. The intention is that workers will be able to make up the difference in tipping the receipt from customers.

Cuts to the social safety net

The legislation calls to make $880bn in cuts to key government programmes with a focus mostly on Medicaid and food stamps.

The CBO found that more than 10 million people could lose Medicaid access and 7.6 million could lose access to health insurance completely by 2034 under the current plan.

Even far-right Republicans have called out the Medicaid cuts. In an op-ed in The New York Times this week, Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri said the cuts are “morally wrong and politically suicidal”.

According to a new report from One Fair Wage shared with Al Jazeera, tipped workers could be hit especially hard, as 1.2 million restaurant and tipped workers could lose access to Medicaid.

“A no tax on tips proposal, which is like a minuscule percentage of their income and doesn’t affect two-thirds of tips workers because they don’t earn enough to pay federal income tax, is just nowhere near enough to compensate for the fact that we’re going to have millions of these workers lose the ability to take care of themselves, in some cases go into medical debt, in many cases just not take care of themselves,” Saru Jayaraman, president of One Fair Wage, an advocacy group for restaurant workers, told Al Jazeera.

The bill also introduces work requirements to receive benefits, saying that recipients must prove they work, volunteer or are enrolled in school for at least 80 hours each month.

At the same time, the bill also shortens the open enrolment period by a month for the Affordable Care Act (ACA), otherwise known as Obamacare. This means people who have employer-funded healthcare and lose their job might lose eligibility to buy a private plan on the healthcare exchange.

“It’s taking folks like 11 to 12 weeks to find a new job. The worse the labour market gets, that number will tick up. If you’re unemployed for three months, you get kicked off Medicaid,” Liz Pancotti, managing director of policy and advocacy at the Groundwork Collective, told Al Jazeera.

“Then, if you try to go buy a plan on the ACA marketplace, you are no longer eligible for subsidies … which I think is really cruel.”

Other major proposed cuts will hit programmes like Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programme or SNAP, which helps 42 million low-income individuals afford groceries and comes at a time when food costs are still 2 percent higher than a year ago. The CBO found that 3 million people could lose SNAP access under the new plan.

The bill would also force states to take up more responsibility in funding the programmes. States would be required to cover 75 percent of the administrative costs, and all states would have to pay at least 5 percent of the benefits — 28 states would need to pay 25 percent.

“States are now going to be on the hook for billions of dollars in funding for these two vital programmes. They have a tough choice. One is, do they cut funding from others like K-12 education, roads, veteran services, etc, to cover this gap, or do they raise taxes so that they can raise more revenue to cover this gap,” Pancotti added.

Under the current law, the federal government is solely responsible for shouldering the cost of benefits. The proposed cuts would save $300bn for the federal government but hit state budgets hard.

Bill fuels Trump administration priorities

The bill would also cut the $7,500 tax credit for new electric vehicle purchases and $4,000 for a used EV, a move which could hurt several major US automakers that are already reeling from the administration’s tariffs on automobiles.

General Motors pumped billions into domestic EV production in the last year, which has included a $900m investment to retrofit an existing plant to build electric vehicles in Michigan and alongside Samsung, the carmaker invested $3.5bn in EV battery manufacturing in the US.

In February, Ford CEO Jim Farley said that revoking the EV tax credit could put factory jobs on the chopping block. The carmaker invested in three EV battery plants in Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee. The federal government under the administration of former President Joe Biden paid out more than $2bn in EV tax credits in 2024.

The proposed legislation would also give the Trump administration authority to revoke the tax exempt status of nonprofit organisations that it deems as a “terrorist supporting organisation”. It would give the secretary of the treasury the ability to accuse any nonprofit of supporting “terrorism”, revoke their tax exempt status without allowing them due process to prove otherwise, which has raised serious concerns amongst critics.

“This measure’s real intent lurks behind its hyperbolic and unsubstantiated anti-terrorist rhetoric: It would allow the Treasury Department to explicitly target, harass and investigate thousands of U.S. organizations that make up civil society, including nonprofit newsrooms,” Jenna Ruddock, advocacy director of Free Press Action, said in a statement.

“The bill’s language lacks any meaningful safeguards against abuse. Instead it puts the burden of proof on organizations rather than on the government. It’s not hard to imagine how the Trump administration would use it to exact revenge on groups that have raised questions about or simply angered the president and other officials in his orbit.”

The bill would introduce new taxes on colleges, including a varying tax rate based on the size of a university’s endowment per student with the highest at 14 percent for universities with a per student endowment of more than $1.25m but less than $2m and 21 percent for those of $2m or more.

This comes amid the Trump administration’s increased tensions with higher education. In the last week, the Trump administration pulled $450m in grants to Harvard on top of the $2.2bn it pulled in April — a move which will hinder research into cancer and heart disease, among other areas. Harvard has an endowment of $53.2bn, making it one of the richest schools in the country.

The legislation would also increase funding for a border wall between the US and Mexico, which the administration has argued will help curb undocumented immigration. However, there is no evidence that such a wall has deterred border crossings.