World
Has India’s influence in Afghanistan grown under the Taliban?
Pakistan has accused Afghanistan’s Taliban of serving as a “proxy” for India, amid escalating hostilities between Islamabad and Kabul.
Just hours after Pakistan bombed locations in Kabul early on Friday, Pakistan’s Minister of Defence Khawaja Asif wrote on X that after NATO forces withdrew from Afghanistan in July 2021, “it was expected that peace would prevail in Afghanistan and that the Taliban would focus on the interests of the Afghan people and regional stability”.
list of 3 itemsend of listRecommended Stories
“However, the Taliban turned Afghanistan into a colony of India,” he wrote and accused the Taliban of “exporting terrorism”.
“Pakistan made every effort, both directly and through friendly countries, to keep the situation stable. It carried out extensive diplomacy. However, the Taliban became a proxy of India,” he alleged as he declared an “open war” with Afghanistan.
This is not the first time that Asif has brought India into tensions with Afghanistan.
Last October, he alleged: “India wants to engage in a low-intensity war with Pakistan. To achieve this, they are using Kabul.”
So far, Asif has presented no evidence to back his claims and the Taliban has rejected accusations that it is being influenced by India.
But India has condemned the Pakistani military’s recent actions in Afghanistan, adding to Islamabad’s growing discernment that its nuclear rival and the Taliban are edging closer.
Earlier this week, after the Pakistani military carried out air raids inside Afghanistan on Sunday, India’s Ministry of External Affairs said in a statement that New Delhi “strongly condemns Pakistan’s airstrikes on Afghan territory that have resulted in civilian casualties, including women and children, during the holy month of Ramadan”.
After Friday morning’s flare-up between Pakistan and Afghanistan, India’s foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal again said New Delhi “strongly” condemned Pakistan’s air strikes and also noted that they took place on a Friday during the holy month of Ramadan.
“It is another attempt by Pakistan to externalise its internal failures,” Jaiswal said in a statement on X.
Has India’s influence in Afghanistan grown under the Taliban and what is India’s endgame with Afghanistan?
Here’s what we know:
How have relations between India and the Taliban evolved?
When the Taliban first rose to power in Afghanistan in 1996, India adopted a hostile policy towards the group and did not recognise its assumption of power. India also shunned all diplomatic relations with the Taliban.
At the time, New Delhi viewed the Taliban as a proxy for Pakistan’s intelligence agencies. Pakistan, together with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, were the only three countries to have also recognised the Taliban administration at that point.
Then, in 2001, India supported the US-led invasion of Afghanistan, which toppled the Taliban administration. India then reopened its embassy in Kabul and embraced the new government led by Hamid Karzai. The Taliban, in response, attacked Indian embassies and consulates in Afghanistan. In 2008, at least 58 people were killed when the Taliban bombed India’s embassy in Kabul.
In 2021, after the Taliban returned to power, India closed its embassy in Afghanistan once again and also did not officially recognise the Taliban as the government of the country.
But a year later, as relations between Pakistan and the Taliban deteriorated over armed groups which Pakistan accuses Afghanistan of harbouring, India began engaging with the Taliban.
In 2022, India sent a team of “technical experts” to run its mission in Kabul and officially reopened its embassy in the Afghan capital last October. New Delhi also allowed the Taliban to operate Afghanistan consulates in the Indian cities of Mumbai and Hyderabad.
Over the past two years, officials from New Delhi and Afghanistan have also held meetings abroad, in Kabul and in New Delhi.
In January last year, the Taliban administration’s Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi met India’s Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates.
Then, in October 2025, he visited New Delhi and met Indian foreign minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar.
After this meeting, Muttaqi told journalists that Kabul “has always sought good relations with India” and, in a joint statement, Afghanistan and India pledged to have “close communication and continue regular engagement”.
Besides beefing up diplomatic ties, India has also offered humanitarian support to Afghanistan under the Taliban’s rule.
After a magnitude 6.3 earthquake struck northern Afghanistan in November last year, India shipped food, medicine and vaccines, and Jaishankar was also among the first foreign ministers to call Muttaqi and offer his support. Since last December, India has also approved and implemented several healthcare infrastructure projects in Afghanistan, according to a December 2025 report by the country’s press information bureau.
Praveen Donthi, senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, told Al Jazeera that the costs of avoiding engagement with the Taliban in the past have compelled the Indian government to adopt strategic pragmatism towards the Afghan leadership this time.
“New Delhi does not want to disregard this relationship on ideological grounds or create strategic space for India’s main strategic rivals, Pakistan and China, in its neighbourhood,” he said.
Raghav Sharma, professor and director at the Centre for Afghanistan Studies at the OP Jindal Global University in India, added that the current engagement also stems from New Delhi’s pragmatic realisation that the Taliban is now in charge in Afghanistan and that there is no meaningful opposition.
“States engage in order to protect and further their interests. While there is little by way of ideological convergence, there are areas of strategic convergence, which is what has pushed India to engage with the Taliban, some of their unpalatable policies notwithstanding,” he said.
Is this a new stance towards Afghanistan?
No. India’s growing influence and engagement with Afghanistan began well before the Taliban returned to power in August 2021.
Between December 2001 and September 2014, during the US presence in Afghanistan, New Delhi was a strong supporter of the Karzai government, and then of his successor, Ashraf Ghani’s government, which was in power from September 2014 until August 2021, when the US withdrew from the country.
In October 2011, under Karzai, India and Afghanistan renewed ties by signing an agreement to form a strategic partnership. New Delhi also pledged to support Afghanistan in the face of foreign troops in the nation as a part of this agreement.
Under both Karzai and his successor, Ghani, India invested more than $3bn in humanitarian aid and reconstruction work in Afghanistan. This included reconstruction projects like schools and hospitals, and also a new National Assembly building in Kabul, which was inaugurated in December 2015 when Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Afghanistan for the first time.
India’s Border Road Organisation (BRO) also assisted Afghanistan in the development of infrastructure projects like the 218km Zaranj-Delaram highway in 2009 under Karzai’s government.
Under Ghani, New Delhi undertook building the Salma Dam project to help with irrigating Afghanistan. In June 2016, when Modi visited Afghanistan once again, he inaugurated this $290m dam project. In May 2016, Iran, India and Afghanistan also signed a trilateral trade and transit agreement on the Chabahar port.
During this period – 2001-2021 – Pakistan’s unease with New Delhi and Kabul’s new partnership grew.
In October 2011, after signing a strategic agreement with India, Karzai had assured Islamabad that while “India is a great friend, Pakistan is a twin brother”.
But Karzai was critical of Pakistan’s support for the Taliban. In his last speech as president of Afghanistan in Kabul in September 2014, he stated that he believed most of the Taliban leadership lived in Pakistan.
In a 2011 report by a Washington, DC-based think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Amer Latif, former director for South Asian affairs in the US Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, noted that Karzai was walking a “fine line between criticising Pakistan’s activities while also referring to Pakistan as Afghanistan’s ‘twin brother’.”
“It is in this context that Karzai appears to be looking to solidify long-term partnerships with countries that will aid his stabilisation efforts,” he said, referring to Karzai’s visit to India and his efforts to improve relations with the subcontinent.
When Ghani rose to power in September 2014, he tried to reset ties with Pakistan and also visited the country in November that year. But his efforts did not result in improved ties due to border disputes with Pakistan continuing until his administration was overthrown by the Taliban in August 2021.
So why has India maintained ties with Afghanistan under the Taliban?
Initially, when the Taliban returned to power in 2021 following the withdrawal of the US, political analysts largely expected Pakistan to lead the way in recognising the Taliban administration as the official government of Afghanistan, improving bilateral relations which had turned icy under Karzai and Ghani.
But relations turned hostile, with Pakistan repeatedly accusing the Taliban of allowing anti-Pakistan armed groups like the Pakistan Taliban (TTP) to operate from Afghan soil. The Taliban denies this.
Then, the deportation of tens of thousands of Afghan refugees by Pakistan in recent years further strained ties between the two neighbours.
India has ultimately taken a pragmatic approach to the Taliban in order to maintain the good relations it built with Afghanistan from 2001 to 2021, and has somewhat leveraged poor relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan to cement these.
“With Pakistan’s increasingly strained relations with Afghanistan, the logic of ‘enemy’s enemy’ is acting as a glue between Kabul and New Delhi,” International Crisis Group’s Donthi said.
He added that despite the fact that India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government opposes Islamist organisations, “the strategic necessity to counter Pakistan has led it to engage with the Taliban proactively”.
India and Pakistan are nuclear-armed rivals which engaged in a four-day conflict in May 2025 after armed rebels killed Indian tourists in Pahalgam, a popular tourist spot in Indian-administered Kashmir, last April. New Delhi accused Pakistan of supporting rebel fighters, a charge Pakistan strongly denied.
For its part, Afghanistan took the opportunity to strongly condemn the Pahalgam attack and the Indian Ministry of External Affairs expressed “deep appreciation” to the Taliban for its “strong condemnation of the terrorist attack in Pahalgam … as well as for the sincere condolences”.
India has also condemned Pakistani military action in Afghanistan and has provided aid to thousands of Afghan refugees displaced from Pakistan.
So what is India’s endgame in Afghanistan?
Sharma, the OP Jindal Global University professor, said India wants to ensure that Pakistan and China, whose influence has grown in South Asia in recent years, “do not have a free run”, as “there is a divergence of interest on Afghanistan” with both Pakistan and its ally, China.
“There are security interests New Delhi is keen to further and protect for which engagement [with the Taliban] is the only option,” he added.
Anil Trigunayat, a former Indian diplomat, noted that while Afghanistan and Pakistan relations have their own dynamic, currently the Taliban leadership, even if not a monolith, refuses to play to the tunes of the Pakistan military and its intelligence agency.
“Hence they [Pakistan] accuse Indian complicity in Taliban actions in Pakistan,” he said.
But the Taliban, he said, “understands and appreciates India’s intent, policies and [humanitarian] contributions”, making its leaders keen to continue collaboration with New Delhi.
World
War breaking news. Trump postpones decision: nothing after two hours in Situation Room
Iran, Trump shares draft agreement with Israel and other allies
US President Donald Trump has circulated the draft peace agreement for the war with Iran among allies, including Israel, while attempts are underway to prevent new ceasefire violations from escalating and derailing any agreement. Meanwhile, in an effort to accelerate negotiations, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, Mohammad Ishaq Dar, will be in Washington today to meet with his US counterpart, Marco Rubio.
Yesterday, Tehran targeted a US air base in Kuwait after Washington struck what it called an Iranian drone operation near the Strait of Hormuz, highlighting the fragility of the situation as both negotiating parties refuse to give in on the final points of disagreement. On Wednesday, Trump’s cabinet was scheduled to discuss the deal, but Axios – which reported on the terms of the deal reached – reported that the US president needed a few more days to reflect on the eventual go-ahead.
Direct military negotiations between Israel and Lebanon start today at the Pentagon
The first direct meeting between Lebanese and Israeli military delegations opens today at the Pentagon as part of the negotiations promoted by the United States after the truce that came into effect, at least on paper, in mid-April. The talks take place while Israel intensifies raids and bombardments in Lebanon, including the southern suburbs of Beirut. The Jewish state has issued several forced displacement orders to Israeli civilians in Nabatiye and Tyre, the two main Lebanese cities in the south of the country. Beirut’s armed forces come to the table with a position defined by President Joseph Aoun, who is considered close to the United States: a complete ceasefire, an end to Israeli operations, withdrawal from the occupied areas in the south, and increased army deployment along the border. Beirut also demands the release of Lebanese prisoners, the return of displaced persons, and international support for reconstruction. The meeting follows two previous negotiating sessions held in Washington on 14 and 15 May, which led to the extension of the ‘truce’ for 45 days. The United States, engaged in large-scale negotiations with Hezbollah supporter Iran, is aiming to strengthen direct military coordination between the two sides. In this sense, a new political round at the State Department is scheduled for 2 and 3 June. However, the most delicate knot remains on the table: Israel claims the right to conduct preventive operations against threats considered imminent, a formula contested by Beirut and at the centre of internal Lebanese tensions. At the same time, Washington continues to exert pressure on the Hezbollah disarmament dossier, while the Shiite movement reiterates its rejection of direct negotiations and continues its operations against the Israeli occupation forces in southern Lebanon. According to data gathered from Lebanese sources, more than 4,500 Israeli violations, more than 5,500 homes destroyed, and direct or indirect Israeli military control over more than 65 locations in South Lebanon have been recorded since the start of the mid-April ‘truce’.
Emir Qatar hears Trump, ‘priority to political and diplomatic solutions’
Qatar’s Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani has asked US President Donald Trump to “prioritise political and diplomatic solutions” in the Middle East, in the context of negotiations between Washington and Tehran for a possible agreement. The request came during a phone call between the two leaders, during which international efforts to reduce tensions in the region were addressed. This was reported by the Qatari state agency Qna. Al Thani emphasised ‘the need to prioritise political and diplomatic solutions, as well as dialogue between all parties, to consolidate regional security and stability and avoid further tensions and escalation’. Washington meanwhile confirmed an agreement in principle with Iran to extend the 60-day truce and guarantee shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, but the understanding remains pending Trump’s approval and has not yet been confirmed by Tehran.
World
Pentagon hosts first-ever Israeli–Lebanese military talks aimed at curbing Hezbollah
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Israeli and Lebanese military delegations opened Pentagon-mediated talks Friday morning in Washington, launching a new U.S.-brokered security coordination track aimed at preventing renewed escalation along the Israel–Lebanon border and shoring up a fragile ceasefire reached in mid-April.
A State Department official told Fox News Digital that, “As we have continuously stated, the only path to lasting peace is through direct negotiations between the two sovereign governments.”
The discussions mark a shift from diplomatic negotiations into direct military coordination, with talks expected to focus on ceasefire enforcement, border stability, Israeli withdrawal from parts of southern Lebanon and the role of the Lebanese Armed Forces in containing Hezbollah.
ISRAEL MOVES TOWARDS CEASEFIRE DEAL WITH HEZBOLLAH: REPORTS
Michael Needham, counselor for the U.S. Department of State, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa, Lebanese Ambassador to the U.S. Nada Hamadeh Moawad, and Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter pose for a photo before a meeting at the State Department in Washington, D.C., on April 14, 2026. (Jacquelyn Martin/AP Photo)
The talks come weeks after a U.S.-brokered ceasefire first reached during the broader regional conflict tied to the U.S.–Iran war. While large-scale fighting has eased, Israeli forces continue operating inside parts of southern Lebanon and Hezbollah maintains drone and rocket capabilities, keeping tensions high along the border.
The ceasefire was extended on May 15 for another 45 days, creating pressure on both sides to show progress before the current arrangement expires.
But analysts say the central question overshadowing the talks is whether Lebanon can realistically curb Hezbollah’s military power without risking internal collapse.
“This will be the first meeting between representatives of the militaries since the start of the negotiation process between Lebanon and Israel,” Ahmed Sharawi, a research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank, told Fox News Digital.
Representing Lebanon in the talks is Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) commander Gen. Rodolphe Haykal, who previously served as commander of the Lebanese Armed Forces in southern Lebanon, an area where Hezbollah maintains a strong presence. Hezbollah is the Iran-backed Lebanese terrorist organization designated by the United States as a foreign terrorist organization.
“What we should expect is talks regarding de-confliction and what the expectations are for the LAF in terms of the broader disarmament plan against Hezbollah’s weapons,” he said.
Sharawi said the chances of a broader breakthrough remain limited so long as Hezbollah remains heavily armed and politically entrenched inside Lebanon.
“The biggest obstacle here is that the Lebanese state is yet to present a feasible plan to disarm Hezbollah,” he said.
LAWMAKERS QUESTION WHETHER US MOVING FAST ENOUGH TO CAPITALIZE ON HEZBOLLAH’S WEAKENED STATE
But analysts say the central question overshadowing the talks is whether Lebanon can realistically curb Hezbollah’s military power without risking internal collapse. (Ibrahim AMRO / AFP via Getty Images)
He pointed to the terms of the November 2024 ceasefire agreement, which placed responsibility for disarming Hezbollah on the Lebanese state.
“We are yet to see the confiscation of one single bullet from Hezbollah,” Sharawi said.
He also warned that Hezbollah’s deep support among Lebanon’s Shiite population complicates any attempt to move toward normalization with Israel.
“There’s a fear of a civil war,” he said. “That also accounts for the Lebanese state’s unwillingness to disarm Hezbollah.”
The talks opened as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu signaled Israel intends to maintain military pressure on Hezbollah despite the negotiations.
Sharawi argued the Trump administration nevertheless appears determined to push the process forward as part of a broader effort to weaken Iranian influence in the region.
“The reason behind these meetings is that President Trump is really trying to push for a peace agreement between Israel and Lebanon,” he said. “Peace between these two countries could really undermine Hezbollah and its influence in Lebanon.”
WALTZ SAYS TRUMP HAS CREATED ‘BEST CHANCE IN OUR LIFETIME’ TO BREAK HEZBOLLAH’S GRIP ON LEBANON
Churches in the southern Lebanese town of Rmeish remained standing throughout the conflict, as residents say the community resisted Hezbollah attempts to launch rockets from the area. (Jusoor News)
Israeli analysts similarly described the talks less as a breakthrough and more as a strategic signal aimed at Hezbollah.
“The war between us and Hezbollah is continuing,” Yossi Kuperwasser, senior project manager at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security and former head of the Research Division of Israeli Military Intelligence, told Fox News Digital.
“There is no doubt the Lebanese government does not have a monopoly on the use of force in Lebanon,” he said.
‘OVERBLOWN’ REPORTS ON ISRAEL–LEBANON NORMALIZATION RISK HINDERING BORDER TALKS BEFORE THEY BEGIN: OFFICIAL
IDF troops discovered a Hezbollah weapons cache near a UNIFIL post in southern Lebanon in 2024. (IDF Spokesman’s Unit)
Kuperwasser said expectations for an immediate diplomatic breakthrough should remain low, but argued the talks themselves send an important political message.
“The purpose of these talks is first and foremost to send a message to Hezbollah and also to the Americans,” he said. “Both sides are prepared to sit together against Hezbollah and signal that they are moving, even if slowly, toward normalization between Israel and Lebanon.”
He argued Hezbollah has been weakened politically and militarily by the ongoing conflict and by growing frustration among Lebanese civilians displaced by the fighting.
“For years Hezbollah portrayed itself as the defender of Lebanon,” Kuperwasser said. “Now many Lebanese see Hezbollah as responsible for the suffering Lebanon is experiencing.”
Kuperwasser added that while Israel supports strengthening the Lebanese army, Beirut fears direct confrontation with Hezbollah could ignite another civil war.
“The Lebanese government fears military action against Hezbollah would lead to civil war,” he said. “That fear shapes everything.”
The talks also come amid mounting domestic pressure inside Israel, where critics of Netanyahu have accused the government of pursuing containment rather than decisive military victory against Hezbollah.
Speaking Friday during a visit to Israel’s northern front, Netanyahu said Israeli forces had crossed the Litani River and were operating across multiple parts of Lebanon.
“We are operating in Beirut, in the Bekaa Valley, across the entire front and striking Hezbollah hard,” Netanyahu said.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
A woman holds her dog as she walks past burned cars a day after an Israeli airstrike in Beirut, Lebanon, on April 9, 2026. (Emilio Morenatti/AP)
Meanwhile, Lebanon’s leadership is attempting to balance growing American pressure with fears of internal instability and renewed sectarian conflict.
Neither the Israeli Embassy in Washington nor the Lebanese Embassy in Washington immediately responded to requests for comment. The Pentagon did not have anything to add when asked to comment.
World
Israel, Russia among new additions on UN sexual violence ‘blacklist’
The United Nations has confirmed it placed Israel on a blacklist of countries suspected of committing sexual violence against civilians, and pushed back on accusations made by Israel regarding its inclusion.
The list, part of a “conflict-related sexual violence” report released on Friday, prompted Israel’s foreign ministry to say it would sever all ties with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.
list of 3 itemsend of listRecommended Stories
Last August, the UN cited “credible information” regarding sexual violence committed by Israeli security forces against Palestinian detainees in prisons and other detention centres, and said UN inspectors had been denied access to the facilities.
“We invited the representative of the UN to come to Israel to check those ridiculous allegations. They chose not to come,” Israel’s UN Ambassador Danny Danon posted on X on Thursday.
“I never received an iota of information on measures taken by the government of Israel on implementation of the preventive measures,” Pramila Patten, the UN official who authored the report, told reporters on Friday at a briefing at the UN’s New York headquarters.
“I have made several requests in writing, and sometimes during meetings, for details about initial steps, including the issuance of orders of command information on access and information on accountability measures, but I did not get any response on the substantive aspect of the preventive measures,” she added.
Patten did confirm that there had been an invitation from Israel, but referred also to disagreements about the scope of the visit and related issues of access and cooperation, and said it ultimately had to be suspended due to Israel’s war on Gaza.
‘Multiple incidents’ in Gaza and occupied West Bank
This year’s report said that in 2025 “the United Nations verified multiple incidents of conflict-related sexual violence, including as a form of torture, inflicted against 14 men, seven women, nine boys and one girl from the Gaza Strip and the [occupied] West Bank.”
It said 13 of the attacks happened last year, and 18 in 2023 and 2024.
“Violations consisted of rape, including with objects, gang rape, attempted rape, physical violence to the genitals, instances of targeted shooting of the genitals, touching of breasts and genitals, strip and cavity searches conducted without apparent security justification, forced nudity and threats of rape,” it said.
“Rape and gang rape, in some cases repeated, were perpetrated against nine victims, the majority Palestinians from Gaza,” it said, adding that perpetrators included Israeli armed and security forces. The assaults occurred primarily during detention and interrogation in several sites, including military camps, at checkpoints and during Israeli military operations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
It said survivors included journalists and human rights defenders and in some cases, the violations were filmed or photographed, including one case of rape.
The report added that sexual violence against female detainees included mostly threats of rape, forced nudity, unwanted touching, and humiliating or degrading strip searches without justification, while men and boys were targeted with rape, attempted rape and violence to the genitals.
This resulted in five male victims suffering severe rectal bleeding or swelling for multiple days or weeks, it added.
Russia added to list alongside Israel
The latest UN report also contains harrowing descriptions of abuses at the hands of Russia’s military after “findings of continued patterns of sexual violence documented”.
The UN human rights monitoring mission in Ukraine had verified 310 cases of conflict-related sexual violence perpetrated by Russian armed and security forces.
It said the cases, including rape, gang rape, genital mutilation, electric shocks and beatings to the genitals, injured 280 men, 26 women and four girls.
The report’s annex lists 77 parties deemed responsible for patterns of conflict-related sexual violence, including 62 non-state actors.
New additions include three non-state armed groups operating in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Nearly 10,000 cases of conflict-related sexual violence were recorded worldwide last year – more than double the previous year’s figure, the report said.
Being added to the list does not automatically carry specific punitive measures such as sanctions, although public naming and shaming can cause significant reputational damage for the states involved, and those repeatedly listed are barred from UN peacekeeping operations.
Patten said the increase in cases of conflict-related sexual violence verified by the United Nations marks a very disturbing trend that was still only the “very tip of the iceberg”.
“This number can be attributed to the fact that we are going through a time when we have a record number of extremely violent conflicts, and the fact that perpetrators are feeling emboldened by a context of impunity, where this crime is almost cost-free,” she said.
-
Indiana5 minutes agoPolice searching for missing man with autism last seen riding bike in Highland, Indiana
-
Iowa8 minutes agoChicago Cubs’ Matt Shaw expected to begin rehab assignment with Iowa
-
Kansas13 minutes agoKansas man sentenced to 4 years in connection with 13-year-old Linn County boy’s death
-
Kentucky20 minutes agoSocial media companies pay $27 million to settle Kentucky school district’s lawsuit over social media harms, records show
-
Louisiana23 minutes agoHow is U.S. immigration policy hurting a key Louisiana industry? : Consider This from NPR
-
Maine28 minutes agoSkowhegan students get epic view of their work in western Maine
-
Maryland35 minutes agoMaryland schools rank 3rd in nation in post-pandemic reading recovery – WTOP News
-
Michigan38 minutes agoMichigan House reaches settlement to end $645M work project funding battle