America
Chavista base denounces Venezuelan government’s stance on Iran strikes
The Venezuelan Ministry of Foreign Affairs sparked outcry among Chavistas on Saturday after issuing a statement condemning Iran without explicitly naming the US or Israel.
The Ministry, under the administration of Delcy Rodríguez, condemned the selection of a “military path” in Iran and expressed “profound regret.” The statement questioned Iran’s retaliatory actions, drawing intense criticism from the country’s Chavista base.
Venezuelan officials characterized Iran’s military intervention against targets in various countries as “inappropriate and condemnable,” thereby calling into question the Tehran government’s right to self-defense.
The statement could not be found on the Instagram or Telegram accounts of Foreign Minister Yván Gil, nor on the Ministry’s own official channels. The Ministry subsequently removed the statement from circulation entirely.
However, a digital screenshot of the document was published on Telesur’s English-language X account.
According to analysts, the tone of the communiqué stands in stark contradiction to the strategic relationship forged between Venezuela and Iran since the inception of the Bolivarian Revolution.
Some suggest that this may signal a growing Zionist influence within the Venezuelan government following the US bombing of Venezuela on January 3 and the abduction of President Nicolás Maduro.
However, many Venezuelans draw a distinction between “Chavismo” and the current government, arguing that Chavismo represents a movement far larger than the existing authorities.
For instance, the Alexis Vive Patriotic Force, a unified Chavista grassroots organization based in Caracas’ 23 de Enero neighborhood, issued a statement on Saturday that it claimed “better reflects the true sentiments of the Chavista people regarding the imperialist-Zionist aggression.”
The statement read as follows:
“The Alexis Vive Patriotic Force unequivocally condemns and rejects the military assault launched by the US and ‘Israel’ against the Islamic Republic of Iran on February 28, 2026. This brutal attack is not an isolated incident; it is the latest link in a chain of continuous imperialist aggression against peoples who refuse to submit and who defend their sovereignty against plunder and colonial domination.
On the morning of February 28, imperialist-Zionist forces launched direct bombardments against Tehran and other Iranian regions, deliberately striking civilian and military targets in an attempt to break the will of a people who symbolize honor and resistance against imperialism.
Far from posing a threat, Iran serves as an example through its defense of sovereignty, its international solidarity, and its support for the Palestinians in their historic struggle against colonial Zionism.
This attack is nothing more than another attempt to impose regime change, weaken Iran’s right to self-determination, and redraw the political map of West Asia to serve the strategic interests of Washington and Tel Aviv. This genocidal logic has left millions of victims; Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Palestine are proof of this criminal model of imperialist-Zionist aggression.
Iran is resisting. The Iranian people and their armed forces have risen up against open aggression, defending their land, culture, history, and their right to exist freely without foreign interference. This stance serves as an example of anti-imperialist honor against the expansionism that seeks to impose its hegemony by force.
Stay strong, Iran! No to Zionism! No to imperialism! For the sovereignty of the peoples! Fatherland or death! We shall overcome!”
America
Wealthy Americans drive surge in New Zealand golden visa demand
More than 700 wealthy foreign nationals have applied for New Zealand residency under the country’s “golden visa” programme over the past 14 months, compared with just 115 applications during the previous three years.
Applicants are required to invest at least NZ$5 million in local funds, companies or charitable organisations within three years.
A further 127 people have applied under a separate programme that requires an investment of NZ$10 million in passive assets such as bonds for five years.
The surge followed a relaxation of rules governing property purchases, investment requirements and the amount of time applicants must spend in the country to qualify.
According to the Financial Times (FT), the increase in applications for the right to live, work and study indefinitely in New Zealand has coincided with a period of geopolitical uncertainty that has made the country’s security and remote location increasingly attractive.
Dozens of countries around the world, from Portugal to the US, offer preferential immigration treatment in exchange for investment or, in some cases, cash payments.
Many have had mixed experiences with such schemes. Ireland, Malta and Australia have scrapped their programmes because of insufficient demand or concerns over abuse.
In New Zealand’s case, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon hopes the visas will attract more foreign investment and help reverse a “brain drain” that threatens the country’s economic growth.
Although tourists often fall in love with New Zealand and dream of moving there, many young New Zealanders leave in search of better economic opportunities.
According to Luxon, New Zealand start-ups have already begun benefiting from the policy.
“While everyone else around the world is tightening restrictions, we’ve opened the doors and our start-ups have benefited enormously from the capital flowing in, as well as from the knowledge and technical expertise these investors have brought,” he said.
Since the programme was comprehensively overhauled in April 2025, applicants from North America, Europe and Asia have committed a combined NZ$4.8 billion, through investments of either NZ$5 million or NZ$10 million each.
That figure is comparable to the NZ$14.8 billion in foreign investment recorded during the first quarter of this year.
Lachlan Nixon, co-founder of venture capital firm Motion Capital, said the programme had become “a badge of honour in Silicon Valley”.
Data show that 277 applications have come from Americans, with Californians showing particularly strong interest in obtaining New Zealand residency.
“A massive influx of capital is coming, but what really matters is the quality of the people now investing in the New Zealand economy,” Nixon said. He added that 40% of a recent NZ$27 million fundraising round for high-growth New Zealand companies came from 30 holders of “golden visas”.
According to Luxon, companies benefiting from the programme include critical minerals firm Zethos, which appointed European steel industry veteran Francesc Rubiralta to its board.
Nixon said other companies backed under the programme include seed oil protein producer Miruku and magnesium mining company Aspiring Materials.
In the mountain town of Queenstown, a preferred destination for many applicants, locals refer to billionaires such as Peter Thiel and Anthony Malkin, whose foundation owns New York’s Empire State Building, as “the secret residents on the hills”.
Most prefer to keep their wealth and presence private. Thiel’s citizenship was inadvertently revealed during a parliamentary debate, while Malkin’s presence became public after fireworks he set off on New Year’s Eve sparked grass fires.
According to Cotality, their arrival has made Queenstown New Zealand’s most expensive property market, with a median home price of NZ$1.8 million, double the national average.
Under the visa programme’s rules, participants may purchase only residential properties worth more than NZ$5 million, a provision designed to prevent their presence from distorting the broader housing market.
“There are a lot of billionaires here. They just wear gumboots,” one property adviser said.
However, doubts remain about the programme’s benefits. Sam Stubbs, chief executive of pension fund Simplicity, said people should make “genuine investments” in the country rather than seek special treatment in exchange for “a small amount of money” invested in a venture capital fund.
“Heaven comes at a price. It’s a price we all pay,” Stubbs said.
Some applicants have also voiced concerns. Courtney Andelman, who runs a venture capital fund in Santa Barbara with her husband Jim, successfully obtained a visa last year and now visits New Zealand regularly.
“There’s something magical in the air and the water. It’s an incredibly healthy place,” Andelman said.
However, she said she wanted to settle in a smaller South Island city such as Nelson, where her investments could have a greater impact, but found very few properties worth more than NZ$5 million.
She also complained that under New Zealand’s tax rules, if her family spends more than 183 days a year in the country, their worldwide income becomes subject to New Zealand taxation.
Andelman said she loved New Zealand but expressed concern and issued an implicit warning.
“How to make every dollar achieve its highest and best use is a question we constantly ask ourselves. If New Zealand doesn’t offer the best value, we’ll go somewhere else. Every one of those dollars is mobile.”
America
Oil industry lobbies White House to avert potential Trump export ban
Oil industry executives and White House officials are engaging in a new push to prevent any move by the administration to restrict US oil exports.
According to a report by Politico, industry representatives say these efforts extend to the White House Domestic Policy Council, the National Energy Dominance Council, the Department of Energy, and Chief of Staff Susie Wiles.
Trump believes that oil prices could harm the Republicans’ chances of maintaining control of Congress in the November mid-term elections.
“Everyone from the industry and within the administration is working hand in hand to prevent this,” an energy industry executive said.
The individual added that White House officials had not formally raised the idea, “but everyone knows Trump will act like Trump again.”
The White House maintains that export restrictions are not on the agenda.
White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said in a statement: “While the President and the entire energy team are taking various measures to mitigate temporary disruptions in the energy market, the administration has been very clear: there is no plan to impose restrictions on oil and gas exports.”
White House representatives did not confirm whether industry lobbyists had approached specific agencies or officials to discuss the export issue. Department of Energy representatives did not respond to queries.
However, although administration officials have guaranteed since the early days of the Iranian war that an export ban was off the table, Trump’s directive to the Department of Justice in June to investigate oil companies on charges of price gouging put the sector on high alert.
Concerns within the industry mounted after Trump stated on Monday that oil giants Exxon Mobil and Chevron were making “too much money.”
Industry executives now fear Trump may try to make a move against them by restricting fuel export activities abroad, which have boomed since the start of the US-Israeli war against Iran.
Another industry official said the sector had reiterated its concerns regarding export controls to the White House “very recently.”
The Trump administration has already tried several different approaches to lower prices that enjoy broader support from the oil industry.
These include the release of millions of barrels of oil from the country’s strategic petroleum reserve and the temporary suspension of the Jones Act to make it easier for non-American vessels to transport oil and natural gas between US ports.
Energy Secretary Chris Wright, a former oil company CEO, and Vice President JD Vance have repeatedly opposed the idea of limiting or banning exports.
Wright stated in May that the administration had “definitely” ruled out the option of banning diesel exports.
Mike Sommers, president of the American Petroleum Institute, said he was “confident” Trump understood the need to maintain oil exports, recalling that early in the crisis, the president had encouraged other countries to buy American oil:
“The administration has repeatedly expressed that they are opposed to [export controls]. Therefore, I do not think there is any change in their stance at the moment. Frankly, it feels as though we have to clarify this issue every three weeks.”
In a note sent to clients on Tuesday, consultancy firm ClearView Energy stated that the moment for the White House to take a step toward limiting fuel exports “might be approaching.”
The firm noted that former President Joe Biden had considered imposing export restrictions ahead of the 2022 mid-term elections following a “long summer of high petrol prices” caused by the war in Ukraine.
US crude oil exports increased by approximately 30% compared with last year, reaching nearly 3.5 million barrels per day by the end of July.
Shipments of refined products such as diesel, petrol, and other types of oil rose by 20%, exceeding 8 million barrels per day.
Opponents of exports argue that sending these cargoes abroad leads to rising prices domestically.
However, the oil and gas industry contends that closing the door to exports would harm the domestic market and cause their production to decline.
“Export bans may seem politically attractive, but ultimately they will lead to the exact opposite of the intended effect,” said a refining industry lobbyist who noted they were in contact with the White House on the matter, arguing that cutting off American exports from international markets would mean “a decline in US production, supply shortages, further upward pressure on domestic prices, and even greater disruptions in the global market.”
Chet Thompson, president and CEO of the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, stated that export controls would force US refiners to produce less petrol because they would lose commercial channels to ship other surplus fuels, such as diesel, produced during the process.
America
US and Ukraine restore intelligence sharing to former levels
Three US senators have reported that intelligence sharing between Washington and Kyiv has reached its former level. The White House declined to disclose details of the current intelligence relationship, emphasizing that President Donald Trump remains focused on ending the conflict.
American senators reported that intelligence sharing between the US and Ukraine has returned to its previous level.
According to a report by Politico, the senators offering this assessment include Democratic Senator Mark Warner, a long-standing advocate for increasing aid to Ukraine.
Commenting on the matter, Warner said: “I don’t want to get into details, but things have improved.” Republican senators John Cornyn and Roger Wicker stated that information sharing has accelerated during a period of “strategic importance”.
Democratic Senator Tim Kaine also noted that he has observed signs of a revival in information sharing between the US and Ukraine.
The White House did not disclose details regarding the current state of its intelligence-sharing relationship with Ukraine. However, in comments to Politico, it emphasized that US President Donald Trump is focused on contributing to the termination of the conflict.
A White House official told Politico: “The President and his team remain committed to playing a constructive role in ending the war between Russia and Ukraine and remain optimistic that we will ultimately reach a peace agreement.”
Last autumn, the Financial Times reported that Trump had issued instructions to prepare for sharing intelligence data that could assist Ukraine in conducting strikes deep inside Russian territory.
Russian authorities are demanding that Western nations cease providing military aid to Ukraine, emphasizing that such assistance will not prevent Moscow from achieving its military campaign objectives.
Last year, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs requested that the US side clarify information regarding the transfer of intelligence data to Ukraine.
According to statements from the Kremlin, Russia has long been aware that the US and NATO countries collect intelligence and transfer it to the Ukrainian military, noting that this is “not a new development”.
Nevertheless, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that Russia will not tolerate attacks by the Armed Forces of Ukraine and will continue to respond forcefully.
In June, President Vladimir Putin announced that Russia is prepared to conduct negotiations with Ukraine on the basis of the agreements reached in Istanbul.
According to Putin, the parties must also take into account the agreements reached between Moscow and Washington in Anchorage, the situation on the front line, and the conditions for a settlement previously set out by Russia.
-
Asia2 weeks agoChina launches global tax audit on super-rich to recover billions
-
Europe2 weeks agoEuropean nations seek alternatives to Palantir amid growing digital sovereignty concerns
-
Europe2 weeks agoEuropean carmakers turn to Chinese rivals to salvage struggling plants
-
Europe2 weeks agoEU governments push to narrow “Made in Europe” preference rules in industrial draft bill
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoDefense Priorities director warns US air strategy in Middle East faces tactical limits
-
Europe2 weeks agoDenmark to deploy conscripts to Greenland for first time amid Arctic security risks
-
Opinion2 weeks agoMacroeconomic consequences of asymmetric UAV attacks in Russia
-
Europe2 weeks agoGerman carmakers face historical crisis as Chinese competition and market contraction erode profits
