Ethiopia’s Finance Minister Ahmed Shide met with senior World Bank officials to strengthen development cooperation as the country pushes forward with economic reforms. The discussions, held with Anna Bjerde, the Bank’s Managing Director for Operations, and Victoria Kwakwa, Regional Vice President for Eastern and Southern Africa, focused on Ethiopia’s energy potential, financial sector reforms, and ongoing investment initiatives.

Ethiopia’s energy sector took center stage, with Shide highlighting the country’s vast renewable resources and the importance of collaboration with the World Bank. Ethiopia remains a key player in the Mission300 initiative, which aims to provide electricity to 300 million Africans by 2030. The World Bank has invested heavily in Ethiopia, with over $17 billion committed across multiple sectors.

Ahmed Shide also outlined Ethiopia’s aggressive macroeconomic reforms, including tax and financial sector restructuring, aimed at improving the investment climate. These measures align with the government’s push to stabilize inflation, attract foreign investment, and modernize key industries.

World Bank officials praised Ethiopia’s economic progress and emphasized the need for deeper reforms to encourage private sector participation. The Bank reaffirmed its commitment to supporting Ethiopia’s development agenda, particularly in areas that promote financial sustainability and job creation.

Both sides agreed on the importance of continued collaboration, signaling that Ethiopia’s partnership with the World Bank will remain a cornerstone of its economic transformation.

A catastrophic mid-air collision between an American Airlines regional jet and a U.S. military helicopter over Washington’s Ronald Reagan National Airport has left authorities scrambling for answers. The crash, which ignited a fireball near the Potomac River, has raised urgent concerns about air traffic control protocols and military flight safety near civilian airspace.

Rescue teams are still searching for survivors, but the conditions are grim. The jet, carrying 60 passengers and four crew members, was on its final approach when it struck a Sikorsky H-60 helicopter conducting a training flight with three Army personnel aboard.

FAA data indicates the aircraft was at a low altitude—roughly 120 meters—when the collision occurred. Video from the Kennedy Center captured the terrifying moment of impact, showing both sets of lights merging before the explosion.

The disaster has prompted a firestorm of political reaction. President Trump questioned the failure of air traffic control to prevent the accident, calling it “a bad situation that should have been prevented.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth described it as “absolutely tragic” but refrained from speculating on responsibility.

American Airlines CEO Robert Isom promised full support to the affected families, while Senator Roger Marshall of Kansas, the jet’s departure point, mourned the likely loss of life.

With more than 300 emergency responders working against freezing waters, authorities have yet to confirm fatalities, though the grim reality suggests few, if any, survivors.

This marks the most severe U.S. aviation disaster in over a decade and is bound to trigger intense scrutiny of military flight operations near major airports. The coming days will determine whether this was a tragic accident or a systemic failure that demands accountability.

Lopsided prisoner swaps embolden terrorists—global action is needed to prevent future hostage crises.

Hamas is weaponizing hostages as a means of psychological warfare, stretching out negotiations to maximize suffering while securing an absurdly lopsided prisoner exchange. Over six weeks, only 33 hostages will be freed in exchange for over 1,900 prisoners, including convicted terrorists—a deal that sets a dangerous precedent.

The manipulation tactics are blatant: delaying releases, withholding names, and delivering freed captives with “certificates” as if celebrating a grim achievement. Families remain in agonizing suspense, not knowing whether their loved ones are alive or dead. Meanwhile, Hamas taunts the world, releasing hostage videos and exploiting international mediators without facing any real consequences.

President Donald Trump voiced skepticism about the ceasefire’s longevity, highlighting the fragility of any agreement brokered with a terrorist group that thrives on deception. The implications of these one-sided exchanges are clear: future kidnappings are all but guaranteed. Terrorist groups now see hostage-taking as a highly effective bargaining tool, leveraging human lives for the release of their most dangerous operatives.

Examples of past failed exchanges—like the Iran-Contra affair or the Griner-Bout trade—prove that rewarding hostage-takers only escalates the problem. But today’s deals go beyond bad diplomacy—they are actively empowering terrorists and exposing civilians to greater risks.

The international community must act. Global hostage negotiation protocols should prevent the mass release of convicted terrorists. Nations must freeze assets and sanction hostage-takers to remove financial incentives. Aid to Gaza must come with strict oversight, ensuring it is not diverted into Hamas’ terror infrastructure.

Hamas should not be calling the shots. This broken system will only fuel more kidnappings unless the world takes a stand. The solution isn’t appeasement—it’s firm, coordinated action that denies terrorists the leverage they crave.

Friedrich Merz courts controversy by pushing tough migration laws with potential far-right support.

Germany is at a political crossroads as Friedrich Merz, the likely next chancellor, shifts the country’s postwar political landscape by pushing strict migration policies, even at the risk of accepting votes from the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD).

Merz’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) is leading the polls with 30% support, while the AfD follows at 20%, reflecting a broader shift toward hardline migration stances. His proposal includes blocking asylum-seekers at Germany’s borders and detaining migrants indefinitely if they refuse deportation. While mainstream parties traditionally avoid cooperation with the AfD, Merz suggested he would not reject their votes if it means passing tougher immigration laws.

The move has triggered a political firestorm. Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) warned that working with the extreme right violates Germany’s postwar consensus, while Green and Social Democratic leaders condemned the CDU’s tactics. Even some within Merz’s party fear crossing this red line could backfire politically.

However, CDU strategists argue that engaging in tough migration policies is necessary to stop hemorrhaging voters to the AfD. Senior CDU figures claim their goal is to reclaim lost ground from the far right, not align with it.

With elections looming, Germany’s political battle lines are hardening. If Merz wins, he may struggle to build a governing coalition, as both SPD and Greens remain reluctant partners. Meanwhile, AfD leaders are capitalizing on the situation, claiming that their long-standing stance on immigration is finally being adopted by the mainstream.

As Germany redefines its political identity, Merz’s gamble could either secure his path to the chancellery or create an even deeper divide—one that tests the very foundation of postwar German democracy.

Scientists predict a future ocean will divide East Africa as tectonic forces continue to reshape the continent.

Africa is undergoing a profound geological transformation as the East African Rift System continues to widen, setting the stage for the eventual formation of a new ocean. The rift, stretching from the Red Sea to Mozambique, marks the boundary where the Somali Plate is pulling away from the Nubian Plate, a process that began 35 million years ago and is still unfolding today.

This gradual but relentless split is driven by tectonic forces beneath the rift, where molten rock from the African Superplume is thinning the Earth’s crust and pushing the plates apart at a rate of six to seven millimeters per year. While imperceptible on a daily scale, this movement has already produced cracks, fissures, and increased volcanic activity across Ethiopia, Kenya, and Tanzania.

Notable signs of this split include the 35-mile-long fissure in Ethiopia’s Afar Desert, which formed in 2005, and the massive fault line that disrupted roads near Mai Mahiu, Kenya, in 2018. Over time, the Indian Ocean is expected to flood the widening valley, ultimately separating Somalia, Kenya, Tanzania, and Ethiopia into a new landmass.

The implications of this transformation are significant. Landlocked nations like Uganda and Rwanda may gain access to new coastlines, reshaping trade and economic opportunities. The East African Great Lakes, home to 25% of the world’s unfrozen freshwater, could eventually merge with the new ocean, fostering marine ecosystems and biodiversity. However, the environmental shifts could also disrupt local climates and agriculture, necessitating adaptation from communities that rely on the region’s natural resources.

Geological activity in the region remains intense, with volcanic eruptions from Mount Nyiragongo (Congo) and Ol Doinyo Lengai (Tanzania) continuing to shape the evolving landscape. While destructive, these forces also contribute to fertile soils that support millions of people.

The East African Rift mirrors other continental transformations, such as the Red Sea’s formation, when the Arabian Peninsula drifted away from Africa, and Iceland’s active rift system, where tectonic movements create geothermal energy.

Though this split is expected to take one to five million years, its effects are already visible. The slow birth of a new ocean will eventually redraw Africa’s geography, marking one of the most dramatic changes in the planet’s geological history.

Moscow aims to preserve its strategic foothold in Syria as it negotiates with the country’s new leadership following Bashar Assad’s removal.

A high-ranking Russian delegation led by Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov and Kremlin envoy Alexander Lavrentiev seeks to safeguard Moscow’s military interests following the removal of its longtime ally, former Syrian President Bashar Assad. This marks the first Russian diplomatic mission to Syria since Assad’s fall, underscoring the urgency for Moscow to secure its strategic foothold in the region.

Russia’s military involvement in Syria, which began in 2015, was instrumental in propping up Assad’s regime during the civil war. Now, with Assad out of power, Moscow is recalibrating its approach to ensure its investments in key military bases remain intact. The Tartous naval facility, Russia’s only repair and resupply hub in the Mediterranean, and the Hmeimim airbase, a cornerstone for Russian air operations, are central to these discussions. These bases not only bolster Russia’s Mediterranean presence but also serve as logistical hubs for its expanding influence in Africa through military contractor deployments.

Sources close to the talks confirm that the delegation’s agenda includes securing guarantees from Syria’s new leadership to retain operational control over these bases. These negotiations reflect Moscow’s broader strategy of maintaining its geopolitical leverage in the Middle East, despite the loss of a key ally.

The stakes are high for Russia as regional and international actors monitor its moves in post-Assad Syria. With these bases critical to Russia’s Mediterranean and African operations, their retention will signal Moscow’s enduring influence in the region. However, the outcome of these talks remains uncertain, particularly given Syria’s shifting internal power dynamics and potential competing interests from other global powers.

As Moscow adapts to a post-Assad Syria, the visit underscores Russia’s determination to preserve its strategic assets and ensure its role as a key player in the Middle East.

Danish PM rallies European allies as Trump intensifies efforts to claim the Arctic island, raising global security stakes.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen is spearheading a whirlwind diplomatic mission across Europe to counter U.S. President Donald Trump’s renewed push to claim Greenland, a mineral-rich Arctic territory. With stops in Berlin, Paris, and Brussels, Frederiksen aims to rally European leaders, including German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, French President Emmanuel Macron, and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, in a united front against Trump’s escalating rhetoric.

The urgency of the mission reflects Copenhagen’s rising alarm over Trump’s insistence on acquiring Greenland, a Danish territory since 1953. Trump has hinted at using military force or economic pressure to secure control of the Arctic island, citing its strategic importance for American security and its untapped mineral wealth. Frederiksen’s efforts also come amid intensifying competition in the Arctic from Russia and China.

“Denmark is a small country, but we are part of a strong European community,” Frederiksen said Tuesday morning. “Unity is crucial in these geopolitical times, with war on the continent and challenges to the polar security architecture. Europe must do much more to stand on its own.”

The Financial Times recently reported on a contentious 45-minute call between Frederiksen and Trump, which left officials in Copenhagen deeply concerned. Trump’s revived ambitions for Greenland, previously dismissed during his first term, have taken on a more serious tone, forcing Denmark to rethink its Arctic security strategy.

In response, the Danish government announced a €2 billion investment in Arctic defense, including new ships, long-range drones, and enhanced satellite capabilities. Frederiksen’s diplomatic outreach underscores Denmark’s reliance on European and NATO partnerships to counter growing geopolitical threats to its sovereignty.

As the Arctic heats up both literally and geopolitically, Frederiksen’s mission aims to ensure that Greenland remains a cornerstone of Denmark’s territorial integrity and a symbol of European unity in an increasingly fractured global landscape.

Tense negotiations lead to an agreement on deporting Colombian migrants, averting escalating economic retaliation between two key allies.

The United States and Colombia reached a high-stakes agreement late Sunday, resolving a contentious dispute over the deportation of Colombian migrants and averting the imposition of severe tariffs and sanctions. This development follows a tense diplomatic standoff marked by escalating rhetoric between U.S. President Donald Trump and Colombian President Gustavo Petro.

At the heart of the disagreement was Trump’s campaign-driven push to deport undocumented migrants en masse, a key pillar of his 2024 presidential platform. Colombia, a significant U.S. ally in Latin America, initially refused to accept deportees transported on U.S. military aircraft, citing concerns over human dignity. Petro had demanded that deportations occur on civilian planes and under humane conditions.

The breakthrough agreement now requires Colombia to accept its citizens deported from the United States without restriction, including their transportation aboard U.S. military aircraft. In return, the U.S. will hold off on implementing punitive measures such as a 25% tariff on Colombian goods, which Trump had threatened to double within a week.

While the White House has described the deal as a “positive step,” some sanctions, including visa restrictions for Colombian officials and enhanced customs inspections, remain in place until the first repatriation flights land in Colombia.

Colombia’s Foreign Ministry emphasized its commitment to treating deported citizens with dignity while ensuring their reintegration. The ministry stated that Foreign Minister Luis Gilberto Murillo and Ambassador Daniel García-Peña would travel to Washington for high-level discussions to monitor the agreement’s implementation.

The standoff escalated after Trump’s initial announcement of tariffs on Colombian goods, which prompted a retaliatory move by Petro, who imposed reciprocal tariffs on U.S. imports. Petro framed the issue as a matter of national sovereignty, rejecting any attempt by the United States to dictate terms.

“A migrant is not a criminal and must be treated with the dignity that a human being deserves,” Petro said, adding that Colombia would only accept deportees under humane conditions.

Colombia’s resistance reflects a broader unease in Latin America regarding Trump’s immigration policies, which include mass deportations, increased military presence at the U.S.-Mexico border, and the suspension of asylum appointments.

The agreement comes amid Trump’s ramped-up deportation efforts, which have already seen over 1,000 migrants detained in the first days of his second term. These operations are part of an ambitious plan to crack down on undocumented migrants, an initiative that includes expanding detention facilities and increasing border enforcement personnel.

However, critics argue that the focus on deportations, including those involving relatively small numbers of Colombian migrants, is more about political optics than practical necessity. Deportations of Colombian nationals are unlikely to significantly impact the estimated 11 million undocumented migrants living in the U.S.

Further complicating matters is Colombia’s economic reliance on the United States, its third-largest trading partner in Latin America. The threat of tariffs posed a significant risk to Colombia’s export-driven economy, particularly in agriculture and manufacturing.

Despite the agreement, tensions remain. The Trump administration’s heavy-handed approach has drawn criticism from human rights advocates, who argue that leveraging economic sanctions to enforce deportations undermines diplomatic relations and humanitarian principles.

Meanwhile, Colombia faces its own challenges. The country’s limited resources to reintegrate deportees, coupled with concerns over potential security risks, could strain its social and economic fabric. Petro’s government must balance its commitment to protecting its citizens abroad with maintaining a constructive relationship with Washington.

The U.S.-Colombia deportation deal underscores the complexities of balancing immigration enforcement with diplomatic relations. While the immediate crisis has been averted, the broader implications of Trump’s immigration policies—both domestically and internationally—remain a contentious issue.

As the Trump administration pushes forward with its aggressive deportation strategy, it risks further alienating key allies in the region. For Colombia, the challenge lies in navigating the fallout while safeguarding its national interests and ensuring the humane treatment of its citizens.

The deal represents a temporary truce in what could become a long-term test of U.S.-Latin American relations under Trump’s leadership. How this agreement unfolds will likely shape the dynamics of bilateral cooperation in the months to come.