RED LINE DRAWN —  Russia Warns Western Troops in Ukraine Would Be “Legitimate Targets” as UK and France Plan Post-Ceasefire Force.

Russia has issued its bluntest warning yet to Europe, declaring that any Western troops deployed to Ukraine would be treated as “legitimate combat targets,” a sharp escalation in rhetoric that underscores how fragile — and potentially explosive — any future ceasefire could be.

The threat came hours after Britain and France unveiled plans for a multinational force to deploy to Ukraine if hostilities pause. Meeting in Paris, leaders of the so-called “coalition of the willing” outlined a framework that could see thousands of European troops operating on Ukrainian soil to help secure airspace, protect maritime routes and assist in rebuilding Ukraine’s armed forces. French President Emmanuel Macron openly floated the idea of deploying French troops, while British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the initiative would establish a legal basis for long-term Western military involvement.

Moscow’s response was immediate and unforgiving. In a statement, Russia’s Foreign Ministry warned that Western military units, infrastructure or depots in Ukraine would constitute “foreign intervention” and pose a direct threat to Russian security. Any such presence, it said, would fall squarely within the Russian military’s list of lawful targets. The ministry went further, branding the European initiative a dangerous “axis of war” that risks dragging the continent into a deeper, costlier confrontation.

The language matters. For the first time, the Kremlin is explicitly signaling that a post-ceasefire Western presence would not be treated as peacekeeping, but as an extension of the battlefield itself. That framing narrows the diplomatic space and raises the stakes for European capitals weighing how far they are willing to go to guarantee Ukraine’s security.

Russia continues to argue that its 2022 invasion was a pre-emptive move to stop NATO’s eastward expansion and prevent Ukraine from becoming a Western military outpost. It has long insisted that the stationing of foreign troops in Ukraine is a non-negotiable red line. Ukraine and its allies counter that Moscow’s real aim is territorial conquest and long-term domination, pointing to Russia’s occupation of nearly 20 percent of Ukrainian territory.

The United States has drawn its own limits. Washington has ruled out sending American troops but has voiced support for security arrangements designed to deter future Russian attacks. That gap — European ambition paired with American restraint — is now shaping a dangerous gray zone.

At its core, the dispute exposes the central paradox of any Ukraine ceasefire: Kyiv wants guarantees strong enough to prevent another invasion, while Moscow sees those same guarantees as provocation. Russia’s warning suggests that unless this contradiction is resolved, even “peace” could come with the constant risk of a wider European war.

BLACKOUT & BLOOD — Iran Pulls the Plug as Protesters Defy Khamenei.

Iran’s government has imposed a nationwide internet shutdown as protests continue to spread despite a violent crackdown that rights groups say has killed dozens, exposing deep fractures inside the Islamic Republic and growing fear at the top of the regime.

Demonstrations erupted again Thursday in Tehran and multiple provincial cities, even as security forces intensified their response. Videos posted before the blackout showed shops shuttered in Tehran’s historic bazaar, a powerful signal of unrest in a country already reeling from soaring inflation and a collapsing currency.

What began as protests over economic hardship has now morphed into a direct political challenge. Crowds in Tehran, Mashhad, Isfahan and Kermanshah were heard chanting slogans against Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei — a red line rarely crossed in the Islamic Republic.

By early evening, monitoring group NetBlocks confirmed that Iran had cut off internet access nationwide, a tactic long used by authorities to isolate protesters, slow mobilization and prevent images of violence from reaching the outside world.

The crackdown has been brutal. Amnesty International said security forces have fired live ammunition, metal pellets and tear gas at largely peaceful demonstrators, while beating and arbitrarily arresting hundreds. The Hengaw Human Rights Organization reported at least 42 people killed so far, including six children. Families of victims, Amnesty said, have been threatened into silence, with officials warning of secret burials if they refuse to cooperate.

Inside the government, the response has been fractured. President Masoud Pezeshkian has struck a conciliatory tone, urging dialogue, while hard-liners have vowed zero tolerance. Iran’s judiciary chief warned this week there would be “no leniency” for anyone deemed to be aiding the regime’s enemies.

The unrest is unfolding under growing international pressure. U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly warned Tehran that further killings could trigger American intervention — a threat that Iranian leaders are taking seriously after Washington’s recent capture of Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro.

For now, neither side is backing down. The streets remain tense, the internet is dark, and Iran’s leadership faces a dangerous dilemma: escalate the violence and risk foreign intervention, or ease repression and risk losing control.

ANOTHER CITY, ANOTHER GUNFIRE — Border Patrol Shoots Two in Portland Amid ICE Backlash.

Two people were shot and wounded by a U.S. Border Patrol agent in Portland, Oregon, on Thursday, in what federal officials again described as an act of “self-defense” during a targeted vehicle stop — the latest in a string of violent encounters linked to the Trump administration’s expanded immigration enforcement.

Portland police said officers responded shortly after 2:15 p.m. to reports of gunfire in the 10200 block of Southeast Main Street. Minutes later, a second call came from several miles away near Northeast 146th Avenue and East Burnside Street, where a man reported being shot and asked for help. Officers found both a man and a woman suffering from apparent gunshot wounds and rushed them to a hospital. Their conditions have not been released.

Authorities later determined that both injuries stemmed from an encounter involving federal agents.

The Department of Homeland Security said Border Patrol agents were conducting a “targeted vehicle stop” aimed at a passenger described as a Venezuelan national allegedly tied to the transnational Tren de Aragua criminal network. DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin claimed the driver — also alleged to be affiliated with the gang — attempted to run over agents with the vehicle.

“Fearing for his life and safety, an agent fired defensive shots,” McLaughlin said. The vehicle then fled the scene with both occupants inside.

Law enforcement sources told NBC News that the car, a red Toyota, struck one of the agents as it attempted to escape, prompting gunfire. The wounded individuals were identified as a 33-year-old man and a 32-year-old woman.

The shooting comes just one day after a similar and far more deadly incident in Minneapolis, where Renee Nicole Good, a U.S. citizen and mother, was shot and killed by an ICE officer during an enforcement operation. In both cases, DHS used nearly identical language, claiming the suspects “weaponized” their vehicles.

That framing has drawn sharp criticism. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey flatly rejected DHS’s account of the earlier shooting, calling it “bulls—,” while witnesses said Good appeared to be fleeing when she was shot. A New York Times video analysis later raised further doubts about the official narrative.

In Portland, officials moved quickly to urge calm — but condemnation followed.

“We are still in the early stages of this incident,” Police Chief Bob Day said, acknowledging the “heightened emotion and tension” following the Minneapolis killing. The FBI has taken over the investigation, describing the case as an “assault on federal officers,” while confirming that the two people shot had fled before seeking medical care.

Portland Mayor Keith Wilson called for a halt to ICE operations in the city until the investigation is complete. “Portland does not respond to violence with violence,” he said. “We respond with clarity, unity, and a commitment to justice.”

The Multnomah County Board of Commissioners was more direct, saying the incident underscored what they called a pattern of fear and force. “Enough is enough,” the board said. “The terror and violence ICE is causing in our neighborhoods must end now.”

With Minneapolis, Portland, and other cities now on edge, the question is no longer whether the immigration crackdown will spark unrest — but how many more confrontations it will take before Washington is forced to reckon with the consequences.

LONDON STEPS IN —UK Confirms Support for U.S. Seizure of Russian-Flagged Oil Tanker in Atlantic Operation.

Britain has confirmed that it provided direct military support to the United States during a high-stakes operation to seize a Russian-flagged oil tanker in the North Atlantic, underscoring the depth of Anglo-American coordination as Washington tightens its blockade on sanctioned oil flows linked to Venezuela, Iran and Russia.

In a statement Wednesday, the U.K. Ministry of Defence said British forces offered “pre-planned operational support, including basing,” after a formal request from the United States. The operation culminated in the seizure of the tanker — formerly known as Bella-1 and later renamed Marinera — following a pursuit lasting more than two weeks across the Atlantic.

According to the MoD, a Royal Navy vessel supported U.S. forces tracking the tanker, while Royal Air Force assets provided aerial surveillance. British officials said the mission was conducted in full compliance with international law.

Defence Secretary John Healey described the tanker as having a “nefarious history,” linking it to sanctions-evasion networks involving Russia and Iran. “This action formed part of global efforts to crack down on sanctions busting,” Healey said, framing the seizure as a collective enforcement measure rather than a unilateral American move.

British officials also confirmed that the tanker was sanctioned by the United States under its counter-Iran sanctions regime, adding to its legal exposure. The MoD noted that the vessel was being shadowed by a Russian submarine at the time of the operation — a detail that highlights the geopolitical sensitivity of the mission and the growing friction between NATO states and Moscow at sea.

Healey emphasized the strategic significance of the cooperation, calling the United States Britain’s “closest defence and security partner.” The operation, he said, demonstrated how closely the two militaries can operate when confronting shared security challenges. “Today’s seamlessly executed operation shows just how well this works in practice,” he added.

The confirmation places the United Kingdom squarely alongside Washington as it escalates enforcement against oil shipments tied to sanctioned regimes. It also signals to Moscow that future attempts to shield or reroute sanctioned vessels will face coordinated Western resistance — not only diplomatically, but operationally.

As tensions rise across the Atlantic and beyond, the seizure marks another step in a broader campaign that is increasingly blurring the line between sanctions enforcement and strategic power projection at sea.

Russia has issued a sharp warning to Washington after U.S. forces seized a Russian-flagged oil tanker in the North Atlantic, calling the move a dangerous escalation that could ignite wider military and political tensions across the Euro-Atlantic region.

In a forceful statement on Thursday, Russia’s Foreign Ministry said the seizure “lowers the threshold for the use of force against peaceful shipping” and risks triggering broader instability. Moscow accused Washington of violating international maritime law and acting out of what it described as “neo-colonial ambitions” tied to control over Venezuela’s oil wealth.

The tanker, originally known as Bella 1 and later renamed Marinera, was seized Wednesday for violating U.S. sanctions. American officials say the vessel attempted to evade a blockade on sanctioned Venezuelan oil shipments and only re-flagged to Russia last month in an apparent effort to avoid enforcement.

Notably, President Vladimir Putin has remained silent — both on the tanker seizure and on the earlier U.S. capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. That silence has not gone unnoticed inside Russia.

Hawkish commentators and military bloggers blasted the Kremlin for failing to respond decisively, with some calling for Russian naval escorts for so-called “shadow fleet” tankers. Others urged deploying armed contractors aboard commercial vessels to prevent future seizures. “Facing a bully who feels all-powerful, we must slap him across the face,” wrote Alexander Kots, a prominent pro-Kremlin military correspondent.

Yet analysts say Moscow’s outrage masks a harsher reality: Russia has few practical options.

“They’ve been embarrassed,” said Daniel Fried, a former U.S. assistant secretary of state. “Russian power is not what Putin claims it is — and they couldn’t do anything about this ship.”

Western governments have long vowed to tighten pressure on Russia’s shadow fleet, and the U.S. action is already being seen in Moscow as a dangerous precedent. But Russia’s legal arguments are weakened by the tanker’s last-minute re-flagging and by the broader context of its war in Ukraine.

For now, Moscow is left with fiery rhetoric — and little else. Even as tensions rise, Putin appears wary of directly confronting Donald Trump, a leader he has often sought to manage through flattery rather than force.

The seizure sends a clear signal: Washington is willing to test red lines at sea. And Moscow, despite the anger, is discovering just how constrained its response has become.

“SHE BROUGHT IT ON HERSELF” — Vance Backs ICE Shooting as Minneapolis Erupts.

U.S. Vice President JD Vance has forcefully defended a federal immigration officer who shot and killed a woman in Minneapolis, calling criticism of the incident “preposterous” as protests and political backlash intensify.

In a social media post on January 8, Vance said the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent acted in “self-defense” and was “doing his job” during the operation that ended with the death of 42-year-old Renee Nicole Good.

“He discharged his weapon in self defense,” Vance wrote, shifting blame squarely onto the victim. While acknowledging the outcome as tragic, Vance argued that responsibility lay with Good herself. “She tried to stop him from doing his job,” he said. “When he approached her car, she tried to hit him.”

The vice president’s comments came amid growing scrutiny of the shooting, which occurred on January 7 in a residential neighborhood south of downtown Minneapolis during a sweeping immigration enforcement operation. The crackdown, involving more than 2,000 federal agents, has already inflamed tensions in a city still shaped by the legacy of George Floyd’s killing.

A video analysis published by The New York Times, however, appears to contradict Vance’s account. The footage suggests that Good’s vehicle was turning away from the officer at the moment she was shot in the head — a detail that has fueled calls for an independent investigation.

Democratic lawmakers and local officials have reacted with outrage. Some have publicly called for the officer’s arrest, while Minneapolis leaders have demanded that ICE immediately leave the city, accusing federal agents of escalating violence and undermining public safety.

The shooting has become a flashpoint in the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration strategy, with critics warning that federal enforcement tactics are increasingly militarized and prone to deadly outcomes. Supporters, including Vance, argue the officers are operating under threat and deserve unequivocal backing.

As protests continue and questions mount over the use of lethal force, the Minneapolis shooting is fast becoming a defining test of how far Washington is willing to go — and how much accountability it is prepared to accept — in its expanding immigration crackdown.

Abiy Hosts China’s Wang Yi as Beijing Deepens Horn of Africa Diplomacy, Eyes Somalia Visit.

Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed on Wednesday hosted China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi at the National Palace, marking the latest signal of Beijing’s intensifying diplomatic engagement in the Horn of Africa.

The high-level meeting, held as part of Wang’s two-day official visit to Ethiopia, focused on strengthening bilateral cooperation and exchanging views on regional and international issues, according to Ethiopian officials. Wang Yi, who also serves as a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China’s Central Committee, is among Beijing’s most senior and influential diplomats, underscoring the political weight of the visit.

The talks reflect the long-standing partnership between Addis Ababa and Beijing, which has expanded over two decades to include infrastructure development, trade, investment, and security cooperation. China remains one of Ethiopia’s largest trading partners and a major financier of railways, industrial parks and energy projects, even as Addis Ababa seeks to rebalance its external relationships amid economic strain and regional instability.

Wang’s stop in Ethiopia is part of a broader African tour that also includes Tanzania, Lesotho — and notably Somalia. China’s Foreign Ministry announced Wednesday that the foreign minister will travel to Mogadishu in the coming days, a visit that carries significant geopolitical overtones.

The Somalia leg of the trip comes at a sensitive moment in the Horn of Africa, as Mogadishu works aggressively to rally international opposition to Israel’s recent recognition of Somaliland as an independent state. Beijing has already rejected the move, aligning itself with Somalia’s federal government and the African Union.

Analysts say China’s stance is consistent with its broader foreign policy doctrine, which places sovereignty and non-recognition of Somaliland at the center of international order — a principle Beijing applies not only in Africa, but also in cases closer to home, including Taiwan, Tibet and Xinjiang.

While details of Wang’s planned meetings in Somalia have not been made public, officials familiar with the agenda say discussions are expected to cover bilateral cooperation, regional security, and the future of China–Africa relations. Somalia has become an increasingly important node in Beijing’s Red Sea and Indian Ocean calculus, particularly as global competition intensifies over trade routes, ports and political influence in the region.

Taken together, Wang Yi’s visits to Addis Ababa and Mogadishu highlight China’s methodical approach in the Horn of Africa: strengthening ties with established regional powers like Ethiopia, while simultaneously reinforcing the sovereignty-based international framework that favors Mogadishu — and constrains Somaliland’s push for broader recognition.

As geopolitical fault lines harden across the Horn, China intends not merely to observe, but to shape the diplomatic terrain.

AID CUT OFF: Washington Freezes All Support to Mogadishu After Alleged Looting of Food for the Hungry.

The United States has suspended all assistance to Somalia’s federal government, accusing officials in Mogadishu of illegally seizing and destroying donor-funded humanitarian aid meant for some of the country’s most vulnerable people.

In a statement posted Wednesday by the U.S. State Department’s Under Secretary for Foreign Assistance, Humanitarian Affairs and Religious Freedom, the Trump administration alleged that Somali officials destroyed a World Food Programme warehouse and confiscated 76 metric tonnes of food aid funded by American taxpayers. The supplies were intended for distribution to Somalis facing acute food insecurity.

“The Trump Administration has a zero-tolerance policy for waste, theft, and diversion of life-saving assistance,” the statement said, calling the reported actions “deeply concerning.”

Somali authorities have not yet publicly responded to the accusations, and no independent verification has been released. Still, the move marks one of the most severe diplomatic and financial measures Washington has taken against Mogadishu in years, and it comes amid a broader hardening of U.S. policy toward Somalia under President Donald Trump’s second term.

While details remain limited, the suspension appears to apply specifically to assistance routed through the Somali federal government, not necessarily all humanitarian aid delivered by international agencies. Even so, the decision injects new uncertainty into a country where millions rely on external support to survive drought, conflict and chronic economic collapse.

The aid freeze also fits into a wider pattern. Since returning to office in 2025, Trump has sharply scaled back U.S. humanitarian assistance globally, while simultaneously escalating military pressure on armed groups in Somalia through expanded air strikes. Under former President Joe Biden, Washington provided roughly $770 million in assistance to Somalia, though only a fraction went directly to the federal government.

Beyond foreign aid, Somalia has increasingly been drawn into Trump’s domestic political rhetoric. In December, the president launched a racially charged tirade against Somali Americans during a cabinet meeting, accusing them of “destroying America” and singling out Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar. His administration has since floated denaturalization as a potential tool against Somali Americans implicated in fraud cases, while ramping up immigration enforcement raids in Minneapolis, home to the largest Somali diaspora in the United States.

Those domestic actions now intersect with foreign policy. The State Department’s statement made clear that the aid suspension is conditional, leaving the door open to a reversal — but only if Mogadishu accepts responsibility.

“Any resumption of assistance will be dependent upon the Somali Federal Government taking accountability for its unacceptable actions and taking appropriate remedial steps,” the statement said.

For Somalia’s leadership, the decision is a stark warning. For ordinary Somalis, it risks becoming another chapter in a long history where political breakdown and corruption allegations translate into collective punishment. And for Washington, the move underscores a sharper doctrine: humanitarian aid is no longer treated as neutral relief, but as leverage — with accountability demanded before compassion resumes.