Foes seek to oust Peruvian President Boluarte over unreported surgery
June 19 (UPI) -- Peru's congressional oversight committee has approved a report that recommends removal of President Dina Boluarte, alleging she abandoned her post in 2023 to undergo cosmetic surgeries without notifying Congress or formally delegating her duties.
The committee approved the report after weeks of investigation that included checking medical records, reviewing the presidential schedule and hearing testimony.
According to the report, there is a "high degree of certainty" that Boluarte underwent surgery for cosmetic and functional reasons between June 28 and July 4, 2023.
The panel concluded her absence jeopardized the continuity of presidential leadership, real-time decision-making, national emergency response and the overall direction of state policy.
"The country cannot accept a president stepping away from her duties to undergo personal surgeries without officially recording her absence, as required by Article 115 of the Peruvian Constitution," said Congressman Juan Burgos, chairman of the congressional oversight committee.
The investigation initially focused on Boluarte's undisclosed use of luxury watches and other assets. During the probe, documents emerged showing medical expenses tied to cosmetic procedures, prompting the committee to broaden its inquiry -- later known as the "surgery case."
In a national address in December 2024, Boluarte acknowledged undergoing surgery but denied it was cosmetic.
"Yes, I underwent a surgical procedure. It was not cosmetic -- it was necessary for my health, essential for respiratory function. ... It did not impair my ability to carry out my duties as president," she said.
However, Dr. Mario Cabani, the surgeon who performed the procedures, told the committee that Boluarte underwent multiple cosmetic and functional facial surgeries.
The report now heads to the full Congress, which must decide whether to admit it for debate and eventually hold a vote on the motion to remove Boluarte from office. The measure requires 87 votes out of 130 to pass.
So far, major opposition blocs support the effort, but lawmakers from Boluarte's ruling coalition and the Fujimorist bloc have withheld support and did not endorse the report in committee.
If admitted, it would be the sixth attempt to remove Boluarte since she took office in December 2022. Three motions were filed in 2023 and two in 2024. None secured the votes needed to oust her.
Copyright 2025 UPI News Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
37 minutes ago
- The Hill
Whole Hog Politics: Land of Lincoln? Not so much for Red America
On the menu: Reconciliation bill still sinking with voters; New York mayoral muddle; DNC's chairman agonistes; Crowded field could save Cassidy; Don't sweat it Thank you for signing up! Subscribe to more newsletters here Today is West Virginia Day, the holiday celebrating the 35th state's admission to the union on June 20, 1863. We West Virginians are more eager to celebrate the formation of our own state than are the sons and daughters of most of the other 49. Some of this is genuine pride. I don't know a place more beautiful or a people more kind. Some of it is stubbornness. When your state is treated as a punchline by the rest of the country, you tend to stand up a little straighter so everyone can see that chip on your shoulder. But another piece of it is in the dubious nature of the state's creation. As our great patron, Abraham Lincoln, allowed, 'It is said the admission of West Virginia is secession, and tolerated only because it is our secession. Well, if we can call it by that name, there is still difference enough between secession against the Constitution, and secession in favor of the Constitution.' There's the rub. West Virginia was in 'favor of' the Constitution, but the Constitution couldn't be said to be exactly in favor of West Virginia. Ripping the 55 western counties of Virginia away from the mother state was, as the scholars would say, 'legal but not constitutional.' The Constitution forbids any state to be divided by the federal government against the wishes of its residents, and the residents of the eastern 99 counties surely would not have favored separation. But because Virginia was in rebellion and part of the Confederacy, the breakaway counties could petition Congress to be recognized as the legitimate government of Virginia and then undertake the process of statehood for the new entity. Under that convenient legal fiction, West Virginia had the legal standing to apply as both the separator and separatee. But the West Virginians were certainly seceding in favor of the spirit of the Constitution and the aims of the Declaration of Independence: Indivisible union and the liberty of its people, even those held as slaves at that moment. The celebration of West Virginia Day is, therefore, a fundamentally defiant act. Which makes this year's West Virginia Day celebration a little more complicated. For the first time since the establishment of the Juneteenth federal holiday on June 19, 2021, that holiday and West Virginia Day fall on a Thursday and a Friday, giving state and local workers in West Virginia a four-day weekend. That was until Gov. Patrick Morrissey last week canceled the state's observance of Juneteenth. He cited 'continued fiscal challenges,' but also nixed 'any formal activities' in observance of the holiday, suggesting that there was more at work than just belt tightening. Juneteenth is the celebration of another of Lincoln's lawyerly innovations during the Civil War. The Emancipation Proclamation, also issued in 1863, freed the slaves in the places where Lincoln had the legal power but not the practical authority to do so. Lincoln couldn't proclaim slavery abolished in the states that hadn't left the Union. That would require congressional action. But he could, as commander in chief, make a wartime declaration about the slaves in enemy territory. That technicality was enough to let Lincoln define the conflict with Confederacy once and for all as a war to abolish slavery. From the proclamation in January to West Virginia statehood in June to his address at the Soldiers' National Cemetery at Gettysburg, Pa., in November, the year 1863 was the when Lincoln defined the purpose of the war: 'That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.' It took 30 months for the Emancipation Proclamation to reach the farthest point in the Confederacy, when Maj. Gen. Gordon Granger read out General Order No. 3 at Galveston Bay, Texas, on June 19, 1865. But at its heart, Juneteenth is a celebration of Lincoln's choice to make the war not just about preserving the Union, but of that 'new birth of freedom.' West Virginia this year joins other states in skipping Juneteenth as a state holiday: Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Hawaii, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Wisconsin and Wyoming have all resisted the trend. One imagines that the list will grow as other red states, like West Virginia, reject Juneteenth as some kind of DEI holiday. Which is a shame. The Republican Party has a great inheritance from its first and most formative president. But like West Virginia, the GOP nationally has come to revere the rebellious populism of Andrew Jackson or even the heroes of the Confederacy more often than the sober, sacrificial republicanism of Lincoln. This is maybe understandable in the former states of the Confederacy where Republicans took control not as the Party of Lincoln, but as the alternative to the Democrats who had abandoned legal segregation after 90 years of succoring segregation and Jim Crow. But in West Virginia, which wouldn't even exist without Lincoln's legal and political dexterity, it seems more than a little churlish. Holy croakano! We welcome your feedback, so please email us with your tips, corrections, reactions, amplifications, etc. at WholeHogPolitics@ If you'd like to be considered for publication, please include your real name and hometown. If you don't want your comments to be made public, please specify. NUTRITIONAL INFORMATION Trump Job Performance Average Approval: 42.6% Average Disapproval: 55.8% Net Score: –13.2 points. Change from one week ago: -1.6 points Change from one month ago: -3.8 points [Average includes: Ipsos/Reuters: 42% approve, 54% disapprove; Fox News: 46% approve, 54% disapprove; Echelon Insights: 45% approve, 53% disapprove; Pew: 41% approve, 58% disapprove; AP/NORC: 39% approve, 60% disapprove] Tax and budget bill loses luster Overall, based on what you know, do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of the tax and budget bill being discussed by Congress, also known as the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act'? All adults Favorable: 35% Unfavorable: 64% Republicans Favorable: 61% Unfavorable: 36% Democrats Favorable: 13% Unfavorable: 85% Independents Favorable: 27% Unfavorable: 71% [Kaiser Family Foundation survey of 1,321 U.S. adults, June 4-8, 2025] ON THE SIDE: WELL, FIDDLEDEEDEE The West Virginia Encyclopedia: 'Clark Kessinger was among the most prolific and influential fiddlers of the 20th century, and one of West Virginia's most important traditional musicians. He [made] made his initial mark as a recording artist between 1928 and 1930, when he recorded more than 60 instrumentals with his nephew, guitarist Luches Kessinger. … The most popular of these 78 rpm releases was 'Wednesday Night Waltz,' though lively dance tunes such as 'Hell Among the Yearlings' and 'Turkey in the Straw' also sold well. The Kessinger Brothers started performing on radio station WOBU (later WCHS) when the Charleston station began broadcasting in 1927. Clark Kessinger remained in the Kanawha Valley and performed locally for the next 30 years, leading up to his rediscovery during the folk music revival of the 1960s. During the next decade, he recorded extensively, played music across the country, and won numerous fiddling contests. In 1966, he was a guest artist on the Grand Ole Opry radio program, on NBC-TV's Today Show, and at the prestigious Newport Folk Festival in Rhode Island.' PRIME CUTS Antisemitism charges shake NYC mayor race ahead of Tuesday vote: The Hill: 'New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani is facing criticism over remarks he made in which he avoided denouncing the phrase 'globalize the intifada' and compared it to the Warsaw ghetto uprising during the Holocaust. … Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who is the front-runner in the race, slammed Mamdani for saying the phrase about the intifada is 'subject to interpretation.' He called on all mayoral candidates to denounce the comment. 'That is not only wrong – it is dangerous,' he said in a post on X. 'At a time when we are seeing antisemitism on the rise and in fact witnessing once again violence against Jews…' Gaming out a muddle in New York's mayoral race: New Yorker: 'No matter who wins on June 24th, New York City could be in line for a competitive general election for the first time in more than two decades. If [Andrew] Cuomo wins, [Zohran] Mamdani may still appear on the ballot in November, on the progressive Working Families Party line. Eric Adams, the beleaguered incumbent, has announced his intention to appear on the ballot as an Independent. If Cuomo ends up losing the primary, he has pledged to do the same. The Republican nominee, the longtime political gadfly Curtis Sliwa, who, in the late seventies, founded the red-beret-clad vigilante group the Guardian Angels, ran four years ago and garnered twenty-seven per cent of the vote in a head-to-head matchup with Adams. This year, some think Sliwa's twenty-seven per cent, or something like it, could be enough to win a four-way race.' Dems pressure term-limited governor to challenge Collins: The Hill: 'Eyes in Maine are on Gov. Janet Mills (D) as Democrats await a final decision from her on whether she will challenge Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), their top target in the 2026 midterms. Mills, subject to months of speculation about a possible Senate run as she's unable to seek a third term in office, is viewed as perhaps Democrats' best chance of finally ousting Collins after several failed attempts in the past. She cast some doubt in April about whether she would run, though she didn't definitively rule it out. Dems tap challengers for Virginia contests: WTOP: 'Ghazala Hashmi, the first Muslim to serve in Virginia's Senate, has won the Democratic nomination for lieutenant governor in Tuesday's primary election, firming up the Democrats' lineup in statewide races for November's general election. Hashmi won the crowded primary race by a slim margin, beating Democrat Levar Stoney by less than a percentage point…. She will run alongside U.S. Rep. Abigail Spanberger and former state Del. Jay Jones, who won the Democratic nomination for attorney general on Tuesday night… Some political experts look at Virginia's off-year elections as an early indicator for potential outcomes from the midterms in 2026… Both Spanberger and Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears ran unopposed in the gubernatorial race. Conservatives didn't hold a statewide primary this year. Earle-Sears was the only candidate to qualify for the governor's race. Republican Attorney General Jason Miyares easily secured his reelection bid. And despite some earlier controversy in his candidacy, talk-radio host John Reid became the de facto lieutenant governor nominee for Republicans.' SHORT ORDER Miseries multiply for embattled new DNC chairman — New York Times Another Senate primary challenger for Cassidy in Louisiana — The Hill Florida Democrat Josh Weil announces Senate bid —Miami Herald Former Ambassador to Ukraine announces Democratic congressional candidacy in Michigan—Politico TABLE TALK Moose on the loose 'He probably needs to go in butt first.' — A staffer in the office of New Hampshire Sen. Jeanne Shaheen discussing how to get Marty, a life-sized plush moose, onto an elevator in the Hart Senate Office Building. Marty, along with his black bear friend, Kodak, came in from New Hampshire for a celebration this week. MAILBAG 'I just wanted to ask your opinion about estrangement between friends and families, specifically due to political differences. I have personally seen this type of estrangement in my life and it fascinates me. It seems like it's getting more coverage than ever in the media, and being a bit of an expert in that field yourself, I was curious if you believed that that extra attention is warranted. Do you think it's becoming more common now? Do you think it's ever justified? Other than general polarization, what about politics is breaking people apart to the extent of going no contact? Do you think there are any decent solutions? Or do you think the entire topic is blown out of proportion? I know this is a lot of questions, but like I said, the topic fascinated me.' — Justin Bliley Washington Court House, Ohio Mr. Bliley, There's probably no way to quantify whether political estrangement is getting worse. It's an inherently subjective question since it relates to the feelings people have about each other. But I can't imagine that political estrangement is worse now than it was 50 years ago, when a generational clash over Vietnam, the draft, Watergate, civil rights, women's liberation, abortion and everything else had just taken place against the backdrop of economic contraction and crushing inflation. The baby boomers, then mostly in their 20s, had just completed one of the most successful youth movements in American history. It was the end of an old consensus about how people in our country lived, loved, worshiped, worked and served. Now those same baby boomers, mostly in their 70s, are fighting like hell against the next revolution, and for the moment seem to be winning. I hope that in another 50 years, people look back on the 2010s and 2020s as a similarly transitional period in which a new, useful and durable consensus got hammered out. That way that happens is that some fights are won and lost while others simply fade away, obviated by technology or just run out of steam. A consensus is born out of a great deal of exhaustion. When people get tired enough of fighting, they can become amenable to compromise. Another similarity to 50 years ago is that America was getting ready to celebrate a big birthday, the bicentennial of 1976 then and the semiquincentennial of 2026. What I saw in the Army parade last week that kicked off the festivities gave me some reason to hope that the hokey, homey patriotism of which we are very much in need these days might make a comeback. And none too soon. All best, c You should email us! Write to WholeHogPolitics@ with your tips, kudos, criticisms, insights, rediscovered words, wonderful names, recipes, and, always, good jokes. Please include your real name—at least first and last—and hometown. Make sure to let us know in the email if you want to keep your submission private. My colleague, the resolute Meera Sehgal, and I will look for your emails and then share the most interesting ones and my responses here. Clickety clack! FOR DESSERT Follow the simple, printed instructions CTV News: 'A motorcyclist last seen wearing a 'come get me' sweater has been arrested by Guelph [Ontario] Police. On May 29, an officer spotted a bike with no licence plate driving erratically on Stone Road West and Edinburgh Road South. Police pulled up beside the motorcycle at a red light and told the rider to pull over. Instead, he took off. Police said he was going approximately [75 mph] on Stone Road and, in the interest of public safety, they stopped their pursuit. They then turned to social media to find the motorcyclist. Police noted he was wearing a sweater with 'come get me' written across the back. That post, they said, was viewed 575,000 times and several tips were reported, which led to the identification of the rider. On Friday, a 20-year-old Guelph man was arrested and charged with dangerous driving, flight from police, stunt driving and offences under the Highway Traffic Act.' Chris Stirewalt is political editor for The Hill and NewsNation, the host of The Hill Sunday on NewsNation and The CW, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of books on politics and the media. Meera Sehgal contributed to this report.
Fox News
38 minutes ago
- Fox News
'No basis in reality': Expert turns tables on key Democrat claim against Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'
Democrats in Washington, D.C., are misrepresenting major criticisms of President Trump's "big beautiful bill" with incorrect facts, according to an expert who spoke to Fox News Digital this week as Trump's budget reconciliation package is debated in Congress. "The bill doesn't cut benefits for anyone who has income below the poverty line, anyone who is working at least 20 hours a week and not caring for a child, and people who are Americans," Jim Agresti, president and cofounder of Just Facts, told Fox News Digital in response to criticisms from Democrats and a handful of Republicans, including Sen. Josh Hawley, that Trump's bill will cut Medicaid and disproportionately hurt the poor. "In other words, it cuts out illegal immigrants who are not Americans and fraudsters. So that narrative has no basis in reality. See, what's been going on since the Medicaid program was started? Is that it's been expanded and expanded and extended. You know, it got its start in 1966. And since that time, the poverty rate has stayed roughly level around 11% to 15%. While the portion of people in the United States on Medicaid has skyrocketed from 3% to 29%. Right now, 2.5 times more people are on Medicaid than are in poverty." Medicaid cuts and reform have been a major sticking point with Democrats, who have merged data from two new reports from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to back up claims that nearly 14 million would lose coverage. The White House and Republicans have objected, as not all the policy proposals evaluated were actually included in Republicans' legislation, and far fewer people would actually face insurance loss. Instead, Republicans argue that their proposed reforms to implement work requirements, strengthen eligibility checks and crack down on Medicaid for illegal immigrants preserve the program for those who really need it. "I agree," Dem. Rep. Jasmine Crockett said in response to a claim on CNN that Republicans "want poor people to die" with Medicaid cuts. Agresti told Fox News Digital that the Medicaid cuts are aimed at bringing people out of poverty and waste. "It's putting some criteria down to say, 'Hey, if you want this, and you're not in poverty, you need to work,'" Agresti said. "You need to do something to better your situation, which is what these programs are supposed to be, lifting people out of poverty, not sticking them there for eternity. So the whole idea is to get people working, give them an incentive. Hey, if you want to do better in life, and you want this Medicaid coverage, then you have to earn it." Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders has claimed the bill is a "death sentence for the working class," because it raises health insurance "copayments for poor people." Agresti called that claim "outlandish." "First of all, the Big Beautiful Bill does not raise copayments on anyone who's below the poverty line," he explained. "Now, for people who are above the poverty line, it requires states to at least charge some sort of copayment, and it also reduces, actually, the max copayment from $100 per visit to $35 per visit." Agresti went on to explain that under the current system, "people have basically free rein to just go to a doctor or an emergency room or any other place without any co-payment, and they're not in poverty." "What ends up happening is they waste a ton of money," Agresti said. "This has been proven through randomized control trials, which are the gold standard for social science analysis, where you have people in a lottery system, some people get the benefit, and some people don't, and what you end up seeing is that people who don't have to have skin in the game, abuse emergency rooms, they go there for a stuffy nose, rack up all this money, and it does nothing to improve their health. It's just wasteful." In a statement to Fox News Digital, Sanders Communications Director Anna Bahr said, "Mr. Agresti's facts here are simply incorrect." Sanders' office added that "nearly half of all enrollees on the ACA exchanges are Republicans" and pointed to the House-passed reconciliation bill that Sanders' office argues "says that if a worker can't navigate the maze of paperwork that the bill creates for Medicaid enrollees, they are barred from receiving ACA tax credits as well." "But workers must earn at least $15,650 per year to qualify for tax credits on the ACA marketplaces – approximately equal to the annual income for a full-time worker earning the federal minimum wage." Sanders' office also pointed to "CBO estimates that 16 million people will lose insurance as a result of the House-passed bill and the Republicans ending the ACA's enhanced premium tax credits." Sanders' office also reiterated that the House-passed bill makes a "fundamental change" to copay for Medicaid beneficiaries, shifting from optional to mandatory. "While claiming that I'm 'incorrect,' Sanders' staff fails to provide a single fact that shows the BBB cuts health care for poor working Americans," Agresti responded. "It's especially laughable that they cite expanded Obamacare subsidies in this context, because people in poverty aren't even eligible for them," Agresti continued. "After this 'temporary' Covid-era handout expires, people with incomes up to 400% of the federal poverty level — or $150,600 for a family of five — will still be eligible for this welfare program, although they will receive less." Agresti argued that the claim a "max $35 copay (for people who are not poor) 'hurts working families'" is not supported by research "which makes generalizations and merely cites 'associations.'" "As commonly taught in high school math, association doesn't prove causation," Agresti said. Sanders' office told Fox News Digital, "Mr. Agresti seems to believe that a working family of four earning only $32,150 per year doesn't deserve help affording their health care. Health care in the United States is more expensive than anywhere in the world. Terminating health care coverage for 16 million Americans and increasing health care costs for millions will make it harder for working people to afford the health care they need, even if Mr. Agresti doesn't agree." Agresti also took issue with the narrative that cuts cannot be made to Medicaid without cutting benefits to people who are entitled to them. "The Government Accountability Office has put out figures that are astonishing, hundreds of billions of dollars a year are going to waste," Agresti said. "So, yeah, some criteria to make sure that doesn't happen is a wise idea. Unfortunately, there is a ton of white-collar crime in this country, and this kind of crime is a white-collar crime. It's not committed with a gun, or by robbing or punching someone, it's committed by fraud, and there's an enormous amount of it. "And the big, beautiful bill, again, seeks to rein that in by putting a criteria to make sure we're checking people's income, we're checking their assets. A lot of these federal programs, government health care programs, they've stopped checking assets. So you could be a lottery winner sitting on $3 million in cash and have very little income. And still get children's health insurance program benefits for your kids." Hawley said on Monday that he did not have a problem with some of the marquee changes to Medicaid that his House Republican counterparts wanted, including stricter work requirements, booting illegal immigrants from benefit rolls and rooting out waste, fraud and abuse in the program that serves tens of millions of Americans. However, he noted that about 1.3 million Missourians rely on Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and contended that most were working. "These are not people who are sitting around, these are people who are working," he said. "They're on Medicaid because they cannot afford private health insurance, and they don't get it on the job." "And I just think it's wrong to go to those people and say, 'Well, you know, we know you're doing the best, we know that you're working hard, but we're going to take away your health care access,'" he continued.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Our unexploded bombs in Southeast Asia from 50 years ago still kill people today
Imagine airplanes dropping bombs every 8 minutes, 24 hours a day, for 9 long years. This was the reality for Laos, a country scarred by a secret war most Americans never knew about. My parents, age 14 at the time, were forced to endure the destruction and displacement of their community, its people and its religious sites. From 1964 to 1973, the U.S. secretly dropped at least 2.5 million tons of ordnance on Laos during 580,000 bombing missions, making it the most bombed country per capita in history. Although I wasn't born during this war, I inherited its consequences. As a child, I witnessed my father, a surgeon, operate on countless victims of unexploded ordnance accidents. One was my classmate, a five-year-old little girl. The imminent dangers forced my family to flee in 1990 when I was only six years old. In 1971, the so-called 'Secret War' in Laos was revealed to Congress, thanks to the courage of Fred Branfman and Bouangeun Luangpraseuth, who collected harrowing survivor testimonials. Yet it took two more decades before the U.S. began allocating funds to clean up its mess. In 1993, funding remained under $3 million, barely a drop compared to the $50 billion it had cost to bomb a neutral country against which we never declared war. Today, millions of unexploded bombs remain, posing a deadly threat to children and their families. An estimated one-fourth of Laos is contaminated and less than 10 percent has been cleared. This burden hinders all aspects of life for the people of Laos, not only safety, but the long-term economic development. As we commemorate World Refugee Day on June 20, we also recognize two other important dates: 50 years since the end of the Vietnam War and 50 years since the largest refugee resettlement wave in U.S. history — a direct result of America's military actions in Southeast Asia. The Vietnam War affected not just the U.S. and Vietnam, but also Laos and Cambodia. Instead of celebrating our collective gains of peace with former adversaries, President Trump took office announcing a 90-day foreign aid freeze on January 20. All U.S.-funded programs were issued a stop-work order, including life-saving de-mining initiatives in Laos. This was no insignificant matter. During the freeze, there were nine casualties in Laos from unexploded ordnance, including the death of a 15-year-old girl. Thanks to persistent advocacy efforts from former U.S. ambassadors, veterans, youth and strong bipartisan Congressional support, funding for unexploded ordnance programs has resumed. but the damage during the halt is irreversible, and the trust between our country and the region is fragile. To its credit, the U.S. has worked to resolve the enduring legacies of war — efforts that have saved lives, supported vulnerable communities, and strengthened diplomacy. Foreign aid is a strategic investment in our nation's long-term interests and global stability. Nowhere is this more evident than in Southeast Asia, where U.S. assistance has shown clear and lasting benefits: improved safety, stronger economies, and deeper cooperation between nations. The U.S. began its post-war engagement by focusing on the recovery of Americans missing in action in 1985. The first American investigative team was approved by the Laotian government well before Laos and the U.S. normalized relations. The American team traveled to my childhood home, Pakse, Laos, to recover the remains of 13 service members lost in a 1972 plane crash. Since then, the U.S. has recovered more than 280 of the MIAs in Laos. This collaboration became the cornerstone for broader initiatives, such as the removal of unexploded ordnance and education about the dangers of explosive remnants of war. These preventative efforts, combined with de-mining, have led to a dramatic drop in casualties in Laos, from more than 300 annually to 60 or fewer in the last decade. Recognizing the value of these efforts, the U.S. now invests in similar programs globally and is the world's largest supporter of humanitarian de-mining, with more than $5 billion invested to date. These programs prove what long-term commitment and international cooperation can achieve — helping war-torn communities rebuild, heal, and thrive. As a former refugee, I view World Refugee Day as not just a day of reflection, but a reckoning — a test of our values, of whether we are willing to do right by those still living with the consequences of our past actions. If America is to lead with morality, it must continue investing in the recovery of countries like Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam. That means sustained funding and genuine partnership — not the politics of the moment, but a humane foreign policy shaped by the lessons of our past. In the end, this is not only about Southeast Asia. It is about who we are and who we choose to be. America's legacy should not be measured by the bombs we dropped, but by the lives we choose to heal. Sera Koulabdara is CEO of Legacies of War and co-chair of the War Legacies Working Group.
