Суспільство

ANCHORAGE, ALASKA — The Alaska Gold Rush town of Nome faced a bleak winter. It was hundreds of miles from anywhere, cut off by the frozen sea and unrelenting blizzards, and under siege from a contagious disease known as the “strangling angel” for the way it suffocated children. 

Now, 100 years later, Nome is remembering its saviors — the sled dogs and mushers who raced for more than five days through hypothermia, frostbite, gale-force winds and blinding whiteouts to deliver lifesaving serum and free the community from the grip of diphtheria. 

Among the events celebrating the centennial of the 1925 “Great Race of Mercy” are lectures, a dog-food drive and a reenactment of the final leg of the relay, all organized by the Nome Kennel Club. 

Alaskans honor ‘heroic effort’ 

“There’s a lot of fluff around celebrations like this, but we wanted to remember the mushers and their dogs who have been at the center of this heroic effort and … spotlight mushing as a still-viable thing for the state of Alaska,” said Diana Haecker, a kennel club board member and co-owner of Alaska’s oldest newspaper, The Nome Nugget. 

“People just dropped whatever they were doing,” she said. “These mushers got their teams ready and went, even though it was really cold and challenging conditions on the trail.” 

Other communities are also marking the anniversary — including the village of Nenana, where the relay began, and Cleveland, Ohio, where the serum run’s most famous participant, a husky mix named Balto, is stuffed and displayed at a museum. 

Jonathan Hayes, a Maine resident who has been working to preserve the genetic line of sled dogs driven on the run by famed musher Leonhard Seppala, is recreating the trip. Hayes left Nenana on Monday with 16 Seppala Siberian sled dogs, registered descendants of Seppala’s team. 

A race to save lives

Diphtheria is an airborne disease that causes a thick, suffocating film on the back of the throat; it was once a leading cause of death for children. The antitoxin used to treat it was developed in 1890, and a vaccine in 1923; it is now exceedingly rare in the U.S. 

Nome, western Alaska’s largest community, had about 1,400 residents a century ago. Its most recent supply ship had arrived the previous fall, before the Bering Sea froze, without any doses of the antitoxin. Those the local doctor, Curtis Welch, had were outdated, but he wasn’t worried. He hadn’t seen a case of diphtheria in the 18 years he had practiced in the area. 

Within months, that changed. In a telegram, Welch pleaded with the U.S. Public Health Service to send serum: “An epidemic of diphtheria is almost inevitable here.” 

The first death was a 3-year-old boy on January 20, 1925, followed the next day by a 7-year-old girl. By the end of the month, there were more than 20 confirmed cases. The city was placed under quarantine. 

West Coast hospitals had antitoxin doses, but it would take time to get them to Seattle, Washington, and then onto a ship for Seward, Alaska, an ice-free port south of Anchorage, Alaska. In the meantime, enough for 30 people was found at an Anchorage hospital. 

It still had to get to Nome. Airplanes with open-air cockpits were ruled out as unsuited for the weather. There were no roads or trains that reached Nome. 

Instead, officials shipped the serum by rail to Nenana in interior Alaska, some 1,086 kilometers (675 miles) from Nome via the frozen Yukon River and mail trails. 

Thanks to Alaska’s new telegraph lines and the spread of radio, the nation followed along, captivated, as 20 mushers — many of them Alaska Natives — with more than 150 dogs relayed the serum to Nome. They battled deep snow, whiteouts so severe they couldn’t see the dogs in front of them, and life-threatening temperatures that plunged at times to minus minus 51 degrees Celsius (60 degrees Fahrenheit).

The antitoxin was transported in glass vials covered with padded quilts. Not a single vial broke. 

Seppala, a Norwegian settler, left from Nome to meet the supply near the halfway point and begin the journey back. His team, led by his dog Togo, traveled more than 320 kilometers (250 miles) of the relay, including a treacherous stretch across frozen Norton Sound. 

After about 5 1/2 days, the serum reached its destination on February 2, 1925. A banner front-page headline in the San Francisco Chronicle proclaimed “Dogs victors over blizzard in battle to succor stricken Nome.” 

The official record listed five deaths and 29 illnesses. It’s likely the toll was higher; Alaska Natives were not accurately tracked. 

Balto gains fame 

Seppala and Togo missed the limelight that went to his assistant, Gunnar Kaasen, who drove the dog team led by Balto into Nome. Balto was another of Seppala’s dogs, but was used to only haul freight after he was deemed too slow to be on a competitive team.

Balto was immortalized in movies and with statues in New York’s Central Park and one in Anchorage intended as a tribute to all sled dogs. He received a bone-shaped key to the city of Los Angeles, where legendary movie actress Mary Pickford placed a wreath around his neck. 

But he and several team members were eventually sold and kept in squalid conditions at a dime museum in Los Angeles. After learning of their plight, an Ohio businessman spearheaded an effort to raise money to bring them to Cleveland, a city in Ohio. After dying in 1933, Balto was mounted and placed on display at the Cleveland Museum of Natural History. 

Iditarod pays homage to run 

Today, the most famous mushing event in the world is the Iditarod Trail Sled Dog Race, which is not based on the serum run but on the Iditarod Trail, a supply route from Seward to Nome. Iditarod organizers are nevertheless marking the serum run’s centennial with a series of articles on its website and by selling replicas of the medallions each serum run musher received a century ago, race spokesperson Shannon Noonan said in an email. This year’s Iditarod starts March 1. 

“The Serum Run demonstrated the critical role sled dogs played in the survival and communication of remote Alaskan communities, while the Iditarod has evolved into a celebration of that tradition and Alaska’s pioneering spirit,” Noonan said. 
…

WASHINGTON — A collision between an American Airlines passenger jet and an Army helicopter near Washington, D.C., that killed 67 people brought renewed focus on the federal agency charged with investigating aviation disasters.

National Transportation Safety Board Chairwoman Jennifer Hommendy has described the investigation into the crash as an “all-hands-on-deck event” for the agency.

Here are some things to know about the NTSB:

What does the agency do?

The NTSB is an independent federal agency responsible for investigating all civil aviation accidents as well as serious incidents in the U.S. involving other modes of transportation, such as railroad disasters and major accidents involving motor vehicles, marine vessels, pipelines and even commercial space operators.

“We’re here to ensure the American people that we are going to leave no stone unturned in this investigation,” Homendy said, noting the probe is in the very early stages. “We are going to conduct a thorough investigation of this entire tragedy, looking at the facts.”

The agency has five board members who serve five-year terms and are nominated by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

How will the investigation work?

For the investigation into Wednesday’s crash, the NTSB will establish several different working groups, each responsible for investigating different areas connected to the accident, board member Todd Inman said.

Inman said those groups include operations, which will examine flight history and crewmember duties; structures, which will document airframe wreckage and the accident scene; power plants, which will focus on aircraft engines and engine accessories; systems, which will study the electrical, hydraulic and pneumatic components of the two aircraft; air traffic control, which will review flight track surveillance information, including radar, and controller-pilot communications; survival factors, which will analyze the injuries to the crew and passengers and crash and rescue efforts; and a helicopter group.

The investigation also will include a human-performance group that will be a part of the operations, air traffic control and helicopter groups and will study the crew performance and any factors that could be involved such as human error, including fatigue, medications, medical histories, training and workload, Inman said.

How long will the investigation take?

NTSB officials did not say Thursday how long the investigation would take, but accident investigations often take between one to two years to complete. The agency typically releases a preliminary report within a few weeks of the accident that includes a synopsis of information collected at the scene.

What is the NTSB’s history?

The NTSB history dates to 1926, when Congress passed a law charging the U.S. Department of Commerce with investigating aircraft accidents. It was established as an independent agency within the U.S. Department of Transportation in 1967 and then separated by Congress in 1974 as a stand-alone organization, fully independent from any other federal agencies. Since its creation in 1967, the agency reports it has investigated more than 153,000 aviation accidents and incidents. 
…

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s decision to freeze $45 million in U.S. federal funding for over 400 Burmese students has left many in shock and dismay as their scholarships were abruptly canceled.

The move has also raised concerns about the broader impact it could have on Burmese in Myanmar, a country already grappling with political turmoil and a collapsing education system under military rule.

Students in limbo

One Burmese student who studies at Chiang Mai University in Thailand told VOA that she feels completely lost after learning that her scholarship was being suspended.

“To be honest, I am lost because of this sudden loss of my scholarship. I had been studying with the goal of earning a degree, and now I don’t know what to do,” she said. The student spoke with VOA on condition of anonymity because she fears for her safety if she returns to Burma, which remains under military control.

She said students like her and others at different academic levels are now left without financial support.

“There are students doing four-year master’s degrees, others in four-year bachelor’s programs, and even PhD students. I don’t know whether I should continue my studies, go home, or what my next step should be,” she said. “I am saddened that President Trump only cares about the United States and has cut off my studies.”

An email sent to recipients of the program that was shared with VOA’s Burmese Service, said the Diversity and Inclusion Scholarship Program, or DISP, is currently suspended, and officials “will review whether to continue the scholarship for the students who have been awarded it.”

DISP was created to support Burmese students from marginalized and underprivileged backgrounds, giving them opportunities to study at universities across Asia, including the Philippines, Cambodia, Indonesia, and Thailand. The program also provided funding for online education through the University of Arizona.

For many, the initiative was their only chance to pursue higher education outside of Burma, where the junta-controlled education system has systematically restricted access for those opposing the military regime.

For some students, the immediate impact has been less severe.

Hlwan Paing Thi Ha, who has been studying at Chiang Mai University for a year, told VOA: “My education has already been paid for through the scholarship program, so it hasn’t impacted me yet.” 

Future leaders impacted

One source who has in-depth understanding of the program, said the impact goes beyond just access to education and opportunities. The source spoke with VOA on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak with the media.

More than a quarter of the Burmese students in the program have fled Myanmar due to the military coup, ongoing fighting and forced conscription, which has targeted youth.

“The impact is huge,” the source said, adding that currently, more than 400 Burmese students are attending universities in four countries—the Philippines, Cambodia, Indonesia, and Thailand through the USAID-funded program.

“Of these, 110 were directly recruited from Myanmar, while the rest are students who fled to border regions and Southeast Asian countries due to the military coup or boycotted Myanmar’s junta-controlled education system,” the source said.

The program, which was launched in February 2024, was designed as a five-year initiative, with plans to recruit three batches of students over that period.

“The goal was to ensure that at least 1,000 Burmese students, the ‘current and future leaders of the country,’ could continue their studies in universities across the region. The second batch, which would include hundreds of students, is now in the final stage of the screening process,” the source explained.

Debate continues

In Washington a debate over the freeze and review continues.

On Tuesday, the State Department issued a waiver that exempts some humanitarian aid from the freeze. U.S. lawmakers have also voiced concerns, warning that the freeze will impact American soft power and give China an advantage.

On Wednesday, President Trump defended the funding freeze, specifically calling out the $45 million allocated for diversity scholarships for Burmese students.

“We also blocked $45 million for diversity scholarships in Burma. Forty-five—that’s a lot of money for diversity scholarships in Burma. You can imagine where that money went,” Trump said. “These were the types of payments and many others. I could stand here all day and tell you about things that we found, and we have to find them quickly because we want the money to flow to proper places.”

Name threatens its demise?

Some note that in addition to the freeze, the name of the program may also leave it in a difficult position, with some worrying that the mention of diversity in its title could impact a substantive review of its impact.

The source with direct knowledge of the initiative for Burmese students told VOA that the program was swiftly terminated when the Trump administration began reducing foreign aid, and that its name “Diversity and Inclusion” likely played a major role in its elimination.

“This program was one of the first to be cut as soon as the administration began making budget reductions in this area,” the source said.

While all USAID-funded programs have been temporarily frozen, DISP appears to have been specifically blocked without any review, the source noted.

“USAID officials have not been able to explain why this program was halted so suddenly.”

VOA reached out to the State Department to verify whether the program was permanently blocked or still under review and whether its name played a role in its swift termination. However, as of the time of publication, VOA had not received a response from the State Department.

The source also voiced concern the administration may not understand that the program has no connection to Myanmar’s military junta and was created solely to support young people who lost their education due to military oppression.

Lifeline for ethnic and religious minorities

The Diversity and Inclusion Scholarship Program was set up to reflect Burma’s ethnic and religious diversity, giving equal opportunities to students from all backgrounds who have historically faced discrimination under the Burman-dominated and military-controlled education policies. Burman is the name of the main ethnic group in Myanmar.

Many recipients of the scholarship program belong to ethnic minority groups such as the Karen, Kachin, Shan, Chin, and Rohingya, who have historically faced systemic discrimination in Burma’s education system.  
…

Public health data disappeared from websites, entire webpages went blank and employees erased pronouns from email signatures Friday as federal agencies scrambled to comply with a directive tied to President Donald Trump’s order rolling back protections for transgender people.

The Office of Personnel Management directed agency heads to strip “gender ideology” from websites, contracts and emails in a memo sent Wednesday, with changes ordered to be instituted by 5 p.m. Friday. It also directed agencies to disband employee resource groups, terminate grants and contracts related to the issue, and replace the term “gender” with “sex” on government forms.

Some parts of government websites appeared with the message: “The page you’re looking for was not found.” Some pages disappeared and came back intermittently. 

Asked by reporters Friday about reports that government websites were being shut down to eliminate mentions of diversity, equity and inclusion, Trump said he didn’t know anything about it but that he’d endorse such a move.

“I don’t know. That doesn’t sound like a bad idea to me,” Trump said, adding that he campaigned promising to stamp out such initiatives.

Much public health information was taken down from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s website: contraception guidance; a fact sheet about HIV and transgender people; lessons on building supportive school environments for transgender and nonbinary kids; details about National Transgender HIV Testing Day; a set of government surveys showing transgender students suffering higher rates of depression, drug use, bullying and other problems.

Eliminating health resources creates dangerous gaps in scientific information, disease experts said. The Infectious Diseases Society of America, a medical association, issued a statement decrying the removal of information about HIV and people who are transgender. Access is “critical to efforts to end the HIV epidemic,” the organization’s leaders said.

A Bureau of Prisons web page originally titled “Inmate Gender” was relabeled “Inmate Sex” on Friday. A breakdown of transgender inmates in federal prisons was no longer included.

The State Department on Friday removed the option to select “X” as a gender on passport applications for nonbinary applicants. It also replaced the word “gender” from the descriptor with the word “sex.”

All State Department employees were ordered to remove gender-specific pronouns from their email signatures. The directive, from the acting head of the Bureau of Management, said this was required to comply with Trump’s executive orders and that the department was also removing all references to “gender ideology” from websites and internal documents.

“All employees are required to remove any gender identifying pronouns from email signature blocks by 5:00 PM today,” said the order from Tibor Nagy. “Your cooperation is essential as we navigate these changes together.”

An official from the U.S. Agency for International Development said staffers were directed to flag the use of the word “gender” in each of thousands of award contracts. Warnings against gender discrimination are standard language in every such contract. The official spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal, under a Trump administration gag order prohibiting USAID staffers from speaking with people outside their agency.

The official said staffers fear that programs and jobs related to inclusion efforts, gender issues and issues specific to women are being singled out and possibly targeted under two Trump executive orders.

Some Census Bureau and National Park Service pages were also inaccessible or giving error messages.

Trump’s executive order, signed on his first day back in office, calls for the federal government to define sex as only male or female and for that to be reflected on official documents such as passports and policies such as federal prison assignments.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered the military to immediately stop recognizing identity a day before the start of February’s Black History Month, saying they “erode camaraderie and threaten mission execution.”
…

Голова ОВА додав, що постраждалим надають необхідну допомогу. На місці продовжують працювати рятувальники
…

washington — White House press secretary Karoline Levitt announced Friday that President Donald Trump would be implementing 25% tariffs on Mexican and Canadian goods and a 10% tariff on all Chinese imports on Saturday.  

Consumers told VOA they were bracing for the possible impact of increased costs. 

“I’m concerned about rising prices,” Yon Bui, a student of music and computer science at Middlebury College in Vermont, said in an interview Thursday. 

Bui said that while it might still be too early to tell what the impact could be, she has been considering purchasing costly items, such as expensive cosmetics that she buys sometimes, from China. She also said she needed a new phone. 

Bui said she would “buy products now before they go up in price to a point where they’d become unaffordable.”  

Sean Liu, who lives in Virginia, told VOA that he was glad he’d recently decided to buy a new phone and car.

“With things that are already really expensive, if you add another 10% to their price – it’s not like, say, buying a thermos and adding another 10% – this kind of price hike is truly big,” he said.  

He did add, though, that it might be a little easier to deal with if the tariffs came alongside lower prices for more basic necessities like groceries and gas.

‘One very big power’

On the campaign trail, Trump threatened tariffs as high as 60% on China. Since taking office, those threats have expanded and include everything from a universal tariff to threats against trade partners and rivals such as China and Russia.

Last week, Trump threatened Colombia with tariffs of 25% to 50% to get Bogota to accept deportation flights.

On China, Trump recently told Fox News’ Sean Hannity that tariffs were the “one very big power” the U.S. has over China.  

“They don’t want them, and I’d rather not have to use it,” Trump said.  

The 10% tariff on all Chinese imports is part of what Trump says is a punitive response to China’s role in manufacturing precursor chemicals essential to fentanyl production in Mexico.

Currently, the United States targets China with a 100% tariff on electric vehicles, a 50% tariff on solar cells and semiconductors, a 25% tariff on critical minerals needed to make certain advanced batteries and a 25% tariff on steel and aluminum.

New tariffs would build on more than $300 billion worth of taxes on Chinese imports that Trump imposed during his first term. Those tariffs were upheld and, in some cases, advanced under former President Joe Biden. 

Who will feel impact? 

Some analysts question who will be hurt if these tariffs are implemented. Some say the deep economic ties between China and the United States could mean that American consumers will be the ones bearing the brunt of Trump’s punishment on Beijing. 

Supporters, however, see the move as a fulfillment of Trump’s promise to put American lives and livelihoods first — particularly when it comes to stopping the flow of fentanyl into the country.   

According to William Reinsch, senior adviser of the economics program and Scholl Chair in International Business at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the tariff likely would raise prices of goods in America. 

“The prices on a lot of things that people buy at retail — apparel, footwear, household goods – things like that will be affected. Ten percent is not huge, but it’s not zero either,” Reinsch said. 

Costs and benefits 

Trump has pushed back against the argument that tariffs drive inflation higher and said instead that tariffs would make America rich. 

Liu Longzhu, a California lawyer and delegate at the 2024 Republican National Convention, sees tariffs as the key to recovering America’s economic strength. 

“The main purpose of increasing tariffs is to assure that America is truly ‘America First’ and protect American jobs. If you are looking for a job, they are beneficial to you. If the tariffs are increased, Chinese products will lose their competitiveness, and American products will become more competitive. This will make it easier for Americans to find jobs,” Liu said. 

James Galbraith, an economist at the University of Texas at Austin, doesn’t see tariffs as inherently inflationary, and he agrees that tariffs would bring back jobs that were lost to overseas companies. 

“A tariff strategy can be implemented in such a way that the cost largely falls outside of the country,” Galbraith told VOA. 

But Stephen Lamar, president and CEO at the American Apparel & Footwear Association, said that tariffs, especially those levied on China, will ultimately raise the cost of both domestic and foreign goods given the interconnectivity of global economies. 

“The theory on paper is that you’re giving domestic producers an advantage. The reality in practice is that more people are paying higher prices for products, regardless of their source,” Lamar told VOA.  

Reinsch also cast doubt on the ability of tariffs to bring manufacturing jobs back to America, particularly in labor-intensive sectors like apparel or footwear. 

“I would be surprised if you see a renaissance in the American apparel industry as a result of a 10% tariff. It would take a lot more than that,” Reinsch said, adding that tariffs don’t guarantee a move away from imports and toward domestic manufacturing. 

Importers looking for cheap products can still source from countries in Southeast Asia or Africa that provide competitive, low-cost alternatives to Chinese products. 
…

Українські підрозділи також відбили 10 російських атак на Торецькому напрямку, поблизу Торецька
…

The Trump administration has confirmed that the deportation of Chinese nationals is still underway as part of a broader effort to enforce U.S. immigration laws.

In an emailed response to VOA this week, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official wrote that the agency is removing from the United States any immigrant who is here unlawfully.

“ICE continues to conduct removals to the People’s Republic of China. Due to operational security, ICE does not confirm future removal operations until deportees have been returned to their country of origin,” the ICE official said Tuesday, speaking on background, a method often used by U.S. officials to remain anonymous.

VOA requested the most recent removal numbers for China and an update on deportation flights, but as of Friday, ICE had yet to respond.

Deportations have increased as China signals a greater willingness to repatriate its citizens, a departure from its historically restrictive stance. Large repatriation flights resumed last June, the first since 2018.

On Jan. 6, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, through ICE, conducted the Biden administration’s fifth removal flight to China in less than seven months.

“These [Biden administration] flights were the product of sustained cooperation between the Department and PRC counterparts to repatriate individuals who have not established a legal basis to remain in the United States,” DHS said in a statement on Jan. 10.

Fast-track deportations

Under the Trump administration, the approach is shifting toward making deportations faster and bypassing judicial review.

The Trump administration issued an executive order on Jan. 21 to expand expedited removal, also known as fast-track deportations, to include immigrants who cannot prove they have been continuously living in the United States for more than two years.

“The effect of this change will be to enhance national security and public safety — while reducing government costs — by facilitating prompt immigration determinations,” the notice read.

Expedited removal allows the U.S. government to quickly deport people who are undocumented. Under the process of expedited removal, some noncitizens can be deported in a single day without an immigration court hearing or other appearance before a judge.

ICE data from November showed 37,908 Chinese nationals who were believed to be removable from the United States but had not yet been detained. December and January numbers are not yet available.

On Jan. 22, the American Civil Liberties Union sued the Trump administration over the expansion of expedited removal.

The ACLU argued in court documents that the new rule violates federal law and the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause by effectively eliminating full court hearings that immigrants are entitled to receive.

The organization also cited studies indicating that expedited removals are prone to errors, often leading to the mistaken deportation of immigrants.

Joanna Derman, a program director at Asian Americans Advancing Justice, told VOA that advocates are worried the Trump administration will use “extreme options” to specifically target Chinese nationals for deportation, “especially in the event of a significant escalation between the United States and China.”

“But on the other hand,” she said, “we’re also rapidly mobilizing right now. … We are uplifting resources for people who are the most likely to be impacted. The most vulnerable folks need to know what to do if [or] when ICE shows up at their school, their work or their place of worship.”

US-China repatriation cooperation

For years, China has been among the countries that refused or delayed accepting deportees, complicating U.S. efforts to remove individuals with final orders.

Countries that do not negotiate or refuse to accept their nationals back are deemed “recalcitrant” or “uncooperative.” Recalcitrant countries do not accept their nationals back. Uncooperative countries will accept some of their nationals back.

According to an ICE official and a DHS removal operations document, 15 countries were deemed to be uncooperative: Bhutan, Burma, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Hong Kong, India, Iran, Laos, Pakistan, the People’s Republic of China, Russia, Somalia and Venezuela.

ICE considers these to be at risk of recalcitrant: Bosnia-Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Gabon, Gambia, Iraq, Jamaica, Nicaragua, South Sudan, St. Lucia and Vietnam.

During a Monday press conference, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning was asked if Beijing intended to accept all Chinese nationals in the U.S. illegally.

“I’d refer you to competent authorities for anything specific,” she said. “Let me say more broadly that the Chinese government firmly opposes any form of illegal migration. We have conducted practical cooperation with the migration and law enforcement departments of the U.S. and other countries, which has been productive. As far as repatriation is concerned, China’s principle is to receive the repatriates who are confirmed as Chinese nationals from the Chinese mainland after verification.”

ICE’s deportation numbers reflect U.S. diplomatic efforts with China, with DHS reporting the removal of 109 Chinese nationals on the latest charter flight as of November, following 131 deportations in October and 116 in June.

According to DHS, the Biden administration’s increase in deportations matches China’s work to decrease illegal immigration, which has led to a 62% decline in Chinese migrant apprehensions at the U.S.-Mexico border. Apprehensions of Chinese dropped from 2,198 encounters in June 2024 to 873 in December 2024.

January numbers are not yet available.

Deportation logistics, cost

An ICE official confirmed to VOA by email in late December that the U.S. government buys the commercial airline tickets for deportees, working closely with a travel service provider to book the most cost-effective flights.

ICE determines whether to use charter or commercial flights based on operational needs. ICE did not share cost per person for either type of flight.

But the American Immigration Council estimates that removing 1 million people a year would cost U.S. taxpayers about $88 billion, with the total over a decade approaching $1 trillion.

Despite Beijing’s increased cooperation, China remains one of several nations that usually refuse to take back their citizens or delay repatriations.

During the 2024 fiscal year, ICE removed 517 Chinese nationals from the United States.

Deportation process

In immigration court, deportation orders are usually issued after a foreign national violates the terms of a visa, is found to be undocumented or is convicted of a crime.

When the United States seeks to deport an immigrant, it generally follows a framework negotiated with the other nation; these frameworks are often detailed in writing, through a memorandum of understanding.

Before the United States can deport someone, the other country must agree to receive the deportee. There must also be an administratively final order of removal, or deportation order, and the individual must have a travel document issued by a foreign government.
…

Інші країни готові працювати з Україною для інвестицій у збройне виробництво, заявив президент
…

WASHINGTON — U.S. President Donald Trump’s envoy Richard Grenell is expected to meet with Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on Friday in Venezuela, according to U.S. Special Envoy for Latin America Mauricio Claver-Carone.

Trump said last week his administration likely would stop buying oil from Venezuela and was looking “very strongly” at the South American country.

Grenell, Trump’s envoy for special missions, had earlier said he spoke with multiple officials in Venezuela and would begin meetings, days after the outgoing Biden administration imposed new sanctions on the government of Maduro.

“Diplomacy is back,” Grenell said in a post on social media platform X disclosing his initial calls. “Talking is a tactic.”

During his campaign, Trump called Maduro a dictator after he pursued a “maximum pressure” campaign against him during his first term, from 2017 to 2021, including imposing harsh sanctions on the South American country and its oil industry.

Former President Joe Biden briefly rolled back some of the Trump-era restrictions following electoral promises from Maduro but then reinstated them, saying the Venezuelan leader had reneged on pledges for a fair democratic vote.

The Financial Times reported Friday that Chevron is trying to protect the special U.S. license allowing it to operate in Venezuela.

The oil giant’s chief executive, Mike Wirth, told the newspaper the company would engage with the White House after U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the license should be reconsidered.

If Chevron is forced out, China and Russia will gain influence in the OPEC nation, Wirth said.

Venezuela’s oil exports to the U.S. soared 64% to some 222,000 barrels per day last year, making the United States its second-largest export market behind China, which took 351,000 bpd, down 18% compared with the previous year.
…

Стрічка отримала нагороду «Режисура: Світове документальне кіно»
…

WASHINGTON — On the front lines of the war in Ukraine, local newspapers are vital lifelines in areas where Russia has destroyed cell towers and internet infrastructure.

Journalists provide information about evacuation routes, document alleged Russian war crimes and troop movements, and counter Moscow’s propaganda.

Even a temporary freeze of U.S. foreign aid can mean financial difficulties for small media organizations that rely on outside donors to keep working.

“Many Ukrainian media may now face the threat of closure or significant reduction in operations in the coming weeks,” Sergiy Tomilenko, president of the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine, told VOA.

Ukraine is not alone.

News outlets on the front lines of war and authoritarianism from Ukraine and Belarus to Myanmar are among the organizations affected by a freeze on U.S. foreign aid.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 20 mandating all federal government agencies pause all foreign development assistance for 90 days.

The directive took effect on Jan. 24 and includes foreign funding from the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID.

“Every dollar we spend, every program we fund, and every policy we pursue must be justified with the answer to three simple questions,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a Jan. 26 statement. “Does it make America safer? Does it make America stronger? Does it make America more prosperous?”

Worldwide impact

Many independent news outlets around the world rely on State Department and USAID funding because they report in repressive environments, according to the JX Fund, a Berlin-based group that supports exiled media.

With the current freeze, news outlets around the world are scrambling to find alternative sources of funding in an attempt to continue delivering the news to their audiences and avoid shutting down, multiple analysts told VOA.

“The general feeling is panic. Panic is the only way to describe the situation,” Karol Luczka, who works in Eastern Europe at the International Press Institute in Vienna, told VOA.

JX Fund managing director Penelope Winterhager agreed. These outlets “are thrown back to emergency mode,” she said.

The measure is estimated to be affecting dozens of independent news outlets in more than 30 countries, according to the Brussels-based European Federation of Journalists, or EFJ.

Maja Sever, EFJ president, called on potential donors to fill the gap.

“The European Union and other donors cannot abandon to their fate journalists who are the best bulwark for defending the rule of law and democracy in countries where they are under threat,” Sever said in a statement Tuesday.

During the 90-day pause, relevant U.S. departments and agencies are required to review their foreign funding and determine whether the aid will continue, be modified or cease altogether, according to the executive order.

The State Department did not respond to specific questions and referred VOA to a Wednesday press release.

“Americans are a hardworking and generous people, who have sacrificed their blood and treasure to help their fellow man across the globe. But no foreign nation is entitled to those benefits, and no foreign aid program is above scrutiny,” the statement said.

USAID did not reply to VOA’s request for comment.

In Ukraine

Tomilenko said the aid freeze is creating a dire situation for Ukrainian news outlets on the front line of the war.

“In many areas close to the battle lines, local newspapers are often the only reliable source of information,” said Tomilenko, who is based in Kyiv.

Since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Moscow has ramped up global propaganda efforts while further restricting independent media inside Russia.

The war has also limited the advertising market in Ukraine, which would ideally be a primary source of financial independence for Ukrainian news outlets, said Tomilenko.

The USAID website says it supports programs that “promote free and independent media” in more than 30 countries. VOA could not determine how much U.S. aid goes to support media outlets in these countries.

In the case of Ukraine, Luczka said, “The previous administration in the U.S. saw the importance of supporting civil society in Ukraine in order to make sure that this country keeps standing.”

The United States has been the strongest player when it came to supporting independent media outlets, according to the JX Fund’s Winterhager.

But even though these outlets receive foreign funding, Winterhager emphasized that “their reporting is independent.”

In Myanmar

Several Myanmar news outlets that rely on financial support from USAID and Internews also find themselves in a precarious situation. Internews is a USAID-affiliated nonprofit that supports independent media.

After launching a coup in 2021, Myanmar’s military arrested journalists and banned news outlets. The crackdown forced entire outlets to flee into exile.

Some outlets now report from the Thai-Myanmar border, while others manage to operate from rebel-controlled regions of Myanmar.

Funding has been among the biggest problems for Myanmar media since the coup.

“It is difficult — or even impossible — for many of them to make commercial revenue in this environment,” Ben Dunant, editor-in-chief of the magazine Frontier Myanmar, told VOA last year. “This underlines the vulnerability of these media organizations whose operations are dependent on the whims of donors in faraway countries.”

Mizzima, one of the most prominent of the country’s news outlets and an affiliate of VOA, is among those affected by the aid freeze, according to local media reports.

Founded in exile in 1998, the media outlet covers news on the resistance against the junta and China’s growing influence in the region.

Another outlet, Western News, has already cut staff, according to its chief editor, Wunna Khwar Nyo.

“We are struggling to survive,” Wunna Khwar Nyo told VOA. “Ultimately, this will also hurt the Burmese people.”

If the funding freeze forces news outlets to shutter, the IPI’s Luczka warned that state-backed propaganda from countries such as Russia could fill the gap.

“When media outlets disappear, they create a void,” Luczka said. “And that void needs to be filled by something.”

VOA’s Burmese Service contributed to this report.
…

Україна подала позов до суду ООН 26 лютого 2022-го зі скаргою, що РФ зловживає конвенцією про запобігання геноциду для виправдання вторгнення
…

SEOUL, SOUTH KOREA — When Chinese startup DeepSeek released its AI model this month, it was hailed as a breakthrough, a sign that China’s artificial intelligence companies could compete with their Silicon Valley counterparts using fewer resources.

The narrative was clear: DeepSeek had done more with less, finding clever workarounds to U.S. chip restrictions. However, that storyline has begun to shift.

OpenAI, the U.S.-based company behind ChatGPT, now claims DeepSeek may have improperly used its proprietary data to train its model, raising questions about whether DeepSeek’s success was truly an engineering marvel.

In statements to several media outlets this week, OpenAI said it is reviewing indications that DeepSeek may have trained its AI by mimicking responses from OpenAI’s models.

The process, known as distillation, is common among AI developers but is prohibited by OpenAI’s terms of service, which forbid using its model outputs to train competing systems.

Some U.S. officials appear to support OpenAI’s concerns. At his confirmation hearing this week, Commerce secretary nominee Howard Lutnick accused DeepSeek of misusing U.S. technology to create a “dirt cheap” AI model.

“They stole things. They broke in. They’ve taken our IP,” Lutnick said of China.

David Sacks, the White House czar for AI and cryptocurrency, was more measured, saying only that it is “possible” that DeepSeek had stolen U.S. intellectual property.

In an interview with the cable news network Fox News, Sacks added that there is “substantial evidence” that DeepSeek “distilled the knowledge out of OpenAI’s models,” adding that stronger efforts are needed to curb the rise of “copycat” AI systems.

At the center of the dispute is a key question about AI’s future: how much control should companies have over their own AI models, when those programs were themselves built using data taken from others?

AI data fight

The question is especially relevant for OpenAI, which faces its own legal challenges. The company has been sued by several media companies and authors who accuse it of illegally using copyrighted material to train its AI models.

Justin Hughes, a Loyola Law School professor specializing in intellectual property, AI, and data rights, said OpenAI’s accusations against DeepSeek are “deeply ironic,” given the company’s own legal troubles.

“OpenAI has had no problem taking everyone else’s content and claiming it’s ‘fair,'” Hughes told VOA in an email.

“If the reports are accurate that OpenAI violated other platforms’ terms of service to get the training data it has wanted, that would just add an extra layer of irony – dare we say hypocrisy – to OpenAI complaining about DeepSeek.”

DeepSeek has not responded to OpenAI’s accusations. In a technical paper released with its new chatbot, DeepSeek acknowledged that some of its models were trained alongside other open-source models – such as Qwen, developed by China’s Alibaba, and Llama, released by Meta – according to Johnny Zou, a Hong Kong-based AI investment specialist.

However, OpenAI appears to be alleging that DeepSeek improperly used its closed-source models – which cannot be freely accessed or used to train other AI systems.

“It’s quite a serious statement,” said Zou, who noted that OpenAI has not yet presented evidence of wrongdoing by DeepSeek.

Proving improper distillation may be difficult without disclosing details on how its own models were trained, Zou added.

Even if OpenAI presents concrete proof, its legal options may be limited. Although Zou noted that the company could pursue a case against DeepSeek for violating its terms of service, not all experts believe such a claim would hold up in court.

“Even assuming DeepSeek trained on OpenAI’s data, I don’t think OpenAI has much of a case,” said Mark Lemley, a professor at Stanford Law School who specializes in intellectual property and technology.

Even though AI models often have restrictive terms of service, “no model creator has actually tried to enforce these terms with monetary penalties or injunctive relief,” Lemley wrote in a recent paper with co-author Peter Henderson.

The paper argues that these restrictions may be unenforceable, since the materials they aim to protect are “largely not copyrightable.”

“There are compelling reasons for many of these provisions to be unenforceable: they chill good faith research, constrain competition, and create quasi-copyright ownership where none should exist,” the paper noted.

OpenAI’s main legal argument would likely be breach of contract, said Hughes. Even if that were the case, though, he added, “good luck enforcing that against a Chinese company without meaningful assets in the United States.”

Possible options

The financial stakes are adding urgency to the debate. U.S. tech stocks dipped Monday after following news of DeepSeek’s advances, though they later regained some ground.

Commerce nominee Lutnick suggested that further government action, including tariffs, could be used to deter China from copying advanced AI models.

But speaking the same day, U.S. President Donald Trump appeared to take a different view, surprising some industry insiders with an optimistic take on DeepSeek’s breakthrough.

The Chinese company’s low-cost model, Trump said, was “very much a positive development” for AI, because “instead of spending billions and billions, you’ll spend less, and you’ll come up with hopefully the same solution.”

If DeepSeek has succeeded in building a relatively cheap and competitive AI model, that may be bad for those with investment – or stock options – in current generative AI companies, Hughes said.

“But it might be good for the rest of us,” he added, noting that until recently it appeared that only the existing tech giants “had the resources to play in the generative AI sandbox.”

“If DeepSeek disproved that, we should hope that what can be done by a team of engineers in China can be done by a similarly resourced team of engineers in Detroit or Denver or Boston,” he said. 
…

white house — Arms control advocates are hoping U.S. President Donald Trump’s fresh words of support for denuclearization will lead to talks with Russia and China on arms reduction.

U.S. negotiations with the Russians and Chinese on denuclearization and eventual agreements are “very possible,” according to Trump, who addressed the World Economic Forum a week ago in Davos, Switzerland.

“Tremendous amounts of money are being spent on nuclear [weapons], and the destructive capability is something that we don’t even want to talk about because you don’t want to hear,” he said. “It’s too depressing.”

Trump noted that in his first term, he discussed the topic with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“We were talking about denuclearization of our two countries, and China would have come along,” according to Trump. “President Putin really liked the idea of cutting back on nuclear [armaments], and I think the rest of the world — we would have gotten them to follow.”

Just months before leaving office, former U.S. President Joe Biden met with Chinese President Xi Jinping at the APEC summit in Peru where both agreed that decisions regarding the use of nuclear weapons should remain under human control. That consensus was seen as a positive step after the Chinese, four months previously, suspended nuclear arms control talks with Washington to protest American arms sales to Taiwan.

The horror of nuclear attacks first became evident to many in the world through magazines in the West, which printed photographs of the radiation-burned survivors of the U.S. atomic attack on two Japanese cities in 1945 to end World War II. In subsequent years during the Cold War, U.S. government films captured the destructive force of test detonations in the Nevada desert, eventually prompting public demonstrations to “ban the bomb” and diplomacy to reduce or eliminate all nuclear weapons.

A major breakthrough occurred in 1987 with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) between the United States and the Soviet Union. It entered into full force the following year. By 1991, nearly 2,700 missiles had been dismantled. That was the first time the two nuclear superpowers achieved a reduction of such weapons rather than just limiting their growth.

Over the years, the Americans and the Russians lost their monopoly on nuclear weapons. Nine countries presently have nuclear arsenals, although Israel has never acknowledged possession of such weaponry.

The United States and Russia each have more than 5,000 nuclear warheads — 90% of the world’s total. The combined global force of all countries’ nuclear weapons could destroy the world many times over, according to arms control advocates.

The current New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), signed in 2010 by U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, set limits on the number of deployed strategic nuclear warheads and delivery systems, while including on-site inspection and exchanges of data for verification.

The treaty expires in early February 2026, which adds urgency to Trump’s call for talks with Russia and China, according to Xiaodon Liang, senior analyst for nuclear weapons policy and disarmament at the Arms Control Association.

“And because of that, this issue has to be at the top of the agenda, and having a signal that the president is concerned about this issue and thinking about it is very positive,” Liang told VOA.

Since a formal, comprehensive agreement could take years to negotiate — possibly spanning beyond the four years of the second Trump presidency — Liang suggests the U.S. president consider an “executive agreement” with Putin, an informal consensus or a series of unilateral steps to continue adhering to the numbers in New START for an indefinite period.

“That would be a stabilizing factor in this important bilateral relationship,” Liang added.

There are analysts who advocate a more aggressive tactic.

Trump should consider ordering a resumption of nuclear testing to demonstrate to America’s adversaries that the U.S. arsenal of weapons of mass destruction remains viable and as an act of resolve, writes Robert Peters, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank seen as having a dominant influence on Trump administration policies.

Peters also suggests that Trump might want to withdraw from the 1963 Test Ban Treaty made with Moscow and “conduct an above-ground test either at the Nevada National Security Site or in the Pacific Ocean over open water, where nuclear fallout can be minimized” to stave escalatory moves by an adversary to the United States.

The Heritage Foundation did not respond to multiple requests from VOA to interview Peters.

Moscow is not known to have conducted any sort of test causing a nuclear chain reaction, known as criticality, since 1990. Two years later, the United States announced it would no longer test nuclear weapons, although subcritical simulations continue. The other nuclear nations have followed suit except North Korea, which last triggered a nuclear test explosion in 2017.

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists on Tuesday moved up the hands of its “Doomsday Clock” by one second to 89 seconds to midnight, meant to signify the peril from weapons of mass destruction and other existential threats.

“We set the clock closer to midnight because we do not see positive progress on the global challenges we face, including nuclear risk, climate change, biological threats and advances in disruptive technology,” said Daniel Holz, a physics professor at the University of Chicago, just after the hands of this year’s clock were unveiled at the U.S. Institute of Peace.

While the Doomsday Clock is merely symbolic, Liang at the Arms Control Association sees it as an annual important ritual highlighting the risks to Americans and everyone else posed by the world’s nuclear arsenals.

“It is a good tool for bringing this to more people’s attention, and you can’t blame Americans for having so many other issues on their plate. And having this [clock] as a reminder, I think, is an effective communications tool,” Liang said.

At the Doomsday Clock ceremony, VOA asked former Colombian President and Nobel laureate Juan Manuel Santos what he viewed as the biggest hurdle to Trump, Putin and Xi making progress on denuclearization.

“The biggest challenge, in my view, is for them to understand that they should sit down and talk about how the three of them can take decisions to save their own countries and the whole world,” he said.

Liang compared the situation to U.S. President John F. Kennedy’s call to Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev during the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, which led Washington and Moscow to pull back from the brink of nuclear war.

That resolution turned the hands of the Doomsday Clock the following year back to 12 minutes to midnight in recognition of the Americans, Soviets and British banning nuclear testing in the atmosphere, in space and under water.

It has been several years since the United States engaged in any denuclearization negotiations. Those working-level talks in 2019 in Sweden between the first Trump administration and North Korean officials did not yield any agreement, with Pyongyang’s chief negotiator, Kim Myong Gil, telling reporters that the Americans had raised expectations with promises of flexibility but would not “give up their old viewpoint and attitude.”

The State Department spokesperson at the time, Morgan Ortagus, said in a statement the two countries could not be expected to “overcome a legacy of 70 years of war and hostility on the Korean Peninsula in the course of a single Saturday,” but such weighty issues “require a strong commitment by both countries. The United States has that commitment.”
…

Arms control advocates are hoping U.S. President Donald Trump’s fresh words of support for denuclearization will lead to talks with Russia and China about nuclear arms reduction. VOA’s chief national correspondent, Steve Herman, reports from the White House in Washington.
…