World roundup: June 3 2025
Stories from South Korea, South Sudan, the Netherlands, and elsewhere
You’re reading the web version of Foreign Exchanges. If you’d like to get it delivered straight to your inbox, sign up today:
PROGRAMMING NOTE: I have a commitment this evening so I’m sending out today’s roundup early and without a voiceover. We’ll be back to normal operations tomorrow. Thanks for reading!
TODAY IN HISTORY
June 3, 1940: World War II’s Battle of Dunkirk ends with the last British soldiers evacuating that French city and leaving the Nazis victorious. At Winston Churchill’s order, the Royal Navy returned to Dunkirk the following day to evacuate roughly 26,000 French soldiers, so the full evacuation wasn’t completed until June 4. In all the British military (aided by dozens of small civilian vessels) evacuated 338,226 soldiers from Dunkirk, along with another roughly 192,000 evacuated from other parts of France over the ensuing three weeks. The Nazis rolled into Paris on June 14, completing their conquest of France. Britain left a considerable quantity of materiel behind but the successful rescue of most of the personnel who were trapped at Dunkirk prevented a major defeat from reaching catastrophic levels.
June 3, 1965: Gemini 4, officially the tenth crewed US spaceflight, takes off from Florida’s Cape Canaveral base (which was called “Cape Kennedy” at the time). This mission had a couple of important objectives. It was the first multi-day US space mission, with astronauts James McDivitt and Ed White spending four days in orbit. This was intended to show that human beings could survive lengthy spaceflights such as would be required for a moon mission, and to show that the US space program was catching up to the Soviet program, which had done a nearly five day mission with Vostok 5 in June 1963. Additionally, White became the first American to perform a spacewalk, again catching up to the Soviets who had done their first spacewalk on Voskhod 2 in March 1965.
MIDDLE EAST
ISRAEL-PALESTINE
According to Palestinian civil defense officials, the Israeli military (IDF) gunned down at least 27 people in still another massacre near one of the “Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s” aid distribution facilities in Rafah. Israeli officials say the soldiers opened fire on “suspects who advanced toward the troops,” though how they ascertained that these people were “suspects” is unclear. One assumes the criteria, assuming there is any criteria apart from Being Palestinian, is “advancing toward the troops,” a completely subjective standard that could apply to anything from armed attackers rushing an IDF position to a group of unarmed starving people turning down the wrong street at the wrong time. The IDF says it is not trying to prevent people from reaching the GHF’s distribution centers, which is obviously true—it’s waiting for people to gather and approach those centers before shooting at them, which is more efficient than just picking people off individually.
Speaking of the GHF, the group has hired a new director just over a week after its previous one, former US Marine Jake Wood, resigned citing his inability “to implement this plan while also strictly adhering to the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and independence.” The new director is a “pro-Israel” evangelical preacher named Johnnie Moore, who is reportedly “close” to both Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and who sounds like he’ll be less concerned with the issues that prompted Wood’s resignation. And The Washington Post is reporting that Boston Consulting Group, the management firm that helped design the GHF, has “terminated” its contract with the foundation “and placed one of the senior partners leading the project on leave, pending an internal review.” BCG is insisting that it worked on the GHF project “pro bono,” but a Post source claims that it’s been billing the foundation to the tune of “more than $1 million” per month. Three Post sources suggested that it will be “difficult” for the GHF to continue operating without the BCG’s support.
IRAN
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told reporters in Lebanon on Tuesday that the most recent US nuclear deal proposal “contains many ambiguities and questions” and said that “many issues in this proposal are not clear.” This is not the Iranian government’s official response to the proposal that Trump administration envoy Steve Witkoff submitted over the weekend—that’s apparently coming soon—but the tone suggests that the Iranians are trying to find a middle ground between accepting a deal that violates their “red lines” and the outright rejection that Reuters reported was likely yesterday. Contradictory messages from the administration regarding the future of an Iranian uranium enrichment program—seemingly the most important of those “red lines”—may be complicating things.
ASIA
CHINA
The Diplomat’s Linggong Kong considers the obstacles to a US-China trade deal:
The United States and China face deep-rooted, structural conflicts over trade issues such as currency manipulation, export subsidies, and other non-tariff barriers. Any negotiations between them are inherently difficult, and the outlook is far from optimistic.
A similar breakdown happened during Trump’s first term. In May 2019, just as the two sides appeared close to a deal, talks collapsed. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative accused China of backtracking on previously agreed commitments by removing key pledges from a nearly 150-page draft agreement, including chapters on intellectual property protection, forced technology transfers, and unfair trade practices such as export subsidies. For Beijing, these were red-line issues tied to national sovereignty, and it refused to concede.
Despite facing a slowing domestic economy, China’s leaders believe that Trump is under greater pressure than they are. The high tariffs on Chinese goods have disrupted U.S. supply chains, pushed up prices, shaken the stock market, and could potentially hurt Republican chances in the midterm elections. As a result, Chinese officials feel they have more bargaining power and are less willing to compromise on core issues.
At the same time, Trump has been eager to show strength in the trade talks and avoid any appearance of backing down. For instance, when asked recently by a reporter whether he had “chickened out” in negotiations with China, Trump grew visibly angry – revealing just how sensitive he is to any suggestion of weakness.
SOUTH KOREA
South Korean voters headed to the polls for their country’s snap presidential election on Tuesday and, as expected, chose the Democratic Party’s Lee Jae-myung by a fairly comfortable margin. As of Wednesday morning, with nearly all of the votes counted, Lee had taken 49.3 percent of the vote. That put him about eight points ahead of People Power Party nominee Kim Moon-soo, who conceded the race early Wednesday morning. Turnout was high at just under 80 percent, and voters seemed inclined to punish former President Yoon Suk-yeol for his attempted self-coup in December by electing Lee, the man Yoon defeated in the 2022 presidential election. Because this was a snap election, made necessary after Yoon’s impeachment and removal from office, there’s no transition period and Lee could take office at any time.
AFRICA
SUDAN
A United Nations aid convoy carrying food into the besieged Sudanese city of Al-Fashir was “ambushed” on the way from Port Sudan to North Darfur state on Tuesday. The attackers killed at least five UN personnel and seem to have heavily damaged the convoy. The Rapid Support Forces militant group and the Sudanese military are mutually accusing one another of carrying out the attack. The incident did take place near an RSF-controlled town but that doesn’t rule out a military strike of some kind.
SOUTH SUDAN
The AP reports on deteriorating conditions in South Sudan:
Wiyuach Makuach sat on her bed in a dimly lit ward of a hospital near South Sudan’s border with Ethiopia and rested her remaining arm in her lap as she recalled the airstrike that took her other arm and nearly killed her.
“Everything was on fire,” she said in an interview at the hospital in the border town of Akobo where she was being treated for her injuries.
The bombing happened on May 3 at another hospital in the northern community of Fangak where she had traveled to be with her 25-year-old son while he sought treatment for tuberculosis. A series of strikes there, including several at the Doctors Without Borders facility, killed seven people.
“I ran outside and started rubbing mud on myself to stop the burning,” Makuach said.
Makuach, 60, is just one of the dozens of civilians who aid groups say have been killed or badly injured by airstrikes in recent weeks as South Sudan’s army clashes with militia groups across the country. The army says it targets only combatants, and has not commented on civilian casualties.
UGANDA
The Ugandan military says it was able to thwart an attempted bombing in Kampala on Tuesday, resulting in the deaths of the two alleged would-be bombers. Details are sparse but it sounds like the bomb exploded (accidentally or otherwise) as Ugandan soldiers were approaching them. Authorities seem convinced that the pair were affiliated with the Allied Democratic Forces group, which is more active in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo today but has its roots in Uganda.
EUROPE
RUSSIA
Ukrainian operatives bombed the Crimean Bridge, which links the Crimean Peninsula to Russia over the Kerch Strait, early Tuesday morning, damaging one or more of its pillars and forcing its closure. The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) claimed responsibility for the attack, which it says used 1100 kilograms of explosives planted apparently by sea. Russian authorities indicated that the bridge had reopened after about a three hour closure, suggesting that the damage was not that severe, though the reopening can’t be confirmed and it may only have partial functionality. This is the third time the Ukrainians have attacked this bridge, never to any lasting effect though the repeated strikes do highlight its vulnerability.
UKRAINE
CNN is reporting that the Russian military has advanced far enough into Ukraine’s Sumy oblast to bring the city of Sumy “within range of [its] drones and artillery.” The Russians claimed the capture of another village near the border on Tuesday and are now “6-7 kilometers deep” inside Ukraine according to a Ukrainian military spokesperson named Ivan Shevtsov. Unofficial estimates put the Russians around 20 kilometers outside the city.
POLAND
The Polish parliament has scheduled a no-confidence vote in Prime Minister Donald Tusk and his government for June 11. Tusk indicated that he would seek this vote after far-right academic Karol Nawrocki won Poland’s presidential runoff on Sunday. It’s likely (though not certain) that Tusk’s ideologically divided but still functioning coalition will win the vote, which should give him a bit more stability as he deals with a potentially unfriendly, veto-wielding president. If the coalition loses the vote then Poland will head to a snap parliamentary election.
NETHERLANDS
Party for Freedom (PVV) leader Geert Wilders made good on his threat to withdraw from the Netherlands’ governing coalition on Tuesday, causing the collapse of the government and forcing a snap election at a date yet to be determined. He’d made that threat after the PVV’s coalition partners rejected his demand for a full suspension of asylum admissions. Prime Minister Dick Schoof resigned but will presumably stay on in a caretaker capacity through the election. As I mentioned yesterday polling suggests a snap election will be fairly closely fought, in contrast with the 2023 election that the PVV won fairly handily. A heavily fragmented outcome could find Wilders excluded from subsequent coalition talks.
AMERICAS
ECUADOR
The Ecuadorian National Assembly on Tuesday approved the establishment of foreign military bases in Ecuador, potentially undoing a 2009 law that had barred them. President Daniel Noboa has pushed for this change, which will allow him to invite foreign military forces to Ecuador ostensibly to assist in dealing with the country’s criminal gangs. He’s already asked Donald Trump for assistance and says he intends to invite special forces from other countries to contribute. The assembly vote is just the first step in the process—the legislation will now go to Ecuador’s Constitutional Court for approval before being submitted to voters in a referendum.
UNITED STATES
Finally, with courts questioning the Donald Trump’s invocation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 to support his tariff policy, Foreign Policy’s Keith Johnson looks at the 1974 law to which the president might turn next:
After suffering a pair of judicial setbacks last week that called into question the most expansive of Trump’s tariffs, the administration is likely preparing to use a little-remembered provision from the 1974 Trade Act. The provision, which has never been used before, allows the White House to levy tariffs of up to 15 percent on countries for up to five months before Congress can weigh in.
The legal setbacks are now on hold due to an appeals court stay while litigation plays out. Yet the Trump administration has reportedly told other countries that talks must continue to negotiate bilateral deals with the United States because “the president intends to continue this tariff program pursuant to other robust legal authorities if necessary.”
Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act seems to fit the bill, and it was specifically called out as a potentially legal avenue by the trade court that struck down the Trump administration’s more ambitious April tariffs. That provision allows the president to levy limited, short-term tariffs to address balance-of-payment concerns, which is similar to the Trump administration’s yearslong fretting over the goods trade deficit that the United States runs with many countries. Another part of that 1974 bill, the so-called Section 301 provisions, is another Trump favorite and has already been used to levy broad-based tariffs on China in response to its allegedly discriminating trade behavior.
The irony is that the 1974 law, described by one of its chief architects as the “Magna Carta” of U.S. trade legislation, sought to bridge the unhelpful divide between Congress’s then-absolute control over trade policy and the White House’s control of foreign policy otherwise. The law was meant to give presidents a way to lower trade barriers as part of a global foreign-policy outreach, not as bricks in a protectionist wall.