A Senate Republican believes that regime change is the best long-term ‘solution’ in Iran as a fragile ceasefire between the Islamic Republic and Israel continues to hold.

The truce between Israel and Iran came late last month, and so far has put a hold on the fighting that took place over the course of 12 days in the region, which began when the Jewish State struck Iranian targets on June 13. It culminated in a U.S. strike on Iranian nuclear sites with bunker-busters in an operation greenlit by President Donald Trump.

Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., who serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and previously held a position as chair of the Senate GOP’s campaign arm, told Fox News Digital that he is cautiously optimistic that the truce will hold, but warned that Iran’s deep-seated aggression towards Israel could be the ceasefire’s undoing — unless a new regime took over.

‘I’m of the opinion that the longer-term solution in Iran is going to be regime change,’ Daines said. ‘Because until you have a regime that recognizes the legitimacy of the Jewish state of Israel and their right to exist, and believes that Israel should not be destroyed, I don’t think we’re going to bring the peace that we need, that we all aspire to see between Iran, Israel and, frankly, in the Middle East.’

Daines’ sentiment comes ahead of an expected meeting between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday at the White House. 

There is a bipartisan push between Reps. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., and Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., to further arm Israel with B-2 bombers and bunker-busting bombs, but most lawmakers, including Daines, don’t believe that the U.S. should get involved in toppling the current regime and installing a new one.

The U.S. was involved in regime change in the country in the 1950s, when then-Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh was removed and the door was opened for Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi to take control of Iran. In 1979, the Islamic Revolution took place, which removed Pahlavi from power and saw the birth of the current regime.

Daines argued that any change must come from within, because ‘otherwise, it’s just a matter of time before that regime would lose its legitimacy.’

‘Regime change is risky because you may end up with something worse than what you have,’ Daines said. ‘Now in this case, the bar is set awfully low in Iran, but you could get an equivalent type of philosophy, or maybe something a little better.’

‘I think we need to have a regime that recognizes that Iran and their long-term prosperity will be tied to growing closer to the West and being an ally of the West and not being an ally of China, Russia, North Korea,’ he continued.

‘A ceasefire is not the end. It’s a means. A ceasefire just says, ‘OK, we’re still at war, but we’re not going to shoot for a while.’ That’s what a ceasefire is,’ Daines said. ‘A lasting peace will be when the Iranian leadership recognizes the legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish state.’

‘Until that happens, I think Iran will remain a threat, particularly if the regime, whether it’s the current regime or a regime that changed that has a similar ideology as the current regime, that Israel must be destroyed,’ he continued. ‘That is not a peaceful outcome. That’s just delaying what could be a future development of nuclear capabilities and some kind of a first strike by Iran, either against Israel or against the United States.’

Senior advisors to then-President Joe Biden reportedly urged him to hold a debate against President Donald Trump as early as possible in an attempt to highlight Biden’s ‘leadership’ and Trump’s ‘weakness,’ according to a new book. 

The book, ‘2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America,’ is set for release Tuesday and claims that Biden’s team dismissed concerns about his age during the 2024 election cycle.  

The book, authored by Josh Dawsey of the Wall Street Journal, Tyler Pager of the New York Times and Isaac Arnsdorf of the Washington Post, says Biden senior advisors wrote up a memo advocating an initial spring debate, followed by a potential second one in early September after Labor Day. 

This strategy would allow Biden to take on Trump before early voting in battleground states kicked off, set the terms of the debate most advantageous for Biden and highlight Biden’s ‘leadership’ in contrast to Trump’s, according to a memo on the matter. 

‘By holding the first debate in the spring, YOU will be able to reach the widest audience possible, before we are deep in the summer months with the conventions, Olympics and family vacations taking precedence,’ Biden’s senior advisors reportedly wrote in an April 15, 2024, memo, published by Politico Playbook. ‘In addition, the earlier YOU are able to debate the better, so that the American people can see YOU standing next to Trump and showing the strength of YOUR leadership, compared to Trump’s weakness and chaos.’

Even so, the book reports that some Biden aides were hesitant about an early debate, with some even advocating that Biden shouldn’t debate Trump at all. Specifically, the book cites a Biden donor who pressed the White House in May 2024 to find a reason to pull Biden from the debates, after the donor reported being ‘alarmed’ by Biden’s behavior at a Chicago fundraiser. 

Meanwhile, the Trump White House said the debate backfired on Biden, and instead, shed light on Biden’s own weaknesses. 

‘The only highlight from the debate was Joe Biden’s inability (to) form a complete sentence,’ White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said in a Monday statement to Fox News Digital. ‘American voters got a firsthand look at Biden’s weakness, his campaign in chaos, and what it looks like when real leader is missing from the White House.’ 

‘Unfortunately for the Democrats, no adviser or so-called ‘strategic’ move could save their incompetent candidates and terrible policies from President Trump’s historic, landslide victory,’ Rogers said. 

A spokesperson for Biden did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

Biden and Trump ultimately did face off in a debate on June 27, 2024 – an event that prompted Biden to exit the election in July 2024 and led to Vice President Kamala Harris to take on Trump in November 2024. 

‘2024’ is one of several books that have been released in 2025 detailing Biden’s mental deterioration while in office and how Trump won the election. Another example is the book ‘Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again,’ released May 20. 

The U.S. envoy to Lebanon championed a response issued by Beirut on Monday to a proposal by Washington that detailed the complete disarmament of the Iran-backed terrorist group Hezbollah in exchange for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from its southern region. 

Envoy Thomas Barrack told reporters he was ‘unbelievably satisfied’ with Beirut’s timely response to a June 19 proposal that called for the disarmament of Hezbollah within a four-month timeframe. 

‘What the government gave us was something spectacular in a very short period of time,’ Barrack said following a meeting with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, who took the top job in January. ‘I’m unbelievably satisfied with the response.’

The news comes as negotiators are also working to end Israel’s war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip after Jerusalem saw itself facing four fronts just last fall with a war on its southern border against Hamas, back-and-forth missile strikes with Iran as well as with the Houthis in Yemen, and a campaign that unfolded in Lebanon.

A truce was struck in Lebanon following a sophisticated pager bombing that targeted hundreds of Hezbollah members across the country in September. 

Hezbollah largely retreated from Lebanon’s southern region and has reportedly relinquished some arms.

But reporting by Reuters on Monday also suggested that Hezbollah may be unwilling to relinquish all its arms and the details of the U.S.-Lebanon agreement that would see the disarmament of the terrorist network remain unknown.

Israeli troops have remained in parts of southern Lebanon to counter what it argues is a continued threat posed by the terrorist network to Israeli communities that live on the northern border, and skirmishes have continued. 

Barrack, who also serves as U.S. ambassador to Turkey and special envoy for Syria, said he believes that, ultimately, Lebanon and Israel share the same goal – peace.

‘The Israelis do not want war with Lebanon,’ he said. ‘Both countries are trying to give the same thing – the notion of a stand-down agreement, of the cessation of hostilities, and a road to peace.’

Barrack also suggested that the Trump administration may look to add Lebanon to the list of nations that have normalized ties with Israel under the Abraham Accords – a chief policy of Trump’s during his first administration and one which he has once again made a top priority. 

Fox News Digital could not confirm whether Beirut is yet interested in that level of diplomacy with its southern neighbor.

But Barrack also suggested that Syria has already begun ‘dialogue’ with Israel. 

‘The dialogue has started between Syria and Israel, just as the dialogue needs to be reinvented by Lebanon,’ he said. ‘If you don’t want change, it’s no problem. The rest of the region is moving at Mach speed and you will be left behind.’

The comments come one week after Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs Gideon Sa’ar said Jerusalem ‘is interested in expanding the Abraham Accords circle of peace and normalization.

‘We have an interest in adding countries, such as Syria and Lebanon, our neighbors, to the circle of peace and normalization – while safeguarding Israel’s essential and security interests,’ he added, though much of the normalization efforts would depend on Israel ending its war in the Gaza Strip. 

Reuters contributed to this report. 

Democrats are assembling a new policy brain trust called Project 2029, an effort aimed at shaping the party’s long-term vision and regaining electoral strength.

But at a time when there’s widespread agreement that Democrats need fresh ideas and new voices, the inclusion of longtime party insiders — especially former President Joe Biden’s national security advisor Jake Sullivan — is raising eyebrows across the political spectrum.

‘It’s really disappointing to see the lack of self-awareness on Jake’s part,’ said Brett Bruen, former director of global engagement in the Obama White House. ‘Having Jake involved, let alone leading this, will only lead to stupid, superficial changes.’

‘These Democratic leaders need to take a long look in the mirror and understand they played a big part in bringing this situation about — and exit stage left.’

Modeled in name and structure after the Heritage Foundation’s conservative Project 2025, Project 2029 brings together high-profile Democratic veterans to outline a policy road map. After a decade of standing more against President Donald Trump than for anything else, the group is dedicated to helping Democrats define the policies that can win the 2028 election.

The initiative, first reported by The New York Times, is led by longtime Democratic strategist Andrei Cherny and a cast of familiar faces — including Sullivan, Neera Tanden, Biden’s domestic policy advisor; Anne-Marie Slaughter, CEO of New America; Justin Wolfers, University of Michigan economist; Jim Kessler, co-founder of Third Way; and Felicia Wong , former president of the Roosevelt Institute. 

But Sullivan’s role has drawn particular criticism from both Republicans and progressives. 

Sullivan was Biden’s top advisor during the chaotic 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan, which resulted in the deaths of 13 U.S. service members. He reportedly offered to resign at the time once the evacuation didn’t go as planned. 

He’s also drawn fire for the Biden administration’s failure to help Israel and Hamas reach a lasting ceasefire, and for its Ukraine policy — which, as one European diplomat told Fox News Digital, seemed aimed at letting Ukraine ‘lose slowly.’​​

‘Why isn’t Jake Sullivan working at Chipotle?’ quipped Steven Moore, founder of the Ukraine Freedom Project, on a podcast in 2024. 

‘Jake in his position both as national security advisor and in Biden world is one of the last people on earth that should be involved in a reset for the Democratic Party,’ said Bruen.

Sullivan did not reply to a request for comment by Fox News Digital.

Zohran Momdani’s stunning upset in New York City’s mayoral primary over former Gov. Andrew Cuomo has reignited a debate over whether Democrats on a national level need to start taking progressivism seriously.

‘The people responsible for driving the Democratic Party into a ditch are now asking for the keys again,’ said Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of progressive group Our Revolution. ‘Leaders like Zohran Mamdani are showing what’s possible when you speak directly to working-class pain and stand up to entrenched power.’

Despite the criticism, some Democrats defend Sullivan’s role and believe he could help unify the party.

‘He’s a historic organizer of the diverse lanes of Democratic foreign policy, and he’s done a great job with it,’ said Joel Rubin, a former deputy assistant secretary of state and Democratic strategist. However, Rubin questioned how much real influence Project 2029 will have, especially with no clear 2028 front runner.

‘We’re going to have a wide-open primary,’ Rubin said. ‘Unlike Project 2025, where Republicans had a candidate-in-waiting in Trump, we have no standard-bearer. So Project 2029 is going to be one of many blueprints for what a Democratic administration should do.’

Some argue that figures like Sullivan are better suited to bridge the divide between establishment figures and progressives than any leftist leader. 

‘He’s part of the old guard, but the old guard isn’t that old. There’s a lot of young people,’ one Democratic insider said. ‘You’d be hard-pressed to find people in the progressive lane pulling in establishment folks, whereas the establishment lane is working to pull in progressives.’

Sullivan’s GOP critics also point to his role in promoting now-debunked allegations during the 2016 election.

After a report from Slate claimed Trump Tower maintained a secret server communicating with Russia’s Alfa Bank, Sullivan — then a senior advisor to Hillary Clinton — amplified the claim.

‘This could be the most direct link yet between Donald Trump and Moscow,’ Sullivan said in a statement at the time. ‘This secret hotline may be the key to unlocking the mystery of Trump’s ties to Russia.’

Republicans later accused him of spreading unverified information and misleading the public.

Israel exchanged missile fire with Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen on Monday, targeting the group’s ports and other facilities.

Israel’s initial strikes came in reaction to a suspected Houthi attack on a Liberian-flagged ship in the Red Sea. The vessel was targeted with explosives and small arms fire, causing it to take on water and forcing the crew to abandon ship. The Houthis have not yet claimed responsibility for the attack. Israel’s military issued a warning prior to its attack, which targeted ports at Hodeida, Ras Isa and Salif.

‘These ports are used by the Houthi terrorist regime to transfer weapons from the Iranian regime, which are employed to carry out terrorist operations against the state of Israel and its allies,’ the Israeli military said.

The Houthis responded in kind when Israeli missiles started falling, but Israel reported no casualties from the attack.

The Israeli attack also targeted the Galaxy Leader, a vessel seized by the Houthis in 2023. The IDF said the ship had been ‘fitted with a radar system to track international vessels for terror operations.’

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz threatened further strikes if Houthi aggression continues in the Red Sea or elsewhere.

‘What’s true for Iran is true for Yemen,’ Katz said in a statement. ‘Anyone who raises a hand against Israel will have it cut off. The Houthis will continue to pay a heavy price for their actions.’

Meanwhile, Houthi military spokesman Brig. Gen. Yahya Saree said the group is ‘fully prepared for a sustained and prolonged confrontation’ and plans to maintain its ‘naval blockade.’

U.S. Army Gen. Michael Kurilla told lawmakers in the House Armed Services Committee last month that Iran is the number one reason the Houthis remain a threat, adding the terrorist network ‘would die on the vine without Iranian support.’

News of Monday’s exchange comes just hours before President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are set to meet at the White House.

The two leaders are expected to discuss the future of Gaza, with Israel insisting Hamas must be removed from the region completely.

The Associated Press contributed to this report

President Donald Trump slammed former first buddy Elon Musk for starting a third political party, saying such parties have ‘never worked’ while also calling the move ‘ridiculous.’

Trump spoke with reporters before boarding Air Force 1 in Bedminster, New Jersey, when he was asked about Musk’s move to start a third party.

‘I think it’s ridiculous to start a third party,’ Trump said from the tarmac. ‘We have a tremendous success with the Republican Party. The Democrats have lost their way, but it’s always been a two-party system, and I think starting a third party just adds to confusion.

‘It really seems to have been developed for two parties,’ the president continued. ‘Third parties have never worked. So, he can have fun with it, but I think it’s ridiculous.’

Musk announced the launching of a new political party called the ‘America Party’ on his social media platform X on Saturday.

The entrepreneur called the formation of the party a direct response to a corrupt political establishment that no longer represents the American people.

The announcement followed a viral July 4 poll on X, where Musk asked whether voters wanted independence from what he called the ‘two-party (some would say uniparty) system.’

Over 1.2 million votes were cast, with 65.4% saying ‘yes.’

‘By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it,’ Musk posted Saturday. ‘When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy. Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.’

A short time after his gaggle with reporters, Trump turned to Truth Social to express concerns over Musk, while giving insight into what may have led to the two parting ways.

‘I am saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely ‘off the rails,’ essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK over the past five weeks. He even wants to start a Third Political Party, despite the fact that they have never succeeded in the United States – The System seems not designed for them,’ the president said. ‘The one thing Third Parties are good for is the creation of Complete and Total DISRUPTION & CHAOS, and we have enough of that with the Radical Left Democrats, who have lost their confidence and their minds!

‘Republicans, on the other hand, are a smooth running ‘machine,’ that just passed the biggest Bill of its kind in the History of our Country,’ Trump continued. ‘It is a Great Bill but, unfortunately for Elon, it eliminates the ridiculous Electric Vehicle (EV) Mandate, which would have forced everyone to buy an Electric Car in a short period of time.’

Trump said he has been ‘strongly opposed’ to an EV mandate from the very beginning, and the new bill allows consumers to buy whatever type of vehicle they want, whether it is electric, gas, or hybrid-powered.

‘I have campaigned on this for two years and, quite honestly, when Elon gave me his total and unquestioned Endorsement, I asked him whether or not he knew that I was going to terminate the EV Mandate – It was in every speech I made, and in every conversation I had,’ Trump said. ‘He said he had no problems with that – I was very surprised!’

Trump also said Musk asked a close friend of his to run NASA, but the president took issue with it when he found out that friend was a ‘blue blooded Democrat’ who never contributed to a Republican.

‘I also thought it inappropriate that a very close friend of Elon, who was in the Space Business, run NASA, when NASA is such a big part of Elon’s corporate life,’ he said. ‘My Number One charge is to protect the American Public!’

Musk chose to establish a new political party after expressing grave concerns with the president’s ‘Big, Beautiful Bill,’ which was signed into law on Friday at the White House.

The sweeping $3.3 trillion legislation includes tax cuts, infrastructure spending and stimulus measures and has drawn criticism from fiscal conservatives and libertarians. Though Musk did not reference the bill directly in his America Party posts, the timing suggests rising friction between the billionaire and the president. Musk has previously warned that unchecked spending by both parties threatens the long-term health of the economy.

The new party, according to Musk’s posts, will target a few key seats in Congress. The goal is to create a swing bloc powerful enough to hold the balance of power and block what Musk sees as the worst excesses of both Republicans and Democrats.

Third parties have traditionally had a difficult time gaining ground in American politics as the system is built for two dominant parties. With the Electoral College, winner-take-all elections and strict ballot access laws, outsiders cannot meaningfully compete. Even when a third-party candidate catches fire, it rarely lasts beyond a single election cycle.

One of the biggest third-party efforts in recent history was Ross Perot’s 1992 run. 
He earned nearly 19% of the popular vote as an independent but didn’t win a single Electoral College vote. It was the closest a third-party candidate got to the White House after President Teddy Roosevelt’s famed Bull Moose Party run in 1912 against his onetime protégé, William Howard Taft.

Others, like Ralph Nader, have tried with the Green Party, and Gary Johnson with the Libertarian Party, but no third-party candidate has come close to winning the presidency.

Fox News Digital’s Jasmine Baehr contributed to this report.

Iran is preparing its next step in what one security expert warns remains its chief objective: developing a nuclear weapon.

‘Repair, reconstitute and rebuild is going to be the modus operandi of the Islamic Republic of Iran,’ Behnam Ben Taleblu, Senior Director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Iran Program told Fox News Digital. ‘It just depends on how are they going to be doing it? While flirting with the international community? Are they going to go dark totally altogether?

‘All of this remains to be seen,’ he added.

Spokesman for the regime, Fatemeh Mohajerani, confirmed this week that the Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear sites had been ‘seriously damaged’ following the U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran’s nuclear program last month. 

Questions remain over the extent of damage that was incurred, as well as skepticism over whether Iran was able to move any enriched uranium or centrifuges away from the heavily guarded sites prior to the strikes. 

Though the Trump administration said on Wednesday that it had ‘obliterated’ the three facilities it struck, and has fervently rejected reports suggesting that Iranian officials may have been able to transfer some elements of the regime’s coveted nuclear program, Israeli officials confirmed this week that they are continuing to monitor the situation closely.

Experts in the U.S. and Israel have said they believe Iran is still assessing the extent of the damage from the ‘bunker busting’ bombs, and that the regime will look to recover and repair what it can — meaning it may be looking to buy time.

‘No doubt, the regime will still have a diplomatic strategy designed to rope-a-dope anybody, and to find as much time as possible for this government to do that,’ Ben Taleblu said.

The Iranian regime this week suggested it remained open to negotiations with the U.S. after President Donald Trump signaled that the talks could begin as soon as next week, though multiple Iranian officials said that that timeframe was overly ambitious. 

‘I don’t think negotiations will restart as quickly as that,’ Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in a CBS News interview. ‘The doors of diplomacy will never slam shut.’ 

But the regime also took steps to further hinder the UN nuclear watchdog — which is tasked with tracking all nation’s nuclear programs — and suspended all interaction with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Wednesday. 

That same day, the State Department condemned the move, and spokesperson Tammy Bruce said it was ‘unacceptable that Iran chose to suspend cooperation with the IAEA at a time when it has a window of opportunity to reverse course and choose a path of peace and prosperity.’

Iran has limited IAEA access in the past and Ben Taleblu argued Tehran will likely look to do this again as it attempts to hold on to any bargaining chip it can.

‘The Islamic Republic of Iran’s next step, and likely most dangerous capability right now, is its diplomatic capability,’ the Iranian security expert argued. ‘This is the capability of the regime to either enter negotiations with a weak hand and leave with a strong hand, or try to prevent a military victory of its adversaries from becoming a political victory. 

‘If negotiations do take place between the U.S. and the Iranians, be they direct or indirect, the Iranians are going to be dangling IAEA access. This is already their most important weapon,’ he added. 

Ben Taleblu explained that using the IAEA as a bargaining chip not only enables Iran to play for time as it looks to re-establish its nuclear program, but to sow division in the U.S. by creating uncertainty. 

‘By diminishing the monitoring and by circumscribing and even cutting IAEA access to these facilities, the regime is trying to make America have to rely on intelligence alone,’ he said. ‘And as you see from the very politicized debates over the battle damage assessment, relying on intelligence alone without sources on the ground inspecting the sites, inspecting the facilities, documenting the fissile material, can lead to drastically different conclusions being taken by similar but not the same intelligence organizations or representatives.’

Ultimately, Iran is not going to give up on its nuclear ambitions, Ben Taleblu warned, noting that Tehran’s security apparatus completely changed during its war with Iraq in the 1980s. 

‘Everything that we face from the regime that is a security threat was started then — the ballistic missile program, the drone program, the maritime aggression, the transnational terrorist apparatus and the nuclear program all have their origins in the 1980s,’ he said.  ‘By resurrecting this nuclear program, the Islamic Republic was not engaging in a science fair experiment. 

‘The Islamic Republic was seeking an ultimate deterrent,’ Ben Taleblu continued. ‘It was seeking an ultimate deterrence because it had a vision for what the region and the world should look like, and it was willing to put foreign policy muscle and the resources of its state behind that vision.’

The expert on the Iranian regime warned that Iran’s 40-year ‘obsession’ with developing its nuclear program to achieve its geopolitical aims is not going to change because of U.S. military intervention. 

Prominent Democrats sent messages of doom and gloom rather than celebration on July 4, drawing ire from a multitude of critics. Many of the messages included warnings about supposed threats to the country emanating from the Trump administration.

‘This Fourth of July, I am taking a moment to reflect. Things are hard right now. They are probably going to get worse before they get better,’ former Vice President Kamala Harris wrote in a post on X that included a photo of her and former first gentleman Doug Emhoff at the White House. ‘But I love our country — and when you love something, you fight for it. Together, we will continue to fight for the ideals of our nation.’

Many social media users were quick to point out that Harris cropped former President Joe Biden and former first lady Jill Biden out of the photo. Others took one of Harris’ famous phrases to mock her, saying that the country was ‘unburdened by what has been.’

Harris’ old boss, former President Joe Biden, posted a more mild message, while also encouraging Americans to ‘fight to maintain’ democracy.

Meanwhile, former President Barack Obama also chimed in with a warning of his own, saying that ‘core democratic principles seem to be continuously under attack.’ He argued that the word ‘we’ is the ‘single most powerful word in our democracy,’ and used his first presidential campaign slogan as one of his examples.

‘Independence Day is a reminder that America is not the project of any one person. The single most powerful word in our democracy is the word ‘We.’ ‘We The People.’ ‘We Shall Overcome.’ ‘Yes We Can.’ America is owned by no one. It belongs to all citizens. And at this moment in history—when core democratic principles seem to be continuously under attack, when too many people around the world have become cynical and disengaged—now is precisely the time to ask ourselves tough questions about how we can build our democracies and make them work in meaningful and practical ways for ordinary people,’ Obama wrote.

Xi Van Fleet, a survivor of Mao’s Cultural Revolution, responded saying, ‘We the People are taking our country back from those like you who despise America and work tirelessly to dismantle everything it stands for.’

Sen. Bernie Sanders appeared to support the anti-Trump ‘No Kings’ movement in his July 4 post.

‘On July 4, 1776, Americans said: No to Kings, No to Despotism. On July 4, 2025, all across the country, Americans say again: No to Kings, No to Despotism,’ Sanders wrote.

In response, several social media users pointed out that, unlike a king, President Donald Trump was elected.

Chinese President Xi Jinping will not attend this week’s BRICS Summit in Brazil, marking the first time the Chinese leader has missed the gathering of major emerging economies. The abrupt decision has triggered widespread speculation about internal political dynamics within China and the fraying cohesion of BRICS itself.

China’s official explanation — a ‘scheduling conflict’ and the fact that Xi already met with Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva earlier this year, according to the South China Morning Post — has been met with skepticism. Premier Li Qiang will attend the summit in Xi’s place, continuing a recent trend of Xi scaling back his appearances on the global stage.

‘That doesn’t make sense,’ said Gordon Chang, an expert on U.S.-China relations. ‘There are many other countries at the BRICS summit, not just Brazil. To me, it’s extremely significant that Xi Jinping is not going. It suggests turbulence at home — there are signs he’s lost control of the military and that civilian rivals are reasserting power. This is a symptom of that.’

Bryan Burack of the Heritage Foundation agrees that Xi’s absence underscores deeper issues: ‘It’s another indication that BRICS is not going to be China’s vassalization of the Global South.’ He noted that countries like Brazil and Indonesia have recently imposed tariffs on China over industrial overcapacity and dumping, moves that suggest widening rifts within the group.

‘China is actively harming all those countries for the most part, maybe with some exceptions, through its malign trade policies and dumping and overcapacity.’

Tensions with India and global trade pressure may also be factors

Some analysts point to rising China-India friction as a contributing factor in Xi’s decision to skip the summit. 

‘China has been at war with India for decades, essentially,’ Burack said. ‘These are fundamentally opposing interests. It’s difficult to see China changing its behavior in the near term, and that will keep tensions high.’

India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi is expected to take a leading role at the gathering, potentially another deterrent for Xi’s attendance.

Another key leader — Russian President Vladimir Putin — is only expected to address the group by video. 

BRICS: United in name, divided in decades-long tensions 

Formed by Brazil, Russia, India and China and later joined by South Africa, BRICS was envisioned as a non-Western counterweight to G7 dominance. It has expanded to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, the UAE and, most recently, Indonesia, strengthening its economic footprint.

Economist Christian Briggs highlighted BRICS’s massive scale: ‘BRICS now comprises 12 full members and up to 23 when counting partners. Collectively, they account for over 60% of the world’s GDP and around 75% of the global population. They control vast natural resources and a growing share of global trade flows.’

Yet despite its scale, the bloc remains ideologically and strategically fragmented. ‘It’s a group of countries that hate each other,’ Burack said bluntly. ‘China is harming many of them through unfair trade practices. There’s not a lot of incentive for real unity.’

Currency ambitions and strategic divergences

The alliance’s aspirations to challenge the U.S. dollar through alternative payment systems and a potential BRICS currency have gained media traction — but experts caution against overestimating this threat.

‘There’s been a lot of fearmongering about a BRICS currency,’ said Burack. ‘But the interests of these countries are completely divergent. There’s more smoke than fire when it comes to a currency challenge to the dollar.’

Chang echoed this skepticism: ‘The only country that can challenge the dollar is the United States. Weakness in the dollar is due to what we are doing domestically, not what the BRICS are doing.’

Still, Briggs offered a counterpoint, arguing that BRICS members are already reshaping global currency flows.

‘They’re moving away from the dollar into digital yuan, rupees, rubles. China has launched a SWIFT alternative already adopted by the Caribbean banking sector — trillions of dollars are shifting.’

Is BRICS still a threat to U.S. influence?

While its cohesion remains questionable, BRICS poses a long-term challenge to U.S. influence — particularly in regions where Washington has retreated diplomatically and economically.

‘China filled the void left by the U.S. in places like Africa,’ said Briggs. ‘Now it controls about 38% of the world’s minerals. Meanwhile, Russia’s economy has doubled despite sanctions, because they preemptively reduced reliance on the dollar.’

Yet Chang sees India as a brake on any aggressive anti-Western tilt. ‘BRICS has an ‘I’ in it—and that’s India. Modi doesn’t want to be part of an anti-Western bloc. As long as India’s in BRICS, the rest of the world is safe.’

A missed opportunity — or a calculated power move?

To some, Xi’s no-show signals instability in Beijing. To others, the opposite: it demonstrates confidence in China’s dominance over the other BRICS members.

‘He doesn’t have to be there,’ Briggs contended. ‘Xi’s power allows him to delegate. China is trading with nearly 80% of the world now. He’s moving the agenda forward even in absentia.’

What’s clear is that BRICS continues to evolve — its internal contradictions as visible as its geopolitical ambitions. Whether Xi’s absence marks a retreat or a recalibration remains one of the key questions hovering over the summit in Brazil.

In the wake of the 12-day war between Israel and Iran, the regime appears to be turning inward — escalating repression with chilling speed. 

According to Kasra Aarabi, director of IRGC research at United Against Nuclear Iran, the Islamic Republic is accelerating toward what he said is a ‘North Korea-style model of isolation and control.’

‘We’re witnessing a kind of domestic isolation that will have major consequences for the Iranian people,’ Aarabi told Fox News Digital. ‘The regime has always been totalitarian, but the level of suppression now is unprecedented. It’s unlike anything we’ve seen before.’

A source inside Iran confirmed to Fox News Digital that ‘the repression has become terrifying.’

Aarabi, who maintains direct lines of contact in Iran, described a country under siege by its own rulers. In Tehran, he described how citizens are stopped at random, their phones confiscated and searched. ‘If you have content deemed pro-Israel or mocking the regime, you disappear,’ he said. ‘People are now leaving their phones at home or deleting everything before they step outside.’

This new wave of paranoia and fear, he explained, mirrors tactics seen in North Korea — where citizens vanish without explanation and information is tightly controlled. During the recent conflict, Iran’s leadership imposed a total internet blackout to isolate the population, blocking Israeli evacuation alerts, and pushed propaganda that framed Israel as targeting civilians indiscriminately.

‘It was a perverse objective,’ Aarabi said, adding, ‘They deliberately cut communications to instill fear and manipulate public perception. For four days, not a single message went through. Even Israeli evacuation alerts didn’t reach their targets.’

The regime’s aim, he said, was twofold: to keep people off the streets and erode the surprising bond that had formed between Iranians and Israelis. ‘At the start of the war, many Iranians welcomed the strikes,’ Aarabi noted. ‘They knew Israel was targeting the IRGC — the very forces responsible for suppressing and killing their own people. But once the internet was cut and fear set in, some began to question what was happening.’

Dr. Afshon Ostovar, a leading Iran scholar and author of ‘Vanguard of the Imam: Religion, Politics, and Iran’s Revolutionary Guards,’ said domestic repression remains the regime’s most reliable strategy for survival. 

‘Repressing the people at home is easy. That’s something they can do. So it’s not unlikely that Iran could become more insular, more autocratic, more repressive — and more similar to, let’s say, a North Korea — than what it is today. That might be the only way they see to preserve the regime: by really tightening the screws on the Iranian people, to ensure that the Iranian population doesn’t try to rise up and topple the regime,’ he told Fox News Digital.

Inside the regime’s power structure, the fallout from the war is just as severe. Aarabi said that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is facing an internal crisis of trust and an imminent purge. ‘These operations couldn’t have taken place without infiltration at the highest levels,’ he said. ‘There’s immense pressure now to clean house.’

The next generation of IRGC officers — those who joined after 2000 — are younger, more radical and deeply indoctrinated. Over half of their training is now ideological. Aarabi said that these newer factions have begun turning on senior commanders, accusing them of being too soft on Israel or even collaborating with Mossad.

‘In a twist of irony, Khamenei created these extreme ideological ranks to consolidate power — and now they’re more radical than he is,’ Aarabi said. ‘He’s struggling to control them.’

A purge is likely, along with the rise of younger, less experienced commanders with far higher risk tolerance — a shift that could make the IRGC more volatile both domestically and internationally. With Iran’s conventional military doctrine in ruins, terrorism may become its primary lever of influence.

‘The regime’s three pillars — militias, ballistic missiles, and its nuclear program — have all been decapitated or severely degraded,’ Aarabi said. ‘That leaves only asymmetric warfare: soft-target terrorism with plausible deniability.’

Despite the regime’s brutal turn inward, Aarabi insists this is a sign of weakness, not strength. ‘If the Islamic Republic were confident, it wouldn’t need to crush its people this way,’ he said. ‘It’s acting out of fear. But until the regime’s suppressive apparatus is dismantled, the streets will remain silent — and regime change remains unlikely.’