Cold war is a very well-known phenomena. For years, the world witnessed its horrors in the tussle between the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). It finally ended with the disintegration of the latter.&nbsp;

So, what is it actually? &nbsp;

Cold war in simple terms seems to be the tussle to be on the top. The struggle to be better than others builds mistrust then it finally leads to the cold war. &nbsp;

Has is it really ended? &nbsp;

The answer to this question is no. Just the players in the game have changed. The world nowadays seems to be witnessing numerous cold wars. &nbsp;

These wars are being fought between the US and China, the US and Russia,&nbsp;the US and Iran,&nbsp;North and South Korea, China and Taiwan, Iran and some Gulf states, etc. &nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-to-have-frank-conversations-with-china-on-trade-418119" hreflang="en">US to have 'frank conversations' with China on trade</a>

The mistrust has started to build between the UK and the EU, which is the first step towards a cold war. &nbsp;

Not just this, several countries have been at war for numerous years like Israel-Palestine, India-Pakistan, India-China, Ukraine-Russia, etc. &nbsp; &nbsp;

Apart from these countries, several others are caught in the middle of the action. The countries and areas facing the brunt are Ukraine, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Iraq, South China Sea, and slowly the large parts of Africa. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Many countries have also seen regime changes, coming up of dictators, etc in recent times. It somehow seems to be a way to gain more control in the world. This battle is going on unabatedly for years. &nbsp;

Several nations, such as India, Vietnam, Taiwan, Japan, the Phillipines, Ukraine, etc, are having a hard time due to the over aggressiveness of their adversaries. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-sends-56-warplanes-into-taiwans-defence-zone-in-largest-ever-air-incursion-418264" hreflang="en">China sends 56 warplanes into Taiwan's defence zone in largest-ever air incursion</a>

Almost every other day, there is either an incursion or a line of control, airspace or border violation. Several missile tests, airshows, military exercises, unveiling of new weapons or defence systems, buying of advanced weapons, etc are being done with the sole purpose of either preparing for any future war or dissuading the adversary. &nbsp;

Many countries are spending large parts of their budgets in the defence, neglecting other crucial sectors important for the development and prosperity of any nation. &nbsp;&nbsp;

But overall, it has been just helpful in increasing mistrust, encouraging arms race, hiking debt ceiling, and most of all, erosion of peace in the world. &nbsp;&nbsp;

So, let’s hope the adversaries make peace and not bring an end to the world by actually engaging in a nuclear war in the future. The world can only keep a patient and close watch.&nbsp;

Cold war is a very well-known phenomena. For years, the world witnessed its horrors in the tussle between the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR).

Cold war is a very well-known phenomena. For years, the world witnessed its horrors in the tussle between the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). It finally ended with the disintegration of the latter. So, what is it actually? Cold war in simple terms seems to be the tussle to be on the top. The struggle to be better than others builds mistrust then it finally leads to the cold war. Has is it really ended? The answer to this question is no. Just the players in the game have changed. The world nowadays seems to be witnessing numerous cold wars. These wars are being fought between the US and China, the US and Russia, the US and Iran, North and South Korea, China and Taiwan, Iran and some Gulf states, etc. Also Read: US to have 'frank conversations' with China on trade The mistrust has started to build between the UK and the EU, which is the first step towards a cold war. Not just this, several countries have been at war for numerous years like Israel-Palestine, India-Pakistan, India-China, Ukraine-Russia, etc. Apart from these countries, several others are caught in the middle of the action. The countries and areas facing the brunt are Ukraine, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Iraq, South China Sea, and slowly the large parts of Africa. Many countries have also seen regime changes, coming up of dictators, etc in recent times. It somehow seems to be a way to gain more control in the world. This battle is going on unabatedly for years. Several nations, such as India, Vietnam, Taiwan, Japan, the Phillipines, Ukraine, etc, are having a hard time due to the over aggressiveness of their adversaries. Also Read: China sends 56 warplanes into Taiwan's defence zone in largest-ever air incursion Almost every other day, there is either an incursion or a line of control, airspace or border violation. Several missile tests, airshows, military exercises, unveiling of new weapons or defence systems, buying of advanced weapons, etc are being done with the sole purpose of either preparing for any future war or dissuading the adversary. Many countries are spending large parts of their budgets in the defence, neglecting other crucial sectors important for the development and prosperity of any nation. But overall, it has been just helpful in increasing mistrust, encouraging arms race, hiking debt ceiling, and most of all, erosion of peace in the world. So, let’s hope the adversaries make peace and not bring an end to the world by actually engaging in a nuclear war in the future. The world can only keep a patient and close watch.

Is the world witnessing multiple cold wars?

On Tuesday, US&nbsp;President Joe Biden delivered his first address to the United Nations General Assembly, declaring that the world is at a "inflection point in history" and that the world must act quickly and cooperatively to address the lingering issues of the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change, and human rights violations.

In the midst of rising tensions with China, Biden also stated that the US is “not seeking a new Cold War.”&nbsp;

Biden highlighted growing concerns about rising tensions between the two countries without directly addressing China.

“We are not seeking a new Cold War or a world divided into rigid blocks,” he clarified. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/un-general-assembly-2021-alarm-to-wake-up-world-key-points-from-strong-speech-by-secretary-general-antonio-guterres-414680">Also read | Alarm to wake up world: Key points from strong speech by Secretary General Antonio Guterres</a>

With no lack of issues facing the world, the president emphasised his decision to end America's longest war, in Afghanistan, last month, and set the stage for his administration to shift its focus to intensive diplomacy.

He is motivated by the notion that "to deliver for our own people, we must also engage deeply with the rest of the world," according to him.&nbsp;

He said&nbsp;that the pandemic has been a time of "great grief and incredible possibilities," but that the world now has a chance to make a difference.&nbsp; 
 
WION-USA Direct: Biden to host Modi at White House, counter terrorism &amp; Afghan situation on agenda

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/wion-usa-direct-biden-to-host-modi-at-white-house-counter-terrorism-afghan-situation-on-agenda-414697/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

He asserted that at the "beginning of a pivotal decade for our globe," there is a "clear and urgent choice" to "define our futures." 
 
The US president stated that powerful countries will not be able to dominate weaker countries.

Countries must work together to face important challenges such as climate change and COVID-19, he said, "even if we have great disagreement in other areas."&nbsp;

Biden said that countries must now address climate change and prepare for the next pandemic, which he predicts will occur.&nbsp; 
 
WATCH:&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BsDDjRcbR7s" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

On Tuesday, US President Joe Biden delivered his first address to the United Nations General Assembly, declaring that the world is at a "inflection point in history" and that the world must act quickly and cooperatively to address the lingering issues of the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change, and human rights violations.

On Tuesday, US President Joe Biden delivered his first address to the United Nations General Assembly, declaring that the world is at a "inflection point in history" and that the world must act quickly and cooperatively to address the lingering issues of the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change, and human rights violations. In the midst of rising tensions with China, Biden also stated that the US is “not seeking a new Cold War.” Biden highlighted growing concerns about rising tensions between the two countries without directly addressing China. “We are not seeking a new Cold War or a world divided into rigid blocks,” he clarified. Also read | Alarm to wake up world: Key points from strong speech by Secretary General Antonio Guterres With no lack of issues facing the world, the president emphasised his decision to end America's longest war, in Afghanistan, last month, and set the stage for his administration to shift its focus to intensive diplomacy. He is motivated by the notion that "to deliver for our own people, we must also engage deeply with the rest of the world," according to him. He said that the pandemic has been a time of "great grief and incredible possibilities," but that the world now has a chance to make a difference. WION-USA Direct: Biden to host Modi at White House, counter terrorism & Afghan situation on agenda He asserted that at the "beginning of a pivotal decade for our globe," there is a "clear and urgent choice" to "define our futures." The US president stated that powerful countries will not be able to dominate weaker countries. Countries must work together to face important challenges such as climate change and COVID-19, he said, "even if we have great disagreement in other areas." Biden said that countries must now address climate change and prepare for the next pandemic, which he predicts will occur. WATCH: ×

UN General Assembly 2021 | 'We are not seeking a new cold war': US President Joe Biden

According to a senior US official, in his first speech at the UN General Assembly on Tuesday, President Joe Biden will make it clear that the United States is not looking to pursue a "new Cold War" with any country.

US official: Biden to tell UNGA that US not looking for new Cold War

US President Joe Biden will push back against the idea that the United States is plunging into a new Cold War with key rivals in his address to the UN General Assembly this week, a senior official said Monday.

"President Biden will communicate tomorrow that he does not believe in the notion of a new Cold War with the world divided into blocks. He believes in vigorous, intensive, principled competition," the official said, previewing the speech.

"The president will essentially drive home the message that ending the war in Afghanistan closed the chapter focused on war and opens a chapter focused on personal, purposeful, effective American diplomacy," the official said.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/canada-elections-few-things-that-you-need-to-know-about-the-campaign-414449">Also read |&nbsp;Canada elections: Few things that you need to know about the campaign</a>

He further added that in his first address to the United Nations as president, Biden will stress that Washington will work with allies and partners "to solve problems that can't be solved by military force."

Biden will also issue an "all hands on deck" call for global cooperation to end the deadly pandemic that has ravaged the world.

US President Joe Biden will push back against the idea that the United States is plunging into a new Cold War with key rivals in his address to the UN General Assembly this week, a senior official said Monday.

US President Joe Biden will push back against the idea that the United States is plunging into a new Cold War with key rivals in his address to the UN General Assembly this week, a senior official said Monday. "President Biden will communicate tomorrow that he does not believe in the notion of a new Cold War with the world divided into blocks. He believes in vigorous, intensive, principled competition," the official said, previewing the speech. "The president will essentially drive home the message that ending the war in Afghanistan closed the chapter focused on war and opens a chapter focused on personal, purposeful, effective American diplomacy," the official said. Also read | Canada elections: Few things that you need to know about the campaign He further added that in his first address to the United Nations as president, Biden will stress that Washington will work with allies and partners "to solve problems that can't be solved by military force." Biden will also issue an "all hands on deck" call for global cooperation to end the deadly pandemic that has ravaged the world.

Biden to tell UN he does not believe in a 'New Cold War': US official

The Taliban Friday said they "welcome and support" the exit of all US and NATO forces from Afghanistan's Bagram Air Base, a sign of an imminent final withdrawal of foreign troops from the country.

"Their full withdrawal (from Afghanistan) will pave the way for Afghans to decide about their future between themselves," Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/afghanistans-survival-security-unity-in-danger-warns-abdullah-abdullah-395265/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

American troops pulled out of their main military base in Afghanistan on Friday&nbsp;under an agreement with the Taliban allowing for the withdrawal of all US&nbsp;forces from the country after a two-decade war.

The US&nbsp;military has coordinated its air war and logistical support for its Afghan mission from the&nbsp;Bagram&nbsp;air base, about 60 km (40 miles) north of Kabul, and the withdrawal of the forces symbolises the end of the US&nbsp;military involvement in the country.

The base is being handed over to the Afghan government as its armed forces face a surging war with the Taliban and questions swirl about their prospects.

For decades Bagram Air Base, north of the Afghan capital, served as both the linchpin for foreign armies fighting insurgents and as a symbol of the brutalities unleashed by years of civil war.

Just 50 kilometres (30 miles) from Kabul, the base is vital to the security of the capital while also providing strategic cover to much of the country's rugged north.&nbsp;&nbsp;

The sprawling airfield was first built by the Americans for its Afghan ally during the Cold War in the 1950s as a bulwark against the Soviet Union in the north.&nbsp;

Since its construction, a rotating cast of characters has exchanged control of the base, during decades of conflict that have roiled Afghanistan.

It served as the staging ground for the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan following the Red Army's invasion in 1979, and Moscow vastly expanded it.

Following the Soviet withdrawal nearly a decade later, the base went from being controlled by the Moscow-backed government to being occupied by the shaky mujahideen administration during the civil war.&nbsp;

It was reported that at one point the Taliban controlled one end of the three-kilometre (two-mile) runway, and the opposition Northern Alliance the other.

Bagram ultimately fell into the Taliban's hands after the hardline jihadist group overran large swathes of the country in the mid-1990s.

Following the September 11 attacks and the US invasion of Afghanistan, the Americans took control of the base.

Washington's long war against the Taliban and their Al Qaeda allies was largely maintained with airstrikes and resupply missions stemming from the airfield.&nbsp;

The past two decades have brought numerous US presidential visits, while the base was also home to a prison that stoked controversy over the treatment of Afghan detainees by foreign forces.

During its heyday, the mini-city was visited by hundreds of thousands of service members and contractors.

It boasted swimming pools, cinemas and spas,&nbsp;and even a boardwalk featuring fast-food outlets such as Burger King and Pizza Hut.

In recent months, Bagram has come under rocket barrages claimed by the jihadist Islamic State, sparking new fears that militants are already eyeing the base for future attacks.

Following months of consultations, US President Joe Biden in April announced he would end the country's longest war and bring home its remaining troops ahead of the 20th anniversary of the September 11 attacks.

To this day, the sides of the road from Kabul to Bagram remain littered with the rusting hulks of old Soviet tanks, a searing reminder of the more than four decades of conflict that has left much of Afghanistan in tatters.

(With inputs from agencies)

The Taliban Friday said they "welcome and support" the exit of all US and NATO forces from Afghanistan's Bagram Air Base, a sign of an imminent final withdrawal of foreign troops from the country.

The Taliban Friday said they "welcome and support" the exit of all US and NATO forces from Afghanistan's Bagram Air Base, a sign of an imminent final withdrawal of foreign troops from the country. "Their full withdrawal (from Afghanistan) will pave the way for Afghans to decide about their future between themselves," Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said. American troops pulled out of their main military base in Afghanistan on Friday under an agreement with the Taliban allowing for the withdrawal of all US forces from the country after a two-decade war. The US military has coordinated its air war and logistical support for its Afghan mission from the Bagram air base, about 60 km (40 miles) north of Kabul, and the withdrawal of the forces symbolises the end of the US military involvement in the country. The base is being handed over to the Afghan government as its armed forces face a surging war with the Taliban and questions swirl about their prospects. For decades Bagram Air Base, north of the Afghan capital, served as both the linchpin for foreign armies fighting insurgents and as a symbol of the brutalities unleashed by years of civil war. Just 50 kilometres (30 miles) from Kabul, the base is vital to the security of the capital while also providing strategic cover to much of the country's rugged north. The sprawling airfield was first built by the Americans for its Afghan ally during the Cold War in the 1950s as a bulwark against the Soviet Union in the north. Since its construction, a rotating cast of characters has exchanged control of the base, during decades of conflict that have roiled Afghanistan. It served as the staging ground for the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan following the Red Army's invasion in 1979, and Moscow vastly expanded it. Following the Soviet withdrawal nearly a decade later, the base went from being controlled by the Moscow-backed government to being occupied by the shaky mujahideen administration during the civil war. It was reported that at one point the Taliban controlled one end of the three-kilometre (two-mile) runway, and the opposition Northern Alliance the other. Bagram ultimately fell into the Taliban's hands after the hardline jihadist group overran large swathes of the country in the mid-1990s. Following the September 11 attacks and the US invasion of Afghanistan, the Americans took control of the base. Washington's long war against the Taliban and their Al Qaeda allies was largely maintained with airstrikes and resupply missions stemming from the airfield. The past two decades have brought numerous US presidential visits, while the base was also home to a prison that stoked controversy over the treatment of Afghan detainees by foreign forces. During its heyday, the mini-city was visited by hundreds of thousands of service members and contractors. It boasted swimming pools, cinemas and spas, and even a boardwalk featuring fast-food outlets such as Burger King and Pizza Hut. In recent months, Bagram has come under rocket barrages claimed by the jihadist Islamic State, sparking new fears that militants are already eyeing the base for future attacks. Following months of consultations, US President Joe Biden in April announced he would end the country's longest war and bring home its remaining troops ahead of the 20th anniversary of the September 11 attacks. To this day, the sides of the road from Kabul to Bagram remain littered with the rusting hulks of old Soviet tanks, a searing reminder of the more than four decades of conflict that has left much of Afghanistan in tatters. (With inputs from agencies)

Taliban 'welcome and support' exit of foreign forces from Bagram

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Monday stated that none of NATO's member states wants to launch a Cold War with China.&nbsp;

Ahead of the NATO summit in a doorstep statement, he said that "I don't think anybody around the table today wants to descend into a new Cold War with China. I don't think that's where people are, but I think people see challenges. They see things that we have to manage together. But they also see opportunities,".

The same was stated by NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, who stressed that while there is no new Cold War with China, western allies must adapt to the challenge posed by Beijing's emergence.&nbsp;

"We're not entering a new Cold War and China is not our adversary, not our enemy," Stoltenberg told reports after a NATO leaders' summit.

"But we need to address together, like the alliance, the challenges that the rise of China poses to our security."

Members of NATO are also expected to support the formation of a new cyber defence policy to increase coordination with nations affected by the rising frequency of ransomware attacks.&nbsp;

The NATO summit on Monday comes as US President Biden tries to mobilise allies for more cooperation in countering China and Russia, two rivals whose activities on the economic and national security fronts have been the president's top foreign policy worries thus far.&nbsp;

According to the White House, there will be a climate security action plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions from military activities in line with national obligations under the Paris Agreement, as well as a promise to improve NATO's deterrence to face threats from Russia and abroad.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Monday stated that none of NATO's member states wants to launch a Cold War with China. Ahead of the NATO summit in a doorstep statement, he said that "I don't think anybody around the table today wants to descend into a new Cold War with China.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Monday stated that none of NATO's member states wants to launch a Cold War with China. Ahead of the NATO summit in a doorstep statement, he said that "I don't think anybody around the table today wants to descend into a new Cold War with China. I don't think that's where people are, but I think people see challenges. They see things that we have to manage together. But they also see opportunities,". The same was stated by NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, who stressed that while there is no new Cold War with China, western allies must adapt to the challenge posed by Beijing's emergence. "We're not entering a new Cold War and China is not our adversary, not our enemy," Stoltenberg told reports after a NATO leaders' summit. "But we need to address together, like the alliance, the challenges that the rise of China poses to our security." Members of NATO are also expected to support the formation of a new cyber defence policy to increase coordination with nations affected by the rising frequency of ransomware attacks. The NATO summit on Monday comes as US President Biden tries to mobilise allies for more cooperation in countering China and Russia, two rivals whose activities on the economic and national security fronts have been the president's top foreign policy worries thus far. According to the White House, there will be a climate security action plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions from military activities in line with national obligations under the Paris Agreement, as well as a promise to improve NATO's deterrence to face threats from Russia and abroad. (With inputs from agencies)

No one at NATO wants new 'cold war' with China: UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson

April 16 in history: Discovery of psychedelic effects of LSD, coining of term 'Cold War' and more

Instances of foreign interference and spying in Canada have hit levels unseen since the Cold War, Canada’s spy agency said on Monday. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) said that these breaches were a product of vulnerabilities made apparent due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

The agency also singled out Russia and China as primary causes of concern. According to CSIS, national security threats like extremism, foreign interference, espionage, and cyber activity with malicious intent rose majorly in 2020.

In its yearly report, CSIS linked the surge in foreign spying to the increasing number of people working from home during the pandemic.

"Foreign threat actors — including hostile intelligence services and those working on their behalf — have sought to exploit the social and economic conditions created by the pandemic”, the statement read.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/microsoft-software-flaw-being-misused-by-at-least-10-hacking-groups-researchers-369705" hreflang="en">Microsoft software flaw being misused by at least 10 hacking groups: Researchers</a>

In February, the head of CSIS said that China posed a serious strategic threat. In addition, CSIS identified state-run programmes in China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia for the first time ever. The report continues to build&nbsp;on increasing threat from China and Russia.

The agency added how in 2020, it observed espionage and foreign interference at levels not seen since the Cold War. "In 2020, CSIS observed espionage and foreign interference activity at levels not seen since the Cold War," its statement said.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/as-understanding-of-russian-hacking-grows-so-does-alarm-354169" hreflang="en">As understanding of Russian hacking grows, so does alarm</a>

In addition, it focused on how China and Russia continue to use various to increase their own goals while compromising the data of other countries.

"China, Russia, and other foreign states continued to covertly gather political, economic, and military information in Canada through targeted threat activities in support of their own state development goals”, Reuters cited the report as saying.

Instances of foreign interference and spying in Canada have hit levels unseen since the Cold War, Canada’s spy agency said on Monday. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) said that these breaches were a product of vulnerabilities made apparent due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Instances of foreign interference and spying in Canada have hit levels unseen since the Cold War, Canada’s spy agency said on Monday. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) said that these breaches were a product of vulnerabilities made apparent due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The agency also singled out Russia and China as primary causes of concern. According to CSIS, national security threats like extremism, foreign interference, espionage, and cyber activity with malicious intent rose majorly in 2020. In its yearly report, CSIS linked the surge in foreign spying to the increasing number of people working from home during the pandemic. "Foreign threat actors — including hostile intelligence services and those working on their behalf — have sought to exploit the social and economic conditions created by the pandemic”, the statement read. Also read: Microsoft software flaw being misused by at least 10 hacking groups: Researchers In February, the head of CSIS said that China posed a serious strategic threat. In addition, CSIS identified state-run programmes in China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia for the first time ever. The report continues to build on increasing threat from China and Russia. The agency added how in 2020, it observed espionage and foreign interference at levels not seen since the Cold War. "In 2020, CSIS observed espionage and foreign interference activity at levels not seen since the Cold War," its statement said. Also read: As understanding of Russian hacking grows, so does alarm In addition, it focused on how China and Russia continue to use various to increase their own goals while compromising the data of other countries. "China, Russia, and other foreign states continued to covertly gather political, economic, and military information in Canada through targeted threat activities in support of their own state development goals”, Reuters cited the report as saying.

China, Russia push foreign interference in Canada to Cold War levels: Spy agency

President Joe Biden said last month that he makes “no apology” for undoing some of the hard-line Trump-era immigration policies.

According to a study, the Biden administration’s proposed immigration bill would increase annual green card numbers by 35%.

Biden is pushing to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws to make them more “humane."&nbsp;

A proposal he sent to Congress would increase the number of people allowed to gain legal permanent residence each year by almost 375,000, according to a separate study by the immigration services group Boundless Immigration Inc.

The report projects that the American economy will be three-quarters the size of China’s by 2050 under current US population trends and immigration levels. FWD.us, an immigration advocacy group founded by tech industry leaders, conducted the study in conjunction with George Mason University.

Biden says his administration is working on solutions to manage the immigrants coming to the country. Biden officials have largely blamed the problems on what they say were shoddy Trump policies.

(With inputs from agencies)

President Joe Biden said last month that he makes “no apology” for undoing some of the hard-line Trump-era immigration policies. According to a study, the Biden administration’s proposed immigration bill would increase annual green card numbers by 35%.

President Joe Biden said last month that he makes “no apology” for undoing some of the hard-line Trump-era immigration policies. According to a study, the Biden administration’s proposed immigration bill would increase annual green card numbers by 35%. Biden is pushing to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws to make them more “humane." A proposal he sent to Congress would increase the number of people allowed to gain legal permanent residence each year by almost 375,000, according to a separate study by the immigration services group Boundless Immigration Inc. The report projects that the American economy will be three-quarters the size of China’s by 2050 under current US population trends and immigration levels. FWD.us, an immigration advocacy group founded by tech industry leaders, conducted the study in conjunction with George Mason University. Biden says his administration is working on solutions to manage the immigrants coming to the country. Biden officials have largely blamed the problems on what they say were shoddy Trump policies. (With inputs from agencies)

If US immigration doesn't improve, China will overtake its economy: Study

Sixty years ago on Tuesday, Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first person in space, securing victory for Moscow in its race with Washington and marking a new chapter in the history of space exploration.

Decades later, Gagarin's journey has become shrouded in myth after many details about the historic mission were for years kept secret by the Soviets.

Here are five things to know about Gagarin's legendary flight:

'Let's go!' 
A trained steelworker turned military pilot, Gagarin was selected from thousands of candidates to undergo the rigorous training required for a space flight.

Apart from showing excellent results in his tests, Gagarin, then aged 27, also reportedly stood out by removing his shoes before entering the Vostok spacecraft designated for the mission, a custom in Russia when entering a home.

On April 12, 1961, as Gagarin's flight took off from the Baikonur spaceport in Kazakhstan, he exclaimed his iconic catchphrase "Poekhali!", or "Let's go!" in Russian.

Risky business

The flight lasted just 108 minutes as the Vostok completed one loop around the Earth.

Once Gagarin safely returned home, the success of his mission outshone the fact that not everything went according to plan.

Among a dozen technical glitches, his spacecraft entered into orbit at a higher altitude than expected.

If its brakes system had malfunctioned, Gagarin would have had to wait for the spacecraft to begin descending on its own. And while the Vostok was stocked with enough food, water, and oxygen to last 10 days, the higher altitude meant the wait would have been much longer and Gagarin would have run out of supplies.

Luckily for the Russian cosmonaut, the brakes worked.

Spy suspicions&nbsp; 
But Gagarin came down miles away from his expected landing point, ejecting from his capsule over the Saratov region in southern Russia.

He landed in a field where the first people he saw were a young girl and her grandmother digging up potatoes.

Clad in a white helmet and orange spacesuit, he struggled at first to convince them amid Cold War tensions that he was not a foreign spy.

- Urination nation - 
Legend has it that before takeoff Gagarin asked the bus driver bringing him to the launchpad to pull over so he could relieve himself, before urinating on the back right tyre.&nbsp;

For years Russian cosmonauts repeated the ritual before launching into space, but the decades-old superstition may soon be forced into retirement: the new design of the Russian spacesuit presented in 2019 is not equipped with a fly and is too heavy to nimbly remove.

The man behind Gagarin&nbsp; 
While Gagarin became a household name in the Soviet Union, for years nobody knew about the mastermind of the country's space programme: Sergei Korolyov.

The Soviets even rejected a Nobel prize awarded to their "Chief Designer", determined to keep his identity a secret. Only after his death in 1966 was his name revealed.

Under Korolyov's leadership, the USSR sent not only the first person to space, but later the first woman, as well as conducting the first spacewalk.

Sixty years ago on Tuesday, Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first person in space, securing victory for Moscow in its race with Washington and marking a new chapter in the history of space exploration.

Sixty years ago on Tuesday, Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first person in space, securing victory for Moscow in its race with Washington and marking a new chapter in the history of space exploration. Decades later, Gagarin's journey has become shrouded in myth after many details about the historic mission were for years kept secret by the Soviets. Here are five things to know about Gagarin's legendary flight: 'Let's go!' A trained steelworker turned military pilot, Gagarin was selected from thousands of candidates to undergo the rigorous training required for a space flight. Apart from showing excellent results in his tests, Gagarin, then aged 27, also reportedly stood out by removing his shoes before entering the Vostok spacecraft designated for the mission, a custom in Russia when entering a home. On April 12, 1961, as Gagarin's flight took off from the Baikonur spaceport in Kazakhstan, he exclaimed his iconic catchphrase "Poekhali!", or "Let's go!" in Russian. Risky business The flight lasted just 108 minutes as the Vostok completed one loop around the Earth. Once Gagarin safely returned home, the success of his mission outshone the fact that not everything went according to plan. Among a dozen technical glitches, his spacecraft entered into orbit at a higher altitude than expected. If its brakes system had malfunctioned, Gagarin would have had to wait for the spacecraft to begin descending on its own. And while the Vostok was stocked with enough food, water, and oxygen to last 10 days, the higher altitude meant the wait would have been much longer and Gagarin would have run out of supplies. Luckily for the Russian cosmonaut, the brakes worked. Spy suspicions But Gagarin came down miles away from his expected landing point, ejecting from his capsule over the Saratov region in southern Russia. He landed in a field where the first people he saw were a young girl and her grandmother digging up potatoes. Clad in a white helmet and orange spacesuit, he struggled at first to convince them amid Cold War tensions that he was not a foreign spy. - Urination nation - Legend has it that before takeoff Gagarin asked the bus driver bringing him to the launchpad to pull over so he could relieve himself, before urinating on the back right tyre. For years Russian cosmonauts repeated the ritual before launching into space, but the decades-old superstition may soon be forced into retirement: the new design of the Russian spacesuit presented in 2019 is not equipped with a fly and is too heavy to nimbly remove. The man behind Gagarin While Gagarin became a household name in the Soviet Union, for years nobody knew about the mastermind of the country's space programme: Sergei Korolyov. The Soviets even rejected a Nobel prize awarded to their "Chief Designer", determined to keep his identity a secret. Only after his death in 1966 was his name revealed. Under Korolyov's leadership, the USSR sent not only the first person to space, but later the first woman, as well as conducting the first spacewalk.

Five things to know about Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin, first human to travel into space

The first high-level US-China&nbsp;meeting of the Biden administration got off to a fiery start on Thursday&nbsp;in Achorage with both sides levelling sharp rebukes of the others' policies in a rare public display that underscored the level of bilateral tension.

The run-up to the talks in Anchorage, Alaska, which followed visits by US&nbsp;officials to allies Japan and South Korea, was marked by a flurry of moves by Washington that showed it was taking a tough stance, and by a blunt talk from Beijing.

Also read|&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/sensed-strong-smell-of-gunpowder-in-us-talks-says-china-371685" hreflang="en">Sensed strong smell of gunpowder in US talks, says China</a>

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Chinese Communist Party foreign affairs chief Yang Jiechi took aim at each other's country's policies on Thursday in their meeting in Anchorage.

Jiechi said ''Well, I think we thought too well of the United States. We thought the U.S. side would follow the necessary diplomatic protocols.&nbsp;So for China, it was necessary that we make our position clear.''

''Let me say here, that in front of the Chinese side the United States does not have the qualification to say that it wants to speak to China from a position of strength.''

Also read|&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/abandon-cold-war-mentality-us-chinese-officials-clash-during-talks-in-alaska-371538" hreflang="en">'Abandon Cold War mentality': US, Chinese officials clash during Alaska talks</a>

Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday mocked Joe Biden for calling him a "killer", saying "it takes one to know one", as ties between Moscow and Washington sank to new lows.

US President Biden's comments sparked the biggest crisis between&nbsp;Russia&nbsp;and the United States in years, with Moscow recalling its ambassador for consultations and warning that ties were on the brink of outright "collapse".

But speaking during an event marking seven years since&nbsp;Russia's annexation of Crimea, Putin ruled out severing ties with the United States altogether and lobbed a jab at the 78-year-old US leader.

"We always see in another person our own qualities and think that he is the same as us," Putin said, referring to Biden's "killer" comment.

"It takes one to know one," Putin added, citing a saying from his Soviet-era childhood in Saint Petersburg.&nbsp;

It is not&nbsp;unprecedented for world leaders to insult and mock each other.&nbsp;

Richard Nixon once dubbed Canada's Pierre Trudeau as a ''pompous egghead''. While George W. Bush called &nbsp;North Korea's Kim jong-il a ''pygmy.''

Similarly,&nbsp;Hugo Chavez called Barack Obama a ''poor ignoramus''&nbsp;and French leader Nicolas Sarkozy called Benjamin Netanyahu a ''liar.''

Former US President Donald Trump mocked Biden by saying that&nbsp;''he was only a good vice president because he understood how to kiss Barack Obama's [ass]."

He also&nbsp;called Justin Trudeau ''two-faced,''&nbsp;labelled Syria's president Bashar-al-Assad an 'animal', and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un&nbsp;a 'little rocket man', that is a&nbsp;'dotard'.

Even though Trump has left office but his&nbsp;style of politics&nbsp;seems to have permeated global diplomacy&nbsp;and the world seems to have turned into one big reality-tv show.

The first high-level US-China meeting of the Biden administration got off to a fiery start on Thursday in Achorage with both sides levelling sharp rebukes of the others' policies in a rare public display that underscored the level of bilateral tension.

The first high-level US-China meeting of the Biden administration got off to a fiery start on Thursday in Achorage with both sides levelling sharp rebukes of the others' policies in a rare public display that underscored the level of bilateral tension. The run-up to the talks in Anchorage, Alaska, which followed visits by US officials to allies Japan and South Korea, was marked by a flurry of moves by Washington that showed it was taking a tough stance, and by a blunt talk from Beijing. Also read| Sensed strong smell of gunpowder in US talks, says China Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Chinese Communist Party foreign affairs chief Yang Jiechi took aim at each other's country's policies on Thursday in their meeting in Anchorage. Jiechi said ''Well, I think we thought too well of the United States. We thought the U.S. side would follow the necessary diplomatic protocols. So for China, it was necessary that we make our position clear.'' ''Let me say here, that in front of the Chinese side the United States does not have the qualification to say that it wants to speak to China from a position of strength.'' Also read| 'Abandon Cold War mentality': US, Chinese officials clash during Alaska talks Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday mocked Joe Biden for calling him a "killer", saying "it takes one to know one", as ties between Moscow and Washington sank to new lows. US President Biden's comments sparked the biggest crisis between Russia and the United States in years, with Moscow recalling its ambassador for consultations and warning that ties were on the brink of outright "collapse". But speaking during an event marking seven years since Russia's annexation of Crimea, Putin ruled out severing ties with the United States altogether and lobbed a jab at the 78-year-old US leader. "We always see in another person our own qualities and think that he is the same as us," Putin said, referring to Biden's "killer" comment. "It takes one to know one," Putin added, citing a saying from his Soviet-era childhood in Saint Petersburg. It is not unprecedented for world leaders to insult and mock each other. Richard Nixon once dubbed Canada's Pierre Trudeau as a ''pompous egghead''. While George W. Bush called North Korea's Kim jong-il a ''pygmy.'' Similarly, Hugo Chavez called Barack Obama a ''poor ignoramus'' and French leader Nicolas Sarkozy called Benjamin Netanyahu a ''liar.'' Former US President Donald Trump mocked Biden by saying that ''he was only a good vice president because he understood how to kiss Barack Obama's [ass]." He also called Justin Trudeau ''two-faced,'' labelled Syria's president Bashar-al-Assad an 'animal', and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un a 'little rocket man', that is a 'dotard'. Even though Trump has left office but his style of politics seems to have permeated global diplomacy and the world seems to have turned into one big reality-tv show.

US-China engage in undiplomatic sparring match

The Kremlin on Friday said that it is ''prepared for the worst''&nbsp;when it was asked about the possibility of a new Cold War between the United States and Russia.

It comes after Russian President Vladimir Putin&nbsp;mocked Joe Biden for calling him a "killer", saying "it takes one to know one", as ties between Moscow and Washington sank to new lows.

US President Biden's comments sparked the biggest crisis between Russia and the United States in years, with Moscow recalling its ambassador for consultations and warning that ties were on the brink of outright "collapse".

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-joe-biden-calls-vladimir-putin-a-killer-371517/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

On Friday, the Kremlin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said Putin's offer of talks remained open and that Putin could do any time that was convenient for Biden, though the offer would not stay on the table indefinitely.

"Putin said that despite everything there's no point in playing at megaphone diplomacy and trading barbs. There is a point in continuing relations," Peskov told reporters on a conference call.

He was asked about a new Cold War between the two countries.

"We, of course, always hope for the best but are always ready for the worst. As far as Russia is concerned, President Putin has clearly stated his desire to continue ties...," he said.

"But of course, we cannot take into account Biden's comments," he said, in a reference to Biden's interview with ABC News broadcast on Wednesday.

In it, Biden said "I do" when asked if he believed Putin was a killer, prompting Putin to cite a Russian children's playground chant in response saying "he who said it, did it".

Moscow and Washington share a mutual distrust that flared after the Kremlin's annexation of the Crimean peninsula in 2014.

Ties deteriorated over Russia's alleged meddling in the US elections in 2016 and more recently when the West concluded that Russian opposition figure Alexei Navalny was poisoned last summer with a Soviet-designed nerve agent.

But the two countries have continued cooperation on issues of shared interest, including the Iran nuclear deal and the Afghanistan peace process.

The US Commerce Department announced this week it was toughening export restrictions imposed on Russia as punishment for Navalny's poisoning in August.

Over the past few decades Russia has rarely recalled its ambassadors.

Moscow last summoned its envoy in the US in 1998 over a Western bombing campaign in Iraq.

In 2014, during the fallout after the annexation of Crimea,&nbsp;Putin&nbsp;refused to recall a Washington envoy even after then US President Barack Obama said that the Russian leader would pay for his Ukraine policies.&nbsp;

Putin&nbsp;at the time said recalling an envoy would be a "measure of last resort".

The Kremlin on Friday said that it is ''prepared for the worst'' when it was asked about the possibility of a new Cold War between the United States and Russia. It comes after Russian President Vladimir Putin mocked Joe Biden for calling him a "killer", saying "it takes one to know one", as ties between Moscow and Washington sank to new lows.

The Kremlin on Friday said that it is ''prepared for the worst'' when it was asked about the possibility of a new Cold War between the United States and Russia. It comes after Russian President Vladimir Putin mocked Joe Biden for calling him a "killer", saying "it takes one to know one", as ties between Moscow and Washington sank to new lows. US President Biden's comments sparked the biggest crisis between Russia and the United States in years, with Moscow recalling its ambassador for consultations and warning that ties were on the brink of outright "collapse". On Friday, the Kremlin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said Putin's offer of talks remained open and that Putin could do any time that was convenient for Biden, though the offer would not stay on the table indefinitely. "Putin said that despite everything there's no point in playing at megaphone diplomacy and trading barbs. There is a point in continuing relations," Peskov told reporters on a conference call. He was asked about a new Cold War between the two countries. "We, of course, always hope for the best but are always ready for the worst. As far as Russia is concerned, President Putin has clearly stated his desire to continue ties...," he said. "But of course, we cannot take into account Biden's comments," he said, in a reference to Biden's interview with ABC News broadcast on Wednesday. In it, Biden said "I do" when asked if he believed Putin was a killer, prompting Putin to cite a Russian children's playground chant in response saying "he who said it, did it". Moscow and Washington share a mutual distrust that flared after the Kremlin's annexation of the Crimean peninsula in 2014. Ties deteriorated over Russia's alleged meddling in the US elections in 2016 and more recently when the West concluded that Russian opposition figure Alexei Navalny was poisoned last summer with a Soviet-designed nerve agent. But the two countries have continued cooperation on issues of shared interest, including the Iran nuclear deal and the Afghanistan peace process. The US Commerce Department announced this week it was toughening export restrictions imposed on Russia as punishment for Navalny's poisoning in August. Over the past few decades Russia has rarely recalled its ambassadors. Moscow last summoned its envoy in the US in 1998 over a Western bombing campaign in Iraq. In 2014, during the fallout after the annexation of Crimea, Putin refused to recall a Washington envoy even after then US President Barack Obama said that the Russian leader would pay for his Ukraine policies. Putin at the time said recalling an envoy would be a "measure of last resort".

'Prepared for worst': Kremlin on possible new Cold War with US

Reversing a trend of disarmament, Britain on Tuesday announced plans to increase its stockpile of nuclear weapons.

"The UK will move to an overall nuclear weapon stockpile of no more than 260 warheads," said a government review of defence, security and foreign policy. The review said that emerging threats no longer made it possible to stick to commitment to reduce warheads.&nbsp;

It is being viewed that UK is taking the step with Russia and China in mind.

In recent years, the UK has had its share of disagreements with both Russia and China on an array of issues ranging from cyber-attacks to human rights to espionage. Many people within the UK have called for the country’s “Trident nuclear programme” to be scrapped, as the global calls for denuclearisation increase.

International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), Beatrice Fihn accused the UK of being “irresponsible and dangerous”, while adding how this move violates international law.

Meanwhile, the review of&nbsp;country's post-Brexit 'Global Britain' vision concluded that the UK must shift its foreign policy focus to Indo-Pacific region. The review suggests that countries such as India, Australia and Japan should be at the heart of the move.

UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who will formally release the review in the House of Commons later on Tuesday, is to activate the so-called Indo-Pacific tilt with a visit to India at the end of next month, an application for partner status of the Association of South East Asian nations (ASEAN) economic union and the Royal Navy warship Queen Elizabeth Carrier deployment to the region.

(With agency inputs)

Reversing a trend of disarmament, Britain on Tuesday announced plans to increase its stockpile of nuclear weapons. "The UK will move to an overall nuclear weapon stockpile of no more than 260 warheads," said a government review of defence, security and foreign policy.

Reversing a trend of disarmament, Britain on Tuesday announced plans to increase its stockpile of nuclear weapons. "The UK will move to an overall nuclear weapon stockpile of no more than 260 warheads," said a government review of defence, security and foreign policy. The review said that emerging threats no longer made it possible to stick to commitment to reduce warheads. It is being viewed that UK is taking the step with Russia and China in mind. In recent years, the UK has had its share of disagreements with both Russia and China on an array of issues ranging from cyber-attacks to human rights to espionage. Many people within the UK have called for the country’s “Trident nuclear programme” to be scrapped, as the global calls for denuclearisation increase. International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), Beatrice Fihn accused the UK of being “irresponsible and dangerous”, while adding how this move violates international law. Meanwhile, the review of country's post-Brexit 'Global Britain' vision concluded that the UK must shift its foreign policy focus to Indo-Pacific region. The review suggests that countries such as India, Australia and Japan should be at the heart of the move. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who will formally release the review in the House of Commons later on Tuesday, is to activate the so-called Indo-Pacific tilt with a visit to India at the end of next month, an application for partner status of the Association of South East Asian nations (ASEAN) economic union and the Royal Navy warship Queen Elizabeth Carrier deployment to the region. (With agency inputs)

UK planning to increase nuclear weapons stockpile: govt review

December 3 in History: From India-Pak war to Cold War and more

A whale shark can live up to 100 years, or even more, scientists have realised!

Researchers employed a technique unheard until now: using a Cold War bomb isotope.

By analysing and measuring the amount of Carbon-14, an isotope used in Cold War bombs, the scientists were able to ascertain the age.

So it goes something like this: The isotope was placed in a shark’s "hard parts" naturally due to its release in the atmosphere during the Cold War. Based on this, the age was decrypted.

The older the whale shark, the lesser Carbon-14 scientists were likely to find.

After collating the study, scientists realised that whale sharks can live for over a century.

During the arms race between 1955-1963, the use of atomic bombs doubled, and this Carbon-14 was then released into the atmosphere - twice the regular amount. This isotope was absorbed by every living being on the planet.

<h6><img alt="p" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="b3b392fc-a307-4b6f-9473-b570035f2170" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design%20%288%29_27.jpg" /> 
Indian residents stands next to a whale shark that washed ashore and was lifted out by a crane for inspection by officials at Kasimedu fishing harbour in Chennai on July 27, 2019 | AFP 
&nbsp;</h6>

It is used by archaeologists and historians to date ancient bones and artefacts.

The new study, published in Frontiers in Marine Science, was headed by Dr Mark Meekan from the Australian Institute of Marine Science in Perth.

In conversation with BBC, he said "So any animal that was alive then incorporated that spike in Carbon-14 into their hard parts. That means we’ve got a time marker within the vertebrae that means we can work out the periodicity at which those isotopes decay".

However, this wasn’t easy, as whale sharks are endangered creatures, making it harder for scientists to even trace them.

Two dead specimens were held in Taiwan and Pakistan, where the tests were then conducted.

Even though it might be a stretch, Dr Meekan also believes that the sharks could go on living for as many as 150 years!

“The absolute longevity of these animals could be very, very old, possibly as much as 100-150 years old”, he told BBC.

“This has huge implications for the species. It suggests that these things are probably intensely vulnerable to over-harvesting”, he added.

As the largest fish in the world, whale sharks can weigh 20.6 tonnes (20,000&nbsp;kgs) and can grow up to 32 feet!

A whale shark can live up to 100 years, or even more, scientists have realised! Researchers employed a technique unheard until now: using a Cold War bomb isotope.

A whale shark can live up to 100 years, or even more, scientists have realised! Researchers employed a technique unheard until now: using a Cold War bomb isotope. By analysing and measuring the amount of Carbon-14, an isotope used in Cold War bombs, the scientists were able to ascertain the age. So it goes something like this: The isotope was placed in a shark’s "hard parts" naturally due to its release in the atmosphere during the Cold War. Based on this, the age was decrypted. The older the whale shark, the lesser Carbon-14 scientists were likely to find. After collating the study, scientists realised that whale sharks can live for over a century. During the arms race between 1955-1963, the use of atomic bombs doubled, and this Carbon-14 was then released into the atmosphere - twice the regular amount. This isotope was absorbed by every living being on the planet. Indian residents stands next to a whale shark that washed ashore and was lifted out by a crane for inspection by officials at Kasimedu fishing harbour in Chennai on July 27, 2019 | AFP It is used by archaeologists and historians to date ancient bones and artefacts. The new study, published in Frontiers in Marine Science, was headed by Dr Mark Meekan from the Australian Institute of Marine Science in Perth. In conversation with BBC, he said "So any animal that was alive then incorporated that spike in Carbon-14 into their hard parts. That means we’ve got a time marker within the vertebrae that means we can work out the periodicity at which those isotopes decay". However, this wasn’t easy, as whale sharks are endangered creatures, making it harder for scientists to even trace them. Two dead specimens were held in Taiwan and Pakistan, where the tests were then conducted. Even though it might be a stretch, Dr Meekan also believes that the sharks could go on living for as many as 150 years! “The absolute longevity of these animals could be very, very old, possibly as much as 100-150 years old”, he told BBC. “This has huge implications for the species. It suggests that these things are probably intensely vulnerable to over-harvesting”, he added. As the largest fish in the world, whale sharks can weigh 20.6 tonnes (20,000 kgs) and can grow up to 32 feet!

Cold war bombs help scientists discover whale sharks can live up to a century!

It's the year and the definition of a cold war has remarkably changed. If we talk of spies in the modern day and age, the mastermind of the most notorious spy ring would be a Chinese sitting somewhere in Mainland China.

China has been operating spy rings like never before, and in its web are people from all professions -- journalists, political leaders, policy makers, and researchers.

You name it and you will find them on the Chinese payroll.

An Australian MP is currently being investigated. His name is Shaoquette Moselmane.

This man is extremely pro-China, and he is very vocal about it. In the recent months, he has even lauded the Chinese response to the novel coronavirus.

That move itself is enough to get alarm bells ringing.

Another thing to be kept in consideration is agents these days no longer keep a low-profile or roam around in hoodies.

China does not anyway need spies to evesdrop. It has technologies like Huawei or Zoom for that job. The task for its human agents is to influence policies.

Since the Commmunist Party can only control the circus at home, it needs agents abroad to generously dish out the party's propaganda and influence affairs in its favour.

And who better to do this job than a legislator?

Shaoquette is not a lone wolf. There are several others working with him -- supposedly working for China. While some are influencing policies, others are stealing information and critical research.

They are placed in some of the world's top research labs, and they are being paid in millions to smuggle information to the dragon's nest.

There is Charles Lieber also -- a professor at the Harvard University. Only earlier this year, US authorities found out that Lieber was working closely with China.

China had paid him $1 million.

US authorities busted two other chinese agents -- Yanqing Ye. She was a researcher at the Boston University. But before that she was in the Chinese army.

Then there is cancer researcher Zaosong Zheng. He was arrested at the Boston airport.

Authorities found 21 biological samples in his bag. Zaosong was allegedly flying to China.

It does not end there.

There are Chinese agents in some 500 odd foreign universities. They are msquerading as Confucious scholars. On the chinese payroll are also journalists. They are being offered overtures -- sponsored trips or junkets to China.

What they have to do in return is speak in favour of the Uighur camps or Cheer china's coronavirus response, write editorials praising China.

There's evidence to it as well. The international federation of journalists recently carried a survey, in which journalists from 58 countries were asked whether they received overtures from Beijing.

Turns out, in at least 29 of these countries, journalists had been on trips to China.

Some of the respondents said that China has a visible presence in their national press.

67% of the respondents said they were approached by Chinese entities.

All of this summed up serves as China's non-traditional espionage -- one that is an integral part of Xi's plan of global dominance.

Every country has intelligence agencies. But what China is doing is escalating this spy war.

It is recruiting like never before -- eavesdropping, and stealing information and secrets like never before.

It's the year and the definition of a cold war has remarkably changed. If we talk of spies in the modern day and age, the mastermind of the most notorious spy ring would be a Chinese sitting somewhere in Mainland China.

It's the year and the definition of a cold war has remarkably changed. If we talk of spies in the modern day and age, the mastermind of the most notorious spy ring would be a Chinese sitting somewhere in Mainland China. China has been operating spy rings like never before, and in its web are people from all professions -- journalists, political leaders, policy makers, and researchers. You name it and you will find them on the Chinese payroll. An Australian MP is currently being investigated. His name is Shaoquette Moselmane. This man is extremely pro-China, and he is very vocal about it. In the recent months, he has even lauded the Chinese response to the novel coronavirus. That move itself is enough to get alarm bells ringing. Another thing to be kept in consideration is agents these days no longer keep a low-profile or roam around in hoodies. China does not anyway need spies to evesdrop. It has technologies like Huawei or Zoom for that job. The task for its human agents is to influence policies. Since the Commmunist Party can only control the circus at home, it needs agents abroad to generously dish out the party's propaganda and influence affairs in its favour. And who better to do this job than a legislator? Shaoquette is not a lone wolf. There are several others working with him -- supposedly working for China. While some are influencing policies, others are stealing information and critical research. They are placed in some of the world's top research labs, and they are being paid in millions to smuggle information to the dragon's nest. There is Charles Lieber also -- a professor at the Harvard University. Only earlier this year, US authorities found out that Lieber was working closely with China. China had paid him $1 million. US authorities busted two other chinese agents -- Yanqing Ye. She was a researcher at the Boston University. But before that she was in the Chinese army. Then there is cancer researcher Zaosong Zheng. He was arrested at the Boston airport. Authorities found 21 biological samples in his bag. Zaosong was allegedly flying to China. It does not end there. There are Chinese agents in some 500 odd foreign universities. They are msquerading as Confucious scholars. On the chinese payroll are also journalists. They are being offered overtures -- sponsored trips or junkets to China. What they have to do in return is speak in favour of the Uighur camps or Cheer china's coronavirus response, write editorials praising China. There's evidence to it as well. The international federation of journalists recently carried a survey, in which journalists from 58 countries were asked whether they received overtures from Beijing. Turns out, in at least 29 of these countries, journalists had been on trips to China. Some of the respondents said that China has a visible presence in their national press. 67% of the respondents said they were approached by Chinese entities. All of this summed up serves as China's non-traditional espionage -- one that is an integral part of Xi's plan of global dominance. Every country has intelligence agencies. But what China is doing is escalating this spy war. It is recruiting like never before -- eavesdropping, and stealing information and secrets like never before.

Here's how China's spy racket is bigger than the cold war!

Chinese President Xi Jinping is so nervous about the position of the Communist Party that he is risking a new Cold War and imperilling Hong Kong's position as Asia's pre-eminent financial hub, says the former&nbsp;British governor of the territory.

Chris Patten said Xi's 'thuggish' crackdown in Hong Kong risked triggering an outflow of capital and people from the city which funnels the bulk of foreign investment into mainland China.

The West, he said, should stop being naive about Xi, who has served as General Secretary of the Communist Party since 2012.

"We have long since passed the stage where, without wanting another Cold War, we have to react to the fact Xi seems to want one himself," Patten said.

Patten cast Xi as a dictator who was "nervous" about the position of the Communist Party in China after criticism of its early handling of the novel coronavirus outbreak and the economic impact of its trade disagreements with the United States.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/hong-kong-slams-trumps-move-to-end-citys-special-status-302036" hreflang="en">Hong Kong slams Trump's move to end city's special status</a>

"One reason Xi Jinping is whipping up all this nationalist feeling about Hong Kong, about Taiwan and about other issues, is that he is more nervous than any official would allow about the position of the Communist Party in China," he said.

The Chinese embassy in London did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Patten, now 76, watched as the British flag was lowered over Hong Kong when the colony was handed back to China in 1997 after more than 150 years of British rule.

Hong Kong's autonomy was guaranteed under the "one country, two systems" agreement enshrined in the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration. But thousands of Hong Kong protesters have defied Beijing in recent months.

China’s parliament this week approved a decision to create laws for Hong Kong to curb sedition, secession, terrorism and foreign interference.

"Xi Jinping hates the things which Hong Kong has been promised under the ‘one country, two systems’ treaty lodged at the United Nations which he is wilfully breaking," Patten said. "What he hopes he can do is to bash Hong Kong into shape."

Patten said Xi's actions had placed Hong Kong's position as Asia's premier international financial hub under question.

"What does it mean? It means serious question marks not just about Hong Kong's future as a free society but also about Hong Kong's ability to continue as probably the premier international financial hub in Asia," Patten said.

"A lot of people will try to leave Hong Kong," Patten said, adding that he feared capital would also flow out. "It is going to be pretty rough over the next few months."

The autonomy of Hong Kong has, until now, given investors faith in the territory's legal and governance systems. China’s legal system is accountable to the Communist Party.

"What you have coming into conflict is a dictatorial idea of what the law is with the common law which is undoubtedly going to cause a constitutional clash," Patten said

He added the West had been even more naive with Xi's China than it had with post-Soviet Russia.

"What Xi has demonstrated so far is that unless you stand up to bullies they go on bullying you," he said.

Patten said the West should stand together when allies, such as Australia, were targeted by Beijing and be cautious with companies such as Huawei which Britain has allowed to help build its 5G network.

"Huawei is an agent of an unpleasant Chinese state," Patten said. Huawei has repeatedly denied claims that it is agent of the Chinese state.

Chinese President Xi Jinping is so nervous about the position of the Communist Party that he is risking a new Cold War and imperilling Hong Kong's position as Asia's pre-eminent financial hub, says the former British governor of the territory.

Chinese President Xi Jinping is so nervous about the position of the Communist Party that he is risking a new Cold War and imperilling Hong Kong's position as Asia's pre-eminent financial hub, says the former British governor of the territory. Chris Patten said Xi's 'thuggish' crackdown in Hong Kong risked triggering an outflow of capital and people from the city which funnels the bulk of foreign investment into mainland China. The West, he said, should stop being naive about Xi, who has served as General Secretary of the Communist Party since 2012. "We have long since passed the stage where, without wanting another Cold War, we have to react to the fact Xi seems to want one himself," Patten said. Patten cast Xi as a dictator who was "nervous" about the position of the Communist Party in China after criticism of its early handling of the novel coronavirus outbreak and the economic impact of its trade disagreements with the United States. Also read: Hong Kong slams Trump's move to end city's special status "One reason Xi Jinping is whipping up all this nationalist feeling about Hong Kong, about Taiwan and about other issues, is that he is more nervous than any official would allow about the position of the Communist Party in China," he said. The Chinese embassy in London did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Patten, now 76, watched as the British flag was lowered over Hong Kong when the colony was handed back to China in 1997 after more than 150 years of British rule. Hong Kong's autonomy was guaranteed under the "one country, two systems" agreement enshrined in the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration. But thousands of Hong Kong protesters have defied Beijing in recent months. China’s parliament this week approved a decision to create laws for Hong Kong to curb sedition, secession, terrorism and foreign interference. "Xi Jinping hates the things which Hong Kong has been promised under the ‘one country, two systems’ treaty lodged at the United Nations which he is wilfully breaking," Patten said. "What he hopes he can do is to bash Hong Kong into shape." Patten said Xi's actions had placed Hong Kong's position as Asia's premier international financial hub under question. "What does it mean? It means serious question marks not just about Hong Kong's future as a free society but also about Hong Kong's ability to continue as probably the premier international financial hub in Asia," Patten said. "A lot of people will try to leave Hong Kong," Patten said, adding that he feared capital would also flow out. "It is going to be pretty rough over the next few months." The autonomy of Hong Kong has, until now, given investors faith in the territory's legal and governance systems. China’s legal system is accountable to the Communist Party. "What you have coming into conflict is a dictatorial idea of what the law is with the common law which is undoubtedly going to cause a constitutional clash," Patten said He added the West had been even more naive with Xi's China than it had with post-Soviet Russia. "What Xi has demonstrated so far is that unless you stand up to bullies they go on bullying you," he said. Patten said the West should stand together when allies, such as Australia, were targeted by Beijing and be cautious with companies such as Huawei which Britain has allowed to help build its 5G network. "Huawei is an agent of an unpleasant Chinese state," Patten said. Huawei has repeatedly denied claims that it is agent of the Chinese state.

China's 'nervous' Xi risks new Cold War, says former Hong Kong governor

Military thinkers, strategists and philosophers have grappled with the issue of war and peace since perhaps time immemorial. One major strand that has emerged from this is the ‘theory of just war’. Based on two major criteria-right to go to war (jus ad bellum) and right conduct in war( jus in Bello)-that apparently render war morally justifiable, just war theory, whose earliest proponent was Saint Augustine, holds that war is not always the worst option. The claim embedded in the just war theory is a bold one. But, is it right? Can war ever be justified and just? Is there something morally and practically wrong with the just war? Last but the least, does the just war theory hold in or under conditions of post-modernity?

There is something fundamentally wrong in positing that war can be just. The reasons, in the main, pertain to the fluidity of conditions in war and combat which is essentially in the nature of a zero-sum, Hobbesian struggle where it's you or me thinking or rationalizations dominate. In this, ‘if I don’t kill you first, you will kill me’ thinking, morality, ethical and humanitarian considerations naturally fly out of the window. But assuming there is something to the just war theory, who decides to go war? Who has the right to wage war? In the law of the jungle, that is the world of states, it is strong that determine issues of war and peace; the weak are at the sufferance of the strong. Yes, in modern times, there are notable and laudable institutions that are designed to maintain peace and prevent war, but as the Second Gulf War demonstrated, the ‘Parliament of Man’ can be superseded if a powerful state is determined to go to war.

Moreover, in modern conditions, where nuclear weapons, by and large, act as a deterrent to war, generally speaking, wars assume the shape of sub-conventional wars: that is, militarised conflicts that do not necessarily constitute conventional war but are wars nonetheless. There are also intra state conflicts that grew in salience during the cold war and even after. There then is a grey area of war. But does this make wars any just? No is the answer. War is war, a deplorable, inhumane and inhuman activity that depraves and debases both combatants and statesmen who order it and makes whole populations suffer.

What about the theory that a quick, short war made possible by technology or Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) can be a decisive one leading to peace thereafter? This theory that gained traction in the initial days of the second Gulf War met its Waterloo in Iraq , so to speak where a raging insurgency ensued and military planners and strategists had to go back to ‘old school’ counterinsurgency theories and practice. There is also the issue of an exit strategy here. Once begun wars are notoriously difficult to end even if there is an initial exit plan because of the very nature of war and the contingency it implies.

But there is another aspect to the saga. In conditions of post-modernity, where overt wars are not easy to wage (unless a state is a major power), and there are institutional and nuclear checks to war, the notion of hybrid war has emerged. Hybrid warfare incorporates elements of the political, unconventional war, economic war, cyber-attacks plus psychological dimensions like fake news, planted news and so one made eminently possible now by social media. (An example of this would be Russia’s meddling in the 2016 US elections). Hybrid war makes a mockery of the just war theory and renders it almost meaningless. But, are hybrid wars if an amendment or allowance is made to just war theory, justified? No. They are not.

If no war is ever justified, but given that war has been a feature of the human condition, how can it be prevented? This is a million-dollar question that lends itself to no easy answers. But, the answer, if there is any lies in the domain of the institutional, the political and the economic. Institutionally, the Parliament of Man, that is, the United Nations must be strengthened and multilateralism ( not as a fetter but as an ideal) be rendered the operative dynamic of interstate relations and diplomacy. Politically, a discursive attempt must be made too discredit war and diplomacy held to be the option of choice in dealing with conflict. These two approaches can be complemented by developing and crystallizing trading relationships between states in a way that, if breached, hurts all sides. These options cannot be on a stand-alone basis. 
 
There are clear interrelationships between these. There then must be an integrated approach that links these elements together and makes war unjustifiable and relegated to the dust bin or history. Is this a realist approach? No. It is not. I plead guilty to the charge of idealism here but, in the final analysis, it is ideals, not ‘reality’ that determine the course of history. Let then steps be taken to abolish war from statecraft and history. A good start would be to invert &nbsp;the Clausewitz dictum that, ‘ war is diplomacy by other means’ to ‘ all war is bad politics and economics

&nbsp;(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp;

Military thinkers, strategists and philosophers have grappled with the issue of war and peace since perhaps time immemorial. One major strand that has emerged from this is the ‘theory of just war’.

Military thinkers, strategists and philosophers have grappled with the issue of war and peace since perhaps time immemorial. One major strand that has emerged from this is the ‘theory of just war’. Based on two major criteria-right to go to war (jus ad bellum) and right conduct in war( jus in Bello)-that apparently render war morally justifiable, just war theory, whose earliest proponent was Saint Augustine, holds that war is not always the worst option. The claim embedded in the just war theory is a bold one. But, is it right? Can war ever be justified and just? Is there something morally and practically wrong with the just war? Last but the least, does the just war theory hold in or under conditions of post-modernity? There is something fundamentally wrong in positing that war can be just. The reasons, in the main, pertain to the fluidity of conditions in war and combat which is essentially in the nature of a zero-sum, Hobbesian struggle where it's you or me thinking or rationalizations dominate. In this, ‘if I don’t kill you first, you will kill me’ thinking, morality, ethical and humanitarian considerations naturally fly out of the window. But assuming there is something to the just war theory, who decides to go war? Who has the right to wage war? In the law of the jungle, that is the world of states, it is strong that determine issues of war and peace; the weak are at the sufferance of the strong. Yes, in modern times, there are notable and laudable institutions that are designed to maintain peace and prevent war, but as the Second Gulf War demonstrated, the ‘Parliament of Man’ can be superseded if a powerful state is determined to go to war. Moreover, in modern conditions, where nuclear weapons, by and large, act as a deterrent to war, generally speaking, wars assume the shape of sub-conventional wars: that is, militarised conflicts that do not necessarily constitute conventional war but are wars nonetheless. There are also intra state conflicts that grew in salience during the cold war and even after. There then is a grey area of war. But does this make wars any just? No is the answer. War is war, a deplorable, inhumane and inhuman activity that depraves and debases both combatants and statesmen who order it and makes whole populations suffer. What about the theory that a quick, short war made possible by technology or Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) can be a decisive one leading to peace thereafter? This theory that gained traction in the initial days of the second Gulf War met its Waterloo in Iraq , so to speak where a raging insurgency ensued and military planners and strategists had to go back to ‘old school’ counterinsurgency theories and practice. There is also the issue of an exit strategy here. Once begun wars are notoriously difficult to end even if there is an initial exit plan because of the very nature of war and the contingency it implies. But there is another aspect to the saga. In conditions of post-modernity, where overt wars are not easy to wage (unless a state is a major power), and there are institutional and nuclear checks to war, the notion of hybrid war has emerged. Hybrid warfare incorporates elements of the political, unconventional war, economic war, cyber-attacks plus psychological dimensions like fake news, planted news and so one made eminently possible now by social media. (An example of this would be Russia’s meddling in the 2016 US elections). Hybrid war makes a mockery of the just war theory and renders it almost meaningless. But, are hybrid wars if an amendment or allowance is made to just war theory, justified? No. They are not. If no war is ever justified, but given that war has been a feature of the human condition, how can it be prevented? This is a million-dollar question that lends itself to no easy answers. But, the answer, if there is any lies in the domain of the institutional, the political and the economic. Institutionally, the Parliament of Man, that is, the United Nations must be strengthened and multilateralism ( not as a fetter but as an ideal) be rendered the operative dynamic of interstate relations and diplomacy. Politically, a discursive attempt must be made too discredit war and diplomacy held to be the option of choice in dealing with conflict. These two approaches can be complemented by developing and crystallizing trading relationships between states in a way that, if breached, hurts all sides. These options cannot be on a stand-alone basis. There are clear interrelationships between these. There then must be an integrated approach that links these elements together and makes war unjustifiable and relegated to the dust bin or history. Is this a realist approach? No. It is not. I plead guilty to the charge of idealism here but, in the final analysis, it is ideals, not ‘reality’ that determine the course of history. Let then steps be taken to abolish war from statecraft and history. A good start would be to invert the Clausewitz dictum that, ‘ war is diplomacy by other means’ to ‘ all war is bad politics and economics (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

There's something fundamentally wrong in positing that war can be just

The United States is pushing relations with China to "the brink of a new Cold War", the Chinese foreign minister said on Sunday, with tensions soaring over coronavirus, Hong Kong's status and other issues.

"It has come to our attention that some political forces in the US are taking China-US relations hostage and pushing our two countries to the brink of a new Cold War," foreign minister Wang Yi told reporters.

Longstanding friction between the two countries&nbsp;over trade, human rights and other issues have been pushed to new heights since the COVID-19 outbreak.

Wang did not identify what "forces" he was referring to, but US President Donald Trump has led world criticism of China's initial response to the pandemic, which has caused more than 330,000 deaths and economic carnage worldwide.

The introduction in China's legislature on Friday of a proposal to impose a security law in Hong Kong to suppress the semi-autonomous city's pro-democracy movement has further raised the temperature, drawing US and world condemnation.

But Wang hit back at Washington, accusing it of seeking to repeatedly "attack and smear" China.

"Aside from the devastation caused by the novel coronavirus, there is also a political virus spreading through the US," Wang said at a press conference on the side of the annual legislative meeting.

"This political virus is the use of every opportunity to attack and smear China. Some politicians completely disregard basic facts and have fabricated too many lies targeting China, and plotted too many conspiracies."

He also said that&nbsp;Hong Kong security law must be imposed 'without slightest delay'.

(With inputs from AFP)&nbsp;

The United States is pushing relations with China to "the brink of a new Cold War", the Chinese foreign minister said on Sunday, with tensions soaring over coronavirus, Hong Kong's status and other issues.

The United States is pushing relations with China to "the brink of a new Cold War", the Chinese foreign minister said on Sunday, with tensions soaring over coronavirus, Hong Kong's status and other issues. "It has come to our attention that some political forces in the US are taking China-US relations hostage and pushing our two countries to the brink of a new Cold War," foreign minister Wang Yi told reporters. Longstanding friction between the two countries over trade, human rights and other issues have been pushed to new heights since the COVID-19 outbreak. Wang did not identify what "forces" he was referring to, but US President Donald Trump has led world criticism of China's initial response to the pandemic, which has caused more than 330,000 deaths and economic carnage worldwide. The introduction in China's legislature on Friday of a proposal to impose a security law in Hong Kong to suppress the semi-autonomous city's pro-democracy movement has further raised the temperature, drawing US and world condemnation. But Wang hit back at Washington, accusing it of seeking to repeatedly "attack and smear" China. "Aside from the devastation caused by the novel coronavirus, there is also a political virus spreading through the US," Wang said at a press conference on the side of the annual legislative meeting. "This political virus is the use of every opportunity to attack and smear China. Some politicians completely disregard basic facts and have fabricated too many lies targeting China, and plotted too many conspiracies." He also said that Hong Kong security law must be imposed 'without slightest delay'. (With inputs from AFP)

Chinese foreign minister says US, China nearing 'brink of new Cold War'

The US Navy sailed three warships into the Barents Sea off Russia's Arctic coast Monday -- first time since the mid-1980s, the height of the Cold War.

The three destroyers -- USS Donald Cook, USS Porter and USS Roosevelt -- were joined by a UK Royal Navy frigate, HMS Kent.

The Barents Sea is part of the Arctic Ocean and borders northern Norway and Russia.

The US Navy said it had notified Moscow of the upcoming operation on Friday "to avoid misperceptions, reduce risk, and prevent inadvertent&nbsp;

The purpose of the operation was to assert freedom of navigation and demonstrate seamless integration among allies, US Naval Forces Europe said in a statement.

The US and Russian militaries often find themselves operating in close proximity in and around Europe.

US officials have consistently said that Russia has boosted its military presence in the Arctic in recent years.

Last month the US military accused Russian jets of twice endangering the crew of a US Navy surveillance plane flying in international airspace in the eastern Mediterranean after the Russian aircraft performed what the Navy called "unsafe and unprofessional" intercepts.

The US Navy sailed three warships into the Barents Sea off Russia's Arctic coast Monday -- first time since the mid-1980s, the height of the Cold War. The three destroyers -- USS Donald Cook, USS Porter and USS Roosevelt -- were joined by a UK Royal Navy frigate, HMS Kent.

The US Navy sailed three warships into the Barents Sea off Russia's Arctic coast Monday -- first time since the mid-1980s, the height of the Cold War. The three destroyers -- USS Donald Cook, USS Porter and USS Roosevelt -- were joined by a UK Royal Navy frigate, HMS Kent. The Barents Sea is part of the Arctic Ocean and borders northern Norway and Russia. The US Navy said it had notified Moscow of the upcoming operation on Friday "to avoid misperceptions, reduce risk, and prevent inadvertent The purpose of the operation was to assert freedom of navigation and demonstrate seamless integration among allies, US Naval Forces Europe said in a statement. The US and Russian militaries often find themselves operating in close proximity in and around Europe. US officials have consistently said that Russia has boosted its military presence in the Arctic in recent years. Last month the US military accused Russian jets of twice endangering the crew of a US Navy surveillance plane flying in international airspace in the eastern Mediterranean after the Russian aircraft performed what the Navy called "unsafe and unprofessional" intercepts.

US Navy sails warships into Barents Sea for the first time since the 1980s

April 16 in history: 'Cold War' term coined, Michael Jordan's last game and more

A motion for Iran to quit the nuclear <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/india-must-sign-npt-to-gain-entry-into-nsg-patient-negotiations-required-china-194132">Non-Proliferation Treaty</a> (NPT) was introduced in parliament on Tuesday, the assembly's news site ICANA reported, in a move that appears to raise the stakes in Tehran's confrontation with the West.

The report did not say when parliament might vote on the motion.

Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-could-consider-withdrawing-from-npt-if-nuclear-dispute-referred-to-unsc-zarif-275493">Iran could consider withdrawing from NPT if nuclear dispute referred to UNSC: Zarif</a>

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/irans-rouhani-sounds-alarm-for-democracy-after-candidates-barred-276882">Iran</a>'s Supreme Leader <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/irans-khamenei-stands-by-revolutionary-guards-after-unrest-over-downed-plane-275015">Ayatollah Ali Khamenei</a>, the highest authority in the Islamic Republic, makes the final decisions regarding the country's nuclear policy.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-could-consider-withdrawing-from-npt-if-nuclear-dispute-referred-to-unsc-zarif-275493">Javad Zarif </a>said last week that Iran could withdraw from the NPT if European countries refer it to the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/united-nations-says-six-civilians-killed-in-afghanistan-airstrike-276918">UN</a>&nbsp;Security Council over a nuclear agreement, a move that would overturn diplomacy in Tehran's turbulent relations with Western powers.

Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/india-must-sign-npt-to-gain-entry-into-nsg-patient-negotiations-required-china-194132">India must sign NPT to gain entry into NSG, patient negotiations required: China</a>

The 1968 NPT has been the foundation of global nuclear arms control since the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/is-koreas-cold-war-about-to-end-178133">Cold War</a>, including a 2015 deal Iran signed with world powers that offered it access to global trade in return for accepting curbs to its atomic program.

The fate of the 2015 pact has been in doubt since US&nbsp;President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/impeachment-trial-of-donald-trump-all-star-defence-team-scared-of-going-near-bolton-276987">Donald Trump</a> pulled the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-top-court-sides-with-trump-on-immigrant-welfare-benefits-276959">United States</a> out of it in 2018 and reimposed sanctions. Iran has responded by scaling back its commitments, although it says it wants the pact to survive.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/eu-not-to-ban-huawei-in-europe-but-to-impose-strict-rules-european-commissioner-breton-277078">Britain</a>, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/paris-cancels-lunar-new-year-parade-due-to-chinas-viral-outbreak-276669">France </a>and <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/coronavirus-outbreak-deadly-virus-continues-to-spread-outside-china-276966">Germany</a> declared Iran in violation of the nuclear deal two weeks ago and have launched a dispute mechanism that could eventually see the matter referred back to the Security Council and the reimposition of UN&nbsp;sanctions.

A motion for Iran to quit the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was introduced in parliament on Tuesday, the assembly's news site ICANA reported, in a move that appears to raise the stakes in Tehran's confrontation with the West.

A motion for Iran to quit the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was introduced in parliament on Tuesday, the assembly's news site ICANA reported, in a move that appears to raise the stakes in Tehran's confrontation with the West. The report did not say when parliament might vote on the motion. Also read: Iran could consider withdrawing from NPT if nuclear dispute referred to UNSC: Zarif Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the highest authority in the Islamic Republic, makes the final decisions regarding the country's nuclear policy. Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said last week that Iran could withdraw from the NPT if European countries refer it to the UN Security Council over a nuclear agreement, a move that would overturn diplomacy in Tehran's turbulent relations with Western powers. Also read: India must sign NPT to gain entry into NSG, patient negotiations required: China The 1968 NPT has been the foundation of global nuclear arms control since the Cold War, including a 2015 deal Iran signed with world powers that offered it access to global trade in return for accepting curbs to its atomic program. The fate of the 2015 pact has been in doubt since US President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of it in 2018 and reimposed sanctions. Iran has responded by scaling back its commitments, although it says it wants the pact to survive. Britain, France and Germany declared Iran in violation of the nuclear deal two weeks ago and have launched a dispute mechanism that could eventually see the matter referred back to the Security Council and the reimposition of UN sanctions.

Motion for Iran to quit nuclear proliferation treaty enters parliament

China on Monday accused Mike Pompeo&nbsp;of "outdated Cold War thinking" after the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/pompeo-slams-iran-intimidation-of-iaea-inspector-as-outrageous-260911">US Secretary of State</a> warned against a Chinese threat to Western freedoms.

Pompeo, who spoke in Germany on the eve of the 30th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, said the Chinese Communist Party "uses tactics and methods to suppress its own people that would be horrifyingly familiar to former East Germans".

He added that Washington has made clear to Beijing that they should "honour their commitment" to the "one country, two systems" policy that allows Hong Kong rights unseen in the mainland.

In response, Beijing slammed Pompeo's "baseless malicious attacks" on the Chinese government.

Some figures in the US have "attempted to build an ideological wall between Chinese and foreign enterprises," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said Monday at a regular press briefing.

Geng accused Pompeo of ignoring the interest of the American people to pursue personal political goals, and urged him to "abandon his ideological bias and outdated Cold War thinking".

Pompeo's visit to Berlin came as Germany prepared to mark three decades since November 9, 1989, when the Berlin Wall came down, ultimately culminating in the collapse of the communist regime in the east.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/pompeo-warns-against-china-russia-on-eve-of-berlin-wall-anniversary-260807">Pompeo</a> said on Friday that the United States and its allies should "defend what was so hard-won... in 1989" and "recognise we are in a competition of values with unfree nations".

His Berlin speech was the latest in a string of hawkish remarks on China by the Secretary of State.

In October, Pompeo called Beijing "truly hostile" to the United States, and vowed to ramp up pressure on China on multiple fronts.

China on Monday accused Mike Pompeo of "outdated Cold War thinking" after the US Secretary of State warned against a Chinese threat to Western freedoms. Pompeo, who spoke in Germany on the eve of the 30th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, said the Chinese Communist Party "uses tactics and methods to suppress its own people that would be horrifyingly familiar to former East Germans".

China on Monday accused Mike Pompeo of "outdated Cold War thinking" after the US Secretary of State warned against a Chinese threat to Western freedoms. Pompeo, who spoke in Germany on the eve of the 30th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, said the Chinese Communist Party "uses tactics and methods to suppress its own people that would be horrifyingly familiar to former East Germans". He added that Washington has made clear to Beijing that they should "honour their commitment" to the "one country, two systems" policy that allows Hong Kong rights unseen in the mainland. In response, Beijing slammed Pompeo's "baseless malicious attacks" on the Chinese government. Some figures in the US have "attempted to build an ideological wall between Chinese and foreign enterprises," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said Monday at a regular press briefing. Geng accused Pompeo of ignoring the interest of the American people to pursue personal political goals, and urged him to "abandon his ideological bias and outdated Cold War thinking". Pompeo's visit to Berlin came as Germany prepared to mark three decades since November 9, 1989, when the Berlin Wall came down, ultimately culminating in the collapse of the communist regime in the east. Pompeo said on Friday that the United States and its allies should "defend what was so hard-won... in 1989" and "recognise we are in a competition of values with unfree nations". His Berlin speech was the latest in a string of hawkish remarks on China by the Secretary of State. In October, Pompeo called Beijing "truly hostile" to the United States, and vowed to ramp up pressure on China on multiple fronts.

Beijing slams Pompeo for 'outdated Cold War thinking' in Berlin speech against China

US Secretary of State <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-renews-attack-on-pompeo-says-communist-party-criticism-dangerous-260769">Mike&nbsp;Pompeo</a>&nbsp;on&nbsp;Friday issued a stark warning&nbsp;against&nbsp;China&nbsp;and&nbsp;Russia&nbsp;on&nbsp;the&nbsp;eve&nbsp;of the 30th&nbsp;anniversary&nbsp;of the fall of the&nbsp;Berlin&nbsp;Wall.

"Western, free nations have a responsibility to deter threats to our people" from governments like&nbsp;China,&nbsp;Russia&nbsp;and Iran,&nbsp;Pompeo&nbsp;said, speaking just a few metres (yards) away from where the&nbsp;Wall&nbsp;ran past the German capital's world-famous Brandenburg Gate.

The US and its allies should "defend what was so hard-won... in 1989" and "recognise we are in a competition of values with unfree nations," he added.

Picking at sore spots in Washington's relationship with&nbsp;Berlin,&nbsp;Pompeo&nbsp;said the under-construction Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from&nbsp;Russia&nbsp;to Germany would mean "Europe's energy supplies… depend&nbsp;on&nbsp;(Russian President Vladimir) Putin's whims".

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/germanys-merkel-in-fresh-push-for-nationwide-e-car-charging-network-259740">Chancellor Angela Merkel</a> has repeatedly said the pipeline is a purely private business concern.

And he warned of "Chinese companies' intent to build 5G networks", after the German government failed to exclude tech giant Huawei from the bidding process for the next-generation mobile network infrastructure.

Pompeo&nbsp;is&nbsp;on&nbsp;a whirlwind two-day tour of Germany where he has revisited the site of his Cold War military service&nbsp;on&nbsp;the former Iron Curtain border and is slated to meet leaders including Merkel.

While in Europe, he has looked to shore up transatlantic relations eroded by trade conflicts and discord over geopolitical crises and military spending.

Spurred by the US leaving the way open to Turkish and Russian military action in northern Syria, France's President Emmanuel Macron told The Economist this week that the NATO alliance,&nbsp;of which Ankara is also a member,&nbsp;was suffering a "brain death" of lack of coordination between Europe and Washington.

Recalling past "challenges between partners" within NATO, including France's 1960s departure from the alliance's command structure,&nbsp;Pompeo&nbsp;on&nbsp;Friday dismissed the debate around Macron's comments as a "kerfuffle".

Other leaders including Merkel, NATO secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau have also firmly rejected Macron's assessment.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Friday issued a stark warning against China and Russia on the eve of the 30th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. "Western, free nations have a responsibility to deter threats to our people" from governments like China, Russia and Iran, Pompeo said, speaking just a few metres (yards) away from where the Wall ran past the German capital's world-famous Brandenburg Gate.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Friday issued a stark warning against China and Russia on the eve of the 30th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. "Western, free nations have a responsibility to deter threats to our people" from governments like China, Russia and Iran, Pompeo said, speaking just a few metres (yards) away from where the Wall ran past the German capital's world-famous Brandenburg Gate. The US and its allies should "defend what was so hard-won... in 1989" and "recognise we are in a competition of values with unfree nations," he added. Picking at sore spots in Washington's relationship with Berlin, Pompeo said the under-construction Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Germany would mean "Europe's energy supplies… depend on (Russian President Vladimir) Putin's whims". Chancellor Angela Merkel has repeatedly said the pipeline is a purely private business concern. And he warned of "Chinese companies' intent to build 5G networks", after the German government failed to exclude tech giant Huawei from the bidding process for the next-generation mobile network infrastructure. Pompeo is on a whirlwind two-day tour of Germany where he has revisited the site of his Cold War military service on the former Iron Curtain border and is slated to meet leaders including Merkel. While in Europe, he has looked to shore up transatlantic relations eroded by trade conflicts and discord over geopolitical crises and military spending. Spurred by the US leaving the way open to Turkish and Russian military action in northern Syria, France's President Emmanuel Macron told The Economist this week that the NATO alliance, of which Ankara is also a member, was suffering a "brain death" of lack of coordination between Europe and Washington. Recalling past "challenges between partners" within NATO, including France's 1960s departure from the alliance's command structure, Pompeo on Friday dismissed the debate around Macron's comments as a "kerfuffle". Other leaders including Merkel, NATO secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau have also firmly rejected Macron's assessment.

Pompeo warns against China, Russia on eve of Berlin Wall anniversary

Germany marks three decades since the fall of the Berlin Wall this week, but a hint of a return of the Cold War and the rise of nationalism is dampening the mood.

Leaders of former Cold War powers will be absent from anniversary festivities, as Donald Trump's America First, Britain's Brexit and Russia's resurgence put a strain on ties.

Gone, too, is the euphoric optimism for liberal democracy and freedom that characterised the momentous event on November 9, 1989, as Germany grapples with a surge in far-right support in its former communist states.

"The spirit of optimism" that we saw 30 years ago, or even five or 10 years ago, "is not perceivable" today, said Berlin's culture senator Klaus Lederer, whose office took the lead in putting together the capital's festivities for the week.

The mood is therefore "reflective, but we are celebrating", he said. "We are looking back at history together, and we are also talking about the future."

As a sign of the tense times, Germany will put on a sober political programme to mark the epochal event that led to reunification and brought down the Iron Curtain dividing a communist East from a capitalist West.

Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said the anniversary was a chance to remind Europe why it needs to stay united in the face of rising geopolitical tensions around the world.

"Exhortations from individual European capitals fall on deaf ears in Moscow, Beijing and, unfortunately, to an increasing extent also in Washington, DC," he wrote in an op-ed carried in newspapers across the EU on Saturday.

"It is only Europe's voice that carries decisive weight. This is why unilateral action at the national level must finally be taboo in Europe."

Serious tone

While the spotlight five years ago was on world leaders from Barack Obama to Mikhail Gorbachev, this time round, the central focus is on Europe itself.

EU chief Ursula von der Leyen will set the tone with a speech on the eve of the anniversary at an event attended also by Chancellor Angela Merkel.

On November 9 itself, only central European presidents will headline the official ceremonies.

Merkel and President Frank-Walter Steinmeier will be joined by his Polish, Czech, Slovak and Hungarian counterparts, in town to mark "the contribution of the central European countries to the peaceful revolution" that led to the collapse of the communist regime.

Merkel will speak at the Chapel of Reconciliation, which stands on the former Berlin Wall border strip.

Steinmeier, the moral arbiter of the country, will also make a speech at the Brandenburg Gate on the anniversary evening, before a series of concerts including by the prestigious Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra.&nbsp;

And US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who was stationed in Germany as a young soldier in 1989, will be in visiting from Wednesday but leave on the eve of the anniversary.&nbsp;

He meets Merkel and members of her cabinet on Friday, in meetings set to underline the growing divisions across the globe.

In a statement announcing his visit, Pompeo's office said talks with his counterpart Maas will "discuss the importance of our Transatlantic partnership and the need for strengthened engagement in the face of growing threats from Russia, China, and Iran."

'Cold war is back'

While the fall of the Iron Curtain that divided post-war Europe had led to hopes of a liberal democratic era and arms dismantlement three decades ago, the mood has soured today.

Within the EU, cracks have appeared as former eastern bloc countries like Hungary or Poland are accused by Brussels of challenging the rule of law.

On a broader arena, Trump's go-it-alone stance on rejecting world treaties including on climate change and a nuclear disarmament deal with Iran has deeply shaken long-time allies in Europe.

Russia, meanwhile, is consolidating its foothold in the Middle East, while the US is also increasingly at odds with China.

For UN chief Antonio Guterres, "the Cold War is back -- with a vengeance, but with a difference. The mechanisms and the safeguards to manage the risks of escalation that existed in the past no longer seem to be present."

Gorbachev, who chose to stand aside instead of stopping the Wall from falling 30 years back, was also more pessimistic today.

Writing in his latest book, Gorbachev warned: "International politics is on an extremely dangerous trajectory... military operations currently have the characteristics of a real war."

Germany marks three decades since the fall of the Berlin Wall this week, but a hint of a return of the Cold War and the rise of nationalism is dampening the mood.

Germany marks three decades since the fall of the Berlin Wall this week, but a hint of a return of the Cold War and the rise of nationalism is dampening the mood. Leaders of former Cold War powers will be absent from anniversary festivities, as Donald Trump's America First, Britain's Brexit and Russia's resurgence put a strain on ties. Gone, too, is the euphoric optimism for liberal democracy and freedom that characterised the momentous event on November 9, 1989, as Germany grapples with a surge in far-right support in its former communist states. "The spirit of optimism" that we saw 30 years ago, or even five or 10 years ago, "is not perceivable" today, said Berlin's culture senator Klaus Lederer, whose office took the lead in putting together the capital's festivities for the week. The mood is therefore "reflective, but we are celebrating", he said. "We are looking back at history together, and we are also talking about the future." As a sign of the tense times, Germany will put on a sober political programme to mark the epochal event that led to reunification and brought down the Iron Curtain dividing a communist East from a capitalist West. Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said the anniversary was a chance to remind Europe why it needs to stay united in the face of rising geopolitical tensions around the world. "Exhortations from individual European capitals fall on deaf ears in Moscow, Beijing and, unfortunately, to an increasing extent also in Washington, DC," he wrote in an op-ed carried in newspapers across the EU on Saturday. "It is only Europe's voice that carries decisive weight. This is why unilateral action at the national level must finally be taboo in Europe." Serious tone While the spotlight five years ago was on world leaders from Barack Obama to Mikhail Gorbachev, this time round, the central focus is on Europe itself. EU chief Ursula von der Leyen will set the tone with a speech on the eve of the anniversary at an event attended also by Chancellor Angela Merkel. On November 9 itself, only central European presidents will headline the official ceremonies. Merkel and President Frank-Walter Steinmeier will be joined by his Polish, Czech, Slovak and Hungarian counterparts, in town to mark "the contribution of the central European countries to the peaceful revolution" that led to the collapse of the communist regime. Merkel will speak at the Chapel of Reconciliation, which stands on the former Berlin Wall border strip. Steinmeier, the moral arbiter of the country, will also make a speech at the Brandenburg Gate on the anniversary evening, before a series of concerts including by the prestigious Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra. And US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who was stationed in Germany as a young soldier in 1989, will be in visiting from Wednesday but leave on the eve of the anniversary. He meets Merkel and members of her cabinet on Friday, in meetings set to underline the growing divisions across the globe. In a statement announcing his visit, Pompeo's office said talks with his counterpart Maas will "discuss the importance of our Transatlantic partnership and the need for strengthened engagement in the face of growing threats from Russia, China, and Iran." 'Cold war is back' While the fall of the Iron Curtain that divided post-war Europe had led to hopes of a liberal democratic era and arms dismantlement three decades ago, the mood has soured today. Within the EU, cracks have appeared as former eastern bloc countries like Hungary or Poland are accused by Brussels of challenging the rule of law. On a broader arena, Trump's go-it-alone stance on rejecting world treaties including on climate change and a nuclear disarmament deal with Iran has deeply shaken long-time allies in Europe. Russia, meanwhile, is consolidating its foothold in the Middle East, while the US is also increasingly at odds with China. For UN chief Antonio Guterres, "the Cold War is back -- with a vengeance, but with a difference. The mechanisms and the safeguards to manage the risks of escalation that existed in the past no longer seem to be present." Gorbachev, who chose to stand aside instead of stopping the Wall from falling 30 years back, was also more pessimistic today. Writing in his latest book, Gorbachev warned: "International politics is on an extremely dangerous trajectory... military operations currently have the characteristics of a real war."

Sombre mood as Germany marks 30 years of Berlin Wall fall

President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday that Russia would produce missiles that were banned under the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-tests-medium-range-cruise-missile-after-exiting-inf-treaty-244247">nuclear pact with the US</a> which ended last month.

"We have already said publicly that we will not deploy - after the Americans have tested such a missile - we will not deploy it, we will surely produce the missiles of the same kind in the regions where the US missiles of such kind - the land-based missiles - will not appear."

Last month the US had tested a medium-range <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/moscow-set-to-deploy-new-weapons-as-cold-war-era-inf-treaty-ends-239966">ground-launched cruise missile</a>, just weeks after walking out the pact. The test occurred even as Russian President Putin urged the United States to begin new arms talks after the collapse of a Cold War nuclear pact between the two world powers.

Russia has blamed the Trump administration for unilaterally ending the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty signed in 1987 between the then US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. &nbsp;

Speaking at the Eastern Economic Forum (EEF), Putin while replying to a question said: "In case they are deployed in Japan and South Korea, we understand it will be done under a pretext of neutralising the threat from North Korea. But it also creates certain major problems for us because most likely these missile systems would cover a significant part of Russian territory including at the Far East."

"The fact that Pentagon chiefs said that the US plan to deploy them in Japan and South Korea does not make us happy, it is regrettable and causes some concern," the Russian president added.

However, Japanese President Shinzo Abe who was present at the forum denied the US had given any indication to deploy the missiles.

"I would like to make it clear that the US, of course, hasn't talked about deploying such missiles and there is no plan to do so," the Japanese president said.

Washington and NATO had accused Russia of developing the new 9M729 missile which they said violates the treaty, but Russia shot back saying that its range was&nbsp;short of 500 kilometres.

Putin had said earlier that if the US deploys new missiles, it "will be forced to begin the full-scale development of similar missiles". 
&nbsp;

President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday that Russia would produce missiles that were banned under the nuclear pact with the US which ended last month. "We have already said publicly that we will not deploy - after the Americans have tested such a missile - we will not deploy it, we will surely produce the missiles of the same kind in the regions where the US missiles of such kind - the land-based missiles - will not appear.

President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday that Russia would produce missiles that were banned under the nuclear pact with the US which ended last month. "We have already said publicly that we will not deploy - after the Americans have tested such a missile - we will not deploy it, we will surely produce the missiles of the same kind in the regions where the US missiles of such kind - the land-based missiles - will not appear." Last month the US had tested a medium-range ground-launched cruise missile, just weeks after walking out the pact. The test occurred even as Russian President Putin urged the United States to begin new arms talks after the collapse of a Cold War nuclear pact between the two world powers. Russia has blamed the Trump administration for unilaterally ending the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty signed in 1987 between the then US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Speaking at the Eastern Economic Forum (EEF), Putin while replying to a question said: "In case they are deployed in Japan and South Korea, we understand it will be done under a pretext of neutralising the threat from North Korea. But it also creates certain major problems for us because most likely these missile systems would cover a significant part of Russian territory including at the Far East." "The fact that Pentagon chiefs said that the US plan to deploy them in Japan and South Korea does not make us happy, it is regrettable and causes some concern," the Russian president added. However, Japanese President Shinzo Abe who was present at the forum denied the US had given any indication to deploy the missiles. "I would like to make it clear that the US, of course, hasn't talked about deploying such missiles and there is no plan to do so," the Japanese president said. Washington and NATO had accused Russia of developing the new 9M729 missile which they said violates the treaty, but Russia shot back saying that its range was short of 500 kilometres. Putin had said earlier that if the US deploys new missiles, it "will be forced to begin the full-scale development of similar missiles".

Will produce same missiles as US cruise test but won't deploy: Putin

Any move by the United States to place&nbsp;new&nbsp;ground-launched, intermediate-range&nbsp;missiles&nbsp;in South Korea could spark a "new&nbsp;Cold War" and an escalating arms race in the region,&nbsp;North&nbsp;Korean&nbsp;state&nbsp;media&nbsp;said on Wednesday.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-wants-to-quickly-deploy-new-missiles-in-asia-us-secretary-of-defense-240407">US Defence Secretary Mark Esper</a> this month said he was in favour of placing ground-launched, intermediate-range&nbsp;missiles&nbsp;in Asia, a day after the United States withdrew from the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty with Russia.

"The&nbsp;US pointed out that it is now examining a plan for&nbsp;deploying&nbsp;ground-to-ground medium-range&nbsp;missiles&nbsp;in the<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-defence-secretary-visits-south-korea-as-the-region-faces-myriad-challenges-241741"> Asian region and South Korea </a>has been singled out as a place for the deployment,"&nbsp;North&nbsp;Korea's state&nbsp;news agency KCNA said.

"It is a reckless act of escalating regional tension, an act that may spark off a&nbsp;new&nbsp;Cold War and arms race in the Far Eastern region to deploy a&nbsp;new&nbsp;offensive weapon in South Korea," it said in a commentary.

Other senior&nbsp;US officials have said any deployment of such weaponry&nbsp;would&nbsp;be years away.

South Korea's defence ministry has said there had been no discussion of placing American intermediate-range&nbsp;missiles&nbsp;in the country, and there were no plans to consider the idea.

The KCNA statement also criticised recent moves to improve military sites in South that host&nbsp;US Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) systems, which are designed to intercept ballistic&nbsp;missiles.

"It is a hard fact that the deployment of THAAD is under the&nbsp;US strategy to contain great powers and hold supremacy in&nbsp;Northeast Asia, not the one for 'shielding' South Korea from someone's 'threat'," KCNA said.

North&nbsp;Korea's military has launched a series of&nbsp;missiles&nbsp;in recent weeks to protest what it sees as a military build-up in South Korea, as well as joint military exercises by South&nbsp;Korean and American troops stationed on the peninsula.

The launches have complicated attempts to restart talks between&nbsp;US and&nbsp;North&nbsp;Korean&nbsp;negotiators over the future of the country's nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programmes, which prompted sanctions by the United Nations Security Council.

Any move by the United States to place new ground-launched, intermediate-range missiles in South Korea could spark a "new Cold War" and an escalating arms race in the region, North Korean state media said on Wednesday.

Any move by the United States to place new ground-launched, intermediate-range missiles in South Korea could spark a "new Cold War" and an escalating arms race in the region, North Korean state media said on Wednesday. US Defence Secretary Mark Esper this month said he was in favour of placing ground-launched, intermediate-range missiles in Asia, a day after the United States withdrew from the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty with Russia. "The US pointed out that it is now examining a plan for deploying ground-to-ground medium-range missiles in the Asian region and South Korea has been singled out as a place for the deployment," North Korea's state news agency KCNA said. "It is a reckless act of escalating regional tension, an act that may spark off a new Cold War and arms race in the Far Eastern region to deploy a new offensive weapon in South Korea," it said in a commentary. Other senior US officials have said any deployment of such weaponry would be years away. South Korea's defence ministry has said there had been no discussion of placing American intermediate-range missiles in the country, and there were no plans to consider the idea. The KCNA statement also criticised recent moves to improve military sites in South that host US Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) systems, which are designed to intercept ballistic missiles. "It is a hard fact that the deployment of THAAD is under the US strategy to contain great powers and hold supremacy in Northeast Asia, not the one for 'shielding' South Korea from someone's 'threat'," KCNA said. North Korea's military has launched a series of missiles in recent weeks to protest what it sees as a military build-up in South Korea, as well as joint military exercises by South Korean and American troops stationed on the peninsula. The launches have complicated attempts to restart talks between US and North Korean negotiators over the future of the country's nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programmes, which prompted sanctions by the United Nations Security Council.

Deploying new US missiles would be 'reckless act': North Korean state media

The U.S Pulls out of the cold war-era treaty, the 32-year old treaty becomes obsolete.

WION Dispatch: U.S Pulls out of cold war-era treaty

Demilitarised Zone: A look at the world's last Cold War frontier

Donald Trump meets Kim Jong-un, becomes first sitting United States president to set foot in North Korea

cold-war

Cold War, News on Cold War, stories on Cold War, articles on Cold War, Cold War stories at Wion, Cold War news, Cold War latest news