Saudi Arabia will host top American and Russian officials on Tuesday for a high-stakes rapprochement meeting – a role that underlines the kingdom’s aspirations to become a global actor capable of successfully mediating international conflicts. Another likely aim: added leverage for Riyadh in future talks on the fate of postwar Gaza.

The location for these talks – described by Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov as one that “generally suits” the United States and Russia – is widely considered a win for the kingdom’s 39-year-old de facto leader, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. He’s on a mission to transform his oil-rich country and its fundamentalist Islamist past, into a nation that can cultivate soft power from immense wealth.

“I don’t think there’s another place where the leader has such a good personal relationship with both Trump and Putin,” Saudi commentator Ali Shihabi said, adding that for “Saudi Arabia, (the event is) prestigious and enhances the Saudi soft power regionally and globally.”

It’s all part of a wider shift. In recent years, Saudi Arabia has realigned its policies towards neutrality in global conflicts with the hope of attracting billions of investments that could help achieve “Vision 2030” – the crown prince’s plan to diversify the Saudi economy away from oil. Prince bin Salman has significantly pulled back from Yemen after years of war with neighboring Houthis, he is mending ties with regional rival Iran and has maintained close relationships with China and Russia – all while preserving the close Saudi relationship with the West.

Ties with both Putin and Trump

In addition to hosting international boxing bouts and electronic music festivals, Saudi Arabia has sought to project an image of being a global peacekeeper, hosting aid donor meetings and peace conferences. In August 2023, it hosted a two-day peace summit on Ukraine with representatives from more than 40 countries (albeit without Russia), and in February of the same year, pledged $400 million in aid to Ukraine.

Prince bin Salman’s ascension as a powerbroker in the talks stem from his close relationship with US President Donald Trump, who supported the young royal when he was internationally shunned following the killing of columnist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi agents.

In 2017, Trump broke with tradition by choosing Saudi Arabia for his first international presidential visit. Even after he lost the 2020 election, Saudi Arabia continued close business ties with Trump, investing $2 billion in a firm chaired by his son-in-law Jared Kushner and announcing plans to build Trump towers in the kingdom.

The crown prince also has warm ties with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who refused to isolate the prince after the Khashoggi murder. Prince bin Salman resisted Western pressure to alienate Moscow after Ukraine’s invasion and continued coordinating closely with Putin to control global oil supply, even siding with Russia by rebuffing calls from the Biden administration to ramp up oil production in 2022. Putin visited the kingdom in 2023 and has courted Riyadh to join BRICS – a bloc of countries seeking to counter US economic influence.

The hedging of Saudi Arabia’s relations in an increasingly polarized world has proven beneficial, analysts say. Prince bin Salman was “instrumental” in the release of American teacher Mark Fogel from Russian custody last week, Trump’s envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff said. Saudi Arabia, along with its neighbor the United Arab Emirates, was also successful in mediating several prisoner exchanges between Ukraine and Russia.

On Monday, Witkoff joined US National Security Adviser Mike Waltz and Secretary of State Marco Rubio for a meeting with Prince bin Salman in the Saudi capital Riyadh, just one day ahead of the scheduled talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Putin’s aide Yury Ushakov and Russia’s sovereign wealth fund chief Kirill Dmitriev.

Notably, Tuesday’s talks will not include Ukraine. However, President Volodymyr Zelensky, who is in the United Arab Emirates capital Abu Dhabi, said he will travel to Saudi Arabia later this week for separate talks with Saudi officials.

European leaders will be meanwhile meeting in Paris to discuss a coordinated response to the talks in Saudi Arabia, having been left out of direct participation – a signal from Washington that Europe’s security role may no longer be a priority for the United States.

An eye on Gaza

Longer term, Saudi Arabia may aim to use its role as a mediator in the meeting between Russia and the US to capitalize on a pressing regional matter – Trump’s controversial suggestion that the US take ownership of Gaza and permanently relocate its residents.

Earlier this month, Trump laid out a vision of bringing peace to the Middle East by redeveloping the war-torn Gaza strip with “Riviera”-style premium housing and permanently relocating its more than 2 million residents.

Arab countries swiftly rejected the idea. There will be a summit at the end of this week in Saudi Arabia where a counter proposal will be discussed before presenting it to Trump.

“By facilitating President Trump’s stated goal of ending the Ukraine war, Saudi Arabia is well-positioned to accumulate goodwill in Washington. The kingdom, which is scheduled to host a mini-Arab summit on Friday, could capitalize on its rising stock with the Trump administration to help bridge the gap between the US and Arab positions on the fate of Gaza,” said Hasan Alhasan, senior fellow for Middle East policy at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in Bahrain.

The next four years could see Prince bin Salman banking on his close relationship with Trump – but the prince may still find himself in tough spots trying to balance his regional interests amid aggressive demands from the transactional American president.

Trump would like to see Saudi-Israel relations normalized, but amid growing anger in the Middle East over Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, defending a path to Palestinian statehood is politically non-negotiable for Prince bin Salman.

“Achieving lasting and just peace is impossible without the Palestinian people obtaining their legitimate rights in accordance with international resolutions, as has been previously clarified to both the former and current U.S. administrations,” the kingdom said in a statement earlier this month in reaction to Trump’s Gaza plan.

The Israeli military is keeping troops at five southern Lebanese posts despite a Tuesday withdrawal deadline and Hezbollah warnings that Israel is violating a ceasefire agreement.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) will, for the time being, remain at the outposts in Lebanon “so we can continue to defend our residents and to make sure there’s no immediate threat,” Lt. Col. Nadav Shoshani, an IDF spokesperson, said on Monday. Israel’s military identified the handful of strategic locations in southern Lebanon overlooking northern Israeli communities.

Israel and Hezbollah ended a year-long war in November, in a ceasefire brokered in part by the United States. A deadline for Israel to withdraw, originally set for January, was extended to February 18 at Israel’s request.

Around 60,000 Israelis were forced from their homes in the north of the country after Hezbollah attacked Israel in solidarity with Hamas, in October 2023. Few of them have returned to border towns that have been devastated by rocket fire. A year-long, low-level conflict culminated last fall with an Israeli invasion and bombing campaign that saw more than a million Lebanese civilians displaced from their homes.

“Based on the current situation, we will leave small amounts of troops deployed temporarily in five strategic points along the border,” Shoshani said. “We are committed to the agreement of the ceasefire. We think it’s a good process.” He declined to say whether Lebanon’s government had agreed to the extension, saying only that the Israeli government had spoken with the ceasefire’s mediators, led by the US.

Publicly, Lebanese leaders have been scathing. Nabih Berri, the speaker of Lebanon’s parliament, said in a Thursday statement that the US had informed him of Israel’s plan, which he rejected on Lebanon’s behalf.

“I refused to talk about any deadline to extend the withdrawal period,” he said, according to Lebanon’s official news agency NNA. “And it is the responsibility of the Americans to impose the withdrawal.” He added that if Israel remains in those locations, it “means that the Israelis will practice freedom of movement and aggression in Lebanon, and this is unacceptable.”

Israel has accused the Lebanese government of failing to uphold its side of the ceasefire agreement, by failing to adequately deploy south of the Litani River – an area from which both Israel and Hezbollah are supposed to withdraw.

The IDF has, on occasion, continued to bomb Hezbollah targets during the ceasefire, accusing the Iran-backed militant group of using military sites in violation of the November agreement. It has also continued, on a near-daily basis, to destroy buildings in southern Lebanon in an effort, the military says, to destroy Hezbollah infrastructure. The efforts have left many of southern Lebanon’s towns in ruins.

The US military, which along with the United Nations and France runs a body to administer the ceasefire and discuss disputes, has been vague – stopping short of confirming that Israel would uphold its withdrawal commitment. In a statement on Friday, Maj. Gen. Jasper Jeffers said that the Lebanese Armed Forces “will control all population centers in the Southern Litani Area before next Tuesday.”

Jeffers has in recent weeks praised the Lebanese military, saying that their “checkpoints and patrols operate effectively,” and that it was providing for stability and security.

Naim Qassem, who assumed the post of Hezbollah secretary-general after Israel assassinated his predecessor, Hassan Nasrallah, in a massive bomb attack last September, said that there were “no excuses” for Israel’s failure to withdraw.

“This is the agreement,” he said in an address on Sunday. “The Lebanese state must take a firm stance and say no – because if Israel remains in any occupied area after that date, it will be in violation of the agreement.”

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said on Thursday that his country put together a proposal for United Nations peacekeepers to replace Israeli forces at key points in Lebanon, Reuters reported. This was meant to ensure that Israeli troops leave Lebanon by the February 18 deadline.

Eugenia Yosef, Nadeen Ebrahim and Pauline Lockwood contributed to this report.

Pope Francis is in a “stable” clinical condition and rested well overnight as he continues receiving treatment for bronchitis at a hospital in Rome, the Vatican’s press office said Sunday.

“This morning he received the Eucharist and followed the Holy Mass on television. In the afternoon he alternated reading with rest,” the Vatican added.

Earlier, the Pope thanked the healthcare workers at Rome’s Gemelli Hospital in his Angelus prayer.

“I would like to thank the doctors and healthcare workers in this hospital for their care: they do such a valuable and tiring job,” Pope Francis said in a written text of his Angelus prayer Sunday.

The Pope also thanked the public for the “affection, prayer and closeness with which you are accompanying me in these days.”

The Vatican said Saturday the pontiff would not lead the Angelus prayer as normal, as medical staff had prescribed him “absolute rest” to recover from his respiratory tract infection.

A spokesperson for the Vatican said Pope Francis had a peaceful second night in hospital.

“Pope Francis had a quiet night, slept well, ate breakfast and read some newspapers as he usually does. He continues the therapy,” the Vatican spokesperson said Sunday.

The pontiff was admitted to the hospital in Rome on Friday for treatment for bronchitis and medical examinations, the Vatican said, the latest in a string of ailments that have raised concerns about the 88-year-old pontiff’s health.

Francis has made a number of visits to the hospital in recent years, and received abdominal surgery in 2023. He has been struggling with bronchitis in recent weeks and has asked aides to read speeches and addresses.

The future of Ukraine will be discussed this week in Riyadh between Americans and Russians, with neither Europeans, nor, at the time of writing, Ukrainians themselves at the table. The question for European leaders now is: what can any of them do about it?

A hastily organized meeting in Paris, for now short on details in terms of attendance, is a measure of their concern as they wake up to the reality of Trump 2.0: that their long-standing American ally is no longer much of an ally and may in fact be far more dangerous to them existentially than they had imagined possible only a week ago.

There was, of course, US Vice President JD Vance’s startling speech in Munich on Friday, a rallying cry to the European far right that was quickly seized upon by their news outlets, in which he accused a stone-faced crowd of democratically elected European leaders on their own continent of selling out.

In a remarkable and disingenuous twisting of recent European history, Vance accused his audience of having betrayed the very ideals that allies had fought for during World War II. The danger, he said, warming to a theme he had touched upon in Paris just a few days before at French President Emmanuel Macron’s AI summit, was in Europe’s stifling of free speech, warning his audience that they should fear neither Moscow nor Beijing but European leadership itself.

It was a speech that went so much further than anyone had anticipated by questioning the moral underpinnings of the NATO alliance itself, rather than simply the operational question of budgetary contributions that had so far been President Donald Trump’s principal gripe.

Yet the vice president’s words, as surprising as they were, were not the only ones to set European alarm bells ringing.

Another senior American official to speak in Munich was the special envoy for Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, who sought to reassure the conference with tough words about his plan for extracting concessions from Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The American position, he said, was to be tough on Moscow, to demand territory from Russia and security guarantees for Europe. Yet his comments came only days after US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told his NATO counterparts in Brussels that he couldn’t see Ukraine joining the alliance at all, sweeping aside in one fell swoop not just the American position thus far but also what many had considered a key piece of leverage as negotiations with Moscow began.

The fear for Europeans is not now simply that Americans are preparing to negotiate without them but that they are preparing to negotiate badly without them. And while an invitation to Ukrainian leaders to join the discussions in Saudi Arabia may be in the post, for now the prospect is of American and Russian negotiators gathering around a table to discuss not just the future of the 6 million Ukrainians currently living under Russian occupation but also that of a European security architecture that impacts most closely the people living in Kyiv and Paris and every city in between.

The fact is that European countries, like their American ally thus far, spent nearly three years depleting their own arsenals and treasuries in the name of a fight for freedom and democracy that had felt to them existential as the Russian invasion began. That now appears to have been entirely brushed aside in the name of political expediency and the search for peace.

And, while peace is also what Europeans aspire to, their worry is now how costly it may be, given the price Washington seems prepared to pay, and how short lived, given Putin’s record.

Hence the meeting in Paris. European leaders may not be able to weigh in on the terms of a future peace deal but they do hope to find ways of giving security guarantees to Kyiv. Yet the danger facing them as they head to the French capital is that that just as the fight for Ukraine united them three years ago, so too might the specter of peace on their Eastern flank divide them once more. Particularly at a time when several of them are facing an increasingly emboldened and electorally successful European far right that is far more closely aligned with Washington’s new leaders than they are.

But European leaders are also keen not to appear rattled. The French foreign minister explained on French radio on Sunday that these sorts of meetings happened all the time. And Macron himself billed Monday’s talks as “an informal meeting” for those interested “in peace and security in Europe.”

For now, we expect not only the presidents of the EU council and Commission to attend, but also the NATO secretary general and the leaders of Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland and Denmark. The British prime minister has also confirmed his presence, with Downing Street calling it a “once in a generation moment” for national security.

Few of those heading to Paris had doubted that Trump meant what he said the first time round, it’s more that now he appears to have surrounded himself with people who know exactly what they’re doing when it comes to undermining Europe and dismantling NATO. And they are, it seems, done with doing Europe’s bidding. This will make Monday’s meeting not just about how to help Ukraine, but, at its heart, about how to save Europe itself.

Argentine President Javier Milei is facing calls for impeachment after promoting a little-known cryptocurrency, whose price soared then collapsed after his endorsement, leading to losses for thousands of investors.

The news has caused a major scandal in Argentina, with the opposition accusing Milei of promoting a scam, an allegation that the presidency has denied.

It started with a tweet posted by the president to his X account, which has more than 3.8 million followers. “This private project will be dedicated to encouraging the growth of the Argentine economy,” he wrote, with a link to the $LIBRA cryptocurrency project.

Hours later, Milei deleted the message and, in another post, said he had no ties to the initiative. “I was not aware of the details of the project and after having become aware of it I decided not to continue spreading it,” he said.

The presidency on Saturday announced an investigation into the matter, saying: “President Javier Milei has decided to immediately involve the Anti-Corruption Office to determine whether there was improper conduct on the part of any member of the national government, including the president himself.”

Up and down in a matter of hours

At the time of its launch, most of the cryptocurrency was held in a few digital wallets, and its price was almost zero. After the president’s post, its price increased rapidly to almost $5, but in less than three hours it plummeted to cents, according to trading application sites.

“The first thing I saw was that the website had been registered yesterday (Friday); (which) is typical of a scam,” said Sabbatella. He also indicated that the token was created minutes before Milei published the message.

“The whales (large holders of the asset) bought at practically nothing. Then the price flies and when it is up, they sell. It is known as pump and dump; that mechanic happened,” said Sabbatella.

He noted that he saw accounts that bought at very low levels earning more than $4 million in two hours, and one that earned up to $87 million with the sale.

Argentina’s political opposition criticized the president, with the Union for the Homeland coalition announcing Saturday it would move forward with a request for impeachment against Milei.

Figures close to Milei rejected the possibility of an impeachment, with Congressman Diego Santilli calling such calls an attempt to “overthrow” the president.

Security Minister Patricia Bullrich defended Milei, telling Radio Rivadavia: “The president has the freedom of expression to raise the issues he wants.” She also compared his message on X with a presidential visit to a factory, saying that “it does not imply that he is creating a lobby for that place.”

It was nearly 30 years ago when Rosember Lopez received a life-altering diagnosis: He was HIV positive.

With scant government resources for HIV support at the time in Mexico, Lopez joined advocacy groups to secure the funding he needed for medication to help him survive.

The experience inspired him to start his own organization in Tapachula, in southern Mexico, to help destigmatize HIV with the help of funding from the United States.

Today, his is one of dozens of aid groups across Latin America in jeopardy due to the Trump administration’s freeze on almost all international aid and the gutting of the US’ global development network.

The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a George W. Bush-era program that has enjoyed bipartisan support, was among those hit by US President Donald Trump’s actions. Relief groups have warned that halting programs such as PEPFAR could pose a risk to the lives of millions of people who will have to stop their HIV treatment, potentially opening the door to a HIV resurgence.

Organizations like Lopez’s help those with the disease access antiretroviral medications needed to reduce the risk of transmission, and give them a chance at a long, healthy life.

After hearing about the aid freeze in late January, Lopez began to worry not only about the future of his organization, A Helping Hand in the Fight Against AIDS (UMALCS), but also the deaths that could result from the lack of HIV care.

“It took me back to the times when there was no support and I said, ‘Well, now what is going to happen if we are no longer going to have the support of antiretroviral treatments?’” he said.

‘Shooting ourselves in the face’

PEPFAR has been a lifeline for those living with HIV and AIDS, saving tens of millions of people across the world since its inception, say advocates.

Without consistent treatment, Spencer warned that in a span of weeks or months, “We’re going to have people who had their HIV well controlled, who will be uncontrolled. You will have people that could not have transmitted who will be able to transmit now.”

If PEPFAR is not reauthorized for the next four years, and without other resources for the HIV response, there would be 6.3 million AIDS-related deaths in the near future, a 400% increase, Christine Stegling, the deputy executive director of the United Nations agency tasked with tackling HIV and AIDS, UNAIDS.

Not ‘enough money for everyone’

The lack of US funding is already impacting organizations in Colombia.

Some organizations, like Red Somos, which provides HIV care to Venezuelan migrants, have been forced to drastically scale back their operations.

“This could be dangerous for their life,” Marquez said, adding that the organization is looking to other sources of funding.

Without explicit permission from the US to resume work, Red Somos has more than 170 antiretroviral drugs that are nearing their expiration date. The group also had to suspend its educational, social protection and mental health services since January.

Miguel Lopez, who was diagnosed with HIV 10 years ago, founded Más Que Tres Letras — which translates to “More Than Three Letters” — to normalize public discourse in Colombia about HIV and where to seek help.

While Lopez’s group relies on other donors, he still anticipates fallout from the latest US policy. Lopez and his team worry there might not be enough money to go around as organizations that once relied on US funding are now scrambling to find other donors.

“There is not going to be enough money for everyone,” Lopez said.

Reduced activities

In Haiti, Dr. Alain Casseus and his colleagues at healthcare organization Zanmi Lasante have been severely impacted by the aid freeze.

Some approved services can’t immediately resume for aid groups that have already cut down on staff and are operating at reduced capacity.

There are parts of Haiti that rely almost solely on American funding for their healthcare needs, the USAID employee said. “If these health facilities were not there, people would receive no medications, no healthcare, nothing.”

“We urgently need international support to sustain our work.”