U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz warned Iran during an emergency meeting of the Security Council that President Donald Trump ‘is a man of action’ who has ‘made it clear all options are on the table to stop the slaughter.’ 

Waltz said Thursday that, ‘We all have a responsibility to support the Iranian people and to put an end to the regime’s neglect and oppression of the Iranian nation.’ 

Iran has been plunged into turmoil amid recent anti-government protests, with the death toll from those being at least 2,677, the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency told The Associated Press. 

‘Colleagues, let me be clear. President Trump is a man of action, not endless talk like we see at the United Nations. He has made it clear all options are on the table to stop the slaughter. And no one should know that better than the leadership of the Iranian regime,’ Waltz added. 

Waltz’s remarks came as Gholam Hossein Darzi, the deputy Iranian ambassador to the U.N., accused the U.S. of trying to destabilize the Islamic Republic.

‘Under the hollow pretext of concern for the Iranian people and claims of support for human rights, the United States regime is attempting to portray itself as a friend of the Iranian people, while simultaneously laying the groundwork for political destabilization and military intervention under a so-called humanitarian narrative,’ Darzi said. 

Waltz dismissed the claim, telling diplomats at U.N. headquarters on Thursday that Iran’s leaders are ‘afraid of their own people.’ 

‘I would like to address the allegation put forward by the regime that these inspired protests are somehow a foreign plot to give a precursor to military action. Everyone in the world needs to know that the regime is weaker than ever before, and therefore is putting forward this lie because of the power of the Iranian people in the streets,’ Waltz said.

‘They are afraid. They’re afraid of their own people. Iran says it’s ready for dialogue, but its actions say otherwise. This is a regime that rules through oppression, through violence, and through intimidation, and has destabilized the Middle East for decades. Well, enough is enough,’ he added. 

‘The regime’s dereliction of duty to its own citizens is what has put the ayatollahs in the positions they are in today with hundreds of thousands, if not millions, protesting in the streets after decades of neglect and abuse. So everyone should ask themselves, everyone sitting here today, how many people are dead?’ Waltz also said.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Thursday that Trump and his team ‘have communicated to the Iranian regime that if the killing continues, there will be grave consequences.’ 

‘And the president received a message as he revealed to all of you and the whole world yesterday, that the killing and the executions will stop. And the president understands today that 800 executions that were scheduled and supposed to take place yesterday were halted. And so the president and his team are closely monitoring this situation, and all options remain on the table for the president,’ she added. 

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who visited with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem less than a month ago, said in a Thursday post on X he was going to Israel to meet with the foreign leader and his team.

‘I am traveling to Israel to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his team at this crucial time in the history of the Middle East. The goal is to build on the historic opportunities created by President Trump’s unprecedented leadership, to stand up to evil, and to support the people who are sacrificing for freedom,’ Graham wrote in the post.

‘The Trump-Netanyahu alliance has thus far been one of the strongest partnerships in the history of the U.S.-Israel relationship, and I am hopeful it will pay dividends in the near future. We live in a time of great consequence with the Middle East on the verge of previously unimaginable change. Standing together and following through on our commitments only makes us stronger,’ he added.

Graham’s announcement comes less than a month after he met with Netanyahu in Israel in December.

In a video posted to X on December 21, Netanyahu welcomed the senator, calling Graham ‘a great friend of Israel’ and ‘great personal friend.’

The lawmaker has been advocating for U.S. President Donald Trump to attack Iran.

‘President Trump’s resolve is not the question: Question is, when we do an operation like this, should it be bigger, or smaller? I’m in the camp of bigger,’ Graham said in footage he highlighted in a Thursday post on X. ‘Time will tell. I’m hopeful and optimistic that the regime days are numbered.’

In a Wednesday post on X, Graham wrote, ‘People often ask me what should we do next when it comes to the murderous, religious Nazi regime in Iran. It’s pretty simple. Stand by the protesters demanding an end to their oppression. But it’s going to take more than standing by them. We must stop those who are responsible for killing the people by any means necessary ASAP. Make The Iranian People Safe Again.’

Former Rep. Billy Long, who was nominated by President Donald Trump to be ambassador to Iceland, has apologized after privately joking to House lawmakers that the Arctic island would become the ’52nd state’ with him as its governor.

Long, a Republican who represented Missouri from 2011 to 2023 and served a brief stint as IRS commissioner last year, said he was just joking with his former congressional colleagues.

‘There was nothing serious about that, I was with some people, who I hadn’t met for three years, and they were kidding about Jeff Landry being governor of Greenland and they started joking about me and if anyone took offense to it, then I apologize,’ Long told Arctic Today.

‘I apologize and that’s my only comment, I look forward to working with the people of Iceland and I apologize it was taken that way, I was with a group of friends and there was nothing serious about it,’ he added.

Trump recently named Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry as a special envoy to Greenland.

This comes as Trump heats up his threats to acquire Greenland, a Danish territory, saying he plans to take the island ‘one way or the other.’

‘We are going to do something on Greenland, whether they like it or not,’ Trump said last week. ‘Because if we don’t do it, Russia or China will take over Greenland, and we’re not going to have Russia or China as a neighbor.’

Trump administration officials are openly weighing options such as military force to take Greenland, a move that would violate NATO’s Article V, which states that an attack on one member is an attack on all of them and could end the alliance of more than 75 years.

Denmark and other European countries have made moves, including sending additional troops to Greenland in case of a U.S. invasion, backing the territory as it reaffirms its position that it does not want to join the U.S. Iceland is among the NATO members that have expressed opposition to Trump’s repeated threats to take Greenland.

On Capitol Hill, most Democrats and even some Republicans have opposed the idea of taking Greenland, while other Republicans have voiced support for pursuing closer ties with the territory, including Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., who introduced legislation to make it the 51st U.S. state, although he said the best way to acquire Greenland is voluntarily.

Trump has also said he wanted to make Canada the 51st U.S. state.

Long was visiting former colleagues on the House Floor earlier this week when he made the controversial comment about Iceland, sparking some minor diplomatic backlash, with Iceland’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs demanding answers from the U.S. Embassy in Reykjavík.

‘There is no doubt that this is very serious for a small country like Iceland,’ Icelandic Parliament member Sigmar Guðmundsson told MBL. ‘We need to understand that all the security arguments made by the U.S. regarding Greenland, also apply to Iceland.’

Some Icelanders also launched a petition drive calling on their government to reject Long as ambassador if he is confirmed by the U.S. Senate. The petition has obtained 2,000 signatures.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told Politico that Long was ‘probably having some fun’ and ‘I wouldn’t read too much into that.’

The Supreme Court is poised to rule soon on President Donald Trump’s use of an emergency wartime law to unilaterally impose sweeping tariffs on most U.S. countries — and which brought to the fore key questions over the ‘major questions doctrine,’ or the limiting principle by which courts can, in certain circumstances, move to curb the power of executive agencies.

During oral arguments over Trump’s tariffs in November, justices honed in on the so-called major questions doctrine — which allows courts to limit the power of executive agencies on actions with ‘vast economic and political significance’ — and how it squares with Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to enact his sweeping global and reciprocal tariffs.

Plaintiffs told the court that Trump’s use of IEEPA to unilaterally impose his steep import duties violates the major questions doctrine, since IEEPA does not explicitly mention the word ‘tariffs.’ Rather, it authorizes the president to ‘regulate … importation’ during a declared national emergency — plaintiffs noted, arguing that it falls short of the standard needed to pass muster for MQD.

‘Congress does not (and could not) use such vague terminology to grant the executive virtually unconstrained taxing power of such staggering economic effect — literally trillions of dollars — shouldered by American businesses and consumers,’ they told the court in an earlier briefing.

Lawyers for the Trump administration countered that text of the IEEPA emergency law is the ‘practical equivalent’ of a tariff.

‘Tomorrow’s United States Supreme Court case is, literally, LIFE OR DEATH for our Country,’ Trump posted on Truth Social back in November.

‘With a Victory, we have tremendous, but fair, Financial and National Security. Without it, we are virtually defenseless against other Countries who have, for years, taken advantage of us,’ Trump continued.

‘Our Stock Market is consistently hitting Record Highs, and our Country has never been more respected than it is right now,’ he added. ‘A big part of this is the Economic Security created by Tariffs, and the Deals that we have negotiated because of them.’

While U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer acknowledged to the justices that IEEPA does not explicitly give an executive the power to regulate tariffs, he stressed in November that the power to tariff is ‘the natural common sense inference’ of IEEPA.

But whether the high court will back his argument remains to be seen.

That was the conclusion reached by the U.S. Court of International Trade last year. Judges on the  three-judge panel voted unanimously to block Trump’s tariffs from taking force, ruling that, as commander in chief, Trump does not have ‘unbounded authority’ to impose tariffs under the emergency law. 

‘The parties cite two doctrines—the nondelegation doctrine and the major questions doctrine—that the judiciary has developed to ensure that the branches do not impermissibly abdicate their respective constitutionally vested powers,’ the court said in its ruling.

The doctrine was also a focus in November, as justices pressed lawyers for the administration over IEEPA’s applicability to tariffs, or taxation powers, and asked the administration what guardrails, if any, exist to limit the whims of the executive branch, should they ultimately rule in Trump’s favor.

Though it’s not clear how much the court will rely on the MQD in its ruling, legal experts told Fox News Digital that they would expect it to potentially be cited by the Supreme Court if it blocks Trump’s tariff regime.

The high court agreed to take up the case on an expedited basis last fall, and a ruling is expected to be handed down within the coming days or weeks.

There’s very little precedent for major questions as a formal precedent cited by the courts, as noted by the University of Chicago College of Law in 2024.

The doctrine was cited formally by the Supreme Court for the first time ever in its 2022 ruling in West Virginia v. EPA, when the court’s majority cited the doctrine as its basis for invalidating the EPA’s emissions standards under the Clean Power Plan. 

Prior to that, the doctrine existed as a more amorphous strand of statutory interpretation — a phenomenon that Justice Elena Kagan noted in her dissent in the same case.

‘The current Court is textualist only when being so suits it,’ Kagan said then. ‘When that method would frustrate broader goals, special canons like the ‘major questions doctrine’ magically appear as get-out-of-text-free cards.’

One factor that could play in Trump’s favor is the fact that the tariffs case is to some degree a foreign policy issue, which is an area where executives enjoy a higher level of deference from the court. 

Still, if oral arguments were any indication, the justices seemed poised to block Trump’s use of IEEPA to continue his steep tariff plan. 

Justices pressed Sauer as to why Trump invoked IEEPA to impose his sweeping tariffs, noting that doing so would be the first time a president used the law to set import taxes on trading partners.

They also seemed skeptical of the administration’s assertion that they did not need additional permission from Congress to use the law in such a sweeping manner, and pressed the administration’s lawyers on their contention that EEPA is only narrowly reviewable by the courts.

‘We agree that it’s a major power, but it’s in the context of a statute that is explicitly conferring major powers,’ Sauer said. ‘That the point of the statute is to confer major powers to address major questions — which are emergencies.’

Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado said she presented President Donald Trump with her Nobel Peace Prize medal, describing it as a historic gesture recognizing his commitment to freedom and the fight against tyranny.

Machado spoke with reporters outside the U.S. Capitol Thursday, when she was asked whether she offered her Nobel Peace Prize to Trump.

‘I presented the president of the United States the medal … the Nobel Peace Prize, and I told him, ‘Listen to this, 200 years ago, General Lafayette gave Simón Bolívar a medal with George Washington’s face on it,’ Machado said. ‘He kept that medal for the rest of his life. Actually, when you see his portraits, you can see the medal.’

She said Lafayette gave the medal to Bolívar as a symbol of the partnership between the people of the U.S. and the people of Venezuela and their shared fight for freedom against tyranny.

‘Two hundred years in history, the people of Bolívar are giving back the heir of Washington, a medal, in this case the medal of the Nobel Peace Prize, as a recognition for his unique commitment with our freedom,’ Machado said.

Machado’s meeting with Trump came nearly two weeks after the U.S. captured Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro and amid lingering questions about her political future. The meeting also followed comments from Trump casting doubt on Machado leading the country rather than endorsing the Venezuelan opposition leader.

‘I think it would be very tough for her to be the leader,’ Trump told reporters Jan. 3. ‘She doesn’t have the support within or the respect within the country. She’s a very nice woman, but she doesn’t have the respect.’

The Washington Post previously reported Trump was annoyed Machado won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2025, an award he had hoped to receive and that Machado dedicated to him, though the White House said the president’s decisions were based on ‘realistic decisions.’

Still, Machado floated the idea of transferring the prestigious award to Trump last week during an appearance on Fox News’ ‘Hannity.’

‘Did you at any point offer to give him the Nobel Peace Prize?’ Sean Hannity asked. ‘Did that actually happen?’

Machado responded, ‘Well, it hasn’t happened yet.’

‘I certainly would love to be able to personally tell him that we believe — the Venezuelan people, because this is a prize of the Venezuelan people — certainly want to give it to him and share it with him,’ Machado continued. ‘What he has done is historic. It’s a huge step toward a democratic transition.’

Despite her intent, the Norwegian Nobel Institute shut down the idea last Friday.

‘Once a Nobel Prize is announced, it cannot be revoked, shared or transferred to others,’ the institute said in a statement. ‘The decision is final and stands for all time.’

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for a reaction.

Fox News Digital’s Michael Sinkewicz contributed to this report.

The Biden administration purchased a pulsed energy weapon suspected of being the type that may have caused ‘Havana Syndrome’ which caused a series of mysterious ailments for U.S. diplomats and government workers in Cuba. 

The weapon was bought at the end of the Biden Administration and has since been tested by the Pentagon, Fox News has learned. House Republicans are demanding answers amid reports of the purchase of the device.

In a letter to Homeland Security Kristi Noem, House Committee on Homeland Security Chairman Andrew Garbarino, R-N.Y., is asking for information on the procurement process for the weapon, its costs and the findings associated with its year-long testing related to Havana Syndrome, officially known as Anomalous Health Incidents (AHI). 

‘The device in question is described as capable of producing pulsed radio waves and containing Russian components, though it is supposedly not entirely Russian in origin,’ the letter states. ‘Following HSI’s successful acquisition of the device, it was reportedly transferred to DoW, which spent more than a year testing the device and its capabilities.’

Some U.S. intelligence agencies have said a foreign adversary could be behind the mysterious ailment. 

Fox News Digital previously reported that Adam, a former government employee whose identity Fox News agreed to protect, is considered to be ‘Patient Zero.’

He was first attacked in December 2016 while living in Havana on assignment. During his time on the Caribbean island, Adam experienced multiple attacks and described pressure to the brain that led to vertigo, tinnitus and cognitive impairment.

‘While assessments from the Intelligence Community (IC) do not conclusively identify the factors causing AHIs or any foreign actor responsible, an assessment from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) presented a majority view concluding that it was ‘very unlikely’ that a foreign actor ‘used a novel weapon or prototype device to harm even a subset of the U.S. Government personnel,’ with five out of seven agencies agreeing with that assessment,’ Garbarino wrote in his letter. 

‘However, two agencies dissented from the majority view and assessed that there was a chance that foreign actors may have developed some sort of ‘novel weapon or prototype device’ that could have harmed U.S. personnel,’ he added. 

However, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) released the report and held a background call with reporters on Friday explaining that new reporting ‘led two components to shift their assessments about whether a foreign actor has a capability that could cause biological effects consistent with some of the symptoms reported as possible AHIs.’

‘This shift consequently led two IC components to subtly change their overall judgment about whether a foreign actor might have played a role in a small number of events,’ the agency said. 

Fox News’ Liz Friden contributed to this report. 

A former Ukrainian prime minister has been accused of plotting to bribe politicians with stacks of U.S. dollars in a scheme aimed at weakening President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s government, a former political adviser has claimed.

Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (UNACB) first confirmed Jan. 13 it uncovered an alleged effort by the leader of an unnamed parliamentary faction to offer illegal benefits to lawmakers, according to Reuters.

Video released by UNACB showed stacks of U.S. dollars seized during overnight searches earlier this week, including footage of a woman in the office sitting behind a desk. Authorities did not publicly identify the suspect.

According to the Kyiv Post, published recordings allegedly show that three lawmakers were offered $10,000 per month in exchange for their votes, with the case linked by some to Yulia Tymoshenko, a veteran politician, former prime minister, and current leader of the Batkivshchyna party.

Former Zelenskyy press secretary Yuliia Mendel told Fox News Digital the cash allegedly belonged to Tymoshenko and was intended to pay lawmakers to vote against the president’s legislative proposals.

‘In Ukraine, such transactions are usually discussed in U.S. dollars, as you can see from the law enforcement reports,’ Mendel, a former political advisor said.

‘The U.S. dollars shown in that video were allegedly hers that she was supposed to use to pay people to vote against Zelenskyy’s legislative proposals. She said it was her personal savings,’ Mendel added.

Mendel said the sums shown in the footage appeared relatively modest, ‘about $40,000,’ she said, noting other corruption cases in Ukraine have involved ‘much larger sums, sometimes millions of dollars.’

The raid on Tymoshenko’s party office reportedly lasted nearly all night. ‘Officers arrived in the evening and remained in her office for almost the entire night,’ Mendel said.

Investigators allege several lawmakers — reportedly including members of Zelenskyy’s own faction — approached Tymoshenko, leading to discussions about regular monthly payments in exchange for coordinated voting.

Despite reportedly being served with a notice of suspicion, Tymoshenko also addressed parliament this week, calling the case ‘political persecution against me.’

‘The so-called ‘urgent investigative actions’ that lasted all night ended at the Batkivshchyna party office. These ‘urgent investigative actions’ have nothing to do with law and order,’ Tymoshenko also wrote on Facebook.

According to Mendel, the goal was not to attack Zelenskyy personally but to fracture the ruling mono-majority in parliament.

‘Ukraine’s system is a parliamentary-presidential republic, meaning the legislature plays a central role in governance. When the president controls a mono-majority, legislation can pass quickly,’ Mendel said.

‘Breaking that majority would significantly weaken Zelenskyy’s legislative authority,’ Mendel explained.

Tymoshenko, a central figure in the 2004 Orange Revolution and Ukraine’s first female prime minister, has faced legal trouble before.

In 2011, she was jailed over a gas deal with Russia in a case widely viewed as politically motivated, before being released in 2014. She is expected to appear before Ukraine’s High Anti-Corruption Court.

‘Corruption is one of the key reasons we are losing this war. It severely damages Ukraine’s image on the international stage,’ Mendel warned.

‘By 2024, corruption had reached such a scale that Ukrainians chose an extremely dangerous and painful path — exposing it publicly in order to fight it,’ Mendel added.

‘Now, cases like this bring the issue back into the spotlight. Corruption will destroy Ukraine.’

Fox News Digital has reached out to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s office for comment.

After a brief series of delay tactics deployed by Democrats, the Senate passed a $174 billion spending package, sending a trio of funding bills to President Donald Trump’s desk.

The move puts Congress one step closer to averting a partial government shutdown, but lawmakers are only halfway through completing and passing the legislation needed to keep the lights on in Washington, D.C.

Neither party is keen to repeat the events of last fall, when Congress shattered the record for the longest government shutdown in history at 43 days. Still, hurdles remain before the fast-approaching Jan. 30 deadline to fund the government.

Despite attempts by Senate Democrats to slow the process, with lawmakers railing against recent actions by the Trump administration in Minnesota and Colorado, the power of jet fumes and an impending week-long break from the Capitol smashed through any resistance.

The three-bill package, known as a minibus, includes legislation to fund commerce, justice, science and related agencies; energy and water development and related agencies; and interior, environment and related agencies.

Comparatively, that package, and a forthcoming two-bill package from the House, are much easier lifts for lawmakers to pass than what’s to come.

Funding the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has proved tricky, given congressional Democrats’ outrage over the agency’s actions in Minnesota.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., was hopeful that a forthcoming package would include that bill, and that it could advance through the House to the Senate in the coming weeks.

‘Appropriators are working on another package of the four remaining bills, which I hope will receive the same bipartisan backing that has characterized the appropriations cycle thus far,’ Thune said on the Senate floor. ‘And before the end of the month the Senate will need to process all of these funding bills and get them to the president’s desk.’

But there is an acknowledgment among several lawmakers that Congress will likely have to turn to a short-term funding extension, or continuing resolution (CR), for some remaining funding bills or directly targeted at DHS.

Congressional Democrats are demanding restrictions on DHS funding, particularly money that flows to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) following the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good by an ICE agent last week.

Lawmakers are staying tight-lipped, for now, about what exactly the restrictions could be.

In the upper chamber, Homeland Security Appropriations Chair Katie Britt, R-Ala., said that Republicans had sent a ‘counteroffer to the Democrats but have yet to hear back from them.’

When asked if, ultimately, a CR for just DHS funding would be acceptable for the time being, she told Fox News Digital, ‘What I want to do is actually pass a bill.’

‘I find it hard to believe that Democrats would give President Trump, in their words, a ‘slush fund’ on DHS,’ Britt said. ‘So I think figuring out a pathway forward is what we need to do for everybody involved. And so I’m continuing to be committed to doing that. Time is of the essence.’

Britt’s opposite on the committee, Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., noted that the bill was ‘obviously the hardest,’ but contended that Democrats did not want to try to fix every issue in one fell swoop.

He also believed that a CR wouldn’t fix any of the issues, either.

‘A CR doesn’t stop them from terrorizing our citizens, doesn’t stop the violence,’ Murphy said. ‘So, a CR isn’t great. A budget without any constraints on DHS isn’t likely to get a lot of Democratic votes either.’

‘That’s one of the difficult things to figure out, is whether there’s any language you can put in a budget that the administration will follow,’ he continued. ‘But yes, I think there are ways that we could write accountability into the budget that would be hard for the administration to avoid.’

The Senate’s passage of the minibus comes after the House advanced its latest two-bill package on Wednesday evening. That bill totaled roughly $80 billion in funding for the State Department and related national security, as well as federal financial services and general government operations.

That legislation easily passed the House in a 341-79 vote on Wednesday evening and is now headed to the Senate for its consideration.

House appropriators are expected to release the text of their minibus covering the War Department, Labor Department, Education Department, Department of Transportation, and Department of Health and Human Services, among others, in the coming days.

House GOP leaders are hoping to advance that bill, which will likely be the largest by far, next week while the Senate is in recess. The House will be out the following week.

Questions remain about whether DHS funding will be part of that legislation or its own standalone issue, however.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., told Fox News Digital on Wednesday, ‘Right now, there’s no bipartisan path forward for the Department of Homeland Security bill.’

President Donald Trump’s push for the U.S. to acquire Greenland could carry an estimated price tag of $700 billion, according to reports.

The estimate, reported by NBC News, was said to have been calculated by scholars and former U.S. officials involved in early planning discussions surrounding Trump’s interest in acquiring the 800,000-square-mile island as a strategic buffer in the Arctic against adversaries including Russia and China.

The figure would exceed half of the Defense Department’s annual budget and reflects what officials described as a significant national security priority for the Trump administration.

The reported cost comes as new Reuters polling shows the Trump proposal is unpopular with Americans, but also continues to strain relations with U.S. allies.

‘The United States needs Greenland for the purpose of national security,’ Trump wrote Wednesday in a Truth Social post and warned that if the U.S. does not act, ‘Russia or China will.’

The president added that ‘anything less’ than U.S. control of Greenland is ‘unacceptable’ and argued that the Arctic territory is vital to American defense interests, including the ‘Golden Dome’ missile defense system in development.

Trump’s renewed push has increased tensions with Denmark and other NATO allies.

As previously reported by Fox News Digital, troops from several European countries deployed to Greenland Thursday for a two-day mission aimed at boosting the territory’s defenses.

France, Germany, Sweden and Norway are participating in the exercise, Fox News said, with leaders saying the mission is intended to demonstrate NATO’s ability to deploy military assets quickly in the Arctic.

NBC News also reported that Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been tasked with developing a proposal to purchase Greenland that will be presented to Trump in the coming weeks.

Rubio and Vice President JD Vance are also expected to meet with officials from Denmark and Greenland in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday.

Trump has vowed to acquire Greenland ‘one way or the other,’ a remark Danish and Greenlandic officials have sharply rejected.

Danish leaders have warned that any military action against another NATO member could jeopardize the alliance itself.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll also found just 17% of Americans approve of Trump’s efforts to acquire Greenland, with 47% opposed, and 35% unsure.

Greenland is the world’s largest island and has a population of roughly 56,000 people with most people living along its ice-free coastline. About 80% of the territory is covered by ice caps and glaciers.

Fishing, hunting, whaling, sealing and tourism are the backbone of its local economy.

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.

More than a decade ago, China launched its Belt and Road Initiative, pouring billions into ports, railways and power plants across the developing world to extend Beijing’s economic and political reach far beyond its borders.

Today, experts say China is applying that same playbook to a far more strategic domain: space.

Across Africa, Latin America and other parts of the Global South, Chinese firms have quietly built or expanded satellite ground stations, tracking facilities and space infrastructure that position Beijing as a gateway to orbit for countries like Pakistan, Egypt, Ethiopia, Venezuela, Argentina and Namibia, which lack the resources to get there on their own. Analysts warn the effort carries implications not just for economic influence, but for future warfare and global dominance.

A new report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) finds that China is embedding itself deeply into the space programs of dozens of countries, offering end-to-end services that include satellite design, manufacturing, launches, training and ground infrastructure — a strategy that could give Beijing long-term leverage over a domain increasingly critical to modern military power.

High above Ethiopia’s capital, Addis Ababa, a newly expanded satellite facility built by Chinese firms now tracks objects in orbit. Similar Chinese-built or Chinese-operated sites have appeared in Egypt and Namibia, where large satellite dishes, tracking antennas and testing complexes support space missions that can serve both civilian and military purposes.

Together, the facilities form part of a growing global network strengthening China’s ability to track, communicate with and potentially influence activity in space — now widely viewed by defense planners as a new frontier of conflict.

‘This is really about who’s winning the space diplomacy race in the Global South,’ said Matthew Funaiole, a senior fellow at CSIS and one of the report’s authors. ‘Space is becoming central to economic power, national security, and military capability, and China is positioning itself accordingly.’

Once dominated by science and commerce, space is now treated as a warfighting domain alongside land, sea, air and cyberspace. Satellites underpin modern military operations, enabling communications, intelligence collection, missile warning, navigation and targeting.

Experts say China cannot operate a truly global space power from within its own borders alone. Satellites require constant tracking and communication, which is only possible through a worldwide network of ground stations spread across multiple continents. 

By building facilities overseas, China is closing gaps in its own network and adding redundancy that would be critical in a crisis.

‘Chinese-built ground stations can absolutely support civil and scientific missions — and they do,’ Funaiole said. ‘But they also provide China with the ability to level up its own national security capabilities.’

The report raises particular concern about the dual-use nature of the infrastructure China is exporting. Facilities marketed as scientific or commercial assets also can be used to monitor military satellites, communicate with defense systems, and collect sensitive data — capabilities closely tied to China’s People’s Liberation Army.

Compounding those concerns is a lack of transparency over who ultimately controls the data flowing through these systems.

‘When you’re dealing with space technology in China, there’s always a question of who has access and what the data is being used for,’ Funaiole said. ‘That lack of transparency is a real issue.’

Instead of ports and highways, experts say Beijing is now exporting satellites, launch services and ground stations — offering countries a turnkey path to space while embedding Chinese technology, standards and companies deep inside critical national systems. It is, in effect, Belt and Road applied to orbit.

‘There’s a lot of interest across Africa and Latin America in gaining access to space,’ Funaiole said. ‘Many countries just don’t have the capabilities to do it on their own, and China has stepped into that gap in a way the United States largely hasn’t.’

The report introduces a new China Space Cooperation Index, ranking 64 countries based on the depth of their engagement with Beijing. More than three-quarters of those countries are in the Global South, with Africa accounting for the largest share.

While China’s commercial space sector remains less advanced than that of the United States, it has leveraged state-backed financing, diplomatic outreach and bundled technology offerings to gain footholds that can be difficult to unwind.

‘Once countries are in China’s ecosystem, it becomes very costly for them to switch away,’ Funaiole said. ‘We’ve seen that play out in other critical technologies.’

The United States, by contrast, built its global space network decades ago primarily for warfighting and allied defense, relying on facilities in close partner nations rather than developing countries. Washington never packaged space access as a diplomatic tool, leaving a gap China is now exploiting.

While Africa has emerged as a hub for China’s newest physical infrastructure, the report finds some of Beijing’s deepest space partnerships are in Latin America, including Venezuela and Argentina — developments with direct implications for U.S. security interests closer to home.

That expansion has not gone unnoticed in Washington. 

On display during the most recent operation to capture Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro, President Donald Trump explicitly revived what he dubbed the ‘Donroe Doctrine,’ a modernized and more confrontational take on the Monroe Doctrine that asserted the United States’ right to push hostile foreign powers out of the Western Hemisphere.

The posture was sharpened by the crisis in Venezuela, where China had built a significant economic and technological footprint, reinforcing concerns that Beijing was using infrastructure and technology partnerships to gain long-term strategic leverage in Latin America.

Experts say China’s growing role in satellite launches, space infrastructure and data-sharing agreements shows how strategic competition is moving beyond ports, power plants and telecom networks — and into space.

Beyond security concerns, the report warns of economic consequences if China becomes the space partner of choice for the developing world. The global space economy is projected to reach trillions of dollars in the coming decades, and long-term partnerships forged today could determine who dominates that market tomorrow.

Despite China’s momentum, Funaiole stressed that the United States still holds decisive advantages, if it chooses to use them.

‘The U.S. still has tremendous strengths,’ he said, pointing to companies like SpaceX, which he described as ‘leaps and bounds ahead’ of Chinese competitors. ‘China is trying to emulate that success.’

The question, he said, is whether Washington is willing to treat space not just as a scientific or commercial arena, but as a strategic tool of diplomacy, deterrence and competition.

‘This isn’t an area where it’s too late,’ Funaiole said. ‘The U.S. still has the ability to provide a real alternative — but it requires sustained attention and commitment.’