International

Palestine’s path to full membership in the UN will be long

Palestine’s request to become the 194th State of the United Nations could follow the relatively rapid steps of other States that have joined the UN throughout the 21st century, but in its case it faces the probable veto of the United States in the Security Council.

The most recent State to take a seat at the UN as a full member was South Sudan, which in 2011 separated from Sudan after a friendly agreement. His incorporation into the UN was made by acclamation on July 14 of that year, just a week after his declaration of independence.

In 2006, Montenegro, another state that emerged from the dismemberment of the former Yugoslavia, separated after a popular referendum from the last remaining remnant of that federation and proclaimed its independence from Serbia. The referendum took place on June 3 and on the 28th of that same month the state was admitted to the UN.

And 2002 was a very special year because the UN welcomed two members: Switzerland did so in September, thus putting an end to an anomaly that made it welcome numerous international organizations but did not sit at the UN for the sake of a principle of neutrality inscribed in its DNA.

Much more traumatic was the chaos of Timor Leste, which was also admitted in September 2002. The new Asian country, a former Portuguese colony, lived 24 years of occupation and resistance against Indonesia and then almost three years of supervised administration of the UN, but its entry into the United Nations was unanimously approved by the Assembly.

20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90

In 2011, Palestine first presented its formal request to enter the United Nations, but the procedure ran aground in its first stage: it did not get the support of 9 of the 15 members of the Security Council (that is, the qualified majority), so that request did not reach the General Assembly, the second stage of the process.

Palestine had to settle for acquiring the status of “observer state,” an anomaly that only the Vatican has in the United Nations, which is not even considered a country with its own attributes.

Palestine obtained 138 votes in the General Assembly in favor of its new observer status, while 9 voted against (including Israel, the United States and Canada) and 41 abstained.

It is foreseeable that Palestine will not have it as easy as South Sudan, Montenegro or Switzerland had, and all observers assume that Washington will use the veto tool in the Security Council, which is the instance where the incorporation process begins and ends.

According to the UN letter, the request for a new State necessarily goes through the following stages: it is formulated before the Security Council, which appoints an ad hoc committee to study it formed by the fifteen members, and if the committee approves it, the Council then assesses whether it is “a peace-loving state” (article 60), in which case it sends the issue to the General Assembly.

20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90

In the Assembly, the votes of two-thirds of the Member States are needed to move forward, and if this happens, the final decision returns to the Security Council.

The United States, as a permanent member of the Security Council, has the right to veto the process at any time – in 2011 it threatened to do so, but did not need it – and few doubt that he will also use it on this occasion.

If this happens, the dream of Palestine will have fallen by the wayside.

But something has changed since 2011: now, every time a permanent member uses the right of veto, the question comes to the General Assembly, where that country must explain its position and submit to a non-binding vote.

At the current juncture, the United States will once again be evident in the face of a very large majority of states that are expected to support Palestinian membership.

20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90

International

EU Faces Migration Crisis After 60,000 Migrants Arrive in Spain’s Ceuta Enclave

The arrival of around 60,000 migrants from Morocco to Spain’s Ceuta enclave triggered a major European Union crisis on Friday, after Madrid described the situation as an “attack” on its territorial integrity.

At least 34 people died while attempting to reach the Spanish territory, according to local authorities.

Hundreds of migrants had begun arriving in Ceuta earlier in the week, either by swimming across the border or climbing security fences. Most of those who entered were young men and teenagers.

However, the situation escalated dramatically early Thursday morning, when the number of arrivals surged within a few hours, reaching nearly 60,000 people. According to the Spanish government, the vast majority of them — around 48,000 migrants — had returned to Morocco by Friday evening.

The episode represents one of the most serious migration crises faced by the autonomous city of Ceuta, which has a population of around 84,000 residents, in recent years.

20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90

Several European countries responded strongly to the crisis, with Italy announcing the temporary suspension of the Schengen free movement agreement with Spain, a measure supported by Finland and Denmark.

“The temporary suspension of Schengen with Spain is a necessary decision to protect the security of our citizens and defend Europe’s borders,” Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani said in a post on X.

Italy’s Interior Ministry confirmed that the country had tightened controls on maritime and air entry points from Spain, but clarified that the measure would not affect Spanish or European citizens traveling to Italy.

The additional checks will specifically target non-European citizens arriving from Spain, according to the ministry.

The measure will remain in effect for one month starting Saturday, authorities said.

20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90

Spain’s Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares responded to the Italian announcement through a statement on X, as European governments continued discussions over the consequences of the migration crisis.

International

Chuck Schumer Unveils Proposal to Strengthen Oversight of the U.S. Presidency

U.S. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer on Thursday announced legislation to establish a federal anti-corruption office aimed at strengthening oversight of the executive branch and preventing future presidents from using the White House for personal financial gain.

Schumer said the proposal was prompted by what he described as President Donald Trump’s misuse of the presidencyto benefit his family’s business interests.

“In just 18 months, the Trump family has made more than $4 billion by exploiting the influence of the presidency,” Schumer alleged.

The New York senator also argued that the alleged corruption has had direct economic consequences for American households.

“The same corrupt practices Trump is using to pocket billions of dollars are also forcing Americans to pay, on average, $3,100 more each year because of the rising cost of living,” he said.

20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90

The legislation was introduced alongside Democratic Senators Alex Padilla, Jeff Merkley, and Andy Kim.

According to Schumer, the bill has two primary objectives: “First, to return money to the American people. Second, to ensure that no one can ever steal from them again.”

He added that the proposal would create legal mechanisms allowing citizens to seek the recovery of funds allegedly obtained through government corruption.

“The fact that Trump stole money from the American people does not make it his. Americans deserve to get that money back,” Schumer said.

Under the proposed legislation, any U.S. citizen—as well as state attorneys general acting on behalf of their residents—would be authorized to file civil lawsuits to recover funds allegedly acquired through corrupt practices by public officials.

20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90

“Our bill would empower any individual, including a state attorney general acting on behalf of the people of that state, to bring legal action to recover money stolen from the public through government corruption,” Schumer said.

The measure is expected to face debate in Congress, where Republicans and Democrats remain deeply divided over executive accountability and the scope of presidential powers.

International

Trump Administration Urges Latin America to Increase Defense Spending Against Organized Crime

The administration of U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday urged Latin American countries to increase investment in defense and security to strengthen the fight against organized crime and drug trafficking networks.

The appeal was made by Elbridge Colby, the U.S. Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, in an article published by Americas Quarterly. Colby argued that governments across the region should assume greater responsibility for protecting their territories from transnational criminal organizations.

“It is essential that our neighbors in the region invest more in their own defense and security. There is no reason why any country, especially those facing significant narco-terrorist threats, should spend so little on defense,” Colby wrote.

The Pentagon official described it as “absurd” that some Latin American nations allocate less than 1% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to defense, although he did not identify the countries. He contrasted that with NATO members in Europe, many of which are increasing defense expenditures to 3.5% of GDP, with an additional 1.5% devoted to security-related investments.

Colby, who participated earlier this month in the Conference of Defense Ministers of the Americas in Cusco, Peru, said there is “a historic opportunity” for the United States and its regional partners to strengthen cooperation against drug trafficking and other transnational threats.

20260101_dengue_cubeta_728x90

He also defended the proposed Shield of the Americas, a military partnership promoted by the Trump administration to combat organized crime and supported by several conservative governments in the region. The initiative does not include Brazil or Mexico.

In addition, Colby said the administration’s security strategy includes an updated interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine, the long-standing U.S. foreign policy principle that historically viewed Latin America as part of Washington’s sphere of influence.

“Of course, we recognize that the Monroe Doctrine is controversial in many circles. But it is also frequently misunderstood,” he said.

According to Colby, the United States is not seeking “exploitation, subordination or dependence,” but rather a region characterized by greater prosperity, stability and security.

He also stated that Washington is prepared to use “all available resources,” including the U.S. Armed Forces, to combat drug trafficking and irregular migration. Colby highlighted ongoing counternarcotics operations in the Caribbean, despite criticism from human rights organizations that have questioned some missions over allegations of extrajudicial killings in international waters.