

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.

Daniel Jasper, 414-465-9865, djasper@afsc.org
Today, in light of a national security directive mandating a review of the impact of sanctions on COVID-19 relief efforts, 55 humanitarian, research, peacebuilding, faith-based, human rights, and other civil society groups - representing over 65 millions supporters - sent a letter to President Biden urging immediate sanctions relief and outlining necessary legal reforms to ensure sanctions do not harm innocent civilians.
Read the full text of the letter here.
"The U.S. cannot continue to claim to care about the wellbeing of civilians on one hand while restricting basic goods required for the welfare and livelihoods of whole populations on the other hand," said Daniel Jasper, Asia Advocacy Coordinator for the American Friends Service Committee. "Sanctions impede the delivery of humanitarian aid and the result is civilians bear the burden of ineffective, dangerous, and counterproductive U.S. foreign policy."
The letter urges the President to make the agency review process transparent, broaden humanitarian safeguards, address the reluctance of financial institutions to work with humanitarian actors in sanctioned locations, implement ongoing assessments of the human costs of sanctions, and indefinitely suspend broad-based sanctions on civilian sectors that leave populations more exposed to humanitarian emergencies.
The 55 organizations, some of which have decades of experience operating in heavily-sanctioned contexts, highlight the fact that sanctions can prevent the delivery of COVID-19 relief, medical supplies, and goods needed for things like childcare or food security projects, as well as limiting communication and partnerships necessary to deliver aid and monitor ongoing projects.
"The health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic go well beyond the virus itself. Globally we are seeing compounding health impacts hitting the already vulnerable - from falling immunization rates to increased malnutrition and surging mental health needs," said Paul Shetler Fast, Health Coordinator for Mennonite Central Committee. "Sanctions and travel restrictions have significant downstream impacts on the ability to end this pandemic and for humanitarian organizations to respond to the many urgent health needs exacerbated by the pandemic."
Citing a growing body of independent literature that shows the impacts of sanctions on civilians, the letter also highlights the dangers that sanctions pose to global security amid a pandemic. The authors note that "sanctioned countries and locations could continue to be, or could become, hotbeds of infection for years, providing ample opportunities for the virus to mutate into more contagious and deadly strains.
"For too long, the United States has reflexively relied on suffocating, broad-based sanctions with absolutely no regard for their impact on everyday people," said Win Without War Deputy Director Sara Haghdoosti. "At any time -- but especially during a pandemic -- these sanctions regimes are inhumane, deadly, and a threat to global health. On top of it all, they are proven to undermine the work of changemakers struggling for progress within sanctioned countries. This is a no-brainer: it's time for reform."
"President Biden's decision to review the impact of US sanctions on COVID-19 responses is a step in the right direction. However, before the pandemic, US sanctions were already responsible for detrimental economic and humanitarian outcomes across the globe. The Biden administration must act to broaden transparency over our sanctions policies and their impacts, and immediately move to end the collective punishment of civilian populations,"said Cavan Kharrazian, Foreign Policy Campaigner, Demand Progress.
"The regular US use of economic sanctions has had a devastating humanitarian impact on communities, with women and girls often the hardest hit. In much of the world, women and girls shoulder the responsibility of caring for family members and securing basic needs for their households. By raising food and fuel prices, weakening water infrastructure, and making medical equipment and care harder to access, economic sanctions only deepen these burdens," said Yifat Susskind, Executive Director of MADRE. "The Biden administration's decision to review the impact of sanctions on COVID relief efforts is a positive first step, and should include a study of its gendered impacts in consultation with women's groups in targeted countries."
"The Biden administration's review of the impact of economic sanctions on COVID relief efforts is an encouraging first step toward recognizing the enormous suffering that US sanctions have brought upon innocent civilians," said Alexander Main, International Policy Director at the Center for Economic and Policy Research. "As the administration performs the review, it should consult humanitarian groups, human rights experts and multilateral agencies - like WHO and PAHO - that witness the effects of sanctions on local communities. The administration should also immediately ease existing unilateral sanctions, as top UN officials and European leaders have called for. In the longer term, the administration should comply with international law and basic moral standards and stop implementing unilateral economic sanctions."
American Friends Service Committee is a Quaker organization devoted to service, development, and peace programs throughout the world. Our work is based on the belief in the worth of every person, and faith in the power of love to overcome violence and injustice.
(215) 241-7000"He’s the Jim Cramer of Iran war predictions," said one critic.
Conservative commentator Dave Rubin, who for months has been a top booster of President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran, was inundated with mockery on Sunday after a viral video exposed months' worth of his failed predictions about the conflict.
The video, which was posted on social media Saturday, begins with Rubin telling viewers to not listen to any of the prognostications being made by critics of the war, which Trump launched in late February without any authorization from Congress.
"I'm pretty good with predictions," Rubin says. "And my prediction here is that everything the media is now going to say about Iran—it's going to close the Strait of Hormuz, and energy prices are going to go crazy—none of this is going to come to pass."
Iran war: greatest hits from the last 12 weeks pic.twitter.com/9pgXyvmsgF
— Dave Rubin Clips II (Parody) - Retired Jan.20/2025 (@DaveClips) May 24, 2026
The video then cuts to Rubin wrongly predicting that gas prices during the conflict "will continue to come down," before switching to claims that Iran lacks the military capability to keep the Strait of Hormuz closed in the face of US military power.
"If the United States wants to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, which it does," says Rubin, "and Donald Trump says we'll escort ships through if we have to, it's going to stay open."
From there, the video shows Rubin hyping of the prospect of Iranian dissident Reza Pahlavi swooping in to take over the country after the war, and then getting fooled by a fake artificial intelligence-generated video of Iranians giving thanks to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for bombing their country.
The video compilation of Rubin's failed predictions drew immediate ridicule from critics.
"He’s the Jim Cramer of Iran war predictions," joked Krystal Ball.
Commentator Adam Mockler wrote of Rubin that "it’s brutal watching him make failed predictions week after week."
Journalist Glenn Greenwald argued that the video should be the last nail in the coffin of whatever credibility Rubin had left.
"Imagine having sat through and listened to all of this Israeli propaganda, which turned out to be (predictably and completely) false," commented Greenwald, "and then thinking there was some value in continuing to listen to this person."
The Bulwark's Tim Miller said that while he knew Rubin was "a smooth-brained hack," he still "couldn’t even fathom how bad these war takes would be."
Political analyst Omar Baddar, meanwhile, said the video should erase any doubt that Rubin is "the dumbest man on the internet."
The Trump administration last week sued Minnesota after it passed a law banning prediction markets from operating in the state.
A Sunday report in The New York Times revealed how the Trump administration is using a key government agency to shut down any efforts to regulate online betting markets such as Kalshi and Polymarket.
According to the Times, the administration has stacked the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) with industry insiders who have systematically "mowed down" staffers at the agency who have expressed interest in providing oversight on prediction markets.
Among other things, the report documented how multiple officials at CTFC have been put on leave simply for asking questions about the betting markets' ties to members of President Donald Trump's family or for having past experience enforcing regulations related to cryptocurrencies.
What's more, the Times found that even being an industry insider isn't enough to guarantee good standing in the agency. Brian Quintenz, who was tapped by Trump to lead CTFC last year, saw his nomination withdrawn after he drew the ire of Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss for refusing to support their cryptocurrency exchange's complaint against the agency.
Revelations about industry insiders rolling over regulators at CTFC come as the Trump administration is fighting any attempts by states to regulate prediction markets.
As explained in a Thursday report from CNBC, the Trump administration is "fighting a multi-front battle to stop the state actions and assert its regulatory authority," with CTFC arguing that it is "the only entity that can regulate" betting platforms.
16 different states are engaged in legal proceedings against the platforms, and Minnesota last week passed a law to ban them outright, which immediately drew a lawsuit from the administration.
The new Minnesota law, which is scheduled to take effect in August, bans prediction markets "from hosting, creating or advertising in the state," according to ABC News.
In an interview with ABC, Minnesota state Rep. Emma Greenman (D-63B) said she authored the legislation because she has grown increasingly concerned about young people in the state seeing their finances drained from placing online bets.
"We're seeing studies come out that say [the companies] are targeting 18- to 21-year-olds," said Greenman, "and we are seeing gambling starting younger and younger."
CFTC Chair Michael Selig last month warned states against trying to regulate prediction markets, which he said would "circumvent the clear directive of Congress."
"Our message to Wisconsin is the same as to New York, Arizona, and others," said Selig. "If you interfere with the operation of federal law in regulating financial markets, we will sue you."
"Nothing was accomplished by Operation Epic Fury except putting the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in charge of Iran and the Strait of Hormuz," said one critic of the war.
President Donald Trump revealed on Saturday that he is mulling a deal that would end his illegal war with Iran, and some hawks within the Republican Party are expressing alarm.
According to a Sunday report in The New York Times, many details of the agreement to end the war remain murky, with the fate of Iran's enriched uranium up in the air. US and Iranian officials have also given contradictory messages about the proposed deal's contents, suggesting there is much work still to be done before any agreement is finalized.
Regardless, three hawkish GOP senators on Saturday raised major concerns about the contents of the deal, warning against accepting any agreement that will leave Iran in a stronger position than before Trump illegally launched a war against it without any authorization from Congress in late February.
"If it is perceived in the region that a deal with Iran allows the regime to survive and become more powerful over time, we will have poured gasoline on the conflicts in Lebanon and Iraq," wrote Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who lobbied Trump to attack Iran repeatedly before the start of the war. "A deal that is perceived to allow Iran to survive and possess the ability to control the [Strait of Hormuz] in the future will put Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Shia militias in Iraq on steroids.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), another longtime Iran hawk, said he was "deeply concerned" about what he's been hearing about the deal and expressed particular worry about Iran getting relief from US sanctions while still maintaining the ability to shut down the Strait of Hormuz.
"If the result of all that is to be an Iranian regime—still run by Islamists who chant 'death to America'—now receiving billions of dollars," Cruz wrote, "being able to enrich uranium and develop nuclear weapons, and having effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, then that outcome would be a disastrous mistake."
Sen. Roger Wicker (D-Miss.) was even blunter in his condemnation of the reported agreement.
"The rumored 60-day ceasefire—with the belief that Iran will ever engage in good faith—would be a disaster," Wicker wrote. "Everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught!"
Ben Rhodes, a former deputy national security adviser for President Barack Obama, challenged Wicker's claims that Trump's illegal war had achieved anything of value.
"Nothing was accomplished by Operation Epic Fury," Rhodes wrote, "except putting the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in charge of Iran and the Strait of Hormuz."
Rhodes' criticism was echoed by Stephen Wertheim, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who wrote that "everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury is already for naught."
Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group, accused the Iran hawks of being delusional for thinking further bombing would force Iran to capitulate.
"DC's Iran hawks got two wars, nearly every conceivable sanction designation, a blockade, threw a wrench in global economy," Vaez wrote, "and will still claim that just a little more pressure and a touch more bombing will magically yield the concessions they still won't be satisfied with."