The briefing for Wednesday, March 25.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz announced Tuesday that Israeli troops will establish direct military control over a large buffer zone in southern Lebanon extending to the Litani River, approximately 30 kilometers from the border. Israeli forces destroyed five bridges on the Litani River and declared that displaced Lebanese residents will not be allowed to return until northern Israel is deemed secure. The move represents a significant escalation following renewed conflict with Hezbollah after the group fired rockets into Israel in retaliation for the killing of Iran's supreme leader.

The strategy mirrors Israel's approach in Gaza's Rafah and Beit Hanoun, where major population centers remain under Israeli military control after extensive destruction. According to the Lebanese health ministry, 1,072 people have been killed in Lebanon since the latest escalation began, including at least 121 children and 42 health workers. More than one million people have been displaced, worsening Lebanon's existing humanitarian crisis. Southern Lebanon is the heartland of Lebanon's Shia Muslim community and Hezbollah's main support base, though it is also home to Christians and other communities.

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun described the Israeli plans as 'collective punishment against civilians.' The November 2024 ceasefire agreement had required Hezbollah to disarm and withdraw from the south under Lebanese government supervision, but implementation remained partial. Israel maintained several military posts and continued regular attacks on what it described as Hezbollah targets. Katz stated that the Lebanese government had done 'nothing' to fulfill ceasefire obligations, justifying Israel's unilateral action. The creation of this buffer zone raises comparisons to Israel's 1985-2000 occupation of southern Lebanon, which ended after sustained Hezbollah resistance inflicted significant casualties on Israeli forces.

A New Mexico jury ruled Tuesday that Meta knowingly harmed children's mental health and concealed child sexual exploitation on its platforms, ordering the company to pay $375 million in civil penalties. The verdict found Meta violated New Mexico's Unfair Practices Act through false or misleading statements and 'unconscionable' trade practices that exploited children's vulnerabilities. The jury determined there were thousands of violations, each carrying a maximum $5,000 penalty, though the total award fell short of the nearly $2 billion prosecutors had sought. Meta's stock rose 5% in after-hours trading, suggesting investors viewed the penalty as manageable for the $1.5 trillion company.

The seven-week trial presented internal Meta documents and testimony from former employees showing the company was aware of child predators using its platforms. Former engineering leader Arturo Béjar, who became a whistleblower after leaving in 2021, testified about experiments showing underage users were served sexualized content. He revealed his own daughter was propositioned for sex by a stranger on Instagram. State prosecutors presented internal research showing that at one point, 16% of all Instagram users reported being shown unwanted nudity or sexual activity in a single week. New Mexico's case relied partly on an undercover investigation where agents posed as children to document sexual solicitations and Meta's response.

The verdict marks the first time a state has successfully sued Meta over child safety issues, potentially opening the door for similar cases nationwide. More than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Meta claiming the company contributes to a mental health crisis by deliberately designing addictive features. A second phase of the trial in May will determine whether Meta's platforms created a public nuisance and whether the company must fund public programs to address the harms. Meta spokesperson said the company disagrees with the verdict and will appeal, stating 'We work hard to keep people safe on our platforms and are clear about the challenges of identifying and removing bad actors or harmful content.'

Luis Moreno Ocampo, founding chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, told the BBC that the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran amounts to a crime of aggression under international law. Moreno Ocampo said President Trump's threats to bomb Iranian power plants, as well as attacks by both Iran and Israel on energy infrastructure, do not constitute legitimate military targets. He likened such strikes to Russia's attacks on energy sites in Ukraine that led to ICC indictments for alleged war crimes. Under the Rome Statute, 'intentionally directing attacks at civilian objects which are not military objectives' is defined as a war crime.

The White House called Moreno Ocampo's statement 'ridiculous,' saying Trump was taking 'bold action to eliminate the threat posed by a rogue, terrorist regime.' U.S. Ambassador to the UN Mike Waltz told CBS News that when a regime uses critical infrastructure 'to further not only the repression of its own people, to attack its neighbors, and in contravention of UN sanctions to march towards a nuclear weapon, then that makes those legitimate targets.' Moreno Ocampo countered that Iran's attacks on Gulf neighbors that had not attacked it would also constitute crimes of aggression under international law. Neither the U.S., Israel, nor Iran are ICC members, though the Trump administration has sanctioned several ICC judges in retaliation for investigations.

Rights groups warn that attacking Iranian power plants could devastate civilian life, as Iranians already face power outages and electricity is often needed to pump water to homes. Iran has threatened to attack the energy and water systems of Gulf neighbors in retaliation if the U.S. strikes its power infrastructure. Trump postponed his 48-hour ultimatum to Iran on Monday, saying talks were yielding 'major progress,' though Iranian officials have denied substantive negotiations are taking place. Moreno Ocampo argued the global rules-based order was designed to protect civilians and prevent nations from resorting to war except in self-defense or with UN Security Council approval, adding 'Now we go to the rule of the man, whatever today President Trump decides will be the rule. That's not a viable world.'

The Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday on whether the Trump administration can revive an immigration policy known as 'metering' that limited asylum applications at the U.S.-Mexico border. The practice, which turned back migrants at ports of entry citing capacity constraints, created makeshift camps in Mexico during Trump's first term as people waited for opportunities to seek asylum. While the policy is not currently in place and Trump has ordered a wider suspension of the asylum system, the administration argues metering remains a 'critical tool' that should be available if needed in future. Some conservative justices appeared receptive to overturning a lower court ruling against the practice.

The legal dispute centers on interpreting the phrase 'arrive in' under U.S. asylum law. The Justice Department contends it means anyone physically inside the United States, so it doesn't apply to people authorities stop on the Mexico side of the border. Immigration attorneys argue the law has long meant anyone who comes to a port of entry must be able to apply for asylum. Justice Brett Kavanaugh questioned why Congress would 'privilege someone who illegally enters the United States' over those seeking legal entry at the border. A government attorney maintained that people turned away one day could return later, characterizing it as 'saying our port is at capacity today, try again some other day.'

Chief Justice John Roberts pressed attorneys on exactly where someone must be to claim asylum, while Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson suggested the hypothetical nature of the case made it difficult to rule. 'We have a lot of hypotheticals regarding how this policy may have worked in the past, how it's possibly going to work in the future, but we don't have a policy in effect right now that we can actually rule on,' she said. Metering was first used during the Obama administration and expanded to all border crossings under Trump's first term before ending in 2020 during the pandemic. A district judge ruled in 2021 that metering violated migrants' constitutional rights and federal law, a decision affirmed by a divided Ninth Circuit. The case attracted Supreme Court attention after nearly half the judges on the full appeals court voted to rehear it.

Federal Reserve officials are signaling that interest rate cuts planned for this year may be delayed or canceled as the Iran war drives inflation concerns. Fed Chair Jerome Powell acknowledged last week that higher gas prices stemming from the conflict will likely push inflation measures upward in coming months. Wall Street investors no longer foresee rate reductions this year, with futures pricing now showing nearly 25% odds of an actual rate hike by October, up from zero just a week ago. The shift represents a dramatic reversal from early 2026, when debate focused on how many times the Fed would cut rates rather than whether it would do so at all.

Longer-term interest rates have risen quickly since the war began February 28, pushing up costs for mortgages, auto loans, and business borrowing. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note has climbed from just below 4% before the conflict to current levels reflecting expectations that the Fed will keep rates higher for longer. Austan Goolsbee, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, told the Associated Press Monday that if inflation rises while unemployment remains stable and Americans begin anticipating higher future inflation, 'then there is an obvious playbook, which is rate increases have to be on the table.' San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly said in a written statement that uncertainty from the war means 'there is no single most-likely path' for interest rates.

The war creates a complex dilemma for the Fed, as higher gas prices could both increase inflation and slow economic growth if consumers cut spending elsewhere to offset fuel costs. Economists at UBS expect inflation according to the Fed's preferred measure will jump to 3.4% this month and end the year at 3%, above the Fed's 2% target. 'The number of incidents and attacks has been increasing significantly,' Krishna Guha of Evercore ISI wrote Tuesday, adding 'We think cuts are delayed, not derailed. The question is, delayed to September, delayed to December, or delayed more indefinitely' into 2027. Powell noted at a news conference last week that assuming the inflation impact would be temporary is challenging because inflation has remained above target for five years, eroding public confidence in the economy.

Poland experienced 270,000 cyberattacks in 2025, representing a 2.5-fold increase over the previous year, Deputy Minister of Digital Affairs Paweł Olszewski announced Tuesday. The country faced what authorities believe was an unprecedented destructive attack on its energy system in December, suspected of originating from Russia. During coordinated strikes on December 29, attackers targeted a combined heat and power plant serving nearly 500,000 customers, along with multiple wind and solar farms. While electricity supply was not disrupted, the nature of the sabotage prompted Polish authorities to issue a detailed technical report asking the cyber community for observations.

Marcin Dudek, head of Poland's Computer Emergency Response Team, said the attack marked 'a significant escalation' from typical ransomware incidents motivated by financial gain. 'In this case, there was no financial motivation—the motivation was just destruction,' Dudek told the Associated Press. He stated he was not aware of any other destructive cyberattacks on energy sectors in NATO or EU countries, though there have been espionage incidents and minor damage from activist groups. According to CERT analysis, the infrastructure used in the Polish attack had been previously employed by a Russian threat actor known as 'Dragonfly,' also called 'Static Tundra' or 'Berserk Bear,' which the FBI identified in August 2025 as associated with Russia's FSB Center 16 unit.

Poland has strengthened cyber defenses since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, in response to perceived rising threats from Russia. If the attack had targeted larger energy units on a bigger scale, 'it could impact the stability of the Polish grid system,' Dudek warned. ESET, a major cybersecurity company, confirmed that traces lead back to Russia. The FBI stated in its August alert that FSB Center 16 has 'compromised networking devices globally' for over a decade as part of signals intelligence and cyber operations. Polish secret services have not yet publicly identified the culprit, as CERT's mandate limits it to describing methods and identifying likely threat actors.