Demonstrators react as people attend the “People’s March on Washington” ahead of the presidential inauguration of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, in Washington, on January 18, 2025.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

Thousands of people have gathered in Washington to protest against Donald Trump’s policies ahead of his inauguration as the 47th President of the United States on January 20.

Mr. Trump, 78, succeeds Joe Biden, 82, on Monday (January 20, 2025) as the new occupant of the White House. A coalition of nonprofit bodies, including Sakhi for South Asian Survivors, under the banner of People’s March, held the demonstration here to protest against the policies of Trump.

The People’s March — previously known as the Women’s March — has taken place every year since 2017.

Displaying anti-Trump posters and banner, the protestors raised slogans against the next President and also against some of his close supporters including Tesla owner Elon Musk.

The same group had also held a similar protest on January 2017, when Mr. Trump was inaugurated for the first time.

There were a series of three protests which started from three different parks and culminated near the Lincoln Memorial.

“Mass protest is one of the most effective ways to demonstrate to our communities that we are not obeying in advance or bowing to fascism, and invites them to do the same,” People’s March said.

The rallies coincide with Mr. Trump’s arrival to the nation’s capital for a series of weekend events in the lead-up to his swearing-in ceremony on Monday.

Amongst the coalition members are Abortion Action Now, Time to Act, SisterSong, Women’s March, Popular Democracy In Action, Harriet’s Wildest Dreams, The Feminist Front, NOW, Planned Parenthood, National Women’s Law Centre Action Fund, Sierra Club, and the Frontline.

Women’s March is anchoring the logistics of the mobilisation. Similar marches, though at a smaller scale, were also held in various other cities including New York, Seattle and Chicago.

“We really wanted to come to support women, equality, immigration, everything that really feels like we don’t have much of a say in right now,” Brittany Martinez, one of the protesters, told USA TODAY.

Law enforcement officials said protests and major events are being planned throughout the weekend ahead of the inauguration on Monday. The protestors condemned Trump’s policies and values. Many of them chanted “F**k Trump!”, “Trans Lives Matter!”, “Stand up, fight back!”, “Trust Black women!” and “We cannot be silent.”

Emboldened by his victory in the U.S. presidential polls, Donald Trump has drummed up his rhetoric of belligerence by announcing plans to annex Canada and Greenland and retake control of the Panama Canal. While the U.S. has not historically shied away from coveting the two northern territories, threatening to renege on a deal that ceded Washington’s control of the canal to Panama has been strictly the brainchild of the President-elect.

Panama Canal is an 82-km-long strategic waterway that connects the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. It helps ships do away with the need to go around the South American tip of Cape Horn, saving 13,000 km and days of journey. Consequently, the canal facilitates the passage of over 14,000 ships a year.

The 78-year-old Republican first spelt out his plans for the canal during a speech at a Conservative event in Arizona and subsequently on his social media platform Truth Social. “We’re being ripped off at the Panama Canal like we’re being ripped off everywhere else,” he said, referring to the increased shipping rates, while speaking at AmericaFest on Sunday (December 22). “It was given to Panama and the people of Panama, but it has provisions. If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to us, in full, quickly and without question.” Mr. Trump also warned of said while of warning about the growing “Chinese influence” in the region. Later, Mr. Trump posted a photo on Truth Social of the U.S. flag flying over the narrow waterway in the Isthmus of Panama. The caption read “Welcome to the United States Canal”.

In its response, the Central American nation said, “Every square meter of the Panama Canal and the surrounding area belongs to Panama and will continue belonging (to Panama).” The country’s President Jose Raul Mulino decried Chinese presence and stated that shipping rates were not set on a whim. Mr. Trump’s remarks also angered the Panamanians who took to the U.S. embassy calling out “Trump, animal, leave the canal alone” and burning his image.

Mr. Trump’s grief in the matter is understandable for the U.S., whose ships constitute 74% of the traffic in the canal, is its biggest benefactor, followed by China at 21%. If not for the canal, ships traversing the east and west coasts of the U.S. would have to undertake an additional 22 days of voyage. In historical context, The canal also came to the aid of the Allies during the Second World War.

What began as a French project in 1880 under the leadership of Ferdinand de Lesseps, who had built the Suez Canal, soon fell apart due to unforeseen difficulties. Americans stepped in to complete the canal but Colombia, which ruled over Panama, did not favour the idea. By orchestrating independence from Colombia, then U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt secured a deal whereby Panama gave his country control over a 16-km wide strip of land to build the canal in exchange for monetary compensation.

Lock technology

The canal entered into operation in 1914. By using a technology comprising a series of locks, it revolutionised shipping. However, a dispute over the ownership and administration soon broke out between the U.S. and Panama, which eventually led to a direct clash in 1964 costing the lives of 28 people. In 1977, then President Jimmy Carter (despite opposition from the Senate) and Panama’s military leader Omar Torrijos signed two treaties — the Permanent Neutrality Treaty and the Panama Canal treaty that saw the U.S. hand over the control of the canal to Panama in 1999.

The former agreement grants the U.S. the authority to ensure the canal remains free and open without giving it the power to interfere in Panama. The latter ensured that Washington transferred the canal to Panama by December 31, 1999.

Since 2000, Panama has overseen the administration of the canal. However, the region, one of the wettest until recently, experienced a rainfall deficit in 2022. Gatun Lake, which provides the 200 million litres of water needed for each ship to transit the canal, experienced a drop in water levels, prompting authorities to increase shipping charges starting in 2025. Mr. Trump has objected to this.

His allegation of Chinese influence pertains to the Hong Kong-based company C.K. Hutchison Holdings, which manages two of the five ports in the region — one on each side of the canal. Bolstering his claim further was Panama’s 2017 decision to cut ties with Taiwan.

Growing tensions between the U.S. and Panama might not align with Mr. Trump’s top policy priorities such as stopping illegal migration from South America, warn experts.

“He’s [Donald Trump] essentially pimping out our men and women in uniform to a foreign power who’s the highest bidder… He is unfit to be our commander-in-chief.” These were the words of Tusli Gabbard, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for Director of National Intelligence, back in 2019. Clearly Ms. Gabbard’s loyalties have drastically changed since then.

Ms. Gabbard started public life by getting elected to the Hawaii House of Representatives in 2002 at the age of 21. She had to step down from the role in 2003, as her National Guard regiment was called for duty in Iraq. She would later serve in Kuwait and work her way up the ranks to the post of Lieutenant Colonel in 2021.

Conflicting policies

She started her tenure in the U.S. Congress as a Democrat, representing Hawaii’s second congressional district, in 2013. She was also the first Hindu in the U.S. Congress. Her political portfolio has been marked by diverse but often conflicting policies. Ms. Gabbard, perhaps owing to her time in the Army, has been a strong advocate against U.S. military interventionism. The New Yorker once quoted her as saying “If our troops are sent to fight a war, it must be the last option.” Not the first.”

One such ‘intervention’ Ms. Gabbard once decried was Mr. Trump’s push for escalating the war in Syria. In 2018, she accused Mr. Trump and then Vice-President Mike Pence of protecting “al-Qaeda and other jihadist forces in Syria,” all the while “threatening Russia, Syria, and Iran, with military force if they dare attack these terrorists.”

When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Ms. Gabbard spoke about the “legitimate” security concerns Russia had if Ukraine were to join NATO. “This war and suffering could have easily been avoided if Biden Admin/NATO had simply acknowledged Russia’s legitimate security concerns,” she posted on Twitter (now X) at the time. She also gave value to Russia’s claims that Ukraine was using U.S. funded labs to create deadly bioweapons. Her sympathetic position on Russia had even earned her praise on Russian state TV, while domestically she has been perceived as indiscriminately believing Russian propaganda.

Similarly With respect to Syria, Ms. Gabbard has been accused of cosying up to ‘dictators’ such as Bashar al-Assad. As a member of Congress in 2017, Ms. Gabbard once moved outside of official channels to meet the Syrian leader in 2017. The meeting kicked up a storm among her then-fellow Democrats who said that she was giving legitimacy to a leader accused of various war crimes.

However, the former Congresswoman has taken a tough line on Islamist extremism. She has condemned al-Qaeda, the Islamic State and more recently Hamas. Such a diverse portfolio does make it difficult for Ms. Gabbard to fit in perfectly with either of the political parties —Democrats or Republicans.

Breaking loose

Ms. Gabbard’s allegiances have undergone a 180-degree shift. In 2016, Ms. Gabbard endorsed Bernie Sanders for President over Hillary Clinton. In 2020, she unsuccessfully ran for Democratic nomination and later endorsed Joe Biden. And in 2022, she left the Democratic Party, accusing them of being an “elitist cabal of warmongers” driven by “cowardly wokeness“. She then registered as an independent and became a frequent contributor to Fox News wherein she espoused conservative ideas about gender and freedom of speech. And earlier this year, she joined the Republican party and endorsed Donald Trump for President.

While her nomination as Director of National Intelligence needs Senate confirmation, Ms. Gabbard’s selection has already created controversy citing her past political positions and her lack of experience. According to CNN, Ms. Gabbard was briefly placed on a Transportation Security Administration list that prompts additional security screening before flights after her overseas travel patterns and foreign connections triggered a government algorithm. And now by being director, she will oversee agencies such as the CIA, the FBI and the NSA.

This is of particular interest as Ms. Gabbard has been a fierce defender of Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, both men who have been accused by the U.S. government of leaking national secrets to the public. It remains to be seen how she makes sense of her position as both a defender of whistleblowers and as protector of national intelligence.

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump chose Rep Elise Stefanik to serve as his Ambassador to the United Nations.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

President-elect Donald Trump has chosen Rep Elise Stefanik to serve as his ambassador to the United Nations.

“Elise is an incredibly strong, tough, and smart America First fighter,” Mr. Trump said in a statement on Monday (Novermber 11, 2024) announcing his pick.

Nikki Haley, who challenged Mr. Trump for the GOP nomination, was among those who previously held the role in his first term.

Ms. Stefanik, 40, who serves as House Republican Conference Chair, has long been one of Mr. Trump’s most loyal allies in the House, and was among those discussed as a potential vice presidential choice.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. File
| Photo Credit: Reuters

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer touched upon a range of topics, including defence and regional security, during his congratulatory phone call with U.S. President-elect Donald Trump after a “historic” election victory.

Also Read: ‘Whole world loves Modi’: Trump in a post-victory conversation with PM Modi

During the call on Wednesday (November 6) evening, both leaders agreed to work towards strengthening the “incredibly strong” U.S.-U.K. special relationship and committed to ensure the bilateral ties continue to thrive.

“The Prime Minister offered his hearty congratulations and said he looked forward to working closely with President-elect Trump across all areas of the special relationship. From defence and security to growth and prosperity, the relationship between the U.K. and U.S. was incredibly strong and would continue to thrive for many years to come, the leaders agreed,” a Downing Street spokesperson said.

Mr. Starmer is said to have also reflected on the situation in the Middle East and “underscored the importance of regional stability”. They went on to discuss their recent meeting at Trump Tower when Starmer was in New York for the United Nations General Assembly.

“The leaders fondly recalled their meeting in September, and President-elect Trump’s close connections and affinity to the United Kingdom and looked forward to working with one another,” Downing Street added.

The phone call came after a heated first exchange between Mr. Starmer and the newly elected U.K. Leader of the Opposition Kemi Badenoch in the House of Commons.

The Conservative Party chief challenged the Labour leader over his party volunteers having flown in to support the campaign of Trump’s Democrat rival Kamala Harris.

“I am very sure that President Trump will soon be calling to thank him for sending all of those north London Labour activists to campaign for his Opponent,” Ms. Badenoch taunted.

“It is absolutely crucial that we have a strong relationship – that strong, special relationship, forged in difficult circumstances — between the U.S. and the U.K.. We will continue to work, as we have done in our four months in government, on issues of security, our economy and global conflict,” Mr. Starmer responded.

Earlier, Mr. Starmer had been forced to stress that any party activists in the U.S. during the election campaign were there as volunteers on their own time.

Ms. Badenoch also raised the risk of increased tariffs on U.K. exports by the new Trump administration, which would threaten the country’s manufacturing sector and urged him to revive UK-US free trade agreement (FTA) talks, which the previous Biden regime had cancelled.

Meanwhile, Mr. Starmer is in Budapest on Thursday for a summit hosted by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban where Trump’s victory and its implications on Europe and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) are expected to dominate the agenda.

The European Political Community (EPC), which holds these summits every six months, was set up in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine conflict as a chance for the European Union (EU) to meet wider partners including non-members such as the UK and Turkiye to discuss key security challenges affecting Europe.