World | WPN World People News

In recent days, the Trump administration has presented Ukraine and Russia with a draft peace proposal containing roughly 28 points, aiming to end the full-scale conflict that has continued since 2022. Once the proposal was revealed by Western media, it immediately triggered strong reactions from Kyiv and its allies.

The first to feel the shock was undoubtedly Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. For him, this so-called “peace” proposal appears both as a possible exit from a long and exhausting war and as a knife pressed against his throat. Pressure from the United States, anxiety from allies, and public outrage at home have combined to create an unprecedented dilemma, forcing Ukraine to make decisions within an extremely short timeframe.

The Trump administration’s plan has been described as “pragmatic but tilted toward Russian interests.” It calls on Ukraine to relinquish control of parts of its eastern territory—such as Donbas—reduce its military to 600,000 troops, and abandon its bid to join NATO. Frozen Russian assets would serve as the main source of future reconstruction funds. The U.S. has signaled it wants a response within a short deadline. The core idea is an immediate ceasefire and cessation of hostilities, with conditions resting on significant strategic concessions from Ukraine. For a country ravaged by war, “peace” is undeniably tempting—but the price may be national dignity, long-term security, and territorial integrity.

Responding to the proposal, Zelensky admitted that Ukraine is facing “one of the most difficult moments in its history,” saying he is being forced to choose between “losing the dignity of the nation” and “losing one of its most important international partners.” He knows the United States is irreplaceable for Ukraine. The Trump administration has hinted that if Kyiv outright rejects the plan, future military aid and intelligence support may be reduced or reconsidered. While European allies generally support Ukraine, their military capacity and political will have limits and cannot quickly compensate for a potential U.S. shortfall.

However, within Ukraine, trading land for peace has always been taboo. Since the war began, countless families have lost loved ones, and cities have been turned into ruins. Abandoning territory not only means acknowledging gains Russia achieved through force; it may also be seen as “betraying the fallen.” Polls have consistently shown that most Ukrainians oppose ceding territory, even under dire wartime conditions. If Zelensky accepts the plan, he will face intense public backlash and fierce attacks from political opponents—potentially destabilizing his leadership.

European nations find themselves in a similar bind. Although some leaders privately acknowledge that the U.S. proposal could serve as a starting point for negotiations, they insist that any agreement must not legitimize Russia’s use of military force to redraw European borders. Germany and France argue that Ukraine’s security must be institutionally guaranteed; otherwise, any ceasefire would be only a temporary pause before renewed conflict. Excessive Western concessions now, they warn, could undermine future security in Eastern Europe and even the broader NATO framework.
Meanwhile, Russia’s stance has remained relatively predictable. Moscow has long sought Ukraine’s demilitarization and neutrality, and it aims to solidify control over eastern regions. For Russia, certain elements of the U.S. plan amount to partial realization of its wartime objectives. If Ukraine accepts, Russia could legitimize its territorial gains through a “peace agreement.” If Ukraine refuses, Moscow could exploit any rift between Kyiv and Washington to strengthen its position both on the battlefield and diplomatically.

The most likely scenario moving forward is that Ukraine will present a revised version of the proposal before the deadline—avoiding a direct rejection while seeking stronger security guarantees and adjustments on territorial issues. This would prolong negotiations and force the U.S., Europe, and Ukraine to renegotiate a less contentious framework. If the Trump administration proves willing to revise certain terms—especially regarding territory and NATO—some form of “phased peace” may still emerge.

But if Ukraine ultimately refuses the deal and the U.S. responds by scaling back aid, the battlefield situation could worsen. Over the past year, Ukrainian forces have faced ammunition shortages and compressed defensive lines. Reduced assistance could allow Russian forces to make additional gains in the short term. This would push Ukraine into even more difficult choices—potentially forcing it to negotiate later from an even weaker position.

If Ukraine ultimately accepts the agreement, the war may quickly de-escalate and open the door to large-scale reconstruction. Yet such a peace would be fraught with concerns: if Russia regains strength in the future, or if Ukraine’s security architecture lacks firm guarantees, conflict could return. Trust in the government, social cohesion, and political stability within Ukraine would also face serious tests.

The controversy surrounding this peace proposal marks a new turning point in the Ukraine war. Zelensky’s decision is not merely a strategic calculation—it is a high-stakes political gamble that will shape the country’s destiny. In the coming weeks, as the proposal is revised, allies adjust their positions, and Russia issues its responses, the entire trajectory of the war may shift. How a nation balances survival, security, and dignity will remain at the center of global attention.

Media reports say that Niigata Governor Hideyo Hanazumi plans to approve the restart of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant on the 21st. This facility is the largest nuclear power plant in the world, and its restart is part of Japan’s gradual return to nuclear energy following the complete shutdown of reactors after the Fukushima disaster, aimed at reducing dependence on imported fossil fuels.

According to the reports, the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant has a total of seven reactors, but only one is slated for restart at this time. After announcing his decision, Hanazumi must consult the prefectural assembly; if the assembly supports the proposal, he will submit a formal application to the central government.

The reports also note that after the 2011 tsunami and Fukushima nuclear disaster, public anxiety about nuclear power increased and Japan shut down all domestic nuclear reactors. Following the implementation of strict new safety standards, 14 reactors nationwide have since been restarted, mainly located in western and southern Japan.

Lebanon’s Ministry of Health confirmed on the 18th that Israel carried out airstrikes on Sidon, the main city in southern Lebanon, killing 13 people and injuring many others who were taken to hospital. Israel claimed that the targets of the strikes were Hezbollah, the Lebanese armed group backed by Iran, and at times Hamas members operating in the area.

Hamas later issued a statement condemning the attack. The statement accused “the Zionist occupation forces (the Israel Defense Forces)” of fabricating the claim that the strike targeted “a training camp belonging to our organization,” calling it a lie intended to justify “its criminal acts of aggression.” The Israeli attack struck an open-air sports field used by residents of the refugee camp, and there are no military facilities in Lebanese refugee camps.

Israeli forces occupy five outposts inside Lebanon and frequently carry out airstrikes in the south, claiming their targets are Iran-backed groups. Last year, Israel and Hezbollah reached a ceasefire agreement requiring Lebanese armed groups to possess no weapons in the south and obliging Israeli forces to fully withdraw from Lebanon.

U.S. President Donald Trump said on the 17th that he may hold talks with Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in the future, while also stressing that he does not rule out sending U.S. troops into Venezuela. His remarks came as the United States increased its military presence off the coast of Venezuela, heightening regional tensions.

According to foreign media reports, Washington has accused the Maduro regime of being involved with drug-trafficking groups that exhibit “terrorist-organization behavior patterns,” posing a threat to U.S. national security. In an interview at the White House, Trump said: “At some point, I will talk to him,” adding that Maduro “has not been good to the United States.”

When asked whether he ruled out military intervention, Trump replied: “No, I don’t rule that out. I don’t rule out anything.” He also accused Venezuela of sending hundreds of thousands of prisoners into the United States.

In addition, Trump said that if necessary, he might authorize military action against drug-trafficking organizations inside Mexico. When asked whether he would approve anti-drug strikes, he responded, “I’m not opposed to it. To stop the drugs, everything is on the table.”

Former Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who in 2024 ordered a violent crackdown on student protests that later escalated into a nationwide anti-government uprising resulting in as many as 1,400 deaths, was found guilty and sentenced to death on November 17, 2025, by a Dhaka court. The interim government reached the verdict after several months of trial, convicting Hasina on three counts, including crimes against humanity.

Between July and August 2024, Bangladesh was rocked by massive student-led protests that were met with force by the government. According to the United Nations, about 1,400 people were killed. Former Prime Minister Hasina was accused of incitement, ordering killings, and failing to prevent atrocities. The trial began in June, during which multiple witnesses testified that Hasina personally ordered the massacre. Prosecutors also presented an audio recording in which she instructed security forces to “use lethal weapons.”

In August 2024, when enraged crowds stormed her official residence, Hasina fled to India by helicopter and has remained missing since. She refused to return for trial, calling the proceedings a “legal farce.” In July this year, she was convicted in absentia for contempt of court and sentenced to six months in jail. Additional corruption cases are pending against her, involving her daughter, UN official Wasade, and her niece, British MP Siddiq—all of whom deny the charges. Although Hasina was once praised for economic reforms, she was also widely criticized for suppressing the media and persecuting political opponents.

Hasina, now 78, is the daughter of Bangladesh’s founding leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, who was assassinated in a 1975 coup. After six years in exile, she returned to the country and briefly allied with Zia’s Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) to topple the military government. She first came to power in 1996 and regained office in 2008, steering Bangladesh’s rapid economic growth, with per-capita income surpassing India’s by 2021. Now sentenced to death, her chances of a political comeback are slim. Her longtime rival Zia, now 80, despite past periods of house arrest, is set to contest the 2026 election, in which the BNP is widely expected to prevail.

U.S. Marine Corps spokesperson Captain Steven J. Keenan confirmed on the 15th that a group of suspected Haitian gang members opened fire this week on U.S. forces tasked with protecting the American Embassy in Port-au-Prince, underscoring the continued deterioration of local security conditions.

In an emailed statement, Keenan said the shooting occurred on the 13th, though news of the incident only emerged over the weekend. After coming under attack, the Marines returned fire, and fortunately no one was injured. The Associated Press noted that Haitian police could not be reached for comment.

Nearly 90% of Haiti’s capital is now under gang control. Armed groups wield heavy firepower as they fight for territory and rely on extortion, kidnapping, and other crimes for profit. While the U.S. Embassy remains operational, the State Department has repeatedly issued travel warnings in recent years, urging American citizens to avoid Haiti due to risks of crime, terrorism, and civil unrest.

According to United Nations data, gang violence has displaced more than 1.3 million Haitians. Since President Jovenel Moïse was assassinated by mercenaries in 2021, Haiti has faced a prolonged power vacuum, has been unable to hold elections to select new leadership, and has seen its security environment collapse.

To help stabilize the situation, the UN Security Council voted at the end of September to assemble an international security support mission of roughly 5,500 personnel to assist in combating armed gangs in Haiti. However, the UN human rights office noted that 5,600 Haitians were killed by gangs just last year, and the smaller Kenya-led police contingent previously deployed has struggled to effectively curb criminal activity.

According to a Reuters report on the 14th, the United States and Switzerland announced a trade framework agreement focusing on reducing U.S. tariffs on Swiss imports from 39% to 15%, while Switzerland committed to investing USD 200 billion in the United States by the end of 2028. The White House said in a statement that the goal for the United States, Switzerland, and Liechtenstein is to complete negotiations on the trade agreement in the first quarter of 2026. This would place Switzerland’s tariff rates on par with those of EU member states.

U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer stated that the agreement breaks long-standing trade barriers and opens new markets for American goods. The United States welcomes Switzerland’s large-scale investments, which will help reduce trade deficits in pharmaceuticals and other critical sectors while creating thousands of jobs in the United States.

According to the White House statement, at least USD 67 billion of the pledged USD 200 billion investment will be in place as early as 2026. The USD 200 billion commitment includes USD 50 billion from pharmaceutical company Roche, USD 23 billion from Novartis, and additional investments from engineering group ABB, railway equipment manufacturer Stadler, and others. In addition to pharmaceuticals—Switzerland’s largest export to the United States—the investments will also cover U.S. production in medical devices, aerospace, and gold refining.

Swiss Economy Minister Guy Parmelin said when announcing the agreement that lowering tariffs to 15% would put Switzerland on equal competitive footing with the EU. The agreement affects about 40% of Swiss exports. It will also reduce tariffs on U.S. industrial goods, fish, seafood, and agricultural products deemed "non-sensitive" by Switzerland, while lowering or eliminating tariffs on certain fresh and dried nuts, fruits, seafood, and chemicals. Switzerland will additionally grant tariff-free bilateral quotas of 500 tons of beef, 1,000 tons of bison meat, and 1,500 tons of poultry from the United States. Switzerland will also recognize U.S. vehicle safety standards—an important step toward addressing Washington’s complaint that EU regulatory practices hinder American-made cars. Parmelin added that Switzerland would of course prefer the USD 200 billion in investment to remain domestically, and that the government will make every effort to study how to reduce business costs to offset the impact.

Swiss manufacturing industries welcomed the agreement—particularly machinery manufacturers—saying it places them on a level playing field with EU competitors. The Swiss industry association noted that in the three months through September, Swiss exports to the United States fell by 14%, while shipments by machine-tool makers plunged by 43%. Reuters reported that the tariff deal will provide the greatest relief to Switzerland’s machinery, precision instruments, watchmaking, and food sectors.

The agreement also brings an end to the trade dispute between the two sides that has been ongoing since August. Citing a USD 40 billion trade deficit with Switzerland, the United States had announced a 39% tariff on Swiss goods—the highest rate imposed by the Trump administration on a developed country. Switzerland was taken by surprise by the sudden tariff hike and has engaged in intensive diplomatic negotiations with the United States over the past several months.

The U.S. visa review process is set to tighten again. On November 6, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a directive to U.S. embassies and consulates around the world, instructing visa officers to consider chronic conditions such as obesity, cancer, heart disease, and diabetes when evaluating visa applications. These conditions could even become grounds for visa denial. The new rules also require officials to assess factors such as whether the applicant is of retirement age, the number of dependents (such as children or elderly parents), and whether those dependents have "special needs" or physical or mental disabilities, raising concerns internationally.

This policy significantly expands the scope of medical examinations, which were previously limited to infectious diseases, and gives visa officers more discretion in rejecting applicants based on their health status. The new guidelines also instruct visa officers to evaluate the potential economic burden that an applicant’s medical condition could impose on the U.S. The rules apply to both temporary visas (e.g., H-1B) and immigrant visa applications for permanent residency, but some humanitarian visas, such as those for refugees, are exempt. Immigration lawyers are concerned that this new policy will make common chronic diseases a reason for visa denial, broadening the impact beyond previous regulations.

The State Department stated on the 13th that this measure, initiated during the Trump administration, aims to prevent the immigration system from becoming a burden on taxpayers. An anonymous State Department official revealed that the directive was drafted by political appointees and did not go through the usual review process nor seek input from career diplomats. A diplomat who received the directive told “The Washington Post” that State Department leadership has been actively seeking new ways to prevent foreign nationals from entering the U.S. or to slow down the entry process.

A compromise funding bill passed the U.S. Senate and House by votes of 60–40 and 222–209, respectively, and became law after being sent to the White House for President Donald Trump’s signature. This officially ended the longest government shutdown in U.S. history, which lasted 43 days. During the shutdown, millions of Americans lost access to food assistance, and hundreds of thousands of federal employees went without pay—some of whom were still required to work. This led to severe disruptions in air traffic control across the country, causing widespread flight cancellations and delays.

The funding bill temporarily ensures that no layoffs will occur before January 30 next year, allowing government agencies to continue operating. Democrats had attempted to tie the bill to the year-end expiration of a healthcare subsidy but were unsuccessful. The subsidy—which affects roughly 24 million people—will be voted on in December. If it does not pass, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that Americans’ insurance premiums will more than double on average, and over 2 million people will completely lose health coverage next year. The six-week shutdown has caused an estimated $11 billion in permanent economic losses. At least 75% of Americans believe both parties bear a “moderate” level of responsibility for the shutdown, and essentially, neither the public nor either party came out as a winner.

A series of scandals have recently rocked South Korea’s higher education sector, as students from top universities were caught using generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools to cheat — helping themselves earn higher grades on assignments or exams. The schools involved are none other than the country’s most prestigious “SKY” universities: Seoul National University, Yonsei University, and Korea University.

According to a 2024 survey by the Korea Research Institute for Vocational Education and Training (KRIVET), among 726 students enrolled in four- and six-year programs, a staggering 91.7% admitted to using AI for writing assignments or conducting research. Many South Korean students noted that using AI to complete coursework or exams has already become “commonplace” on campuses.

Out of 131 universities nationwide, over 70% currently have no official regulations or guidelines regarding the use of generative AI. Experts warn that without substantive and enforceable restrictions, simply introducing “AI ethics education courses” to teach students how to use AI responsibly will be merely symbolic — unlikely to have any real educational or deterrent effect.