Pentagon considering military options for Panama Canal access: Report
Officials say US military’s Southern Command exploring multiple options, from working with Panama to military action. The Pentagon is reportedly exploring military options for the Panama Canal to ensure ongoing US access to the strategically important waterway, following a request from the White House. The Reuters news agency reported on Thursday that a US official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said a document, described as an interim national security guidance by the new Trump administration, called on US forces to look at military options to safeguard access to the Panama Canal. Responding to reports of possible US military action, Panama’s government said that it would remain “firm” in defending its sovereignty amid the news that US President Donald Trump is considering options aimed at “reclaiming” the strategic canal. “With respect to these statements, I have nothing more to say than that Panama remains firm in defending its territory, its canal, and its sovereignty,” Panamanian Foreign Minister Javier Martinez-Acha told reporters on Thursday. “Let it be clear, the canal belongs to the Panamanians and will remain so,” he added. Advertisement Tensions between the US and Panama have again spiralled over Trump’s repeated threats to “take back” the Panama Canal. News of US military planning was reported earlier this week by NBC, citing an internal memo from the Trump administration and remarks from unnamed US officials. Officials told the network that the US military’s Southern Command will consider several options, including working with Panama’s military or taking the canal by force. They also said a US invasion of Panama is still unlikely at this time. The memo, however, asked the Pentagon “to provide credible military options to ensure fair and unfettered US military and commercial access to the Panama Canal”, according to reports. The Panama Canal runs through the narrow isthmus of Panama connecting North and South America, and is highly valuable because it connects the Pacific Ocean to the Caribbean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean. While more than 100 years old, the waterway has been in the global spotlight since Trump took office in January. The US president said in an address to the US Congress last week that his administration “will be reclaiming the Panama Canal, and we’ve already started doing it”. Despite his frequent remarks about the canal, Trump has yet to speak publicly about how the canal will be taken and if the US military would be involved. The US acquired the rights to build and operate the canal in the early 20th century. In a treaty signed in 1979, during the administration of President Jimmy Carter, the US agreed to turn over control of the canal to Panama at the close of 1999. Advertisement But the US and Panama are treaty-bound to defend the canal against any threat to its neutrality and are permitted to take unilateral action to do so. Control of the canal has also been a point of contention between Washington and Beijing, as Trump has previously claimed – without evidence – that China is secretly controlling the waterway. Both Panama and China have denied any foreign interference. Until recently, two of the canal’s four major ports were majority-owned by the Hong Kong-based conglomerate, CK Hutchison Holdings. After weeks of scrutiny, the conglomerate last week sold most of its global port operations – spanning 23 countries – to a consortium of investors led by the US firm BlackRock for $22.8bn. While the sale may have appeased Trump for now, the company now appears to be in the crosshairs of China’s Communist Party. This week, the pro-Beijing Hong Kong newspaper Ta Kung Pao published a scathing op-ed calling the BlackRock deal a “betrayal” of the Chinese people and CK Hutchison a “spineless grovelling, profit-seeking, profit-forgetting” company. The newspaper’s commentary was later uploaded to the website of China’s representative offices in Hong Kong and Macau, indicating tacit approval of its contents. Adblock test (Why?)
Columbia University punishes pro-Palestine students who occupied building
An unknown number of Columbia students were suspended from campus, expelled or had their degrees revoked. New York’s Columbia University said it has handed down punishments to pro-Palestine student protesters who occupied a university building last year during a pro-Palestine demonstration. Punishments range from multi-year suspensions to expulsions, and revocation of student degrees, the university said in a statement on Thursday, following a review of the “severity of behaviour at these events” and past infractions by students if any. The university did not say how many students were to be punished and declined to name those targeted to protect their privacy. The punishments relate to events in April 2024, when student protesters briefly occupied Hamilton Hall during a larger series of pro-Palestine and pro-Israel demonstrations across the university’s Manhattan campus. Protesters took action seeking an end to US support for Israel’s war on Gaza and for the university to divest from Israeli companies, among other demands. During the Hamilton Hall occupation, students barricaded themselves in the building but were later removed by police. The university claims the protesters also vandalised the building. Advertisement News of the severe punishment of student protesters comes just days after former Columbia postgraduate student Mahmoud Khalil was arrested by US immigration authorities at the behest of the US Department of State over his involvement in pro-Palestinian activism. Khalil, who is a permanent resident of the US and is married to a US citizen, took part in demonstrations until his graduation in December. Khalil’s deportation has been temporarily blocked by a federal judge, but he remains in custody in a detention facility in the southern state of Louisiana. Last week, US President Donald Trump also announced that he would be cancelling $400m of federal government grants and contracts due to “legitimate concerns” of anti-Semitism on campuses linked to the pro-Palestinian protests. Adblock test (Why?)
India strongly rejects Pakistan’s allegation of hand in Balochistan train hijacking: ‘Whole world knows where epicenter of global terrorism…’
Earlier on Thursday, Pakistan Foreign Office spokesperson Shafqat Ali Khan claimed that the rebels involved in the attack on the Jaffar Express were in contact with ring leaders in Afghanistan.
Second judge orders Trump admin to rehire probationary workers let go in mass firings
A second judge late Thursday ordered the Trump administration to reinstate probationary workers who were let go in mass firings across multiple agencies. In Baltimore, U.S. District Judge James Bredar, an Obama appointee, found that the administration ignored laws set out for large-scale layoffs. Bredar ordered the firings halted for at least two weeks and the workforce returned to the status quo before the layoffs began. He sided with nearly two dozen states that filed a lawsuit alleging the mass firings are illegal and already having an impact on state governments as they try to help those who are suddenly jobless. The ruling followed a similar one by U.S. District Judge William Alsup, who found Thursday morning that terminations across six agencies were directed by the Office of Personnel Management and acting director, Charles Ezell, who lacked the authority to do so. MICHELLE OBAMA REVEALS OBAMA NEEDED TO ‘ADJUST’ TO BE PUCNTUAL, LEAVE ON TIME Alsup’s order tells the departments of Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Defense, Energy, the Interior and the Treasury to immediately offer job reinstatement to employees terminated on or about Feb. 13 and 14. He also directed the departments to report back within seven days with a list of probationary employees and an explanation of how the agencies complied with his order as to each person. The temporary restraining order came in a lawsuit filed by a coalition of labor unions and organizations as the Republican administration moves to reduce the federal workforce. The Trump administration has already appealed Alsup’s ruling, arguing that the states have no right to try and influence the federal government’s relationship with its own workers. Justice Department attorneys argued the firings were for performance issues, not large-scale layoffs subject to specific regulations. CHUCK SCHUMER WILL VOTE TO KEEP GOVERNMENT OPEN: ‘FOR DONALD TRUMP, A SHUTDOWN WOULD BE A GIFT’ Probationary workers have been targeted for layoffs across the federal government because they’re usually new to the job and lack full civil service protection. Multiple lawsuits have been filed over the mass firings. Lawyers for the government maintain the mass firings were lawful because individual agencies reviewed and determined whether employees on probation were fit for continued employment. Alsup, who was appointed by President Bill Clinton, has found that difficult to believe. He planned to hold an evidentiary hearing on Thursday, but Ezell did not appear to testify in court or even sit for a deposition, and the government retracted his written testimony. There are an estimated 200,000 probationary workers across federal agencies. They include entry-level employees but also workers who recently received a promotion.
Russia-Ukraine war: List of key events, day 1,114
These are the key developments on day 1,114 of Russia’s war on Ukraine. Here is the situation on Friday, March 14: Fighting Russian President Vladimir Putin said his forces have trapped the remaining Ukrainian soldiers still in the country’s western Kursk region, where Kyiv’s troops have clung on for more than seven months in one of the key battles of the war after making a daring cross-border incursion. Putin told a news conference that the situation in Kursk was “completely under our control, and the group that invaded our territory is in isolation”. Ukraine’s military leadership has denied their forces are being encircled but said the remaining troops in the Kursk region are adopting better defensive positions. According to the Russian military, Ukraine now holds less than 200 square kilometres (77sq miles) in Kursk, down from 1,300sq km (500sq miles) at the peak of the incursion. Maps published by Deep State, an authoritative Ukrainian source that charts the front lines of the war, show a dramatic shrinking of Ukrainian-held territory in the past week but little change in the past 24 hours. Ukraine’s general staff said that five Russian attacks in Kursk have been repelled and clashes were continuing in four locations. A Russian war correspondent reported heavy Ukrainian artillery fire on Kursk’s Sudzha town, which Russia recaptured on Wednesday. Combat is reported to be ongoing on the periphery of Sudzha as some Ukrainian soldiers try to fight their way out of Kursk and back into the neighbouring Sumy region of Ukraine, The Associated Press (AP) news agency said. Video clips from Sudzha, published by Russian media and military bloggers, showed scenes of devastation from the seven months of fighting, with burned-out vehicles, roofless buildings and mountains of rubble. A Russian soldier walks along a ruined street in the Malaya Loknya settlement, which was recently retaken from Ukrainian forces by Russia’s military in the Kursk region, Russia [Handout/Russian Defence Ministry via Reuters] Ukrainian soldiers and commanders fear that Russia’s air superiority will enable them to wipe out the logistics routes vital to sustaining the soldiers who are still in Kursk, the AP reports. To retreat from Kursk, Ukrainian soldiers must walk dozens of kilometres to get back into Ukraine while avoiding Russian forces. Advertisement Ceasefire President Putin said he agrees in principle with a United States proposal for a 30-day ceasefire in Ukraine, but cautioned that terms are yet to be worked out. “The idea itself is correct, and we certainly support it,” Putin told a news conference in Moscow. “But there are issues that we need to discuss, and I think that we need to talk about it with our American colleagues and partners and, perhaps, have a call with President Trump and discuss it with him.” Putin said Russian forces were moving forward along the entire front line and that the ceasefire would have to ensure that Ukraine did not seek to use it simply to regroup. “How can we and how will we be guaranteed that nothing like this will happen? How will control [of the ceasefire] be organised?” Putin said. “These are all serious questions.” US President Donald Trump said there were “good signals” coming out of Russia and offered guarded optimism about Putin’s statement. Trump said Putin had “put out a very promising statement, but it wasn’t complete”. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy characterised Putin’s response to the ceasefire plan as “manipulative”, saying “at this moment he is, in fact, preparing to reject it”. Zelenskyy said in his evening video message to the nation that Putin did not dare to tell Trump openly that he wants the war to continue. Right now, we have all heard from Russia Putin’s highly predictable and manipulative words in response to the idea of a ceasefire on the front lines—at this moment he is, in fact, preparing to reject it. Of course, Putin is afraid to tell President Trump directly that he wants… pic.twitter.com/SWbYwMGA46 — Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) March 13, 2025 The Ukrainian president’s chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, said his country would not agree to a frozen conflict with Russia, where a ceasefire is not properly resolved and where fighting rumbles on with occasional eruptions. David Lammy, the United Kingdom’s foreign secretary, said it would be “wrong” for Putin to place conditions on a ceasefire, and a pause in fighting would be a “first step” to allow talks to start on “a full settlement” to end the war. Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff arrived in Moscow to discuss the ceasefire plan. Top Kremlin aide, Yuri Ushakov, said Witkoff would meet Putin when the president “gives the signal”, Russian news agencies reported. Advertisement Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko said Europe and Ukraine will be “done for” if Russia comes to an agreement with the US on a ceasefire. Lukashenko said Moscow and Washington would hold Europe’s fate “in their hands”. Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski said, “If Russia rejects this test and fails, it will be clear who wants war and who wants peace.” Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman told Putin in a phone call that his kingdom remains committed to facilitating dialogue and supporting a political resolution to the Ukraine crisis, the Saudi state news agency reported. Military The US is poised to resume shipments to Ukraine of long-range bombs known as Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bombs (GLSDB) after they were upgraded in order to better counter Russian electronic jamming techniques, two people familiar with the weapon told the Reuters news agency. The munitions will arrive amid reports that Ukraine’s supply of similarly-ranged Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) has been depleted. Sweden announced a new military aid package worth 3 billion Swedish krona ($294m) to strengthen Ukraine’s artillery capabilities, the Turkish news agency Anadolu reports. Jack Teixeira, the Air National Guard member who caused an international uproar when he leaked highly classified US documents about the war in Ukraine, used his court-martial hearing to describe himself as a “proud patriot” who was only “exposing and correcting
US stock market tumbles again as Trump threatens tariffs on wine
Benchmark S&P 500 falls 1.39 percent, dragging index more than 10 percent below its February peak. The United States’ stock market has taken another tumble following US President Donald Trump’s threat to impose steep tariffs on wine and other alcoholic products from the European Union. The benchmark S&P 500 fell 1.39 percent on Thursday, dragging the index into a correction – Wall Street lingo for a decline of 10 percent or more from the peak. Corrections are not unusual in the US stock market, which has consistently recovered from losses over its history, though they can be unsettling for investors in the shortterm. The S&P 500 last entered correction territory in October 2023, when the index slid 10.3 percent from its peak that July. The Dow Jones Industrial Average and tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite also recorded sharp declines, falling 1.30 percent and 1.96 percent, respectively. The latest losses mean that US stocks have lost more than $5 trillion in market value since their February peak. Trump’s back-and-forth announcements on trade have unnerved markets, with investors struggling to gauge whether his tariffs are here to stay or are a bargaining tactic to extract concessions. Advertisement “The main difference between the trade war under Trump 1.0 and Trump 2.0 is duration,” the Kobeissi Letter, a financial newsletter founded by Adam Kobeissi, said on X. “In his first term, Trump’s tariffs were taken to be more of a posturing tactic. This time around, markets are pricing in tariffs for longer on more trade partners. This is a material change.” In his latest trade salvo on Thursday, Trump threatened to slap a 200 percent tariff on wine, champagne and other alcoholic products from the EU. Trump’s threat came after the bloc announced plans to impose a 50 percent tariff on US bourbon whiskey from April 1 in response to US duties on steel and aluminium that went into effect on Wednesday. On Tuesday, Trump backed off from a threat to impose a 50 percent tariff on Canadian aluminium and steel after the province of Ontario agreed to temporarily suspend a surcharge on electricity exports. Trump and his aides have played down the stock market turmoil as a transition period for the economy. “I think this country is going to boom. But as I said, I can do it the easy way or the hard way,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday. “The hard way to do it is exactly what I am doing, but the results are going to be 20 times greater.” Adblock test (Why?)
Greenland PM calls for ‘tougher rejection’ of Trump’s plan to take island
Outgoing Prime Minister Mute Egede says ‘disrespect’ for Greenland must stop as US president again says he wants Arctic island. Greenland’s outgoing Prime Minister Mute Egede has called for a stronger rejection by local politicians of United States President Donald Trump’s promise to take over the strategically-located island, warning that “enough is enough”. “This time we need to toughen our rejection of Trump. People cannot continue to disrespect us,” Egede wrote on Facebook after Trump reiterated on Thursday his desire to annex the autonomous Danish territory. “The American president has once again evoked the idea of annexing us. I absolutely cannot accept that,” he wrote. “I have therefore asked the administration to summon the party heads as soon as possible,” said Egede, who continues to lead Greenland while awaiting the formation of a new government following his party’s defeat in elections on Tuesday. Speaking earlier at the White House alongside NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, Trump doubled down on his wish to annex Greenland – an island of 57,000 people – saying: “I think it will happen.” “You know, Mark, we need that for international security, not just security – international – we have a lot of our favourite players cruising around the coast, and we have to be careful,” Trump told Rutte as they sat side-by-side in the White House Oval Office for talks. Advertisement Rutte responded by saying he would leave the question of Greenland’s future to others, adding, “I don’t want to drag NATO” into the debate. The NATO chief said it should be a topic for countries in the “high north” because the Chinese and Russians are using water routes in the Arctic region. But Trump persisted, saying Denmark was refusing to discuss the topic of Greenland and that he might send more US troops to bolster the US military bases on the island. In his first stint as US president from 2017-21, Trump raised the idea of buying Greenland – a semi-autonomous Danish territory – an idea flatly rejected by Denmark and Greenland. “We’ve been dealing with Denmark, we’ve been dealing with Greenland, and we have to do it,” Trump continued. “We really need it for national security. I think that’s why NATO might have to get involved in a way because we really need Greenland for national security. It’s very important,” Trump said. Trump then moved on to undermine Denmark’s claim to the island. “You know, Denmark’s very far away, and really has nothing to do. What happens, a boat landed there 200 years ago or something? And they say they have rights to it. I don’t know if that’s true. I don’t think it is,” he said. Rutte refused to comment on the issue when asked by a reporter in the White House. NATO and Denmark’s embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Danish politician Rasmus Jarlov took to social media after the Trump meeting with Rutte, saying that Denmark did “not appreciate” the head of NATO “joking with Trump about Greenland like this”. Advertisement “It would mean war between two NATO countries,” Jarlov said. “Greenland has just voted against immediate independence from Denmark and does not want to be American ever,” he said. We do not appreciate the Secr. Gen. of NATO joking with Trump about Greenland like this. It would mean war between two NATO countries. Greenland has just voted against immediate independence from Denmark and does not want to be American ever.pic.twitter.com/eh7enEHoA8 — Rasmus Jarlov (@RasmusJarlov) March 13, 2025 Since returning to office, Trump has made the annexation of Greenland a major talking point, and his comments on Thursday suggest he might want NATO involved in his attempt to take over the territory. Greenland’s strategic location and rich mineral resources could benefit the US. It is located along the shortest route from Europe to North America and is vital for the US’s ballistic missile warning system. According to polls, most Greenlanders support independence from Denmark and reject annexation by the US. Adblock test (Why?)
DOGE says 239 contracts canceled over 2 days, including a grant to teach trans farmers about ‘food justice’
Over a two-day period, 239 “wasteful” contracts with a “ceiling value” of $1.7 billion have been terminated, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) said Thursday, including a grant intended to teach transgender and queer urban farmers about “food justice.” The elimination of the contracts represents a savings of $400 million, according to a DOGE tweet posted on X. Among them included an $8.5 million consulting contract for “fiscal stewardship to improve management and program operations in order to drive innovation and improve efficiency and effectiveness of business services; rethink, realign and reskill the workforce; and enhance program delivery through a number of transformational initiatives.” DOGE PROTESTERS RALLY OUTSIDE KEY DEPARTMENT AFTER EMPLOYEES ARE TOLD NOT TO REPORT TO WORK On Tuesday, DOGE announced the National Institutes of Health canceled multiple federal grants related to trans and sexual identity. Those include $699,000 for studying “cannabis use” among “sexual minority gender diverse individuals” and $620,000 for “an LGB+ inclusive teen pregnancy prevention program for transgender boys,” DOGE said. DOGE AND AGENCIES CANCEL 200,000 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CREDIT CARDS Another included $225,000 in federal funds for the University of Colorado to study the “effects of hormones on headaches in transmasculine adolescents.” On Wednesday, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins noted that a $379,000 U.S. Department of Agriculture grant in the San Francisco Bay Area to educate queer, trans and BIPOC urban farmers and consumers about food justice and values-aligned markets had been canceled. “By stopping this wasteful spending here at USDA, we are ending identity politics, and we are refocusing our agency on its core mission of supporting American farming, ranching and forestry,” she said in a video message.
Jewish activists protest at Trump Tower in support of Mahmoud Khalil
NewsFeed Dozens of activists, including a Hollywood actress occupied Trump Tower in New York City to protest the arrest of Mahmoud Khalil. The Trump administration is threatening to deport Khalil who took a leading role in pro-Palestine protests at Columbia University. Published On 13 Mar 202513 Mar 2025 Adblock test (Why?)
What is happening with talks between Israel, the US and Hamas?
An Israeli negotiating team has reportedly extended its stay in the Qatari capital Doha, a day after the US envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff was in town to try and find a path forward between Israel and Hamas. The deal reportedly on the cards is an extension of the ceasefire for up to 60 days in exchange for between five and 10 living Israeli captives held in Gaza. While Hamas has previously rejected a similar deal, they may be more amenable after direct meetings between US hostage envoy Adam Boehler and top Hamas officials in recent weeks. Boehler had said that the meetings went well and suggested a deal was on the cards for a potential long-term ceasefire, prompting a backlash from Israel and pro-Israeli US politicians. There are even reports that Boehler has been taken off the Israel-Gaza file, but those reports may be premature. Let’s take a closer look. What is the deal currently being negotiated? A deal between Israel and Hamas had already been reached, which included three phases and was eventually to lead to a permanent ceasefire. The first phase involved a limited swap of Israeli captives and Palestinian prisoners, as well as a temporary ceasefire and Israel allowing an increased amount of humanitarian aid into Gaza. The details of the second phase were still to be negotiated, but the previous US administration of President Joe Biden made it clear that the first phase would continue until the second phase could be agreed upon. Advertisement Israel has ignored that, and while it has not restarted an all-out war on Gaza, it has threatened to do so, and blocked the entry of all humanitarian aid, as well as electricity. At the start of March Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu introduced a new proposal, which he said had come from Witkoff – although the US envoy never publicly took ownership of it. Netanyahu’s office said the deal would see the ceasefire extended for six weeks and half of the captives in Gaza – dead and alive – released on the first day of the extension. While that was initially rejected by Hamas, the current deal being negotiated in Doha appears to be similar, although critics still say that Netanyahu has no desire to end the war permanently, as he fears his government will collapse if he does so. What about Boehler’s negotiations? While Boehler’s remit only extended to the five Israeli-American captives, four of whom are believed dead, it seems that the direct talks held the possibility of not just securing a lasting ceasefire, but potentially the release of all captives held by Hamas. Speaking to both Israeli and US media last Sunday, Boehler indicated that he had used the opportunity to engage with Hamas directly, gaining a commitment to maintaining a ceasefire of between five and 10 years, laying down its arms and relinquishing control of the Gaza Strip. Boehler made clear that he had not coordinated with Israel before holding talks with Hamas, and added in an interview that the US was “not an agent of Israel” and had its own “specific interests at play”. Advertisement How has Israel reacted to news of the direct talks? Not well. Israel’s far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich told Israel’s Army Radio that unspecified Israeli officials had “made it clear to him [Boehler] that he cannot speak on our behalf, and if he wishes to negotiate on behalf of the United States, then good luck to him”. Ron Dermer, Israel’s strategic affairs minister and a close confidante of Netanyahu, was reported to have repeatedly “lashed out” at Boehler the night before news of the talks became public. The former head of the Israeli security service, the Shin Bet and current agriculture minister, Avi Dichter, also criticised the US initiative, telling Israeli radio the direct US-Hamas talks undermined Israeli negotiations. “It’s very dangerous when you undertake moves without knowing and without coordinating with the Israeli side,” Dichter said. The Israeli campaign against Boehler continued in the press, with a Times of Israel editorial picking apart Boehler’s comments, branding the envoy “complacent, confused and dangerously naive”. Has Trump abandoned Boehler? When news of the US-Hamas talks emerged at the start of the month, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that Trump backed them because they were “the right thing for the American people”. But following Boehler’s comments to the press last Sunday, Israeli news reports emerged saying that the hostage envoy did not represent the White House’s position, and that Witkoff would continue to take the lead on negotiations. Advertisement Then, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, whose most important portfolios in Ukraine and the Middle East appear to have been taken by Witkoff, said on Monday that the talks were a “one-off situation” that had failed. Reports on Thursday alternated between claims that said that Boehler would not be dealing with Israel and Gaza any more, and others that said he would continue to support Witkoff. A report from Jewish Insider included quotes from several anonymous Republican senators berating Boehler, with one suggesting he had “lost all trust”. Does that matter? Until Trump himself speaks, it is hard to gauge what his true position on the matter is. It may be the case that he simply hasn’t decided yet. But either way, the fact that the senators quoted did not want their names published may show that they are still hedging their bets and avoid being seen as second-guessing Trump. The talks with Hamas, even if the US does not repeat them, are a sign that the Trump administration is taking the lead on Gaza, and is dragging Israel and Netanyahu along with them. Israel is entirely reliant upon the US for both military and diplomatic support. Moreover, in light of Trump’s unexpected shrugging off of traditional US alliances, such as those with Canada and Europe, many within Israel are worried that Trump’s support for their war on Gaza may prove equally fickle. Responding to news of