Mahdawi, a Columbia University student now being held at a prison in Vermont in the US, says he has faith in the ‘ability of justice’.
A Palestinian man who led peaceful protests against Israel’s genocide in Gaza as a student at Columbia University, and was recently detained during an interview about finalising his US citizenship, has said he’s “in good hands” at the Vermont prison where he is being held.
Mohsen Mahdawi, a legal permanent resident of the United States, was arrested on April 14 in Colchester, Vermont. He met on Monday with US Senator Peter Welch of Vermont, a Democrat.
US President Donald Trump’s administration has been cracking down on pro-Palestine activities. In the first week of his presidency, Trump pledged to deport students who joined protests against Israel’s war on Gaza that swept US university campuses last year.
“I’m staying positive by reassuring myself in the ability of justice and the deep belief of democracy,” Mahdawi said in Welch’s video posted on X. “This is the reason I wanted to become a citizen of this country, because I believe in the principles of this country.”
Welch’s office said Mahdawi was being detained at the Northwest State Correctional Facility in St Albans, Vermont. His case is scheduled for a status conference on Wednesday. His lawyers have called for his release.
The US Justice Department has not said why he’s being detained. The New York Times reported April 15 that US Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote a memo that says Mahdawi’s activities could “potentially undermine” the Middle East peace process. Rubio did not provide any evidence of this.
Rubio has cited a rarely used statute to justify the deportation of Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil. It gives the US power to deport those who pose “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States”.
Khalil says he is a political prisoner. He also missed the birth of his son after being refused temporary release to attend the birth, his wife Noor Abdalla said on Monday.
Abdalla said that she gave birth to the couple’s first child in New York without Khalil present after US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) made the “purposeful decision” to make her family suffer.
An immigration judge ruled April 11 that Khalil can be forced out of the country as a national security risk, after lawyers argued the legality of deporting the activist who participated in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. His lawyers plan to appeal.
A US immigration judge in the state of Louisiana ruled last week that Khalil, who was detained last month, can be deported – setting a precedent for the administration to proceed with its efforts to deport dissenting foreign students, despite them being in the country legally and not being charged with any crime.
Trump has also threatened to halt federal funding for schools, colleges, and universities if they allow what he called “illegal protests”.
In other high-profile cases, immigration officers have detained and sought to deport Rumeysa Ozturk, a Tufts University student from Turkiye, and Columbia student Yunseo Chung, who is a US permanent resident originally from South Korea.
District judge orders administration to restore the capacity of broadcaster shuttered over claims of ‘leftist bias’.
A federal judge has stated that US President Donald Trump illegally halted the operation of the Voice of America (VOA), a federally funded international news service created by Congress.
In a ruling on Tuesday, US District Judge Royce Lamberth ordered the Trump administration to restore the 83-year-old broadcaster’s capacity to the levels before Trump slashed funding and laid off scores of personnel.
In a March court filing stating that all 1,300 employees had been placed on administrative leave, lawyers for VOA said that the broadcaster seeks to report the news “truthfully, impartially, and objectively”, pushing back against claims from the Trump administration that it promotes a “leftist bias” and is insufficiently “pro-American”.
Judge Lamberth also ordered the administration to restore the capacity of two other broadcasters also funded by the federal Agency for Global Media, Radio Free Asia and Middle East Broadcasting Networks, while those lawsuits progress.
The judge also denied a similar request for two additional networks, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and Open Technology Fund.
Trump and his allies have wielded federal funds to dismantle programmes and agencies within the government that they dislike and compel greater ideological compliance from media organisations and universities under the premise of combatting what the administration portrays as “left-wing” views. Kari Lake, a close Trump ally, was also placed in charge of the Agency for Global Media.
The administration shuttered VOA in March, instituting funding cuts that Lamberth said reflected a “hasty, indiscriminate approach”.
A labour union representing workers at the Agency for Global Media celebrated the ruling as a “powerful affirmation of the role that independent journalism plays in advancing democracy and countering disinformation”.
VOA was first founded during World War II in an effort by the US government to counter Nazi propaganda and was later used to project pro-US views to countries around the world during the Cold War, a history that has led some to criticise the network as a means of promoting US interests around the world.
“That simple mission [delivering impartial news] is a powerful one for those living across the globe without access to a free press and without the ability to otherwise discern what is truly happening,” lawyers for VOA wrote.
Many other institutions created during the post-war era to project US political and cultural influence around the world, such as the humanitarian assistance agency USAID, have also come under attack by a Trump administration that sees them as ideological enemies or sources of bureaucratic bloat.
After largely gutting USAID, tech billionaire and Trump ally Elon Musk said that the international assistance group had been a “viper’s nest of radical left Marxists who hate America”.
April 22 (UPI) — Yemen-based Houthi attacks on shipping and U.S. forces prompted ongoing military strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen, President Trump told congressional leaders in a March 28 letter.
“Houthi militants operating from bases in Yemen have perpetrated piratical aggressions against shipping and have continued to threaten and attack United States forces in the airspace and waters in and around Yemen,” Trump said.
“I will no longer allow this band of pirates to threaten and attack United States forces and commercial vessels in one of the most important shipping lanes in the world,” Trump added. “We will act to keep Americans safe.”
The president said he directed the Department of Defense to take several actions against the Houthis in Yemen, including moving additional forces into the Middle East to improve the U.S. military’s defensive capabilities and be better prepared for potential military actions.
“These forces include capabilities for air and missile defense of Israel and of locations hosting United States forces as well as fighter, support and reconnaissance aircraft to enable strikes on Houthi targets,” Trump explained.
“The additional forces have deployed to countries in the Middle East region.”
He said U.S. Central Command forces “commenced large-scale strikes in Houthi-controlled areas in Yemen to eliminate” Houthi threats against commercial shipping and U.S. forces in the Red Sea and surrounding waters.
U.S. Navy Ships and aircraft and Air Force bombers, fighters and drone aircraft carried out the military strikes against Houthi targets located in and around Yemen.
“Targets have included Houthi leadership and equipment, command and control facilities, and munitions storage facilities,” Trump told Johnson and Grassley.
“We will continue these decisive military operations until the Houthi threat to United States forces and navigational rights and freedoms in the Red Sea and adjacent waters has abated.”
He provided Johnson and Grassley with the letter to report to keep Congress fully informed in accordance with the War Powers Resolution.
“I directed these actions consistent with my responsibility to protect Americans’ and United States’ interests abroad and in furtherance of United States national security and foreign policy interests, pursuant to my constitutional authority as commander-in-chief,” Trump said.
The president sent the duplicate letters to the congressional leaders shortly after The Atlantic journalist and editor Jeffrey Goldberg announced he inadvertently was included in a Signal chat discussion among Trump cabinet members and others regarding the pending military action against the Houthis.
Voice of America leader Kari Lake is seen in an overflow room for President Donald Trump’s Inauguration ceremony at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on January 20. On Tuesday, a federal judge ordered the Trump administration to restore VOA after the president signed an executive order to cut the federally-funded news outlet. File Pool photo by Greg Nash/UPI | License Photo
April 22 (UPI) — A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to restore Voice of America and affiliated news services after ruling Tuesday that last month’s cuts were unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberthordered the U.S. Agency for Global Media to restore the staffs of VOA, Radio Free Asia and Middle East Broadcasting Network, and to resume all congressional funding to the news outlets. A preliminary injunction was not granted to Radio Free Europe on Tuesday after it filed a separate lawsuit.
“In short, the defendants had no method or approach towards shutting down USAGM that this court can discern,” said Lamberth, an appointee of former President Reagan.
“They took immediate and drastic action to slash USAGM, without considering its statutorily or constitutionally required functions as required by the plain language of the executive order, and without regard to the harm inflicted on employees, contractors, journalists and media consumers around the world,” Lamberth added.
Before taking office in January, President Donald Trump chose Kari Lake — a former television news anchor and former gubernatorial and senatorial candidate in Arizona — to lead the federally funded VOA. Lake said she found “waste, fraud and abuse run rampant” in the agency before Trump signed an executive order to eliminate USAGM, which oversees the international state media network.
Last month, VOA reporters, unions and the international free press advocacy nonprofit Reporters Without Borders sued the Trump administration over the order and its cuts.
While Trump called the federally funded news network “unnecessary,” lawyers accused the administration of silencing America’s interests abroad, including reports on Hamas, transgender rights or any negative coverage of Trump.
“They can use a scalpel or a sledgehammer; either way it’s viewpoint discrimination,” lawyer Andrew Celli claimed in reference to the Department of Government Efficiency’s cuts under Elon Musk.
“The defendants have silenced VOA, canceled funds to affiliate networks and shut down all transmitters at foreign service stations abroad,” Judge Lamberth wrote.
“In sum, the irreparable harm that the plaintiffs allege impacts the very existence of USAGM, the health and safety of its journalists and employees, and the interests of the millions of reporters and listeners who depend on USAGM’s programming.”
April 22 (UPI) — The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced Tuesday more than $300 million in relief to rural communities in southern states affected by weather-related or other disasters.
U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins was in North Dakota and revealed the federal government will grant $340.6 million in critical disaster relief aid to farmers, ranchers and rural communities impacted by natural disasters in states such as North Carolina and Tennessee via USDA’s Disaster Assistance Fund.
Rollins says USDA was “fulfilling” President Donald Trump‘s prior executive order and “ensuring we are doing everything we can to support state and local efforts to rebuild these communities to be even stronger than before,” according to a release.
On Tuesday, the secretary, 53, was in Fargo with Gov. Kelly Armstrong, Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., and U.S. Rep. Julie Fedorchak, R-N.D., to meet with local officials, farmers, manufacturers, students and other local trade groups where the department delivered more than $5 million to aid the rebuild of local electric infrastructure following severe storms and wildfire damage.
Tune in today as we bring you our coverage of today’s visit from Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins in ND. She is joined by Senator John Hoeven, Representative Julie Fedorchak, and Governor Kelly Armstrong to meet with local commodity groups, students, and producers. pic.twitter.com/8TJj0uIyNY— Ag News 890 (@AgNews890) April 22, 2025
The North Dakota Corn Growers Association stated Thursday that NDCGA President Andrew Mauch wanted to meet with Rollins over federal ag policy and how it affected the corn production and profitability of its growers.
According to USDA officials, at least $25 million in relief will be earmarked to North Carolina and $18 million to communities in Tennessee affected by a number of hurricanes since 2022, including hurricanes Fiona, Ian, Idalia and Helene in which more than 230 people died last fall across Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia as it flooded small towns, destroyed bridges and roads and swept away homes.
More than $15 will go to rebuild key infrastructure projects in rural communities with $20 million going to other critical water, sanitary waste and electrical restoration projects and $2 for technical assistance to towns seeking aid.
The department’s disaster assistance fund was tailored to give direct financial relief to rural farms, families and small business owners in order to recover and rebuild after a disaster.
An Oct. 2023 Pew Research Center poll suggested a majority of the American public believe that climate change is harming the United States and that its effects will only worsen.
Climate change was directly linked by scientists to the series of deadly hurricanes in recent years which continue to spike insurance costs, and likewise connected to just as deadly “historic” flooding last year in Europe that devastated hamlets typically untouched by water.
“The idea that America was ‘better before’ is one of our oldest myths.” Rotimi Adeoye says the Trump administration’s nostalgic push to return the US to a past economic era is a recurring theme in American history, one that often comes at the expense of the marginalised.
April 22 (UPI) — The United States is set to impose tariffs of up to 3,521% on solar panels imported via a small number of Southeast Asian nations.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Commerce Department announced new tariffs targeted at companies in Thailand, Cambodia, Malaysia and Vietnam after a year-long investigation on allegations that Chinese subsidiary companies were flooding the American market with cheap goods.
Meanwhile, the International Trade Commission — a separate U.S. agency — is due to reach its final decision in June on new tariffs in a case brought on by U.S.-based solar panel makers like Arizona’s First Solar and Hanwha Qcells, a Korean company.
President Donald Trump has imposed a tax of up to 145% on Chinese imports with some countries facing a blanket 10% tariff until July.
Critics like the Washington-headquartered Solar Energy Industries Association trade group said tariffs will harm American solar manufacturers because tariffs would raise the price on imported cells assembled into solar panels in the United States.
Last week, the administration said that new tariffs on top of already existing tariffs could spike to 245%.
Chinese officials have countered with a sweeping 125% levy on American products in a vow to “fight to the end.”
Malaysian-based Chinese solar panel manufacturer Jink Solar saw the lowest U.S. tariff at 41% while Trina Solar, a Chinese-based company, faced 375% tariffs on its products made in Thailand.
However, Cambodian exporters face the highest duties at 3,521% because of what was perceived as a lack of cooperation with the U.S. probe.
Then-President Joe Biden initially declared a 24-month tariff exemption on solar panel products from the four countries in June 2022 as part of the invoking of the Defense Production Act in a move largely supported by environmentalists.
In August 2023, the Commerce Department made its final determination alleging that neighboring Malaysia, Vietnam, Cambodia and Thailand had violated U.S. trade rules by utilizing Chinese-sourced materials without paying tariffs.
“This is a decisive victory for American manufacturing and confirms what we’ve long known: that Chinese-headquartered solar companies have been cheating the system,” Tim Brightbill, lead counsel to the American Alliance for Solar Manufacturing Trade Committee which called on federal officials to launch its investigation, stated at the time.
Gold prices soared briefly above $3,490 per ounce on Tuesday, hitting a new record high, before settling back down around $3,490 per ounce.
This was primarily because of higher safe haven demand, as more investors flocked to the precious metal following US president Donald Trump’s changing tariff statements and his escalating criticism against US Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell.
Although Trump has announced a 90-day pause for his so-called reciprocal tariffs, global stock markets have already been significantly hit, with investors also worrying about whether this hiatus will be long enough.
Gold prices have already climbed 5.7% this week and 14.2% this month. The precious metal has also soared almost 31% so far this year.
What is driving gold’s rally?
One of the biggest factors contributing to gold’s current rally is Trump’s increased scrutiny and criticism of the US Federal Reserve recently. The US president has slammed Fed chair Jerome Powell for not decreasing interest rates fast enough, despite inflation having come down significantly already.
In a post on his social media platform Truth Social on Monday, Trump said: “Preemptive cuts” in interest rates are being called for by many. With Energy Costs way down, food prices (including Biden’s egg disaster!) substantially lower, and most other “things” trending down, there is virtually No Inflation.”
He added: “With these costs trending so nicely downward, just what I predicted they would do, there can almost be no inflation, but there can be a SLOWING of the economy unless Mr. Too Late, a major loser, lowers interest rates, NOW.”
Trump is also reportedly looking into the possibility of having Jerome Powell fired. However, although the Fed chair is appointed by the US president, it is an independent role. According to Powell, this means that the chair cannot be legally demoted or fired by the president without cause.
However, the US Supreme Court is currently considering a case which could make it easier for Trump to fire Powell.
Trump’s statements about Powell have given rise to concerns about the potential politicisation of US monetary policy, which could undermine the Fed’s credibility and significantly damage investor confidence as well.
This has led to increased economic and market turmoil, leading to rising demand for safe haven assets such as both gold and silver, which has seen a 1.3% jump this week as well.
A weaker US dollar, and escalating global trade tensions, fuelled by strained EU-US and US-China relations have also contributed to this demand.
Currently, the US has imposed tariffs of up to 245% against China, while China has implemented a 125% levy on the US.
Tensions between the US and China could further deteriorate in the coming weeks, following Trump recently launching a probe into US critical minerals imports. If so, this could continue to support gold’s rally.
Although global gold supply is relatively robust at the moment, aging mines, depleting reserves and declining ore grades still remain a concern, which could push prices up even more in the long term.
Roche announced a $50 billion investment into the United States. File Photo by Steffen Schmidt/EPA-EFE
April 22 (UPI) — Biotechnology giant Roche said it will invest $50 billion into the United States over the next five years.
Roche announced Monday that the financial effort will include new research and development sites, as well as both new and expanded manufacturing facilities.
This investment plan is expected to create over 12,000 new jobs, with a thousand at Roche and the remaining 11,000 to serve as support for the new facilities, in addition to 6,500 construction jobs.
Among the moves Roche plans to make include a gene therapy manufacturing facility in Pennsylvania, another for continuous glucose monitoring in Indiana and a third in Massachusetts that will both conduct AI studies and medical research.
Roche will also upgrade and expand its manufacturing and distribution capacities for medicines and diagnostics at existing facilities in California, Indiana, Kentucky, New Jersey and Oregon, and furthermore create a center for the manufacture of weight loss medications at a location that has yet to be announced.
“Our investments of [$50 billion] over the next five years will lay the foundation for our next era of innovation and growth, benefiting patients in the U.S. and around the world,” Roche Group CEO Thomas Schinecker said in the press release.
Roche is the latest company that has responded to the threat from President Donald Trump to end the pharmaceutical industry’s exemption from import tariffs with strategies of international growth.
Switzerland’s Novartis proclaimed earlier in April it plans to invest $23 billion into ten of its U.S. facilities, and Britain’s AstraZeneca said it would invest $2.5 billion in creating a Beijing hub back in March in addition to its two research and development centers in the United States.
New Delhi, India – The optics were warm: As United States Vice President JD Vance and his family visited Narendra Modi on Monday evening, the Indian prime minister showed them around his residence and gave each of the American leader’s three children a peacock feather.
But behind the smiles and hugs hovered the shadow of US President Donald Trump’s threat to impose major tariffs on Indian goods as a part of the trade war he has unleashed on the world since returning to office in January.
Vance’s four-day tour, which began on Monday, comes as the Modi government desperately tries to duck US tariffs. These “reciprocal” tariffs – including a 26 percent levy on Indian exports to the US – are currently on pause for 90 days, until July 8, for all countries except China. India, like all other countries, however, is currently being tariffed at 10 percent.
The US is India’s largest trading partner and the biggest buyer of its exports. Officials from the two countries have been engaged in intense negotiations to lock down a bilateral trade agreement that would allow them to avoid a tariff battle.
But those negotiations have prompted concerns among Indian farmers: The country has long used tariffs to shield agriculture from being swamped by products from other countries. Now, farmers critical of Modi fear that the Indian government may weaken those protections as part of a trade deal with Trump.
As Vance prepared to vacation with his family at India’s famed Taj Mahal and historic forts, dozens of farmers protesting in several villages across India burned his effigies on Monday and raised slogans: “Go back, Vance. India is not for sale!”
So, what is at stake on Vance’s maiden visit to India? How much do India and the US need each other economically? How much do they tariff each other? And what are the political challenges Modi faces in negotiating a trade deal?
India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi meets US Vice President JD Vance, second lady Usha Vance and their children at his residence in New Delhi, India, April 21, 2025 [India’s Press Information Bureau/Handout via Reuters]
What did Modi and Vance talk about?
On Monday evening, Modi received Vance along with his wife, Usha Vance, whose parents are from India, and their three children at his residence, where the leaders also separately held talks. They “reviewed and positively assessed the progress in various areas of bilateral cooperation,” Modi’s office said in a statement late at night.
The leaders “welcomed the significant progress in the negotiations for a mutually beneficial” bilateral trade agreement, the statement added, noting “continued efforts towards enhancing cooperation in energy, defence, strategic technologies and other areas”.
However, the statements did not delve into the details of the ongoing closed-door trade negotiations.
Vance’s office said in a statement that a bilateral trade agreement presents an opportunity to negotiate a new and modern one focused on promoting job creation and citizen wellbeing in both countries.
The US vice president’s visit builds on early engagement between the two governments in Trump’s second term. Modi was among the earliest leaders to meet Trump in Washington, DC in February, and Trump is expected to visit India later this year for a summit of the Quad grouping, which consists of the US, India, Japan and Australia, and is widely seen as a counter to China’s influence in the Asia Pacific region.
Randhir Jaiswal, India’s Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson, said Monday that Vance’s visit would “further deepen the India-US comprehensive global strategic partnership”.
US President Donald Trump, right, speaks with India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi during a news conference in the East Room of the White House, Thursday, February 13, 2025, in Washington, DC [FILE: Ben Curtis/AP Photo]
What’s Vance’s visit really about?
While India views the US as a critical strategic partner as New Delhi increasingly battles Beijing’s clout in the Indian Ocean region, Washington, too, sees the world’s largest democracy as a counterbalance to China.
But Trump’s tariff threats have perturbed that broader convergence of interests.
During Vance’s visit, India’s efforts will be focused on expediting trade negotiations with the US, said Anil Trigunayat, a former Indian diplomat who has served in the US, “so that there is minimal damage to ongoing trade, as the US is India’s biggest trading partner”.
Yet some critics worry that the Modi government’s bet on the PM’s bonhomie with Trump – they have both described each other as friends – to resolve tariff tensions might be misplaced. Unlike China, the European Union or Canada, India has avoided responding to Trump’s threats with its own countermeasures.
“The Indian side has not shown any strength or resilience. All of the public indications have shown that they have been extremely pliable and trying to please the US government,” said Jayati Ghosh, economics professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.
“The US is essentially using bullying tactics to try and extract as many concessions as possible,” Ghosh told Al Jazeera. “It is very bad for India’s security and economy – and it is unacceptable.”
How much do India and the US trade with each other?
For several years, the US and China have competed for the tag of India’s largest trading partner.
In 2024, the US pipped China to the top slot: India-US bilateral trade was worth $129.2bn, per US government trade data. India-China trade was worth $127.7bn.
But trade with China primarily comprises of India importing from its larger neighbour – India imported more than $110bn worth from China and exported less than $15bn in 2024.
By contrast, India’s balance of trade is very favourable with the US, and the countries are eyeing an ambitious target of expanding their bilateral trade to $500bn by 2030.
Last year, US exports to India amounted to $41.8bn. While oils and fuels maintain a nearly 30 percent share with almost $13bn, they are followed by precious pearls and stones, amounting to $5.16bn. India also imports parts of nuclear reactors, electrical machinery and equipment, and medical instruments from the US.
The US, meanwhile, is India’s biggest export market. Indian exports to the US totalled $87.4bn in 2024. Pearls, electrical machinery, and pharmaceutical products lead India’s export products.
India also exports organic chemicals, textile articles, steel and apparel to the US.
The US trade deficit with India stands at $45.7bn in 2024, in New Delhi’s favour. That is small compared with the US trade deficit with China – $295bn last year. Still, India ranks 10th among countries that the US has the largest trade deficits with.
Indian bikers ride their Harley Davidson motorbikes in Guwahati, India, on Thursday, April 3, 2025. India has cut tariffs on these bikes – but they remain high [Anupam Nath/AP Photo]
What has Trump accused India of?
As Trump has engaged in an all-out trade war with China, the US president has also railed repeatedly against India, describing it as a “tariff abuser” and “tariff king”. Trump insists that many countries – including China and India – have cheated the US, gaming globalisation to sell the US much more than they buy from it and using tariffs to achieve this goal.
In a joint news conference during Modi’s Washington visit in February, Trump noted that India has “been very strong on tariffs”. “It’s very hard to sell into India because they have trade barriers, very strong tariffs,” he said.
He repeated that allegation in public, at least three times, in March. “India charges us massive tariffs, massive, you can’t even sell anything into India. It’s almost, it’s almost restrictive. It is restrictive. We do very little business inside,” Trump said.
He did, however, concede that the Indian government was accommodating some of his concerns.
“They’ve agreed, by the way, they want to cut their tariffs way down now because somebody’s finally exposing them for what they’ve done,” Trump said.
In this June 21, 2019 photo, almonds hang on the branches of an almond tree in an orchard in Modesto, California. India’s average tariff rate on agricultural imports is 39 percent, compared with just 4 percent that the US levies on average [FILE: Rich Pedroncelli/AP Photo]
How high are India’s tariffs on US goods?
Indeed, as Trump said, India has already offered some concessions to the US in recent weeks, slashing tariffs on luxury goods like bourbon – down from 150 to 100 percent – and high-end motorcycle brands like Harley Davidson – from 50 to 40 percent.
But even with those cuts, current tariff rates remain very high – and much higher than the tariffs that Indian goods face in the US.
While bourbon has received some relief, all other imported alcohol is still tariffed at 150 percent. The duty on premium cars and motorcycles can go up to 125 percent, and agricultural products like walnuts face a 100 percent tariff.
India’s average tariff rate is 17 percent, compared with 3.3 percent by the US, as per a report by the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER).
“The most striking difference is in the agriculture sector, where India’s tariffs are notably higher,” ICRIER said in the February report.
The simple average tariff rate that India imposes on agricultural imports is 39 percent, according to ICRIER – pointing to the country’s protectionist policies. By contrast, the Indian think tank found, “the US maintains relatively low agricultural tariffs.” The simple average tariff rate that the US charges on agricultural imports is 4 percent.
The gulf is wide in other sectors, too.
US pharmaceutical exports to India face a 10.9 percent tariff. By contrast, Indian pharma products face a tiny 0.01 percent tariff while entering the US.
US electronics exports to India are taxed at 7.64 percent, while Indian electronics exports to the US face a mere 0.41 percent tariff.
India’s Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, seen here, said on April 21, 2025 that India expects the first phase of a trade deal with the US to be complete by the end of the year [FILE: Justin Tallis/Pool Photo via AP]
How are India-US tariff negotiations shaping up?
So far, the early tariff cuts on bourbon and high-end motorbikes have helped India signal to the US that it is open to negotiations on lifting levies further.
Now, talks are on, and on Monday, Indian Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said a first phase of a trade deal with the US could be ready by the end of the year.
But it is unclear if that timeline will work for Trump, whose 90-day respite ends in July. Trump’s coercive approach, said trade economist Biswajit Dhar, is not conducive to diplomacy.
“Trump doesn’t want rules in trade,” said Dhar, describing the US president’s approach as “laws of the jungle”.
“India has to ensure that it’s a win-win situation. We cannot have Trump have his say,” he said.
Trigunayat, the retired diplomat who has participated in several multi-national trade treaties, said it was important for the Modi government to be transparent, during negotiations, about its political limitations.
“It is very important to put your cards on the table and explain your domestic situation,” he said. “On an international level, we start with a maximalist position. And then they come somewhere in between.”
“But we always must safeguard our citizens’ needs.”
And nowhere is that conundrum sharper than in agriculture.
Farmers shout slogans during a protest against the visit of US Vice President JD Vance to India, in Hyderabad, India, Monday, April 21, 2025 [Mahesh Kumar A/AP Photo]
Can India slash agriculture tariffs?
In the last five decades, India has transitioned from a food-deficit nation to a food-surplus one and has become a leading exporter of agricultural products. For instance, India accounts for 40 percent of global rice exports.
But India has kept tariffs high to safeguard its farmers from imports that might otherwise flood domestic markets – nearly half of India’s population is dependent on farming or the agricultural sector.
India also exports shrimp, vegetable extracts, castor oil, and black pepper; in turn, the US sends walnuts, apples, almonds, and pistachios.
Now, the US wants to balance that equation and has pressured India to reduce tariffs so that its farm products can enter the world’s most populous nation more easily.
That prospect has many Indian farmers on edge.
“We are completely kept in the dark about these trade negotiations – there is no transparency; and in a federal setup like India, how can the government function like this?” said Vijoo Krishnan, general secretary of the All India Kisan Sabha (AIKS), India’s oldest farmers’ union that is leading the protests against Vance’s visit. The AIKS is the farmers’ wing of the Communist Party of India, which is part of the national opposition.
“The Modi government has been sliding in a direction of free trade and slashing import duties – and if it includes the farming sector, then we are doomed,” he said, arguing that an Indian farmer would not be able to compete with Western counterparts, who are “much richer”.
Indian farmers have already once shown their political might to Modi: Huge protests forced the prime minister to withdraw three controversial farm laws in 2021.
“The protests and rolling back the laws were a humiliating defeat for the Modi government – they are taking revenge on the farmers by pushing them under the bus now [through a trade deal with Trump],” claimed Krishnan.
Any tariff waivers on agricultural imports would need to be weighed against the risks they might pose to the livelihood of millions of Indian farmers, cautioned Dhar, the trade economist.
“If we bow to the US demands in negotiations, it is going to create a whole lot of economic, social and political problems for the government,” Dhar said. “They cannot really afford to risk the lives of millions of Indians.”
US president calls latest controversy over defence chief’s handling of military information a ‘waste of time’.
United States President Donald Trump has backed his defence chief following reports he shared sensitive military information in a second Signal group chat, branding the latest controversy about the top Pentagon official a “waste of time”.
Trump’s backing of US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on Monday came after multiple media outlets reported that the defence chief had shared details about planned bombing raids on Yemen in a group chat that included his wife, brother and personal lawyer.
The reports have reignited scrutiny of Hegseth’s leadership, following revelations last month that he shared details about upcoming air strikes on Houthi rebels in a Signal group chat that the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic magazine had been mistakenly added to.
“Here we go again. Just a waste of time,” Trump told reporters at the White House.
“He is doing a great job.”
“Ask the Houthis how he’s doing,” Trump added.
Trump also suggested that Hegseth, a former US Army National Guard officer and Fox News host, was the victim of “disgruntled employees”, after several of his former aides, including his former press secretary, John Ullyot, publicly criticised him.
In an op-ed published on Sunday, Ullyot, one of four defence officials that Hegseth fired or asked to resign in the last week, wrote that the Pentagon was in “disarray” and “total chaos” under the secretary’s leadership.
“They just bring up stories,” Trump said.
“I guess it sounds like disgruntled employees. You know, he was put there to get rid of a lot of bad people, and that’s what he’s doing. So you don’t always have friends when you do that.”
Hegseth also hit out at the criticisms, accusing the media of using former employees with grievances “to slash and burn people and ruin their reputations”.
Numerous Democratic lawmakers, including Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, have called on Hegseth to resign or be fired over the controversy.
Republicans, with the exception of Congressman Don Bacon of Nebraska – who has called for Hegseth’s removal – have either remained silent or rallied to his defence.
“It seems like the leak investigation at the Pentagon needs to continue to find these latest leakers,” Republican Senator Tom Cotton, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said on X.
“Secretary Hegseth is busy implementing President Trump’s America First agenda, while these leakers are trying to undermine them both. Shameful.”
Mahmoud Khalil’s wife Noor Abdalla accuses US government of trying to silence pro-Palestinian activism.
Mahmoud Khalil, the pro-Palestinian activist who has been detained in the United States pending his deportation, has missed the birth of his son after being refused temporary release to attend the birth, his wife has said.
Noor Abdalla said on Monday that she gave birth to the couple’s first child in New York without Khalil present after US Immigration and Customs Enforcement made the “purposeful decision” to make her family suffer.
“My son and I should not be navigating his first days on earth without Mahmoud,” Abdalla, a US citizen, said in a statement.
“ICE and the Trump administration have stolen these precious moments from our family in an attempt to silence Mahmoud’s support for Palestinian freedom.”
“I will continue to fight every day for Mahmoud to come home to us,” Abdalla added.
“I know when Mahmoud is freed, he will show our son how to be brave, thoughtful, and compassionate, just like his dad.”
ICE did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Khalil, a graduate student at Columbia University who played a prominent role in last year’s campus protests against Israel’s war in Gaza, was detained by immigration authorities on March 8 as part of US President Donald Trump’s crackdown on pro-Palestinian activism.
The Trump administration is seeking to deport Khalil, who is being detained at an ICE facility in Louisiana, claiming that his advocacy has undermined US efforts to “combat anti-Semitism” and “protect Jewish students from harassment and violence”.
Khalil, who is a permanent US resident, has denied engaging in anti-Semitism.
An immigration judge in Louisiana earlier this month ruled that the Trump administration could proceed with deportation proceedings against Khalil, finding that the government had “established by clear and convincing evidence that he is removable”.
Khalil’s lawyers have said they will appeal the decision.
US President Donald Trump intensified pressure on Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell for interest rate cuts on Monday, calling him “a major loser” and warning of an economic slowdown.
“There can almost be no inflation, but there can be a SLOWING of the economy unless Mr Too Late, a major loser, lowers interest rates, NOW,” he posted on Truth Social. Trump also compared the Federal Reserve with the European Central Bank (ECB), which has reduced interest rates seven times. “Powell has always been ‘Too Late,’ except when it came to the election period when he lowered rates in order to help Sleepy Joe Biden, later Kamala, get elected. How did that work out?” he added.
The comments raised concerns over the independence of the Federal Reserve, triggering further sell-offs in US assets, including equities, the dollar, and government bonds.
Investors continue to offload US Assets
US stock markets deepened losses following the Easter holiday break, with all three major indices—the Dow Jones, S&P 500, and Nasdaq Composite—slumping more than 2% on Monday. Wall Street has experienced heavy selling since Trump announced reciprocal tariffs at the start of April, followed by a historic rebound after he decided to pause the levies on all countries except China one week later. However, Trump’s attack on Powell now raises fresh concerns about the Fed’s independence and may threaten the broader stability of the global financial system.
“Were Powell to be fired, the initial reaction would be a huge injection of volatility into financial markets, and the most dramatic rush to the exit from US assets that it is possible to imagine,” wrote Michael Brown, senior research strategist at Pepperstone in London. “If this were to happen, then the reserve status of the dollar, and haven value of Treasuries, would be wiped out—probably permanently in both cases.”
The US dollar weakened significantly against major currencies, with the dollar index falling to just above 98, its lowest level since March 2022. The euro surged against the greenback, surpassing 1.05 to reach its highest level since November 2021. The Swiss franc also strengthened to levels not seen since 2015, when the Swiss National Bank removed its currency peg to the euro.
US government bonds saw sharp declines as yields surged, particularly on long-dated Treasuries. The 10-year and 30-year Treasury yields rose by 8 and 10 basis points, reaching 4.4% and 4.9%, respectively.
Gold prices soared, repeatedly reaching new all-time highs amid concerns that the US dollar is losing its global reserve currency status. Risk-off sentiment and inflationary fears also lifted precious metal prices. Gold futures on COMEX rose 1.6% to $3,480 per ounce at 4:00 a.m. CEST, following a 2.9% rally on Monday.
Powell signals no rush to cut rates
Last week, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell acknowledged that the central bank is facing a growing dilemma in fulfilling its dual mandate of price stability and maximum employment.
US Federal Reserve (Fed) Chair Jerome Powell warned last week that escalating tariffs could fuel inflation while undermining growth. He acknowledged that the central bank is facing a growing dilemma in fulfilling its dual mandate of price stability and maximum employment. Powell signalled no rush to cut interest rates further: “For the time being, we are well positioned to wait for greater clarity before considering any adjustments to our policy stance.”
Following the speech, Trump took aim at Powell, urging rate cuts, adding that his “termination cannot come fast enough.” National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett also indicated that the Trump administration was studying whether to fire Powell.
The Fed chair is an independent role, although appointed by the US president. Powell noted previously that presidents may not legally fire or demote the Fed chair. His four-year term will end on 15 May 2026. Under the Supreme Court ruling, Federal board members can only be dismissed before their terms expired “for cause.”
China has warned countries against striking trade deals with the United States at Beijing’s expense, ratcheting up its rhetoric in a spiralling trade war between the world’s two biggest economies.
Responding to reports suggesting that US President Donald Trump’s administration is pressuring other countries to isolate China, a spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Commerce said on Monday that Beijing “will take countermeasures in a resolute and reciprocal manner” against nations that align with the US against it.
The warning comes as countries prepare for talks with the US to seek exemptions from “reciprocal” tariffs that Trump imposed and then later paused on about 60 trading partners.
So what’s this latest verbal spat about, how much clout does China wield in global trade and can Trump drive a wedge between other capitals and Beijing?
What’s the backdrop?
The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Trump was seeking to use tariff talks to push US economic partners to curb trade with China and rein in Beijing’s manufacturing dominance.
In return, these nations could secure reductions in US levies and trade barriers. The Trump administration has said it is in negotiations with more than 70 countries.
On Monday, China’s Commerce Ministry hit back, warned other nations that “to seek one’s own temporary selfish interests at the expense of others’ interests is to seek the skin of a tiger”. In effect, it argued that those trying to strike deals with the US – the tiger – would be eaten up themselves eventually.
The ministry also said China would in turn target all countries that fell in line with US pressure to hurt Beijing.
What’s the status of US-China trade?
After Trump suspended his “reciprocal tariffs” on major US trading partners on April 9, he ramped them up on China. US trade levies on most Chinese exports have climbed to 145 percent. Beijing has retaliated with duties of its own at 125 percent on US goods.
Trump has long accused China of exploiting the US on trade, casting his tariffs as necessary to revive domestic manufacturing and return jobs to the US. He also wants to use tariffs to finance future tax cuts.
“There are no winners in trade wars and tariff wars,” Xi said in an article published in Vietnamese media, without mentioning the US.
As with other countries in Southeast Asia, Vietnam has been caught in the trade war’s crossfire. It is not only a manufacturing hub itself, but China also frequently uses it to dispatch exports to the US to avoid the tariffs imposed by the first Trump administration on Beijing in 2018.
Elsewhere, the Trump administration has begun talks with East Asian allies over the tariffs with a Japanese delegation visiting Washington, DC, last week and South Korean officials set to arrive this week.
Many countries now find themselves stuck between the world’s two biggest economies – China, a large source of manufactured goods and a key trading partner, and the US, a crucial export market.
How dependent is the world on Chinese exports?
In a report published in January by the Lowy Institute, a Sydney-based think tank, analysts found that in 2023, about 70 percent of countries imported more from China than they did from the US.
China’s rapid ascent as a trading superpower can be traced back to 2001, the year it joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) and when it started to dominate global manufacturing after years of successful protectionist industrial policies.
During the 2000s, China benefitted from the relocation of international supply chains, turbocharged by substantial inflows of foreign investment, large pools of low-cost labour and an undervalued currency exchange rate.
By 2023, China had become the largest trading partner for at least 60 countries, almost twice as many as for the US, which remained the largest trading partner for 33 economies.
The gap between them is also widening in many countries: The Lowy Institute analysis found that in 2023, 112 economies traded more than twice as much with China as they did with the US, up from 92 in 2018 during Trump’s first trade war.
“The critical dependence China has developed around the world, especially in Asia, means that lots [of trading partners] cannot do without China,” said Alicia Garcia-Herrero, an economist at the investment bank Natixis. “From critical minerals to silicon chips, Chinese exports are almost irreplaceable.”
Has world trade tipped more in China’s favour since Trump’s last trade war?
In 2018, two years into his first administration, Trump imposed 15 percent tariffs on more than $125bn in Chinese goods, including footwear, smartwatches and flat-screen TVs.
Since then, the US has become an even more important source of demand for non-Chinese exports, especially from Mexico and Vietnam, reflecting the impact of years of US tariffs on China.
Yet if Trump’s aim in part was to hurt Beijing, his first salvoes failed.
Since 2018, many more nations have deepened their trade relations with China – at the expense of the US.
When China joined the WTO, more than 80 percent of countries had more two-way trade with the US than with China. That had fallen to just 30 percent by 2018, the year of Trump’s first tariffs on China, according to the Lowy Institute analysis.
That trend has only solidified since then: In 2018, 139 nations traded more with China than with the US. By 2023, that number had risen to 145, and about 70 percent of the world’s economies now trade more with China than with the US – up from just 15 percent in 2001.
“Trump doesn’t seem to understand how important Chinese trade flows have become,” Garcia-Herrero told Al Jazeera. “What’s more, he’s not offering much by way of carrots, like more investment, so I don’t think he’ll get what he wants.”
Can countries afford to alienate China on trade?
According to Garcia-Herrero, a few countries such as Mexico that have particularly deep trade links with the US, probably will “say no to Chinese imports”.
However, she highlighted that “China’s presence in supply chains is so massive for most of America’s other trade partners, decoupling is virtually impossible.”
Indeed, around the world, China has become an invaluable source of imports. The European Union, for instance, had a trade deficit with China worth 396 billion euros ($432bn) in 2022, up from 145 billion euros ($165bn) in 2016.
China accounts for 20 percent of EU goods imports. The equivalent figure in Great Britain is 10 percent. Last week, Treasury Secretary Rachel Reeves said it would be “very foolish” for the UK to engage in less trade with China.
Across the developing world, China’s trade role is just as crucial. Roughly a quarter of Bangladesh’s and Cambodia’s total imports are from China. Nearly a fifth of Nigeria’s and Saudi Arabia’s goods imports come from China.
“Trump’s trade policy is shortsighted,” Garcia-Herrero said. “Trying to pry trade away with China may work in countries where the US has military bases. … They may have to accept the US’s concerns.”
“But for most countries, particularly those in the Global South, the more that Trump threatens, the more that countries will go on China’s side.”
US stocks and the dollar have dropped sharply as United States President Donald Trump’s attacks on the chief of the US central bank shake investors’ confidence in the world’s top economy.
The benchmark S&P 500 fell 2.36 percent on Monday, one of the steepest one-day declines of the year.
The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite tumbled 2.55 percent, dragging the index down nearly 18 percent from its position at the start of the year.
The dollar fell to a three-year low, at one point weakening to 97.923 against a basket of major currencies.
US government bonds also fell as investors sold off the traditional safe-haven assets, with the yield on 10-year Treasury notes rising above 4.4 percent.
Asian markets opened broadly lower on Tuesday, with Japan’s Nikkei 225, Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index and Taiwan’s TAIEX down about 0.8 percent, 0.6 percent and 0.5 percent, respectively, as of 02:00 GMT.
The steep losses came as Trump renewed his attacks on US Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, branding the central bank boss a “major loser” and “Mr Too Late” on social media for not moving faster to cut interest rates.
Trump has repeatedly threatened to replace Powell, saying last week that his termination “cannot come fast enough”.
On Friday, Kevin Hassett, Trump’s top economic adviser, said the administration was studying the possibility of removing Powell, whose term runs until May next year.
Since announcing its most recent cut to its benchmark interest rate in December, the Federal Reserve’s policy-making committee has expressed caution about lowering rates further in the near term amid concerns that Trump’s sweeping tariffs will stoke inflation.
Powell warned in a speech last week that the tariffs could leave the US economy grappling with weak growth, rising unemployment and higher inflation all at once, putting the central bank’s dual goals of maximum employment and stable prices in “tension”.
“We know from experience in the United States and many other countries that politicians are tempted to ease monetary policy while they are in office because the initial effects are to increase growth and employment. Only later, perhaps when they have left office, does the higher inflation show up,” Joseph E Gagnon, a senior fellow at Peterson Institute for International Economics, told Al Jazeera.
“Markets understand this and are worried that President Trump may try to undo the Fed’s longstanding protection against political interference.”
Powell, who was nominated by Trump in 2017 and tapped to serve another four-year term by former US President Joe Biden, has said he would not resign if asked and insisted that he can only be removed for malfeasance.
Under a US Supreme Court ruling handed down in 1935, the executive branch is prohibited from dismissing the heads of independent federal agencies such as the Federal Reserve except for “cause”.
The Trump administration, which has taken aim at numerous established norms, is seeking to overturn the 90-year-old precedent in a Supreme Court case related to its dismissal of the heads of the Merit Systems Protection Board and the National Labor Relations Board.
Any move to dismiss Powell would almost certainly send shockwaves through financial markets, given the more than century-old principle that the Federal Reserve should set interest rates free from political considerations.
On Monday, Austan Goolsbee, the president and chief executive officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, warned that any effort to undermine the independence of the central bank would have negative ramifications for the economy.
“When there is interference over the long run, it’s going to mean higher inflation,” Goolsbee said in an interview with CNBC, without commenting directly on Trump’s attacks on Powell.
“It’s going to mean worse growth and higher unemployment.”
Gagnon said the financial markets were reacting to the “greater probability of presidential interference” with the Federal Reserve.
“More generally, investors will be less interested in holding investments in the United States if they believe the Fed will not be independent in the future because that means the US economy will not perform as well in the future as in the past,” he said.
The crest adorns a gate on the campus of Harvard University in Allston, Mass. Harvard on Monday sued the Trmp administration after federal funding was withdrawn and institutional oversight was demanded.Photo by CJ Gunterh/EPA-EFE
April 21 (UPI) — Harvard, one of the most prestigious universities in the United States, on Monday sued the Trump administration after federal funding was withdrawn and institutional oversight was demanded of the private school.
The 51-page lawsuit, which was filed in federal court of its home state of Massachusetts, asks a judge to block the funding freeze, arguing it is “unlawful and beyond the government’s authority.”
The White House did not immediately respond to comments with ABC News and CNN about the lawsuit by the Ivy League school.
“All told, the tradeoff put to Harvard and other universities is clear: Allow the Government to micromanage your academic institution or jeopardize the institution’s ability to pursue medical breakthroughs, scientific discoveries, and innovative solutions,” Harvard’s lawyers wrote.
University President Alan M. Garber, in a letter addressed to the Harvard community on Monday, said the actions “have stark real-life consequences for patients, students, faculty, staff, researchers, and the standing of American higher education in the world.”
He added: “Indiscriminately slashing medical, scientific, and technological research undermines the nation’s ability to save American lives, foster American success, and maintain America’s position as a global leader in innovation.”
In a previous letter on April 14, Garber wrote that Harvard “will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights” by agreeing to the government’s demands.
“Before taking punitive action, the law requires that the federal government engage with us about the ways we are fighting and will continue to fight antisemitism,” Garber wrote Monday. “Instead, the government’s April 11 demands seek to control whom we hire and what we teach.
The federal government said it is would freeze more than $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts after Harvard refused to agree to demands, including eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion programs, banning masks at campus protests, enacting merit-based hiring and admissions reforms, and silencing those “more committed to activism than scholarship.”
Also, another $1 billion in federal health research contracts to Harvard could be withheld. The IRS is considering rescinding the tax-exempt status of the university. And the administration has threatened Harvard’s ability to enroll foreign students.
“The consequences of the government’s overreach will be severe and long-lasting,” Garber wrote. “Research that the government has put in jeopardy includes efforts to improve the prospects of children who survive cancer, to understand at the molecular level how cancer spreads throughout the body, to predict the spread of infectious disease outbreaks, and to ease the pain of soldiers wounded on the battlefield.
“The victims will be future patients and their loved ones who will suffer the heartbreak of illnesses that might have been prevented or treated more effectively.”
Teaching hospitals affiliated with Harvard Medical School and/or Harvard University include Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Massachusetts General Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. There are also research and rehabilitation centers associated with Harvard.
The lawsuit also alleges the funding freeze violates the First Amendment and federal law. And the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which requires procedures needed before funding can be frozen, has been violated, the suit alleges.
“The Government made no effort to follow those procedures – nor the procedures provided for in Defendants’ own agency regulations – before freezing Harvard’s federal funding,” the lawsuit said.
Other private universities, including Princeton, Cornell and Northwestern, have seen federal funding paused.
The Trump administration has been concerned about antisemitism and anti-Muslim bias on campus since October 2023 when Hamas invaded Israel and a war continues in Gaza.
“The Government has not – and cannot – identify any rational connection between antisemitism concerns and the medical, scientific, technological, and other research it has frozen that aims to save American lives, foster American success, preserve American security, and maintain America’s position as a global leader in innovation,” the suit, filed Monday, said.
Hardvard’s president said he will soon release reports of the Task Force on Combating Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias and the Task Force on Combating Anti-Muslim, Anti-Arab, and Anti-Palestinian Bias.
“The reports are hard-hitting and painful,” he wrote. “They also include recommendations with concrete plans for implementation, which we welcome and embrace. No one in our community should experience bias, intolerance, or bigotry. We believe adoption of the recommendations and other measures will go far toward eradicating those evils on our campus.”
The Anti-Defamation League’s CEO and national director said the Trump administration may be overreaching.
“The issue of combating antisemitism on campus should be addressed on its own process and merits,” Jonathan Greenblatt wrote Friday in an article published in the Times of Israel. “Other debates on higher education may be important, but they can and should be resolved separate from fighting antisemitism on campus.”
Harvard has an enrollment of 24,596 undergraduate and graduate students with 20,667 faculty and staff.
Tuition at Harvard was more than $56,000 this year and total cost of attendance was almost $83,000, according to its financial aid website.
In March, the school announced undergraduate tuition will be free for students from families making $200,000 or less, starting next fall. Currently, 55% of undergraduates receive financial aid, with the average family contribution standing at $15,700 in 2023-2024.
Harvard’s endowment is valued at $53.2 billion, but it’s considered a long-term investment and not a slush fund.
Massachusetts’ Democratic Gov. Maura Healey told CBS News’Face the Nation on Sunday: “It’s part of this continued playbook that Donald Trump has been using, which is to silence critics.
“First he went after the law firms, then he went after companies, then he went after everyday Americans. Now he’s going after colleges and universities, using any and all tactics to try to shut them down, to silence them.”
Garber concluded his letter by writing: “The time ahead will demand much from each of us, but I am as confident as ever in our ability to meet our challenges with integrity and resolve, our minds set on the work before us and our hearts committed to the future of our beloved University.”
The Ivy League school has filed suit to halt a US federal freeze on more than $2.2bn in grants.
Harvard University has sued US President Donald Trump’s administration to halt the government’s pause of more than $2bn in funding for the US educational institution.
“Over the course of the past week, the federal government has taken several actions following Harvard’s refusal to comply with its illegal demands,” Harvard President Alan Garber said in a statement on Monday.
“Moments ago, we filed a lawsuit to halt the funding freeze because it is unlawful and beyond the government’s authority,” Garber said.
Among the United States government agencies mentioned in Harvard’s lawsuit were the Education Department, the Health Department, the Justice Department, the Energy Department and the General Services Administration.
The Trump administration had no immediate comment.
But Trump and his White House team have publicly justified their campaign against universities as a reaction to what they say is uncontrolled “anti-Semitism” and a need to reverse diversity programmes aimed at addressing the historical oppresion of minorities.
“The Government has not – and cannot – identify any rational connection between antisemitism concerns and the medical, scientific, technological, and other research it has frozen that aims to save American lives, foster American success, preserve American security, and maintain America’s position as a global leader in innovation,” Harvard’s legal complaint read.
Many US universities, including Harvard, cracked down on the protests over the allegations at the time, with the Cambridge-based institution placing 23 students on probation and denying degrees to 12 others, according to protest organisers.
Other institutions, including Columbia University in New York City, have bowed to less far-ranging demands from the Trump administration, which claims that the educational elite is too left wing.
Tyler Coward, the lead counsel for government affairs with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a nonpartisan First Amendment group, praised Harvard for “taking a principled stand against federal overreach that threatens the core values of higher education”.
“The Trump administration’s attempt to bypass federal civil rights law and impose sweeping ideological mandates through financial coercion sets a dangerous precedent,” Coward said.
“Colleges must comply with civil rights laws to receive federal funding. Enforcement of those laws must be lawful, transparent, and respect constitutional rights.”
April 21 (UPI) — China says it will retaliate against other countries who work with the United States in any way that could compromise its interests.
A Chinese Ministry of Commerce spokesperson said Monday in a press conference that it expects other countries should “stand on the side of fairness and justice, one the side of historical correctness,” and should defend economic and trade rules when it comes to negotiations with the United States.
The spokesperson called out the United States for having “abused” tariffs on all its trading partners, in reference to the tariffs levied by President Donald Trump on April 2.
China called Trump tariffs “unilateral bullying,” and that “appeasement cannot bring peace, and compromise cannot be respected.”
It also opposes any country that makes a trade deal with the United States and will “resolutely take countermeasures in a reciprocal manner” against any country who does.
The warning comes as the Trump administration will allegedly ask for limits on trade with China when it negotiates tariffs with other nations.
A Ukrainian Armed Forces chaplain takes advantage of a short-lived pause in the fighting on Sunday to hold an impromptu Easter service for the crew of a tank on the frontline in Zaporizhzhia province, much of which is occupied by Russian forces. Photo courtesy Ukraine Armed Forces 65th Mechanized Brigade/EPA-EFE
April 21 (UPI) — Russian forces launched aerial attacks targeting cities across southeastern and central Ukraine overnight, including the capital, Kyiv, Ukrainian authorities said.
At least one man was injured in Kherson by artillery fire and scores of drones and missiles were launched against Mykolaiv, Zaporizhzhia, Dnipro, Kharkiv, Cherkasy and Kyiv provinces, dashing hopes that a 30-hour “Easter” cease-fire announced by Moscow on Saturday might lead to a more permanent cessation of hostilities.
The multi-pronged airborne assault from cruise missiles, two anti-radar missiles and at least 96 mainly attack drones came out of Russia’s Rostov, Kursk and Bryansk regions as well as occupied Crimea and the North Caucasus, the Ukrainian Air Force said in an update on its official Telegram account.
The wave of attacks, beginning at around 2 a.m., two hours after the cease-fire expired at midnight Sunday, continued for several hours with the air force claiming 42 of the drones had been shot down.
“The enemy attack was repelled by Ukrainian aviation, anti-aircraft missile units, electronic warfare systems, and mobile fire teams of the Ukrainian Defense Forces,” the air force said.
Moscow did not immediately comment on the attacks, but the state-run TASS news agency reported that Moscow’s so-called “Special Military Operation” had been restarted by Russian forces following the expiration of the cease-fire.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said President Vladimir Putin had not given any orders to extend it.
Both sides accused each other of widespread violations, with Moscow dismissing an offer by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky late Saturday to extend the truce to 30 days, as blatant “demagoguery” given the 4,900 cease-fire breaches by the Ukrainian army confirmed by the Russian Defense Ministry.
Ukraine also accused Moscow of violating its own cease-fire thousands of times, with President Volodymyr Zelensky citing 1,882 instances of artillery bombardment, 812 of them using heavy weapons.
The frontline city of Pokrovsk, where Ukrainian forces are battling to prevent Russian forces from breaking through to link up Donetsk with other Russian-occupied territory to the west, suffered the brunt of the shelling.
However, Ukrainian authorities confirmed that across Ukraine there had been no air-raid alerts Sunday for the first time since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022.
Zelensky’s proposal for a cessation of all “strikes using long-range drones and missiles on civilian infrastructure for a period of at least 30 days, with the possibility of extension,” was far less ambitious than the comprehensive 30-day cease-fire plan hammered out between Ukraine and the United States in talks in Saudi Arabia last month.
Russia has so far failed to sign onto to the plan — despite extensive U.S. diplomatic efforts — but announced the 30-hour plan Saturday, hours after the United States signaled it was ready to walk away, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio saying Washington needed “to move on” if an end to the war was not going to be possible.
“We need to determine very quickly now, and I’m talking about a matter of days, whether or not this is doable,” he said on a trip to Paris accompanied by U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, for talks with British, French, German and Ukrainian officials.
President Donald Trump backed up Rubio’s ratcheting up of the pressure but qualified it by saying that, while a breakthrough must come “very shortly” and that he would have no hesitation in “taking a pass” on trying to bring the two sides to the table if Moscow or Kyiv “make it very difficult,” he was not demanding it happen by a certain date.
“We’re just going to say: ‘You’re foolish. You’re fools. You’re horrible people,’ and we’re going to just take a pass. But hopefully we won’t have to do that.”
It remains unclear what impact that might have on American military aid — weapons and other support — to Ukraine. Current flows are under drawdowns on assistance packages approved under the previous administration of President Joe Biden, with no fresh approvals in the three months since Trump came into office Jan. 20.
