

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.

Today, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reinstated the national Roadless Area Conservation Rule in the Tongass National Forest in Southeast Alaska. The move restricts development on roughly 9.3 million acres in North America’s largest temperate rainforest.
“Protecting the Tongass National Forest is an important step in recognizing the role of our forests in fighting the biodiversity and climate crises,” said Patrick Lavin, Alaska policy advisor for Defenders of Wildlife. “Today’s action helps restore responsible stewardship in the Tongass, as demanded by an overwhelming majority of people during the public process. We look forward to working with the Biden administration to similarly protect older forests and wildlands across the nation.”
Among the largest temperate rainforests in the world, the Tongass contains rare expanses of pristine old-growth forest and as many as 17,000 miles of creeks, rivers and lakes. These waters abound with all five species of Pacific salmon, which anchor the economy of Southeast Alaska. Approximately 1 million visitors come from all over the U.S. and internationally each year to see its glaciers, old-growth forests and abundant wildlife.
Defenders of Wildlife is the premier U.S.-based national conservation organization dedicated to the protection and restoration of imperiled species and their habitats in North America.
(917) 363-4149One analyst noted that Section 224 of the National Defense Authorization Act would "provide a higher level of military-industrial integration than the US has with any other country in the world."
US Rep. Ro Khanna on Sunday said he will introduce an amendment to kill a provision tucked inside the sprawling 2027 National Defense Authorization Act that would deepen ties between the American and Israeli militaries.
Khanna (D-Calif.) wrote on social media that he would work to ensure the provision, Section 224 of the NDAA, is removed from the bill in the House Armed Services Committee, which is set to mark up the $1.15 trillion legislation on Thursday. The provision, according to legislative text unveiled last week, would "require the secretary of defense to designate an executive agent responsible for synchronizing cooperative efforts between the United States and Israel, including bilateral defense technology research, development, testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation."
Khanna's pledge to spearhead committee efforts to remove the provision came after Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.)—who has partnered with the California Democrat in pushing for the full release of the Epstein files—condemned Section 224 on social media and vowed to "offer an amendment to strip it from the bill on the floor" if it survives the House Armed Services Committee.
"We are a sovereign country," Massie wrote.
And I will be offering an amendment in the committee itself to strip section 224 out, @RepThomasMassie.
Trump can't kill the Massie/Khanna partnership no matter how much he posts on Truth Social. https://t.co/4Dz4ks84XH
— Ro Khanna (@RoKhanna) May 31, 2026
Ben Freeman, director of the Democratizing Foreign Policy program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, noted last week that while the US and Israel "already work together heavily on missile defense," Section 224 "would greatly expand coordination to seemingly every area of defense tech, including AI, quantum, autonomous systems, directed energy, cyber, biotech, and many more."
"It also proposes 'network integration' and 'data fusion.' In other words, the US military’s data could soon be the Israeli military’s data. If fully enacted, this proposal would provide a higher level of military-industrial integration than the US has with any other country in the world," Freeman wrote. "The result could well be a US political system even more susceptible to the whims of an Israeli government that seemingly has no qualms about drawing the US into military conflicts in the Middle East."
The NDAA provision has drawn outrage from anti-war groups that are pushing American lawmakers to cut off military assistance to Israel over its genocidal assault on Gaza, which has been carried out with the help of US weaponry. Last month, the Trump administration fast-tracked the approval of a transfer of American rockets to the Israeli military, which receives around $4 billion per year in aid from the US.
"While Americans oppose more military aid to Israel, Congress is inserting something even deeper and more insidious into the US military budget (NDAA): US integration with the Israeli military!" Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the peace group CodePink, said last week. "Tell Congress: Reject Section 224 of the NDAA. No military integration. No weapons and AI partnerships."
Section 224 is crammed into legislation that, if passed, would authorize more than $1 trillion in military spending for the coming fiscal year—part of President Donald Trump's push for an unprecedented $1.5 trillion military budget for 2027.
Experts at the Center for American Progress (CAP) noted in a Monday analysis that "while the recently released chairman’s mark of the NDAA does moderate some aspects of the budget—such as introducing guardrails on the 'Trump-class' battleship program—it does not go nearly far enough."
"Congress should refuse to authorize the president’s unjustifiable increase request," CAP argued. "Instead, lawmakers should insist on a disciplined defense budget that makes sense, ensuring that funds are spent on programs critical for the well-being of American servicemembers and modern defense needs—not vanity projects with limited military utility."
"Israel is doing everything it can to derail diplomacy by turning southern Lebanon into another Gaza," said one foreign policy expert.
Shortly after reporting emerged Monday that Iran was suspending talks with the United States over Israel's ramped up assault on Lebanon, President Donald Trump claimed that Israeli forces headed toward Beirut have "turned back" and that Hezbollah has agreed that "all shooting will stop" following separate phone calls with representatives from the two warring sides.
Since Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu began bombing Iran on February 28, Iranian officials and global experts have repeatedly accused the Israeli government of trying to sabotage any path to peace.
Iran's Tasnim News Agency reported Monday that "given the continuation of the Israeli regime's attacks in Lebanon, and considering that Lebanon had been one of the preconditions for a ceasefire—which has now been violated on all fronts, including Lebanon—the Iranian negotiating team is suspending 'talks and exchanges of texts through mediators.'"
According to Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-affiliated news agency, the IRGC said in a statement that Iran considers "the crossing of red lines in Lebanon and Gaza to mean direct war and the imposition of costs on its national security and the Islamic Resistance," and in response, it will "undertake defensive operations through unconventional measures, opening new fronts and maintaining the Strait of Hormuz equation."
Iran has responded to the US-Israeli assault by restricting traffic through the waterway, a key trade route, particularly for fossil fuels and fertilizer. As oil prices around the world have soared, Trump has imposed a naval blockade that he has maintained despite the April ceasefire agreement—which Israel initially claimed did not include Lebanon.
In a brief phone call on Monday, Trump told NBC News that he had not been informed of Iran's reported decision to suspend negotiations over Israel's escalation in Lebanon, but "I think it's fine if they're done talking."
"It's an appropriate thing to say, because they're better negotiators than they are fighters... But they haven't informed us of that," he continued. "It doesn't mean we're going to go and start dropping bombs all over there."
That comment notably came after the Trump administration launched new strikes against Iran over the weekend, and the Iranians attacked US military installations in the Middle East.
"We'll keep the blockade," Trump told NBC. "If they don't want to talk, that's OK with me. I think it's fine. I don't particularly want to talk either. We talk too much."
However, shortly after that, Trump said on his Truth Social platform that he "had a very productive call" with Netanyahu, "and there will be no Troops going to Beirut, and any Troops that are on their way, have already been turned back."
"Likewise, through highly placed Representatives, I had a very good call with Hezbollah, and they agreed that all shooting will stop—That Israel will not attack them, and they will not attack Israel," Trump continued. Less than 15 minutes later, he added that "talks are continuing, at a rapid pace, with the Islamic Republic of Iran."
While Iran's leadership had not publicly confirmed that talks were halted on Monday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote on social media that "the ceasefire between Iran and the US is unequivocally a ceasefire on all fronts, including in Lebanon. Its violation on one front is a violation of the ceasefire on all fronts. The US and Israel are responsible for the consequences of any violation."
Iran's chief negotiator, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, similarly said: "The naval blockade and escalation of war crimes in Lebanon by the genocidal Zionist regime are clear evidence of US noncompliance with the ceasefire. Every choice has a price, and the bill comes due. It will all fall into place."
Responding to Israel "dramatically escalating its military campaign" in southern Lebanon and Tasnim's reporting on negotiations, Sina Toossi, a senior nonresident fellow at the Center for International Policy in Washington, DC, concluded that "the Iranian message is increasingly clear: no Lebanon ceasefire, no broader framework, and potentially no talks at all."
"The talks are in a vicious cycle: progress, escalation, backtracking," he noted. "Many in Iran suspect Trump is trying to bring down the 'floor' for oil prices ahead of more war. And Israel is doing everything it can to derail diplomacy by turning southern Lebanon into another Gaza."
The "Gaza playbook" Israel is now using in Lebanon, Toossi said, features "scorched-earth tactics, mass displacement, and the ethnic cleansing" of its neighboring nation.
Other experts also pointed to Gaza, where Israel is widely accused of pursuing a genocide against Palestinians in the besieged exclave. Calling out Reuters reporting on Israel's escalation in Lebanon, Arab Center Washington DC fellow Assal Rad said that "like 'targeting Hamas' in Gaza, 'Hezbollah-controlled' is used to justify Israel flattening entire neighborhoods in Lebanon. This isn't journalism, it's stenography."
"This is what Israel's total destruction of southern Lebanon looks like, deliberately destroying people’s homes so they have nothing to return to," she added, sharing satellite images of the destruction.
Mohamad Safa, who earlier this year resigned as a representative for the nongovernmental organization Patriotic Vision Association at the United Nations, on Monday accused Israel of "committing another genocide in real time in Lebanon with complete impunity."
Former US Department of Defense adviser Jasmine El-Gamal, who now leads the consulting firm Averos Strategies, said early Monday: "Early in the Iran war, I warned that US and Israeli interests would inevitably diverge and that President Trump would have to make a choice: to actually put America first, or to continue to allow Netanyahu to threaten our interests. Lebanon is the epitome of this choice."
"Instead of protecting workers and families from death, injury, and illness, Trump’s EPA is putting communities at greater risk of harm," said the Coalition to Prevent Chemical Disasters.
Two recent high-profile chemical plant disasters are putting a spotlight on the Trump administration's aggressive deregulation of the industry, with even more cuts to chemical safety regulations expected in the coming months.
The disasters—one at a paper mill in Washington state that killed 11 people and the other in an aerospace plastics facility in California that forced tens of thousands of people to evacuate their homes—came after months of warnings from experts and labor unions about the impact of the administration's deregulatory agenda.
In late March, for instance, members of United Steelworkers (USW) rallied in Washington, DC to protest against a US Environmental Protection Agency plan to scrap regulations enacted under former President Joe Biden, which included "new safeguards such as identifying safer technologies and chemical alternatives, requiring implementation of safeguard measures in certain cases, more thorough incident investigations, and third-party auditing."
USW Local 13-228 process safety specialist Phil Stagg at the time warned that scrapping the rule would put "profits over safety" by prioritizing cost cutting over worker safety.
Following last week's twin disasters, the Coalition to Prevent Chemical Disasters also pointed to plans to weaken Biden-era safety regulations as a grave mistake that will put American workers at greater risk.
"The fatal and shocking incidents communities have faced in recent days demonstrate the urgent need to implement and build on existing regulatory safeguards so communities near chemical facilities are protected from chemical disasters," the group said. "But, instead of protecting workers and families from death, injury, and illness, Trump’s EPA is putting communities at greater risk of harm by weakening the nation’s primary defense against chemical facility incidents."
The administration has also been targeting the Chemical Safety Board (CSB), an independent federal watchdog charged with investigating the root causes of industrial chemical accidents.
As The New York Times reported last month, Trump's proposed budget all but eliminates the CSB by cutting its funding down to $0 while arguing that the watchdog merely duplicates work already done by the EPA.
Rep. Marie Glusenkamp Perez (D-Wash.) said in a Sunday social media post that the CSB did essential work in preventing future accidents, and she vowed to fight the administration's plans to zero out its budget.
"I’ll be making it my priority ensuring [CSB] has the resources they need for a through, unbiased investigation," Perez said. "They also have three vacancies currently on that board of directors, and my hope is that we're able to work with the administration to ensure that people with real trades experience are appointed to that board."
The horrifying loss of life in Longview last week demands a thorough impartial investigation conducted by the independent watchdog Chemical Safety Board.
Unfortunately the presidents proposed budget has zeroed out the CSB budget.
Next week, I’ll be making it my priority to… pic.twitter.com/3SqbDSASWJ
— Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (@RepMGP) May 31, 2026
Jordan Barab, a former deputy assistant secretary at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), explained in an interview published by Mountain State Spotlight last week that CSB produces invaluable work about chemical disasters' root causes, whereas the EPA's work focuses on whether disasters were caused by violating federal regulations.
In particular, Barab noted that CSB can "look at other problems, other causes that aren’t necessarily covered by regulations or standards," and added that "a lot of the ways the industry has modernized to improve safety are based on recommendations that came out of the CSB."