Connect with us

International

The pro-Palestinian student movement in the United States looks at itself in history to continue

Opposition to the war in Gaza has triggered a student movement in the United States not seen since the protests against apartheid in South Africa in the 1980s and in rejection of the Vietnam War in the 60s, although the difference is the strong police reaction to more peaceful rallies.

The one that has already been called by historians such as Robert Cohen, of New York University, as the largest university movement in the United States in the 21st century has parallels with the uprisings of the past, but is also unique in forcing Washington to “be more careful with what it does with its military help.”

For Juan González, who was one of the leaders of the 1968 protests at Columbia University (New York), today’s demonstrations are much more peaceful but are facing more immediate repression.

“Never in the history of student protests has a protest been suppressed for so little violation of the law,” said Cohen, an expert in social movements, in a recent interview.

“Basically they are setting up camps in public spaces, they are not interfering with classes (…) we took several buildings in a single day,” he said in an interview with EFE González, 76, who considers that the police response is being much more severe on this occasion, with eviction of peaceful camps and more than 2,000 arrested.

Advertisement
20260224_estafa_mh_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow

Authorities from both New York City in the United States and the university were willing to negotiate with González and the other student leaders, he explained, something that has only happened in a handful of educational centers during the current movement.

In educational centers such as the University of California in Los Angeles (UCLA), the University of Texas in Austin or the University of South Florida in Tampa in the United States, state and local law enforcement agencies have entered to evict the camps and forcibly expel the students shortly after they congregated with the approval of the university authorities.

Another of the main differences is the historical context: the student protests of 1968 against the Vietnam War were included in a much larger movement that transcended the campuses and that included other causes such as the rejection of racial discrimination.

“Our strike in Columbia began only a couple of weeks after Martin Luther King was killed (…) there were riots and riots in more than 100 cities across the country,” explained González, who recalls that the worst moment of police repression was when in 1970 the Ohio National Guard killed four students at Kent State University.

The students’ requests, however, have similarities. Currently, university students ask educational centers to cut all kinds of ties with Israel and its military industry, while in 1968 they asked the institution to cut ties with the IDA, a center that was investigating weapons to be used in Vietnam.

Advertisement
20260224_estafa_mh_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow

The protests of now are also loaded with an “internationalist perspective” something that for the historian of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Tanalís Padilla did not happen years ago in the United States.

“Within the empire, the country’s actions are rarely taken aware of,” Padilla said of these protests against injustices that are happening “in another part of the world.”

The author of “After Zapata” indicated that this student movement has similarities with the fight against the Vietnam war in the 70s and the civil rights claims in the 60s, but contrary to the first case, “U.S. soldiers are not dying” and, in the second, there was no internationalist vision and solidarity with the suffering of the people of Palestine.

“It is a movement of international solidarity that has not been seen in a long time, which gives hope and it is very important that it happens in the most powerful country in the world,” said the teacher, a Jewish descendant of victims of the Holocaust and who has participated in the MIT student camp.

Advertisement
20260224_estafa_mh_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow
Continue Reading
Advertisement
20260224_estafa_mh_300x250

International

Mexico, Brazil and Colombia left out of Trump’s “Shield of the Americas” summit

Left-wing governments in Latin America, including Mexico, Brazil and Colombia, were excluded from the “Shield of the Americas” summit convened by U.S. President Donald Trump.

The meeting, held in Miami, Florida, brought together 12 presidents from across the continent to discuss strategies to combat drug cartels and organized crime.

In Mexico’s case, President Claudia Sheinbaum had recently rejected the use of military force as a solution to the drug trafficking problem. She has argued that her administration’s security strategy is producing results and emphasized that force alone is not the answer.

During the summit, Trump said that most narcotics entering the United States come through Mexico and referred to his previous conversations with Sheinbaum on the issue.

“I like the president very much, she’s a very good person,” Trump said. “But I told her: ‘Let me eradicate the cartels.’ And she said, ‘No, no, no, please, president.’ We have to eradicate them. We have to finish them.”

Advertisement
20260224_estafa_mh_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow

The remarks highlighted ongoing differences between Washington and Mexico over how to confront drug trafficking networks operating across the region.

Continue Reading

International

Trump announces 17-nation alliance in the Americas to “destroy” drug cartels

U.S. President Donald Trump announced on Saturday the creation of a 17-nation alliance across the Americas aimed at dismantling drug cartels, during a regional summit held at his golf club in Doral.

Speaking to a group of allied leaders at the Shield of the Americas Summit, Trump said the initiative would rely on military force to eliminate powerful criminal networks operating throughout the hemisphere.

“The heart of our agreement is the commitment to use lethal military force to destroy these sinister cartels and terrorist networks. Once and for all, we will put an end to them,” Trump told the assembled heads of state.

The Republican leader argued that large portions of territory in the Western Hemisphere have fallen under the control of transnational gangs and pledged U.S. support to governments seeking to confront them. He even suggested the potential use of highly precise missiles against cartel leaders.

Before making the announcement, Trump greeted the roughly twelve leaders attending the summit, including close allies such as Javier Milei, Daniel Noboa and Nayib Bukele, whom he described as a “great president.”

Advertisement
20260224_estafa_mh_728x90
previous arrow
next arrow

The meeting forms part of Trump’s broader regional strategy inspired by his reinterpretation of the Monroe Doctrine, which seeks to reinforce Washington’s influence in the Americas, strengthen security cooperation and counter the growing presence of powers such as China.

Trump pointed to recent U.S. actions in the region as examples of his administration’s approach, including the operation that led to the capture of former Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro earlier this year.

The summit also takes place amid escalating international tensions following the conflict launched last week by the United States and Israel against Iran.

Continue Reading

International

Trump replaces Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem with Senator Markwayne Mullin

U.S. President Donald Trump announced Thursday the departure of Kristi Noem as Secretary of Homeland Security, one of the key architects of the administration’s policy of deporting undocumented immigrants.

Noem, who has been assigned a new role as a “special envoy” to Latin America, will be replaced starting March 31 by Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin, the president said in a message posted on his social media platform Truth Social.

According to media reports, Trump made the decision after Noem’s recent hearings in Congress, during which she faced tough questions regarding the awarding of a major public contract.

Continue Reading

Trending

Central News