In partnership with
Special Envoy Steve Witkoff’s marathon meeting with President Putin yesterday has led to the announcement of a summit between President Trump and Putin in the coming days. President Zelenskyy is not invited. How, exactly, the Americans and Russians intend to bring the war in Ukraine to a conclusion remains a mystery, but at least there’s some positive diplomatic momentum. |
Burned out by the news? There’s a better way.
Outrage headlines. Never-ending feeds. Everyone shouting, no one listening.
Keeping up with political news today can feel more like emotional labor than staying informed. That’s why Tangle exists.
Tangle is an independent, nonpartisan newsletter that covers one major political story each day. It breaks down the facts, shows how the left, right, and center are talking about it, and adds clear, honest analysis — without the spin, hysteria, or bias.
No sides to pick. Just clear, honest analysis from an independent source — all in under 10 minutes a day.
More than 400,000 readers — no matter their politics — trust Tangle to get the full picture and stay informed without getting burnt out.
If you’re tired of feeling overwhelmed by the news — but still want to understand what’s really happening — give Tangle a try.
Center of Gravity
What you need to know
Witkoff’s talks pave the way for Trump–Putin summit
After a three-and-a-half-hour meeting in Moscow between U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff and Russian President Vladimir Putin, President Donald Trump described the encounter as “highly productive” and noted that “great progress was made.” The Kremlin characterized the dialogue as useful and constructive, with both parties exchanging signals on Ukraine and even discussing prospects for renewed strategic cooperation, though no concrete concessions were publicly confirmed.
Trump has simultaneously maintained pressure, advancing a deadline for a ceasefire and warning of new secondary sanctions, including on nations continuing to trade with Russia. In particular, he has imposed steep tariffs on Indian imports of Russian oil (discussed in more detail below).
Russia’s position remains firm: Putin’s demands reportedly include formal guarantees of NATO non-expansion, Ukrainian neutrality, territorial control of eastern Ukraine and Crimea, and protection for Russian speakers in Ukraine. Ukraine continues to reject any recognition of Russia’s territorial control over Ukrainian land.
Following the meeting, the Kremlin confirmed that a summit between Trump and Putin has been agreed in principle to take place in the coming days, although the time and venue have not yet been disclosed. Notably, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is not expected to be invited, signaling a bilateral approach to diplomacy that may further marginalize Kyiv and concern European allies.
Russian stocks have so far today jumped 4.5 percent on the news.
Known Unknowns: The impact of U.S. tariffs on international trade & especially the U.S. bond market. Whether the U.S. and Iran will restart nuke talks. Relations of new Syrian government with Israel, international community & ability to maintain stability inside Syria. China’s triggers for military action against Taiwan. U.S. responses to China’s ‘grey zone’ warfare in the South China Sea and north Asia. Ukraine’s ability to withstand Russia’s war of attrition. The potential for the jihadist insurgency in Africa’s Sahel region to consolidate and spread.
Trump Administration
Move fast and break things
HHS shifts away from mRNA vaccine development
The decision by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to wind down funding for mRNA vaccine development marks a sharp departure from earlier federal health policy, particularly when set against the backdrop of President Donald Trump’s first-term support for the technology.
Originally developed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, mRNA vaccines by Moderna and Pfizer–BioNTech formed the cornerstone of the U.S. public health response.
Through Operation Warp Speed, the first Trump administration invested billions of dollars in rapid vaccine development, production, and distribution, ushering in what was widely viewed as a new era in immunization science.
The vaccines were praised for their speed of development, adaptability, and early effectiveness in reducing severe illness and hospitalizations.
However, under the leadership of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longstanding critic of mRNA platforms, the department yesterday announced the cancellation or restructuring of 22 mRNA vaccine programs.
The decision followed a broad internal review, which concluded that the vaccines failed to offer durable protection against upper respiratory infections such as COVID-19 and influenza.
Contracts with major institutions and companies (including Moderna, Emory University, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca) were terminated or significantly revised.
Kennedy stated that future investment would prioritize broader and safer vaccine platforms, particularly those capable of maintaining efficacy even as viruses continue to evolve.
However, mRNA vaccines were not only being developed for respiratory illnesses, but also to treat other illnesses, especially cancer. It is likely that this cutting-edge research will also be undermined by the HHS decision.
This reversal stands in stark contrast to the biotech-forward strategy of President Trump’s first term. It reflects not only a shifting scientific consensus on the limitations of mRNA technology for fast-mutating respiratory viruses, but also a political realignment within the Republican base, where vaccine skepticism has become increasingly pronounced.
While Trump once championed mRNA innovation as a triumph of American science and industrial capacity, his second administration now appears to be aligning with critics of the technology. That pivot is personified in the appointment of Kennedy and the subsequent dismantling of key programs. The move signals a broader retreat from mRNA vaccine development in favor of alternative platforms perceived to offer longer-lasting protection with fewer political liabilities.
The Middle East
Birth pangs in the birthplace of civilization
Lebanon tightens financial laws as part of crackdown on illicit networks
On Tuesday, the Lebanese Cabinet quietly adopted a significant but largely overlooked reform, buried as point four on its agenda: amendments to Law 44/2015 aimed at combating money laundering and terrorism financing. The new provisions bring Lebanon’s legal framework into alignment with the standards of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), as part of a broader push to remove the country from the organization’s grey list.
This legislative shift comes amid mounting financial pressure. Earlier this week, the European Union formally prohibited Lebanese banks from handling euro-denominated transactions, underscoring the urgency of restoring confidence in the country’s battered financial sector.
Yet the implications of the amendments go well beyond mere international financial compliance.
If implemented effectively, the changes could close off long-standing channels used by Hezbollah to finance its operations.
The revisions introduce tougher penalties and tighter scrutiny in cases involving money laundering or terrorism financing, including those who provide “consultancy” or support services.
The definition of “professional secrecy” has been narrowed, making it harder for lawyers to shield knowledge of such crimes.
Additional oversight will now extend to the trade in gold, jewelry, and other precious metals (common vehicles for laundering illicit funds).
As well as to non-profit organizations suspected of serving as fronts for criminal activity.
Crucially, the law now explicitly incorporates FATF criteria, limiting the ability of individuals and institutions to claim ignorance when suspicious transactions occur.
The Cabinet also approved a separate measure, point three on the agenda, that strengthens scrutiny of cash entering the country and increases penalties for false or incomplete declarations.
These reforms are part of a wider tightening of the legal and regulatory environment surrounding Hezbollah-linked networks. Legal loopholes are being closed, cooperation with international monitoring bodies is being expanded.
And the Lebanese Armed Forces have been tasked with presenting a roadmap to establish a state monopoly over the use of weapons by the end of 2025. This will be the most difficult and dangerous measure to implement, and could lead to widespread violence.
In a related development, the Lebanese Army announced the killing of Ali Zaiter, one of the country’s most notorious drug lords. He was eliminated in what appears to have been an airstrike followed by a ground operation in the Beqaa Valley. Zaiter was closely associated with Hezbollah and played a central role in the cross-border trafficking of arms and narcotics—especially Captagon—through Syria.
U.S. Foreign & Trade Policy
America First
U.S. pushes back on Europe’s attempt to overturn encryption and monitor speech
The administration of President Donald Trump has quietly instructed American diplomats across Europe to launch a coordinated lobbying campaign against the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA).
A recent State Department cable, signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, directs embassies to persuade EU governments and regulators to amend or oppose key provisions of the legislation, which Washington views as a threat to free speech and a financial burden on U.S. technology firms.
Diplomats have been armed with a detailed set of talking points urging revisions to the definition of “illegal content,” limits on punitive fines, and restrictions on the power of so-called “trusted flaggers”—individuals and institutions authorized to request content removals directly from platforms.
The DSA, adopted in 2022 and implemented in stages, mandates that large digital platforms improve transparency around content moderation, algorithmic recommendations, and the treatment of user complaints. Non-compliance can lead to fines of up to 6 percent of a company’s global turnover. American officials argue that the law clashes with constitutional traditions in the United States, particularly regarding protections for free expression, and imposes disproportionate compliance costs on firms headquartered outside Europe.
In parallel, European lawmakers are moving forward with a separate and even more contentious proposal often referred to as “chat control.” The measure would require messaging apps to scan private communications for illegal content, including material related to child sexual abuse, before those messages are sent…even when end-to-end encryption is enabled.
The plan, revived now during Denmark’s EU presidency, has alarmed privacy advocates and cybersecurity experts who argue it would fundamentally undermine encryption, paving the way for mass surveillance under the banner of child protection. If adopted, the regulation could come into force as early as October.
These European moves are part of a broader international trend toward more intrusive digital regulation, particularly affecting matters related to speech, privacy, and online safety.
In Britain, controversial age-verification laws have already been introduced, requiring websites to implement identity checks for users accessing adult content. Adult content is being broadly interpreted, including commentary that might upset children on platforms like X.
Critics have warned that the measures risk creating a centralized database of sensitive personal data and could normalize surveillance infrastructure under the guise of protecting children.
Australia, for its part, has signaled its intent to follow suit, with the government proposing new rules mandating age verification and identity screening across a wide range of online services.
Together, these legislative efforts expose a growing divide between liberal democracies over how to balance civil liberties with monitoring criminal behavior in the digital sphere.
While the European Union, the United Kingdom, and Australia frame their agendas in terms of user protection and accountability, the United States is positioning itself as the principal defender of open speech and innovation online.
U.S. technology companies have largely echoed the administration’s concerns, characterizing many of the proposed rules as heavy-handed, costly, incompatible with the architecture of the modern internet, and ultimately unenforceable.
Tech-savvy criminals will easily be able to bypass these restrictions, while ordinary citizens will find their online activity linked to digital identities stored by governments or third parties and of course (as recent history has shown), those identities and viewing activities will almost certainly be leaked.
The U.S. sees a creeping overreach that threatens core civil liberties and global business models. American tech giants have largely aligned with the administration’s position, characterizing the EU’s rules as a form of bureaucratic censorship.
Trump escalates trade tensions with India
President Donald Trump has doubled tariffs on Indian imports to 50 percent, adding a fresh 25 percent penalty on top of existing duties. The trigger was India’s continued imports of Russian oil, which Trump deems tantamount to financing Moscow’s war in Ukraine.
The increased tariffs will take effect in 21 days, offering scant respite amid spiralling tensions.
The Indian rupee, already under pressure, tumbled to near‐record lows against the U.S. dollar as trade disparities swell, prompting the Reserve Bank of India to intervene in currency markets.
Hardest hit will be India’s textile, jewelry, marine and leather sectors, which face an uneven playing field against rival exporters benefiting from lower duties.
Some strategic exemptions (pharmaceuticals, electronics, energy products) will shield key segments.
But the tariffs could shave up to one percentage point off India’s GDP growth.
Despite market jitters, major U.S. firms including Apple and Google remain bullish, leaning on India’s market potential and adjusting supply chains to adapt to the new trade order.
Trump snubs Swiss overtures
Meanwhile, Switzerland's president, Karin Keller-Sutter, concluded a hurried visit to Washington without securing any reprieve from Trump’s newly imposed 39 percent tariff on Swiss exports—the steepest among developed nations. A high-level proposal failed to sway U.S. officials, and no meeting with the president materialised.
Her return home prompted a rare emergency cabinet meeting in Bern to address the economic fallout.
Trump’s gambit underscores his reliance on tariff diplomacy, using punitive duties as both reward and punishment in pursuit of geopolitical objectives. By dismissing Swiss overtures despite long‑standing economic cooperation, he is resetting the norms of bilateral trade, demanding political concessions in exchange for commercial access.
Center of Gravity sign up link: https://www.namea-group.com/the-daily-brief
What happened today:
1420 - Construction begins on Dome of Florence Cathedral under Brunelleschi. 1789 - U.S. War Department established. 1942 - U.S. Marines land on Guadalcanal, launching first major Allied offensive in the Pacific. 1944 - IBM introduces the Automatic Sequence Controlled Calculator (Harvard Mark I). 1960 - Côte d’Ivoire declares independence from France. 1998 - U.S. embassies bombed in Kenya and Tanzania by al-Qaeda. 2008 - Russo-Georgian War begins over South Ossetia. 2019 - India revokes Article 370, ending Kashmir’s special status.
