Trump to end U.S. sanctions on Syria with executive order, White House says
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the move was designed to 'promote and support the country's path to stability and peace.' Sanctions will remain in place on former President Bashar Assad, his associates and others, she said.
Get daily National news
Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy
The U.S. granted Syria sweeping exemptions from sanctions in May, which was a first step toward fulfilling the Republican president's pledge to lift a half-century of penalties on a country shattered by 13 years of civil war.
Trump met with Syria's interim leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa, in Saudi Arabia in May and told Al-Sharaa that he would lift sanctions and explore normalizing relations in a major policy shift between the U.S. and Syria.
'This is another promise made and promise kept,' Leavitt said Monday.
Story continues below advertisement
The European Union has also followed through with lifting nearly all remaining sanctions on Syria.
Canada announced in March it was taking steps to ease existing sanctions for a six-month period, which it called a 'period of transition' following the toppling of the Assad regime.
—With additional files from Global News
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
35 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
How an empty North Carolina rural hospital explains a GOP senator's vote against Trump's tax bill
WASHINGTON (AP) — Though patients don't rush through the doors of this emergency room anymore, an empty hospital in Williamston, North Carolina, offers an evocative illustration of why Republican Sen. Thom Tillis would buck his party leaders to vote down President Donald Trump's signature domestic policy package. Martin General is one of a dozen hospitals that have closed in North Carolina over the last two decades. This is a problem that hospital systems and health experts warn may only worsen if the legislation passes with its $1 trillion cuts to the Medicaid program and new restrictions on enrollment in the coverage. Tillis' home state showcases the financial impact that more Medicaid dollars can have on hospitals in rural and poor regions throughout the country. Tillis said in a floor speech on Sunday, explaining his vote, that the GOP bill will siphon billions of dollars from Medicaid recipients and the health system in his state. 'Republicans are about to make a mistake on health care and betraying a promise,' said Tillis, who has announced he will not seek re-election because of his opposition to the bill. Along with Republicans Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky, he joined all Democrats in voting against the bill. Tillis later accused the president and his colleagues of not fully grasping the full impact of the bill: 'We owe it to the states to do the work to understand how these proposals affect them. How hard is that? I did it.' For Martin General Hospital in Williamston, North Carolina's decision to expand Medicaid came just too late. The emergency room abruptly closed its doors in the eastern North Carolina county that's home to more than 20,000 people in August 2023. The closest hospital is now about a 30-minute drive away. Then-Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper faulted the state's failure to expand the Medicaid program to more low-income adults sooner to prevent Martin General's closure. North Carolina began offering Medicaid expansion to its residents in December. Today, more than 673,000 people are receiving this coverage. Now, Tillis and other state officials are worried the Republican bill, which will limit how much Medicaid money is sent back to providers, threatens funds for hospitals in their state again. And it could trigger a state Medicaid law that would close down North Carolina's otherwise successful expansion of coverage unless state legislators make changes or locate funds. The Medicaid dollars that Republicans seek to scale back in their bill have helped buttress the remaining rural hospitals across North Carolina, said Jay Ludlam, a deputy health secretary who leads North Carolina Medicaid. 'This has been a lifeline for our rural hospitals here in North Carolina and has helped provide and keep them open,' Ludlam said. 'Rural hospitals play an integral role in communities both as a point of access for health care but also for the local economy because of the contributions that those hospital and hospital systems make to those communities.' Republicans have responded to concerns with a provision that will provide $10 billion annually to rural hospitals for five years, or $50 billion in total. Around the country, 200 hospitals have closed or shuttered emergency services in the last two decades, many of them in red states across the southeastern and midwestern U.S. Wednesdays Columnist Jen Zoratti looks at what's next in arts, life and pop culture. States that have declined to expand Medicaid coverage, the health insurance program for the poorest of Americans, have seen the closures accelerate. Tennessee, for example, has shed 500 beds since 2014, when a federal law first allowed states to expand Medicaid coverage to a greater share of low-income people. It's one of 10 states that has not expanded Medicaid. More than 300 hospitals could be at risk for closure if the Republicans' bill becomes law, an analysis by the Cecil G. Sheps Center at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill found last month. The center tracks rural hospital closures. 'Substantial cuts to Medicaid or Medicare payments could increase the number of unprofitable rural hospitals and elevate their risk of financial distress,' the analysis concluded. 'In response, hospitals may be forced to reduce service lines, convert to a different type of health care facility, or close altogether.' — Associated Press writer Gary D. Robertson in Raleigh, North Carolina, contributed to this report.
Global News
35 minutes ago
- Global News
Former UCP MLAs trying to resuscitate Alberta's once-dominant PC Party
See more sharing options Send this page to someone via email Share this item on Twitter Share this item via WhatsApp Share this item on Facebook Two former members of Alberta's governing United Conservative Party are resuscitating the province's once-dominant Progressive Conservative Party. Former infrastructure minister Peter Guthrie and legislature member Scott Sinclair were booted from caucus earlier this year for pushing back against the Premier Danielle Smith's government and now sit as Independents. Sinclair says the province's two-party system has become too divisive, and they want to galvanize support from Albertans who feel they don't have a political home. Former NDP premier Rachel Notley ended the PC's 44-year dynasty in 2015, prompting conservatives to merge the Wildrose and PCs into the United Conservative Party. Story continues below advertisement Sinclair told the Ryan Jespersen podcast that Smith has morphed what was supposed to be a mainstream, big tent party into a separatist party. Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy Guthrie said on the podcast that Smith has turned her back on accountability while spending too much money on a growing, bloated bureaucracy. The two are aiming to gather the 8,800 signatures needed to register as a political party with Elections Alberta.
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Trump says deal for ceasefire in Gaza is closer after Israel agrees on terms
CAIRO (AP) — U.S. President Donald Trump says Israel has agreed on terms for a new 60-day ceasefire with Hamas and that Washington would work with both sides during that time to try to end more than 20 months of war in Gaza. Neither side has accepted the proposal announced Tuesday by Trump, who has admonished Hamas that if the militant group does not buy into the offer, its prospects will get worse. It's not clear what conditions Israel agreed to. The efforts to reach a truce are unfolding in the wake of powerful Israeli and American strikes on nuclear sites in Iran, which has long supported Hamas, and just days before Trump is scheduled to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington. Here's a look at the situation and the challenges it might present. Details are murky Details of the proposed ceasefire are just beginning to emerge. But rather than being completely new, the potential deal seems to be a somewhat modified version of a framework proposed earlier this year by Trump's Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff. Trump said Tuesday in a social media post that Qatar and Egypt have been working on the details and would deliver a final proposal to Hamas. An Egyptian official involved in the ceasefire talks told The Associated Press that the proposal calls for Hamas to release 10 more hostages during the two-month period — eight on the first day and two on the final day. During that period, Israel would withdraw troops from some parts of Gaza and allow badly needed aid into the territory. The war began on Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas-led militants attacked southern Israel, killing 1,200 people and taking roughly 250 hostages. The group is believed to still have some 50 hostages, with fewer than half of them thought to be alive. The Egyptian official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to reporters, said a sticking point over how aid would be distributed had been resolved with Israel. He said both sides have agreed that the United Nations and the Palestinian Red Crescent would lead aid operations and that the Israeli- and U.S.-backed Gaza Humanitarian Fund would also continue to operate. Hamas has been weakened The unraveling of Iran's regional network of proxies, capped by the blow inflicted on Iran during the recent 12-day war with Israel, has left Hamas weaker and more isolated in the region. Iran was a key backer of the militant group, but its influence has waned, and it's now preoccupied with its own problems. At the same time, Trump has made it clear to Israel that he wants to see the Israel-Hamas war end soon. While he has been supportive of Netanyahu, Trump had tough words for Israel in the opening hours of last week's ceasefire with Iran, when he pressured Israel to scale back its response to an Iranian missile attack. That could help persuade Hamas to embrace a deal. A diplomat briefed on the talks said there is now a 'big opportunity' to reach an agreement. 'The indications we're getting are people are ready.' He said Trump's harsh talk toward Israel has 'given a bit of confidence to Hamas' that the U.S. will guarantee any future deal and prevent a return to fighting. The diplomat spoke on condition of anonymity because he was discussing behind-the-scenes diplomatic contacts. Israeli military positions and future talks pose obstacles The Egyptian official said Israel has not yet agreed to a proposal to withdraw its forces to positions held in early March after a previous ceasefire officially expired. Since then, the Israeli army has seized large swaths of Gaza to put pressure on Hamas, and it's not clear whether Israel is ready to return to those same positions. An Israeli official characterized the agreement as a 60-day deal that would include a partial Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and a surge in humanitarian aid to the territory. The mediators and the U.S. would provide assurances about talks on ending the war, but Israel is not committing to that as part of the latest proposal, said the official, who was not authorized to discuss the details of the deal with the media and spoke on condition of anonymity. The Egyptian official said Hamas will have to review the proposal with other factions before submitting an official response. One point that does seem to have been ironed out is the question of who will administer Gaza. Israel has said Hamas cannot run the territory, and the Egyptian official said the proposal would instead put Gaza under a group of Palestinians without political affiliations known as the Community Support Committee once a ceasefire is reached. Potentially complicating the effort, Netanyahu reiterated his hard-line position Wednesday, vowing that 'there will be no Hamas' following the 60-day ceasefire plan. Previous ceasefire did not last A previous ceasefire agreed to in January established three phases, but the two sides never made it past phase one. During that time, however, there were multiple exchanges of Hamas-held hostages for prisoners held by Israel, and critical humanitarian aid was able to reach Gaza. When phase one expired on March 1, Israel sought to extend it while Hamas argued that phase two should go ahead as planned. The second phase would have compelled Hamas to release all the remaining living hostages in exchange for more Palestinian prisoners, a lasting ceasefire and a full Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. That was always seen as difficult, because it would have forced Israel to choose between its two main war goals — the safe return of the hostages and the annihilation of Hamas. On March 18, Israel broke the ceasefire with new airstrikes and resumed hostilities. In Gaza, residents expressed hope that this time, a ceasefire will bring an end to the war. 'We are seriously tired,' said Asmaa al-Gendy, who has been living in a tent camp in Deir al Balah with her two children. The family has been displaced and starved and endured 'every form of torture in the world.' ___ Rising reported from Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Associated Press writers Josef Federman in Jerusalem and Wafaa Shurafa in Deir al Balah, Gaza Strip, contributed to this report.
