US Down to 2,500 Troops in Afghanistan, as Ordered by Trump

In this Dec. 19, 2020, file photo, an Afghan security official stands near a vehicle in which rockets were placed, in Bagram, north of Kabul, Afghanistan, Saturday, Dec. 19, 2020, after five rockets were fired at a major US base in Afghanistan.(AP Photo/Rahmat Gul, File)
In this Dec. 19, 2020, file photo, an Afghan security official stands near a vehicle in which rockets were placed, in Bagram, north of Kabul, Afghanistan, Saturday, Dec. 19, 2020, after five rockets were fired at a major US base in Afghanistan.(AP Photo/Rahmat Gul, File)
TT

US Down to 2,500 Troops in Afghanistan, as Ordered by Trump

In this Dec. 19, 2020, file photo, an Afghan security official stands near a vehicle in which rockets were placed, in Bagram, north of Kabul, Afghanistan, Saturday, Dec. 19, 2020, after five rockets were fired at a major US base in Afghanistan.(AP Photo/Rahmat Gul, File)
In this Dec. 19, 2020, file photo, an Afghan security official stands near a vehicle in which rockets were placed, in Bagram, north of Kabul, Afghanistan, Saturday, Dec. 19, 2020, after five rockets were fired at a major US base in Afghanistan.(AP Photo/Rahmat Gul, File)

The US military has met its goal of reducing the number of troops in Afghanistan to about 2,500 by Friday, a drawdown that appears to violate a last-minute congressional prohibition.

President Donald Trump, who ordered the reduction in November, said Thursday that troop levels in Afghanistan had reached a 19-year low, although he did not mention a troop number. Last February his administration struck a deal with the Taliban to reduce American troop levels in phases and to go to zero by May 2021, although it is unclear how the incoming Biden administration will proceed.

President-elect Joe Biden, who has advocated keeping a small counterterrorism force in Afghanistan as a way to ensure that extremist groups like al-Qaida are unable to launch attacks on the United States, faces a number of questions on Afghanistan. One is how and whether to proceed with further troop cuts.

Trump in his brief statement alluded to his longstanding desire to get out of Afghanistan entirely.

"I will always be committed to stopping the endless wars," he said, referring to US wars that have dragged on in Afghanistan since 2001 and in Iraq for much of the period since 2003.

Although senior military officials had cautioned against speedy troop reductions in Afghanistan, Acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller announced on Nov. 17 that he was implementing Trump's order. As a result, military commanders scrambled to pull more than 1,500 troops out of the country in the last few weeks. At Trump's order, commanders also cut U.S. troop levels in Iraq to 2,500 from about 3,000 in the same period.

The Afghanistan decision was seen by some as unnecessarily complicating the decision-making of the incoming administration. Trump at the time had refused to acknowledge that he had lost the election and would be ceding to Biden on Jan. 20. Some in Congress, including fellow Republicans, opposed Trump's decision.

Under the National Defense Authorization Act passed by Congress two weeks ago, the Pentagon was explicitly forbidden to use money from this year´s or last year´s budget on reducing the number of troops below 4,000 - or below the number that was in the country the day the bill was finalized, which was Jan. 1. Trump vetoed the measure, but both the House and Senate voted to override his veto.

The Pentagon has not yet fully explained how it squares its continued drawdown with the legal prohibition. In response to questions about this, the Pentagon issued a written statement saying, "DoD will adhere to all statutory provisions of the FY21 National Defense Authorization Act, to include those in Section 1215 that impact the ongoing drawdown in Afghanistan." It said it has been working with the National Security Council "on the most efficient means to ensure consistency amidst an anterior drawdown already occurring across Afghanistan, and in a manner that continues to ensure the safety of US personnel."

The defense legislation provides two conditions under which the Pentagon could get around the prohibition -- a presidential waiver or a report to Congress assessing the effect of a further drawdown on the US counterterrorism mission in Afghanistan and the risk to US troops there. As of Thursday the Pentagon had met neither of those conditions.

The prohibition on completing the drawdown put the Pentagon in a bind, coming weeks after it had begun the drawdown, which involved a large logistical effort to remove equipment as well as troops. Because of less-than-transparent military procedures for counting troops in Afghanistan, it is possible that the 2,500 figure may be fudged.

The main reason for concern about a too-quick troop withdrawal is what the Pentagon sees as continued high levels of Taliban violence against the Afghan government. Some US officials have questioned he wisdom of fully withdrawing, in accordance with the February 2020 agreement with the Taliban, if violence remains high.

The US invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001 was aimed at overthrowing the Taliban regime, running al-Qaida out of the country, and laying the groundwork for a global "war on terrorism." It turned into something more ambitious but less well-defined and became far more costly in blood and treasure. During Biden's time as vice president, the US pushed US troop totals in Afghanistan to 100,000 in a failed bid to compel the Taliban to come to the negotiating table. When Trump took office four years ago there were about 8,500 troops in the country, and he raised it to about 13,000 that summer.

Last month, when he met with Afghan officials in Kabul and with Taliban representatives in Qatar, Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he emphasized to both sides that in order to give fledgling peace talks a chance, they must rapidly reduce levels of violence.

"Everything else hinges on that," Milley told reporters.

During Milley's visit, Army Gen. Scott Miller, the top commander of US and coalition forces in Afghanistan, told reporters that the Taliban had stepped up attacks on Afghan forces, particularly in the southern provinces of Helmand and Kandahar, and against roadways and other infrastructure.



Ghana Begins Repatriating Citizens from South Africa due to Anti-immigration Tensions

A man draped in a Ghana flag stands among other Ghanaians as Ghana repatriates hundreds of its citizens from South Africa following instances of violence against migrants from other sub-Saharan African countries, amid a wave ‌of protests against illegal immigration, at O.R. Tambo International Airport in Kempton Park, South Africa. REUTERS/Siphiwe Sibeko
A man draped in a Ghana flag stands among other Ghanaians as Ghana repatriates hundreds of its citizens from South Africa following instances of violence against migrants from other sub-Saharan African countries, amid a wave ‌of protests against illegal immigration, at O.R. Tambo International Airport in Kempton Park, South Africa. REUTERS/Siphiwe Sibeko
TT

Ghana Begins Repatriating Citizens from South Africa due to Anti-immigration Tensions

A man draped in a Ghana flag stands among other Ghanaians as Ghana repatriates hundreds of its citizens from South Africa following instances of violence against migrants from other sub-Saharan African countries, amid a wave ‌of protests against illegal immigration, at O.R. Tambo International Airport in Kempton Park, South Africa. REUTERS/Siphiwe Sibeko
A man draped in a Ghana flag stands among other Ghanaians as Ghana repatriates hundreds of its citizens from South Africa following instances of violence against migrants from other sub-Saharan African countries, amid a wave ‌of protests against illegal immigration, at O.R. Tambo International Airport in Kempton Park, South Africa. REUTERS/Siphiwe Sibeko

The first group of around 300 Ghanaian nationals flew to their country on Wednesday as their government started a voluntary repatriation program for its citizens in response to anti-immigration tensions in South Africa.

Families and travelers gathered at the Tambo International Airport in Johannesburg with their luggage as officials and police coordinated the departure process.

The repatriation follows renewed demonstrations over illegal immigration in parts of South Africa, where frustrations over unemployment, crime and access to services have fueled tensions, The AP news reported.

Ghana’s High Commissioner to South Africa, Benjamin Quashie, told reporters at the airport that more people than those on the registered list turned up to the airport.

He said their registration would be processed ahead of the next flight to Ghana, expected to depart Sunday.

Ghana recently summoned South Africa's ambassador over reported attacks on Ghanaians, before announcing it would evacuate its affected citizens.

Loren Landau, a migration expert and political analyst at the University of the Witwatersrand, said the move by the Ghanaian government was a message to South Africa about their unhappiness over recent events.

“I think in this case, it’s less about Ghana trying to protect its citizens per se, or these 300. This is a symbolic move to try to send a message to their sort of bigger counterpart, South Africa, that this is politically unacceptable,” said Landau.

Some of those repatriated had been held at the Lindela Repatriation Centre for immigration-related matters.

More than 800 Ghanaians registered with the Ghana High Commission in Pretoria for evacuation following weeks of protests and rising fears among foreign nationals.

Ghanaian authorities said the repatriation effort was being carried out in coordination with South African officials after concerns over the safety and well-being of migrants.

South African authorities have condemned violence against foreign nationals while acknowledging concerns about illegal immigration.

Nigeria also voiced its disapproval at the treatment of some of its citizens and said it was also considering evacuating some of its citizens.


Iran Could Open Strait of Hormuz within a Month if Terms Agreed

Ships anchored in the Strait of Hormuz, May 25, 2026 (Reuters)
Ships anchored in the Strait of Hormuz, May 25, 2026 (Reuters)
TT

Iran Could Open Strait of Hormuz within a Month if Terms Agreed

Ships anchored in the Strait of Hormuz, May 25, 2026 (Reuters)
Ships anchored in the Strait of Hormuz, May 25, 2026 (Reuters)

Tehran would restore shipping through the Strait of Hormuz to pre-war levels within a month in a framework deal with the US to also include withdrawing US forces from Iran's vicinity, Iranian state television reported on Wednesday. The report said the US would end a naval blockade of Iranian shipping, citing a memorandum of understanding being negotiated between the two sides to end the war which has choked global energy supplies through the strategic waterway.

Iranian state TV said it had obtained an unofficial draft of the MOU though it was not final and may not be agreed. The US denied the report, saying it was "complete fabrication" in a White House statement on social media.

Iran's government did not comment. The issue of US troops in the region also needs further discussion, the TV report said without being more specific.

There was no mention of Iran's nuclear program which the US wants disbanded.

The state TV report was the latest signal of possible progress towards a deal, although publicly Tehran and Washington have outlined positions starkly at odds and the potential terms outlined by the broadcaster did not appease all US demands.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Tuesday it may take a few more days, after President Donald Trump had raised hopes over the weekend for an imminent end to the war.

Key sticking points have included reopening and management of the waterway through which a fifth of the world's oil and liquefied natural gas flowed before the conflict and the dismantling of Iran's nuclear capacity.

Oil prices fell more than 5% on Wednesday after the Iranian TV report.

It was not immediately clear what a US military pullback as described by Iranian state television would look like.

US naval vessels, some with thousands of sailors and Marines aboard, regularly transit the region, stopping in ports including in Oman.


Starmer Cites Russian Threat as UK, Poland Seal Defense Pact

Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer visits a children’s activity center in Essex, Britain, Thursday, May 21, 2026. Kin Cheung/Pool via REUTERS
Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer visits a children’s activity center in Essex, Britain, Thursday, May 21, 2026. Kin Cheung/Pool via REUTERS
TT

Starmer Cites Russian Threat as UK, Poland Seal Defense Pact

Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer visits a children’s activity center in Essex, Britain, Thursday, May 21, 2026. Kin Cheung/Pool via REUTERS
Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer visits a children’s activity center in Essex, Britain, Thursday, May 21, 2026. Kin Cheung/Pool via REUTERS

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer hailed Wednesday a defense pact with Poland, arguing the European allies faced "no greater challenge" than "Russian aggression" as he welcomed Polish counterpart Donald Tusk to Britain.

The new security treaty signed by the NATO allies aims to allow the two countries to combine their armed forces' expertise and industrial capability, including developing and manufacturing "next-generation complex weapons", according to the UK government.

It paves the way for large?scale joint exercises by land forces and for London and Warsaw to boost the use of uncrewed systems to reinforce NATO's eastern flank, it said.

The agreement's security elements will also bolster information-sharing and other cooperation to tackle organised crime and aid joint work on cyber, migration and health security.

It follows Britain signing similar defense pacts with Germany and France in recent years.

Poland -- an EU and NATO member that shares its eastern border with Russia, Belarus and Ukraine -- also recently inked a deal in Paris to ramp up joint defense ties.

"There's no greater challenge for either of our countries than the challenge of Russian aggression," Starmer, flanking Tusk, said after signing the treaty at a World War II-era bunker on a former military base in northwest London.

"And we see that not just in Ukraine itself, but beyond Ukraine, impacting on our own countries," he added, calling the treaty "a generational uplift" in the allies' security and defense relationship.

Tusk thanked Starmer for his commitment to defending "shared values" like the rule of law, democracy and human rights, saying they were "important for us and for our nations".

"That is the foundation of the treaty," he noted, speaking through an interpreter.

The pair had earlier held bilateral talks at the Royal Air Force's nearby base at Northolt.

They were expected to discuss the uptick in allegedly Russian-ordered arson attacks in London and elsewhere across Europe, as well as other malign threats, Starmer's office said in advance.

The signing came on the same day as the head of the UK's top-secret electronic eavesdropping agency GCHQ accused Russia of "relentlessly" targeting critical infrastructure, democratic processes, supply chains and public trust in Britain and Europe.

Delivering an inaugural annual lecture, Anne Keast-Butler detailed how Moscow has been increasing its hybrid activity against some European countries, as she urged the public and businesses to make cyber security "10 times more urgent".

Keast-Butler -- appointed GCHQ's first woman chief in 2023 -- noted her agency's work focused on "disrupting Russia's efforts to smuggle western tech, fending off cyber attacks, and countering reckless sabotage and assassination attempts".