How US drone strike, political betrayal drove aging Afghan militant closer to Daesh

1 / 3
Hajji Amanullah, left, with some of his men in Shaygal district, Kunar province. (Courtesy Fazelminallah Qazizai)
2 / 3
Afghanistan police and officials investigate the site of a suicide attack in Kabul in 2012. (AFP)
3 / 3
Hizb leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar speaking in Kabul. (AFP)
Updated 02 March 2018
Follow

How US drone strike, political betrayal drove aging Afghan militant closer to Daesh

KUNAR, Afghanistan: Hajji Amanullah had been walking through the night, hoping to use the cover of darkness to shake off the Americans hunting him down, when he again heard the familiar low-pitched hum of the drone that seemed to watch his every move. It was early on the morning of June 24, 2017, near the end of Ramadan, and for the past few days the unmanned aerial vehicle had been doggedly following the insurgent commander as he traversed the boulder-strewn peaks and valleys that form the district of Shaygal, in eastern Afghanistan.
Almost 180 coalition troops had been killed in the surrounding province of Kunar since the war began in 2001 and Amanullah was the architect of much of the bloodshed. As a senior figure in the Islamist group Hizb-e Islami (the Islamic Party), he had clashed with the Americans dozens of times. Only now did he realize that this was their moment of revenge.
He had been using a torch to light a path through the rugged terrain and just as he recognized his mistake and paused to switch it off, a loud tearing sound split the sky. The first missile hit the ground in front of him, throwing him to the floor. The second landed closer, sending dirt, rocks and branches into the air. Stunned, and with his left wrist and left ear bleeding, he recited his last rites, convinced another missile was on its way. But to his amazement there were no more explosions. After several minutes villagers arrived on the scene and took him to a cluster of nearby houses. There, he began to recuperate and plot his next move.
Recounting the details of the drone strike in an exclusive interview with Arab News recently, Amanullah blamed himself for being too casual with his own security and underestimating the Americans’ firepower.
“If your enemy is a fox, you should think of it as a lion,” he said, repeating an old proverb.
Amanullah’s previously untold story offers a fascinating, and sobering, glimpse into the insurgent side of the war in Afghanistan, as US policymakers continue their search for a decisive breakthrough that will turn around the conflict. It is a tale of missed opportunities and shifting alliances; the horrors of combat and the perils of making peace with an intractable enemy. Ultimately, it is also the story of the changing face of radicalism in this country — a land that nurtured Al-Qaeda and that is now becoming an increasingly important sanctuary for Daesh.
Aged 50 and sporting a long white beard, Amanullah comes from the La Hussein valley in Shaygal, a picturesque area of persimmon and walnut trees. He belongs to the Shinwari tribe, one of eastern Afghanistan’s most prominent Pashtun groups, and was born into a typically large family, with eight brothers and three sisters. He was just 12-years-old when he joined Hizb-e Islami in its guerrilla war against local Marxists in the late 1970s.
 

Hizb, as it is commonly known by Afghans, was influenced by the ideas of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and led by a charismatic and ruthless former engineering student, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who Aman revered. Together, they vowed to wage armed jihad until the country was governed by a radical interpretation of Islamic law. The party went on to become the most powerful Mujahedeen faction in the 1979-1989 war against Soviet occupation, when it received the largest share of covert US arms supplies funnelled to the resistance through Pakistan’s ISI intelligence agency. At the same time, Hekmatyar mentored militants from across Asia and the Middle East, training them to launch insurrections in their home countries after the Soviet withdrawal.
But when the Russians left Afghanistan and victory seemed within reach, Hizb was outflanked by rival Mujahedeen parties and Kabul descended into a savage civil war that killed tens of thousands of people, ultimately giving rise to the Taliban. Hekmatyar, one of the conflict’s main protagonists, fled to Iran before returning to Afghanistan in 2002 to launch a jihad against the America-led occupation.
For many of Hekmatyar’s supporters this new guerrilla campaign was a step too far and, exhausted by years of conflict, they laid down their arms to join the democratic process in Kabul, forming their own factions of Hizb. Amanullah was one of the few who stood by Hekmatyar and the insurgent wing of the party, known in US-military parlance as HIG. Before he had a chance to fire a shot in anger, however, American forces arrested him in the eastern province of Nangarhar while he was trying to visit a friend in jail. The experience only hardened his resolve. Released after five months, he returned to Shaygal and resumed his insurgency.
By his own account, Amanullah first confronted US soldiers in battle in late 2002, digging up a rocket-propelled grenade launcher he had hidden in a cemetery and ambushing a military convoy. Already well known in local rebel circles, his reputation grew in the years that followed as he led dozens of raids against the Americans. He rose through Hizb’s ranks, eventually becoming head of its military committee — the section of the party tasked with organizing guerrilla operations across the country. His growing influence was most keenly felt in Kunar, where American troops stationed in remote outposts struggled to withstand frequent assaults from radical fighters largely drawn from a local population hostile to outsiders.
As the war dragged on, Hizb conducted several high-profile attacks in Kabul, including one by a female suicide bomber in September 2012 that killed at least 12 people — eight of them South African employees of a chartered aviation company. But Hekmatyar’s faction remained militarily weak compared with the Taliban and, after years of behind the scenes talks, it signed a peace agreement with the Afghan government in September 2016, less than two months before Donald Trump’s election as US president. It seemed like one of the most significant political breakthroughs Afghanistan had experienced in years.
Even then, however, there were warning signs that the deal would give rise to a new wave of radicalism. A small band of Daesh fighters had already spent several months living under Amanullah’s protection in Shaygal, impressing him with their adherence to a violent and austere way of life that they claimed mirrored the conduct of Islam’s earliest apostles. He sheltered them in accordance with Pashtun honor codes but opted to keep a prudent distance from their daily operations while he waited to see how their jihad progressed.
The more time that passed, the more troubled he became by the contrasting approaches between the extremist old guard he grew up with and the younger, stricter, fighters emerging in their wake. While Daesh seemed to resemble the earlier incarnation of Hizb that he joined in the late 1970s — executing alleged spies in the pockets of territory under its control and demanding everyone adhere to its interpretation of Islam — the men he had spent a lifetime serving alongside appeared to have given up on their goal of turning Afghanistan into a radical Islamist state that would inspire uprisings across the Muslim world.
The last straw for Amanullah came in April 2017, when Hekmatyar used his first public speeches in the country for 20 years to rebuke sections of the insurgency and call for an end to the war. As far as the commander was concerned, his leader was tacitly condoning the American occupation. To add to his consternation, Hekmatyar — a man once famous for his support for Al-Qaeda and his strident denunciations of US foreign policy — then came to Kabul and took up residency in a house owned by the Afghan president, Ashraf Ghani.
“God is a witness that from the start of the peace talks until the end, the process was un-Islamic and illegal,” Amanullah told Arab News. “If you look at history Muslims never send an offer of peace to infidels and apostates; it is always the infidels who send us the offer of peace. They are the forces of Satan and they will be defeated by the forces of God — they cannot resist us.”
Disgusted, he announced that he was forming his own faction of Hizb and took hundreds of fighters with him. He insisted to us that this move was initially meant as a symbolic show of dissent, rather than an act of war against his former colleagues. He claimed he only intended to speak out against the peace deal and had no plans to reignite his insurgency until the drone strike caused him to reconsider his options and edge even closer to Daesh.
Amanullah survived the attack, which occurred in La Hussein, with relatively minor injuries, but two of his most trusted fighters were killed: Amran, a 25-year-old father of five, and Redi Gul, a 30-year-old father of seven. In the hours that followed the commander’s men began to spread the rumor that he had also died, hoping the announcement would be picked up by mainstream and social media, throwing the Americans off his scent. The deception worked.
In the ensuing days leaflets started appearing in and around Kunar, warning of more retribution to follow. “Hajji Amanullah is dead!” they proclaimed in Pashto, over a picture of him with his face crossed out. “We are coming after you. Understand this: your leaders are also not safe because the coalition forces are coming after you.”
It was a boast that may yet come back to haunt the American and Afghan governments. We first met Amanullah in June 2016, before he formed his own faction of Hizb. Back then, he was happy walking in daylight and served under Hekmatyar’s chief lieutenant, Kashmir Khan, a prominent local commander who would die of natural causes later that year. Even in those days Daesh fighters enjoyed the protection of Hizb in Shaygal but their numbers were small. By the time of our most recent meeting late last year, the situation was markedly different. Security was tighter and the tension greater.
With drones clearly audible in the sky over the district, Amanullah’s militants forbade photography and kept phone conversations to a minimum. It took us several attempts to rendezvous with him at a safe house in rugged terrain in a remote corner of the district.
He arrived for the interview just after 10:45pm, accompanied by five bodyguards. He wore a shalwar kameez, a flat Afghan pakhool hat, military belt and hiking boots, and walked with the aid of a long stick. He was polite and genial, demonstrating the hospitality Pashtuns customarily show to guests. Throughout the area in which we met there was talk of the growing strength of Daesh. In places under Amanullah’s jurisdiction the group’s fighters roamed freely alongside members of the Taliban. He claimed they had all learnt from the way he and his men governed with an iron fist.
“I tell people here that the rules and laws of Daesh were the rules of Hizb. First they were adopted by the Taliban, now they are adopted by Daesh,” he said.
As someone who prides himself on keeping his word and protecting the honor of his fighters, Amanullah’s split with Hizb’s leadership has proved more traumatic than the drone strike that nearly killed him. He still regards himself as a member of the party but feels senior figures within the movement have betrayed its core principles, leaving him with no choice other than to take matters into his own hands and establish a splinter group.
At a gathering of 3,000 mainstream Hizb members in Kabul last November, Hekmatyar attempted to address the grievances of colleagues like Amanullah who are angry with the peace agreement. He acknowledged that the government had yet to fulfil key aspects of its side of the deal, including the large-scale release of party prisoners and the provision of land for the families of thousands of Hizb members currently living as refugees in Pakistan. But he claimed that by working openly in the country Hizb now had “an effective and decisive role” in Afghan politics. Dissidents should “be patient and have hope in the future,” he said.
Privately, some senior party officials are less magnanimous toward their former brothers-in-arms who continue to advocate violent resistance. Speaking to us last autumn, one high-ranking figure in Hekmatyar’s inner-circle accused Amanullah of acting out of self-interest, claiming the rogue commander was being funded by unspecified foreign donors to cause divisions within the party’s ranks.
We found no evidence to support this claim. The living conditions of Amanullah and his men were far harsher than their contemporaries in Kabul, and they expressed no interest in compromise or political power. What mattered to them was sticking to their radical beliefs, however unpalatable those ideas may be to millions of their fellow Afghans.
In Shaygal itself, the highly conservative community views Amanullah’s strict leadership as upholding Islamic values. Smoking and music are outlawed in villages under his control and it is forbidden for men to shave. Opium cultivation is banned and residents are only allowed to fish using nets or rods, not by throwing grenades into the local river — a practice that has become all too common in war-ravaged Afghanistan.
He predicted that Hizb’s influence would wane under Hekmatyar’s continued guidance and left open the possibility that he would formally merge his break-away faction of the movement with Daesh. Even if he is killed there seems little doubt that his followers will continue the jihad he started more than 30 years ago.
“All over the country the Mujahedeen of Hizb are ready to stay with us and continue as Mujahedeen until we achieve our holy aim,” he said.
When the interview was over he gathered a handful of his men and led them in prayer. He then melted back into the night.

* For this article Chris Sands reported from Kabul and Fazelminallah Qazizai reported from Kunar.


Melania Trump brings steely fashion game back to Washington

Updated 5 sec ago
Follow

Melania Trump brings steely fashion game back to Washington

  • American first ladies don’t get much of a voice — but their sartorial choices are broadcast to the world and scrutinized for subtext and statements

WASHINGTON: Where in the world is Melania Trump? Back in Washington in a sharply tailored outfit that exudes international woman of mystery as her husband once again becomes president of the United States.
Wearing a long navy coat and matching wide-brimmed hat — which shielded her eyes in most photos and hindered her commander-in-chief husband’s attempts to give her a peck before his swearing-in — Melania’s fit drew snark on social media and a flurry of comparisons to a 1980s video game character.
“Where in the world is Carmen Sandiego?” quipped the Internet, referring to the franchise that spun off into a popular 1990s geography game show for kids, and featured a criminal mastermind dressed in a long, carmine trench coat and eye-obscuring fedora.
Melania Trump’s coat and skirt were silk wool Adam Lippes, an independent American designer based in New York, an ensemble paired with an ivory blouse tightly wrapped at the Slovenian-born former model’s neck.
“The tradition of the presidential inauguration embodies the beauty of American democracy and today we had the honor to dress our first lady, Mrs. Melania Trump,” said Lippes in a statement that emphasized American manufacturing over political ideology.
“Mrs. Trump’s outfit was created by some of America’s finest craftsmen and I take great pride in showing such work to the world.”
The hat was by New York milliner Eric Javits.
“She cut the figure of a mafia widow or high-ranking member of an obscure religious order, and a bit of ‘My Fair Lady,’ wrote Rachel Tashjian, style critic for The Washington Post.
American first ladies don’t get much of a voice — but their sartorial choices are broadcast to the world and scrutinized for subtext and statements.
The late Rosalynn Carter, for example, drew strong reactions by wearing a dress she had already worn — gasp! — when her husband Jimmy was inaugurated in 1977.
The point was to show empathy for the economic struggles of Americans — but sometimes what the people really want is aspirational glamor.
In recent years first ladies have routinely turned to independent designers for inaugural events: in 2021, Jill Biden wore a sparkling blue coat-and-dress combo by Markarian, a small brand in New York.
Michelle Obama made waves in 2009 in a lemon-colored outfit by Isabel Toledo, wearing Thom Browne at her husband’s second swearing-in. She wore gowns by Jason Wu to both series of inaugural balls.
Melania Trump, for her part, channeled Jackie Kennedy to kick off her first turn in the White House, wearing Ralph Lauren — a heritage-brand favorite on both sides of the political aisle — to the daytime events in 2017.
She swapped her powder-blue cashmere dress and matching asymmetrical bolero jacket with opera gloves for a silk crepe gown by Herve Pierre that year, both looks that signaled a sense of buoyancy as she began her new role as a political wife.
Her shadowy-chic 2025 look marks a sharp departure as she enters tenure two.
“For her second round as first lady, the fashion game — the tool she brandishes most often and most forcefully, even if the public sometimes struggles to divine her sartorial messages — is likely to be one of steely, precise armor, of clothes with brash and exacting tailoring,” wrote the Post’s Tashjian.
“For the past year, she has worn a wardrobe of mostly black, but this does not seem intended to make her disappear into the background.”


UK to hold inquiry after teenager admits murdering three girls in Southport

Police officers stand on duty outside The Queen Elizabeth II Law Courts in Liverpool, north west England on January 20, 2025.
Updated 39 min 38 sec ago
Follow

UK to hold inquiry after teenager admits murdering three girls in Southport

  • Despite finding Al-Qaeda manual, police had said the incident was not being treated as terrorism-related, and his motive remains unknown
  • In the wake of the murders, large disturbances broke out in Southport after false reports spread on social media that the suspect was a radical migrant

LONDON/LIVERPOOL: A British teenager unexpectedly pleaded guilty on Monday to murdering three young girls at a Taylor Swift-themed dance event last July, while the government said it would hold an inquiry into the atrocity which was followed by nationwide rioting.
Axel Rudakubana, 18, surprised the judge, prosecutors and police by admitting he had carried out the killings in the northern English town of Southport, making the trial that was about to start at Liverpool Crown Court unnecessary.
He also pleaded guilty to 10 charges of attempted murder relating to the attack, as well as to producing the deadly poison ricin and possessing an Al-Qaeda training manual.
Hours later, the government announced there would be a public inquiry, with Prime Minister Keir Starmer saying it was “a moment of trauma for the nation when there are grave questions to answer as to how the state failed in its ultimate duty to protect these young girls.”
Rudakubana had previously been referred to Prevent, a counter-radicalization scheme, three times, but no action had been taken and he had also been in contact with the police, the courts, and mental health services, the government said.
“It is clear that this was a young man with a sickening and sustained interest in death and violence,” said Ursula Doyle from the Crown Prosecution Service. “He has shown no signs of remorse.”
Rudakubana, who was 17 at the time of the incident, initially refused to speak when asked to confirm his name, as he had at all previous hearings, which meant that “not guilty” pleas had been entered on his behalf in December.
But after consulting with his lawyer, he admitted murdering Bebe King, 6, Elsie Dot Stancombe, 7, and Alice Dasilva Aguiar, 9, who were at the summer vacation event.
Doyle said he had carried out a “meticulously planned rampage” as innocent children enjoyed a carefree dance workshop and made friendship bracelets.
Judge Julian Goose said he would sentence Rudakubana on Thursday and that a life sentence was inevitable.
Anti-immigrant riots sparked across Britain
Rudakubana, who was born in Britain, was arrested shortly after the attack in the quiet seaside town north of Liverpool. Despite finding the Al-Qaeda manual, police had said the incident was not being treated as terrorism-related, and his motive remains unknown.
In the wake of the murders, large disturbances broke out in Southport after false reports spread on social media that the suspect was a radical migrant.
The unrest spread across Britain with attacks on mosques and hotels housing asylum seekers. Starmer blamed far-right thuggery and more than 1,500 people were arrested.
The Guardian newspaper reported that Rudakubana, the son of devout Christians who had moved to Britain from Rwanda, had been referred to Prevent over concerns that he was looking at online material about US school massacres and past terrorist attacks. But he was not judged to be a terrorism risk, the paper said.
The interior minister Yvette Cooper said an inquiry was needed so families of the victims “can get answers about how this terrible attack could take place and about why this happened to their children.” 


Trump says to declare national emergency, use military at Mexico border

Updated 41 min 46 sec ago
Follow

Trump says to declare national emergency, use military at Mexico border

  • Donald Trump: ‘First, I will declare a national emergency at our southern border’
  • Trump: ‘I will send troops to the southern border to repel the disastrous invasion of our country’

WASHINGTON: Donald Trump said Monday that he will issue a raft of executive orders aimed at reshaping how the United States deals with citizenship and immigration.
The 47th president will set to work almost immediately with a series of presidential decrees intended to drastically reduce the number of migrants entering the country.
“First, I will declare a national emergency at our southern border,” Trump said minutes after his inauguration.
“All illegal entry will immediately be halted, and we will begin the process of returning millions and millions of criminal aliens back to the places from which they came.
“I will send troops to the southern border to repel the disastrous invasion of our country,” he said.
Trump, who campaigned on a platform of clamping down on migration and whose policies are popular with people who fret over changing demographics, also intends to put an end to the centuries-old practice of granting citizenship automatically to anyone born in the United States.
“We’re going to end asylum,” White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly told reporters, and create “an immediate removal process without possibility of asylum. We are then going to end birthright citizenship.”
The notion of birthright citizenship is enshrined in the US Constitution, which grants anyone born on US soil the right to an American passport.
Kelly said the actions Trump takes would “clarify” the 14th Amendment — the clause that addresses birthright citizenship.
“Federal government will not recognize automatic birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens born in the United States,” she said.

The first effects of Trump’s hard-line stance on immigration became apparent minutes after Trump’s inauguration when an app unveiled under president Joe Biden to help process migrants went offline.
“Effective January 20, 2025, the functionalities of CBP One that previously allowed undocumented aliens to submit advance information and schedule appointments at eight southwest border ports of entry is no longer available, and existing appointments have been canceled,” said a notice on the landing page.
US media reported 30,000 people had appointments scheduled.
Kelly said the administration would also reinstate the “Remain in Mexico” policy that prevailed under the last Trump administration.
Under that rule, people who apply to enter the United States at the Mexican border were not allowed to enter the country until their application had been decided.

Kelly said Trump would seek to use the death penalty against non-citizens who commit capital crimes, such as murder.
“This is about national security. This is about public safety, and this is about the victims of some of the most violent, abusive criminals we’ve seen enter our country in our lifetime, and it ends today,” she said.
Many of Trump’s executive actions taken during his first term were rescinded under Biden, including one using so-called Title 42, which was implemented during the Covid pandemic preventing almost all entry to the country on public health grounds.
The changes under Biden led to an influx of people crossing into the United States and images of thousands of people packing the border area.
Trump frequently invoked dark imagery about how illegal migration was “poisoning the blood” of the nation, words that were seized upon by opponents as reminiscent of Nazi Germany.

While US presidents enjoy a range of powers, they are not unlimited. Analysts say any effort to alter birthright citizenship will be fraught.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, said the 14th Amendment was “crystal clear” in granting citizenship to anyone born in the United States with the exception of children of foreign diplomats.
“We have had birthright citizenship for centuries, and a president cannot take it away with an executive order,” he told AFP. “We expect rapid court challenges.”
Reichlin-Malik said all sides of the immigration debate recognized that the laws needed reform, but presidential orders were unlikely to achieve lasting change.
Cris Ramon, immigration senior policy adviser at civil rights group UnidosUS, said the administration was “using a ‘throw spaghetti at the wall’ approach.”
“We don’t care whether this is legal or not,” he said of the apparent attitude. “We’re just simply going to do it and see if it survives the courts.”


Trump returns to power after unprecedented comeback

Updated 20 January 2025
Follow

Trump returns to power after unprecedented comeback

  • Four years ago, Trump was voted out of White House during an economic collapse caused by the COVID-19 pandemic
  • But he never lost his grip on the Republican Party and was undeterred by criminal cases and two assassination attempts

WASHINGTON: Donald Trump, who overcame impeachments, criminal indictments and a pair of assassination attempts to win another term in the White House, was sworn in as the 47th president Monday, taking charge as Republicans assume unified control of Washington and set out to reshape the country’s institutions.
Trump will act swiftly after the ceremony, with executive orders already prepared for his signature to clamp down on border crossings, increase fossil fuel development and end diversity and inclusion programs across the federal government.
He plans to declare the beginning of “a thrilling new era of national success” as “a tide of change is sweeping the country,” according to excerpts of his inaugural address.
The executive orders are the first step in what Trump will call “the complete restoration of America and the revolution of common sense.”
Frigid weather is rewriting the pageantry of the day. Trump’s swearing-in was moved indoors to the Capitol Rotunda — the first time that has happened in 40 years — and the inaugural parade was replaced by an event at a downtown arena. Throngs of Trump supporters who descended on the city to watch the inaugural ceremony on the West Front of the Capitol from the National Mall will be left to find somewhere else to view the festivities.
“We needed a change. The country was going in the wrong direction in so many ways, economically, geopolitically, so many social issues at home,” said Joe Morse, 56, of New Jersey, who got in line with his sons at 11 p.m. Sunday and secured a spot on the main floor at Capitol One Arena to watch a livestream of the inauguration.

A cadre of billionaires and tech titans — including Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Tim Cook and Sundar Pichai — were given prominent positions in the Capitol Rotunda, mingling with Trump’s incoming team before the ceremony began. Also there was Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, who is expected to lead an effort to slash spending and federal employees.
Trump began the day with a prayer service at St. John’s Episcopal Church. He and his wife, Melania, were later greeted at the North Portico of the executive mansion by outgoing President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden for the customary tea and coffee reception. It was a stark departure from four years ago, when Trump refused to acknowledge Biden’s victory or attend his inauguration.
“Welcome home,” Biden said to Trump after the president-elect stepped out of the car. The two presidents, who have spent years bitterly criticizing each other, shared a limo on the way to the Capitol.
When Trump took the oath of office at noon, he realized a political comeback without precedent in American history. Four years ago, he was voted out of the White House during an economic collapse caused by the deadly COVID-19 pandemic. Trump denied his defeat and tried to cling to power. He directed his supporters to march on the Capitol while lawmakers were certifying the election results, sparking a riot that interrupted the country’s tradition of the peaceful transfer of power.
But Trump never lost his grip on the Republican Party and was undeterred by criminal cases and two assassination attempts as he steamrolled rivals and harnessed voters’ exasperation with inflation and illegal immigration.
“I am ready for a new United States,” said Cynde Bost, 63, from Lake Havasu City, Arizona.
Now Trump will be the first person convicted of a felony — for falsifying business records related to hush money payments — to serve as president. He will pledge to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution from the same spot that was overrun by his supporters on Jan. 6, 2021. He’s said that one of his first acts in office will be to pardon many of those who participated in the riot.
Eight years after he first entered the White House as a political newcomer, Trump is far more familiar with the operations of federal government and emboldened to bend it to his vision. Trump wants to bring quick change by curtailing immigration, enacting tariffs on imports and rolling back Democrats’ climate and social initiatives.

He has also promised retribution against his political opponents and critics, and placed personal loyalty as a prime qualification for appointments to his administration.
With minutes to go before leaving office, Biden issued preemptive pardons to his siblings and their spouses to shield them from the possibility of prosecution. He said in a statement that his family “has been subjected to unrelenting attacks and threats” and that he has “no reason to believe these attacks will end.”
Earlier in the day, Biden took a similar step with current and former government officials who have been the target of Trump’s anger. Biden said “these are exceptional circumstances, and I cannot in good conscience do nothing.”
Trump has pledged to go further and move faster in enacting his agenda than during his first term, and already the country’s political, business and technology leaders have realigned themselves to accommodate Trump. Democrats who once formed a “resistance” are now divided over whether to work with Trump or defy him. Billionaires have lined up to meet with Trump as they acknowledge his unrivaled power in Washington and his ability to wield the levers of government to help or hurt their interests.
Long skeptical of American alliances, Trump’s “America First” foreign policy is being watched warily at home and abroad as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will soon enter its third year, and a fragile ceasefire appears to be holding in Gaza after more than 15 months of war between Israel and Hamas.
At the Capitol, Vice President-elect JD Vance was sworn-in first, taking the oath read by Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh on a bible given to him by his great-grandmother.
Trump will follow, using both a family bible and the one used by President Abraham Lincoln at his 1861 inauguration as Chief Justice John Roberts administers his oath.
Also present will be the head of TikTok, the popular Chinese-owned social media app deemed a national security risk by the US Trump has promised to lift an effective ban on TikTok through one of many executive orders expected to be issued on Monday as the new president attempts to show quick progress.
Trump is planning to swiftly reinstitute his 2020 playbook to crackdown on the southern border — again declaring a national emergency, limiting the number of refugees entering the US and deploying the military. He’s expected to take additional actions — including constitutionally questionable ones — such as attempting to end birthright citizenship automatically bestowed on people born in the US
Trump will also sign an executive order aimed at ending diversity, equity and inclusion programs within the federal government. The order will direct federal agencies to coordinate with the White House on identifying and terminating DEI programs. Conservatives have long criticized programs that give preference based on race, gender and sexual orientation, arguing they violate the Constitution.
Others orders are expected to allow more oil and gas drilling by rolling back Biden-era policies on domestic energy production and rescind Biden’s recent directive on artificial intelligence.
More changes are planned for the federal workforce. Trump wants to unwind diversity, equity and inclusion programs known as DEI, require employees to come back to the office and lay the groundwork to reduce staff.
With control of Congress, Republicans are also working alongside the incoming administration on legislation that will further roll back Biden’s policies and institute their own priorities.


Trump vows US ‘taking back’ Panama Canal, despite ‘peacemaker’ pledge

Updated 20 January 2025
Follow

Trump vows US ‘taking back’ Panama Canal, despite ‘peacemaker’ pledge

  • Donald Trump: ‘Above all, China is operating the Panama Canal, and we didn’t give it to China, we gave it to Panama. And we’re taking it back’
  • Trump has also not ruled out force to seize Greenland, an autonomous territory of NATO ally Denmark, where Russia has been increasingly active

WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump on Monday cast himself as a peacemaker in his second inaugural address, but immediately vowed that the United States would be “taking back” the Panama Canal.
Trump issued the threat, without explaining details, after weeks of refusing to rule out military action against Panama over the waterway, which the United States handed over at the end of 1999.
“Above all, China is operating the Panama Canal, and we didn’t give it to China, we gave it to Panama. And we’re taking it back,” Trump said after being sworn in inside the US Capitol.
Panama maintains control of the canal but Chinese companies have been steadily increasing their presence around the vital shipping link between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.
Panama denies that China has any role in running the canal, and has repeatedly asserted its sovereignty over the waterway since Trump first threatened to take it over after he was elected in November.
At his inauguration, Trump said that the United States has been “treated very badly from this foolish gift that should have never been made.”
“The purpose of our deal and the spirit of our treaty has been totally violated. American ships are being severely overcharged and not treated fairly in any way, shape or form, and that includes the United States Navy,” he said.
Marco Rubio, Trump’s choice for secretary of state, stopped short of threatening military action during his confirmation hearing last week but warned that China through its influence could effectively shut down the Panama Canal to the United States in a crisis.
“This is a legitimate issue that needs to be confronted,” Rubio said.
Trump has also not ruled out force to seize Greenland, an autonomous territory of NATO ally Denmark where Russia has been increasingly active as ice melts due to climate change.
The Panama Canal was built by the United States mostly with Afro-Caribbean labor and opened in 1914.
US President Jimmy Carter, who died last month, negotiated its return in 1977, saying he saw a moral responsibility to respect a less powerful but fully sovereign nation.

Trump pledged an “America First” policy of prioritizing US interests above all else. He has put a top priority on cracking down on undocumented immigration and said he will deploy the military to the border with Mexico.
But Trump also cast himself as a peacemaker and pointed to a Gaza ceasefire deal whose implementation began Sunday.
“My proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and unifier. That’s what I want to be — a peacemaker and a unifier,” he said.
The Gaza ceasefire, which includes an exchange of hostages and prisoners, follows the outlines of a proposal outlined in May by then-president Joe Biden, but it was pushed through after intensive last-minute diplomacy by envoys of both Biden and Trump.
Trump has also promised to end the war in Ukraine by pushing for compromises — a contrast to Biden’s approach of supporting Kyiv to a potential military victory.
Despite Trump’s vow to be a unifier, he immediately fired a symbolic but provocative shot above the bow to Mexico.
Trump in his address said that the United States would start referring to the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America” — making the water body the latest in the world whose name is disputed between neighbors.
“America will reclaim its rightful place as the greatest, most powerful, most respected nation on Earth, inspiring the awe and admiration of the entire world,” Trump said.