By HYUNG-JIN KIM and KEN MORITSUGU, Associated Press

BEIJING (AP) — North Korean leader Kim Jong Un will make his first visit to China in six years to attend a military parade next week, the two countries said Thursday, in an event that would bring him together with a large group of world leaders for the first time since taking office in late 2011.

Related Articles

Today in History: August 28, Emmett Till’s brutalized body found

Postal services that suspended US shipments need time to prepare for new tariffs, UN agency says

Russian forces break into another region of Ukraine with peace efforts stuck

Ukrainian drone attacks on oil refineries have some Russian regions running on empty

Woman seeks compensation from South Korea over her forced adoption to France in 1984

With Russian President Vladimir Putin also coming for the parade, the event will underline the three-way alignment among Beijing, Moscow and Pyongyang in the face of a U.S. push to bolster its alliances with South Korea and Japan.

North Korea’s state media said Kim was invited to visit China by President Xi Jinping. Kim will be among 26 foreign leaders who attend next Wednesday’s parade in Beijing to mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and China’s resistance against Japan’s wartime aggressions, China’s foreign ministry said.

“We warmly welcome General Secretary Kim Jong Un to China to attend the commemorative events,” Hong Lei, China’s assistant minister of foreign affairs, told a press conference. “Upholding, consolidating and developing the traditional friendship between China and the DPRK is a firm position of the Communist Party of China and the Chinese government.”

DPRK refers to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, North Korea’s official name.

Kim’s first attendance of a multination event

Since inheriting power upon his father’s death in December 2011, Kim has met Xi, Putin, U.S. President Donald Trump, former South Korean President Moon Jae-in and others. But all those summits were bilateral meetings and Kim hasn’t attended any big multilateral events with foreign leaders.

“Given that other leaders attending are mostly from pro-Russia and pro-Chinese countries, Kim likely intends to form solidarity with those Global South countries while showing he’s leader of a normal country,” said Moon Seong Mook, an analyst for the Seoul-based Korea Research Institute for National Strategy.

Observers say Kim is likely emboldened by his country’s expanding cooperation with Russia, which has helped him bear the brunt of U.S.-led sanctions and break out of diplomatic isolation. North Korea has been supplying troops and ammunition to support Russia’s war against Ukraine in return for economic and military assistance.

Others coming for the parade include the leaders of Iran, Belarus, Serbia, Cuba, Indonesia, Myanmar, Pakistan and Malaysia. No leaders from major Western countries including the U.S. are expected to attend, in part because of their differences with Putin over the war in Ukraine. The parade is expected to feature some of China’s newest weaponry and a speech by Xi.

It’ll the first time Xi, Kim and Putin gather at the same event

China, North Korea and Russia are embroiled in separate confrontations with the U.S., but they haven’t formed a clear three-way alliance so far.

Xi, Putin and Kim haven’t met in trilateral formats, though they’ve met one another bilaterally.

“Kim’s attendance is significant for his own international stature, but it also holds weight in the balance of alliances between the U.S. and China,” said Soo Kim, a former CIA analyst. “Xi, Putin, and now Kim attending the parade cements a visible statement about the alignment between the three countries.”

The three leaders likely share desires to check the strengthening cooperation among the U.S., South Korea and Japan, which have been meeting regularly and expanding trilateral military exercises. Despite their shared goals, it’s not clear how far China, North Korea and Russia will go to further cement ties.

China remains the largest purchaser of Russian oil and technology provider supporting the Russian war machine, though it is officially neutral in the conflict.

China has also long been North Korea’s biggest trading partner and main aid provider, but there have been questions about their relations in recent years. Chinese group tours to North Korea have remained suspended for years.

Kim’s China trip may signal his interest in resuming US diplomacy

Kim’s visit to China could also be related to efforts to restart diplomacy with Trump, who has repeatedly highlighted his relationship with Kim and expressed his hopes to resume talks.

In all, Kim traveled to China four times from 2018 to 2019 to meet Xi. His first and fourth visits happened just before he met Trump for their earlier high-stakes nuclear negotiations.

“Pyongyang’s illicit cooperation with Moscow has strained ties with Beijing, even as China’s political and economic support remains vital for the North Korean regime,” said Leif-Eric Easley, professor of international studies at Ewha Womans University in Seoul.

“To reengage Trump from a position of strength, Kim seeks to repair relations with Xi, and attending the parade in Beijing is a highly visible way of doing that,” Easley said.

During a meeting with South Korean President Lee Jae Myung in Washington earlier this week, Trump spoke of one of his past summits with Kim at the Korean Demilitarized Zone. Responding to a question over whether he would return to the Demilitarized Zone, Trump told reporters, “I loved it. Remember when I walked across the line and everyone went crazy.”

North Korea has so far dismissed Trump’s outreach, but many analysts say it would return to talks if it determines the U.S. would make bigger concessions.

North Korea likely wants greater cooperation with China

While Kim’s foreign policy priority is Russia now, many observers expect him to take steps to improve ties with China. It’s unclear if North Korea and Russia would maintain the same level of cooperation after Ukraine war ends.

In 2023, about 97% of North Korea’s external trade was with China, while 1.2% was with Russia, according to Chinese data.

Cheong Seong-Chang, deputy head of private Sejong Institute in South Korea, said Kim likely decided to go to China to ask for assistance as North Korea needs resources for lavish celebrations of two domestic events — the 80th anniversary of the ruling Workers’ Party in October and a party congress early next year.

Kim reported from Seoul, South Korea. Christopher Bodeen in Taipei, Taiwan contributed to this report.

By IGNATIUS SSUUNA, Associated Press

KIGALI, Rwanda (AP) — Seven migrants were transferred from the United States to Rwanda in August under a deportation agreement with the U.S., authorities in the East African country said Thursday.

Rwanda said earlier in August it would accept up to 250 deportees from the U.S.

Related Articles

Today in History: August 28, Emmett Till’s brutalized body found

Amish woman accused of killing her 4-year-old son by throwing him into an Ohio lake

Nvidia’s AI chip sales surged again in latest quarter, but worries about a tech bubble persist

Pro-DEI organizers fired up to maintain Target boycott as promises go unfulfilled

A Mississippi city’s tax break spurred post-Katrina building. But will homes stand the next storm?

Yolande Makolo, a spokeswoman for the Rwandan government, said in a statement that the “first group of seven vetted migrants arrived in Rwanda in mid-August.”

Rwanda is one of four African countries that have reached deportation agreements with Washington, The others are Uganda, Eswatini and South Sudan.

No information was provided about the identities of the deportees sent to Rwanda this month.

They have been “accommodated by an international organization” with visits by the International Organization for Migration, as well as representatives of Rwandan social services, Makolo said.

“Three of the individuals have expressed a desire to return to their home countries, while four wish to stay and build lives in Rwanda,” Makolo said.

In addition to accommodation, those approved for settlement in Rwanda will receive workforce training and health care, she said.

The Trump administration has come under scrutiny for the African countries it has entered into secretive deals with to take deportees. It sent eight men from South Sudan, Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar and Vietnam to South Sudan in early July after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling cleared the way for their deportations.

The U.S. also deported five men who are citizens of Vietnam, Jamaica, Cuba, Yemen and Laos to the southern African kingdom of Eswatini, where the government said they will be held in solitary confinement in prison for an undetermined period of time.

Uganda has also agreed to a deal with the U.S. to take deported migrants as long as they don’t have criminal records and are not unaccompanied minors. U.S. officials have said they want to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a high-profile detainee, to Uganda.

Wary of inflation, Americans have been watching the prices of everyday items such as eggs and gasoline. A less-noticed expense should cause greater alarm: rising premiums for health insurance. They have been trending upward for years and are now rising faster than ever.

Related Articles

Why getting a COVID-19 vaccine is likely to be more complicated this year

FDA approves updated Pfizer COVID shots but limits access for some kids and adults

FTC has long said products must back up health claims. A MAHA lawsuit would upend that

Two deaths among 20 Minnesota cases of West Nile virus this year

The national suicide hotline for LGBTQ+ youth went dead. States are scrambling to help

Consider that, from 2000 to 2020, egg prices fluctuated between just under $1 and about $3 a dozen; they reached $6.23 in March but then fell to $3.78 in June. Average gas prices, after seesawing between $2 and $4 a gallon for more than a decade starting in 2005, peaked at $4.93 in 2022 and recently fell back to just over $3.

Meanwhile, since 1999, health insurance premiums for people with employer-provided coverage have more than quadrupled. From 2023 to 2024 alone, they rose more than 6% for both individuals and family coverage — a steeper increase than that of wages and overall inflation.

For many people who have the kind of insurance plans created by the Affordable Care Act (because they work for small companies or insure themselves), rates have probably risen even more drastically. In this market, state regulators scrutinize insurers’ proposed rate increases, but only if they exceed 15%.

And the situation is about to get worse: For 2026, ACA marketplace insurers have proposed eye-popping new prices: In New York, UnitedHealthcare has proposed a 66.4% rise. HMO Colorado has asked for an average increase of more than 33% in that state. In Washington, the average proposed increase across all insurers is 21.2%, and in Rhode Island it’s 23.7%.

According to Business Group on Health, a consortium of major employers, “actual health care costs have grown a cumulative 50% since 2017.” In a separate survey published in 2021, 87% of companies said that in the next five to 10 years, the cost of providing health insurance for their workers would become “unsustainable.”

And insurers in the ACA marketplace are increasing premiums by an average of 20% for next year, according to a new analysis. Imagine if tens of millions of Americans’ rent or mortgage payments were to suddenly increase by that amount.

Insurance regulators theoretically could demand that these proposed rates be lowered — and this often happens. But some states are more active than others in this regard. And all are wary that too much regulatory interference could drive insurers from their markets.

Insurers offer many explanations for their calculations, some of which are tied to recent actions by Congress and President Donald Trump. New tariffs on America’s trading partners, for example, are expected to push up the cost of drugs and medical supplies.

Meanwhile, reductions in health care spending included in the GOP budget bill, along with the expiration of some Biden-era premium subsidies at the end of this year, will cause many people to lose their health insurance. About 16 million Americans are expected to become uninsured by 2034, in many cases because keeping insurance will become unaffordable.

Because most of these people are likely to be young and/or healthy, the “risk pool” of those remaining insured will become older and sicker — and therefore more expensive to cover.

“Ultimately, we believe the ACA market will likely be smaller and higher acuity-driven next year,” Janey Kiryluik, vice president of corporate communications for Elevance Health (formerly known as Anthem), wrote in an email. She added: “Our position reflects early disciplined action.”

Remember, most insurers in the United States are public, for-profit companies; as such, they tend to act in the interests of their shareholders, not the patients whose health care they cover.

Large employers that manage their own health care plans might be able to negotiate better deals for their workers. But smaller companies, for the most part, will need to accept what’s on offer.

Premiums are not the only part of health insurance that’s getting more expensive. Deductibles — the money that beneficiaries must spend out-of-pocket before insurance kicks in — are also rising. The average deductible for a standard ACA silver plan in 2025 was nearly $5,000, about double what it was in 2014. (For those with employer-based insurance, the average number is just under $2,000.)

A few states are trying to stem the tide by offering a state-run “public option,” a basic affordable insurance plan that patients can choose. But they have struggled because a lower payment rate for workers generally means fewer participating providers and reduced access to care.

If voters paid as much attention to the price of health insurance as they do to the cost of gas and eggs, maybe elected officials would respond with more action.

Elisabeth Rosenthal writes for KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs of KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling and journalism.

 

Ask an American conservative what makes America great, and at least until about a week ago, he might have said that, among other virtues, it’s a country in which the government stays out of the business of getting in business.

Yes, there are exceptions — Fannie Mae and Amtrak come to mind — but their record of mismanagement and mediocrity would prove the conservative’s point. Other democratic countries have government-controlled champion enterprises, and some of them, like the Airbus consortium in Europe, sometimes do well. Yet the heavy hand of the state tends to lead to problems over time, including corruption, inefficiency and a reluctance to let bad companies fail.

But American conservatism under President Donald Trump is changing into something unrecognizable, at least to those of us (silly us!) who thought the movement had guiding principles beyond getting, wielding and abusing power. Umpteenth case in point: The federal government becoming an equity shareholder in Intel.

This month, Trump called for the resignation of Lip-Bu Tan, Intel’s new CEO, based on vague allegations that he had invested in Chinese technology companies that U.S. officials say have links to China’s military. (Tan is a U.S. citizen who was born in Malaysia and raised in Singapore.) Trump also decided to convert nearly $9 billion in government funding promised to Intel under the 2022 CHIPS Act, a piece of industrial policy intended to boost the U.S. semiconductor manufactures, into an equity stake.

“You know what? I think the United States should be given 10% of Intel,” Trump says he told Tan in a White House meeting Friday. Tan speedily agreed. On Monday, Trump boasted on social media that he would “make deals like that for our Country all day long.”

If a Democratic president did this to Tan or any other American CEO, Republicans would call it a political shakedown, an assault on capitalism, a loser for taxpayers. They’d be right. Intel, which had a $500 billion market cap at the turn of the century, is now at $107 billion. What’s to keep it from going lower and taking taxpayers down with it?

As for other arguments for investing in Intel — that it’s systemically important to the U.S. economy (as the banks were in the 2008 financial crisis), that it’s vital for national security (as the critical minerals industry is today), that it’s a symbol of American industrial might (as, arguably, Boeing is) — none of them hold water. The ecosystem of American chipmakers, from Nvidia to Micron to Qualcomm, is thriving. With about 110,000 workers worldwide at the end of last year, Intel pales in comparison with the largest U.S. companies. If Intel were to fail, or stagger along for years to come, it would simply join the long gray line of America’s corporate has-beens, from Sears to Chrysler to IBM to General Electric.

Instead, Intel is about to become something much worse: a precedent.

In a news release, the company insisted that the government’s stake will be “passive ownership, with no board representation or other governance or information rights.” That’s like letting a tiger into your house on the solemn promise that it won’t raid the fridge or eat your children. Intel will now join the stable of other cowed and compliant corporations, universities and law firms living in fear of the next Truth Social post, funding revocation or regulatory obstruction. And that’s to say nothing of the FBI searches that could await those unlucky enough to have once served Trump with insufficient servility.

Republicans now cheering Trump for his daily Big Dog performance should at least wonder what the consequences for America’s economic freedom and competitiveness will be once he makes America statist again. Trump’s personalized control of ever-broader swaths of the economy based on ever-thinner pretexts is the beginning of a long trend with neither a political check nor a limiting principle.

Especially since ever-greater government control of private enterprise is usually a progressive goal, not a conservative one. A current of neosocialism now runs through parts of MAGA land, particularly among those who confuse Catholic social teachings with economic reality. This crew should remember that in democratic politics, two can play the game. What the Trump administration did to “60 Minutes” could be done by a left-wing administration to Fox News or Newsmax. And what Trump is doing with Intel could soon become a template for dozens, if not hundreds, of U.S. companies in which Uncle Sam demands a golden share.

Last year, I said that Republicans would regret a second Trump term and that principled conservatives should not imagine he’s on their side. To them one can only say: It’s going to get worse.

Bret Stephens writes a column for the New York Times.

Related Articles

Thomas Friedman: Israel’s Gaza campaign is making it a pariah state

David French: What it really means to choose life

David M. Drucker: Crime stats aren’t the best way to make people feel safe

Michael R. Bloomberg: RFK Jr. is sabotaging President Trump’s health legacy

Stephen Mihm: It’s not just Sydney Sweeney — the U.S. always fights about jeans