No English content available

Warsh has big plans for the Fed, but results may take time

2026-05-13 10:02 AM UTC / Reuters

By Howard Schneider and Ann Saphir

May 13, 2026 10:02 AM UTC Updated 15 mins ago

Kevin Warsh, U.S. President Donald Trump’s nominee to be next chair of the Federal Reserve, testifies before a Senate Banking Committee confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 21, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo

• Summary

• Changes to balance sheet, inflation analysis, other issues expected to be gradual
• Warsh’s ideas would involve technical, cultural change at the central bank
• Counterarguments on AI, balance sheet already taking shape

WASHINGTON, May 13 (Reuters) – Fifteen years after leaving the Federal Reserve in opposition to an expansive bond-buying program that has since saddled it with a $6.7 trillion portfolio, Kevin Warsh is expected to return as the U.S. central bank’s leader this month with a big reform agenda that may be tough to translate into quick changes.

With critiques spanning everything from how the Fed monitors inflation to its willingness to bail out markets to its communications strategy, Warsh’s ideas would involve not just technical reform to the central bank’s economic analyses, but sensitive shifts in how it speaks to financial markets and the public more broadly – issues previously hashed over and considered hard to meddle with quickly.

The Week in Breakingviews newsletter offers insights and ideas from Reuters’ global financial commentary team. Sign up here.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

The 56-year-old lawyer and financier could make fast changes in tone and at his discretion cut back on things like press conferences, a return to the more restrained, opaque form of central banking that existed before the 2007-2009 recession and financial crisis triggered a bias towards more public explanation and “forward guidance” for markets about where policy was heading.

Warsh is not a fan of that approach, but he also “doesn’t want to disrupt the markets. There are so many things that he wants to do and it is just going to take time to work through that,” said Randall Kroszner, a University of Chicago economics professor who served alongside Warsh as a Fed governor from 2006 to 2009. “It’s not just ‘off with their heads’ or suddenly tomorrow we’re going to have the balance sheet be $4 trillion.”

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

President Donald Trump’s nomination of Warsh to take over the top job from Fed Chair Jerome Powell is expected to clear the U.S. Senate this week. Trump clashed repeatedly with Powell, initially demanding interest rate cuts but expanding his pressure through an effort to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook and a Justice Department criminal probe of Powell that many consider a broader assault on the central bank’s independence. The Cook case is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court and the Justice Department has closed its Powell investigation.

Powell’s eight-year tenure as Fed chief ends on Friday, but he has decided to keep his seat on the central bank’s Board of Governors while that investigation fully winds down, in part to buffer the Fed against further legal attacks by the administration.

BEYOND INTEREST RATES

Warsh’s immediate challenge will be to navigate that same conflict between Trump’s rate-cut demands and economic data that leaves little room for them. The U.S. unemployment rate remains a relatively low 4.3%, while inflation, the other key issue the Fed manages, remains well above the central bank’s 2% target and is likely moving higher.

When Warsh chairs his first policy meeting in June, in fact, it may be a victory for him if he keeps colleagues on the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee from saying a rate hike may actually be needed. Three Fed policymakers dissented at the April 28-29 meeting in favor of new language along those lines, and that trend may gain momentum based on inflation broadening beyond what can be attributed to tariffs or elevated oil prices.

Powell had about six months after Trump promoted him to the Fed chief job in 2018 before the president began berating him, and at this point investors do not expect rate cuts before 2028.

Warsh, in speeches, interviews and public hearings over the past year, has provided various arguments for why interest rates might still fall despite the current data: Productivity gains flowing from artificial intelligence may make everything cheaper; shrinking the Fed’s longer-dated bond holdings might justify lower short-term rates; and alternate and more accurate measures of inflation actually show prices rising more slowly than those currently emphasized by the Fed.

While he may have reasonable arguments about any of those items, buttressing them with compelling research and convincing fellow policymakers will take time, if it’s possible at all.

Former Fed staff and officials said the most likely first steps would be for Warsh to commission a range of internal reviews, followed by debates at the FOMC and, later, potential changes in things like rules for bank reserves – one possible path to a smaller balance sheet – or the incorporation of different inflation data in policy discussions.

Warsh has also indicated he would like to change some longstanding communication tools like the quarterly Summary of Economic Projections, which includes the “dot plot” chart of rate projections. There’s broad dissatisfaction about aspects of the SEP, for example, making that a possible area for faster reform.

But both the SEPs issued by the central bank and the press conferences held by the Fed chief have become powerful tools for shaping public expectations. In a recent Brookings Institution survey of academic and private-sector Fed experts, nearly all of the 29 respondents regarded the post-meeting press conference as “useful or extremely useful” and just over half said the same about the SEP and dot plot.

Press conferences in particular are “an international standard” for explaining policy decisions and the economic outlook, said former St. Louis Fed President James Bullard, the dean of Purdue University’s Mitch Daniels School of Business. “I think it would be hard to change that.”

COUNTERARGUMENTS ALREADY DEVELOPING

On other issues, former Fed officials and staff say Warsh’s proposals would need to be vetted like any other.

Ideas are already circulating about how to reduce the balance sheet, for example, but there is skepticism about Warsh’s notion that shrinking bond holdings would allow for rate cuts.

Warsh’s comments about the impact of improving productivity on inflation also are broadly accepted – in theory – but with doubts about the time frame involved and the implications for rates. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee last week laid out an alternative scenario in which the AI revolution becomes so broadly anticipated that people start spending expected stock and wealth gains today, driving up inflation and forcing the Fed to hike rates.

The difference in views is less about what AI means for the economy and more about timing and risk – how long improving productivity takes to lower inflation versus stoking extra spending today, and whether the Fed can safely bank on future disinflation to risk cutting rates now.

“He might be right in the impact on demand versus the impact on supply,” Goolsbee told reporters after participating in a conference in Los Angeles. “I think it is worth thinking about … I don’t know what the debate ground rules are going to be … I hope, for my purposes … it will be rooted in serious economic research.”

Reporting by Howard Schneider; editing by Dan Burns and Paul Simao

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

特朗普总统提名沃什入主美联储，美国参院周二表决批准了他14年的理事任期，至于四年主席任期最早可在30小时后进行。 （路透社）

（华盛顿综合电）美国参议院星期二（5月12日）以51票赞成、45票反对，正式确认特朗普总统提名的沃什出任美国联邦储备局理事，任期14年。

参议院最早在美东时间星期三（13日）投票表决沃什是否接替鲍威尔，在未来四年担任美联储主席。

鲍威尔的主席任期将在星期五（15日）结束，不过理事任期要到2028年1月才结束。他此前已表示，将继续留任理事，在司法部对美联储的调查“真正透明地完结前不会离开”。

特朗普过去一年多次出言羞辱鲍威尔，批评他不愿快速降低利率。

美国本周二发布的4月份通货膨胀率达3.8%，创2023年以来最高，当中能源和食品价格都显著上涨。

沃什若顺利接任主席，市场将紧密关注他在6月中首次主持美联储利率政策会议，会对通胀和利率前景采取怎样的观点。

Trump promised to hold 30,000 migrants at Guantanamo. A year later, it’s mostly empty.

2026-05-13T06:05:00-0400 / CBS News

By Camilo Montoya-Galvez Immigration Correspondent
Camilo Montoya-Galvez is the Immigration Correspondent at CBS News, where his reporting is featured across multiple programs and platforms, including national broadcast shows, CBS News 24/7, CBSNews.com and the organization’s social media accounts.

Read Full Bio

Updated on: May 13, 2026 / 7:17 AM EDT / CBS News

Just eight days after returning to the White House last year, President Trump announced plans to turn the U.S. military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, into a massive detention center to hold 30,000 detainees facing deportation as part of his aggressive crackdown on illegal immigration.

But a CBS News review of internal government documents and information provided to Congress shows the detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay are sitting mostly empty over a year later, even though the highly publicized operation is projected to cost the American military over $70 million.

On May 11, the U.S. government was holding just six immigration detainees at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, all of them nationals of Haiti, according to federal documents obtained by CBS News. Over the past year, the documents show, 832 immigration detainees have been transferred to the base on more than 100 flights.

In fact, there are significantly more government employees assigned to the immigration detention operation at Guantanamo than detainees, according to the documents. This week, government employees outnumbered detainees roughly 100 to 1.

Figures provided to Congress indicate the Department of Defense has 522 personnel to assist with immigration detention at Guantanamo. The internal federal documents show there are around 60 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and non-military staff assigned to the mission, too.

Information provided by the Department of Defense to Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren in April also shows the Guantanamo immigration detention effort is expected to cost $73 million, just for the U.S. military. That is an increase from the previously publicly reported estimate of $40 million.

Mr. Trump said in January 2025 that officials would set up 30,000 detention beds at Guantanamo. But the internal federal documents indicate the base’s capacity to hold immigration detainees is limited to roughly 400 beds. On May 11, fewer than 2% of the beds were occupied.

Together with the numbers provided to Congress, the documents shed light on the status of the controversial and largely secretive effort to hold civil immigration detainees at Guantanamo, where the indefinite detention of post-9/11 terrorism suspects gained infamy over allegations of abuse, due process violations and torture.

In a statement to CBS News, Warren, who received the projected cost for the Guantanamo operation, accused President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth of “wasting billions in taxpayer funds on a cruel immigration agenda.”

CBS News has reached out to the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security for comment, including on whether the Trump administration plans to continue the operation to hold immigrant detainees at the naval base.

In a statement Wednesday, DHS spokeswoman Lauren Bis said, “If you come to our country illegally and break our laws, you could end up in Guantanamo Bay, CECOT, or a third country. Our message is clear: criminal illegal aliens are not welcome in the U.S.”

“Political theater”

In this photo reviewed by U.S. military officials, a U.S. soldier stands between two cells, one used as a library and the other a gym, inside the Camp VI detention facility at the Guantanamo Bay U.S. naval base in Cuba on June 6, 2018. AP Photo/Ramon Espinosa, File

Publicly, the Trump administration has released scant details about its operation to hold those awaiting deportation at the Guantanamo base, which sits on Cuban land that the U.S. has long argued is being leased. The Cuban government alleges the arrangement is illegal.

Before the second Trump administration, the U.S. government, under Republican and Democratic presidents, used Guantanamo to house some migrants intercepted at sea, including tens of thousands of Haitians during the Clinton administration.

But in February 2025, officials began sending groups of detainees arrested by ICE in the U.S. to Guantanamo, so they could be held there pending their deportation. Initially, Mr. Trump and his top aides vowed to send the “worst” detainees and “high-priority criminal aliens” to Guantanamo. But subsequent reporting found that was not entirely accurate.

Soon after the effort started, CBS News revealed Guantanamo was being used to hold both migrants with alleged gang or criminal histories, and detainees categorized as “low-risk” because they lacked serious criminal records — or any at all. Then, in April 2025, CBS News disclosed that the internal government memo governing the operation gave officials wide-ranging discretion to decide who to send to Guantanamo, including the ability to transfer non-criminal detainees there.

Officials have been housing the detainees considered to be “low-risk” at the Migration Operations Center, a barrack-like facility that had previously held asylum-seekers intercepted at sea. Meanwhile, those deemed to be “high-risk” immigration detainees have been detained at Camp VI, a section of the post-9/11 prison complex that still holds some terrorism suspects.

The legality of detaining civil immigration detainees at Guantanamo is still being litigated. In December, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., found in a preliminary ruling that the immigration detention effort at Guantanamo was “impermissibly punitive” and likely unlawful, but stopped short of blocking the operation.

Lee Gelernt, the American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who filed the lawsuit, said “the use of Guantanamo is nothing more than political theater like so many other administration policies.”

“Not only is the Trump administration’s use of Guantanamo unprecedented and illegal, but it serves no legitimate policy goal given the financial and logistical burdens of using this notorious military base for immigration purposes,” Gelernt said.

Theresa Cardinal Brown, a former DHS immigration official under presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, said the Trump administration set up Guantanamo and other controversial facilities, such as “Alligator Alcatraz” in Florida, to push people in the U.S. illegally to self-deport and deter others from entering the country unlawfully.

Cardinal Brown said Guantanamo’s deterrence effect is difficult to measure, beyond the low levels of illegal crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border. But she said it’s clear the operation has been costly.

“Everything has to be shipped in there, right? It’s not like we’re importing things from Cuba,” Cardinal Brown said. “Everything has to come from a U.S. source to that military installation. It’s going to be much, much more expensive.”

Analysis by

Brett H. McGurk

PUBLISHED May 13, 2026, 4:00 AM ET

Vehicles in Tehran, Iran drive past a billboard depicting President Donald Trump and the Strait of Hormuz, May 8.

Majid-Asgaripour/Wana News Agency/Reuters

Brett McGurk is a CNN global affairs analyst who served in senior national security positions under Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

In the darkest days of the Cuban Missile Crisis, President John F. Kennedy privately reflected on the central question before him: Who blinks first? For days, Washington and Moscow sat locked in a test of wills — each side convinced time and pressure favored them, each side wary that backing down could invite greater danger later.

That same logic now hangs over the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran has effectively shut the strait to normal commercial transit, declaring that ships must pass through its waters and pay a transit fee. The United States, in turn, has blocked Iran’s ports — telling Tehran that if the world cannot use the strait as before, then Iran cannot use it either.

The result is a stalemate, one with no immediate off-ramps and a handful of options that range from bad to worse.

Option 1: Settle in

The default outcome is that both sides settle in, believing time is on their side.

Iranian leaders project themselves as prepared to push their country to the brink of economic collapse if necessary for the survival of the revolutionary system.

There is truth to this view. Iran’s leaders are ideological — committed to expelling American influence from the Middle East and confronting Israel — and many have personally endured worse, including the brutal Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s.

But even the most hardened systems have a breaking point, and the blockade on Iran’s ports will compound over time. Even before this crisis began, Iran was suffering from roughly 60 percent inflation and a historic economic crisis. Those conditions helped drive Iranians into the streets earlier this year in protests the regime ultimately suppressed by force. None of those grievances have disappeared.

President Donald Trump is also projecting readiness to settle in, saying he feels “no pressure” over the situation. He is right that the US economy has shown resilience, and as the world’s largest oil producer, the United States is more insulated than in past decades from the shocks of a Middle East crisis.

President Donald Trump walks to board Marine One as he departs from the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, DC, on May 12.

Kent Nishimura/AFP/Getty Images

But energy trades in a global market, and with roughly 20 percent of global oil supplies that once moved through the strait now disrupted or diverted, pressure on the global economy will also compound over time — and eventually reach American shores. Tehran believes Trump will not be able to withstand that pressure indefinitely, particularly heading toward the midterm elections. So, both sides believe the other will blink first, which means neither may blink at all.

Option 2: Concede

Breakthrough diplomacy rarely comes from banging the table harder than a counterpart. Breakthroughs require compromises, and compromises require concessions. Right now, neither Iran nor the US appears prepared to make them. Both are focused on breaking the other’s will, rather than breaking through to a deal.

For Iran, that means refusing to back away from its assertion of sovereignty over the strait and its demand that commercial traffic pass through Iranian-controlled waterways and pay a toll. Tehran has fired missiles and drones at ships failing to comply with this new reality.

Related live story President Donald Trump said Monday that the monthlong ceasefire between the US and Iran is on “massive life support.” Clipped From Video Cost of Iran war increases to $29 billion so far, Pentagon official says

This assertion of control over an international strait violates longstanding principles of freedom of navigation. The US could lead in building an international diplomatic and military coalition to reject Iran’s claims. But as of now, Washington has not done so, and Iran has demonstrated both the capability and willingness to enforce its demands.

The US could ultimately concede the principle in the interest of relieving pressure on the global economy. Trump has previously suggested the strait is less central to American interests, but such a concession would alter the region’s balance of power in Iran’s favor and raise profound questions about the future stability of other international waterways — including the Taiwan Strait, an international waterway that Beijing increasingly asserts as sovereign territory.

Option 3: Fight

The US could conclude that freedom of navigation through the strait is a non-negotiable core interest and move militarily to secure it outright.

Historically, the free flow of commerce through major waterways has been a foundational principle of American power. But a sustained operation to reopen or guarantee maritime access would likely be expensive and time-consuming even in the best-case scenario.

Vessels in the Strait of Hormuz on May 8, 2026.

Stringer/Reuters

Recent efforts in the Red Sea demonstrated the challenge. Even successful naval coalitions proved more effective at defeating missiles and drones than at restoring commercial confidence among shipping companies.

The threat today is not primarily from mines in the water, but from drones and missiles that can be fired from hundreds of miles away. So long as Iran can launch attacks from positions deep inside its territory — including from the mountains overlooking the strait — the threat to commercial shipping will not recede.

A US military campaign to forcibly reopen the strait therefore remains an option, but its viability and outcome are uncertain. Iran could also retaliate with missile attacks against Gulf energy infrastructure, worsening the global economic shocks already underway.

For now, a new normal

Against this backdrop, we should assume the strait may remain effectively closed for the foreseeable future — and that even if the immediate crisis subsides, presumptions about freedom of navigation through the strait may never fully return.

Many countries in the Gulf are already acting accordingly, accelerating plans for east-west infrastructure projects that bypass the strait altogether. Saudi Arabia’s east-west pipeline system has already proven strategically valuable, while Iraq is increasingly focused on routes that would move oil from the Gulf to the Mediterranean. The UAE’s Port of Fujairah, which bypasses the strait, is also likely to emerge as an even more important global energy hub.

This is the logical long-term response: reducing dependence on the strait and on Iran’s ability to hold the global economy hostage.

But infrastructure projects take years, not months. Until then, the world may remain trapped in what amounts to the Great Strait Stalemate.

欧盟对美国天然气依赖升至历史新高

2026年5月13日 19:08 / 联合早报

欧洲越来越依赖波动较大的全球液化天然气市场，也更容易受到地缘政治冲突影响。图为西班牙巴塞罗那港恩加斯液化天然气接收站。 （彭博社）

（伦敦/巴黎综合电）美国能源经济与金融分析研究所指出，随着美国填补中东地区天然气供应减少带来的缺口，欧洲今年对美国天然气的依赖预计将升至历史新高。

报告说，欧洲今年约三分之二的液化天然气可能来自美国，比例将创纪录。若按天然气总供应量计算，美国甚至可能超越挪威，成为欧洲最大天然气供应国。

数据显示，去年美国占欧盟、英国与土耳其液化天然气进口量约58%，今年第一季度已升至63%。IEEFA预计，到2028年，欧盟从美国进口的液化天然气占比可能高达80%。

自俄罗斯2022年入侵乌克兰后，欧盟持续推动能源来源多元化，美国液化天然气已成为替代俄罗斯管道天然气的重要来源。不过，一些欧洲官员担心，欧洲只是把对俄罗斯的依赖转向美国。

与此同时，欧盟仍未完全摆脱对俄罗斯能源依赖。今年第一季度，欧盟共进口69亿立方米俄罗斯天然气，同比增加16%，创下俄乌战争爆发以来同期新高；4月进口量同比再增17%。

目前，俄罗斯仍是欧盟第二大液化天然气供应方，占总进口量约14%。

尽管俄罗斯通过管道向欧盟输送天然气已基本停止，但各国仍在通过油轮购买其液化天然气，其中以法国、西班牙和比利时为首。

IEEFA指出，欧洲越来越依赖波动较大的全球液化天然气市场，也更容易受到地缘政治冲突影响。当前伊朗战争已加剧市场震荡，并推高天然气价格风险。

Takeaways from the nation’s oddest Senate primary

May 13, 2026 / The Washington Post

Nebraska Democrats knew they couldn’t unseat a GOP senator, so they backed an independent and fielded a candidate who promised to drop out if she won. Then it got complicated.

By Erin Cox

Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-Nebraska) speaks to the media after casting his ballot at the Omaha Community Playhouse on May 12. (Rebecca S. Gratz/AP)

The long-shot path to unseating a Republican senator in Nebraska got slightly less complicated Tuesday night, as primary voters picked a Democratic nominee who promised to drop out and consolidate support behind an independent with the best chance of winning statewide.

No English content available

特朗普飞抵北京开始对华国事访问

2026年5月13日 19:52 / 联合早报

美国总统特朗普星期三（5月13日）晚上乘空军一号专机飞抵北京首都机场，开始为期三天的对华国事访问。这是特朗普自2017年以来，首次踏上中国国土，也是美国总统时隔九年再度访华。

特朗普乘搭的总统专机空军一号当地时间星期二（5月12日）下午从美国马里兰州安德鲁斯基地起飞，经阿拉斯加州城市安克雷奇（Anchorage）加油后，续程飞往北京首都机场。

据白宫首席副新闻秘书凯利公布的特朗普访华行程，他星期三晚抵达北京，星期四（5月14日）早上出席欢迎仪式，之后中美元首将举行双边会谈。同日下午，特朗普将与中国国家主席习近平一起参观天坛公园，晚上出席国宴。中美领导人星期五（5月15日）将举行双边茶叙和工作午餐，之后特朗普将返回华盛顿。

特朗普和习近平上一次面对面交流是在去年10月，两人当时于亚太经合组织（APEC）峰会在韩国釜山举行期间会晤。

特朗普原定于3月底访华，因伊朗战事而延后。白宫早在3月底已公布，特朗普改在5月14日至15日访华；中国外交部直到星期一才宣布，特朗普应习近平邀请，将于5月13日至15日对中国进行国事访问。

据一名白宫官员星期一（5月11日）向媒体透露的名单，共有17名美国商界领袖受邀随特朗普访华。

他们来自科技、金融、半导体、航空航天及农业领域，包括特斯拉创始人马斯克、苹果公司总裁库克，以及波音公司总裁奥特伯格，以及来自脸书母公司Meta、美光科技、高通、黑石、贝莱德、高盛、花旗集团、威士、万事达、嘉吉公司、通用电气航空航天、高意集团和因美纳的企业高层。

本来据说未受邀随团、却在最后一刻临时加入代表团的美国晶片巨头英伟达总裁黄仁勋，星期二下午也登上空军一号随特朗普飞往北京。

欧盟对美国天然气依赖升至历史新高

2026年5月13日 19:08 / 联合早报

欧洲越来越依赖波动较大的全球液化天然气市场，也更容易受到地缘政治冲突影响。图为西班牙巴塞罗那港恩加斯液化天然气接收站。 （彭博社）

（伦敦/巴黎综合电）美国能源经济与金融分析研究所指出，随着美国填补中东地区天然气供应减少带来的缺口，欧洲今年对美国天然气的依赖预计将升至历史新高。

报告说，欧洲今年约三分之二的液化天然气可能来自美国，比例将创纪录。若按天然气总供应量计算，美国甚至可能超越挪威，成为欧洲最大天然气供应国。

数据显示，去年美国占欧盟、英国与土耳其液化天然气进口量约58%，今年第一季度已升至63%。IEEFA预计，到2028年，欧盟从美国进口的液化天然气占比可能高达80%。

自俄罗斯2022年入侵乌克兰后，欧盟持续推动能源来源多元化，美国液化天然气已成为替代俄罗斯管道天然气的重要来源。不过，一些欧洲官员担心，欧洲只是把对俄罗斯的依赖转向美国。

与此同时，欧盟仍未完全摆脱对俄罗斯能源依赖。今年第一季度，欧盟共进口69亿立方米俄罗斯天然气，同比增加16%，创下俄乌战争爆发以来同期新高；4月进口量同比再增17%。

目前，俄罗斯仍是欧盟第二大液化天然气供应方，占总进口量约14%。

尽管俄罗斯通过管道向欧盟输送天然气已基本停止，但各国仍在通过油轮购买其液化天然气，其中以法国、西班牙和比利时为首。

IEEFA指出，欧洲越来越依赖波动较大的全球液化天然气市场，也更容易受到地缘政治冲突影响。当前伊朗战争已加剧市场震荡，并推高天然气价格风险。