Le Journal

Por Christian Edwards, CNN El Gobierno del Reino Unido ha dado luz verde a los planes de China para construir una “megaembajada” cerca del distrito financiero de Londres, a pesar de las advertencias de legisladores, residentes y disidentes chinos en el exilio de que el extenso complejo podría representar riesgos de seguridad. China compró el sitio en Royal Mint Court, donde Reino Unido solía acuñar monedas, por alrededor de US$ 312 millones, en 2018. Pero una decisión sobre los planes para la nueva embajada de 20.000 metros cuadrados, que se convertiría en el puesto diplomático más grande de China en Europa, se retrasó en tres ocasiones antes de que el Gobierno finalmente otorgara la aprobación este martes. Los retrasos reflejan las dudas del Gobierno británico sobre su estrategia hacia China. El Reino Unido busca el dinero y la buena voluntad diplomática de China, pero desde hace tiempo se muestra reticente a permitir que Beiijing construya una embajada ubicada cerca de cables de fibra óptica que transportarían datos confidenciales para empresas financieras, y que algunos temen que pueda utilizarse para espiar a ciudadanos chinos residentes en Londres. La decisión de planificación, un documento de 240 páginas, concluyó que “la propuesta cumple con el plan de desarrollo cuando se toma en su conjunto” y, como tal, “se debe otorgar el permiso de planificación y el consentimiento del edificio catalogado”. Días antes de la aprobación del Gobierno, el periódico británico The Telegraph publicó lo que, según afirmó, eran planos sin editar que demostraban que China pretende construir un complejo de 208 habitaciones bajo la embajada. Una de las habitaciones, según el periódico, se ubicaría justo al lado, y a pocos metros de distancia, de los cables de fibra óptica que transportan el correo electrónico y los datos financieros de millones de británicos. Alicia Kearns, ministra de Seguridad Nacional del llamado gabinete a la sombra del opositor Partido Conservador, advirtió la semana pasada que, de aprobarse, los planes “le darían al Partido Comunista chino una plataforma de lanzamiento para una guerra económica contra nuestra nación” y “crearían un dolor de cabeza diario para nuestros servicios de seguridad”. El MI5, el servicio de espionaje interno británico, no ha presentado objeciones formales a los planes de la embajada, a pesar de advertir sobre amenazas más amplias procedentes de China. Tras su informe anual de amenazas en octubre, el director de la agencia, Ken McCallum, declaró a la prensa: “¿Representan los agentes estatales chinos una amenaza para la seguridad nacional del Reino Unido? La respuesta es, por supuesto, sí, a diario”. El MI5 también emitió una inusual alerta en noviembre, en la que les advirtió a los legisladores que los servicios de inteligencia chinos están utilizando LinkedIn para hacerse pasar por reclutadores y atacar a empleados del Parlamento. La Embajada china en Londres desestimó la acusación, calificándola de “calumnia maliciosa”. La decisión británica podría estar influenciada por la necesidad de la aprobación de China para modernizar su embajada en Beijing. Según informes, China ha paralizado los planes británicos mientras busca la aprobación para su nueva embajada en Londres, lo que le permitirá trasladarse de su actual sede, cerca de Regent’s Park. Pero el Reino Unido también temía que negarle a China el permiso para construir su nueva embajada pudiera perjudicar las relaciones comerciales entre ambos países. Con una urgente necesidad de buenas noticias económicas, Keir Starmer, el primer primer ministro británico en seis años en reunirse con el líder chino Xi Jinping, instó en 2024 a una relación “consistente, duradera y respetuosa” con China y a una mayor cooperación empresarial entre ambos países. Sin embargo, el historial económico ha sido desigual. China fue el cuarto socio comercial más importante del Reino Unido en los cuatro trimestres hasta finales del segundo trimestre de 2025, y representó…

By Daniel Dale, CNN (CNN) — In an extraordinary message to Norway’s prime minister, President Donald Trump linked his pursuit of the self-governing Danish territory of Greenland to his failure to win the Nobel Peace Prize. He repeated his long-debunked claim that he ended eight wars. And he made another false claim – that no written documents support Denmark’s ownership of Greenland. “Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China, and why do they have a ‘right of ownership’ anyway? There are no written documents, it’s only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago, but we had boats landing there, also,” Trump wrote. In reality, Nordic boats began arriving in Greenland centuries before the United States even existed; the settlement that became Greenland’s capital of Nuuk was established by a Danish-Norwegian missionary in the early 1700s, decades before US independence. Of course, the history of many countries, including the US, also involved Europeans arriving by boat and claiming territory in regions previously populated by Indigenous peoples. But just as that wasn’t the end of the story for the US, it’s not the end of the story for Greenland. There are numerous written documents recognizing Danish sovereignty over Greenland – some of them signed by the US government during this century and the last. “Donald Trump’s claim is false, again,” said Marc Jacobsen, associate professor at the Royal Danish Defence College who is an expert on Arctic security and diplomacy. He noted that Denmark’s sovereignty over Greenland has been repeatedly recognized internationally, “not least” by the US. Below is a sampling of the documents the president suggested do not exist. 1916 As part of a deal in which Denmark sold the Danish West Indies to the US, where they renamed them the US Virgin Islands, the US agreed in 1916 to issue a written declaration acknowledging Danish sovereignty over Greenland. Then-Secretary of State Robert Lansing wrote in the declaration that, “duly authorized by his Government,” he had “the honor to declare that the Government of the United States of America will not object to the Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland.” 1933 In 1931, Norway occupied and claimed sovereignty over part of eastern Greenland. But after the dispute landed at the Permanent Court of International Justice (later replaced by the International Court of Justice), the court issued a ruling in 1933 in favor of Denmark’s argument that it had sovereignty over all of Greenland. Among various other factors, the judges cited another document: an 1814 treaty in which Denmark ceded Norway to Sweden but Denmark retained Greenland. 1941 An agreement signed during World War II by the US secretary of state and the Danish ambassador to the US, while Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany, gave the US broad powers to construct and operate military facilities in Greenland. But that agreement explicitly and repeatedly acknowledged Danish sovereignty over Greenland. “Although the sovereignty of Denmark over Greenland is fully recognized, the present circumstances for the time being prevent the Government in Denmark from exercising its powers in respect of Greenland,” the preamble to the agreement explained. The agreement itself said, “The Government of the United States of America reiterates its recognition of and respect for the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Den­mark over Greenland,” the agreement said. It also said, “The Kingdom of Denmark retains sovereignty over the defense areas mentioned in the preceding articles.” 1951 After the establishment of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1949, the US and Denmark signed an updated agreement to incorporate NATO into their 1941 arrangement and to set some rules governing the US military presence in Greenland. Before laying out US powers in the “defense areas” in which the US military was permitted to operate in Greenland, the agreement…

"Vous n’en pouvez plus de voir Lyon saccagée par les tags ? Moi aussi", écrit ce mardi 20 janvier le candidat Rassemblement National (RN) aux élections municipales de Lyon, Alexandre Dupalais sur son compte X. Ces mots sont accompagnés d’une vidéo dans laquelle le candidat se trouve devant un mur de la rue Saint-Maurice (8e […] L’article Municipales à Lyon : le candidat RN Alexandre Dupalais veut créer une brigade anti-tags est apparu en premier sur Lyon Capitale.

By Sandee LaMotte, CNN (CNN) — Heart disease is the No. 1 killer of American women and men — and has been for over 100 years. In fact, cardiovascular diseases are the top cause of adult deaths everywhere, responsible for 1 in 3 deaths worldwide. Cardiologists say physical inactivity, smoking, high blood pressure, high cholesterol and diabetes are all to blame — as is an unhealthy diet full of refined grains, added sugars and the artery-clogging saturated fats found in red and processed meats and full-fat dairy. The recently released 2025-2030 Dietary Guidelines for Americans restrict refined grains, added sugars and ultraprocessed foods (known as UPFs) — a move applauded by medical organizations. However, the revised food pyramid — which flips prior pyramids on their heads — also puts red meat and other foods full of protein and saturated fat in a starring role in the top tier, alongside fresh vegetables and fruits known to protect health. Leading cardiologists tell CNN this is upside-down thinking. “Promoting saturated fat and increasing the amount of protein goes against all nutrition and cardiology science,” said Dr. Kim Williams, chair of the department of medicine at the University of Louisville in Kentucky. “We’ve been researching this for decades, and we definitively know saturated fat — such as butter fat, beef tallow, red and processed meat — are all closely associated with more deaths from cardiovascular disease,” said Williams, a past president of the American College of Cardiology. “This does not fall in line with President Trump’s executive order 14303, which mandates that all federal policies use the best scientific evidence available.” That executive order, signed by Trump on May 23, 2025, called for a return to “a gold standard for science” to ensure “that Federal decisions are informed by the most credible, reliable, and impartial scientific evidence available.” Yet it’s exactly the impartial, verified and credible science that the new guidelines ignore, according to cardiologists. In fact, randomized controlled clinical trials — the current gold standard of research — have found replacing saturated fats with vegetable and seed oils reduced cardiovascular disease by some 30%, similar to the benefits of statin medications. “There’s no question that when we remove saturated fat from the diet and add in polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fats from fish, seed and plant sources, we save lives by improving cardiovascular health,” said Dr. Monica Aggarwal, an adjunct clinical associate professor of cardiovascular medicine at the University of Florida in Gainesville. “People are going to look at the new pyramid and think ‘Oh, I can eat as much steak as I like.’ Social media is already full of headlines like: ‘Beef is back on top,’ or ‘Butter is back,’ or ‘Beef tallow is the way to go,” Aggarwal said. “Yet there is no debate that the saturated fat in those foods is linked to heart disease.” Discarding decades of science In a January 8 press conference on the new guidelines, federal officials spoke of their disdain for past nutritional guidance. “For decades, we’ve been fed a corrupt food pyramid that has had a myopic focus on demonizing natural, healthy saturated fats, telling you not to eat eggs and steak and ignoring a giant blind spot — refined carbohydrates, added sugars and ultraprocessed food,” US Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary said at the briefing. The new dietary guidelines call for less than 10% of total daily calories to come from saturated fats, not terribly far from AHA recommendations to keep unhealthy fats to less than 6%. However, 10% or less is an impossible goal, experts say, if the major emphasis of the Make America Healthy Again movement is on eating more proteins with saturated fats. The Nutrition Source, an online resource from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, recently put the new dietary guidelines, which recommend three servings of dairy a day, to the…