作者： root

因潜在安全威胁 美国一航班返航

2026年6月1日 07:11 / 联合早报

因潜在安全威胁 美国一航班返航

5月30日，一架原定飞往西班牙帕尔马市的美联航客机在飞行约三小时后，于当天晚上9时37分返回纽瓦克自由国际机场。 （路透社档案照片）

美国联合航空公司一架从新泽西州飞往西班牙的航班在飞行途中调头返航，原因是一名乘客的蓝牙耳机以带有威胁性的四个特殊字母命名，触发安全警报。

美国媒体星期天（5月31日）报道，根据航班跟踪数据，这架波音767型客机载有190名乘客和12名机组人员，于30日傍晚6时左右起飞前往西班牙马略卡岛帕尔马市，在飞行约3小时后返回纽瓦克自由国际机场。

报道称，有乘客用“四个特殊字母组成的单词”命名自己的蓝牙设备。一名乘客在社交媒体上发文说，机组人员多次要求乘客关闭所有蓝牙设备，但仍有两台设备保持开启状态。机组人员同位于芝加哥的美联航总部沟通后决定返航。

在纽瓦克机场，乘客们仅携带护照和手机撤离飞机。接受美国运输安全管理局和海关与边境保护局再次安检后，于31日凌晨搭乘由新机组人员执飞的替代航班离开，当天下午抵达帕尔马。

新华社报道，美联航没有透露事件具体细节。这家航空运营商5月状况不断。5月29日，美联航一架国内航班因一名乘客行为不端引发安全隐患，被迫改降其他机场。5月初，一名乘客因手机热点名称不当，飞行员发出警告，要求这名乘客在30秒内删除该名称。一架客机在纽瓦克机场降落时，撞上附近高速公路上一根灯柱和一辆行驶中的拖车。客机安全降落，拖车司机受轻伤。

美伊持续互通信息 伊方：将按自身立场修订协议草案

2026年6月1日 07:13 / 联合早报

伊朗外长阿拉格齐说，伊美的对话和信息交换仍在进行中，在谈判取得明确结果前，不应对相关进程作出判断。 （法新社档案照片）

美国和伊朗周末持续互通信息，寻求修改一项旨在延长停火并开放霍尔木兹海峡的协议草案，但谈判是否取得实质性进展尚不明朗。伊方强调，伊朗将按自身立场修订伊美协议草案。

彭博社星期天（5月31日）报道，自29日白宫战情室会议后，美国总统特朗普一直未就伊朗问题发表讲话。他早些时候在社交媒体上重申了自己的要求，包括伊朗中止核计划，并让霍尔木兹海峡完全恢复自由国际航道地位。

另据伊朗塔斯尼姆通讯社31日报道，围绕伊朗与美国协议草案的文本交换工作仍在继续，但美伊最终都可能拒绝这些修改，导致协议谈判破裂。

一名伊朗知情人士在回应有关“特朗普总统已对现有文本提出新修订意见”的报道时说，双方仍在就潜在谅解文件文本交换意见，伊方也将按照自身立场对文本提出修订建议。对伊朗而言，判断标准是其最终内容是否符合伊方要求，美方提出修订意见并不意味着伊朗将予以接受。

这名知情者还说，伊朗对于无法达成谅解的情况也已做好充分准备。

延伸阅读

特朗普据报修改部分条款 向伊朗提出更强硬协议提案
白宫：特朗普坚持底线 尚未就伊朗协议作最终决定

伊朗外交部长阿拉格齐在31日晚播放的采访中表示，伊美的对话和信息交换仍在进行中，在谈判取得明确结果前，不应对相关进程作出判断。

他说，当前流传的各种说法大多属于猜测性质，“在事情最终确定之前，不应对此赋予过多重要性”。

在美伊外交接触持续进行之际，以色列扩大了在黎巴嫩的地面攻势，打破了以黎之间脆弱的停火协议。

以色列防长卡茨星期天说，以军已占领黎南部战略要地博福特城堡，并正在这片地区扩大针对真主党的地面行动。

伊朗总统府再否认佩泽希齐扬辞职传闻 指境外媒体散布谣言

2026年6月1日 07:20 / 联合早报

2月11日，伊朗总统佩泽希齐扬（中）出席德黑兰举行的伊斯兰革命47周年纪念活动。 （路透社档案照片）

伊朗总统府官员星期天（5月31日）再次否认有关总统佩泽希齐扬已向最高领袖穆杰塔巴提出辞职的传闻，称相关说法是部分境外媒体散布谣言。

新华社报道，伊朗总统府分管新闻与通信事务的官员塔巴塔巴伊在社交媒体平台发文否认佩泽希齐扬辞职。他说，佩泽希齐扬将继续履行职责，不会停止为伊朗人民服务。

伊朗媒体当天报道，佩泽希齐扬在一场讲话中强调，政府将以坚定态度继续推进各项工作，“直至生命最后一刻”。

同日，佩泽希齐扬也在社交媒体平台发文说，国家当前面临诸多挑战，克服困难离不开社会各界共同参与和支持。政府有责任向民众如实说明国家面临的问题和现实情况，以推动全社会共同参与解决问题。

佩泽希齐扬还说，面对困难和挑战，伊朗需要进一步加强社会团结与协作。

5月初，伊朗总统府官员否认佩泽希齐扬与伊朗伊斯兰革命卫队高层存在分歧，称有关佩泽希齐扬可能辞职的传闻为部分媒体为炒作热点而制造的谣言。

Rescue diver details “very heartwarming” moments after 4 miners emerged from Laos cave

May 31, 2026 3:05 PM EDT / CBS News

By Kerry Breen News Editor
Kerry Breen is a news editor at CBSNews.com. A graduate of New York University’s Arthur L. Carter School of Journalism, she previously worked at NBC News’ TODAY Digital. She covers current events, breaking news and issues including substance use.

Read Full Bio

Four of the gold miners trapped in a flooded cave in Laos “self-rescued” on Saturday, lead rescue diver Mikko Paasi told CBS News. Their escape from the cave came one day after a fifth miner was pulled from the cave in a risky maneuver.

“We were just getting ready to come in and they’re already coming out,” Paasi told CBS News chief correspondent Matt Gutman. “The guys came out by themselves.”

Paasi said that the four miners had noticed the water level dropping and decided to act. They “saw the opportunity” to crawl out and “took it,” he said. The miners were muddy and shaken, but alive.

Two miners remain missing, and efforts to locate them continue amid inclement weather. All seven miners were in the cave together when they became trapped by floodwaters almost two weeks ago. The rescuers found the five miners in the furthest of the cave’s five known chambers on Wednesday. Rescue divers were able to bring food and supplies to them once they were located, and map the cave to prepare a rescue plan.

After the first miner in the chamber was rescued on Friday, Paasi and other rescuers kept pumps working all night to remove water from the cave system. When the rescue divers suited up to re-enter the cave Saturday morning to assess conditions for attempting to rescue the remaining miners, they came face-to-face with the four men.

“It took me a while to understand that this is really happening, and counting. Like, are they all three, all four here?” Paasi said.

The miners were greeted with cheers, hugs and a party-like atmosphere, Paasi said. He described the moment as “very heartwarming.”

“It’s the reason that we keep on doing this for sure,” Paasi said.

Now, the rescuers will work to find the two miners who remain missing and are feared dead. They may be in a sixth chamber accessible only through a narrow gap in the part of the cave where the other five miners were, CBS News previously reported. Paasi said the chamber is too small for him to enter, but that other divers will attempt to explore it.

Paasi said the rescue team is in agreement about continuing to search for the remaining men. They will continue to pump out water to attempt to drain the entire cave system, he said, with the hope that they will be able to enter that sixth chamber.

“We agreed that ‘OK, now we’re going to go and find the missing two,’” Paasi said. “We can’t stop here. We are already here. We got everybody around here, everything is set.”

Matt Gutman contributed to this report.

Transcript: Former Vice President Mike Pence on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” May 31, 2026

2026-05-31T12:41:50-0400 / CBS News

The following is the transcript of the interview with former Vice President Mike Pence that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on May 31, 2026.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Welcome back to Face the Nation. We are joined now by former Vice President Mike Pence, who has a new book, What Conservatives Believe: Rediscovering the Conservative Conscience. Good morning to you, Mr. Vice President.

MIKE PENCE: Good morning, Margaret. Good to see you.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You clearly think your party needs some reminders here, and you write that Americans are confused about what it means to be a conservative. You say for many right-wing populists, grievance dictates policy. Who or what are you thinking about there?

MIKE PENCE: Well, I think, look, from all of my adult life, the Republican Party has been defined by a commitment to a conservative agenda to America as leader of the free world, to limited government, free market, economics, and traditional moral values, especially the right to life. And I’m proud to say that from the Reagan administration to the first Trump administration, we governed on that agenda, but I wrote “What Conservatives Believe,” because just in the last four or five years, there’s been a rise of what I call the populist right that focuses more on what we’re against than what we’re for, focuses more on grievance than a positive conservative agenda. I mean the conservative movement has always been battling politically with the progressive left, but now there’s a new threat from the populist right that would embrace policies of isolationism abroad, that would embrace big government and protectionism at home, marginalize the right to life, and as we go into this fall’s elections and go into 2028 I thought it was important that we take a moment as a party and as a movement to remind ourselves what we believe.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But some of what you are describing isn’t just on the fringes or within the party, it’s the President of the United States who’s leader of that party, and you write he has not always governed as a conservative, I understand that the president’s overall approval rating is low. It is. But he still seems to have this vice grip on the neck of the Republican party right now. So, how can you revive a portion of it that he is in opposition to? I mean, right to life was one of them, as you just detailed. You split with him very publicly on that. You think he betrayed it. You think he betrayed on, for example, spending and the way he’s dealing with some of the free market issues.

MIKE PENCE: Well, look, I think the second Trump administration has got a lot right. They got the border secured after the worst border crisis in American history. They extended those Trump-Pence tax cuts that we passed in their entirety. They’ve stood without apology for our cherished ally, Israel, and took the fight directly to Iran. But on other instances, you’ve seen the impact and the embrace by the President and people around him of the politics of the populist right, the price controls on credit cards and pharmaceuticals, nationalization of American businesses, of course, broad-based tariffs on friend and foe alike, add to that marginalizing the right to life, doing nothing about the broad distribution of the abortion pill by mail that Joe Biden’s administration made possible, and then the stops and starts on Ukraine, while they’ve been strong on Israel, strong with Iran. The stops and starts reflect more the politics of the progressive left and appeasement than that time-honored conservative agenda that’s defined our party at home and abroad.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Why isn’t the party standing up to him then?

MIKE PENCE: Well, look, I give the president all kinds of credit (CROSSTALK)

MARGARET BRENNAN: You’ve got majorities in the house and the Senate. They’re been pretty silent.

MIKE PENCE: He has earned great loyalty among Republican primary voters.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Primary voters.

MIKE PENCE: We saw that in Texas, we saw that in Louisiana, we saw that in Indiana in our recent state senate primaries, and I think it’s because look, the progressive left has been essentially in the saddle for about 100 years in this country. Ronald Reagan began the battle back. I think Republican voters truly appreciate the way that President Trump has fought back against the radical left and continues to, but I want our voters to know that there’s, there is this new push from the populist right, and as we look at the midterm elections, as we look at 2028 I think it’s important that we focus on on what we’re for, because not only is it a winning agenda for Republicans, Margaret, I, I believe it’s delivered freedom and prosperity for the American people.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, when you say primary voters, you know that that is not necessarily all Republican voters. Certainly, you just look at the turnouts in that Texas race to speak to that, but isn’t your party, from the president on down, with this gerrymandering push locking in the changes that will only. Feed into that more extreme part of the party. The populist—

MIKE PENCE: Well you know, it’s awfully hard for Democrats to throw stones when they live in glass houses on gerrymandering. There are states around the country that—

MARGARET BRENNAN: Sure but doesn’t gerrymandering disincentivize bipartisan.

MIKE PENCE: There are states around the country, though, where 40% of voters are Republicans, and there are no republican representatives from those states in the Congress.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So, you support the gerrymandering? (CROSSTALK)

MIKE PENCE: I’ve never been a fan of partisan gerrymandering, but look, I have great confidence in the American people and in Republican voters. I think if we hold the banner of American leadership on the world stage of limited government free market economics of traditional values in the right to life high. I think voters will rally to our cause in these midterms and in 2028 when we’re going to decide whether the progressive left with its embrace of socialism is in the lead on the national stage or whether a populist right that, that is a form of progressive politics. I mean, this is when you look at the embrace of isolationism, protectionism, nationalization of companies, and marginalizing values. It’s, it is, it’s more and more an echo of what the left has provided. I think, as President Reagan said years ago, the Republican Party ought to offer a choice, not an echo.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But isn’t the Vice President, JD Vance, an echo of all of those things? If President Trump’s not a conservative, is JD Vance one?

MIKE PENCE: Well, look, let me say, I lost count of the number of times President Trump corrected me when I said that a particular position was conservative. In fact, he said himself he’s not a conservative, he’s never really claimed to be. I’m less clear about the vice president’s views and his philosophy of government, but I’m very clear, as I wrote in my book, that there is this new tension within the Republican party that will take those pieces of the agenda, the populist right agenda that President Trump has embraced, and try and make that the new direction of the Republican party. I think that’d be bad for the Republican party. I think it’d be worse for the country that needs a vigorous, strong conservative party committed to freedom, committed to free markets, committed to traditional values.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Talking about the midterms, you also spent a lot of time writing about character, and you say it matters. Last week, Texas Republicans voted to make you know this is coming, Ken Paxton, their nominee. He’s the current AG, he was impeached by the Republican-controlled House, multiple charges of abuse there, including bribery. His wife, a sitting senator in that state, accused him of committing adultery and is divorcing him on quote “biblical grounds.” He was indicted in 2015 on securities fraud charges, though those charges were dropped, and the president chose him over a much more conservative in your description, John Cornyn. Does character represent—does the character of Ken Paxton represent your party?

MIKE PENCE: Well I think, as I write in my book, I think character, integrity to principle, are enormously important in the life of our movement, in the life of our nation. But when I look at the Texas primary, when I look at Louisiana, Kentucky, Indiana’s many state senate races, I see it more as a reflection of the grip that President Trump has on Republican primary voters who are grateful for the way that he has stood up and fought against the radical left. You look at where the Democratic Party is today. I mean, it’s amazing to see if Republicans, in part, have lost our way with the embrace of the populist right. Democrats have gone over the beam with embracing socialist candidates, socialist policies. I think Republican voters—

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you would separate yourself from Ken Paxton. He does not represent conservative values—

MIKE PENCE: Republican voters want to push back on that. They respect the president’s views. I just want to make sure people understand that as we sort through all these elections this year, that there’s a new force afoot in the Republican party, and I think we’ve got to get back to those core values and principles that have always made our country and our party strong and prosperous.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, Louisiana Senator Bill Cassidy, his offense to President Trump seemed to be that vote to convict him in the second impeachment trial following the attack on the Capitol on January 6. Does it trouble you that the president is even making primary choices based on grievances having to do from January 6?

MIKE PENCE: Well, I don’t know precisely what the president’s reasons were for weighing in

MARGARET BRENNAN: He tweeted pretty explicitly.

MIKE PENCE: The way that he did. So you know we have, we haven’t chatted in a while, but yeah, I, you know, I’ll be honest with you, that I’ll never minimize what happened on January 6, and I’ll always believe, by God’s grace, we did our duty that day to the seat of the peaceful transfer of power under the Constitution. It’s one of the reasons why this talk of a weaponization fund, Margaret, the idea of creating a fund that could compensate people who assaulted police officers and vandalized the Capitol that day is totally unacceptable. My hope is the administration will drop it, drop the idea entirely.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You think Senate Republicans will make them drop it, because it’s hard to stand up to the President. Many Republicans find, because of what you just said. Those primaries and those midterms.

MIKE PENCE: It is, but I’ve been heartened by the number of Republicans in the Senate who have spoken out against it, look, that people that assaulted police officers on January 6 and vandalized our capital should not get one dime of taxpayer money from that fund or anywhere else.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But I mean, even just the precedent of setting it up, should they exclude January 6 attackers? That the idea of a weaponization fund is its own thing that it bears examining, but I want to explicitly ask you about something also that happened.

MIKE PENCE: In Washington, we don’t need slush funds to settle cases.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You view it as a slush fund.

MIKE PENCE: There was a pro-life family that was literally run over by the Biden Department of Justice, that it was just a seven figure settlement for them. The DOJ can settle these issues where people have had their rights trampled on and ought to do that. I welcome that settlement greatly.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Last week, at the request of the Department of Justice, a federal appeals court threw out the convictions of four members of far-right extremist group the Oath Keepers, that was a militia involved in January 6. Do you think that the Trump administration is deliberately whitewashing that day?

MIKE PENCE: Well, I’ve certainly seen evidence of that, particularly I was offended on the anniversary of January 6 when the White House put out a timeline that literally blamed Capitol Hill police for the riot that took place that day. Look, I’m very confident that of the judgment of history in the years ahead about our role, about all the Republicans and Democrats who returned that day after Capitol Police secured the Capitol, and we all did our duty under the Constitution, but, but there’s clearly been an effort by some to rewrite that history, but I don’t expect it’ll work.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Mr. Vice President. Thank you very much for sharing your reflections. It’s good to have you here in person too.

MIKE PENCE: Thank you, Margaret. Appreciate it.

MARGARET BRENNAN: We’ll be right back.

Zelenskyy alleges Russia is abducting Ukrainian kids and training them to fight

2026-05-31T12:43:00-0400 / CBS News

By

Updated on: May 31, 2026 / 3:24 PM EDT / CBS News

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told CBS News in an exclusive interview that his government has evidence that Russia is abducting Ukrainian children and training them to fight against fellow Ukrainians.

It is an allegation that may constitute a war crime, according to the International Criminal Court. This is the first time that Zelenskyy has publicly made this accusation, which goes beyond the documented evidence that Russia has a state-sponsored program of taking Ukrainian children to camps for reeducation or “Russification.”

“When these children grow up and they push these boys to the battlefield,” Zelenskyy said.

Zelenskyy said “yes have evidence of it,” but he did not detail what the evidence his government has.

“Yes, and they taught these children to hate their native country, to hate native people,” Zelenskyy said. “And Ukrainians, can you imagine, such young Ukrainians, young boys, come to the battlefield and kill Ukrainians.”

The International Criminal Court issued a warrant for Vladimir Putin’s arrest in 2023 due to what it referred to as a program of “unlawful deportation of population (children).” The Kremlin called it a humanitarian effort to care for war orphans, and has broadcast images of Putin and the ICC-indicted program head Maria Lvova-Belova embracing some of the kids.

In an exclusive interview with Margaret Brennan that aired Sunday on “Face the Nation,” Zelenskyy emphasized that Russia has long been treating children essentially as combatants, and offering to trade the children for soldiers captured on the battlefield. International humanitarian law provides broad protections for children as non-combatants.

“It’s important to get back our warriors, war prisoners, but we can’t exchange them [for] the children,” he said.

“Can you imagine, how we can exchange our children?” he said. “We can’t. First of all, it’s out of the law. We can’t exchange civilians.”

The previously U.S. government-backed Humanitarian Research Lab at the Yale School of Public Health, which investigates war crimes, concluded with high confidence in a report in March that Gazprom and Rosneft, both Russian state-owned oil and gas companies, helped underwrite the reeducation of more than 2,000 Ukrainian children.

The report also argued that the Trump administration’s decision to issue temporary sanctions relief on Russian oil at sea has provided a windfall for both companies.

“Gazprom and Rosneft are the first known Russian Federation-affiliated corporate entities related to child deportation that are currently making money from U.S. consumer spending at the time of this publication,” the Yale report said.

The U.S. first issued a sanctions waiver in March in an attempt to put supply on the market to offset skyrocketing prices because of the war with Iran. The waiver has been extended twice and, according to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, the extension came at the request of countries in Asia hungry for oil supplies.

Brennan asked Zelenskyy whether the temporarily lifting of U.S. sanctions off some Russian oil sales is inadvertently fueling that abduction program.

“Lifting sanctions is a help for the soldiers of Russia,” he said.

He said his government has spoken with lawmakers about imposing stricter sanctions on Russia in retaliation for the alleged child abduction scheme.

“I hope that Congress will find the possibility again to put sanctions on Russians, because of the children,” he said. “We spoke with congressmen, we spoke so many times about it. I hope that they will make this step.”

Zelenskyy also told CBS that Ukraine has documented the abduction of at least 20,000 Ukrainian children, and wants help tracking down what he suspects are even higher numbers.

U.S. military strike on alleged drug boat in Pacific Ocean kills 3 people in fourth attack this week

May 31, 2026 1:22 PM EDT / CBS/AP

The U.S. military said it carried out another strike Saturday on a boat accused of smuggling drugs in the eastern Pacific Ocean, killing three men in the fourth attack this week and putting the total death toll at 205.

U.S. Southern Command announced the strike with its usual language that the vessel was “engaged in narco-trafficking operations” and operated by a designated terrorist organization. It provided no evidence for the allegation.

It’s the latest in a monthslong campaign against alleged drug boats traversing the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific.

Video released by the military on social media shows a small vessel moving in the ocean before it’s hit and engulfed in a fireball.

The attack brings the death toll to 205 in a series of U.S. strikes that began in early September, with other attacks announced on Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. The death toll also rose slightly this week because some people that had been initially reported by the U.S. military as survivors of the strikes have not been found.

The Trump administration has declared that the U.S. is at armed conflict with Latin American drug cartels, saying they are behind the flow of drugs into American communities.

U.S. Southern Command said in its post on X that the strike came at the direction of Gen. Francis L. Donovan, the top U.S. commander in Latin America. Donovan on Friday also met with Cuban military leaders near the U.S. Navy base in Guantanamo Bay.

The U.S. military conducted a lethal strike on a boat in the Eastern Pacific on Saturday, killing three men, officials said. U.S. Southern Command

The legality of the boat strikes has come under scrutiny by experts. The White House confirmed a Washington Post report that in the first attack, which occurred on Sept. 2, the U.S. conducted a follow-on strike, or so-called double tap, that killed two survivors of the initial strike on the vessel.

Some lawmakers have questioned whether that follow-on strike constituted a war crime.

To date, only three people are known to have survived strikes and then been rescued. Two were rescued from a “narco sub” accused of carrying drugs in October and later returned to their home countries of Ecuador and Colombia.

In March, the U.S. Coast Guard said it recovered a survivor of a strike that killed two others and transferred the survivor to Costa Rican authorities.

Earlier this year, the families of two Trinidadian men who were killed in a U.S. missile strike on a boat in the Caribbean sued the Trump administration in federal court, arguing the “premeditated and intentional killings lack any plausible legal justification.”

Trump expands Turkey ambassador’s diplomatic role, adding Iraq, Syria amid Middle East tensions

May 31, 2026 12:35pm EDT / Fox News

Iraq and Syria, Turkey’s neighbors to the south, have long been Iranian terrorist proxy battlegrounds

By Eric Mack Fox News

Fox News’ Alex Hogan reports on threats targeting ICE agents, the economic impact of the war in Iran and more on ‘Fox News Sunday.’

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

blob:https://www.foxnews.com/134388d5-c109-41aa-8a75-7dd27b154604

Listen to this article

3 min

U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack is getting expanded duties from President Donald Trump to serve as special envoy to Syria and Iraq as the administration tries to forge lasting peace in the Middle East.

“I am pleased to announce that United States Ambassador to Türkiye, Tom Barrack, who has done an outstanding job, will be named Special Presidential Envoy to Syria and, likewise, Special Presidential Envoy to Iraq, as we advance our strategic cooperation with the Governments of Syria and Iraq, our relationship with them continues to grow,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Sunday.

Syria, a longtime Iranian terrorist proxy battleground, has moved to make peace with the Trump administration and Israel in recent years. It has largely been moved in that direction with the guidance of Turkey, the northern neighbor of Iraq and Syria.

“Tom will remain Ambassador to Türkiye, and operate with the full backing of the United States Department of State,” Trump’s post continued. “We greatly appreciate the work that Tom Barrack has done, and his continued willingness to serve our Country.”

US AMBASSADOR BARRACK NAMED SPECIAL ENVOY TO SYRIA AMID SANCTIONS RELIEF PLAN

U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack is getting an expanded role in the region to help root out Iranian terrorist proxies and secure lasting peace in the Middle East under President Donald Trump.(Getty Images)

The announcement came as Washington remains locked in high-stakes negotiations with Iran and as Tehran’s Revolutionary Guards launched new attacks on separatist groups in northern Iraq, according to Reuters.

Barrack’s expanded assignment places him at the center of several overlapping pressure points in the region: the future of U.S. engagement with Syria, the stability of Iraq, Turkey’s role as a regional power broker and the broader fallout from the U.S.-Iran conflict.

The move also follows earlier reporting that Barrack had already been playing a major role in Syria policy, including discussions involving Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio on the administration’s approach to Damascus.

TRUMP TENTATIVELY MAKING PEACE WITH IRAN, BUT POTENTIAL FUTURE STRIKES REMAIN AS LEVERAGE

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6397095837112

Trump’s announcement landed during a tense weekend for U.S. diplomacy. The president has not announced a final decision on a proposed Iran agreement, and recent reports said he requested changes to a draft deal negotiated by his envoys, including tougher provisions related to Iran’s nuclear materials.

Trump said in a Fox News interview that he was “in no hurry” to finalize a deal with Tehran, while warning the U.S. could resume military action if negotiations fail. War Secretary Pete Hegseth also said the U.S. military remained poised to resume strikes against Iran.

The administration’s core peace demands have centered on preventing Iran from developing or acquiring nuclear weapons, reopening the Strait of Hormuz and securing terms that Trump has described as tougher than earlier proposals. The Strait of Hormuz remains a central point of contention because of its importance to global energy shipments.

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6397095842112

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The northern Iraq strikes underscored the risk that the conflict could continue to spill across borders even as diplomacy continues. Iranian forces have repeatedly targeted Kurdish opposition groups based in Iraq’s Kurdistan region, accusing them of threatening Iran’s security. Those attacks have placed additional pressure on Baghdad and the Kurdistan Regional Government while complicating U.S. efforts to stabilize Iraq.

Barrack, a longtime Trump ally and businessman, is now expected to help manage U.S. relationships with three countries that sit at the heart of the administration’s Middle East strategy.

Eric Mack is a writer for Fox News Digital covering breaking news.

Mike Pence says he hopes Trump administration will drop weaponization fund

2026-05-31T13:38:00-0400 / CBS News

By

Updated on: May 31, 2026 / 1:41 PM EDT / CBS News

Washington — Former Vice President Mike Pence said Sunday that he hopes the Trump administration will drop its new “anti-weaponization fund” that has sparked pushback on Capitol Hill and divided Republicans.

“The idea of creating a fund that could compensate people who assaulted police officers and vandalized the Capitol that day is totally unacceptable,” Pence said on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan”.

The $1.776 billion fund, which aims to provide taxpayer-funded payouts to people who allege the legal system has been “weaponized” against them, was established as part of a settlement of a suit by President Trump against the IRS. But the fund has divided Republicans, especially as some Trump allies, including those charged for their involvement in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, have said they are eager to submit claims.

The fund was the topic of a heated conference meeting among Senate Republicans earlier this month, and forced GOP leaders to scrap plans to fund immigration enforcement. On Sunday, Pence said he’s been “heartened by the number of Republicans in the Senate who have spoken out against it.”

“My hope is the administration will drop it, drop the idea entirely,” he said.

The former vice president was a target of the rioters at the Capitol as he was set to certify President Joe Biden’s victory after Congress counted the electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021. He said Sunday that “people that assaulted police officers on Jan. 6, and vandalized our Capitol should not get one dime of taxpayer money from that fund or anywhere else.”

Senate Republicans have sought answers on how the fund will operate and who might receive payments from it, along with possible guardrails to prevent people who assaulted law enforcement from being compensated.

Pence emphasized that the Justice Department “can settle these issues where people have had their rights trampled on, and ought to do that.” He added, “I welcome that settlement greatly.”

On Friday, a federal judge temporarily barred the Justice Department from moving forward with work on the fund. The DOJ has expressed confidence in the fund’s legality amid a handful of challenges to its implementation.

Asked about the Jan. 6 attack more broadly, Pence said he’s “certainly seen evidence” that the administration is white washing that day, saying he was “offended on the anniversary of Jan. 6 when the White House put out a timeline that literally blamed Capitol Hill police for the riot that took place that day.”

“Look, I’m very confident of the judgment of history in the years ahead, about our role, about all the Republicans and Democrats who returned that day after Capitol Police secured the Capitol, and we all did our duty under the Constitution,” Pence said. “There’s clearly been an effort by some to rewrite that history, but I don’t expect it’ll work.”

Why NATO’s defense spending imbalance lasted for decades

2026-05-31T12:47:24-04:00 / Fox News

NATO allies agreed to a new goal of spending 5% of GDP on defense by 2035 at the alliance’s summit in The Hague

By Morgan Phillips Fox News

Published May 31, 2026 12:47pm EDT

Kiron Skinner warns NATO alliance undergoing ‘major restructuring’ amid global conflicts

Fox News contributor Kiron Skinner analyzes the future of U.S.-NATO relations, emphasizing a major restructuring within the alliance.

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

blob:https://www.foxnews.com/18c138ac-833f-4fac-bca7-7cc1b391f00c

Listen to this article

7 min

This is part five of a series examining the challenges confronting the NATO alliance.

For more than three decades, the U.S. carried the largest share of NATO’s military burden while many European allies spent far less on defense than Washington wanted.

The imbalance survived the Cold War, multiple U.S. administrations and repeated debates over burden sharing. Only in recent years — following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine and renewed pressure from President Donald Trump — have many NATO members begun significantly increasing defense spending.

So why did the gap persist for so long?

Defense analysts say the answer lies in a combination of post-Cold War optimism, domestic political priorities and an American defense umbrella that convinced much of Europe it could safely spend less on defense without sacrificing its security.

For more than three decades, the U.S. carried the largest share of NATO’s military burden while many European allies spent far less on defense than Washington wanted.(Handout / Latin America News Agency via Reuters Connect)

GLOBAL SYSTEM TOOK ADVANTAGE OF AMERICA ON TRADE AND DEFENSE. THAT FREE RIDE IS OVER

“For much of the post–Cold War period, it is fair to say that Europeans underinvested in defense, partly because threats were low, and partly because a series of U.S. presidents did everything they could to convince Europeans that we would stay there forever,” Barry Posen, a professor of political science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told Fox News Digital.

The collapse of the Soviet Union reinforced that mindset.

With the primary threat NATO had been created to deter suddenly gone, governments across Europe moved to collect a so-called “peace dividend,” redirecting resources toward domestic priorities and away from their militaries.

Between 1992 and 1999, defense spending among European NATO members fell 22%, helping establish a pattern of underinvestment that would persist for decades even as the United States maintained troops in Europe and continued serving as NATO’s ultimate security backstop.

GERMANY UNVEILS NEW INCENTIVES TO BOOST MILITARY RECRUITMENT AMID GROWING RUSSIA THREAT

As defense spending declined, many European governments expanded or maintained social welfare systems that consumed a growing share of public budgets. Programs such as healthcare, pensions and higher education became deeply embedded in domestic politics, often making them harder to cut than military spending.

With the U.S. continuing to provide the bulk of NATO’s military power, many governments faced little immediate pressure to reverse course. Critics of the alliance’s spending imbalance argued that American taxpayers were effectively subsidizing Europe’s security, allowing allies to devote a larger share of public resources to domestic priorities.

The result was what some defense analysts describe as a “moral hazard” problem: because the U.S. commitment to NATO was viewed as ironclad, allies could spend less on their own militaries without facing the full consequences of those decisions.

“For much of the post–Cold War period, it is fair to say that Europeans underinvested in defense, partly because threats were low, and partly because a series of U.S. presidents did everything they could to convince Europeans that we would stay there forever,” Barry Posen, a professor of political science at MIT, told Fox News Digital.(AP Photo/Darko Vojinovic, File)

NATO CHIEF WARNS EUROPE CAN’T DEFEND ITSELF WITHOUT US AS TENSIONS RISE OVER GREENLAND

Over time, that dynamic became self-reinforcing. As European militaries shrank, many allies grew increasingly dependent on American capabilities ranging from logistics and intelligence to missile defense, strategic airlift and nuclear deterrence.

“We are still having a strong, conventional U.S. presence in Europe,” NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said earlier in 2026, “and, of course, the nuclear umbrella as our ultimate guarantor.”

American frustration over burden sharing is nearly as old as NATO itself.

“We are still having a strong, conventional U.S. presence in Europe,” NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said earlier this year, “and, of course, the nuclear umbrella as our ultimate guarantor.”(Omar Havana/Getty Images)

In 1953, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned European allies that “the American well can run dry” and pressed them to assume a larger share of the alliance’s defense burden. The issue resurfaced repeatedly over the following decades as successive administrations sought greater European contributions to collective defense.

The concern persisted long after the Cold War. In a blunt 2011 farewell speech in Brussels, then-War Secretary Robert Gates warned of a “dim if not dismal future” for NATO if European governments continued underinvesting in their militaries. Gates cautioned that there would be “dwindling appetite and patience” among American lawmakers and taxpayers to bear a disproportionate share of the alliance’s defense costs.

Yet despite decades of warnings, the underlying incentives changed little.

Washington repeatedly reaffirmed its commitment to NATO and maintained a large military presence on the continent, reducing pressure on allies to rapidly increase defense spending.

“Every administration has been pushing allies to spend more money on their own defense,” former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Europe and NATO Jim Townsend told Fox News Digital.

The issue gained renewed urgency after Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, when NATO established a benchmark for members to spend at least 2% of GDP on defense. While spending gradually increased, progress remained uneven across the alliance.

“Nations slowly began going to that. But it’s been slow,” Townsend said.

For years, burden-sharing disputes followed a familiar pattern: American officials urged allies to spend more, European leaders promised improvements and NATO continued to rely heavily on American military power. What finally broke that cycle, Townsend said, was the combination of Russia’s growing aggression and Trump’s willingness to challenge assumptions that had shaped the alliance for decades.

“What really woke everyone up were two things,” Townsend said. “One was the 2022 invasion by Putin the second time. And then the second was Trump.”

Unlike previous presidents, Trump openly questioned whether the United States should defend allies that failed to meet defense spending commitments. During his first term and again during his return to office, Trump argued that NATO members were taking advantage of American taxpayers and suggested U.S. protection should not be unconditional.

Whether European leaders viewed Trump’s approach as pressure, a warning or a negotiating tactic, it altered assumptions that had shaped the alliance since the end of the Cold War and accelerated a debate that had simmered for decades.

The shift culminated at NATO’s summit in The Hague, where allies agreed to a new goal of spending 5% of GDP on defense and defense-related investments by 2035. The agreement marked a dramatic leap from NATO’s long-standing 2% benchmark and reflected a growing consensus that the alliance faced a far more dangerous security environment than the one that emerged after the Soviet Union’s collapse.

The agreement also signaled that many allies had come to the same conclusion American presidents had voiced for decades: the post-Cold War era of reduced military spending was over.

TRUMP PUSHED NATO TO SPEND BIG — NOW COMES THE HARDER QUESTION: CAN EUROPE ACTUALLY FIGHT?

But analysts caution that rebuilding military power is far more complicated than increasing budgets.

Europe remains dependent on the U.S. for capabilities ranging from air defense and logistics to intelligence and defense industrial capacity, Townsend said. Even as governments commit more money to defense, translating those investments into military readiness will take years.

John Byrne of Concerned Veterans for America said the challenge extends beyond equipment and spending levels.

“They don’t have the experience,” Byrne told Fox News Digital, referring to the decades in which large multinational military commands were overwhelmingly led by American officers.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Running large coalition military operations requires years of institutional knowledge and leadership experience, he said — something that cannot be rebuilt overnight.

“You can buy equipment,” Byrne said. “You can’t instantly buy command experience.”