After defence secretary, the FBI has recently begun conducting polygraph examinations to identify information leaks, as confirmed by a bureau spokesperson.
National security agencies in the Trump administration are intensifying leak investigations, implementing polygraph tests that are creating an atmosphere of fear amongst officials.
Attorney General Pam Bondi‘s revised legal guidelines now permit the Justice Department to access reporters’ personal communications and expand criminal prosecution scope beyond classified material to include “privileged and other sensitive” information, Washington Post reported.
Officials express concern that the broader scope could encompass information that merely causes embarrassment or challenges administrative positions.
“People are trying to keep their heads down,” stated a former FBI field office head, speaking anonymously. “Morale’s in the toilet. … When you see people who are being investigated, or names [of agents who worked on Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot cases] being passed over to the DOJ, it’s what the f—?”
At the Pentagon, Hegseth has threatened of using polygraph, with some senior officials already undergoing tests, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The situation has created significant anxiety. Former government employees on buyout are reluctant to communicate with media while still on payroll. Security clearance holders are cautious about journalist contact due to future polygraph considerations.
“It’s a toxic environment,” revealed one official with top-secret clearance, describing concerns about job security and efforts to silence those who diverge from official positions.
The dismissal of Gen. Timothy Haugh from his leadership roles at the national security agency and US cyber command, along with numerous departures at the department of homeland security’s cybersecurity division, has raised concerns about vulnerabilities to foreign cyber threats.
US President Donald Trump removed Haugh without explanation, allegedly for “disloyalty”, following a meeting with far-right

United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres. File
| Photo Credit: Reuters

Expressing deep concern over the situation between India and Pakistan, UN chief Antonio Guterres stands ready to support any initiatives, acceptable to both parties, for “de-escalation” and “resumption of dialogue”, his office has said.

The Secretary-General “remains deeply concerned about the situation between India and Pakistan. He strongly urges both governments to exercise maximum restraint and avoid any escalation,” a statement by the office of his spokesperson said on Monday.

Mr. Guterres “reaffirms his firm belief that even the most challenging issues can be resolved peacefully through meaningful and constructive dialogue.” Tensions have escalated between India and Pakistan after terrorists opened fire near Kashmir’s Pahalgam town on April 22, killing 26 people, mostly tourists, in what is the deadliest attack in the Valley since the Pulwama strike in 2019.

India downgraded diplomatic ties with Pakistan and announced a raft of measures, including expulsion of Pakistani military attaches, suspension of the Indus Water Treaty of 1960 and immediate shutting down of the Attari land-transit post in view of the cross-border links to the Pahalgam terror attack.

Mr. Guterres has said he is following the situation between India and Pakistan “very closely and with very great concern” and has appealed to both governments to exercise maximum restraint and to ensure there is no further deterioration.

The statement on Monday further noted that the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) “has no presence in the area where the attack happened and continues to implement its mandate of observing developments pertaining to and supervising the strict observance of the 1971 ceasefire along the Line of Control.” The UN chief again conveyed his solidarity with the families of the victims of the April 22 terrorist attack and “underscores the importance of accountability and justice.” UNMOGIP was established in January 1949. Following the India-Pakistan war in 1971 and a subsequent ceasefire agreement of December 17 of that year, the tasks of UNMOGIP have been to observe, to the extent possible, developments pertaining to the strict observance of the ceasefire of December 17, 1971, and to report thereon to the Secretary-General.

India has maintained that UNMOGIP has outlived its utility and is irrelevant after the Simla Agreement and the consequent establishment of the Line of Control (LoC).

Last week, the UN Security Council “condemned in the strongest terms” the terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir, stressing that those responsible for these killings should be held accountable and organisers and sponsors of this “reprehensible act of terrorism” should be brought to justice.

Before polls opened on April 28, Mark Carney had already staged a remarkable comeback. In mid-January, the Conservatives held a commanding 27-point lead over the Liberals. But by election night, Carney’s party had surged to 168 seats, just four shy of the 172 needed for a majority. Some projections, including one by EKOS on April 27, had even forecast the Liberals crossing that crucial threshold.
In the event, however, they fell four seats short. A late-campaign softening of President Trump’s anti-Canada rhetoric helped narrow Carney’s early advantage and allowed Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives to close the gap to a mere two percentage points in the popular vote.

Julie Simmons of the University of Guelph, while speaking to TimesofIndia.com, argues that the fading of outside pressure and Canada’s voting system explain why a once-likely majority didn’t happen.

A majority in sight

By the final week of campaigning, national trackers regularly showed the Liberals polling around 44 per cent to the Conservatives’ 39 per cent.

Julie Simmons believes Carney’s credentials fuelled that surge: “It was in large part to the coalescing of support around the new leader (Carney), who seemed more qualified, as a former Bank of Canada governor, than the career politician (Conservative leader, Pierre Poilievre) to take on Donald Trump and counter the President’s musings about Canada becoming the 51st state. Carney’s message of ‘Canada Strong’ resonated with anxious voters.”

Trump’s tonal shift tightens the contest

Yet just as the Liberals appeared poised for a slim majority, the external threat that underpinned Carney’s appeal began to recede. Simmons notes that after a private phone call between Carney and Trump, the US president largely dropped his public threats against Canada.
“Poilievre returned to his messages about being tough on crime, increasing housing supply, and offering tax cuts to Canadians. Some voters were more receptive to these messages because the chaos south of the border seemed muted,” Simmons said.
A Reuters poll on 24 April showed the race tightening to within 3.6 points as domestic issues reclaimed prominence. Without the drumbeat of tariffs and annexation talk, voters drifted back towards Conservative-style platforms enough to clip Carney’s majority hopes.

Parliamentary arithmetic

When the final count was announced, the Liberals led the popular vote by only 43 per cent to 41 per cent, a margin too slim to translate into a majority under first-past-the-post. Their slightly more “efficient” vote distribution yielded a 10–15 seat edge over the Conservatives, but still left Carney four seats short of the 172-seat mark.
As Simmons explains, “Were the campaign to have continued for a week or two more, it is possible that the gap between Poilievre and Carney would have narrowed entirely, and we may have had a Conservative minority government.”

What a minority government for Carney means

Economists Jimmy Jean and Randall Bartlett at Desjardins told Reuters that a confirmed Liberal minority will force Carney into negotiations with opposition parties, especially the New Democratic Party, to enact his agenda.
“If a minority Liberal win is confirmed, Prime Minister Mark Carney will need to negotiate with the opposition parties to implement his policy agenda,” they said. “In terms of executing the Liberal Party platform, this configuration could lean toward the social and cultural measures, and against broad tax cuts and fossil-fuel development.”
Charu Chanana, chief investment strategist at Saxo in Singapore, warned that political fragmentation could limit fiscal stimulus just as Canada faces rising recession risks and tougher US trade talks. “Canada’s likely Liberal minority outcome adds to uncertainty at a delicate time,” she said
With 168 seats to the Conservatives’ 144, Carney must now navigate a minority parliament. He is expected to seek confidence and supply support from the NDP and Bloc Québécois, and to shepherd through priorities such as reducing interprovincial trade barriers, refining immigration levels and diversifying Canada’s trade portfolio beyond the United States.
In the end, Carney’s “Canada Strong” message helped the Liberals claw back from a polling disaster, but not quite to a majority. Voters endorsed his crisis-management credentials, yet showed they remain deeply responsive to domestic concerns once external threats fade.