Venezuelan opposition members leave shelter after more than a year
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said they were in the US after what he described as a rescue operation.
The government of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro did not immediately comment on the situation.
'The US welcomes the successful rescue of all hostages held by the Maduro regime at the Argentinian Embassy in Caracas,' Mr Rubio said on X. 'Following a precise operation, all hostages are now safely on U.S. soil.'
We need your consent to load this Social Media content. We use a number of different Social Media outlets to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity.
The government of Argentine President Javier Milei allowed the five people into the ambassador's residence in March 2024, when authorities loyal to Venezuela's ruling party issued warrants for their arrest, accusing them of promoting acts of violence to destabilise the country.
The group included the campaign manager and communications director of opposition leader Maria Corina Machado.
Ms Machado, also on X, thanked people involved in what she called an 'impeccable and epic operation for the Freedom of five heroes of Venezuela'.
Since late November, the group had denounced the constant presence of intelligence service agents and police outside the residence. It had also accused the government of cutting electricity and water services to the compound.
The government had denied the allegations.
Fernando Martinez, a cabinet minister in the 1990s, sheltered with the group for nine months. He abandoned the compound in mid-December and, according to Venezuelan authorities, appeared before prosecutors. He died in February.
Mr Maduro's government routinely targeted its real or perceived opponents ahead of last year's presidential election and its crackdown on dissent only increased after the country's National Electoral Council, which is stacked with Maduro loyalists, declared him the winner despite credible evidence to the contrary.
The election results announced by the Electoral Council sparked protests across the country to which the government responded with force and ended with more than 20 people dead.
They also prompted an end to diplomatic relations between Venezuela and various foreign countries, including Argentina.
In August, Brazil accepted Argentina's request to guard the diplomatic compound in Caracas after Mr Maduro's government expelled its diplomats when Mr Milei said that he would not recognise 'another fraud'.
A month later, Venezuela revoked Brazil's authorisation to guard the facility, alleging it had evidence of the use of the premises 'for the planning of terrorist activities and assassination attempts'.
Brazil and Argentina have rejected those accusations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
5 hours ago
- NBC News
Spanish-language misinformation on Los Angeles protests pushes a familiar theme
A surge of false or misleading posts, photographs and videos about the Los Angeles protests have been circulating on social media, with many of those shared among Latinos — mostly in Spanish — tying the protesters to socialist or communist governments. One post on X with over 600,000 views claims that in the U.S., immigration protest groups have links to 'the Venezuelan mafia,' the Communist Party of Cuba, and the Morena Party, the left-wing ruling party of Mexico. But the post doesn't specify any groups and doesn't give evidence of this. The narrative echoes similar falsehoods that circulated during the 2020 George Floyd protests and the 2024 pro-Palestinian student protests on university campuses. Parts of Los Angeles and other cities across the country have seen protests against immigration raids as President Donald Trump's administration enforces a hard-line immigration policy. Dramatic scenes where cars, including Waymo taxis, were set on fire and protesters confronted law enforcement by throwing objects at them have filled social media feeds. While some far-left groups have encouraged and even glorified violence in the protests, the onslaught of posts, mostly in Spanish, appears to be an attempt to link protests against immigrant raids to leftist Latin American governments, and the posts show support for President Donald Trump and his policies. 'Though there is always inaccurate information swirling around, there has certainly been a spike since the Los Angeles protests took off,' said Evelyn Pérez-Verdía, president of We Are Más, which focuses on social impact consulting. 'In the past we would find false or inaccurate information more hidden in platforms like Telegram, WhatsApp. Now it's more in the open and more easily found on social media and online publications.' The falsehoods revive prior conspiracies that the protests are a planned provocation from leftist governments and not a spontaneous response to the immigration raids. On his platform, Truth Social, Trump has baselessly claimed protesters are 'Paid Insurrectionists!' Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and California Gov. Gavin Newsom have been targets of some of the misinformation that seeks to link them to communism. A fake picture of Bass with Cuba's late leader Fidel Castro, with his arm around her has circulated on social media. The original picture showed Castro with the late activist and former South African President Nelson Mandela. Bass does have some connections to Cuba; she traveled to the country with the Venceremos Brigade in the 1970s to do volunteer construction work and later went there as a member of Congress. She received criticism in 2020 for calling Castro's death ' a great loss, ' but the fake picture is a step further to link her directly with Fidel Castro. 'What we're seeing in Spanish is different from what we're seeing in English,' said Pérez-Verdía. In Spanish, she added, the false information is mainly focused on elected officials, like Newsom and Bass. 'They talk about the extreme left, communism — actors, whether domestic or foreign, are changing the messaging based on the community they are targeting,' said Pérez-Verdía. In some cases, false information has made its way to the federal government. Some conservative and pro-Russian social media accounts have circulated a video of Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum from before the protests, claiming she encouraged them, according to Newsguard, a fact-checking website. The move was 'portrayed as foreign interference in domestic U.S. politics,' Newsguard reported. During an oval office briefing Tuesday, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem accused Sheinbaum of encouraging 'violent protests.' Sheinbaum responded on X, saying it's 'absolutely false' and included a video of herself from the day before saying she does not agree with violent actions as a form of protest. She also accused the opposition party of falsely saying she incited the protests. In some cases, videos and photos that include a hammer and sickle, are taken out of context to make it seem the protests are a communist movement. One post with tens of thousands of views claims that the protests are 'URBAN COMMUNIST TERRORISM.' One Spanish-language post from an account with over 1 million followers glorifies violence against 'progressive anti-ICE protestors.' Situations like these create fertile ground for disinformation to spread. Fake accounts in Spanish are more prevalent than they are in English, according to Darren Linvill, a professor at Clemson University and co-director of its Media Forensic Hub. Social media platforms are more likely to identify and shut down accounts in English than in other languages. Linvill said that another reason accounts in Spanish are more common than in English is that the use of marketing companies utilizing fake accounts — on behalf of political organizations or politicians — has spiked in the last few years. The spread of false information 'is absolutely having an effect on driving partisanship, conspiratorial thinking, distrust for expertise and the lack of a sort of shared reality,' said Linvill. 'A shared reality is important for us to build compromise and govern nations together. And I think it is absolutely having an effect on that.' 'The degree to which motivated actors [bad actors], are responsible, versus the fundamental nature of social media to create a giant game of telephone that virtually generates the spread of false information, it's hard to say,' Linvill said.
The Guardian
9 hours ago
- The Guardian
From Gaza to Ukraine to Iran, Trump's ‘peacemaker' promise collapses
In his inaugural address this January, Donald Trump declared that his proudest legacy would be that of 'a peacemaker and unifier', pledging that US power would 'stop all wars and bring a new spirit of unity to a world that has been angry, violent, and totally unpredictable'. Five months later, his second presidency is witnessing the spectacular unraveling of that lofty aspiration. A president who vowed to end global conflicts – including one which he said he would resolve within his first 24 hours – has instead presided over their escalation – most recently the spiraling conflict between Israel and Iran. The timeline of the latest conflict resuggests a stark disconnect between Trump's aspirations and reality: the wave of Israeli airstrikes came just hours afterTrump urged Israel not to attack Iran. Marco Rubio, Trump's secretary of state, took pains to describe the Israeli attack as 'unilateral', stressing that the US was 'not involved in strikes against Iran' – only for Trump to then insist he had been well informed of Israel's plans – and warn that further attacks would be 'even more brutal'. Trump's Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, who has emerged as Trump's primary diplomatic negotiator in the Middle East and Ukraine, still reportedly plans to go to Oman this weekend for talks on Tehran's nuclear program, but it appeared unlikely the Iranians would attend. Trump's muddled peace agenda was already disarray long before Thursday's attacks. The Gaza ceasefire his administration helped broker collapsed within weeks, with Israel resuming massive bombardments and imposing a three-month total blockade on humanitarian aid to the territory, where the death toll has now surpassed at least 55,000. In Ukraine – a conflict Trump once bragged he would end on his first day back in office – Russian forces have pressed ahead with a summer offensive, entering the Dnipropetrovsk region for the first time in three years and accumulating more forces – evidence that Putin has no interest in Trump's peace overtures and intends to expand the war further. Meanwhile, Trump's abrupt announcement of a ceasefire between India and Pakistan was met with fury in New Delhi, where officials denied his claims of brokering the deal. And while Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth acknowledged to Congress that the Pentagon has developed contingency plans to seize Greenland and Panama militarily, it's unclear how territorial conquest fits into Trump's definition of peacemaking. His first term ended no wars, nearly sparked conflict with Iran, and saw his signature 'peace' achievement – the Abraham accords – normalize relations between Israel and countries that weren't fighting it anyway. Part of Trump's appeal to voters was precisely a promise to avoid foreign entanglements. In the stands at the inauguration viewing party, supporters told the Guardian how they valued his restraint in military deployment and favored his America-first approach that prioritized domestic concerns over international aid and intervention. And there is a an argument that for Trump peace is not an absence of conflict but rather Washington's distance from it. There is one potentially optimistic interpretation for the latest strikes in Iran. Alex Vatanka, the Iran director from the Middle East Institute in Washington, suggested that Israel's attack could be a calculated gamble to shock Iran into serious negotiations. The theory holds that Israel convinced Trump to allow limited strikes that would pressure Tehran without triggering regime change, essentially using military action to restart stalled diplomacy. On Friday Trump suggested that the strike on Iran might have even improved the chances of a nuclear agreement. 'This is not likely to bring Iran back to the negotiating table,' said Andrew Borene, executive director of global security at Flashpoint and a former staff officer at the US's office of the director of national intelligence. 'It marks the opening of yet another rapidly expanding flashpoint within the global context of a new hybrid cold war, one that will be fought both on the ground and in the darkest corners of the web.' Whether this strategy succeeds depends entirely on Iran's response. The regime could either return to negotiations chastened, or abandon diplomacy altogether and pursue nuclear weapons more aggressively. Early indicators suggest Tehran may not be in a conciliatory mood after having its facilities bombed and leaders killed. But even if the more optimistic readings prove correct, it does not change the broader reality: every major conflict Trump inherited or promised to resolve has intensified on his watch. Trump promised to be a peacemaker. Instead, he's managing multiple wars while his diplomatic initiatives collapse in real time. From Gaza to Ukraine to Iran, the world appears more volatile and dangerous than when he took his oath five months ago.
The Guardian
10 hours ago
- The Guardian
Netanyahu outplayed Trump on Iran. Now the US risks being mired in another war
Before dawn on Friday, Israel unleashed a wave of air strikes against more than 100 targets in Iran, including nuclear facilities, ballistic missile factories and air defense systems. The surprise Israeli attack also killed some of Iran's most senior military commanders and nuclear scientists. The Iranian regime called it a 'declaration of war' – and western powers raced to prevent a wider regional conflict that could draw in the US along with other countries in the Middle East. While the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, claims that he's trying to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, the attack is as much intended to blow up ongoing negotiations between Tehran and Donald Trump's administration. While Trump's overall foreign policy has been a disaster, for months he had resisted Netanyahu's pleas to give Israel a green light to attack Iran, with US assistance. Trump insisted he wanted a chance to negotiate a deal with Iran's leaders that would compel Tehran to give up its nuclear program in exchange for relief from US and other international sanctions. After Friday's attacks, Trump suggested the Iranian regime could still be convinced to negotiate, saying Tehran 'must make a deal, before there is nothing left'. He added that Israel could carry out further attacks that would be 'even more brutal'. Before Trump's aggressive comments, his secretary of state, Marco Rubio, had gone out of his way to explain that Israel had taken 'unilateral action' and warned Tehran against targeting US military bases or embassies in the Middle East. 'We are not involved in strikes against Iran and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region,' Rubio said. It's hard to imagine that Netanyahu would have launched such a brazen attack against Iran without at least some tacit support from Trump. Like all modern US presidents, Trump has lavished Israel with billions of dollars in weapons and has undermined international law and institutions like the UN security council to shield Israel from criticism. But Trump also prizes his reputation as a dealmaker, and he had invested significant political capital in negotiating an agreement with Iran. In a call this week, the president reportedly told the prime minister he preferred diplomacy. By attacking Iran and torpedoing the negotiations, Netanyahu outplayed Trump – and the Israeli leader may well ensnare the US in a new Middle East conflict that Trump insists he does not want. Since Netanyahu unleashed multiple wars in the region after the Hamas attack on southern Israel in October 2023, he's confident that the US will always bail him out. Even after Israel launched a war on Gaza, a two-month ground invasion of Lebanon and frequent attacks on Syria, it continues to receive virtually unlimited US weapons and political support from Washington. Is it any surprise that Netanyahu has been emboldened to take greater risks that undermine several of Israel's neighbors and now threaten to engulf the wider Middle East in a regional war? Starting with steadfast support from Joe Biden's administration and continuing with Trump, Netanyahu knows that the US will always protect Israel from the costs of its escalation and adventurism. And US taxpayers are footing the bill: from October 2023 through September 2024, the US provided Israel with nearly $18bn in weapons, while the Pentagon spent another $4.9bn on its own military activities in the Middle East. That's $22.7bn in US funding that enabled Netanyahu to prolong Israel's brutal war on Gaza, an offensive in which Israel has committed war crimes and sparked accusations of genocide. For its part, the Trump administration announced in February that it would send more than $8bn in new weapons to Israel – continuing Biden's failed policy of unrestrained arms shipments and unwavering political support for Netanyahu. Trump, the supposedly grand dealmaker, has so far failed to use the most effective leverage he has over the Israeli premier: the provision of US weapons and political cover. Despite Trump's persistent claim that he wants to be a peacemaker who ends America's legacy of forever wars, he now risks becoming yet another US president who is mired in a disastrous conflict in the Middle East – thanks to his refusal to restrain Netanyahu, a US ally who has not yet paid any price for his warmongering. In his inaugural address in January, Trump reinforced his desire to establish himself as a mediator who will end global conflicts, including the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, and avoid new wars entirely. 'My proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and unifier,' he said. Trump had also stewed for years over the fact that his predecessor, Barack Obama, won the Nobel peace prize during his first year in office in 2009, while Trump was passed over for the honor, even though he had brokered a series of diplomatic deals in 2020, known as the Abraham Accords, between Israel and several Arab states. If Trump has any hope of winning a Nobel prize – or even salvaging a minor legacy as a peacemaker – he will need to fix the Iran agreement he tore up seven years ago. In 2018, during his first term, Trump unilaterally withdrew the US from a deal that was signed by Obama, and had taken years for Iran to negotiate with six world powers, under which Tehran limited its nuclear enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief. The 2015 agreement, which Trump had called a 'disaster', allowed Iran to continue producing nuclear fuel at low levels, enough to operate nuclear power plants but not to produce weapons. After Trump abandoned the original deal, Iran moved closer to developing a nuclear weapon than ever before. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), as of early this year, Tehran had enriched enough uranium to produce six nuclear weapons, although Iran would still need up to a year of additional work to develop an actual nuclear warhead and deploy it on a missile. In the early weeks of his second term, Trump seemed eager to negotiate a new deal with Iran: he sent a letter to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, saying the US wanted to restart negotiations that had been abandoned by the Biden administration. As he often does in negotiations with foes and enemies alike, Trump then issued a threat, warning Iran's leaders that if diplomacy failed, they would be subjected to 'bombing the likes of which they have never seen before'. In March, Trump dispatched his special envoy, Steve Witkoff, to lead a team of US negotiators to meet with top Iranian officials in mostly indirect talks mediated by Oman. Since then, Iran and the US have held five rounds of talks. The next round of negotiations was supposed to be held on Sunday, with Witkoff heading to Oman. During its attacks on Friday, Israel killed Ali Shamkhani, one of the top Iranian officials responsible for nuclear negotiations with the US. A top aide to Iran's supreme leader, Shamkhani was not officially part of the Iranian delegation in the current round of US talks, but he played a pivotal role in overseeing nuclear policy. Iran has pulled out of the latest round of talks scheduled for this weekend. Netanyahu might have destroyed Trump's chance at making a deal with Iran – and the prime minister has increased the likelihood of yet another disastrous war. Mohamad Bazzi is director of the Hagop Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern Studies, and a journalism professor at New York University
