World | WPN World People News

Ukraine's Christmas was far from peaceful as Russia launched a massive airstrike, firing over 70 missiles and deploying hundreds of drones targeting energy infrastructure. This resulted in power outages and a lack of heating in Kyiv, the capital, and other cities in the northeast, such as Kharkiv. Even Moldova, located to the southwest of Ukraine, experienced missiles crossing its airspace. Poland urgently scrambled fighter jets for defense, and its air defense systems were on high alert.

Russia's Ministry of Defense confirmed that the strikes were aimed at key energy facilities within the "military-industrial complex." The attacks led to one death and six injuries, with cities such as Kyiv, Kharkiv, Dnipro, and Poltava being hit. In Kharkiv, more than half a million people were forced to spend Christmas near freezing temperatures without water, power, or heat.

U.S. President Joe Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky condemned Russia's actions, accusing it of spreading terror on Christmas by intentionally cutting off heat and power during the harsh winter, calling it an inhumane tactic. Biden also reiterated the U.S.'s commitment to continuing military aid to Kyiv. However, with less than a month before Donald Trump’s potential return to office, there is growing uncertainty about future U.S. policy toward Ukraine, as Trump had promised to swiftly end the war during his campaign.

On December 24, U.S. President Joe Biden signed a bill officially designating the bald eagle as the national bird of the United States.

While the image of the bald eagle has appeared in U.S. official documents for over 200 years, the country had never formally designated a national bird. Following Biden's signing of an amendment to the United States Code, which was submitted by Congress, the bald eagle is now officially recognized as the national bird.

The bald eagle, a bird native to North America, is known for its white head, yellow beak, and brown body. It is fierce in nature and large in size. The eagle first appeared in official U.S. documents in 1782, when it was included in the Great Seal of the United States, alongside olive branches, arrows, a shield in the shape of a flag, the Latin motto "E Pluribus Unum" (Out of Many, One), and 13 stars. Over time, the bald eagle has been featured on U.S. passports, presidential flags, military insignia, and American currency.

The Biden administration has announced the initiation of a Section 301 investigation into China's semiconductor industry, focusing on "traditional" semiconductors and their impact on U.S. businesses. These chips are used in everyday products such as automobiles, washing machines, and telecommunications equipment.

The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) stated that the investigation targets traditional chips made in China, noting that Beijing is aiming to dominate the semiconductor sector and control critical global raw materials. The USTR emphasized the need to protect U.S. and other global chip manufacturers from the disruptive effects of China's large-scale subsidies. The investigation will focus on traditional, mature chips widely used in the consumer market, excluding advanced artificial intelligence (AI) chips or complex microprocessors.

U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai pointed out that China is targeting the semiconductor industry in its effort to achieve global dominance. Chinese companies have rapidly expanded production and are offering lower-priced chips, which could severely harm market competition.

According to reports, Biden's Section 301 investigation was launched just weeks before Donald Trump's inauguration on January 20, 2021, which was seen as paving the way for Trump to impose a 60% tariff on Chinese imports. The Chinese Ministry of Commerce accused the U.S. of initiating the new 301 investigation for political reasons, disrupting the global semiconductor supply chain.

The Biden administration also announced that starting January 1 of the coming year, it will impose a 50% tariff on Chinese semiconductors, while tariffs on Chinese solar panels and polysilicon will also rise to 50%.

The U.S. government will accept public comments on the 301 investigation starting January 6, with a public hearing scheduled for March 11-12. This investigation is being conducted under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. In 2018 and 2019, Trump used this provision to impose tariffs as high as 25% on approximately $370 billion worth of Chinese imports, triggering a nearly three-year trade war. If Trump had initiated an investigation, it would need to be completed within a year.

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump stated on the 21st that he intends to reclaim the Panama Canal. On the 22nd, he further announced on his social media platform that for the sake of global security and freedom, it is absolutely necessary for the United States to own and control Greenland.

Greenland, an autonomous territory under Denmark, was a target of Trump's acquisition plans during his first term. However, Denmark outright refused to discuss the matter, declaring that this autonomous territory under the Danish Kingdom was not for sale. Trump's frustration with Denmark's stance led him to cancel a planned state visit to the country.

As the world's largest island and a continental island, Greenland geographically belongs to North America but maintains closer ties with Europe from a geopolitical perspective. Through its connection with Denmark, Greenland also benefits from EU subsidies. The United States has considered purchasing Greenland since acquiring Alaska from Russia in 1867.

Recently, Trump has made a series of provocative remarks regarding foreign territories. He demanded that Panama lower transit fees for U.S. ships passing through the Panama Canal, threatening to reclaim control of the canal otherwise. Trump reiterated this stance on his social media platform and during conservative events.

Greenland is rich in natural resources such as gold, silver, copper, and uranium, with surrounding waters believed to contain abundant and highly valuable oil reserves. Strategically located as a gateway to the Arctic, Greenland has become a focal point in the race among nations to claim Arctic resources. In recent years, Russia has actively sought to assert sovereignty over Greenland's exclusive economic zone.

Trump's latest comments highlight the Arctic's growing significance in international strategy, further intensifying the competition among major powers for control of this strategic region and Greenland's sovereignty.

On December 22, President-elect Donald Trump criticized the Panama Canal's high tolls for U.S. naval and commercial ships on the social media platform Truth Social, calling it a "rip-off" for the United States. He warned that if prices aren't reduced, he would demand Panama return control of the canal to the U.S. Trump noted that transit fees, calculated based on vessel size and container count, range from $0.50 to $300,000 per ship, which he argued is overly costly for frequent U.S. users.

The Panama Canal, a crucial maritime hub connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, holds significant strategic importance for global trade. The U.S. built and managed the canal in 1914 but transferred control to Panama in 1999 under the Torrijos-Carter Treaty. Currently, the U.S. is the canal's largest user, with approximately 70% of cargo passing through annually. Trump also expressed concern over China's influence in Panama, noting that a Hong Kong-based company operates a port at the canal's terminus. He criticized former President Carter's decision to relinquish control of the canal.

According to Bloomberg News, while Trump has threatened to demand Panama return the canal, international treaties do not grant the U.S. legal rights to reclaim it. Experts suggest that this stance is more of a political gesture aimed at reinforcing U.S. influence in canal-related affairs and addressing concerns about China's rising power. The Panamanian government has yet to issue an official response. Moving forward, the management and toll policies of the Panama Canal are likely to draw greater international attention.

The U.S. temporary funding bill, after undergoing multiple revisions and votes, sparked intense debates within Congress. Ultimately, the latest version of the bill was passed late at night on December 20 (local time) through bipartisan compromise, saving the U.S. government from a shutdown. This bill differs from the proposals by President Trump but temporarily provides funding for disaster relief and federal government operations.

The temporary funding bill will sustain federal government operations until early next year, giving Congress more time to resolve long-term budget disputes. The bill covers expenditures for core areas such as defense, healthcare, and infrastructure development but excludes additional funding requested by some lawmakers, including allocations for border security and supplemental budgets for social welfare programs.

The passage of this bill was the result of multiple rounds of negotiations between the two parties. Conservative Republican lawmakers expressed dissatisfaction with the scale of spending, calling for further cuts to curb the federal deficit. Meanwhile, Democrats insisted on maintaining essential funding for social welfare and infrastructure projects.

The Speaker of the House remarked that while the temporary bill is not a perfect solution, it prevents the severe economic and social impacts of a government shutdown. He also urged both parties to show greater cooperation in future budget discussions.

Following the passage of the bill, the White House welcomed the development, emphasizing that stable government operations are critical for the ongoing economic recovery and national security. The Treasury Secretary also warned that a government shutdown could undermine market confidence and further weaken the competitiveness of the U.S. economy globally.

On the other hand, some policy analysts argued that the temporary funding bill is merely a stopgap measure and fails to address the structural issues in U.S. budget management. They urged Congress to swiftly reach a comprehensive budget agreement to avoid facing similar crises in the future.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced new food labeling regulations on December 19, revising the standards for using the "healthy" label on food packaging. The updated definition removes white bread and breakfast cereals from the list, while adding foods such as eggs, olive oil, and salmon.

This marks the first update to these definitions in 30 years, with the last revision occurring in the 1990s. At that time, the standards were based on nutritional science and federal dietary guidelines, which focused on reducing the intake of various fats.

Under the new guidelines, companies wishing to use the "healthy" label on their products must include one or more of the foods recommended in the FDA's dietary guidelines, such as fruits, vegetables, dairy, grains, or proteins. Additionally, limits will be placed on added sugars, saturated fats, and sodium, depending on the product category.

Sugary cereals, high-sugar yogurts, white bread, and granola bars can no longer carry the "healthy" label, but foods like avocados, olive oil, salmon, eggs, and dried fruits are now eligible to display the label. Although water is not classified as food, the FDA’s dietary guidelines consider it the best beverage choice.

According to U.S. chronic disease statistics, 77% of Americans exceed the recommended intake of saturated fats, 63% consume too much added sugar, and 90% have excessive sodium intake. Nearly 80% of people do not consume enough dairy, fruits, and vegetables, which increases the risk of chronic diseases such as heart disease, diabetes, obesity, and cancer.

The FDA is currently designing a new label to help manufacturers quickly comply with the new health standards. The new regulations are expected to take effect within two months, with food manufacturers required to comply by February 2028.

To avoid a government shutdown, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson proposed a temporary spending bill aimed at cooperation with the Democrats. However, the proposal has faced sharp criticism from both Donald Trump and Elon Musk, who are calling for the Speaker to come up with a new plan. If the bill is not passed in time, a complete government shutdown could begin early Saturday (21st), with operations impacted starting next Monday. Since 1980, the U.S. government has experienced 14 shutdowns, three of which lasted more than a week.

The current bill extends funding through March 14 and provides nearly $100 billion in disaster relief funds for federal emergency operations, as well as aid for farmers. However, the bill also includes numerous unrelated provisions, many of which are aligned with Democratic priorities, such as raising congressional salaries, funding for football stadiums, and measures to combat deepfake pornography.

Trump believes there is no need for negotiations with the Democrats and argues that the U.S. debt ceiling should be raised or eliminated outright, instead of continuing to extend the "debt ceiling suspension." Musk has also taken to social media to slam the bill, calling it political payoffs and demanding that lawmakers who support it step down. This has put Speaker Johnson in a difficult position, as he has been attempting to help Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy understand that the bill will require Democratic votes to move forward.

Meanwhile, Musk's actions have angered Democrats, who accuse him of acting like a shadow president and interfering in politics. Over the next four years, they believe the U.S. will be under his control. During his previous term, Trump communicated with Congress via Twitter; this time, Musk’s involvement in amplifying the message through social media will make the U.S. political landscape even more unpredictable and chaotic.

After the ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon, a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip appears to be on the horizon. A Palestinian official revealed on the 17th that negotiations between Israel and Hamas have entered a decisive stage, with Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz reporting to the Israeli Parliament's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that there is consensus on an agreement regarding the release of hostages.

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump stated on the 16th that he hopes Israel and Hamas will reach an agreement before he takes office, or else "unpleasant things" will happen. His statements seem to have accelerated the ceasefire negotiations. According to BBC reports, the ceasefire talks, facilitated by the U.S., Qatar, and Egypt, have resumed, with both sides seeking to end the 14-month conflict. A Palestinian official interviewed by BBC mentioned that the ceasefire would be implemented in three phases. First, Hamas would release the captured civilians and Israeli female soldiers within 45 days. Simultaneously, Israeli forces would withdraw from Gaza City's center, the coastal highway, and the Rafah crossing. Then, Hamas would release the remaining hostages in exchange for Israel's full withdrawal from Gaza. Finally, the war would come to an end.

Hamas, which has ruled Gaza for 17 years, has become incapable of governing under continuous Israeli attacks for the past 14 months. Even its supporters are angry with the group, hoping to end the war at any cost. A poll conducted in September by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in Ramallah found that the satisfaction of Gaza residents with Hamas' performance dropped from 64% in June to 39%. Last week, Hamas began softening its negotiating stance, no longer insisting on Israel's complete cessation of the war and full withdrawal of its troops.

However, Gaza residents still harbor greater disdain for Israel, and some continue to hope that Hamas can maintain a prolonged insurgency to increase the cost of Israel's occupation of Gaza. Political analyst Ibrahim Al-Madhoun, who has close ties with Hamas, noted, "Although internal members of Hamas have publicly criticized and called for ending the war at any cost, it is simply a natural response to the suffering from a prolonged conflict." However, "once the war ends, many perspectives and viewpoints may change again."

On December 16, the German Bundestag voted on a confidence motion for Chancellor Olaf Scholz. Only 207 lawmakers voted in favor of him, while 394 opposed, and 116 abstained. A minimum of 397 votes in favor was needed to pass the confidence motion, meaning Scholz did not secure the vote, and Parliament will be dissolved for new elections. Scholz stated that the real confidence vote should be decided by voters in the upcoming parliamentary elections.

In 2021, Scholz formed a coalition government with three parties: the Social Democratic Party (SPD), led by Scholz; the Green Party, represented by Economy Minister Robert Habeck; and the Free Democratic Party (FDP), led by former Finance Minister Christian Lindner. However, policy differences, especially on economic matters, led to the collapse of the coalition. The SPD and the Greens believed in raising taxes and increasing borrowing, while the FDP advocated for avoiding excessive debt. This disagreement led to the government's downfall. On November 6, Scholz dismissed FDP Finance Minister Lindner, further deepening the rift.

Scholz criticized the FDP for undermining the government and damaging its reputation and that of democracy. He will propose to President Frank-Walter Steinmeier to dissolve Parliament. The President stated he would agree to the request by law and hold new elections within 60 days, expected to take place on February 23, 2025—seven months earlier than the previously scheduled election in September.

The leader of the largest opposition party, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), Friedrich Merz, criticized Scholz's economic policies, accusing him of "sacrificing the interests of the younger generation to increase debt" and blaming him for plunging Germany into one of its worst post-war economic crises. According to a recent Politico poll, the CDU leads with 32% support, and Merz is seen as a potential new Chancellor. The Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has 19%, while Scholz’s SPD stands at 17%.