In a letter sent to Senate leaders on June 3, a team of health experts at Yale University and the University of Pennsylvania warn that funding cuts included in the budget reconciliation package narrowly passed by House Republicans last month would lead to 51,000 more people dying across the United States each year. An additional 5.1 million people would lose coverage because the bill fails to extend tax credits for ACA Marketplace plans, and Health and Human Services has proposed new rules limiting the program's enrollment periods and making other changes, bringing the total to 16 million. The estimate of 51,000 preventable deaths is based on details from a previous analysis from CBO, which initially found that 13.7 million people would lose their health care coverage by 2034. Since CBO has now revised that estimate to be higher in response to queries from Democrats, the estimate of 51,000 deaths could, in fact, be an undercount. The legislation would also repeal federal safe staffing standards that require nursing homes and long-term care facilities to maintain a minimum ratio of nurses to patients in order to provide proper care, which the researchers estimate would result in 13,000 additional deaths annually. “In other words, when you throw 13.7 million Americans off the health care they have … when you increase the cost of prescription drugs for low-income seniors, and when you make nursing homes throughout America less safe, not only will some of the most vulnerable people throughout our country suffer, but tens of thousands will die,” Sanders said in a statement on Tuesday. The latest calculations from public health experts adds to a growing pile of research on the devastating potential impacts of budget cuts, which Trump and his fellow Republicans are pushing for to cover tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the wealthy. The researchers at Yale and the University of Pennsylvania focused on three policies impacting three distinct groups: individuals who will lose all Medicaid coverage, lower-income seniors who will lose subsidies that help pay for prescription drugs, and people who are expected to die in nursing homes if the safe staffing requirements are removed. According to their data, the researchers estimated an additional 51,000 preventable deaths annually, including: In addition, the bill does not extend 2021's enhanced premium tax credits for ACA Marketplace insurance plans. If lawmakers allow these tax credits to expire and the rule changes at the Department of Health and Human Services become effective, an estimated 5.1 million people will lose affordable health insurance, leading to an additional estimated 8,811 preventable deaths, bringing the total to at least 51,000. “We know that when people are enrolled in Medicaid it saves lives compared to people not having health coverage, and we know the bill will increase churn and disenrollment in Medicaid,” said Rachel Werner, director of the University of Pennsylvania's Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics and co-author of the analysis, in an interview. Perhaps this explains why Trump has made a show of publicly urging House Republicans not to “touch” Medicaid. The bill would penalize states that used their own funds to expand Medicaid to cover some immigrants who would not qualify for federal funding; the White House claimed Medicaid would be “strengthened” by removing 1.4 million undocumented immigrants from the rolls. That coverage loss would also extend to documented children and pregnant women under the proposed policy, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF), a top health policy think tank. Trump and his allies in Congress are also defending controversial Medicaid work requirements included in the House bill, which would require adult recipients to prove that they are working at least 80 hours per month to maintain their health coverage. People with disabilities would also likely be required to prove they qualify for exceptions, and all enrollees would face more paperwork and barriers to coverage. The White House said on Monday that “4.8 million able-bodied adults on Medicaid are choosing not to work,” a claim also made by Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson, who recently told NBC's Meet the Press that the 4.8 million people are “refusing” to work and will not lose coverage “if they choose too.” However, as the Washington Post points out, 4.8 million is the number of people estimated to become uninsured due to work requirements, not the number of young men “sitting around and playing video games” instead of getting a job, as Johnson has previously suggested. KFF analysis shows 92 percent of adults on Medicaid are either working or likely qualify for exceptions to work requirements, as most Medicaid enrollees who do not work are caregivers, parents, students, or have a disability. Arkansas instituted Medicaid work requirements in 2018, which led to 18,000 adults losing health coverage over the four months before a court stepped in to halt further implementation. A study by Harvard University researchers found the work requirements were effective at cutting Medicaid rolls during that time period but had no effect on employment. Research on other states has found that few programs linked to Medicaid work requirements actually help enrollees find jobs. When constituents confronted Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa at a recent town hall with questions about people dying without health coverage, she shrugged and told them: “Well, we all are going to die.” After a video of the exchange went viral, Ernst doubled down with a bizarre video in what appears to be a graveyard, suggesting that those who are afraid of preventable deaths under the Medicaid cuts are like children who believe in the tooth fairy and should embrace “my lord and savior, Jesus Christ.” Ernst's flippant comments over the weekend reveal a grim reality: Republicans in Congress know that their tax bill will rip away lifesaving health care from their constituents, jeopardizing lives just to pad billionaires' pockets … and they just don't care,” said Kobie Christian, a spokesperson for the economic justice campaign Unrig Our Economy, in a statement. The “big, beautiful bill” will likely undergo changes in the Senate, where conservative fiscal hawks are anxious about increasing the federal deficit, and defenders of public health refuse to blow holes in a safety net that provides coverage for millions of people in order to pay for tax cuts. “In the wealthiest country in the world, we should be guaranteeing health care to all as a human right, not taking health care away from millions of seniors and working families to pay for tax breaks for billionaires,” Sanders said. Under pressure from an array of McCarthy-style tactics, academics, activists and nonprofits face significant threats for speaking out or organizing in resistance. Truthout is appealing for your support to weather this storm of censorship. Your support will help us continue our nonprofit movement journalism in the face of right-wing authoritarianism. Mike Ludwig is a staff reporter at Truthout based in New Orleans. Get the news you want, delivered to your inbox every day.

US airstrikes on the Ras Isa oil port in Yemen last April killed 84 people and wounded more than 150 others. The April bombing of a Yemeni oil port by U.S. forces that killed and wounded hundreds of civilians and disrupted the delivery of lifesaving aid to one of the world's most war-torn nations was “an apparent war crime” that should be investigated, a leading international human rights group said Wednesday. On April 17, a series of U.S. airstrikes destroyed the Ras Isa oil Port on the Red Sea north of Hodeidah, killing 84 people and wounding more than 150 others, according to first responders, local officials, and a probe by the U.K.-based independent monitor Airwars. The bombings were part of the Trump administration's response to resistance by Houthi rebels to Israel's annihilation of Gaza, which has included ballistic missile strikes targeting Israel and Red Sea shipping related to the key U.S. ally. forces took action to eliminate this source of fuel for the Iran-backed Houthi terrorists and deprive them of illegal revenue that has funded Houthi efforts to terrorize the entire region for over 10 years,” U.S. Central Command said at the time, adding that “this strike was not intended to harm the people of Yemen.” Officials said first responders including paramedics and rescue workers who rushed to the scene were killed in subsequent strikes, known as “double taps” in military parlance. The port is critical as an entry point for aid + commercial imports. HRW Yemen and Bahrain researcher Niku Jafarnia said Wednesday that “the U.S. government's decision to strike Ras Isa Port, a critical entry point for aid in Yemen, while hundreds of workers were present demonstrates a callous disregard for civilians' lives.” “At a time when the majority of Yemenis don't have adequate access to food and water, the attack's impact on humanitarian aid could be enormous, particularly after Trump administration aid cutbacks,” Jafarnia added. Other recent U.S. massacres in Yemen include a series of March 15 strikes on residential areas in the capital Sanaa that killed at least 53 people including numerous women and children, an April 20 strike on the Farwah market in the Shuub neighborhood of the capital Sanaa that killed at least 12 people and wounded 30 others, and the April 28 bombing of a detention center for African migrants in the city of Sa'ada that left at least 68 people dead and dozens more wounded. In March, Hegseth announced that the Pentagon's Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response Office and Civilian Protection Center of Excellence, which was established during the Biden administration, would be closed. Hegseth — who has supported pardons for convicted U.S. war criminals — lamented during his Senate confirmation hearing that “restrictive rules of engagement” have “made it more difficult to defeat our enemies,” who “should get bullets, not attorneys,” according to his 2024 book The War on Warriors. Airwars says hundreds of Yemeni civilians have been killed in 181 declared U.S. actions since 2002. “Those strikes continued until at least 2019 and killed many civilians, including 12 people attending a wedding in 2013. The Pentagon has only acknowledged 13 civilian deaths caused by U.S. military action in Yemen since 2002. The Trump administration has been especially tight-lipped about civilian casualties resulting from its operations, a stance some critics have called ironic given that top administration officials including Hegseth discussed highly sensitive plans for attacking Yemen on a Signal group chat in which a journalist was inadvertently included. “The Trump administration should reverse past U.S. practice and provide prompt compensation to those unlawfully harmed.” The Trump administration is cracking down on political dissent. Under pressure from an array of McCarthy-style tactics, academics, activists and nonprofits face significant threats for speaking out or organizing in resistance. Truthout is appealing for your support to weather this storm of censorship. Your support will help us continue our nonprofit movement journalism in the face of right-wing authoritarianism. Brett Wilkins is a staff writer for Common Dreams. Get the news you want, delivered to your inbox every day.

Hugo Aguilar, who has links to governing party, topped unprecedented and controversial popular vote “But while they say we the Indigenous are represented in him, in reality he has spent almost 20 years operating for the government, not for [Indigenous] peoples.” Roughly 2,600 posts, from local magistrates to supreme court justices, were up for grabs. Given the sheer number of positions and candidates involved, critics had warned that a low turnout was likely. Parts of the opposition also called for a boycott. “The turnout was frankly meagre,” said Javier Martín Reyes, a constitutional law professor at Mexico's Unam university. “The government has tried to argue that voters were demanding this reform. Most have ties to the governing party, meaning it may no longer act as a check on Morena's executive power, as it has in the past. Aguilar is among them, having served as a senior official at the National Institute for Indigenous Peoples during the government of Sheinbaum's predecessor, Andrés Manuel López Obrador. Three sitting justices who decided to run were all re-elected: Lenia Batres, Yasmín Esquivel and Loretta Ortiz. All three were initially nominated by López Obrador and have largely voted in favour of Morena governments. It is not certain how justices with past ties to Morena will vote, but if they band together they could give Sheinbaum a decisive majority on Mexico's highest court. Even those with more independent profiles might fear to go against the executive, said Martín Reyes. “Morena and its allies have a supermajority – they can change the constitution at any moment, start political trials, remove [the justices'] immunity,” said Martín Reyes. “These people will live under the threat of sanction.” Preliminary results suggest Morena may have significant influence in the first of those, too.

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab Chief writer on Russia and CIS. Worked as a journalist on 7 continents and reported from 40+ countries, with postings in London, Wellington, Brussels, Warsaw, Moscow and Berlin. Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol said on Wednesday North America chief stores officer Mike Grams would now be the chief operating officer of the coffee chain. Reuters, the news and media division of Thomson Reuters, is the world's largest multimedia news provider, reaching billions of people worldwide every day. Reuters provides business, financial, national and international news to professionals via desktop terminals, the world's media organizations, industry events and directly to consumers. Access unmatched financial data, news and content in a highly-customised workflow experience on desktop, web and mobile. Screen for heightened risk individual and entities globally to help uncover hidden risks in business relationships and human networks. All quotes delayed a minimum of 15 minutes. See here for a complete list of exchanges and delays.

Prime Minister Mark Carney says Canada will not immediately retaliate after U.S. President Donald Trump raised tariffs on steel and aluminum to 50 per cent, citing ongoing negotiations over a new trade and security deal with Washington. Speaking to reporters before a caucus meeting Wednesday, he described Mr. Trump's tariffs as “unjustified” and “illegal” but said Ottawa would hold off on responding. From investing to real estate, here's how you can Trump-proof your wallet An estimate by Oxford Economics this week found that more than half of U.S. steel imported into Canada is currently exempt from tariffs. The Prime Minister's hesitation on retaliation is a contrast with the approach of former prime minister Justin Trudeau, who immediately imposed tariffs on the U.S. both earlier this year and in 2018, during Mr. Trump's previous trade war with Canada. Ontario Premier Doug Ford on Wednesday urged immediate retaliation by the federal government. “He didn't give me a guarantee, but I'll be all over him. We can't sit back and let President Trump steamroll us,” Mr. Ford told reporters at Queen's Park. He cancelled the measure within a day after Mr. Trump threatened to double steel and aluminum tariffs in response. He also said the U.S. had broken an agreement he had with Mr. Lutnick after meeting with him in March that the Trump administration would not hike steel and aluminum tariffs if Ontario did not impose the electricity surcharge. “We had an agreement before that he was going to take off the other 25 per cent and keep it at 25 per cent, and unfortunately, they broke a verbal agreement,” Mr. Ford said. Mr. Ford, once an admirer of Mr. Trump who has become a vocal critic of the President's through regular appearances on U.S. cable news, said he plans to meet with Canadian steel companies to try to onshore $30-billion of steel that is currently imported from the U.S. “It's unfortunate that President Trump and his team in the U.S. have thought this is a great idea. This is going to hurt the American people,” he said. Prime Minister Mark Carney says the U.S. decision to double tariffs on steel and aluminum is not justified and will harm Americans as well as Canadians. At a White House meeting last month, Mr. Trump said there was nothing Mr. Carney could say that would make him change his mind on tariffs but the Prime Minister has remained insistent that such a deal would include the U.S. lifting its levies on Canada. Mr. LeBlanc was in Washington on Tuesday to meet with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick in a bid to push the talks forward. At a committee hearing, Senator John Kennedy, a Louisiana Republican, asked Mr. Lutnick if he would accept a deal from Vietnam in which that country would remove all tariffs and trade barriers in exchange for the U.S. doing the same. That would be the silliest thing we could do,” Mr. Lutnick replied. “What's the purpose of reciprocity, then?” Mr. Kennedy fired back. We don't want other people making them,” Mr. Lutnick said. Mr. Kennedy's grilling of Mr. Lutnick could indicate a fracture in Republican support for Mr. Trump's agenda. While the party traditionally supported free trade, it has largely fallen in line behind the President's protectionism since he returned to office. Steel prices in the U.S. have already risen by 16 per cent since Mr. Trump took office in January, and his higher tariffs risk causing inflation for American consumers by making products built with steel more expensive. In an interview with The Globe and Mail earlier this week, Catherine Cobden, president of the Canadian Steel Producers Association, also called on Mr. Carney to reinstate retaliatory tariffs on U.S. steel imports and hike them to 50 per cent. She said Mr. Carney's decision to roll back some of the tariffs was “ill-advised” and stopped manufacturers from moving toward using Canadian steel. With a report from Laura Stone and Niall McGee Authors and topics you follow will be added to your personal news feed in Following.

This “structural investigation,” as it is called, collects and preserves evidence of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in a particular context, without necessarily linking that evidence to specific perpetrators. It can do this, for example, by reaching out to victims and survivors who have fled wars of atrocity to gather their testimony. It can also include collecting open-source evidence, such as videos or photographs. States like Canada can use the evidence collected if an opportunity to do so arises, such as to support a prosecution of a perpetrator who enters onto their territory. Canada is currently conducting a structural investigation into Ukraine and conducted one into the atrocities committed against the Yazidi people in northern Iraq. U.S.-backed Gaza aid group stops distribution, UN set to vote on ceasefire demand Or is it emphasizing themes, such as use of starvation as a weapon of war in Gaza or settler violence in the West Bank – topics that Canadian leaders have been especially vocal about in recent weeks? When Canada opened its structural investigation into Ukraine, it did so with a great deal of publicity. Was it only acknowledged now because patience with the Netanyahu government is running thin? Is the investigation's goal criminal accountability or something else? Over the last two decades, and with few exceptions, Canada stepped away from actively prosecuting alleged perpetrators of international crimes who arrived on Canadian soil. Could the investigation be aimed at ensuring Canada is not a “safe haven” for alleged war criminals? While structural investigations focus on contexts and not specific individuals, effective probes into international crimes should lead to prosecutions, especially in countries where alleged perpetrators reside or where they regularly visit. In other Western states, such as Belgium and Britain, law enforcement agencies are actively considering or have already launched investigations into dual citizens who fought with the Israel Defense Forces and who allegedly committed war crimes. A structural investigation might also examine whether any Canadian companies or persons have contributed to settler violence or the construction of Israeli settlements in the illegally occupied West Bank, which Canada views as a violation of the Geneva Conventions. Canada was a founding member of the court but has historically opposed the ICC's investigation into Gaza, going so far as to suggest that its funding for the world's only permanent international court with jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide was at risk of being pulled. Some of that opposition softened in recent months, but direct co-operation between the RCMP and ICC on this investigation could be a game changer, while also extending concrete support to the ICC as it faces unrelenting attacks from the Trump administration. It is important to remember that states like Canada are under a legal obligation to investigate and prosecute perpetrators of war crimes and genocide, regardless of their nationality or where their crimes were committed. More than anything, the opening of a structural investigation signals that Canada may finally be moving from talking about the need for accountability for atrocities committed in the Palestinian territories, to playing a part in delivering it. Authors and topics you follow will be added to your personal news feed in Following.

Republican President Donald Trump has asked his fellow party members in the US Senate not to bring to a vote, for the time being, a bill that would tighten sanctions against Russia, including by imposing restrictions on third countries, according to Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee Roger Wicker (Republican, Mississippi). "I know he has requested that [Republican Senate Majority Leader John] Thune not bring the bill up [for consideration] this week," the lawmaker said during an online meeting with the Defense Writers Group in Washington, of which TASS is a member. The bill in question was introduced in early April by a bipartisan group of senators. The main sponsors were Senator Lindsey Graham (Republican, South Carolina, designated by Russia as a terrorist and extremist) and Senator Richard Blumenthal (Democrat, Connecticut). The initiative envisions, among other measures, secondary sanctions targeting Russia's trading partners. The proposal includes imposing a 500% import tariff on goods entering the US from countries that purchase oil, gas, uranium, and other commodities from Russia. Senator Rand Paul (Republican, Kentucky) recently warned in an op-ed for the Responsible Statecraft website that the country most harmed by the potential passage of this legislation would be the United States itself, both economically and strategically. According to the information presented by Wicker, the bill enjoys overwhelming support from the 100-member Senate, making its passage through the upper chamber of Congress virtually assured. In his assessment, should the bill become law, it would have a very negative impact also on China. However, Wicker did not clarify whether, in his view, Trump would support the bill.

For healthcare specialists around western Appalachia, the recent dramatic fall in opioid overdose deaths has been nothing short of spectacular. Last year saw a record decline of 30% in Kentucky to 1,410 people. In neighboring West Virginia, state health authorities estimate that there are at least 318 more people alive today due in large part to the availability and widespread use of naloxone or Narcan, a nasal spray that when administered in time, can reverse the effects of an opioid overdose. Recent years have seen a spate of treatment and recovery programs help initiate a dramatic fall in the number of people dying from illicit drug overdoses. In Tennessee alone, authorities have attributed it to saving “at least 103,000 lives” between late 2017 and mid-2024. But now, the White House and Republican politicians are proposing cuts to programs and departments that could undo that hard-fought progress. On 2 May, the Trump administration announced proposed cuts of $33.3bn to the health and human services department budget that would eliminate, among other programs, $56m used to train first responders and law enforcement officers how to administer Narcan. SAMHSA lost more than 100 staff in March and is set for further cuts. House Republicans have been looking to cut funding for Medicaid, a program that provides communities with millions of dollars in opioid treatment and recovery funding, a move that Trump has recently warned against. “We still saw nearly 90,000 people die from overdoses last year. And few Appalachian communities have been hit as hard as Huntington, West Virginia, part of a region situated along the banks of the Ohio river that major drug manufacturers swamped with highly addictive painkillers such as Oxycontin in decades past. “The thing I am concerned about is access to treatment, because there's a big pool of funding that puts peer supports in places where they otherwise wouldn't be – hospitals, ERs, syringe exchanges all over the place,” says Gibson, the regional director at Path Behavioral Healthcare in Huntington, an organization providing mental and behavioral health treatment across five states. He found the painkiller OxyContin in his grandmother's house when he was in high school, which led him on the road to methamphetamines, Suboxone and other substance addictions. “That was at a time when [doctors] were really pushing [highly addictive opioid painkillers]. “I went to treatment just so my mom could sleep at night.” When authorities clamped down on pill mills and pharmaceuticals more than a decade ago, in their place came heroin, then synthetic opioids fentanyl and more recently, carfentanyl. Kentucky saw a 49% increase in overdose deaths from 2019 to 2020. Two years later, it still ranked among states with the highest per capita opioid overdose fatalities. So for those who've worked hard to develop recovery and treatment efforts across Kentucky, the recent budget cuts are a major blow. “Reducing this funding not only undermines life-saving work, it contradicts the goal of achieving greater government efficiency. Pulling support now would not only stall momentum but set us back years in the great investments we have made,” says Tara Hyde of People Advocating Recovery, a Louisville-based non-profit. Experts say the benefits of reducing the number of people dying from overdoses include having more people in local workforces, reducing the load on already-struggling hospital emergency rooms and staff, and parents being alive, healthy and able to raise their children. “This progress has created momentum helping to reduce stigma, because more people are showcasing the reality of recovery and speaking out to show that they are thriving in the workforce, going to school, or learning a trade,” says Hyde. In Huntington, a city that's lost close to half its residents since the 1950s, population decline has now slowed to a trickle, while household income levels are on the rise. Outside the Harmony House shelter on Huntington's 4th Avenue, around a dozen people with their belongings – sleeping bags, clothes and bottles of water gathered up in shopping carts – bake in the early summer heat. “We're used to adapting and overcoming,” says Gibson, whose offices are a couple of blocks away, “one way or the other.”

In one black-and-white picture, posted on Instagram on Wednesday, Meghan can be seen cuddling Lilibet, whose face is partially visible behind her mother's hand and arm. Four years ago today she came into our lives – and each day is brighter and better because of it. Thanks to all of those sending love and celebrating her special day,” wrote Meghan in the caption. A second photo in the post shows Meghan cradling Lilibet, whose face is visible in profile, shortly after her birth. Meghan and husband Prince Harry are known to fiercely guard the privacy of Lilibet and older brother Prince Archie, 6. The couple did release a Christmas card last year that featured a rare photo of both children, but their backs are to the camera as they run towards their parents. It marked the first time since 2021 that Harry and Meghan released a Christmas card featuring their children. In April, Meghan revealed that she had suffered from postpartum preeclampsia, calling the potentially fatal condition “so rare and so scary.” “The world doesn't know what's happening quietly,” Meghan said on the debut episode of her “Confessions of a Female Founder” podcast. “And in the quiet, you're still trying to show up for people… mostly for your children, but those things are huge medical scares.” Most cases of postpartum preeclampsia develop within 48 hours of childbirth, but it can develop four to six weeks postpartum, according to the Mayo Clinic. Postpartum preeclampsia can cause seizures and other serious complications if left untreated.

This website uses cookies to collect information about your visit for purposes such as showing you personalized ads and content, and analyzing our website traffic. By clicking “Accept all,” you will allow the use of these cookies. SEOUL — South Korea's new President Lee Jae-myung has positioned Japan as an important, cooperative partner and also called for enhanced trilateral relations between the two countries and the United States. It is believed that Lee has attempted to provide a sense of security both domestically and internationally by showing that he would not turn away from former President Yoon Suk Yeol's decision to work toward improving Japan-South Korea relations. Lee pledged during his campaign that he would engage in pragmatic diplomacy. Regarding relations with Japan, he also claimed that he would deal with social, cultural and economic issues in a future-oriented manner. Wi Sung-lac, Lee's diplomatic brain and a member of the National Assembly, said at a press conference on May 28 that Lee would, within a broad framework, maintain Yoon's policies, including his solution to the issue of lawsuits regarding former wartime requisitioned workers from the Korean Peninsula. In the past, Lee made a series of harsh comments about Japan and criticized Yoon's efforts to improve the South Korea-Japan relationship, calling it “humiliating diplomacy toward Japan.” During the election campaign, Lee's remarks toward Japan became more conciliatory, as momentum has grown for a cooperative response to issues such as U.S. President Donald Trump's tariff policy and the deteriorating security environment in Northeast Asia. Lee has pledged that he would “deal with issues related to history and territory in a principled manner.” However, should there be a dispute with Japan, some have voiced concerns over his ability to handle the situation in a cool-headed manner. Among Lee's campaign pledges was a policy to strengthen cooperation among Japan, South Korea and the United States, which stressed that a strong alliance with the United States is the foundation of diplomacy. Our weekly ePaper presents the most noteworthy recent topics in an exciting, readable fomat.

Stand behind Ukrainian independent journalism when it's needed most. An explosion recently occurred at the Crimean Bridge, but caused "no damage," Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov claimed on June 4, accusing Ukraine of attempted attacks on Russia's infrastructure. There was no damage, the bridge continues to function," Peskov said, according to the Russian state-run news agency RIA Novosti. "Kyiv continues in its attempts to attack infrastructure facilities." Constructed after Russia's illegal occupation of Crimea in 2014, the Crimean Bridge — also known as the Kerch Bridge — is a critical supply and transport route for Russian forces to the occupied Ukrainian territories. The Russian state media reported on June 3 that a "Ukrainian intelligence agent" who had constructed a bomb on "orders from Kyiv" had been detained by Russia's FSB. The bridge suffered significant damage during two previous Ukrainian attacks in October 2022 and July 2023, though neither managed to take the bridge out of commission. We're working hard to show the world the truth of Russia's brutal war — and we're keeping it free for everyone, because reliable information should be available to all. Our goal: reach 20,000 members to prove independent journalism can survive without paywalls, billionaires, or compromise. Will you help us do it?

Stand behind Ukrainian independent journalism when it's needed most. "God loves the Trinity, and the SBU always brings what is conceived to the end and never repeats itself," SBU Chief Vasyl Malyuk said in a statement posted on social media. "Previously, we struck the Crimean Bridge in 2022 and 2023. So today we continued this tradition underwater," he added. Constructed after Russia's illegal occupation of Crimea in 2014, the Crimean Bridge is a critical supply and transport route for Russian forces to the occupied Ukrainian territories. "And today, without inflicting any civilian casualties, the first explosive was activated at 4:44 a.m.," the SBU said. Underwater supports of the bridge's piers were severely damaged at the bottom as 1,100 kilograms of explosives in TNT equivalent were detonated, according to the statement. Russian state media later reported a "Ukrainian intelligence agent" who had constructed a bomb on "orders from Kyiv" had been detained by Russia's FSB. President Volodymyr Zelensky praised the SBU in his evening address, though he did not refer to the attack directly. "And it is always nice to give special thanks to the Security Service of Ukraine, well done!" A claimed "agent of Ukrainian intelligence services" has been detained in Crimea, Russia's Federal Security Service said later on June 3, accusing the detainee of producing a "powerful explosive." The bridge suffered significant damage during two previous Ukrainian attacks in October 2022 and July 2023, though neither managed to take the bridge out of commission. The $4 billion project was a political statement designed to affirm the Kremlin's illegal 2014 annexation of Crimea, as the peninsula is not connected by land to Russia. Russia's Defense Ministry previously claimed that three Ukrainian drones were downed over Crimea overnight on June 3. The Crimean Bridge was closed for traffic between 6 and 9 a.m. local time on that day, according to local Telegram channels. According to pro-Ukrainian Telegram channel Crimean Wind, the bridge had been closed down for inspection, possibly to examine damage. Later the same day, Crimean Wind reported a new "powerful explosion" near Kerch at around 3 p.m., writing that a helicopter is patrolling the strait. We're working hard to show the world the truth of Russia's brutal war — and we're keeping it free for everyone, because reliable information should be available to all. Our goal: reach 20,000 members to prove independent journalism can survive without paywalls, billionaires, or compromise.

Erin Patterson, the woman accused of murdering three guests with a meal laced with death cap mushrooms, told her trial on Wednesday she may have inadvertently added foraged mushrooms to the lunch because her duxelles tasted “a little bland.” On the third day of evidence on Wednesday, Patterson was taken through the events of July, 2023, when she's accused of deliberately adding lethal death cap mushrooms to a Beef Wellington meal she cooked for four guests, including her parents-in-law, at her house in the small Australian town of Leongatha in rural Victoria. She also denies attempting to kill a fourth lunch guest, Heather's husband, Ian Wilkinson, her local pastor. Patterson said all ingredients came from Woolworths, a major Australian supermarket. She cooked the sauteed mixture, known as a duxelles, for perhaps 45 minutes so it was dry and didn't make the pastry soggy, she said. Patterson told the court she tasted the mixture, and as it was “a little bland,” she added dried mushrooms that she'd previously stored in a plastic container in the pantry. Asked by Mandy what she believed to be in the plastic container in the pantry: “I believed it was just the mushrooms that I bought in Melbourne,” Patterson said. “And now, what do you think might have been in that tub?” Mandy asked. Patterson told the court that Ian and Heather Wilkinson ate all of their meal. Patterson only ate about a quarter or third of her Beef Wellington, because she was talking a lot and eating slowly, she said. After lunch, they cleaned up and sat down to eat an orange cake that Gail had brought. “I had a piece of cake, and then another piece of cake, and then another,” Patterson said. “How many pieces of cake did you have?” Mandy asked. She said that amounted to around two-thirds of the original cake. “I felt over full, so I went to the toilets and brought it back up again,” she said. Patterson has previously told the court that she had battled bulimia for much of her life and was self-conscious about her weight. Patterson said she felt nauseous after the lunch, and later that evening, took medication for diarrhea. The next day she skipped Sunday mass due to the same symptoms and still had diarrhea later that day. The next day, Monday, she thought she might need fluids so went to the hospital, where a doctor told her that she may have been exposed to death cap mushrooms. Patterson said she was “shocked and confused.” “I didn't see how death cap mushrooms could be in the meal,” she said. Earlier Wednesday, Patterson told the court she hadn't seen websites that purported to show the location of death cap mushrooms near her house. She said she was aware of death cap mushrooms and had searched online to find out if they grew in the area. Patterson also told her trial on Wednesday that she foraged for mushrooms at the Korumburra Botanical Gardens in May 2023, and may have picked some mushrooms near oak trees. The court has previously heard that death cap mushrooms grow near oak trees. Patterson said she would dehydrate any mushrooms she didn't want to use immediately and store them in plastic containers in the pantry. Because they had a pungent smell, she said she put them in a plastic container in the pantry. Mandy asked: “Do you have a memory of putting wild mushrooms that you dehydrated in May or June of 2023 into a container which already contained other dried mushrooms?” Later in proceedings, Patterson recalled a conversation she had with her husband, Simon, as his parents were gravely ill in hospital. She said his comment caused her to do “a lot of thinking about a lot of things.” “It got me thinking about all the times that I'd used (the dehydrator), and how I had dried foraged mushrooms in it weeks earlier, and I was starting to think, what if they'd gone in the container with the Chinese mushrooms? She said child protection officers were due to visit her house that afternoon, and she was “scared” about having a conversation about the meal and the dehydrator. “I was scared that they would blame me for it…. “I was scared they'd remove the children,” she added. Asked whether she had come to the realization that death cap mushrooms may have been in the meal, Patterson said, “No.” Patterson also told the court she was responsible for three factory resets of her phone.

MOSCOW, June 4. /TASS/. A Russian billionaire and one of the largest owners of commercial real estate in Moscow, Valery Tsimbayev, is accused of an attempting to organize a contract killing, law enforcement sources have told TASS. "Defendant Valery Tsimbayev was charged with attempted murder by a group of persons upon a preliminary collusion. He will remain in custody until September 11, 2025," the sources said. The events took place back in 2003. The target of the planned hit was a former adviser to Moscow's Control and Audit Chamber, Alexander Revzin.

Since its founding in 1922, Foreign Affairs has been the leading forum for serious discussion of American foreign policy and global affairs. The magazine has featured contributions from many leading international affairs experts. EDWARD FISHMAN is a Senior Research Scholar at Columbia University's Center on Global Energy Policy and the author of Chokepoints: American Power in the Age of Economic Warfare. He pledges to resolve a long-burning crisis through diplomacy, despite widespread skepticism that it's possible. European allies also grow frustrated and impose new penalties. After refusing to accept a cease-fire and intensifying attacks on Ukraine, Vladimir Putin has shown that he's not interested in peace. Meanwhile, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, of South Carolina, has secured over 80 votes for a bill to impose “bone-crushing sanctions” on Russia—enough for a veto-proof majority. During George W. Bush's second term, the United States steadily escalated sanctions on Iran. When Obama entered office, he pivoted to diplomacy, proposing an arrangement in which Tehran would part with its stockpile of enriched uranium in exchange for nuclear fuel. European countries also stepped up and imposed an oil embargo. With Trump's Russia policy at a dead end, his administration would do well to learn from Obama's Iran experience. A particularly important lesson is that congressional initiative—while almost always unwelcome by the executive branch—can be an essential ingredient to a successful economic pressure strategy. If Trump is serious about ending the war in Ukraine, his administration should work with Graham and other hawks on Capitol Hill rather than oppose them. Another takeaway is that oil sanctions can work, even against major exporters. As the Trump administration explores options to ramp up pressure on Russian oil, it should study what succeeded against Iran. A final lesson is that Europe has more agency than it often realizes. As Trump repeatedly threatens sanctions and then retreats, Europe's best move now is to act first—and trust that the United States won't be far behind. It was in this context that Obama made his first diplomatic overture. In fall 2009, his administration proposed a deal: Iran would ship most of its enriched uranium to Russia in exchange for enough nuclear fuel to power the Tehran Research Reactor—which produced medical isotopes—for more than a decade. Although Iranian negotiators initially accepted the deal, they soon reversed course, and it collapsed within weeks. Long skeptical of Obama's Iran diplomacy, Congress took matters into its own hands. Obama signed the bill, and it worked: even risk-tolerant banks in Dubai and Istanbul backed away from Iran, completing the country's financial isolation. Democratic Senator Bob Menendez, of New Jersey, and Republican Senator Mark Kirk, of Illinois, proposed an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act mandating secondary sanctions on any foreign bank that processed payments with the Central Bank of Iran, the repository for all the country's oil revenues. At the time, Iran exported roughly 2.5 million barrels of oil per day to more than 20 countries. When Obama administration officials studied Congress's plans, they went into a panic. Their projections found that the sanctions could spike oil prices above $200 per barrel and cause a “nuclear winter recession,” as a senior Treasury official recalled. They would be allowed to continue importing Iranian oil without facing secondary sanctions—but only if they wound down their purchases over time. Over the next 18 months, Iran's oil sales plummeted by 60 percent, to around one million barrels per day. U.S. shale producers boosted production in turn, keeping the oil market balanced and staving off the price spike that Obama had feared. Strong-arming China to quit Iranian oil entirely was unlikely to work, and if Beijing called Washington's bluff, the credibility of American sanctions could be permanently damaged. Obama officials reached another compromise with Congress: foreign banks could keep processing payments for Iranian oil, but the funds had to remain in the buyer's country, usable only for nonsanctioned trade. If a Chinese refinery bought Iranian oil, it would deposit the funds in a Central Bank of Iran account based in China. That pressure helped Hassan Rouhani win election as Iran's president in 2013 and led to the negotiations that froze Iran's nuclear program and culminated in the 2015 nuclear deal. In those negotiations, the ability to repatriate Iran's escrowed oil funds was Washington's most valuable bargaining chip. Throughout this entire period, Congress was a thorn in Obama's side. Yet Obama administration officials sometimes grudgingly acknowledged the upside of pressure from Capitol Hill. Meanwhile, Obama had played the good cop, using congressional pressure to enable diplomacy. Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, U.S. sanctions policy has attempted to strike a delicate balance: maximizing pressure on Russia without disrupting the world oil market. This has been difficult, as Russia accounts for just over ten percent of global oil production, while hydrocarbon revenues contribute roughly a third of Russia's federal budget. Russia plays a major role in the world oil market, and oil plays an essential role in funding the Russian government—including Putin's war machine. Initially, the United States attempted to balance these competing objectives by focusing sanctions on Russia's banking and defense industries, leaving energy relatively untouched. On the very first day of the invasion, Joe Biden affirmed publicly that the sanctions were “specifically designed to allow energy payments to continue”—and his administration maintained a broad sanctions exemption for all energy-related transactions with Russia. In an economy already struggling with inflation, the prospect of skyrocketing gasoline prices was too frightening to hazard. Over the next three years, Biden tiptoed toward oil sanctions but remained wary of anything that risked decreasing Russian supply. Specifically, the policy barred Western tankers from carrying Russian oil—and Western firms from insuring such shipments—if the oil was priced above $60 per barrel. When they bought Russian oil, Emirati traders and Chinese refineries faced no threat of U.S. penalties—even if they bought the oil at a price exceeding the cap. Russia exploited the built-in weaknesses of the policy, reducing its reliance on Western maritime insurance and amassing a large shadow fleet of oil tankers. In his final weeks in office, Biden finally began dialing up the pressure on Russian oil, sanctioning Russia's third- and fourth-largest oil producers, but it was too little, too late. As of today, despite frequent claims that Russia is the most sanctioned country on earth, it's nowhere close: its top two energy companies, Rosneft and Gazprom, are not even subject to primary sanctions, to say nothing of Iran-style secondary sanctions. Although Russia's economy has struggled under sanctions, oil revenues have kept it afloat. It turned out there are hard limits to how much pressure Washington could apply to Moscow without targeting its most lucrative export. Since returning to office, Trump has imposed no new sanctions on Russia. He has focused instead on diplomacy, pressuring Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to negotiate and insisting that Putin wants a deal. In the Senate, Graham has introduced legislation requiring the Trump administration to regularly assess whether Russia is refusing to negotiate a peace deal. (Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, co-authored the bill.) If the administration determines that Russia is stonewalling, a wave of new penalties would automatically take effect—most notably, secondary tariffs of 500 percent on any country that imports Russian oil, gas, petroleum products, or uranium. In effect, the bill would impose embargo-level tariffs on a wide array of countries unless they halt Russian energy imports entirely, including China and India (Russia's top oil customers), Turkey and Brazil (major buyers of Russian diesel), and the EU and Japan (significant consumers of Russian liquefied natural gas). The world has already watched Trump struggle to sustain 145 percent tariffs on China for more than a few weeks, and most countries would probably call Washington's bluff on a tariff threat several times higher. Besides, Russian energy exports cannot drop to zero overnight without triggering severe market dislocation. As a result, if the bill were enacted as written, Trump would most likely invoke a national security waiver and decline to enforce it. His administration should strike a compromise with Graham to replace the extreme tariff proposal with a more targeted oil sanctions regime, modeled on what worked against Iran. Under such a system, buyers of Russian oil would face secondary sanctions unless they meet two conditions: that their countries reduce total purchases every six months, and that payments are made into escrow accounts that Russia can use only for humanitarian imports. There is good reason to believe this approach could work. With global oil supplies outpacing demand, there's room to cut Russian exports without disrupting markets. Removing all of Russia's crude exports from the market, totaling some five million barrels per day, is unrealistic, but a 20 to 40 percent reduction over the next year is achievable—and could even open the door for U.S. shale producers to gain market share, advancing Trump's goal of American energy dominance. Moreover, Chinese, Indian, and Turkish banks would likely comply with the escrow account arrangement. All of them have been cautious about U.S. secondary sanctions, and this system might even benefit them by boosting exports to Russia. If Indian banks can release Russian oil funds only to finance bilateral trade, for example, India's sales of pharmaceuticals and agricultural products to Russia would likely increase—giving the country a reason to comply beyond the threat of punishment. And if the system succeeded, it would quickly give the Trump administration a massive pile of escrowed Russian oil funds to incentivize Putin to take concrete steps toward peace, such as accepting an unconditional cease-fire. Just as the EU oil embargo on Iran helped spur action in Washington a decade and a half ago, major new EU sanctions on Russia could do the same today. Instead of waiting around for Trump, Brussels should advance new penalties on Russia's energy sector. Even unilateral EU measures would tighten the screws on Moscow—and could prompt Washington to follow suit. Most important, the EU should seize the more than $200 billion in Russian sovereign assets that are already frozen in Europe and channel them into support for Ukraine. Combined with hard-hitting oil sanctions, such a move would force Putin to reconsider his long-standing belief that time is on his side—that Western resolve will crack if he just waits long enough. Over the past four months, Trump has threatened to levy sanctions against Russia on at least half a dozen occasions. As Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently acknowledged, “The president's belief is … right now, [if] you start threatening sanctions, the Russians will stop talking.” Trump's handling of Russia diverges sharply from his approach to every other country. He hasn't hesitated to impose massive tariffs on China while pursuing a trade deal or to levy new sanctions on Iran amid nuclear negotiations. In most cases, he sees coercion as compatible with diplomacy. With Russia, he seems to believe that the two are mutually exclusive. Of course, it will be even harder for Trump to coax Putin into a just peace in Ukraine than it was for Obama to strike a nuclear deal with Iran. But that only underscores the need for more pressure. And the global oil market is better positioned to absorb disruptions than it has been in years. The question is whether he's ready to play them. Our editors' top picks, delivered free to your inbox every Friday. * Note that when you provide your email address, the Foreign Affairs Privacy Policy and Terms of Use will apply to your newsletter subscription. Our editors' top picks from the week, delivered on Friday. * Note that when you provide your email address, the Foreign Affairs Privacy Policy and Terms of Use will apply to your newsletter subscription.