Salvadorans and Venezuelans among beneficiaries as Biden administration shields immigrants from looming Republican deportation plans.

In a last-minute move before President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration, President Joe Biden has extended temporary protected status (TPS) for more than 800,000 immigrants, including 230,000 Salvadorans and 600,000 Venezuelans. The decision offers a lifeline to individuals from disaster-stricken or conflict-ridden nations, providing temporary legal protection as fears mount over Trump’s promise of mass deportations.

The Department of Homeland Security cited severe environmental conditions in El Salvador, including a series of catastrophic weather events, as justification for the extension. Venezuelans, whose nation remains gripped by political turmoil under President Nicolás Maduro, were similarly granted extended protections. The timing coincided with Maduro’s controversial swearing-in for a third term, which the U.S. condemned by issuing a $65 million bounty on his arrest.

TPS has long been a critical safety net for immigrants, protecting individuals from 17 countries, including Haiti, Honduras, Sudan, and Afghanistan. Despite offering legal status, the program does not provide a pathway to citizenship, leaving beneficiaries vulnerable to political shifts. Salvadorans, who first gained TPS following devastating earthquakes in 2001, are among the largest groups benefiting from this provision.

Activists welcomed the move but warned of future challenges. Felipe Arnoldo Díaz of the National TPS Alliance called the extension a “small victory,” noting that many other nations with TPS designations face imminent expiration.

This humanitarian gesture underscores the stark contrast between Biden’s administration and the incoming Trump presidency. Trump has pledged the largest deportation campaign in U.S. history, and during his 2024 campaign, he and running mate JD Vance indicated plans to scale back TPS significantly. In his first term, Trump moved to terminate TPS for El Salvador, a decision ultimately stalled in court.

With the extension, Biden offers temporary reprieve to hundreds of thousands of immigrants while highlighting the uncertain future they face under an administration poised to reshape America’s immigration landscape.

Widespread discontent surges over $50 billion lost in Syria, inflation, and severe power outages, as hope for regime change rises.

Iran is facing escalating unrest as economic hardships and public frustration with the regime’s foreign policies converge. Benny Sabti, a researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), highlighted the deepening anger over the government’s expenditure of $50 billion in Syria, funds perceived as squandered in a failed foreign venture. This is coupled with financial aid to Lebanon and other regions, further enraging a population already struggling with domestic crises.

Living conditions in Iran have deteriorated sharply. Daily power outages lasting up to seven hours have paralyzed Tehran and rural areas, often causing water shortages. Industrial activity has ground to a halt, driving the unemployment rate to a staggering 35%. Pollution from burning ship fuel adds to the misery, forcing widespread shutdowns and confining citizens indoors.

Despite isolated protests by workers, widespread demonstrations have yet to materialize, though the regime appears increasingly anxious. Recent protest-response drills indicate a fragile hold on power, with officials openly admitting military and financial strains.

Public hope for change is growing. Many Iranians see international pressure as key to weakening the regime, with some calling for decisive action against oppressive Revolutionary Guard forces. Amid soaring inflation and a plummeting currency, Benny Sabti described 2024 as a decisive year, with the regime’s vulnerabilities exposed and public opposition reaching critical mass.

Protests against Chinese mining company Xinfeng expose tensions in Namibia’s Erongo region over alleged corruption and resource exploitation.

The arrest of Namibian activist Jimmy Areseb during a protest against alleged illegal lithium mining by the Chinese company Xinfeng has thrust the resource-rich Erongo region into the national spotlight. Areseb and his fellow demonstrators accuse local traditional authorities of accepting bribes from Xinfeng in exchange for mining rights, a claim the company and local leaders deny.

The controversy has reignited longstanding tensions in Namibia over the exploitation of its natural resources, the role of foreign investors, and the accountability of local leaders. Videos of the police crackdown, including images of elderly protesters being forcibly removed, have drawn comparisons to Namibia’s apartheid-era policing, galvanizing public outrage.

The protests centered on accusations that Xinfeng bypassed proper legal channels to gain access to lithium deposits in Uis, a small mining settlement in Erongo. Community members claim that local chiefs and councilors granted the company consent in exchange for bribes disguised as “corporate social responsibility” payments. Xinfeng, however, denies these allegations, asserting that their monthly contributions to the traditional authority—about $550—are legitimate and unrelated to any illicit activity.

Areseb was arrested for allegedly obstructing law enforcement officers enforcing a court order to vacate the protest site. Activists, however, argue that the arrest underscores a double standard, as no legal action has yet been taken against Xinfeng despite accusations of illegal mining.

Namibian police have defended their actions, stating that Areseb’s arrest was an immediate response to his interference with officers, whereas investigations into Xinfeng require more time and evidence. Police spokesperson Kauna Shikwambi dismissed comparisons between the two cases, calling them “nonsensical.”

The incident has highlighted broader concerns over law enforcement impartiality, with critics accusing the police of favoring corporate interests over community grievances.

The conflict has also exposed fractures within the local community. Chief Sagarias Seibeb, accused of prioritizing Xinfeng’s interests over those of his people, dismissed the allegations as personal vendettas from family members unhappy with his leadership.

Seibeb emphasized that as a custodian of the land, he has no authority to deny prospecting activities approved by the state. However, this has done little to appease protesters, who demand greater transparency and accountability from both local leaders and government officials.

The tensions in Uis reflect larger issues facing Namibia as it navigates the balance between attracting foreign investment and ensuring that resource extraction benefits local communities. The lithium deposits in question are part of a broader push by global powers to secure critical minerals for renewable energy technologies, putting countries like Namibia at the center of geopolitical competition.

For the Namibian government, the situation poses a challenge: how to uphold the rule of law, address community grievances, and ensure fair and sustainable resource management.

A planned meeting between protesters, Chief Seibeb, and central government officials offers a chance for dialogue, though its outcome remains uncertain. For the community, the stakes are high—not just in resolving the immediate conflict but in setting a precedent for how Namibia manages its rich natural resources in the face of foreign interest and internal divisions.

As the world increasingly turns to Africa for critical minerals, Namibia’s handling of this case could serve as a bellwether for the continent’s broader struggles with resource governance and community rights.

US President-elect signals potential diplomatic move to resolve the Russia-Ukraine conflict, but concerns arise over the cost to Kyiv.

As preparations intensify for Donald Trump’s inauguration as the 47th President of the United States, the President-elect has revealed that plans are underway for a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Speaking to Republican governors at his Mar-a-Lago resort, Trump confirmed Putin’s expressed desire for talks and hinted at the potential for diplomatic breakthroughs, particularly regarding the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war.

Trump has consistently framed himself as a dealmaker capable of resolving the nearly three-year-long conflict between Russia and Ukraine. His latest comments underscore his intent to prioritize diplomatic engagement with Moscow, a strategy that has drawn both cautious optimism and significant criticism from international observers and allies.

“He wants to meet, and we are setting it up,” Trump announced, signaling that the meeting would occur after his January 20 inauguration. Trump also reiterated his desire to end what he called a “bloody mess,” referring to the war that has claimed thousands of lives and reshaped global geopolitics since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

While no formal timeline has been announced, the Kremlin has acknowledged Trump’s overtures. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov confirmed Moscow’s willingness for dialogue but stressed that official arrangements would wait until Trump formally assumes office. Putin himself has previously expressed openness to direct talks with the incoming U.S. leader.

Trump’s push for diplomacy comes against the backdrop of his campaign promise to resolve the Russia-Ukraine conflict “within 24 hours.” However, the President-elect has since tempered his optimism, acknowledging the complexities of securing a lasting peace.

Trump’s advisors have floated controversial proposals, including concessions that could cede significant portions of Ukrainian territory to Russian control. These suggestions have sparked concern in Kyiv and among NATO allies, who fear that a hastily brokered agreement could undermine Ukraine’s sovereignty and embolden Moscow’s expansionist ambitions.

The prospect of a Trump-Putin meeting has drawn mixed reactions. Proponents argue that high-level dialogue between Washington and Moscow could mark a pivotal step toward de-escalation and a potential end to the war. Others, however, remain skeptical of Trump’s approach, warning that his eagerness to forge a quick peace might come at an unacceptably high cost for Ukraine.

Critics also point to Trump’s past admiration for Putin and question whether his administration will hold Russia accountable for its actions in Ukraine. The fear is that a peace deal could solidify Russian gains in eastern Ukraine, leaving Kyiv in a weakened position and setting a dangerous precedent for international norms.

The stakes of a Trump-Putin meeting extend far beyond the immediate conflict in Ukraine. Any agreements reached could have significant implications for U.S.-Russia relations, NATO unity, and the broader geopolitical balance in Eastern Europe.

For Ukraine, the challenge lies in navigating potential pressure to accept compromises that might undermine its territorial integrity and national security. For Trump, the meeting represents an opportunity to demonstrate his much-touted dealmaking prowess while testing his administration’s ability to handle the complexities of international diplomacy.

As Trump prepares to take office, the anticipated meeting with Putin signals a bold attempt to address one of the most pressing global crises. Whether the talks will lead to a sustainable resolution or further complicate the geopolitical landscape remains to be seen.

For now, both Washington and Moscow are signaling readiness for dialogue, but the path to peace is fraught with challenges that could define the early months of Trump’s presidency and the future of U.S.-Russia relations.

From megadams in Tibet to solar stations in space, China’s ambitious energy projects signal its drive to lead in renewable energy innovation.

China is pushing the boundaries of energy innovation, unveiling plans that could reshape global renewable energy dynamics. With a commitment to achieving net-zero emissions by 2060, the nation has turned its attention skyward, planning an ambitious solar power station in space. At the same time, its terrestrial energy ambitions remain undiminished, as evidenced by the upcoming hydropower project on the Yarlung Tsangpo River in Tibet.

The space-bound solar power station, dubbed the “Three Gorges Dam in Space,” represents a groundbreaking effort to harness energy beyond Earth’s atmosphere. Using super-heavy rockets, China plans to assemble a solar power station in orbit capable of capturing sunlight and transmitting energy back to Earth via microwave or laser beams.

Rocket scientist Wang Xiaojun revealed the blueprint, emphasizing that this “incredible project” aligns with China’s strategy to achieve energy security while significantly cutting carbon emissions. The project, while still in its early stages, underscores China’s vision of integrating advanced technology with sustainable development.

On Earth, China is constructing a mega hydropower project over the Yarlung Tsangpo River in Tibet—a river that holds sacred significance and boasts the deepest canyon on the planet. The proposed dam will generate a staggering 300 billion kilowatt-hours of power annually, tripling the output of the Three Gorges Dam.

The project is not without controversy. Drilling tunnels up to 20 kilometers long to divert river flow and tapping into the steep gradients of the plateau pose significant technical and ecological challenges. Furthermore, the area’s geological instability due to tectonic activity increases the risks associated with such a monumental undertaking.

Both projects highlight China’s willingness to undertake bold, high-risk ventures to secure its energy future. The hydropower initiative in Tibet has drawn concerns about the region’s fragile ecosystem and its cultural implications, particularly for Tibetans who regard the Yarlung Tsangpo as sacred.

On the other hand, the space-based solar station faces technological hurdles, including the development of efficient energy transmission methods and ensuring safety during assembly and operation.

China’s dual ambitions of creating a massive space-based energy system and a record-breaking hydropower project signify more than a commitment to renewable energy. They also signal the nation’s geopolitical aspirations. By mastering advanced energy technologies, China is positioning itself as a global leader in clean energy—a move likely to unsettle traditional energy powers.

The hydropower project in Tibet could also heighten regional tensions, particularly with India, as the Yarlung Tsangpo flows into India’s Brahmaputra River. Concerns over water security and downstream ecological impacts will likely dominate regional diplomatic discussions.

China’s ventures into space and its terrestrial mega-dam illustrate the duality of its approach: leveraging cutting-edge technology for sustainability while grappling with the environmental and geopolitical complexities of large-scale infrastructure projects. As these projects unfold, they will serve as a litmus test for the feasibility of bold energy solutions in the face of ecological, technical, and geopolitical challenges.

Whether on Earth or in space, China’s ambitions are shaping the future of global energy.

Armed commando assault on N’Djamena’s presidential palace sparks deadly clash; government faces opposition skepticism over official account.

Calm returned to N’Djamena on Thursday morning following a dramatic assault on Chad’s presidential palace the previous evening. The heavily armed attack, carried out by a 24-member commando unit, resulted in 19 fatalities, including 18 of the attackers and one member of the presidential guard, according to government reports.

The clash began shortly before 8:00 pm local time, with heavy gunfire echoing through the center of the capital. Security forces swiftly subdued the assailants, whom government spokesman and Foreign Minister Abderaman Koulamallah described as a group of “drunken criminals” armed with weapons, machetes, and knives. Dressed in civilian clothing, the attackers reportedly originated from a poor southern neighborhood of the city.

In a video statement released hours after the violence, Koulamallah reassured the public, declaring, “The situation is completely under control… The destabilization attempt was put down.” He confirmed that Chad’s president, Mahamat Idriss Deby Itno, was inside the palace during the attack but did not provide further details on the incident.

While the government has lauded its forces’ swift response, opposition figures have questioned the official narrative. Max Kemkoye, spokesman for the Political Actors’ Consultation Group (GCAP), accused authorities of fabricating the event as a pretext to tighten their grip on power.

Chad’s government, led by President Deby since his takeover in 2021 following his father’s death, has faced growing dissent amid claims of corruption and unfulfilled promises of a transition to democratic rule. Wednesday’s attack has heightened concerns about instability in the military-ruled nation, where the government has struggled to balance internal security with regional challenges.

The opposition’s skepticism underscores the fraught political climate in Chad. Many opposition groups view the attack as either a fabricated incident or a deliberate overstatement to justify increased security measures.

As the international community awaits further clarification, the government has promised a briefing to diplomats and a prosecutor’s statement later in the day. For now, the deadly assault leaves Chad at a crossroads, with questions lingering about the motivations behind the attack and its implications for the country’s fragile political landscape.

Brig. Gen. Behrouz Esbati openly acknowledges Iran’s strategic failures in Syria, blaming Assad’s inaction and Russian duplicity for the loss of influence.

In an unprecedented admission, Brigadier General Behrouz Esbati, a key figure in Iran’s military strategy in Syria, has described Iran’s involvement in the Syrian conflict as a “very bad defeat.” Speaking at Tehran’s Valiasr mosque, Esbati acknowledged the profound setbacks Iran has faced, including the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime and the erosion of its strategic foothold in Syria.

Esbati, who oversaw Iranian military operations in Syria, offered a rare critique of both Assad and Iran’s primary ally, Russia. He blamed widespread corruption and oppressive governance under Assad for creating conditions that made the regime’s fall inevitable. The general revealed that Assad repeatedly ignored Tehran’s warnings to implement political reforms that might have preserved his grip on power.

Russia, meanwhile, stands accused of duplicitous actions during the conflict. Esbati alleged that Russian forces misled Iranian commanders, claiming to target opposition forces while instead dropping bombs on uninhabited areas. Additionally, he criticized Russia for disabling radar systems, effectively facilitating Israeli airstrikes on Iranian positions in Syria.

Iran’s strategic losses extend beyond Syria. Esbati noted that Israeli strikes have significantly degraded Iran’s air defense capabilities, leaving them “essentially naked.” Iran’s traditional allies, including Hezbollah and Hamas, are no longer in a position to mount large-scale support, further diminishing Iran’s regional leverage.

Despite the setbacks, Esbati indicated that Iran would pivot to unconventional methods to maintain influence in Syria. This includes mobilizing resistance cells and leveraging long-established social networks within Syrian society. “We can activate the social layers that our guys lived among for years; we can be active in social media and form resistance cells,” he stated, hinting at a shift toward insurgent and grassroots operations.

Esbati’s candid remarks represent a stark departure from the Iranian regime’s typically guarded narrative. They highlight the depth of Iran’s losses in Syria and the broader challenges it faces as its regional strategy falters. With weakened allies, compromised defenses, and diminishing credibility, Iran’s path forward in Syria appears fraught with uncertainty.

Kamel Saqr reveals Assad’s last-ditch pleas for support to Putin and his hasty escape as rebel forces closed in on Damascus.

Bashar al-Assad’s dramatic fall from power has been shrouded in speculation, but recent revelations from his former media chief, Kamel Saqr, suggest Russian President Vladimir Putin may have played a pivotal role in the ousted Syrian president’s undoing. In a candid interview with Mazeej Studios, Saqr painted a picture of Assad’s desperate final days, marked by failed requests for military support and an unceremonious escape from Damascus.

According to Saqr, Assad sought Putin’s assistance during a critical meeting in Moscow on November 29, just over a week before Damascus fell to opposition forces. At the time, rebels had already gained significant ground in Aleppo, and Assad’s position was rapidly deteriorating. Faced with dwindling support from Iran and Hezbollah, Assad pleaded with Putin to facilitate the transport of Iranian military aid via Russia’s Hmeimim airbase in Latakia.

While Putin reportedly agreed to assist, Saqr claims that no action was taken. Iranian officials later informed Assad that their attempts to mobilize were met with silence from Moscow and warnings from the United States, which threatened to shoot down any Iranian aircraft attempting to deliver aid. This inaction, Saqr alleges, points to deliberate deception by Putin, leaving Assad without crucial reinforcements as the opposition closed in.

The political isolation deepened as Turkey, a key supporter of the rebel offensive, declared an end to mediation efforts. Despite persistent requests from Russia and Iran, Assad refused to meet Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, dismissing such overtures as ploys for concessions.

In the days leading up to Damascus’ fall, Saqr recounts how Assad’s attempts to contact Putin went unanswered. Faced with imminent defeat, Assad decided against addressing the Syrian public, shelving a prepared 400-word speech. Instead, he fled the capital on December 7, reportedly using a private plane to reach Moscow via the Hmeimim airbase.

Assad’s hasty departure underscored the unraveling of his alliances. Despite years of support from Russia and Iran during Syria’s 13-year civil war, both countries appeared unwilling to expend further resources on his failing regime.

Now reportedly in exile in Moscow, Assad’s fate is emblematic of a broader narrative of betrayal and strategic calculation by his erstwhile allies. Saqr’s claims not only shed light on the inner workings of Assad’s final days but also highlight the shifting dynamics of power and allegiance in the Syrian conflict.

As the international community reflects on Syria’s protracted war, the revelations from Assad’s former aide serve as a stark reminder of the fragility of alliances in geopolitics, where promises of support can evaporate as swiftly as they are made.