It was the perfect feel-good story, just in time for Christmas.

On December 20 last year, the United States secured from Venezuela the release of 10 US citizens – six of them wrongfully detained – in exchange for a close ally of authoritarian President Nicolas Maduro and a commitment from Caracas that it would stop detaining Americans to use as negotiating pawns.

“The administration has made abundantly clear the expectation that additional Americans are not detained, and has secured commitments along those lines,” a cheerful US official announced at the time.

That deal, which also included the extradition of a former military contractor known as “Fat Leonard” who orchestrated the largest corruption scandal in US Navy history, was hailed as a thawing of relations in the long-running standoff between the countries that has seen the US impose sanctions on Venezuela and accuse its leader of illegally usurping power, abusing human rights and trafficking drugs.

But fast-forward to nearly a year later and the vibe has turned more Halloween trick than Christmas treat.

Venezuela recently announced it had detained at least four US citizens, along with a handful of other foreign nationals, alleging they were part of an international conspiracy masterminded by the CIA and Spanish intelligence to overthrow Maduro.

That claim has been strongly denied by both the US and Spanish governments.

The US State Department has said the claims are “categorically false” and intimated that the detentions are linked to American criticisms of Venezuela’s disputed presidential election, which Maduro claims to have won despite widespread skepticism. The United States “continues to support a democratic solution to the political crisis in Venezuela,” the State Department said, pointedly, when commenting on the allegations.

So, is there anything to Venezuela’s claims? And if not, what does Maduro hope to gain by returning to an old playbook?

Hollywood script and a convenient bogeyman

The details of the alleged plot read like the script of a Hollywood thriller. Maduro’s interior minister Diosdado Cabello claims the detained foreigners – who also included two Spaniards and a Czech – were part of a shadowy unit who traveled to Venezuela to kill Maduro, apparently motivated by the up to $15 million reward the US Justice Department offered in 2020 for information leading to his arrest or conviction.

According to Cabello, the plot not only involved the CIA but was led by an active duty US Navy Seal, and involved a shipment of 400 (now seized) US-manufactured rifles and other firearms.

Two other US citizens, Cabello claims, were “hackers” intent on disrupting Venezuela’s chronically inefficient power service. (Not the first time Cabello has cried foul over blackouts; he alleged “terrorist actions” by the opposition were behind a late-August blackout that affected at least nine Venezuelan states and dozens of cities including the capital Caracas.)

Intriguingly, White House spokesperson John Kirby confirmed that the man Caracas identified as the alleged ringleader – Wilbert Castañeda – is an active service member in the US Navy whom, Kirby said, went to Venezuela on “personal travel.” Other media have reported that Castañeda, who is a dual Mexican-US citizen, used to serve as a Navy Seal but was stripped of his status sometime in the past.

Given the nature of the allegations, Venezuela’s claims are almost impossible to independently verify.

But then skeptics might say that’s exactly the point – that for Maduro, the CIA is merely a convenient, tried-and-tested bogeyman.

Maduro has in the past also alleged, without proof, that the US government and former US President Donald Trump were behind a 2018 assassination attempt in which an explosive-laden drone detonated mid-air during one of his speeches (an ‘attack’ prosecutors initially tried to pin on then-Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos). Maduro has also alleged, again without evidence, that the CIA and Washington in general were to blame for an insurrection in April 2019, and in September of the following year his government detained US citizen Matthew Heath on allegations of spying on oil refineries in the state of Falcon. Heath was later released in a prisoner exchange, and the US government has always denied involvement in any of the alleged schemes.

All that said, Maduro knows there is an audience receptive to such narratives, precisely because the CIA does have a well-documented history of meddling in the region. And it’s likely not lost on him that the US was aware of a plot to overthrow his predecessor, Hugo Chavez, weeks before a coup d’etat was attempted in 2002.

‘Loose dogs’, or a threat from within?

Still, even among those in the Venezuelan government who believe the security services have stumbled on some kind of plot, there are some who are skeptical of Cabello’s claims of CIA involvement.

“I think these are more loose dogs than a real involvement from the US government, because everyone knows that removing Maduro by force would only escalate the conflict around Venezuela,” said a government source who, like other people consulted for this article, asked not to be named due to the confidential nature of the topic.

“But you cannot underestimate the allure of the ($15 million Department of Justice) reward especially for crazy adventurers, or do you really believe a Navy Seal on active duty travelled to Venezuela for a summer romance?” the source said.

One scenario that doesn’t seem to be under consideration in Caracas’ corridors of power is whether a plot could have originated from within the country.

That may sound surprising, given Maduro has alienated vast swathes of the population with his election ‘victory’ and subsequent crackdown on the opposition. He has also likely alienated some of those within his own government with his habit of chopping and changing key personnel on a whim.

But while it’s not impossible to imagine former Chavistas plotting to bring Maduro down, a more likely explanation may simply be that the Venezuelan leader has cooked up the whole story for political leverage against his old foe, the US.

If so, what does Maduro think he has to gain?

A negotiating tactic?

The obvious answer leads back to the election. In October last year, before the release of “Fat Leonard” and Co, Maduro had promised the US that Venezuela’s election would be free and fair. And as recently as six months ago, the economic community in Caracas was hoping it would be at least fair enough for the US to lift its remaining oil sanctions and bring Venezuela back into the fold of the world’s democracies.

The subsequent electoral farce, and Maduro’s desertion of his commitments to restore democracy, pulverized those hopes and made it clear that any further steps toward reconciliation would have to be painfully negotiated by diplomats.

It would seem Maduro sees the newly detained Americans as pawns to be used in those negotiations, with a view to quieting US criticisms of the election, and as leverage in any sanctions negotiations.

It’s an approach that sends a calculated message to US President Joe Biden, whose administration has prioritized the release of US citizens unjustly detained abroad – having reached similar deals with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the releases of WNBA star Brittney Griner and the Wall Street Journal journalist Evan Gershkovich.

But beyond Biden, the detentions are also a message to the new Commander in Chief, be it Kamala Harris or Donald Trump.

Since the disputed vote in Venezuela, the State Department has only minimally acted against the country, imposing personal sanctions on 16 individuals and calling for Venezuela to release the full voting ballots to clarify the result.

While the US has imposed economic sanctions on Venezuela’s oil exports for years, a special authorization allowing oil company Chevron to operate in the country is still valid despite the international outcry this summer.

Whoever wins the US election in November will have the fate of the detainees weighing on them when they are faced with deciding whether to continue that minimal approach or to turn the screw.

And they can forget any hope that the detainees’ fate can be left to the courts.

“You cannot even talk of a trial, to be honest,” said a lawyer who represented US citizens wrongfully detained in Venezuela in the past. “In most cases, there’s no file with the charges presented against your client, you don’t have access to the investigation, there are no witnesses, and you cannot present new evidence, all of those proceedings happen in a court, but they’re a farce.”

“It’s frustrating, you basically go to court, and you know nothing ruled there will make any difference for your client,” said another lawyer, whose client was released after spending more than two years in jail without being sentenced.

So, what’s Maduro’s bottom line?

Even for those convinced that Maduro has cooked up the plot to gain leverage with the US, there’s one mystery left: his preferred endgame.

In previous negotiations over prisoner exchanges, Maduro was able to obtain the release of his alleged money fixer, Alex Saab, and of two of his wife’s nephews who were serving time for trying to smuggle 800 kilograms of cocaine into the United States.

He was also able to secure the withdrawal of some of the oil sanctions the US imposed on Caracas in recent years.

This time around, with none of his close associates in US hands, it’s unclear what Maduro could ask at the bargaining table other than legitimacy and further sanctions withdrawal.

Likewise, it’s unclear how a new US administration would entertain the idea of giving in to – and being seen to give into – an authoritarian bully.

Hostage negotiation is an awkward topic for any government, none more so than the United States, which has in the past made a point of refusing to engage with kidnappers.

On the other hand, the US may decide the freedom of its citizens are worth whatever limited concessions Maduro is seeking.

As one of the people involved in last year’s negotiations put it: “Free societies decide that no innocent man should be in jail. When you accept that a criminal walks free but no detainee is innocent, that is real freedom.”

Former Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond has died at 69, according to statements from Scotland’s main political parties and UK media reports.

Salmond was taken ill while in North Macedonia, collapsing after delivering a speech on Saturday, according to British media reports.

“I will never be able to thank Alex for all his lessons, advice, guidance, mentorship, love and friendship and for everything he did for Scotland. For many years he was the father of the nation and for several years he has been a father-like figure to me. All of our thoughts are with all of the family and everyone across Scotland who are in mourning,” the General Secretary of Alex Salmond’s Alba Party Chris McEleny said Saturday.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said: “For more than 30 years, Alex Salmond was a monumental figure of Scottish and UK politics. He leaves behind a lasting legacy. As First Minister of Scotland he cared deeply about Scotland’s heritage, history, and culture, as well as the communities he represented as MP (member of parliament) and MSP (member of the Scottish parliament) over many years of service. My thoughts are with those who knew him, his family, and his loved ones. On behalf of the UK government, I offer them our condolences today.”

Salmond stood down as first minister and SNP leader following defeat in the September 2014 referendum on Scottish independence, which he had long championed. He was replaced by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon. He later campaigned for Scotland’s independence under the newly formed Alba Party, which he founded in 2021.

After losing his seat in parliament, Salmond remained a major figure in both Scottish and British politics, working as a commentator and hosting the Alex Salmond Show on Russian state broadcaster RT.

In 2018, he took the country’s government to court over accusations of sexual misconduct made against him. Salmond said the Scottish government denied him the opportunity to properly defend himself against the claims, which related to his alleged behavior toward a member of staff at the official Bute House residence, according to the Daily Record of Scotland.  Salmond was eventually cleared of all charges by a jury in a March 2020 trial.

“The sad news of Alex Salmond’s passing today will come as a shock to all who knew him in Scotland, across the UK and beyond. Our thoughts are with his family and friends at this difficult time and on behalf of Scottish Labour I offer our sincere condolences to all who will be mourning his loss,” said the leader of the Scottish Labour Party Anas Sarwar. “Alex was a central figure in politics for over three decades and his contribution to the Scottish political landscape cannot be overstated.”

The Scottish National Party (SNP) also reposted multiple Scottish media reports of Salmond’s death on social media.

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Police in Toronto, Canada, are opening a hate crime investigation after shots were fired overnight into the window of a Jewish girls’ elementary school – the second time this year the school was targeted by gunfire, officials said.

The incident occurred around 4 a.m. Saturday at the Bais Chaya Mushka Girls Elementary School on Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement and the holiest day of the year in Judaism, Toronto Police Service Inspector Paul Krawczyk said at a news conference.

No arrests have been made and police are not releasing information about suspects at this time, Krawczyk said. The investigation into the incident will be led by the agency’s Gun and Gang Task Force with assistance from its hate crime unit, he added.

There were no injuries or reports of gunshots heard, and the building was empty because the school is currently closed for the Jewish High Holidays, Krawczyk said. In a news release, police said the suspect or suspects were in a motor vehicle when they discharged a firearm at the school. Evidence of gunfire was located at the scene, the release said.

The same school was also hit with gunfire in a similar incident in May, Krawczyk said.

“I appreciate the significant trauma that this can cause those in the Jewish community,” he said. “While we can’t say whether these incidents are connected at this time, it’s certainly a key aspect of our investigation.”

Krawczyk said officials would consider releasing video camera footage from the incident, which will be examined as part of the investigation. The agency has increased police presence in Jewish neighborhoods in recent weeks and will also do so at the school as the investigation unfolds, Krawczyk said.

“We’re asking anyone who is in the area or who could have dash cam footage or other CCTV footage to please step forward and provide us with that evidence. Your help is vital to the work we do and to find those responsible,” he said.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau released a statement on the shooting, saying: “I’m very disturbed to hear that last night, as families marked Yom Kippur, there were shots fired at a Jewish school in Toronto.”

“As we wait for more details, my heart goes out to the students, staff, and parents who must be terrified and hurting today,” Trudeau said on X. “Antisemitism is a disgusting and dangerous form of hate — and we won’t let it stand.”

It seemed like an unlikely stage for Kanye West to unveil his new music.

But last month the American rapper – now known as Ye – held not just one but two sold-out “listening parties” in China, a country that imposes some of the toughest censorship in the world.

Playing on the southern Chinese island of Hainan, his first concerts in the country in 16 years, Ye astounded fans by announcing his new album “Bully” and left some wondering why the country’s ruling Communist Party would allow such a controversial artist to perform.

Just six years ago, Chinese authorities clamped down on hip-hop, blacklisting songs and dropping rappers from shows. Its media regulator banned Chinese television from featuring “actors with tattoos (or depict) hip-hop culture, subculture and immoral culture.” One Chinese rapper, PG One, even apologized for lyrics that came under fire for glorifying drugs and sex.

As well as his own frequent lyrical references to sex and drugs, along with cutting social and political commentary, Ye has made a number of controversial statements in his personal life. He wore a “White Lives Matter” T-shirt in public, and an antisemitic outburst he made lost him an extremely lucrative sneakers deal with German brand Adidas.

Yet, he managed to stage his “Vulture Listening Experience” at the Wuyuan River Sports Stadium in Hainan’s provincial capital Haikou, an arena with more than 41,000 seats, on September 15 and September 28.

He is among a growing number of Western artists returning to the world’s second-biggest economy since the lifting of Covid restrictions.

The Chinese Communist Party, which views popular culture as a key ideological battleground, has long kept the entertainment sector on a tight leash with stringent censorship. But it has also encouraged its growth, especially its domestic industries like film and music, often using them to instill patriotism.

Under Chinese leader Xi Jinping, the party has grown ever more focused on ideological and cultural control. The dazzle of stardom and the frenzy of fandom are increasingly viewed as a dangerous, pernicious influence – especially on the country’s youth.

In 2021, the party cracked down on China’s entertainment industry and what it called “toxic” celebrity culture, accusing it of “advocating wrong values” to Chinese youth.

Experts say Ye’s shows could mark a turning point. Allowing him to play shows in China “sends a signal that Western artists are welcome to play in China if they comply with local restrictions,” said Chen Dan, an associate professor at the University of Richmond’s political science department.

Several other American megastars have also recently set their eyes on performing in China.

Mariah Carey performed two shows in Beijing in September, sharing photos on X of her visiting the Great Wall of China with her children. John Legend also played gigs in Beijing and Shanghai in October.

American singer Charlie Puth is also set to perform in China in early December.

Boosting China’s economy

Letting in these Western stars could be a way for Beijing to boost consumer spending, Chen says, as it tries to revive a flailing economy plagued by high youth unemployment, a protracted property crisis and lukewarm consumer confidence.

In recent weeks, the country has unveiled a raft of stimulus measures, including freeing commercial banks to lend more money and making borrowing cheaper. The government also announced rare cash handouts to disadvantaged citizens while pledging subsidies for recent graduates struggling to find a job.

“The primary motivation for approving Kanye West’s performance may be commercial, that is, to revive the cultural and tourism industry,” Chen said. “China needs commercial revival and more cultural exchange.”

Chinese state media has boasted about the economic benefits Ye’s concerts brought to the tropical island, praising the rapper for “not only firing up his fans, but also sparking a surge in the local holiday tourism economy.”

Almost all fans at his first performance came from outside the province, with the highest ticket sales recorded in major cities such as Shanghai and Beijing, according to state-run China Daily.

Ye’s first show coincided with the first day of the Mid-Autumn festival holiday, and the average hotel occupancy rate in Haikou jumped by about a half to 83%, year on year, on the same holiday a year earlier. Travelers generated an estimated 373 million yuan ($52.6 million) in tourism revenue for the port city, according to state-run news agency Xinhua.

China’s growing music market also represents a massive opportunity for artists and labels looking to expand their audiences and generate revenue, and for domestic companies looking to capitalize off the growth.

One of the fastest-growing in the world, China’s music market became the fifth-largest market globally in 2022, according to IFPI, a trade body for the recorded music industry. China’s recorded music revenues grew 28.4% in 2022 from the year prior, compared with the global market rise of 9%, IFPI said.

But the embracing of foreign acts also poses a conundrum for Beijing.

“Local governments always want more concerts and activities to boost [the] local economy, while the higher authorities allegedly require more and more vetting of lyrics and contents,” said Hung Ho-fung, sociology professor at Johns Hopkins University.

Top stars blacklisted

But while there is a strong financial incentive to crack China’s market, the country’s tough censorship and stringent oversight of performances, including the unpredictability of having shows canceled at the last minute, have presented challenges for artists in the past.

In 2015, two fairly uncontroversial American rock bands – Bon Jovi and Maroon 5 – both had planned shows in Beijing and Shanghai abruptly canceled.

Bon Jovi’s management did not address media queries at the time but social media users speculated the decision may have stemmed from the band’s 2009 video for “We Weren’t Born to Follow,” which featured imagery of the 1989 Tiananmen Square pro-democracy protests in Beijing – a taboo topic for the Chinese government. Others pointed to a 2010 Bon Jovi gig in Tokyo that featured images of the Dalai Lama – a staunch enemy of Beijing – on the stage background.

In the case of Maroon 5, no official reason was given but many speculated that permits had been pulled over a band member wishing the Dalai Lama happy birthday on social media.

Similarly, promoters for Oasis said they were forced to cancel mainland China shows in 2009 after authorities reportedly discovered a member of the British rock band had played at a Tibetan Freedom gig two years earlier. The rest of the band’s Asia tour, including a concert in Hong Kong, went ahead as planned.

Other US musicians such as Justin Bieber, Jay-Z and Lady Gaga have been barred from even entering China.

Bieber “engaged in a series of bad behaviors, both in his social life and during a previous performance in China,” China’s Ministry of Culture announced in 2015, without going into details.

American rapper Jay-Z’s debut concerts in the country were canceled in 2006 because the Ministry of Culture “decided to protect the city’s hip-hop fans from nasty lyrics about pimps, guns and drugs,” according to state-run newspaper China Daily.

Some analysts and Chinese fans have speculated whether Ye may have gotten a pass to perform in Hainan because of his brief time living in China as a child. The rapper lived in the eastern Chinese city of Nanjing for a year while his mother was teaching at Nanjing University, according to China Daily.

“Kanye West’s childhood experience in Nanjing may have made him an artist to welcome in China,” Chen, from the University of Richmond, said.

Ho, from Johns Hopkins, said it’s too early to tell whether Ye and others’ progress in China will inspire more artists to play there.

Logistical challenges like securing visas, obtaining permits and official approval, play a major role in the decision-making process for bands and their management, which are also concerned about the backlash of having to self-censor and staging up a show deprived of spontaneity.

“This tightening scrutiny, on top of the sluggish economy, makes many foreign performers simply decide not to bother and skip China,” he said.

But he added: “If the recent stimulus works, and leads to a genuine and sustained rebound of consumption, Western entertainers’ calculation may change and (they may) become more willing to take the trouble and the risk.”