US military's attempt to retain strategic land for training runs into Native Hawaiian opposition
The U.S. military wants to keep training at this spot, called Pohakuloa, so it's ready to quickly send troops to Asia and the Pacific. Its importance to the U.S. is only growing as China becomes more assertive, particularly regarding Taiwan.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
What to know about a potential deal to keep TikTok running in US
Less than a month after extending a deadline to ban TikTok for the third time, President Donald Trump told reporters late Friday night that, 'We pretty much have a deal,' on TikTok — but he did not offer details. The details and timing of a potential deal are not clear. TikTok did not immediately respond to messages for comment on Monday. Emarketer analyst Jeremy Goldman said while TikTok is 'reportedly planning' a U.S. version of its app to comply with legal restrictions, the platform — if it launches without the original TikTok algorithm — 'risks losing the very personalization that drives user engagement.' In other words, TikTok just isn't TikTok without its algorithm. 'And getting millions to download a new app is no small feat, to say the least,' Goldman added. Here's what to know about where TikTok stands in the U.S. following Trump's comments. Extensions continue Though he has no clear legal basis to do so, Trump has continued to extend the deadline for TikTok to avoid a ban in the U.S. This gives his administration more time to broker a deal to bring the social media platform under American ownership. It is not clear how many times Trump can — or will — keep extending the ban as the government continues to try to negotiate a deal for TikTok, which is owned by China's ByteDance. While there is no clear legal basis for the extensions, so far there have been no legal challenges against the administration. Trump has amassed more than 15 million followers on TikTok since he joined last year, and he has credited the trendsetting platform with helping him gain traction among young voters. He said in January that he has a 'warm spot for TikTok.' TikTok stays for now For now, TikTok continues to function for its 170 million users in the U.S. Tech giants Apple, Google and Oracle were persuaded to continue to offer and support the app, on the promise that Trump's Justice Department would not use the law to seek potentially steep fines against them. Americans are even more closely divided on what to do about TikTok than they were two years ago. A recent Pew Research Center survey found that about one-third of Americans said they supported a TikTok ban, down from 50% in March 2023. Roughly one-third said they would oppose a ban, and a similar percentage said they weren't sure. Among those who said they supported banning the social media platform, about 8 in 10 cited concerns over users' data security being at risk as a major factor in their decision, according to the report. Trump said Friday that on Monday or Tuesday, the U.S. would take the proposal to Chinese leader Xi Jinping or one of his representatives. The president said he thinks they 'probably' need China to approve the deal but he wasn't sure they needed to. When asked whether he was confident China would approve the deal, Trump said, 'I'm not confident but I think so.' He said that for the U.S., 'we make a lot of money if the deal goes through." Who wants to buy TikTok? Although it's unclear if ByteDance plans to sell TikTok, several potential bidders have come forward in the past few months. Aides for Vice President JD Vance, who was tapped to oversee a potential deal, have reached out to some parties, such as the artificial intelligence startup Perplexity AI, to get additional details about their bids, according to a person familiar with the matter. In January, Perplexity AI presented ByteDance with a merger proposal that would combine Perplexity's business with TikTok's U.S. operation. Perplexity had no comment on Monday. Other potential bidders include a consortium organized by billionaire business executive Frank McCourt, which recently recruited Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian as a strategic adviser. Investors in the consortium say they've offered ByteDance $20 billion in cash for TikTok's U.S. platform. And if successful, they plan to redesign the popular app with blockchain technology they say will provide users with more control over their online data. 'Every day that passes without a qualified divestiture of TikTok puts Americans at greater risk of manipulation and surveillance. We believe the administration will ultimately obey the courts and follow the requirements for a lawful divestiture,' McCourt's internet advocacy organization, Project Liberty, said in a statement. "We look forward to working with members of the administration, policymakers, and our many outstanding partners in The People's Bid to achieve this goal.' Among other possible investors are the software company Oracle and the investment firm Blackstone. Neither company immediately responded to messages seeking comment on Monday.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Trump's trade brinkmanship imperils market stability
As the United States and China inch toward formalizing the outcomes of their recent economic talks in London, markets are sending a clear signal: they want stability, not another season of tariff theatrics. Yet the Trump administration's renewed protectionist tilt, including the looming July 9 deadline for punitive tariffs, risks derailing a fragile recovery and undermining American economic resilience. The London meetings followed a call between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, culminating in a framework that would resume China's rare earth exports and ease U.S. trade restrictions. It's an imperfect deal, but it reflects an important truth: Economic coercion has failed to deliver strategic outcomes. Markets, manufacturers and consumers are all still paying the price of the last trade war. Rare earths remain a critical node in this standoff. China refines nearly 80 percent of the global supply — inputs essential to American electric vehicles, semiconductors and defense technologies. When Beijing halted export approvals earlier this year, U.S. manufacturers faced mounting delays and soaring input costs. The reversal eases a significant bottleneck and offers inflation relief. In exchange, China will regain access to U.S. manufacturing inputs and regulatory clarity — a win for both sides, but especially for U.S. firms squeezed by global supply chain frictions. Rare-earth dynamics further reinforce the stakes. China's June 26 pledge to resume rare-earth shipments to the U.S. triggered a sharp rally in domestic producers. Meanwhile, export volumes from China had fallen nearly 50 percent year-over-year in May, citing tightened controls. Those disruptions directly impacted U.S. electric makers and aerospace supply chains. In this context, the tentative deal on rare-earths licensing isn't a niche victory — it's a strategic pivot that underscores: markets reward policy clarity, even in geopolitically charged commodity markets. Yet the calm is temporary. Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariff framework proposes up to 50 percent duties on countries that fail to sign new bilateral deals by July 9. A 90-day grace period has been offered, but this is brinkmanship disguised as strategy. And if the deadline passes without a broader deal, the tariffs snap back — with potentially damaging ripple effects. The last trade escalation offers a cautionary tale. Tariffs on Chinese goods hit 145 percent; Beijing responded with levies up to 125 percent. American manufacturers endured record costs, while exporters in both countries lost access to reliable markets. The U.S. goods trade deficit with China didn't shrink — it widened to $396 billion in 2024. Meanwhile, American farmers faced oversupply, and consumers bore the burden through higher prices. U.S. equities have responded to this nascent trade detente with enthusiasm. The S&P 500 ETF recently hit $615, brushing off earlier tariff jitters. Meanwhile, traders have rotated into commodities, with copper futures climbing nearly 3 percent in late June, reflecting expectations of stronger industrial demand under clearer supply logistics. Even gold has softened from conflict-driven highs. Markets are signaling that certainty matters — not tariff theatrics. The contrast is clear: a modest trade framework sparks calm; tariff threats inject volatility. That is the heartbeat investors care about. The global spillover from trade tensions was immediate. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, World Bank and International Monetary Fund all downgraded growth forecasts, citing the uncertainty created by revived trade barriers. Investor sentiment plunged. Only now, as trade talks signal détente, has the S&P 500 rallied and oil futures stabilized. Markets know the difference between real strategy and performative populism. So do the businesses that depend on open trade. Trump's tariffs didn't reshore factories or rebalance the trade deficit. What they did do was erode U.S. credibility with allies, invite World Trade Organization scrutiny and distort global supply chains. If the objective was to discipline China's behavior, the evidence shows failure. What has worked — albeit modestly — is targeted cooperation, regulatory certainty and consistent enforcement of existing rules. The current agreement is a pragmatic step forward. It restores supply chain continuity for U.S. firms, removes ambiguity for global investors, and signals that economic diplomacy still matters. It also nudges U.S. trade policy back toward rational engagement after years of unilateral theatrics. Legal uncertainty still clouds the picture. A recent federal court ruling in V.O.S. Selections v. United States raises questions about whether the White House even has the authority to implement broad-based tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. If the decision is upheld, it will undercut the legal rationale for Trump's tariff agenda — and perhaps prompt overdue congressional clarity on trade powers. The broader lesson is clear: economic interdependence isn't weakness — it's leverage. The U.S. and China will remain strategic competitors, but durable competition requires rules, not impulsive penalty regimes that backfire on domestic producers. If this new framework holds, it won't mark the end of rivalry — but it could mark the beginning of a more coherent doctrine of economic statecraft. One that recognizes that markets punish uncertainty, and that protectionism is not a patriotic virtue but an economic deadweight. For now, Washington would do well to recognize what the S&P already has: stability is strength. And the best way to keep markets calm is not through tariffs — but through smart, disciplined diplomacy. Imran Khalid is a physician and has a master's degree in international relations. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Top Democrat questions ‘special treatment' for Alaska, Hawaii in GOP SNAP proposal
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), the top Democrat on the Senate Agriculture Committee, questioned why only two states should receive 'special treatment' in a GOP-backed plan to reduce federal dollars for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) in the coming years. As part of a major package being considered in the Senate to advance President Trump's tax priorities, Republicans also include a major change that would require some states to cover a share of SNAP benefit costs, which are currently funded by the federal government, for the first time. Republicans are floating changes to that plan that would create special carve-outs for Alaska and Hawaii amid internal GOP pushback. But senators signal the exemption could be at risk as Democrats question 'special treatment' for the states. 'On the SNAP side, as you know, they've shifted $64 billion to the states, of which 44 have balanced budget amendments,' Klobuchar argued Monday. 'And we tried to stop that, because the states aren't going to be able to do this.' 'Two states — they threw in Hawaii — two states get this special treatment, and no one else, and so I just figure, if they get that treatment, maybe every other state should, you know? Maybe we should be doing that for Wisconsin,' she told The Hill. 'Maybe we should be doing that for Iowa.' 'This cost shift to the states is the biggest cost shift in the bill,' she also said. Republicans are still waiting on a ruling from the Senate parliamentarian to see if the reworked proposal passes muster with the chamber's Byrd Rule. That decision, in turn, could be instrumental in whether Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) will support the bill. Her comments come as Alaska's other senator, Sen. Dan Sullivan (R), is pointing fingers at Democrats. He says the exemption — which is aimed at helping shield Alaska from steep cuts to federal dollars for food assistance — hangs in the balance because of pushback from the other side of the aisle. Politico was first to report the news. '[Senate Democratic Leader] Chuck Schumer and the Democrats are trying, once again, to strip a provision that helps Hawaii and Alaska's most vulnerable,' Sullivan told The Hill on Monday. 'Everything that we're trying to do for Alaska and Hawaii, Schumer and the Democrats strip it,' Sullivan said, urging his Democratic colleagues to call to tell their leadership, 'Don't screw our provision that's just trying to make it a little less difficult on challenging communities to implement their SNAP requirements.' As part of the SNAP proposal, some states will cover a share of the cost of SNAP benefits if they have a payment error rate above 6 percent beginning in fiscal 2028. But in a change from a previous version of the SNAP proposal assembled by the Senate Agriculture Committee, the bill also includes a 'waiver authority' section that could allow for the noncontiguous states of Alaska and Hawaii to see the requirements waived if they're found to be 'actively implementing a corrective action plan' and carrying out other activities to reduce their error rate. The update came after Alaska Republicans raised concerns over the GOP-crafted proposal. Republicans say the proposal is aimed at incentivizing states to get their payment error rates down, while Democrats have argued the measure could lead to states having to cut benefits. Figures recently unveiled by the U.S. Department of Agriculture found Alaska's payment error rate — which factors in overpayment and underpayment error rates — hit 24.66 percent in fiscal 2024, the highest of any state. The national average in the new reporting was 10.93 percent. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
