Democracy Now! Audio - Democracy Now! 2026-05-28 Thursday

Episode Date: May 28, 2026

Democracy Now! Thursday, May 28, 2026

is democracy now. Kids, women, and elderly people all sitting here. Suddenly, the Israelis send evacuation warnings, and these people get thrown into chaos. They pick themselves up and leave. Half an hour. 45 minutes later, look what happens. Israel orders all Lebanese residents

to evacuate southern Lebanon up to the Zahraini River. We'll go to Beirut. Then President Trump threatens to bomb U.S. ally Oman. over reported talks with Tehran around joint control of the Strait of Hormuz. It's going to be open to everybody. Nobody's going to control it. It's international waters. And Oman will behave just like everybody else who will have to blow them up.

They understand that. They'll be fine. Then from Bogota to El Fasher, we'll look at a new report on the UAE hiring Colombian mercenaries to fight in Sudan. Since the start of the war in Sudan in 2003, the RSF has been fighting the Sudanese military, vying for control of the country. In late 2024, videos emerged from the aftermath of an ambush in the desert of North Darfur, showing that Colombian military contractors had crossed into Sudan from Libya. We decided to investigate. And finally, the Justice Department announces it's investigating the writer E. Jean Carroll. who's won two civil lawsuits against President Trump around sexual abuse and defamation.

All that and more are coming up. Welcome to DemocracyNow.companow.org, the War and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman. Kuwait's military says it activated its air defenses in response to a drone and missile attack after Iranian officials announced they'd struck a military base used by the U.S. in the Persian Gulf region. Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said the attack on an unspecified air base came in response to U.S. attacks near Banda Abbas Airport in southern Iran. The renewed violence came, as President Trump said during a cabinet meeting at the White House Wednesday, he's making progress in negotiating the end of the war, though Trump rejected an Iranian state TV report that he may agree to a deal to restore shipping through the Strait of Hormuz to pre-war levels within a month,

with Iran and Oman jointly managing traffic. This is the president being questioned by ABC News reporter Rachel Scott. Would you accept a short-term deal that allows Iran and Oman to control the straight? And would they have to open it immediately, or would you be open to that happening over a period of time? The street's going to be open to everybody. And who would control this? International waters. Nobody's going to control it.

We're going to watch over it. We'll watch over it. But nobody's going to control it. That's part of the negotiation that we have. they would like to control it. Nobody's going to control it. It's international waters. And Oman will behave just like everybody else who will have to blow them up. They understand that. They'll be fine. There's been no official response yet from Oman to Trump's threat.

Iran's foreign ministry condemned it in a statement as, quote, another dangerous sign of normalization of lawlessness and bullying in international relations, unquote. Israel's intensified its tax in southern Lebanon after order. during tens of thousands of additional residents to flee their homes or face death. With its latest order targeting all areas south of the Zahrani River, Israel's declared some 14% of Lebanon's territory, a combat zone. The expanded forced evacuation orders include most of Tyre, Lebanon's fourth largest city. Meanwhile, Israel's latest attacks have killed at least 14 people, including several children.

after headlines will go to Beirut to speak with Ramsey Kais, Levinan researcher at Human Rights Watch. Israel's continued to attack the Gaza Strip, despite the U.S. brokered ceasefire that was supposed to have taken effect last October. Al Jazeera reports an overnight strike on a residential building in Al-Rimal neighborhood west of Gaza City, killed at least 10 people and wounded 20 others. Four children are among the dead. The attack came on the first day of Eid al-Ai, a major Islamic holiday. This is a survivor. At 10, we all woke up to the sounds of rockets. There was no warning of a strike or anything.

Suddenly, we heard the sound of rockets and strikes in the screams of children and the screams of women. We in the Gaza Strip have not experienced a real truce or ceasefire for days. Palestinian authorities say Israel's violated the U.S.-backed ceasefire three thousand times since agreeing to the deal last October, killing more than 900. civilian since then. The Pentagon says it blew up another ship but accused of trafficking narcotics in the eastern Pacific Ocean, the second attack of its kind in two days. A short black and white video posted on social media by U.S. Southern Command Wednesday shows a boat suddenly exploding into flames. The bombing killed two men. The Pentagon says at least 196 people have been killed in 59 attacks on alleged drug vessels since September.

the U.S. has provided no evidence they were carrying drugs. Human rights groups, including Amnesty International, have called the attacks extrajudicial killings and a form of murder. The World Health Organization warns the Democratic Republic of the Congo faces a catastrophic collision of disease and conflict as cases of the deadly Ebola virus spread across eastern provinces plagued by war. On Wednesday, Uganda closed its border with the DRC, as how. officials reported the number of confirmed Ebola past 1,000. Meanwhile, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has asked staff members to volunteer to screen passengers arriving on flights from Congo and Uganda for signs of illness. The request follows sweeping cuts to the CDC and the National Institutes of Health, which have seen thousands of workers laid off during Trump's second term. The U.S. has also formalized its withdrawal from the World Health Organization and gutted USAID programs providing food, water, health care, sanitation, and disease surveillance to countries, including the DRC.

In Newark, New Jersey, hundreds of prisoners at the ICE jail, known as Delaney Hall, are continuing their hunger and labor strike, demanding proper food, ventilation, and medical care, and their release from ICE custody. For five days, demonstrators have been protesting outside the jail in solidarity with a hunger strikers as federal immigration officers sprayed chemicals and charged at that. The Trump administration continues to deny a hunger strike is ongoing at the jail. On Wednesday, U.S. Congress members Jerry Nadler, Daniel Goldman, and Adriano Espayat entered the jail. Esbaat said he'd a court order allowing him to conduct an unannounced visit. This is Congress member Esbaat. There is a hunger strike. And repercussions and retaliations have been launched against the people in the hunger strike.

We were informed that 13 of them were moved out since the hunger strike began. that there is repercussions and there is retaliations for people in the hunger strike. There is an act of hunger strike by both men and women there. Even though the Department of Homeland Security has denied a hunger strike as going on, so-called border czar Tom Holman has said they are considering force-feeding the prisoners. An Associated Press investigation finds that at least 10 immigrants in ICE jails have all died by suicides. President Trump took office. Since October, seven deaths have been classified as suicides the most in the agency's history. ICE has usually recorded one or no deaths annually. The AP found staff at

the ICE jails ignored signs of distress, delayed mental health treatment, and failed to monitor prisoners who were already deemed at risk. They also permitted detainees to have access to materials that could be used for self-harm, according to the AP's review of ICE inspectors. reports and death records. The suicides account for nearly a fifth of the 51 deaths in ICE custody since January of last year. The Justice Department has launched a criminal investigation into the writer E. Jean Carroll. That's according to New York Times and CNN, who report the inquiry is looking into whether E. Jean Carroll committed perjury in a 22 deposition during her civil lawsuits against Trump. The investigation comes despite a 2024 ruling by a federal

Appeals Court panel in New York that dismiss claims E. Jean Carroll committed perjury. In 2019, Carol published a memoir describing an encounter in the 1990s when she says Trump sexually assaulted her in a department store dressing room. When Trump denied the account, Carol sued him and won $5 million in damages with a unanimous New York jury finding Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation. After Trump made disparate, remarks about Carol, she sued him again and won a second defamation judgment for over $83 million. Federal courts have upheld both verdicts, though on Wednesday the U.S. Supreme Court deferred its decision on whether to hear President Trump's appeal of the $5 million civil verdict.

It was the 12th time the Supreme Court has deferred the appeal. We'll have more on this story later in the broadcast. The FBI's arrested a senior CIA official after finding hundreds of gold bars worth more than $40 million in his Virginia home, along with dozens of luxury watches and $2 million in cash. According to court filings, the official, David Rush, requested and was granted large quantities of foreign currency and tens of millions in gold from the CIA for work-related expenses between last November and March. Rush faces charges of criminal theft of public money. He's also accused of forging his academic and military credentials to collect pay worth tens of thousands of dollars. The CIA's internal investigation flagged the misconduct and referred it to the FBI, which searched his home May 18th. Court papers don't explain what CIA were could have required Rush to amass so much gold or why he apparently kept it all at his Virginia home.

And CBS News has declined to renew the contract of 60 Minutes journalist Sharon Alfonzi. The move comes six months after the news division's editor-in-chief, Barry Weiss, abruptly pulled Alfonci's report about the Trump administration's use of the notorious Salvadoran prison secot to torture and detain immigrants. At the time, Alfonzi protested saying CBS killed her segment for political reasons, at corporate censorship. Weiss had requested several editorial changes and asked the team to request an interview with Stephen Miller, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff behind the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. The report eventually aired a month later after Canada aired the report first.

Alfonzi wrote in a parting statement, quote, in the coming days, network leadership may attempt to hide behind corporate euphemisms like modernization and restructuring to explain to explain away my departure. Don't be misled. This was not a routine corporate transition. It was a deliberate choice to penalize a journalist for refusing to sanitize factually accurate reporting, and it sends a chilling message to the entire newsroom, she said. Meanwhile, a student journalist who won an academic award funded by CBS News condemned creeping censorship at CBS on Wednesday evening as he accepted a prize at the 47th annual News Emmy Award ceremony. Santiago Campos is a high school senior from Washington, D.C., winner of the Mike Wallace Memorial Scholarship,

named after the longtime 60 Minutes investigative journalist. As corporate elites take hold over the very pipes through which our information flows, journalism that serves the people becomes increasingly harder to come by, yet ever more crucial. and what the people want is the truth. So if at any time you hesitate to utter the word genocide or remain silent in the face of blatant lies, remember to ask yourself, who is this for? And those are some of the headlines.

This is Democracy Now, DemocracyNow.org, the War and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman. And I'm Narmine Sheikh. Welcome to our listeners and viewers across the country and around the world. We begin today's show in Lebanon, where Israel has intensified its attacks on Beirut and southern Lebanon after ordering tens of thousands of additional residents in the south to flee their homes or face death.

With its latest order targeting all areas south of the Zahraani River, Israel has declared some 14% of Lebanon's territory as a combat zone. There are 300 towns and villages in this zone and hundreds of thousands of people used to live there. The expanded forced evacuation orders include most of fours of foreign. Tyre, Lebanon's fourth largest city. Since March, over a million people in Lebanon, nearly a fifth of the country's population, have been displaced by the war. Israel's latest attacks have killed at least 14 people, including several children. This is a resident of Tyre. Kids, women, and elderly

people, all sitting here. Suddenly, the Israelis send evacuation warnings, and these people get thrown into chaos. They pick themselves up and leave. Half an hour. Forty five minutes later, look what happens. For the latest news from Lebanon, we're joined by Ramsey Kais, the Lebanon research, human rights watch. He's in Beirut. If you can talk about the significance, Ramsey, of these new evacuation orders, is it for everything south of the Zahrani, which of course is north of the Latani River? And what this involves and the bombing that's taking place? Thanks, Amy, and thanks for having me. And the order issued by Israel's military spokesperson yesterday covers the entire area south of the Zaharani River,

but it also comes after multiple displacement orders have been issued for over 50 villages and towns in Lebanon over the last 36 hours. And then after those displacement orders were issued, there was a blanket order issued by Avichai Adruai, the Israeli military spokesperson, calling on residents of all towns and villages south of the Zaharanese. River to leave north of the river. As he noted, it's almost 14% of the Lebanese territory. Not only that, but this comes in a period where it's supposedly a ceasefire. But despite this, there has been just in the last week, Israeli attacks have killed over 180 people. This includes over nine medical workers, seven children, 21 women, and in the entire ceasefire period. So from April 16th until today, there's been nearly a thousand people killed, 975.

people, including 48 children, 43 women, and 26 medical workers. When the ceasefire went into effect in April 16, returns were very rare, slow, if at all, they took place. And this was particularly because the Israeli military had designated a large area around the border, around 600 square kilometers, as a buffer zone, demarcated a yellow line, the south of which it told people there are prohibited from going. but despite this strikes continued across the south, across the Litani, but even north of it. And so we're currently in a supposed ceasefire period, one where hundreds of thousands of people

remain displaced. Over 130,000 people remain displaced across 600 shelters across the country, and hundreds of thousands of others are displaced in homes that they've rented or with families, putting great strain on the Lebanese authorities and their abilities to host or, provide shelter for displaced people. But more than that, it's hard to see an end in sight. There is no signs that things are slowing down. In fact, on Tuesday, Netanyahu said that he and the Minister of Defense, Israel Katz, ordered or instructed that there will be a deepening of the operation in Lebanon.

Smotrich, the Minister of Finance, and a Minister in the Defense Ministry has said that for every explosive drone fired by Hezbollah, 10 buildings should fall in Beirut. once again, I mean, they've both the displacement orders issued for, you know, the blanket displacement for the area south of Zahrani, the high number of displacement ordered issued for villages and the statements by the Israeli authorities showing, you know, complete disregard for the laws of war is not new, but it continues to happen. It continues to happen amidst a supposed ceasefire. And unfortunately, it's not clear where things are going, whether they will continue to escalate.

But what is certain, I think, is that, unfortunately, it is the civilians. Those who are displaced, who will be displaced again, were being killed, that bear at the greatest price or that pay the greatest price. Well, Ramsey, let's go to what Israeli far-right finance minister Basilel Smotrich said. He said, quote, for every explosive drone, 10 buildings in Beirut should fall. We will not overcome drones like any other. For every explosive drone, 10 buildings in Beirut should fall.

The response to a significant threat must be far more significant. We do not respond to strategic threats with fortification, but by changing the rules and the equation. Extracting a deterrent and disproportionate price from the enemy must be a central pillar in our efforts to defend our fighters. These days, we are reshaping the equations against our enemies across all fronts. So, Ramsey, can you respond to what he said? And the reference here to the drones is the fact that Hezbollah is reportedly using fiber optic drones

that can evade Israel's defense systems. Yes, exactly. I mean, the statement by Smoltrich, this is the same minister that said, A few weeks back or perhaps more than a month ago, the Dahi should be turned into Khan Yunus and Gaza, where human rights, watch like other groups, have documented war crimes, crimes against humanity and acts of genocide, is a minister in the same government where the Minister of Defense,

Israel Katz, where, you know, the prime minister, have said that they've instructed destruction of all homes along Lebanon's border, where they said that hundreds of thousands of Shia residents will not be allowed to return until the safety of Israel's northern residence is guaranteed. and, you know, force displacement is prohibited international law. People should be allowed to return when the hostility sees or the conditions for displacement cease to exist. This is a, you know, the Israeli government has repeatedly not only violated the laws of war, but continues to declare its intention to commit more atrocities to, you know,

destroy tens of buildings in Beiru, to destroy all homes along the border. And they're able to do so because there's no restraint on the Israeli military. countries have not taken any significant pressure to suspend arms sales or military assistance to Israel or suspended trade agreements as a result of the egregious violations that continue to be committed, that were committed in the Gaza and are now committed in Lebanon. And additionally, I think another point is that there's a responsibility on the Lebanese government, given that there is no avenue for accountability for any of the violations of the laws of war committed in Lebanon because neither Lebanon nor Israel is a party to the Rome statute.

and Lebanon could and should give jurisdiction to the ICC to investigate and prosecute crimes committed on Lebanese territory since October 2023, because only then would there be a pathway to accountability, documentation, investigation, and potentially accountability mechanisms. But in the current context, you know, we're seeing no restraint both by the actions of the Israeli military and by the statements and intentions to commit more atrocities in Lebanon. And Ramsey, you said earlier that the possibility of reaching some kind of agreement is out of reach or appears out of reach. And if you could just elaborate on that and the position of the Lebanese government vis-à-vis Hezbollah, Hezbollah completely rejects the talks between Lebanon and Israel, whereas the Lebanese government is hoping that it's only through these direct talks that there might be a resolution. Yeah, the Lebanese government is currently engaged in negotiations with the U.S., with Israel, on bringing the hostilities to a halt. I think when it comes to regular people in Lebanon, the feeling is civilians.

The feeling is that of helplessness, is that of not knowing what is going to happen and what may influence whether a ceasefire would take place or not. The negotiations that are happening at the top level, whether between Lebanon, Israel and the U.S. or the U.S. and Iran, but on the ground, it's been more than two and a half years of consistent war where supposed ceasefire periods are ones that are typically accompanied by near daily attacks by continued strikes that don't look like a ceasefire at all and that are a ceasefire enemy only. So I think while these negotiations are ongoing,

people are really left to themselves just to, you know, passed through this period that they've known for the last two and a half years. Ramsey, we just have 30 seconds, but you posted, you wrote, while Israel continues to expand displacement orders across Lebanon, so shameful to see Lebanon's security services dismantling displaced people's tents in this manner. Where should displaced people go if this is how they're being treated by the state you wrote? And we're showing now video you posted along with those words. your final response?

Yeah, this was a video shared by activists and reporters on the ground in the BL area in central Beirut of security services, breaking down the tents of displaced people. There's certainly a large strain on the government. Over 130,000 people that are staying in displacement shelters across 600 shelters in the country. But that doesn't mean that people who are displaced should be treated in undignified manner where their tents are broken down. Some of these tents belong not only to Lebanese people who are displaced, but the Syrian families, the families of migrant workers,

some of the most vulnerable people in the country in the midst of this conflict, you know, whatever the plans of the state are, they had set up a specially designated area for tents for displaced people. That process should be dignified. And, you know, the security service, it is shameful to see security service breaking down the tents of people that have already suffered so much in this manner. Ramsey, Kais, want to thank you so much for being with us,

Lebanon researcher at Human Rights Watch, speaking to us from Beirut. Up next, we look at the latest on the U.S. Iran negotiations. Back in 20 seconds. Jano Jani Jani Singh, performing in our Democracy Now studio. is Democracy Now, Democracy Now.org, the War and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman with Nirmine Sheikh. Tensions are rising in Iran and the Persian Gulf after Iran and the U.S. traded military strikes early on Thursday, just hours after President Trump said he was getting closer to sealing

a deal with Iran. Following the U.S. strikes in the Strait of Hormuz, Iran's revolutionary guards say they targeted an unspecified U.S. airbase that was the source of the American strikes. Kuwait's military says it has... activated its air defenses in response to a drone and missile attack and the U.S. militaries accusing Iran of violating the ceasefire agreement by attacking Kauyth. During a cabinet meeting at the White House Wednesday, President Trump warned the Gulf state of Oman, a longtime U.S. ally, that it would face a bombing campaign if it entered into an agreement with Iran

to share control over the Strait of Hormuz. This is in exchange with ABC News reporter Rachel Scott. Would you accept a short-term deal that allows Iran and Oman to control the strait? And would they have to open it immediately, or would you be open to that happening over a period of time? The strait's going to be open to everybody. And who would control this? It's international waters. Nobody's going to control it.

We're going to watch over it. We'll watch over it. But nobody's going to control it. That's part of the negotiation that we have. They would like to control it. Nobody's going to control it. It's international waters. And Oman will behave just like everybody else who will have to blow them up.

They understand that. They'll be fine. Have to blow them up, President Trump said about Amman, U.S. ally. President Trump also said he felt no pressure from the looming midterm elections to make a deal. He also suggested signing a deal with Iran might be contingent on more Arab and Muslim countries signing the Abraham Accords. And we'd like to have the countries we were talking about, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, and the others. We'd like to have them immediately joined the, and Steve Whitkoff is working on that with Jared and some others, but would like to have them join the Abraham Accords. It'll be historic if they do it.

I think they owe that to it. To be honest, I'm not sure we should make the deal if they don't sign. For more on all of this, we're joined by Robert Malley, the Middle East Program Director at the International Crisis Group, was a senior Middle East official under President's Clinton, Obama, and Biden. And most recently, former U.S. Special Envoy for Iran and the Biden administration, co-author with Hussein Aga, of the new book, Tomorrow is Yesterday, Life, Death, and the Pursuit of Peace in Israel, Palestine. Robert, welcome back to democracy now. First, talk about the U.S. threatening to blow up its own ally, I should say Trump threatening to blow up Oman, around this, around sharing control of the Strait of Hormuz, and then go into the Abraham. Accords. Yeah, well, first, thanks for having me.

Listen, we could spend hours trying to dissect every statement by the president. It's not clear that it's particularly useful because he says the most extravagant things. Yesterday may have taken the cake in some respects, threatening to blow up Oman, but also making this connection between a negotiation with Iran and expanding the Abraham Accords, including to Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and making this strange argument that somehow they owe it to the president, even though, if anything, right now, what they have towards the president, Israel resentment, because he's the one who got them into this mess. It's because of his unlawful, unnecessary war that the Strait of Hormuz is closed.

So I don't know by what logic he thinks that they owe him something because he's going to get them out, perhaps, of the mess that he created. In any event, it's a completely illusory, elusive chase. There is not a chance at all that Qatar or Saudi Arabia coming out of this war with this Israeli government and in this context are going to normalize relations with Israel. One hopes that he just threw that out and will quickly forget it. But if it becomes, in his mind, a condition for a deal, this simply won't be one. And Robert, you were one of the key negotiators for the 2015 Iran nuclear deal during the Obama administration.

And several people are now speculating that whatever deal emerges between Iran and the U.S. it will not be very different from the 2015 deal. Could you just elaborate on that? I mean, you know, the situation is different from 2015. So the comparison is going to be very inexact. Iran is not in the position it was before. It is discovered a tool, the control of the Strait of Hormuz that it didn't really know it had or if it knew it had it,

it wasn't prepared to use it. Its nuclear program is in a very different state than it was in 2015. In some ways, it's weak because it's been bombed. In other ways, it's strong because Iran has a good. accumulated irreversible knowledge. I think the comparison in some ways is sort of a futile exercise. I don't think, I don't want the president to think that whatever deal he reaches is going to be worse than the JCPOA because that will just give him another incentive not to conclude a deal. I think the main question is, number one, what this war shows and where we are today

demonstrates that his decision to withdraw from the deal in 2018 was a completely reckless and and absurd one because we're now in a position where we're renegotiation, renegotiating issues that had already been settled and negotiating a new issue that never should have been on the table in the first place, which is reopening the Strait of Hormuz. The one lesson, though, the comparison where I think some of the critics of the JCPO are having a very hard time with the current reality is that the two main criticisms of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. Number one was that Iran retained its right, what it considered its right, to rich uranium,

something that critics thought never should have been the case. And second, the deal never addressed issues like Iran's ballistic missile program, its support for regional allies, or now its drone program. Whatever deal comes out of the current negotiations, one thing is for sure. Iran will retain what it considers its right to enrich, and the deal will not touch on those other issues that I just mentioned. So the logic of the deal, even if the details will be different, the basic construct of the deal, which is nuclear constraints in exchange for sanctions relief. That's the only thing. deal that's on offer. And again, we should never have been in the position where now, you know, the president's decision to rip up the deal, to impose maximum pressure sanctions, and then to go

to war has left us in a weaker position and without any option for getting a deal that would be dramatically different from the one that was concluded in 2015 at best. Well, Robert, you're back at the International Crisis Group. You were previously the president, now Middle East program director. The latest crisis group monitor on Iran has, of course, as you have too now, cautioned against any speculation about the deal because it's not clear exactly what it contains yet, but also elaborates on a new institutional arrangement Iran has made around the Strait of Hormuz. The so-called Persian Gulf Strait Authority was formalized by Iran's Supreme National Security Council earlier this month on the 18th, 19th of May, which, quote. And this is taken from the Crisis Group Monitor document, quote, appears designed to turn ad hoc revolutionary guards interdictions into a permanent regulatory apparatus, vessel seeking transit, must file ownership details, insurance documentation, crew manifest,

and cargo declarations with the authority before receiving a permit. Now, this is presumably entirely unacceptable, not only to the U.S., but also to Gulf countries. is if you could talk about the significance of this and where it might fit into any potential deal. Right. Well, first, just a reminder, I said it earlier, but we're now negotiating over an issue that wasn't even existing before the war.

And the main topic of negotiation is opening this trade that was not closed prior to the launching of this illegal war. So that's point number one. Point number two, yes, what Iran, it's discovered that it has this ability. Again, it always had it, but it's now put it into practice of stopping and restarting and imposing conditions for vessels to cross the Strait of Hormuz. That is something that is unacceptable under international law. It's unacceptable to the neighbors,

as you just said. The point is, it's a reality. And so when President Trump says Iran will not be in control of the street at the end of this, if there's a deal, he's right in one respect, which is, I suspect the deal will not entrench and formalize any form of control like the one you just mentioned. On the other hand, it's a simply, it's a statement of fact that if at any point Iran is dissatisfied with the implementation of the deal or feels like it's being violated or for any other reason, it decides to close the Strait of Hormuz or to impose conditions. It can do so. But I do think, I mean, one of the reasons why the negotiations are complicated is that Iran

is insisting that it wants some form of economic relief for the damage that was caused by this war. And the most obvious one from its perspective, other than sanctions relief, is imposing some kind of toll, some kind of payment system in the Strait of Hormuz. Very difficult, as you said, for the neighbors to accept it. They're trying to see whether they could do something in which some of the proceeds of that tolling system or that fee system could be shared with other Gulf countries. That's going to be a very tough cell, again, for the neighbors. But the reality remains at this point Iran has proven and demonstrated that it has this ability to switch the light on or off in terms of transit through the Strait of Hormuz.

And that's something, that's one of the legacies of this war that everyone is going to have to contain. So the Iran monitor of your group, the international crisis group, has criticized the U.S. position for, quote, being mired in confusion. Now Trump says he doesn't care about the midterm elections, but there's been speculation suggesting to say the least that domestic considerations are weighing in heavily and that may force Trump's hand to reach an agreement fast. But according to other observers, this may no longer be the case following the Supreme Court's decision on redistricting. If you can respond to that, also the war pushing President Trump's approval ratings to an all-time low.

Yeah, so obviously, I'm not in the president's head. It's not somewhere I'm going to speculate getting into. But I do think listening to him, and let's put it this way, if you were an Iranian official listening to the president every other day saying he doesn't. doesn't care about the midterms, he's not in a hurry. I think every time he says it, they believe it's proof of the opposite, that he's sort of protesting too much, and he's trying to project an air of confidence,

an air of not caring about what will happen in the midterms, what will happen to his political fortunes. I think that's very hard to believe, at least from their perspective. So every time they say they view it as confirmation that they hold that upper hand in terms of who is more in a hurry to reach a deal. Now, I think, you know, again, watching the president, And I'm confused because you would have thought that given the poll numbers, and this is one of the most, if not the most unpopular war, waged by the United States in decades. One can't even think of a precedent where there was not even a rallying around the flag, you know, initiate instinct at first.

This has been unpopular from day one, and it's only grown more unpopular since. It's having a drag on the economy. It's having a drag on the Republican Party's prospects in the midterms. So you'd think that the president would really try to get out of this war. he's had many, many exit ramps since he first launched it. He hasn't really seized them. He's changed. He's gone back and forth.

He's zigzagged. And I think what that reflects is the president is torn. On the one hand, yes, he sees the politics. I'm sure that people, his chief of staff, vice president are telling him, beware this is coming at a cost. And he sees that. On the other hand, he's somebody who hates to appear weak. He is determined to show that Iran has capitulated and surrendered.

And those two instincts can't coexist. he's going to have to choose one or the other. Either he's going to want to continue this war until that elusive triumph which he won't achieve, or he's going to have to settle for less than full victory. And depending on the time of day, depending maybe on who has spoken to him last, he seems to incline more in one direction or the other,

which really is a reason why these negotiations seem to be going through all these ups and downs when we think we're going to reach a deal a week ago or a few days ago, and now, who knows? And Robert, finally, we just have 30 seconds. If you could comment on the fact that Iran has at least partially lifted its internet blackout in the country, the longest in history, 88 days, and what this might say about what the Iranian government feels its position is vis-a-vis its own population. I don't know, and I don't want to speculate it. I'm not there. I'm not sure how widely open it actually is. So I think you'd have to ask people who are there and who are witnessing it.

Certainly, closing the Internet has been a economic drag. for Iran, I think they have found that it's very difficult to do business without the internet. I think it's a great difficulty for them. On the other hand, they have security considerations. They are probably afraid of what some of the people in their country feel and also of outside interference. So we're going to have to see whether it really is materializes and how open it actually is. That's one of the slideshows in this conflict. Robert Malley, we want to thank you so much for being with us, Middle East Program Director at the International Crisis. Group, former U.S. Senior Middle East official under Presidents Clinton, Obama, and Biden.

His new book out, he co-authored is called Tomorrow's Yesterday, Life, Death, and the Pursuit of Peace in Israel, Palestine. This is Democracy Now, Democracy Now.org, the War and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman with Nirmin-Shchev. We turn now to Sudan. A new report by Human Rights Watch has found Colombian mercenaries accused of committing war crimes in Sudan were trained in military-based. in the United Arab Emirates. The report outlines since 2024, the Abu Dhabi-based security company, Global Security Services Group, hired hundreds of Colombian private military contractors who were then deployed to Sudan to fight alongside the rapid support forces. Human Rights Watch found evidence

that the private military contractors were in El Fashir in October 2025, when the RSFs seized the key city and committed widespread massacres. and rape. The report adds to evidence of the UAE's involvement in the war in Sudan despite repeated denials. For more, we're joined now in London by Joey Shea, senior UAE researcher at Human Rights Watch, author of the new report from Bogota to El Fasher. So, Joey, if you can lay this out and how did you find the Colombians to go on the record about being deployed to Sudan to assist the RSF, And if you can put this in a bigger political context for those who aren't following this carefully, the significance of what the RSF is doing in Sudan.

Absolutely. And thanks, Amy, for having me. Our investigation documented how this Abu Dhabi-based security company, Global Security Services Group, has apparently hired hundreds of these Colombian fighters before they were deployed to fight alongside arm and arm with the rapid support forces, an armed group accused of, war crimes and crimes against humanity in Sudan. Now, since the beginning of the war in Sudan three years ago, there has been a steady drip of reporting, mounting evidence, pointing to the fact that the UAE has been militarily supporting the rapid support forces. The New York Times, UN experts, human rights organizations like ours, have repeatedly reported on UAE military

support to the RSF. And yet the international community has remained silent. To this, day, not a single EU member state, the EU, the U.S., the U.S., the U.K., has publicly called out the UAE's role in helping to fund, support, and militarily support the rapid support forces. Now, when it comes to our investigation, we were able to conduct firsthand interviews with some of the Colombian contractors who were deployed to Sudan. Now, this research was incredibly difficult. It took quite a bit of time to convince these contractors. to speak with me. And this research was also corroborated by a deep open source investigation.

Thankfully for us, Colombian contractors are not very hygienic with their social media presence. So we were able to get a lot of information from their own TikTok accounts and other social media that they posted publicly and geolocate them in these sensitive UAE military sites before they were then deployed to Sudan. And I think what is most important about our report is that these contractors transited through sensitive UAE military sites, military bases in the UAE where they received training by Emirati nationals before they were deployed to Sudan. So, Joey, could you talk about this Columbia-based recruitment agency, A4SI, what the origins of this company is? are and what role they've played in sending Colombian mercenaries to Sudan to support the RSF. This organization, this agency, was sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury in December 2025. So A4S.I is the Columbia-based recruitment company that was responsible for recruiting the retired Colombian personnel before they were hired, apparently hired, by Global Security Service.

Group, the UAE-based company that we believe hired the contractors and which has very strong ties to UAE authorities, including senior members of the UAE ruling family. And as you said, A4SI was sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury Department in December of last year. And yet GSSG Global Security Services Group, which we believe has apparently hired these contractors, paid them, has not been sanctioned, nor its CEO, a man named Mohamed Hamdan El Zabi. And in our report, we are calling for the U.S. Treasury Department, the EU allies of the UAE, to investigate GSSG and investigate its CEO, Mohamed Hamdan, El Zabi, with a view to imposing sanctions. Because at the core of this operation, we believe are UAE authorities.

And it's sort of like if you're going to sanction A4SI without sanctioning GSSG, you're cutting off one arm of the octopus without getting to the heart of the operation. Joey, what does UAE have to gain by this intensification of conflict in Sudan? UAE, a close U.S. ally? Yeah, so this, UAE's apparent support to the RSF is part of a broader pattern whereby the UAE has been intervening in neighboring conflicts for over a decade. Human Rights Watch has consistently documented how the UAE has intervened as far back as Yemen in 2014, 2015, and then in Libya, in the war between 2019 and 2020, and now in Sudan. And we really see how the UAE uses these neighboring conflicts to project its political and economic influence abroad.

And again, Human Rights Watch has documented scores of human rights violations. that are linked with UAE's intervention. In Yemen and both Yemen and Libya, we documented scores of indiscriminate and disproportionate airstrikes on civilians and civilian objects. And particularly in southern Yemen, we also documented how the UAE financed, trained, and supported abusive local forces,

which detained civilians in terribly violent counterterrorism operations. So it's not just about Sudan. And with each of these, these very violent interventions, the UAE still has not received any accountability and has not yet been called out by name by the international community. And in the context of Sudan, we're still relying on these ambiguous and weak statements calling out external actors fueling the war, rather than naming names and calling out the UAE. And finally, Joey, before we conclude, why Colombia and are there other states,

that the UAE fighters from other states that the UAE has been recruiting? There may be other fighters of other nationalities that UAE-linked entities have recruited. We weren't really able to verify those accounts. But the relationship between UAE authorities and Colombian retired personnel goes back to 2011 when Muhammad bin Zayed, the current UAE president, started to build an 800-person battalion, a foreign legion comprised entirely of Colombian military personnel.

Well, at this time, this Foreign Legion was legal. The recruitment effort was public. But that was sort of the start of this relationship between UAE authorities and Colombian retired personnel. Colombia provides a very fertile recruitment grounds after years of internal armed conflict. There's also, you know, retired personnel who are incredibly well-trained. Also, they're trained on U.S. equipment, of which the UAE's military is also trained. So there's lots of interoperability between the two forces there. And we also saw Colombian fighters pop up supported by the UAE, in Yemen as well, starting in 2015.

So this relationship goes back more than a decade. I want to thank you so much for being with us, Joey Shea. Senior UAE researcher at Human Rights Watch will link to your report from Bogota to El Fasher. Coming up, the Justice Department has announced it's investigating the writer E. Jean Carroll, who's won two civil lawsuits against President Trump over sexual abuse and defamation back in 20 seconds. From demand, women of the world by Amadu and Mariam in our Democracy Now studio. This is Democracy Now, Democracy Now.org.

I'm Amy Goodman with Nermyn Scha. We end today's show with the latest news that the Justice Department has launched a criminal investigation into the writer E. Jean Carroll. According to the New York Times and CNN, the inquiries looking into whether Carol committed perjury in a 2022 deposition. That's despite a 20-20. for a federal appeals court panel that dismissed claims E. Jean Carroll committed perjury. In 2019, Carol published a memoir describing an encounter in the 1990s when she says Trump sexually assaulted her in a department store dressing room. When Trump denied the account, Carol sued him and won $5 million in damages, with a unanimous New York jury finding Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation. After Trump made disparaging remarks about E. Jean Carroll, she sued him again and won a second defamation judgment for over $83 million.

Federal courts have upheld both verdicts, though on Wednesday the U.S. Supreme Court deferred its decision on whether to hear President Trump's appeal of the $5 million civil verdict. It was the 12th time the Supreme Court has deferred the appeal. We'll have more right now with Deborah Turkheimer, Professor of Law at Northwestern University and the author of Credible, why we doubt accusers and protect abusers. Professor Turkheimer, if you can respond to this latest news that I think have rocked many in this country, President Trump faces paying E. Jean Carroll close to $90 million. And now his own Department of Justice is criminally investigating her.

Can you talk about the grounds and the history of this case? Yes, I can do that. Thanks for having me. I guess we need to go back to October 2020 during the discovery phase of E. Jean Carroll's, lawsuit, she was deposed. And one of the questions that she was asked pertained to whether she was getting any outside funding for her legal fees. And she answered no. This Department of Justice investigation into perjury charges centers on that particular response. So it's a very small piece of this lawsuit. Donald Trump has tried over and over again to impugn E. Jean Carroll's credibility around the sexual abuse allegations that has been unsuccessful over and over again. So this is about the

question of whether she knew when she answered no to that question about outside legal funding, that in fact, billionaire Reid Hoffman had contributed some money to her case, to her lawyers, to enable this to actually come forward because, as we know, it's very expensive to sue civilly and particularly to go up against someone with the resources of Donald Trump. So this perjury investigation centers on that deposition. It's unusual in so many ways, Amy. Explain those ways. So there are some very technical, let's say, obstacles to proving perjury in this case that I'm

thinking about even at this very early stage of an investigation. So, you know, one point to make is that Eging Carroll must have willfully or knowingly lied under oath in this deposition. If she simply made a mistake, if she wasn't aware of whatever funding arrangement was in place, that's not perjury. A second point is that the statement must have some material bearing on the likely outcome of the case. Here, when EG and Carroll's allegations went to trial ultimately, the judge decided that none of this, none of this should even come into evidence. It was too tangential to bear in any meaningful way on the case. So that materiality requirement is going to be tough. The venue is unusual here. Why Chicago, you might ask? Well, it's unclear. Apparently, there may be some

connection to one of Reed Hoffman's nonprofits. But venue is ordinarily in the location where an offense occurred. There's no allegation that the funding of the legal fees was itself improper. So I find that to be curious. And then the last point is probably the most important, which is there is a due process right not to be the victim of any kind of selective or vindictive prosecution. And it's very apparent on the face of this that the use of the Justice Department to go after E. Jean Carroll in this way is completely unprecedented. It is an obvious indication that Donald Trump continues to go after E. Jean Carroll in this vendetta. And in this case, he's using the taxpayer-funded Justice Department to do that. These cases are brought in our name, in the name of the people of the United States, and it's frankly galling.

I mean, so what broader concerns arise from this Department of Justice investigating someone who has successfully sued a sitting president? Well, there is no precedent for anything like this. To take one question and answer in a civil case and to use that. is the basis for this federal investigation, it raises questions about the allocation of resources. Why is this a federal case? Why is it in the interest of justice to go after E. Jean Carroll at this moment in time? And I think the inescapable conclusion is that the Justice Department is being used to pursue Donald Trump's continuing revenge tour against E. Jean Carroll. I will also note that unlike cases against James Comey, Letitia James, Adam Schiff, Jerome Powell, E. Jean Carroll is and always

has been a private citizen. And so there's something about this instance that I think may strike people as even more egregious than some examples in the past where selective or vindictive prosecution is very much in the mix. This seems different. And I should say it's yet another example of the ways in which Donald Trump has tried to silence Ejean Carol, has tried to deter her from coming forward, has tried to threaten her into keeping quiet. Even if this investigation goes nowhere, even if there are no successful perjury charges, as I suspect in the end, there will be no successful perjury charges. It's hugely daunting to know that you are being investigated by the Justice Department. And it's very interesting that he does this at the time of the theatrical release,

of the film about her called Ask E. Jean. And also that this came out after yesterday, if you can in this last 30 seconds explain what the Supreme Court did in E. Jean's case. So the Supreme Court is continuing to sort of kick the can down the road when it comes to deciding whether Donald Trump has any reason not to pay the judgment against him. It seems as if they may be waiting for his appeal to come up in the second case. You mentioned that there were two verdicts against him, one for around $5 million, one for around $83 million. And it may be that they're sort of waiting to consolidate his arguments. We won't know for a bit. But right now, the Supreme Court is sort of sitting on these cases. Deborah Cherkheimer, we want to thank you so much for being with us, Professor of Law

at Northwestern University, and the author of the book, Credible, Why We Doubt Accusers and Protect Abusers. That does it for today's show. I'll be in Great Barrington today for the 20th anniversary of the Berkshire International Film Festival, where steal this story, please, is the opening film, the film about Democracy Now and independent media. Tomorrow I'm headed to Tucson, Arizona for Friday night and Saturday, a fundraiser for KXCI Community Radio in Tucson. That's at 10.30 in the morning, the film's showing at one on Saturday and through the week. And then on Saturday night, I'll be in Phoenix for the showing of the film doing the Q&A afterwards. next week, Tampa celebrating KFAI community radio, and on Sunday will be in Miami. You can check our website the following week in Vermont and Burlington and Montpelier and St. Johnsbury and more.

I'm Amy Goodman with Nermin Shait. Go to DemocracyNow.org for all the details. Thanks so much for joining us.