

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Four senior Conservative MPs have called on the UK Government to repatriate British families held in detention camps in northern Syria.
The MPs, Andrew Mitchell, David Davis, Tom Tugendhat and Tobias Ellwood, addressed their concerns to the Attorney General, Foreign Secretary and Home Secretary, in an open letter.
"We are concerned that their current indefinite detention in increasingly precarious Kurdish detention camps poses a significant security challenge to the UK, as well as significant harm to the children involved," they wrote.
Four senior Conservative MPs have called on the UK Government to repatriate British families held in detention camps in northern Syria.
The MPs, Andrew Mitchell, David Davis, Tom Tugendhat and Tobias Ellwood, addressed their concerns to the Attorney General, Foreign Secretary and Home Secretary, in an open letter.
"We are concerned that their current indefinite detention in increasingly precarious Kurdish detention camps poses a significant security challenge to the UK, as well as significant harm to the children involved," they wrote.
"We urge you to ensure that these individuals are brought back to the UK so that any adults accused of crimes can be fairly prosecuted with due process, and the children's safety is ensured."
"We believe that a policy of family separation would undermine any prospect of reintegrating returning children into UK society, while doing nothing to resolve the risk of losing track of the adults in north-east Syria, or secure justice for any crimes they may have committed."
Many of the women in the camps were trafficked to Syria by older male relatives or abusive partners at a young age. The letter continues: "Whilst some of these young women may have criminal charges to answer, their cases undoubtedly sustained abuse and exploitation, and to leave them in indefinite detention, or to face torture and the death penalty in Assad-controlled Syria or Iraq, would fly in the face of the fact that they are also victims of trafficking and gender-based violence. The complex dynamics of their situation are best dealt with by the UK authorities, and not by leaving them in this unsustainable and precarious position."
The letter was reported on BBC Radio Four's Six O'Clock News, and in the Times.
Reprieve Director Maya Foa said: "Many of these women are victims of serial abuse. Targeted because of their vulnerability, trafficked into Syria by coercive men, and now their own government has abandoned them. The government must urgently bring them back to the UK, and if there are charges to answer they must be dealt with by the British justice system."
Reprieve is a UK-based human rights organization that uses the law to enforce the human rights of prisoners, from death row to Guantanamo Bay.
The latest boat strike comes as new reporting revealed the identities of some of the administration's victims, including an impoverished fisherman and an out-of-work bus driver.
A top global human rights expert said Friday that President Donald Trump and his defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, "must be arrested and prosecuted" as the death toll in their military campaign in the Caribbean and Pacific, which has gone on for two months without congressional authorization, reached 70 people.
"It is illegal to treat drug suspects as combatants to be shot when there is no armed conflict," said former Human Rights Watch executive director Kenneth Roth. "Repetition doesn't change criminality."
Roth spoke out hours after Hegseth posted footage of the Department of Defense's latest strike in the Caribbean, which brought the number of vessels bombed to 18. The White House has said the boats were all operated by "narco-terrorists," but has provided no evidence publicly that they contained drugs or drug traffickers.
The Trump administration has also informed Congress that the US is engaged in an "armed conflict" with Latin American drug cartels, but Congress has not voted to authorize military action in the Caribbean or Pacific. The White House has claimed it does not need lawmakers' approval to carry out the attacks.
On Thursday, Senate Republicans, who control the chamber, voted down a bipartisan war powers resolution that would have required Trump to seek congressional authorization to continue the boat bombings and to take further military action in Venezuela, where the president has insisted drug cartels are producing fentanyl and trafficking it to the US.
Federal agencies and the United Nations have found Venezuela plays virtually no role in the trafficking of fentanyl—a fact that Secretary of State Marco Rubio dismissed in September when a reporter asked him about it—and is not a major producer of cocaine, though some cocaine is trafficked through the country after being produced in Colombia.
The footage Hegseth released on the social media platform X on Thursday was purported to show “a vessel operated by a designated terrorist organization" that was "trafficking narcotics in the Caribbean." Three people were killed in the strike.
"To all narco-terrorists who threaten our homeland: if you want to stay alive, stop trafficking drugs. If you keep trafficking deadly drugs—we will kill you," said Hegseth, who calls the DOD Trump's preferred Department of War, even though congressional approval is needed to officially change a federal agency's name.
As with previously released footage of some of the boat bombings, part of the boat that was struck was not visible in the surveillance video.
Latin American officials and the families of some victims have insisted that the people killed have not been involved in the trafficking of drugs. Venezuela's ambassador to the UN, Samuel Moncada, is among those who have called the bombings "extrajudicial executions" of people who have never been proven to be a threat to the US.
The latest boat strike came as the Associated Press published an investigation into the identities of at least four people who have been killed in the bombings.
The victims, the AP reported, have included Robert Sánchez, a 42-year-old fisherman who made about $100 a month and hoped to eventually purchase his own fishing boat. Economic pressures in the impoverished Sucre state where Sánchez lived pushed him to help cocaine traffickers navigate the Caribbean.
Another man, Juan Carlos “El Guaramero” Fuentes, was struggling to feed his family after he lost work as a transit bus driver, which he had been for several years before his bus broke down. He turned to smuggling to make ends meet, and was one of many novices hired by high-level cocaine traffickers, who typically stay ashore while the impoverished "drug runners" travel through the Caribbean by boat.
One relative of a person killed in one of the boat bombings told the AP that the US government “should have stopped" their family member's vessel instead of striking it and killing those on board.
In the past, the US has treated drug trafficking as a crime to be dealt with by law enforcement agencies, with the US Coast Guard sometimes helping to intercept boats in the Caribbean if they were suspected of carrying drugs and arresting those on board, affording them a day in court.
"You save more lives when you stop a vessel and arrest those aboard, alive, if they're actually trafficking drugs," said Adam Isacson of the Washington Office on Latin America on Thursday. "Instead of drowned bodies, you get useful intel about their criminal structures, their support networks, their finances, and future vessels."
The AP's reporting confirmed, said Isacson, that the Trump administration's boat strikes "are the equivalent of straight-up massacring 16-year-old drug dealers on US street corners."
"It satisfies some people's anger and bloodlust," said Isacson, "but hitting the poorest and most replaceable link in the chain does nothing to affect drug supplies."
“Every fraction of a degree means more hunger, displacement, and loss—especially for those least responsible,” said UN Secretary General António Guterres on Thursday. “This is moral failure—and deadly negligence.”
As world leaders gathered in Brazil for this year's global summit on the accelerating climate crisis this week, many took note of the absence of US President Donald Trump.
This year’s United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30) summit comes on the tenth anniversary of the Paris Climate agreement, in which nations committed to adopting policies intended to keep global temperature increases below the threshold of 1.5°C above preindustrial levels, considered a tipping point at which many of the worst ravages of climate change will become irreversible.
Ten years later, progress has fallen far short of the mark, with leaders scrambling to keep the deal’s goals intact—an aim that is likely untenable without the cooperation of the US, the globe’s largest historical emitter of carbon.
America’s president has not only once again pulled the US out of the Paris agreement, but also sought to turn climate denial into public policy and spent his term in office thus far grinding American investment in renewable energy to a halt—actions viewed as extraordinary abdications of responsibility at a time when the globe is ever more rapidly approaching the point of no return for warming.
Fresh on climate advocates' minds are Trump’s comments at the UN General Assembly in September, when he described climate change as the world’s “greatest con job.”
On Thursday, the World Meteorological Organization found that greenhouse gas emissions had reached a record high. Meanwhile, 2025 is on track to be the third hottest year on record, behind only 2024 and 2023.
“Every fraction of a degree means more hunger, displacement, and loss—especially for those least responsible," said UN Secretary-General António Guterres on Thursday. "This is moral failure—and deadly negligence."
Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who has emerged as one of the world's leading climate defenders from the heart of the Amazon rainforest, began the conference by delivering an indirect but unmistakable shot at Trump. He denounced the "extremist forces that fabricate fake news and are condemning future generations to life on a planet altered forever by global warming."
Other Latin American leaders were more direct. Colombian President Gustavo Petro, whom Trump recently hit with sanctions and threatened with military action, denounced the US president as "against humanity," as evidenced by "his absence" at the conference.
"The president of the United States at the latest United Nations General Assembly said the climate crisis does not exist," added Chilean President Gabriel Boric. "That is a lie."
In Trump's stead, over 100 other state and local figures from US politics have traveled to Brazil to take part in the conference: Among them are California Gov. Gavin Newsom, New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, and Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers.
Another attendee is Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego, chair of the Climate Mayors network, who recently applauded Tuesday night’s elections in the US. More than 40 candidates associated with the network came out victorious, as well as the self-described ecosocialist New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani.
“Our climate mayors did very well on the ballot,” Gallego said to applause at a local leaders forum for COP30. “We want to send this message from the US.”
But despite the US delegation, even with officials from the Trump administration absent, climate campaigners fear the White House may still seek to sabotage the conference from afar. Last month, the administration did just that when it used the threat of tariffs to strong-arm countries into killing what would have been a global-first carbon fee on shipping.
Even without Trump present, COP30 is crawling with fossil fuel lobbyists seeking to stymie progress. A report released Friday from the climate advocacy group Kick Big Polluters Out found that over 5,350 fossil fuel lobbyists have attended UN climate negotiations over the past four years. The corporations they represent are responsible for more than 60% of global emissions.
“These companies have defended their fossil interests by watering down climate action for years," said Fiona Hauke of the German environmental group Urgewald. "As we head towards COP30, we demand transparency and accountability: Keep polluters out of climate talks and make them pay for a just energy transition.”
"A military sending armed soldiers into US cities to fight 'the enemy within' at a president's behest is not one to embolden with more funding."
Nearly two dozen advocacy groups warned Thursday that a Republican-led effort to give President Donald Trump an additional $32 billion in Pentagon funding for the coming fiscal year would enable his administration to accelerate its lawless use of the military, both in US communities and overseas.
"We are seeing the administration intensify its National Guard domestic deployments, an authoritarian move that is plainly designed to clamp down on dissent and chill Americans' First Amendment expression," Public Citizen, Demand Progress, Peace Action, and other organizations wrote in a letter to the top Democrats on the House and Senate Armed Services Committees as lawmakers in both chambers work to hash out differences between their versions of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
"A military sending armed soldiers into US cities to fight 'the enemy within' at a president's behest is not one to embolden with more funding," the groups added.
The letter also notes that Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth are "unconstitutionally and dangerously" using the US military "to carry out assassinations in the Caribbean."
"Providing additional funding to the Pentagon at such a time would be seen as an implicit endorsement of this reckless activity," the groups wrote.
"Hegseth is a key enabler of Trump's authoritarianism, as Pentagon resources are being used in reckless and illegal actions domestically and internationally."
The House version of the NDAA, approved in September in a mostly party-line vote, would authorize $892.6 billion in military spending for the coming fiscal year.
But the Senate-passed version would increase that top line number by just over $32 billion, even as the Pentagon fails to pass an independent audit and remains rife with fraud and abuse.
In a separate letter also backed by Public Citizen, a coalition of advocacy groups called the proposed $32 billion increase in the Senate legislation "fiscally ill-advised and strategically counterproductive."
"Before this year's increases," the groups observed, "the Pentagon budget had already grown by nearly 50% adjusted for inflation since the turn of the 21st Century."
Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen, said in a statement that "Hegseth is a key enabler of Trump's authoritarianism, as Pentagon resources are being used in reckless and illegal actions domestically and internationally."
"Under his leadership, the Pentagon is further entrenching military policing in Americans' daily lives via a National Guard 'rapid response force' and actively attacking international vessels without congressional authorization," said Weissman. "Lavishing Hegseth's Pentagon with $32 billion in extra spending will only fuel Trump's authoritarian agenda. It is particularly galling to consider in the wake of dire cuts to the social safety net imposed by the tax and budget reconciliation bill and Trump administration unilateral action."