US President Donald Trump arrives in Japan on Saturday for a four-day trip likely to be dominated by warm words and friendly images, but light on substantive progress over trade.

Japanese and US officials hail as "unprecedented" the relationship between Trump and his "golf buddy", Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, and the pair will again find time for a round to cement their diplomatic bromance.

The official centrepiece is Trump's meeting on Monday with Japan's new Emperor Naruhito, who only ascended the Chrysanthemum Throne at the beginning of the month following his father's historic abdication for health reasons.

"With all the countries of the world, I'm the guest of honour at the biggest event that they've had in over 200 years," said Trump before his departure.

But the visual highlight is more likely to be Trump's visit on Sunday to the final day of the summer "basho" or <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/clash-of-the-titans-trump-set-for-sumo-showdown-221209">sumo tournament</a> where he is expected to present the cup to the winner.

Trump's appearance at the hallowed sumo hall has presented a logistical, security and protocol nightmare, ranging from where he sits to how he should be protected if the crowd start throwing pillows -- as tradition dictates when a Grand Champion (yokozuna) falls.

The leaders will play golf before going to the sumo and then repair with their wives to a restaurant in Tokyo's Roppongi entertainment district, where the menu features skewers of prime sirloin beef at 5,184 yen ($47) for two.

Abe has just recently returned from Washington and Trump himself will be returning to Japan in just over a month for the Group of 20 leaders' summit in the western city of Osaka.

"Three visits in both directions in a short amount of time is really emblematic of just how close the relationship is," said a senior Trump administration official, who asked not to be identified.&nbsp;

A Japanese diplomat said the frequency of contact "demonstrates the unprecedented level of close personal relations between the Japanese and US leaders".

'Smart move'

The formal diplomatic part of the trip is limited to a short bilateral meeting and a working lunch on Monday, after which the two leaders will brief the media.

They are also poised to meet families of people abducted by North Korea during the Cold War era to train Pyongyang's spies, an emotive issue in Japan that Abe has pressed Trump to raise in talks with the North's leader Kim Jong Un.

Trump will also address troops at a US base in Japan, highlighting the military alliance between the two allies at a time when tensions are running higher with North Korea after the failure of the Hanoi summit in February.

But analysts expect little progress on the main issue that divides the two allies: trade.

US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer is expected to hold talks with his Japanese counterpart on the sidelines of the visit but with Abe facing upper house elections in the coming months and Trump battling China, both are likely to avoid concessions.

Some observers suspect Abe is rolling out the red carpet to present Japan as the most favourable of the countries currently engaged in trade disputes with Washington.

"Japan's strategy is to proceed with negotiations in a cool-headed manner," in contrast to the aggressive tit-for-tat tariff retaliations between the US and China, Shujiro Urata, a trade expert and professor at Tokyo's Waseda University, told AFP.

However, the trip is more likely to be about smiles and reaffirmations of a close alliance -- something Trump will doubtless welcome amid pre-2020 election turmoil at home and a bellicose Iran and China abroad.

"It's a smart move that shows he knows something about foreign policy and that he actually has a friend," said Robert Guttman, who lectures on foreign policy at Johns Hopkins University.

US President Donald Trump arrives in Japan on Saturday for a four-day trip likely to be dominated by warm words and friendly images, but light on substantive progress over trade.

US President Donald Trump arrives in Japan on Saturday for a four-day trip likely to be dominated by warm words and friendly images, but light on substantive progress over trade. Japanese and US officials hail as "unprecedented" the relationship between Trump and his "golf buddy", Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, and the pair will again find time for a round to cement their diplomatic bromance. The official centrepiece is Trump's meeting on Monday with Japan's new Emperor Naruhito, who only ascended the Chrysanthemum Throne at the beginning of the month following his father's historic abdication for health reasons. "With all the countries of the world, I'm the guest of honour at the biggest event that they've had in over 200 years," said Trump before his departure. But the visual highlight is more likely to be Trump's visit on Sunday to the final day of the summer "basho" or sumo tournament where he is expected to present the cup to the winner. Trump's appearance at the hallowed sumo hall has presented a logistical, security and protocol nightmare, ranging from where he sits to how he should be protected if the crowd start throwing pillows -- as tradition dictates when a Grand Champion (yokozuna) falls. The leaders will play golf before going to the sumo and then repair with their wives to a restaurant in Tokyo's Roppongi entertainment district, where the menu features skewers of prime sirloin beef at 5,184 yen ($47) for two. Abe has just recently returned from Washington and Trump himself will be returning to Japan in just over a month for the Group of 20 leaders' summit in the western city of Osaka. "Three visits in both directions in a short amount of time is really emblematic of just how close the relationship is," said a senior Trump administration official, who asked not to be identified. A Japanese diplomat said the frequency of contact "demonstrates the unprecedented level of close personal relations between the Japanese and US leaders". 'Smart move' The formal diplomatic part of the trip is limited to a short bilateral meeting and a working lunch on Monday, after which the two leaders will brief the media. They are also poised to meet families of people abducted by North Korea during the Cold War era to train Pyongyang's spies, an emotive issue in Japan that Abe has pressed Trump to raise in talks with the North's leader Kim Jong Un. Trump will also address troops at a US base in Japan, highlighting the military alliance between the two allies at a time when tensions are running higher with North Korea after the failure of the Hanoi summit in February. But analysts expect little progress on the main issue that divides the two allies: trade. US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer is expected to hold talks with his Japanese counterpart on the sidelines of the visit but with Abe facing upper house elections in the coming months and Trump battling China, both are likely to avoid concessions. Some observers suspect Abe is rolling out the red carpet to present Japan as the most favourable of the countries currently engaged in trade disputes with Washington. "Japan's strategy is to proceed with negotiations in a cool-headed manner," in contrast to the aggressive tit-for-tat tariff retaliations between the US and China, Shujiro Urata, a trade expert and professor at Tokyo's Waseda University, told AFP. However, the trip is more likely to be about smiles and reaffirmations of a close alliance -- something Trump will doubtless welcome amid pre-2020 election turmoil at home and a bellicose Iran and China abroad. "It's a smart move that shows he knows something about foreign policy and that he actually has a friend," said Robert Guttman, who lectures on foreign policy at Johns Hopkins University.

Donald Trump begins his Japan visit to burnish ties with Shinzo Abe over golf, sumo and steak

Russia is stirring the ghosts of Cuba's Cold War past as it looks to re-establish its influence in the Communist-run island nation, although this time analysts say Moscow has no intention of bankrolling Havana.

Whereas once the Soviet Union and Cuba were linked by an ideological bond, now pragmatism and a shared rejection of US foreign policy are drawing them together again.

At Havana's colourful May Day parade Wednesday, Raul Castro, the first secretary of Cuba's Communist Party, received the highest distinction from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation,&nbsp;the Order of Lenin.

The former Cuba president said the prize -- first presented in 1930 by the Soviet Union -- pointed to the "historic relations" between the two countries that "have endured different scenarios and today are being reinforced and renewed."&nbsp;

This rapprochement is not new but has been consolidated by a shared opposition to sanctions imposed on Cuba by Washington, which accuses the Caribbean nation of providing military support to Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro, another Moscow ally.

"The effect of this policy is that it isolates the United States on Cuba and we're opening the door for greater Chinese and Russian presence on the island," said Ric Herrero, executive director of the Cuba Study Group, which connects Cuban-Americans advocating economic and political freedom on the island.

Relations between Havana and Washington had thawed under former president Barack Obama, but have chilled considerably since Donald Trump's administration took over.

'Lovers triangle'

The Soviet era may have been confined to history, but it hasn't been forgotten.

"In Cuba, we've always had fond memories of Russia," said 82-year-old Luis Corredera Rodriguez as he played dominos with friends on a Havana sidewalk. "They supported us in everything."

"They're friends for life," added Julio Garcia, 59, although he noted that "the Russians have changed." In effect, he said, the Cubans have become more Russian than the Russians themselves.

"They're no longer Soviet, they're capitalist like everyone."

Behind the dominos table -- Cuba's national pastime -- a parked Russian Lada is passed by a revving classic 1950s American car.

"It's almost like a lovers triangle between the US, Cuba and Russia: it's an old relationship, there's a lot of emotion here," said Scott B. MacDonald, senior associate of the Americas program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

He said the last two years have seen Cuba slide into "a new Cold War," although with a different dynamic this time.

"At the end of the Soviet Union, it was about $4 billion a year that went to prop up the Cuban economy."

That came to an end when the Soviet Union dissolved in 1990.

Now, Russia is only Cuba's third largest commercial partner, after the European Union and China.

"Russia likes the idea of warming up this relationship, but does Russia want to spend $4 billion a year to keep Cuba alive economically?" asked MacDonald.

The US may be wary of Russia sidling up to Cuba but the EU seems to have no issue with it.

The EU ambassadors in Cuba invited their Russian counterpart to their monthly meeting, where Andrei Guskov talked about the collaboration between Moscow and Havana and his desire to increase it, several participants said.

After agreeing to business deals worth $350 million in 2018, Russian investments will allow Cuba to increase its energy production by 20 per cent and renew the 14-strong fleet of the national airline, Guskov said.

'No ideological dimension'

On top of that, Russia has agreed a 38 million euro ($42 million) loan to modernise Cuba's military, $1 billion to refurbish its railway lines and agreements in civilian nuclear power and cybersecurity.

This "is part of a larger effort by Russia to destabilise the United States, rather than" a bid "to form a Soviet satellite 90 miles off the (US) shores like during the Cold War," said Herrero.

However, the friendship between the two countries today is "built on a pragmatic base, without the ideological dimension there was during the Soviet era," said Nikolai Kalashnikov, deputy director of the Institute of Latin American Studies at the Russian Academy of Sciences.

While Russia is no longer communist, socialist Cuba is driven in part by the threat it will lose its oil aid from crisis-wracked Venezuela -- itself creaking under the strain of US sanctions -- and its need for cash.

"Cuba needs to export and Russia is a market of 143 million" people, said Santiago Perez, deputy director of the Cuban Research Center for International Policy.

There may no longer be a common ideology, but there are "mutual interests."

"The relationship with Russia is crucial for us right now, and I think it's the same for them too."

Russia is stirring the ghosts of Cuba's Cold War past as it looks to re-establish its influence in the Communist-run island nation, although this time analysts say Moscow has no intention of bankrolling Havana.

Russia is stirring the ghosts of Cuba's Cold War past as it looks to re-establish its influence in the Communist-run island nation, although this time analysts say Moscow has no intention of bankrolling Havana. Whereas once the Soviet Union and Cuba were linked by an ideological bond, now pragmatism and a shared rejection of US foreign policy are drawing them together again. At Havana's colourful May Day parade Wednesday, Raul Castro, the first secretary of Cuba's Communist Party, received the highest distinction from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the Order of Lenin. The former Cuba president said the prize -- first presented in 1930 by the Soviet Union -- pointed to the "historic relations" between the two countries that "have endured different scenarios and today are being reinforced and renewed." This rapprochement is not new but has been consolidated by a shared opposition to sanctions imposed on Cuba by Washington, which accuses the Caribbean nation of providing military support to Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro, another Moscow ally. "The effect of this policy is that it isolates the United States on Cuba and we're opening the door for greater Chinese and Russian presence on the island," said Ric Herrero, executive director of the Cuba Study Group, which connects Cuban-Americans advocating economic and political freedom on the island. Relations between Havana and Washington had thawed under former president Barack Obama, but have chilled considerably since Donald Trump's administration took over. 'Lovers triangle' The Soviet era may have been confined to history, but it hasn't been forgotten. "In Cuba, we've always had fond memories of Russia," said 82-year-old Luis Corredera Rodriguez as he played dominos with friends on a Havana sidewalk. "They supported us in everything." "They're friends for life," added Julio Garcia, 59, although he noted that "the Russians have changed." In effect, he said, the Cubans have become more Russian than the Russians themselves. "They're no longer Soviet, they're capitalist like everyone." Behind the dominos table -- Cuba's national pastime -- a parked Russian Lada is passed by a revving classic 1950s American car. "It's almost like a lovers triangle between the US, Cuba and Russia: it's an old relationship, there's a lot of emotion here," said Scott B. MacDonald, senior associate of the Americas program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. He said the last two years have seen Cuba slide into "a new Cold War," although with a different dynamic this time. "At the end of the Soviet Union, it was about $4 billion a year that went to prop up the Cuban economy." That came to an end when the Soviet Union dissolved in 1990. Now, Russia is only Cuba's third largest commercial partner, after the European Union and China. "Russia likes the idea of warming up this relationship, but does Russia want to spend $4 billion a year to keep Cuba alive economically?" asked MacDonald. The US may be wary of Russia sidling up to Cuba but the EU seems to have no issue with it. The EU ambassadors in Cuba invited their Russian counterpart to their monthly meeting, where Andrei Guskov talked about the collaboration between Moscow and Havana and his desire to increase it, several participants said. After agreeing to business deals worth $350 million in 2018, Russian investments will allow Cuba to increase its energy production by 20 per cent and renew the 14-strong fleet of the national airline, Guskov said. 'No ideological dimension' On top of that, Russia has agreed a 38 million euro ($42 million) loan to modernise Cuba's military, $1 billion to refurbish its railway lines and agreements in civilian nuclear power and cybersecurity. This "is part of a larger effort by Russia to destabilise the United States, rather than" a bid "to form a Soviet satellite 90 miles off the (US) shores like during the Cold War," said Herrero. However, the friendship between the two countries today is "built on a pragmatic base, without the ideological dimension there was during the Soviet era," said Nikolai Kalashnikov, deputy director of the Institute of Latin American Studies at the Russian Academy of Sciences. While Russia is no longer communist, socialist Cuba is driven in part by the threat it will lose its oil aid from crisis-wracked Venezuela -- itself creaking under the strain of US sanctions -- and its need for cash. "Cuba needs to export and Russia is a market of 143 million" people, said Santiago Perez, deputy director of the Cuban Research Center for International Policy. There may no longer be a common ideology, but there are "mutual interests." "The relationship with Russia is crucial for us right now, and I think it's the same for them too."

Russia's increasing influence in Cuba stirs ghost of Cold War

Secret headquarters of world's most sophisticated spy services revealed

&nbsp;A restoration centre to preserve the work of Ernest Hemingway opened in Cuba on Saturday, highlighting an area of cooperation with the United States even as bilateral ties between the old Cold War foes have chilled again.

Hemingway, who won the Nobel prize for Literature in 1954, wrote some of his greatest books during the 21 years he lived at Finca Vigia, or Lookout Farm, now a museum in San Francisco de Paula on the outskirts of Havana.

The restoration centre built by the Cuban National Cultural Heritage Council and Finca Vigia Foundation of the United States is located on the 15-acre (6-hectare) property where Hemingway lived in a tree-shaded, airy Spanish-style home.

McGovern said the project would have been much easier were it not for the decades-old US trade embargo on Cuba, that President Donald Trump has tightened since coming to power.

Hemingway moved to Finca Vigia in 1939, the year before "For Whom the Bell Tolls" was published, and wrote "The Old Man and the Sea", "A Moveable Feast" and "Islands in the Stream" while he was there, according to local scholars.

He left Cuba in 1960, more than a year after the Cuban revolution and less than a year before he killed himself in Idaho at age 61 amidst a struggle with depression.

The writer left thousands of documents in Cuba, ranging from manuscripts of some of his works to letters, as well as photographs and annotated books.

The restoration centre, which received financing from the Ford Foundation, American Express Philanthropy and the AT&amp;T Foundation amongst others, includes laboratories and an air-conditioned vault.

The Cuban National Cultural Heritage Council and Finca Vigia Foundation had previously signed three cooperation agreements to conserve and disseminate the legacy of Hemingway.

A restoration centre to preserve the work of Ernest Hemingway opened in Cuba on Saturday, highlighting an area of cooperation with the United States even as bilateral ties between the old Cold War foes have chilled again.

A restoration centre to preserve the work of Ernest Hemingway opened in Cuba on Saturday, highlighting an area of cooperation with the United States even as bilateral ties between the old Cold War foes have chilled again. Hemingway, who won the Nobel prize for Literature in 1954, wrote some of his greatest books during the 21 years he lived at Finca Vigia, or Lookout Farm, now a museum in San Francisco de Paula on the outskirts of Havana. The restoration centre built by the Cuban National Cultural Heritage Council and Finca Vigia Foundation of the United States is located on the 15-acre (6-hectare) property where Hemingway lived in a tree-shaded, airy Spanish-style home. McGovern said the project would have been much easier were it not for the decades-old US trade embargo on Cuba, that President Donald Trump has tightened since coming to power. Hemingway moved to Finca Vigia in 1939, the year before "For Whom the Bell Tolls" was published, and wrote "The Old Man and the Sea", "A Moveable Feast" and "Islands in the Stream" while he was there, according to local scholars. He left Cuba in 1960, more than a year after the Cuban revolution and less than a year before he killed himself in Idaho at age 61 amidst a struggle with depression. The writer left thousands of documents in Cuba, ranging from manuscripts of some of his works to letters, as well as photographs and annotated books. The restoration centre, which received financing from the Ford Foundation, American Express Philanthropy and the AT&T Foundation amongst others, includes laboratories and an air-conditioned vault. The Cuban National Cultural Heritage Council and Finca Vigia Foundation had previously signed three cooperation agreements to conserve and disseminate the legacy of Hemingway.

Hemingway centre opens in Cuba to preserve writer's work

A Vietnamese woman suspected of assassinating the North Korean leader's half-brother accepted a lesser charge Monday and looks set to be freed soon, after her Indonesian co-accused was released last month.

Doan Thi Huong smiled and said "I'm happy" after prosecutors presented her legal team with the new charge in a Malaysian court and they announced the details.

She has been on trial since 2017 for the murder of Kim Jong Nam at Kuala Lumpur airport with a toxic nerve agent in a Cold War-style hit.

It came after authorities last month rejected her initial request for her murder charge to be dropped entirely -- a shock decision after the attorney-general agreed to withdraw the charge against her Indonesian co-defendant, Siti Aisyah, and she walked free.

Salim Bashir, one of her lawyers, told reporters outside the High Court in Shah Alam, outside Kuala Lumpur, that the 30-year-old had been offered a charge of causing hurt by dangerous weapons instead of murder.

Soon afterwards, the new charge was read in court to Huong and she pleaded guilty. The charge carries a maximum 10-year jail term but the lawyer said she would likely receive a shorter sentence.

It is "very likely she could walk out free today", he said.

Denied murder

Both women had always denied murder, saying they were tricked by North Korean spies into carrying out the assassination that shocked the world using a highly toxic nerve agent, and believed it was a prank for a reality TV show.

Their lawyers presented them as scapegoats and said the real masterminds were four North Koreans accused alongside them, but who fled Malaysia shortly after the assassination.

If released, it will mean that no one is facing murder charges for the killing in February 2017 of Kim Jong Un's estranged relative, who was once considered heir apparent to the North Korean leadership until he fell out of favour.&nbsp;

South Korea accuses the North of ordering the hit, a claim vehemently denied by Pyongyang.

There were dramatic scenes in court when Huong's initial bid for immediate release was rejected -- she sobbed in the dock and had to be helped out of court by two police officers.&nbsp;

Vietnam reacted angrily to the decision, which came just days after the Indonesian defendant was released, and started stepping up pressure on Malaysia to free Huong.&nbsp;

A murder conviction carries a mandatory penalty of death by hanging in Malaysia. The government vowed last year to scrap capital punishment but recently indicated that it might backtrack.

A Vietnamese woman suspected of assassinating the North Korean leader's half-brother accepted a lesser charge Monday and looks set to be freed soon, after her Indonesian co-accused was released last month.

A Vietnamese woman suspected of assassinating the North Korean leader's half-brother accepted a lesser charge Monday and looks set to be freed soon, after her Indonesian co-accused was released last month. Doan Thi Huong smiled and said "I'm happy" after prosecutors presented her legal team with the new charge in a Malaysian court and they announced the details. She has been on trial since 2017 for the murder of Kim Jong Nam at Kuala Lumpur airport with a toxic nerve agent in a Cold War-style hit. It came after authorities last month rejected her initial request for her murder charge to be dropped entirely -- a shock decision after the attorney-general agreed to withdraw the charge against her Indonesian co-defendant, Siti Aisyah, and she walked free. Salim Bashir, one of her lawyers, told reporters outside the High Court in Shah Alam, outside Kuala Lumpur, that the 30-year-old had been offered a charge of causing hurt by dangerous weapons instead of murder. Soon afterwards, the new charge was read in court to Huong and she pleaded guilty. The charge carries a maximum 10-year jail term but the lawyer said she would likely receive a shorter sentence. It is "very likely she could walk out free today", he said. Denied murder Both women had always denied murder, saying they were tricked by North Korean spies into carrying out the assassination that shocked the world using a highly toxic nerve agent, and believed it was a prank for a reality TV show. Their lawyers presented them as scapegoats and said the real masterminds were four North Koreans accused alongside them, but who fled Malaysia shortly after the assassination. If released, it will mean that no one is facing murder charges for the killing in February 2017 of Kim Jong Un's estranged relative, who was once considered heir apparent to the North Korean leadership until he fell out of favour. South Korea accuses the North of ordering the hit, a claim vehemently denied by Pyongyang. There were dramatic scenes in court when Huong's initial bid for immediate release was rejected -- she sobbed in the dock and had to be helped out of court by two police officers. Vietnam reacted angrily to the decision, which came just days after the Indonesian defendant was released, and started stepping up pressure on Malaysia to free Huong. A murder conviction carries a mandatory penalty of death by hanging in Malaysia. The government vowed last year to scrap capital punishment but recently indicated that it might backtrack.

Vietnam woman in Kim Jong-un's half-brother murder case accepts new charge, likely to walk free

Russian state television has listed US military facilities that Moscow would target in the event of a nuclear strike, and said that a hypersonic missile Russia is developing would be able to hit them in less than five minutes.

The targets included the Pentagon and the presidential retreat in Camp David, Maryland.

The report, unusual even by the sometimes bellicose standards of Russian state TV, was broadcast on Sunday evening, days after President Vladimir Putin said <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/well-target-us-if-washington-deploys-missiles-in-europe-putin-198553">Moscow was militarily ready</a> for a "Cuban Missile"-style crisis if the United States wanted one.

With tensions rising over Russian fears that the United States might deploy intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe as a Cold War-era arms-control treaty unravels, Putin has said Russia would be forced to respond by placing hypersonic nuclear missiles on submarines near US&nbsp;waters.

The United States says it has no immediate plans to deploy such missiles in Europe and has dismissed Putin's warnings as disingenuous propaganda. It does not currently have ground-based intermediate-range nuclear missiles that it could place in Europe.

However, its decision to quit the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty over an alleged Russian violation, something Moscow denies, has freed it to start developing and deploying such missiles.

Putin has said Russia does not want a new arms race, but has also dialled up his military rhetoric.

Some analysts have seen his approach as a tactic to try to re-engage the United States in talks about the strategic balance between the two powers, something Moscow has long pushed for, with mixed results.

In the Sunday evening broadcast, Dmitry Kiselyov, presenter of Russia's main weekly TV news show 'Vesti Nedeli', showed a map of the United States and identified several targets he said Moscow would want to hit in the event of a nuclear war.

The targets, which Kiselyov described as US&nbsp;presidential or military command centres, also included Fort Ritchie, a military training centre in Maryland closed in 1998, McClellan, a US&nbsp;Air Force base in California closed in 2001, and Jim Creek, a naval communications base in Washington state.

Kiselyov, who is close to the Kremlin, said the "Tsirkon" ('Zircon') hypersonic missile that Russia is developing could hit the targets in less than five minutes if launched from Russian submarines.

Hypersonic flight is generally taken to mean travelling through the atmosphere at more than five times the speed of sound.

"For now, we're not threatening anyone, but if such a deployment takes place, our response will be instant," he said.

Kiselyov is one of the main conduits of state television’s strongly anti-American tone, once saying Moscow could turn the United States into radioactive ash.

Asked to comment on Kiselyov's report, the Kremlin said on Monday it did not interfere in state TV's editorial policy.

Russian state television has listed US military facilities that Moscow would target in the event of a nuclear strike, and said that a hypersonic missile Russia is developing would be able to hit them in less than five minutes.

Russian state television has listed US military facilities that Moscow would target in the event of a nuclear strike, and said that a hypersonic missile Russia is developing would be able to hit them in less than five minutes. The targets included the Pentagon and the presidential retreat in Camp David, Maryland. The report, unusual even by the sometimes bellicose standards of Russian state TV, was broadcast on Sunday evening, days after President Vladimir Putin said Moscow was militarily ready for a "Cuban Missile"-style crisis if the United States wanted one. With tensions rising over Russian fears that the United States might deploy intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe as a Cold War-era arms-control treaty unravels, Putin has said Russia would be forced to respond by placing hypersonic nuclear missiles on submarines near US waters. The United States says it has no immediate plans to deploy such missiles in Europe and has dismissed Putin's warnings as disingenuous propaganda. It does not currently have ground-based intermediate-range nuclear missiles that it could place in Europe. However, its decision to quit the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty over an alleged Russian violation, something Moscow denies, has freed it to start developing and deploying such missiles. Putin has said Russia does not want a new arms race, but has also dialled up his military rhetoric. Some analysts have seen his approach as a tactic to try to re-engage the United States in talks about the strategic balance between the two powers, something Moscow has long pushed for, with mixed results. In the Sunday evening broadcast, Dmitry Kiselyov, presenter of Russia's main weekly TV news show 'Vesti Nedeli', showed a map of the United States and identified several targets he said Moscow would want to hit in the event of a nuclear war. The targets, which Kiselyov described as US presidential or military command centres, also included Fort Ritchie, a military training centre in Maryland closed in 1998, McClellan, a US Air Force base in California closed in 2001, and Jim Creek, a naval communications base in Washington state. Kiselyov, who is close to the Kremlin, said the "Tsirkon" ('Zircon') hypersonic missile that Russia is developing could hit the targets in less than five minutes if launched from Russian submarines. Hypersonic flight is generally taken to mean travelling through the atmosphere at more than five times the speed of sound. "For now, we're not threatening anyone, but if such a deployment takes place, our response will be instant," he said. Kiselyov is one of the main conduits of state television’s strongly anti-American tone, once saying Moscow could turn the United States into radioactive ash. Asked to comment on Kiselyov's report, the Kremlin said on Monday it did not interfere in state TV's editorial policy.

After Putin's warning, Russian TV lists nuclear targets including Pentagon in US

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/vladimir-putin-four-time-president-and-global-influencer-185673">Russian President Vladimir Putin</a> on Wednesday hailed final tests of a hypersonic missile, which he earlier said would render existing missile defence systems obsolete.&nbsp;

"On my instructions, the Ministry of Defence prepared and conducted a final test of this system. This has just been completed with absolute success," Putin said during a televised meeting with members of the government.

"Russia has a new type of strategic weapon," he said, adding that the intercontinental "Avangard" system would be ready for use from 2019.&nbsp;

The Kremlin told Russian news agencies the test had taken place in far eastern Kamchatka while Putin was at the national defence control centre.

Putin unveiled features of the Avangard during his annual address in March, which he said would be part of a new generation of "invincible" weaponry.

The hypersonic missile could fly at 20 times the speed of sound and manoeuvre up and down, meaning it could breach defence systems, he said at the time.&nbsp;

The final test comes after <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/democrats-say-trump-plunging-country-into-chaos-with-multiple-crises-186247">US President Donald Trump</a> announced plans to pull out of a key Cold War-era nuclear weapons pact, the three-decade-old Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF).

Putin has laid out plans to develop missiles banned under the deal if the United States abandons it.

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday hailed final tests of a hypersonic missile, which he earlier said would render existing missile defence systems obsolete.

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday hailed final tests of a hypersonic missile, which he earlier said would render existing missile defence systems obsolete. "On my instructions, the Ministry of Defence prepared and conducted a final test of this system. This has just been completed with absolute success," Putin said during a televised meeting with members of the government. "Russia has a new type of strategic weapon," he said, adding that the intercontinental "Avangard" system would be ready for use from 2019. The Kremlin told Russian news agencies the test had taken place in far eastern Kamchatka while Putin was at the national defence control centre. Putin unveiled features of the Avangard during his annual address in March, which he said would be part of a new generation of "invincible" weaponry. The hypersonic missile could fly at 20 times the speed of sound and manoeuvre up and down, meaning it could breach defence systems, he said at the time. The final test comes after US President Donald Trump announced plans to pull out of a key Cold War-era nuclear weapons pact, the three-decade-old Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF). Putin has laid out plans to develop missiles banned under the deal if the United States abandons it.

Putin hails 'successful' test of new hypersonic missile

NATO countries began its <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/ahead-of-military-exercise-in-norway-nato-chief-says-hope-russia-will-avoid-dangerous-behavior-173367">military exercise, Trident Juncture 18</a>, in Norway close to the Russian border amid tensions between the US and Russia over President Trump's decision to pull out of the NFT.

As many as 31 countries including Finland and Sweden are taking part in the largest military exercise since the end of the Cold War involving over 50,000 troops. The US has committed the highest number of troops numbering 9,000 and has deployed the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman.

Russia termed the latest exercise an activity which "comes across as provocative, even if you try to justify it as being of a purely defensive nature." &nbsp;

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg had said earlier that Europe's security environment had significantly deteriorated in recent years, while asserting that, "Trident Juncture sends a clear message to our nations and to any potential adversary."&nbsp;

"NATO does not seek confrontation but we stand ready to defend all allies against any threat," the NATO chief added.

The mega military drill is reportedly taking place 198 kilometres away from Norway's border to Russia in the far north.

Meanwhile, head of NATO's Allied Joint Force Command said "any fears on the part of the Russian Federation are unfounded," adding,"we defend, we deter, we don't take somebody else's territory. That's not our intent and they are not the focal point of this exercise."

Last month, Russia had conducted a military exercise, Vostok-2018, along with Chinese and Mongolian troops along China's border which involved over 300,000 troops.

Russian foreign ministry had said last month that NATO countries were increasing their military presence in the region, "near Russia's borders". "Such irresponsible actions are bound to lead to a destabilisation of the political situation in the North, to heighten tensions," the foreign ministry spokesman had said.

The military drill in Norway will continue from October 25th to November 7th.

NATO countries began its military exercise, Trident Juncture 18, in Norway close to the Russian border amid tensions between the US and Russia over President Trump's decision to pull out of the NFT.

NATO countries began its military exercise, Trident Juncture 18, in Norway close to the Russian border amid tensions between the US and Russia over President Trump's decision to pull out of the NFT. As many as 31 countries including Finland and Sweden are taking part in the largest military exercise since the end of the Cold War involving over 50,000 troops. The US has committed the highest number of troops numbering 9,000 and has deployed the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman. Russia termed the latest exercise an activity which "comes across as provocative, even if you try to justify it as being of a purely defensive nature." NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg had said earlier that Europe's security environment had significantly deteriorated in recent years, while asserting that, "Trident Juncture sends a clear message to our nations and to any potential adversary." "NATO does not seek confrontation but we stand ready to defend all allies against any threat," the NATO chief added. The mega military drill is reportedly taking place 198 kilometres away from Norway's border to Russia in the far north. Meanwhile, head of NATO's Allied Joint Force Command said "any fears on the part of the Russian Federation are unfounded," adding,"we defend, we deter, we don't take somebody else's territory. That's not our intent and they are not the focal point of this exercise." Last month, Russia had conducted a military exercise, Vostok-2018, along with Chinese and Mongolian troops along China's border which involved over 300,000 troops. Russian foreign ministry had said last month that NATO countries were increasing their military presence in the region, "near Russia's borders". "Such irresponsible actions are bound to lead to a destabilisation of the political situation in the North, to heighten tensions," the foreign ministry spokesman had said. The military drill in Norway will continue from October 25th to November 7th.

NATO begins military excercise in Norway amid US-Russia row over Nuclear Forces Treaty

US defense secretary James Mattis warned&nbsp;that Washington would respond if Russia refused to end its "blatant violation" of a Cold War nuclear arms treaty.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/photos/thaad-vs-s-400-india-dumps-us-picks-russian-defence-missile-system-169445">Also Read: America's THAAD vs Russia's S-400 missile defence system</a>

Mattis said the Kremlin was treating the 1987 Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) with "cavalier disregard" over a new Russian ground-launched missile system.

The United States has said for almost two years that Russia's 9M729 system breaches the INF treaty, which bans mid-range missiles that had been the subject of a mini-arms race in Europe between the Soviet Union and Washington in the 1980s.

"Russia must return to compliance with the INF treaty or the US will need to respond to its cavalier disregard for the treaty's specific limits," Mattis said after a meeting of NATO defence ministers in Brussels.&nbsp;

"Make no mistake -- the current situation with Russia in blatant violation of this treaty is untenable."

He gave no details of how the US might respond, but earlier this year Mattis told Congress that the Pentagon was working on new low-yield nuclear weapons in a bid to force Russia back into compliance with the INF.

The accord signed between US president Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev ended an alarming arms build-up in Europe triggered by Moscow's deployment of SS-20 nuclear missiles targeting Western European capitals.

NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg said Russia was imperilling the agreement, which he has called a "cornerstone" of European security.

"We believe this treaty is in danger because of Russia’s actions. After years of denials, Russia recently acknowledged the existence of a new missile system, called 9M729," Stoltenberg said.

"This system is destabilising. It is a serious risk to our security."

Without credible explanations, Stoltenberg said, the most obvious answer was that Russia was indeed breaching the treaty, though Moscow has denied this.

The US ambassador on disarmament Robert Wood on Thursday suggested Washington may withdraw from the INF treaty if Russia does not end its violations.

US defense secretary James Mattis warned that Washington would respond if Russia refused to end its "blatant violation" of a Cold War nuclear arms treaty. Also Read: America's THAAD vs Russia's S-400 missile defence system Mattis said the Kremlin was treating the 1987 Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) with "cavalier disregard" over a new Russian ground-launched missile system.

US defense secretary James Mattis warned that Washington would respond if Russia refused to end its "blatant violation" of a Cold War nuclear arms treaty. Also Read: America's THAAD vs Russia's S-400 missile defence system Mattis said the Kremlin was treating the 1987 Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) with "cavalier disregard" over a new Russian ground-launched missile system. The United States has said for almost two years that Russia's 9M729 system breaches the INF treaty, which bans mid-range missiles that had been the subject of a mini-arms race in Europe between the Soviet Union and Washington in the 1980s. "Russia must return to compliance with the INF treaty or the US will need to respond to its cavalier disregard for the treaty's specific limits," Mattis said after a meeting of NATO defence ministers in Brussels. "Make no mistake -- the current situation with Russia in blatant violation of this treaty is untenable." He gave no details of how the US might respond, but earlier this year Mattis told Congress that the Pentagon was working on new low-yield nuclear weapons in a bid to force Russia back into compliance with the INF. The accord signed between US president Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev ended an alarming arms build-up in Europe triggered by Moscow's deployment of SS-20 nuclear missiles targeting Western European capitals. NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg said Russia was imperilling the agreement, which he has called a "cornerstone" of European security. "We believe this treaty is in danger because of Russia’s actions. After years of denials, Russia recently acknowledged the existence of a new missile system, called 9M729," Stoltenberg said. "This system is destabilising. It is a serious risk to our security." Without credible explanations, Stoltenberg said, the most obvious answer was that Russia was indeed breaching the treaty, though Moscow has denied this. The US ambassador on disarmament Robert Wood on Thursday suggested Washington may withdraw from the INF treaty if Russia does not end its violations.

Russia must comply with Nuclear Forces Treaty or we will respond, warns US

NATO on Wednesday denounced a new bridge linking mainland Russia to Moscow-annexed Crimea as "another violation" of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The Atlantic alliance echoed the European Union's earlier condemnation of the bridge, which Russian President Vladimir Putin drove a truck over on Tuesday.

"NATO condemns Russia's construction and partial opening of the Kerch Strait bridge between Russia and Crimea," NATO deputy spokesman Piers Cazalet said.

"Crimea is part of Ukraine and this bridge represents another violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity," Cazalet said in a statement.

The bridge, which limits sea traffic to Ukrainian ports on the Azov Sea, amounts to "the infringement of its navigational rights in its territorial waters," he added.&nbsp

"Russia continues to demonstrate a clear disregard for international law," Cazalet said, adding that NATO will not recognise Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea.

Russian state television showed Putin dressed in jeans and a casual jacket sitting behind the wheel of a construction truck to drive across the bridge and officially open it.

The 29-member NATO is pursuing a dual-track policy towards the Kremlin of defence and deterrence coupled with an offer of dialogue.

Tensions between NATO and Russia are at levels not seen since the Cold War, including over Moscow's support for pro-Russian separatists in the conflict in eastern Ukraine.

The Atlantic alliance echoed the European Union's earlier condemnation of the bridge, which Russian President Vladimir Putin drove a truck over on Tuesday

NATO on Wednesday denounced a new bridge linking mainland Russia to Moscow-annexed Crimea as "another violation" of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. The Atlantic alliance echoed the European Union's earlier condemnation of the bridge, which Russian President Vladimir Putin drove a truck over on Tuesday. "NATO condemns Russia's construction and partial opening of the Kerch Strait bridge between Russia and Crimea," NATO deputy spokesman Piers Cazalet said. "Crimea is part of Ukraine and this bridge represents another violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity," Cazalet said in a statement. The bridge, which limits sea traffic to Ukrainian ports on the Azov Sea, amounts to "the infringement of its navigational rights in its territorial waters," he added. "Russia continues to demonstrate a clear disregard for international law," Cazalet said, adding that NATO will not recognise Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea. Russian state television showed Putin dressed in jeans and a casual jacket sitting behind the wheel of a construction truck to drive across the bridge and officially open it. The 29-member NATO is pursuing a dual-track policy towards the Kremlin of defence and deterrence coupled with an offer of dialogue. Tensions between NATO and Russia are at levels not seen since the Cold War, including over Moscow's support for pro-Russian separatists in the conflict in eastern Ukraine.

NATO 'condemns' Russia bridge to Moscow-annexed Crimea

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has warned that the Cold War is back “with a vengeance”.

He said the Middle East is in such “chaos” that it has become a danger to international peace and security — and Syria “represents the most serious threat”.

"The Cold War is back with a vengeance, but with a difference," he said. "The mechanisms and the safeguards to manage the risks of escalation that existed in the past no longer seem to be present."

He urged countries to "act responsibly in these dangerous circumstances".

"Increasing tensions and the inability to reach a compromise in the establishment of an accountability mechanism (for chemical weapons use in Syria) threaten to lead to a full-blown military escalation," Guterres told the Security Council on Friday, Xinhua news agency reported.

"In my contacts with you -- especially with the permanent members of the Security Council -- I have been reiterating my deep concerns about the risks of the current impasse and stressed the need to avoid the situation spiralling out of control. This is exactly the risk we face today -- that things spiral out of control," said the UN chief.

"It is our common duty to stop it."

"In Syria, we see confrontations and proxy wars involving several national armies, a number of armed opposition groups, many national and international militia, foreign fighters from everywhere in the world, and various terrorist organisations," he told the Security Council, which was convening at the request of Russia.

Western powers said an alleged Syrian chemical massacre must not go unanswered even as the United Nations secretary-general warned against a "full-blown military escalation."

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has warned that the Cold War is back “with a vengeance”. He said the Middle East is in such “chaos” that it has become a danger to international peace and security — and Syria “represents the most serious threat”. "The Cold War is back with a vengeance, but with a difference," he said. "The mechanisms and the safeguards to manage the risks of escalation that existed in the past no longer seem to be present." He urged countries to "act responsibly in these dangerous circumstances". "Increasing tensions and the inability to reach a compromise in the establishment of an accountability mechanism (for chemical weapons use in Syria) threaten to lead to a full-blown military escalation," Guterres told the Security Council on Friday, Xinhua news agency reported. "In my contacts with you -- especially with the permanent members of the Security Council -- I have been reiterating my deep concerns about the risks of the current impasse and stressed the need to avoid the situation spiralling out of control. This is exactly the risk we face today -- that things spiral out of control," said the UN chief. "It is our common duty to stop it." "In Syria, we see confrontations and proxy wars involving several national armies, a number of armed opposition groups, many national and international militia, foreign fighters from everywhere in the world, and various terrorist organisations," he told the Security Council, which was convening at the request of Russia.

Cold War is back with a vengeance, UN chief Antonio Guterres warns

Russian diplomats expelled from the United States arrived in Moscow on Sunday, with post-Cold War tensions peaking in the wake of a nerve agent attack on a former spy in Britain.

A deepening crisis in ties between Russia and the West has over the past weeks seen the biggest wave of tit-for-tat diplomatic expulsions in recent memory.

In further signs of tension, Russia warned its nationals on Saturday to think twice before travelling to Britain, where it said they could be singled out for harassment by local authorities.

By expelling 60 Russian diplomats, the US joined a score of Britain's allies in responding to the poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in the English city of Salisbury on March 4.

Two planes arrived at Moscow's Vnukovo airport on Sunday, bringing home a total of 171 people -- the 60 diplomats and their families -- from Washington and New York.

Russian television showed passengers disembarking from a government plane while several buses waited to pick them up.

More than 150 Russian diplomats have now been ordered out of the US, EU members, NATO countries and other nations.

Britain has said it is "highly likely" that Russia was responsible for the Skripal attack using the Soviet-designed Novichok nerve agent. Russia has angrily denied any involvement.

The US alleged the 60 diplomats were "spies" and sent them home from posts around the country and at the Russian mission to the United Nations, as well as closing Russia's consulate in Seattle.

However Washington has since said that Russia is free to apply to accredit more diplomats to replace those expelled.

Moscow responded by expelling 60 US diplomats and closing Washington's consulate in Saint Petersburg on Saturday.

Work to improve ties

US President Donald Trump has often appeared reluctant to criticise Russian leader Vladimir Putin and has said the two could meet for a summit in the near future.

"Now the consulate is closed but our work to improve Russian-US ties is continuing," the US embassy in Moscow said on Twitter.

Moscow also issued further retaliatory measures against Britain on Saturday, demanding that London further slash its diplomatic presence.

"Russia suggested parity. The British side has more than 50 more people," foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told AFP.&nbsp

The call came after 23 British diplomats were expelled from Russia last month.

Moscow also closed a British consulate in Saint Petersburg and suspended all projects of the British Council for the first time in nearly 60 years.

Threatening rhetoric

The Russian embassy in London urged Russians to think carefully before travelling to the UK or sending children to summer school there.

The embassy warned that British authorities including police could single out Russians for additional checks, citing "the anti-Russian policies and an escalation of the British side's threatening rhetoric".

Britain acknowledged Saturday that border officials had searched an incoming Aeroflot flight from Moscow in what Russia blasted as an act of "blatant provocation".

Britain said it conducts routine checks on aircraft to protect the UK from organised crime and people attempting to bring harmful substances into the country.

Earlier this week Moscow summoned British ambassador Laurie Bristow, giving London a month to cut the number of diplomatic staff in Russia to the same number Russia has in Britain.&nbsp

He was handed a protest note over the "provocative and unfounded actions of the British side which instigated the unwarranted expulsion of Russian diplomats from a variety of states," the Russian foreign ministry said.&nbsp

Bristow was summoned along with the heads of missions from 23 other countries -- most of them EU member states -- who were told that some of their diplomats had to leave.

France, Germany, Canada and Poland each said that Russia was expelling four of their diplomats.&nbsp

Other countries including Australia, Ukraine, the Netherlands, Sweden, the Czech Republic, Finland, Lithuania and Norway were also told to pull their envoys.&nbsp

Russian diplomats expelled from the United States arrived in Moscow on Sunday, with post-Cold War tensions peaking in the wake of a nerve agent attack on a former spy in Britain

Russian diplomats expelled from the United States arrived in Moscow on Sunday, with post-Cold War tensions peaking in the wake of a nerve agent attack on a former spy in Britain. A deepening crisis in ties between Russia and the West has over the past weeks seen the biggest wave of tit-for-tat diplomatic expulsions in recent memory. In further signs of tension, Russia warned its nationals on Saturday to think twice before travelling to Britain, where it said they could be singled out for harassment by local authorities. By expelling 60 Russian diplomats, the US joined a score of Britain's allies in responding to the poisoning of former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in the English city of Salisbury on March 4. Two planes arrived at Moscow's Vnukovo airport on Sunday, bringing home a total of 171 people -- the 60 diplomats and their families -- from Washington and New York. Russian television showed passengers disembarking from a government plane while several buses waited to pick them up. More than 150 Russian diplomats have now been ordered out of the US, EU members, NATO countries and other nations. Britain has said it is "highly likely" that Russia was responsible for the Skripal attack using the Soviet-designed Novichok nerve agent. Russia has angrily denied any involvement. The US alleged the 60 diplomats were "spies" and sent them home from posts around the country and at the Russian mission to the United Nations, as well as closing Russia's consulate in Seattle. However Washington has since said that Russia is free to apply to accredit more diplomats to replace those expelled. Moscow responded by expelling 60 US diplomats and closing Washington's consulate in Saint Petersburg on Saturday. Work to improve ties US President Donald Trump has often appeared reluctant to criticise Russian leader Vladimir Putin and has said the two could meet for a summit in the near future. "Now the consulate is closed but our work to improve Russian-US ties is continuing," the US embassy in Moscow said on Twitter. Moscow also issued further retaliatory measures against Britain on Saturday, demanding that London further slash its diplomatic presence. "Russia suggested parity. The British side has more than 50 more people," foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told AFP. The call came after 23 British diplomats were expelled from Russia last month. Moscow also closed a British consulate in Saint Petersburg and suspended all projects of the British Council for the first time in nearly 60 years. Threatening rhetoric The Russian embassy in London urged Russians to think carefully before travelling to the UK or sending children to summer school there. The embassy warned that British authorities including police could single out Russians for additional checks, citing "the anti-Russian policies and an escalation of the British side's threatening rhetoric". Britain acknowledged Saturday that border officials had searched an incoming Aeroflot flight from Moscow in what Russia blasted as an act of "blatant provocation". Britain said it conducts routine checks on aircraft to protect the UK from organised crime and people attempting to bring harmful substances into the country. Earlier this week Moscow summoned British ambassador Laurie Bristow, giving London a month to cut the number of diplomatic staff in Russia to the same number Russia has in Britain. He was handed a protest note over the "provocative and unfounded actions of the British side which instigated the unwarranted expulsion of Russian diplomats from a variety of states," the Russian foreign ministry said. Bristow was summoned along with the heads of missions from 23 other countries -- most of them EU member states -- who were told that some of their diplomats had to leave. France, Germany, Canada and Poland each said that Russia was expelling four of their diplomats. Other countries including Australia, Ukraine, the Netherlands, Sweden, the Czech Republic, Finland, Lithuania and Norway were also told to pull their envoys.

Expelled Russians arrive home as Moscow warns against travel to UK

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Thursday warned of a return to Cold War-like tensions between the United States and Russia following the West's mass expulsions of Russian diplomats.

"I think we are coming to a situation that is similar, to a large extent, to what we lived during the Cold War," Guterres told reporters at UN headquarters in New York.&nbsp

The United States, European nations and NATO countries have announced the expulsion of over 150 Russian diplomats in retaliation for the poisoning of a former spy in England.

Russia on Thursday announced it would expel 60 US diplomats and close a consulate in a tit-for-tat move.

Guterres said he was "very concerned" about the lack of mechanisms to defuse tensions, such as special channels for information-sharing between Washington and Moscow, which were dismantled with the end of the Cold War.&nbsp

"I do believe it's time for precautions of this sort, guaranteeing effective communication, guaranteeing capacity to prevent escalation," he said.

President Donald Trump ordered the departure of 48 Russian diplomats serving in missions in the United States and 12 from the Russian mission to the United Nations, the largest US expulsion of Russian or Soviet agents ever.

Former US president Barack Obama expelled 35 in late 2016 over alleged election meddling.

Relations between the United States and Russia at the UN Security Council have soured over Syria although Moscow has backed Washington's push for sanctions on North Korea.

'I think we are coming to a situation that is similar, to a large extent, to what we lived during the Cold War,' Guterres told reporters at UN headquarters in New York.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Thursday warned of a return to Cold War-like tensions between the United States and Russia following the West's mass expulsions of Russian diplomats. "I think we are coming to a situation that is similar, to a large extent, to what we lived during the Cold War," Guterres told reporters at UN headquarters in New York. The United States, European nations and NATO countries have announced the expulsion of over 150 Russian diplomats in retaliation for the poisoning of a former spy in England. Russia on Thursday announced it would expel 60 US diplomats and close a consulate in a tit-for-tat move. Guterres said he was "very concerned" about the lack of mechanisms to defuse tensions, such as special channels for information-sharing between Washington and Moscow, which were dismantled with the end of the Cold War. "I do believe it's time for precautions of this sort, guaranteeing effective communication, guaranteeing capacity to prevent escalation," he said. President Donald Trump ordered the departure of 48 Russian diplomats serving in missions in the United States and 12 from the Russian mission to the United Nations, the largest US expulsion of Russian or Soviet agents ever. Former US president Barack Obama expelled 35 in late 2016 over alleged election meddling. Relations between the United States and Russia at the UN Security Council have soured over Syria although Moscow has backed Washington's push for sanctions on North Korea.

United Nations chief warns of return to Cold-War-like tensions

In Afghanistan, political pundits are putting pressure on the public instead of the government.

Since 2014, when the highly suspect election process saw the formation of the Afghan National Unity Government (NUG), the media has become a battleground for the opposing political camps of President Mohammad Ashraf Ghani and Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah.

On February 5, 2018, Al Jazeera published an article in which Eisa Khan Ayoobi, former policy adviser to the Afghan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, mercilessly criticized President Ghani&rsquo;s performance as the undisputed head of state and his failure to deliver on campaign promises. The subject matter of his critical review was, inter alia, issuing electronic IDs, tackling unemployment, improving security and bridging the historical divide between all ethnic groups. Although his arguments were not unfounded, Ayoobi&rsquo;s selective approach left room for Ghani&rsquo;s supporters to challenge his stance.

One such die-hard supporter is Ajmal Shams, a deputy minister in the NUG and Ghani&rsquo;s former adviser. Also at Al Jazeera, Shams not only refuted Ayoobi&rsquo;s claims, but defended President Ghani as &ldquo;a unifying force working to bring the divided Afghan society together.&rdquo; Shams was referring to Ghani&rsquo;s agreement to form the NUG with his campaign-time political rival Abdullah Abdullah.

Regardless of the authors&rsquo; views on successes and failures of the NUG and their favorite characters at its helm, both of them have employed a selective approach to present their arguments. In this war of words, Shams&rsquo; conduct is particularly questionable as his choice of words seems to be directed by personal interest and bias.

The subject of constitutionality of the Office of the Chief Executive speaks for its own importance and is open for debate. However, Shams&rsquo; choice of words &mdash; such as &ldquo;allegations of irregularities&rdquo; instead of &ldquo;election fraud and ballot box stuffing&rdquo; in the election process, &ldquo;UN-sponsored audit declared Ashraf Ghani as the legitimate winner of the election,&rdquo; and &ldquo;the Pashtun majority, who overwhelmingly voted for Ghani&rdquo; &mdash; are definitely inconsiderate and untruthful. In his defense of President Ghani, Shams has contradicted himself.

Let&rsquo;s take a moment to break down some of Shams&rsquo; arguments and cross-check his statistics with facts and reasonable doubts.&nbsp;

Looking Further&nbsp;

On May 15, 2014, the United Nations welcomed the release of the first round of election results, in which Abdullah received 45% and Ghani 31.6% of the votes. The Independent Election Commission (IEC) had set June 14 as the date for the second round between the two finalists. Following the run-off poll, distrust fell on the IEC when, on election day, Zia ul-Haq Amarkhail, the IEC secretary, was caught red-handed carrying blank ballots to an unknown destination. This incident unleashed a wave of objections and criticism leading to the impasse and subsequent formation of the National Unity Government.

In a meeting on September 18, 2014, the UN Security Council addressed the impasse over the election results, and Jan Kubis, special representative of the secretary general for Afghanistan, stated that &ldquo;significant levels of fraud had been detected&rdquo; by independent auditors. Furthermore, Zahir Tanin, Afghanistan&rsquo;s ambassador to the UN at the time, asserted that the political breakdown was the result of a &ldquo;protracted, complex and at times messy electoral process.&rdquo;&nbsp;

Happy as he may be to call it &ldquo;allegations of irregularities&rdquo; instead of outright &ldquo;fraud,&rdquo; Shams ardently obscures the truth. Moreover, Shams argues that the credit for breaking the deadlock goes solely to President Ghani who, despite &ldquo;his victory&rdquo; in the run-off elections, agreed to share power with his rival. In order to justify his claims, he seems to have deliberately ignored the fact that the decision to form the NUG was supported by both camps not only to come out of the stalemate, but also to change Afghanistan&rsquo;s political system.

It is an undeniable fact that the 2004 constitution divests kingly powers to the president, and the newly-created position of prime minister was to check and balance those powers. The creation of Office of the Chief Executive was not an act of generosity and humbleness from the Ghani camp. Further to Shams&rsquo; dismay, the decision to form the NUG was the result of a backroom deal long before the IEC announced Ghani as the winner. The commission did not even bother to publish the tallies and voter turnout.

Shams&rsquo; assertion that the &ldquo;Pashtun majority, who overwhelmingly voted&rdquo; for Ashraf Ghani and helped him win the run-off election irks the reader. In this effort, he not only tries to misrepresent Afghanistan&rsquo;s demographic data, but also seems to suggest that all Pashtuns showed up en masse at voting centers. One is at least perplexed, if not infuriated, by his statistics. Here are two very basic reasons why he is biased.

First, the one and only time Afghanistan had conducted a census survey was in the 1970s, and ever since then reliable demographic data is hard to come by. So, the question is where did Shams get his data on &ldquo;Pashtun majority&rdquo; from?

Second, when he says that the &ldquo;Pashtun majority overwhelmingly voted&rdquo; for President Ghani, did he include the Taliban (the majority of whom are said to be Pashtun) in the count as well? If the answer is yes &mdash; as Shams&rsquo; argument implies &mdash; the question arises as to why the Taliban are still fighting a government for which they overwhelmingly voted for?&nbsp;

Realities of the ground 

Shams would do well to study any history book on Afghanistan to get his facts right. No Pashtun-dominated government has ever willingly shared power with non-Pashtun ethnicities, and that attitude still prevails. It seems that Shams is deeply convinced that one ethnic group is forever destined to sociopolitical supremacy in Afghanistan.

His willful ignorance disregards the realities on the ground and downplays the fact that the current crisis at which Afghanistan has arrived, resulting in the general misfortune of the people, is the outcome of an unjust political system &mdash; the foundations of which were laid in the 2004 constitution that gave the president unchecked power and a fraudulent election in the same year.

More importantly, since the fall of the Taliban in 2001, the interlacing of the media with sociopolitical subjects was meant, like the rest of the democratic world, to play a key role in amplifying public unease about government policies. However, since the 2014 elections, opposing camps inside the NUG and across the country have extensively used media to shape public perceptions as well as justify their actions. This has created a false sense of political debate that only serves to obfuscate the facts.

Unfortunately, media outlets in Afghanistan have increasingly assumed a reverse role: By staking their independence and impartiality in contemporary politics, many have turned into institutions that put pressure on the public instead of the government.

&nbsp;

This <a href="rel=" target="blank">article</a> was originally published in <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/">Fair Observer</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp;

By staking their independence and impartiality in contemporary politics, many media outlets have turned into institutions that put pressure on the public instead of the government.

In Afghanistan, political pundits are putting pressure on the public instead of the government. Since 2014, when the highly suspect election process saw the formation of the Afghan National Unity Government (NUG), the media has become a battleground for the opposing political camps of President Mohammad Ashraf Ghani and Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah. On February 5, 2018, Al Jazeera published an article in which Eisa Khan Ayoobi, former policy adviser to the Afghan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, mercilessly criticized President Ghani’s performance as the undisputed head of state and his failure to deliver on campaign promises. The subject matter of his critical review was, inter alia, issuing electronic IDs, tackling unemployment, improving security and bridging the historical divide between all ethnic groups. Although his arguments were not unfounded, Ayoobi’s selective approach left room for Ghani’s supporters to challenge his stance. One such die-hard supporter is Ajmal Shams, a deputy minister in the NUG and Ghani’s former adviser. Also at Al Jazeera, Shams not only refuted Ayoobi’s claims, but defended President Ghani as “a unifying force working to bring the divided Afghan society together.” Shams was referring to Ghani’s agreement to form the NUG with his campaign-time political rival Abdullah Abdullah. Regardless of the authors’ views on successes and failures of the NUG and their favorite characters at its helm, both of them have employed a selective approach to present their arguments. In this war of words, Shams’ conduct is particularly questionable as his choice of words seems to be directed by personal interest and bias. The subject of constitutionality of the Office of the Chief Executive speaks for its own importance and is open for debate. However, Shams’ choice of words — such as “allegations of irregularities” instead of “election fraud and ballot box stuffing” in the election process, “UN-sponsored audit declared Ashraf Ghani as the legitimate winner of the election,” and “the Pashtun majority, who overwhelmingly voted for Ghani” — are definitely inconsiderate and untruthful. In his defense of President Ghani, Shams has contradicted himself. Let’s take a moment to break down some of Shams’ arguments and cross-check his statistics with facts and reasonable doubts. Looking Further On May 15, 2014, the United Nations welcomed the release of the first round of election results, in which Abdullah received 45% and Ghani 31.6% of the votes. The Independent Election Commission (IEC) had set June 14 as the date for the second round between the two finalists. Following the run-off poll, distrust fell on the IEC when, on election day, Zia ul-Haq Amarkhail, the IEC secretary, was caught red-handed carrying blank ballots to an unknown destination. This incident unleashed a wave of objections and criticism leading to the impasse and subsequent formation of the National Unity Government. In a meeting on September 18, 2014, the UN Security Council addressed the impasse over the election results, and Jan Kubis, special representative of the secretary general for Afghanistan, stated that “significant levels of fraud had been detected” by independent auditors. Furthermore, Zahir Tanin, Afghanistan’s ambassador to the UN at the time, asserted that the political breakdown was the result of a “protracted, complex and at times messy electoral process.” Happy as he may be to call it “allegations of irregularities” instead of outright “fraud,” Shams ardently obscures the truth. Moreover, Shams argues that the credit for breaking the deadlock goes solely to President Ghani who, despite “his victory” in the run-off elections, agreed to share power with his rival. In order to justify his claims, he seems to have deliberately ignored the fact that the decision to form the NUG was supported by both camps not only to come out of the stalemate, but also to change Afghanistan’s political system. It is an undeniable fact that the 2004 constitution divests kingly powers to the president, and the newly-created position of prime minister was to check and balance those powers. The creation of Office of the Chief Executive was not an act of generosity and humbleness from the Ghani camp. Further to Shams’ dismay, the decision to form the NUG was the result of a backroom deal long before the IEC announced Ghani as the winner. The commission did not even bother to publish the tallies and voter turnout. Shams’ assertion that the “Pashtun majority, who overwhelmingly voted” for Ashraf Ghani and helped him win the run-off election irks the reader. In this effort, he not only tries to misrepresent Afghanistan’s demographic data, but also seems to suggest that all Pashtuns showed up en masse at voting centers. One is at least perplexed, if not infuriated, by his statistics. Here are two very basic reasons why he is biased. First, the one and only time Afghanistan had conducted a census survey was in the 1970s, and ever since then reliable demographic data is hard to come by. So, the question is where did Shams get his data on “Pashtun majority” from? Second, when he says that the “Pashtun majority overwhelmingly voted” for President Ghani, did he include the Taliban (the majority of whom are said to be Pashtun) in the count as well? If the answer is yes — as Shams’ argument implies — the question arises as to why the Taliban are still fighting a government for which they overwhelmingly voted for? Realities of the ground Shams would do well to study any history book on Afghanistan to get his facts right. No Pashtun-dominated government has ever willingly shared power with non-Pashtun ethnicities, and that attitude still prevails. It seems that Shams is deeply convinced that one ethnic group is forever destined to sociopolitical supremacy in Afghanistan. His willful ignorance disregards the realities on the ground and downplays the fact that the current crisis at which Afghanistan has arrived, resulting in the general misfortune of the people, is the outcome of an unjust political system — the foundations of which were laid in the 2004 constitution that gave the president unchecked power and a fraudulent election in the same year. More importantly, since the fall of the Taliban in 2001, the interlacing of the media with sociopolitical subjects was meant, like the rest of the democratic world, to play a key role in amplifying public unease about government policies. However, since the 2014 elections, opposing camps inside the NUG and across the country have extensively used media to shape public perceptions as well as justify their actions. This has created a false sense of political debate that only serves to obfuscate the facts. Unfortunately, media outlets in Afghanistan have increasingly assumed a reverse role: By staking their independence and impartiality in contemporary politics, many have turned into institutions that put pressure on the public instead of the government. This article was originally published in Fair Observer (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: What role is media playing in Afghanistan's political conflict

The Kremlin insisted US sanctions against Russia were &quot;illegal&quot; today, a day after President Donald Trump signed an executive order to extend measures put in place during the Ukraine crisis.

&quot;We have never been the initiator of these sanctions, we consider them illegal and harmful not just to the people of our two countries but the whole world,&quot; Russian presidential press spokesman Dmitry Peskov said today, Interfax news agency reported.

Washington imposed sanctions on Moscow following Russia&#39;s 2014 annexation of the Crimean peninsula and Moscow&#39;s backing of rebels in eastern Ukraine.

Russian President Vladimir Putin this week set the course for a new arms race with Washington as he boasted of a new generation of &quot;invincible&quot; Russian weapons developed in response to the threat posed by the US.

The moves come as relations between the global powers plummeted to levels not seen since the Cold War, despite candidate Trump&#39;s promises to mend fences.

As well as the Ukraine crisis, Russia and the US have clashed over the conflict in Syria and accusations that Moscow interfered in the US election in 2016.

Washington imposed sanctions on Moscow following Russia's 2014 annexation of the Crimean peninsula and Moscow's backing of rebels in eastern Ukraine

The Kremlin insisted US sanctions against Russia were "illegal" today, a day after President Donald Trump signed an executive order to extend measures put in place during the Ukraine crisis. "We have never been the initiator of these sanctions, we consider them illegal and harmful not just to the people of our two countries but the whole world," Russian presidential press spokesman Dmitry Peskov said today, Interfax news agency reported. Washington imposed sanctions on Moscow following Russia's 2014 annexation of the Crimean peninsula and Moscow's backing of rebels in eastern Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin this week set the course for a new arms race with Washington as he boasted of a new generation of "invincible" Russian weapons developed in response to the threat posed by the US. The moves come as relations between the global powers plummeted to levels not seen since the Cold War, despite candidate Trump's promises to mend fences. As well as the Ukraine crisis, Russia and the US have clashed over the conflict in Syria and accusations that Moscow interfered in the US election in 2016.

Russia slams 'illegal and harmful' extended US sanctions

Europe must lead the way in pushing for nuclear disarmament after Washington proposed upgrading and expanding the United States` nuclear arsenal, German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said Sunday.

&quot;As in the times of the Cold War, we in Europe are especially endangered&quot; by &quot;a renewed nuclear arms race&quot;, Gabriel said.

&quot;That is why precisely we in Europe must begin new initiatives for arms control and disarmament.&quot;

Gabriel was responding to a so-called Nuclear Posture Review released Friday by the Pentagon that details the US military`s vision of nuclear threats and its response in the coming decades.

Upgrading the US arsenal and complementing massive &quot;strategic&quot; bombs with smaller &quot;tactical&quot; weapons was &quot;aimed at making use of nuclear weapons less likely&quot;, President Donald Trump said in a statement.

American nuclear planners believe potential adversaries abroad, especially Russia, assume America would never use its existing arsenal as the effects would be too devastating and provoke globally catastrophic retaliation.

&quot;The US and NATO require a wider range of credible low-yield nuclear options&quot; to deter Russia from using its own smaller nuclear weapons, Greg Weaver, the deputy director of strategic capabilities for the military`s Joint Staff, told reporters Friday.

Gabriel acknowledged that Russia`s annexation of Crimea from Ukraine had led to a &quot;dramatic loss of trust towards Russia&quot; in Europe as well as Washington, and that &quot;signs that Russia is re-arming, not only conventionally but with nuclear weapons, are obvious&quot;.

But instead of developing new weapons, Germany`s top diplomat called for &quot;existing arms control treaties to be upheld unconditionally&quot;.

Berlin would press &quot;with its allies and partners&quot; for further worldwide disarmament, he said.

&quot;Our long-term aim must continue to be a world without nuclear weapons,&quot; Gabriel continued -- the stated aim of US nuclear policy under former president Barack Obama.

Historically a close US ally and key NATO member, nuclear weapons were a divisive issue in Germany`s Cold War politics.

Berlin does not have its own arsenal, but the Pentagon maintained nuclear warheads in Germany as part of a gigantic military presence designed to deter Soviet invasion of western Europe.

The issue has been rediscovered by frontline politicians in the wake of Trump`s election.

Martin Schulz, a failed challenger to Chancellor Angela Merkel in elections last September, called during the campaign for remaining American bombs to be removed from Germany.

The German response to the US nuclear review comes on the heels of condemnations from Russia, China, North Korea and Iran.

'As in the times of the Cold War, we in Europe are especially endangered' by 'a renewed nuclear arms race', Sigmar Gabriel said

Europe must lead the way in pushing for nuclear disarmament after Washington proposed upgrading and expanding the United States` nuclear arsenal, German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said Sunday. "As in the times of the Cold War, we in Europe are especially endangered" by "a renewed nuclear arms race", Gabriel said. "That is why precisely we in Europe must begin new initiatives for arms control and disarmament." Gabriel was responding to a so-called Nuclear Posture Review released Friday by the Pentagon that details the US military`s vision of nuclear threats and its response in the coming decades. Upgrading the US arsenal and complementing massive "strategic" bombs with smaller "tactical" weapons was "aimed at making use of nuclear weapons less likely", President Donald Trump said in a statement. American nuclear planners believe potential adversaries abroad, especially Russia, assume America would never use its existing arsenal as the effects would be too devastating and provoke globally catastrophic retaliation. "The US and NATO require a wider range of credible low-yield nuclear options" to deter Russia from using its own smaller nuclear weapons, Greg Weaver, the deputy director of strategic capabilities for the military`s Joint Staff, told reporters Friday. Gabriel acknowledged that Russia`s annexation of Crimea from Ukraine had led to a "dramatic loss of trust towards Russia" in Europe as well as Washington, and that "signs that Russia is re-arming, not only conventionally but with nuclear weapons, are obvious". But instead of developing new weapons, Germany`s top diplomat called for "existing arms control treaties to be upheld unconditionally". Berlin would press "with its allies and partners" for further worldwide disarmament, he said. "Our long-term aim must continue to be a world without nuclear weapons," Gabriel continued -- the stated aim of US nuclear policy under former president Barack Obama. Historically a close US ally and key NATO member, nuclear weapons were a divisive issue in Germany`s Cold War politics. Berlin does not have its own arsenal, but the Pentagon maintained nuclear warheads in Germany as part of a gigantic military presence designed to deter Soviet invasion of western Europe. The issue has been rediscovered by frontline politicians in the wake of Trump`s election. Martin Schulz, a failed challenger to Chancellor Angela Merkel in elections last September, called during the campaign for remaining American bombs to be removed from Germany. The German response to the US nuclear review comes on the heels of condemnations from Russia, China, North Korea and Iran.

Europe must brake mounting nuclear arms race: Germany

China on Tuesday decried US President Donald Trump&#39;s first National Security Strategy, which described Beijing as a challenge to American power, as a &quot;Cold War mentality&quot; that will only harm Washington.

&quot;Any country, or any report, which distorts the facts, or maliciously slanders will only do so in vain,&quot; foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying told a regular news briefing.

The two countries have been locked in an increasingly acrimonious battle over trade issues, with Washington taking unprecedented steps to investigate and add tariffs to Chinese-made goods.

Trump&#39;s security strategy -- 11 months in the making -- takes a step further, pillorying China as a &quot;revisionist power&quot; seeking to displace the United States in Asia.

&quot;We urge the United States to stop intentionally distorting China&#39;s strategic intentions and to abandon outdated notions such as the Cold War mentality and zero-sum game, otherwise it will only harm itself or others,&quot; Hua said.

Hua launched a vigorous defence of Beijing&#39;s foreign policy.&nbsp;

&quot;China will never pursue its own development at the expense of other countries&#39; interests.&quot;&nbsp;

Hua added: &quot;At the same time we will never give up our legitimate rights and interests.&quot;

The security strategy contrasts with the friendly nature of Trump&#39;s first state visit to Beijing in November, when he received a lavish welcome and repeatedly praised President Xi Jinping.

Trump's security strategy -- 11 months in the making -- takes a step further, pillorying China as a 'revisionist power' seeking to displace the United States in Asia

China on Tuesday decried US President Donald Trump's first National Security Strategy, which described Beijing as a challenge to American power, as a "Cold War mentality" that will only harm Washington. "Any country, or any report, which distorts the facts, or maliciously slanders will only do so in vain," foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying told a regular news briefing. The two countries have been locked in an increasingly acrimonious battle over trade issues, with Washington taking unprecedented steps to investigate and add tariffs to Chinese-made goods. Trump's security strategy -- 11 months in the making -- takes a step further, pillorying China as a "revisionist power" seeking to displace the United States in Asia. "We urge the United States to stop intentionally distorting China's strategic intentions and to abandon outdated notions such as the Cold War mentality and zero-sum game, otherwise it will only harm itself or others," Hua said. Hua launched a vigorous defence of Beijing's foreign policy. "China will never pursue its own development at the expense of other countries' interests." Hua added: "At the same time we will never give up our legitimate rights and interests." The security strategy contrasts with the friendly nature of Trump's first state visit to Beijing in November, when he received a lavish welcome and repeatedly praised President Xi Jinping.

China slams US security strategy as 'Cold War mentality'

A US&nbsp;soldier who deserted to North Korea more than half a century ago, but who was eventually allowed to leave the secretive state, has died in Japan aged 77.

One of the Cold War&#39;s strangest dramas began in 1965 when&nbsp;Charles&nbsp;Robert&nbsp;Jenkins, then a 24-year-old army sergeant nicknamed &quot;Scooter&quot; from tiny Rich Square in North Carolina, disappeared one January night while on patrol near the demilitarised zone between the two Koreas.

At an emotional court martial in Japan in 2004,&nbsp;Jenkins&nbsp;- who had never gone to high school - said he deserted to avoid hazardous duty in South Korea and escape combat in Vietnam.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>You don&#39;t say no to North Korea. You say one thing bad about Kim Il-sung and then you dig your own hole because you&#39;re gone,&#39;&nbsp;Jenkins&nbsp;told his court-martial, referring to the founder of the secretive state</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=You don't say no to North Korea. You say one thing bad about Kim Il-sung and then you dig your own hole because you're gone,'?Jenkins?told his court-martial, referring to the founder of the secretive state" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

&quot;It was Christmas time, it was also cold and dark. I started to drink alcohol. I never had drunk so much alcohol,&quot; he said in a thick Southern accent, choking back sobs.

He drank 10 beers, took his men on patrol and told them to wait while he checked the road below. He then walked towards North Korea, holding a rifle with a white t-shirt tied around it. He said he had planned to go to Russia and turn himself in and had not expected North Korea to keep him.

While in North Korea, where he taught English to soldiers and portrayed an evil US&nbsp;spy in a propaganda film,&nbsp;Jenkins&nbsp;met and married Hitomi Soga, a Japanese woman 20 years his junior who had been kidnapped by North Korea to help train spies.

Fear for his safety and the family he built with Soga made it impossible to refuse any demands made on him,&nbsp;Jenkins&nbsp;said.

&quot;You don&#39;t say no to North Korea. You say one thing bad about Kim Il-sung and then you dig your own hole because you&#39;re gone,&quot;&nbsp;Jenkins&nbsp;told his court-martial, referring to the founder of the secretive state.

Soga was allowed to return to Japan in 2002 and&nbsp;Jenkins&nbsp;followed with their two North Korean-born daughters in 2004.

After serving a token 30-day sentence for desertion,&nbsp;Jenkins&nbsp;moved with his family to Sado, Soga&#39;s rural hometown, late in 2004. He subsequently worked in a gift shop and wrote a book about his experiences in North Korea.

A Sado town official confirmed his death but could give no further details.

At an emotional court martial in Japan in 2004,?Charles Robert Jenkins?-- who had never gone to high school -- said he deserted to avoid hazardous duty in South Korea and escape combat in Vietnam

A US soldier who deserted to North Korea more than half a century ago, but who was eventually allowed to leave the secretive state, has died in Japan aged 77. One of the Cold War's strangest dramas began in 1965 when Charles Robert Jenkins, then a 24-year-old army sergeant nicknamed "Scooter" from tiny Rich Square in North Carolina, disappeared one January night while on patrol near the demilitarised zone between the two Koreas. At an emotional court martial in Japan in 2004, Jenkins - who had never gone to high school - said he deserted to avoid hazardous duty in South Korea and escape combat in Vietnam. You don't say no to North Korea. You say one thing bad about Kim Il-sung and then you dig your own hole because you're gone,' Jenkins told his court-martial, referring to the founder of the secretive state × "It was Christmas time, it was also cold and dark. I started to drink alcohol. I never had drunk so much alcohol," he said in a thick Southern accent, choking back sobs. He drank 10 beers, took his men on patrol and told them to wait while he checked the road below. He then walked towards North Korea, holding a rifle with a white t-shirt tied around it. He said he had planned to go to Russia and turn himself in and had not expected North Korea to keep him. While in North Korea, where he taught English to soldiers and portrayed an evil US spy in a propaganda film, Jenkins met and married Hitomi Soga, a Japanese woman 20 years his junior who had been kidnapped by North Korea to help train spies. Fear for his safety and the family he built with Soga made it impossible to refuse any demands made on him, Jenkins said. "You don't say no to North Korea. You say one thing bad about Kim Il-sung and then you dig your own hole because you're gone," Jenkins told his court-martial, referring to the founder of the secretive state. Soga was allowed to return to Japan in 2002 and Jenkins followed with their two North Korean-born daughters in 2004. After serving a token 30-day sentence for desertion, Jenkins moved with his family to Sado, Soga's rural hometown, late in 2004. He subsequently worked in a gift shop and wrote a book about his experiences in North Korea. A Sado town official confirmed his death but could give no further details.

US soldier who defected to North Korea in 1965 dies

Russia has been banned from the 2018 Winter Olympic in Pyeongchang, South Korea. The ban was imposed when Russian Olympic Committee was found guilty of alleged &quot;state-sponsored doping&quot;. Even government officials are prohibited to attend the events, their flag and symbols will not be displayed and their anthem will not be played.

Thomas Bach, President of International Olympic Committee said in a Press Conference, &quot;Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) is banned from competing in the upcoming Winter Olympics but the athlete can participate, be it individual or team competitions, under the name &quot;Olympic Athlete from Russia&quot; with the acronym OAR. Olympic anthem will be played at any ceremony.&quot;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The purpose of Olympic games is to spread the philosophy of creating a peaceful and better world. Those nations which were engaged in a war or violated human rights have been banished from the games.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The purpose of Olympic games is to spread the philosophy of creating a peaceful and better world. Those nations which were engaged in a war or violated human rights have been banished from the games." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

The individual athlete will participate if they come out &quot;clean&quot;. They will wear the jersey with the abbreviation &quot;OAR&quot; and will carry the Olympic flag. Thomas Bach also mentioned, &quot;The Russian doping system is an unprecedented attack on the integrity of the Olympic games and sports.&quot;

The purpose of Olympic games is to spread the philosophy of creating a peaceful and better world. Those nations which were engaged in a war or violated human rights have been banished from the games. But the case of Russia has gone far beyond. The doping case may not be a grievous crime against humanity or it might not cause a war but it may snag a healthy competition and deal a critical blow to the prestige of the Olympics.

But this punishment is too severe to handle. There are 32 games where Russian contenders have a very high chance of winning, and this harsh decision could completely jeopardise that possibility. Biathlon, Cross-Country Skiing, Curling, Figure Skating, Freestyle Skiing, Ice Hockey, Luge, Short Track Speedskating, Skeleton, Snowboard and Speedskating are the games where Russian team had the best chances of getting the medal.

Russia has already been banned for the Winter Paralympic Games by the International Paralympic Committee for the same doping charges.

Many in the sports circuit and beyond is raising the question whether such actions are really an attempt to keep international sporting events clean of drugs or is it a deliberate attempt to politicise the event? After all, the western world which controls such august sporting bodies has not been in best of terms with Putin&#39;s Russia. So a pertinent question could well be, is Russia suffering Putin&#39;s punishment.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>It is yet to be seen how Vladimir Putin, one of the most influential leaders in the world, responds to this ban. He is not known to be taking national humiliation quietly.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=It is yet to be seen how Vladimir Putin, one of the most influential leaders in the world, responds to this ban. He is not known to be taking national humiliation quietly." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

The IOC is banning Russian officials from attending the event too.&nbsp;It is yet to be seen how Vladimir Putin, one of the most influential leaders in the world, responds to this ban. He is not known to be taking national humiliation quietly.

It will indeed be very unfortunate if the arena of Olympics sports turns into another Cold War between Russia and the West.

Athletes are requesting people not to judge other athletes if they participate in the games. Recently, two-time Olympic champion, Sergei Chepikov, urged people not to criticise the athletes who eventually decide to compete under a neutral flag at the Winter Olympics. But if the IOC is banning Russia, then why it is inviting athlete to play as an individual--deprived of their flag, national anthem and their pride. After all, the main motivation for a participating player is to hear one&#39;s own national anthem during the ceremony. Player represent their nation, not their individuality.

Whether it is a war against drugs or war against Russia, this chain of events has created a state of pain and anger for all Russian sportspersons and related authorities.

There is definitely a need to punish those who are violating the guidelines of such big and expensive events but this collective punishment and to ban a country from participation is not the solution.

(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

There is definitely a need to punish those who are violating the guidelines of such big and expensive events but this collective punishment and to ban a country from participation is not the solution

Russia has been banned from the 2018 Winter Olympic in Pyeongchang, South Korea. The ban was imposed when Russian Olympic Committee was found guilty of alleged "state-sponsored doping". Even government officials are prohibited to attend the events, their flag and symbols will not be displayed and their anthem will not be played. Thomas Bach, President of International Olympic Committee said in a Press Conference, "Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) is banned from competing in the upcoming Winter Olympics but the athlete can participate, be it individual or team competitions, under the name "Olympic Athlete from Russia" with the acronym OAR. Olympic anthem will be played at any ceremony." The purpose of Olympic games is to spread the philosophy of creating a peaceful and better world. Those nations which were engaged in a war or violated human rights have been banished from the games. × The individual athlete will participate if they come out "clean". They will wear the jersey with the abbreviation "OAR" and will carry the Olympic flag. Thomas Bach also mentioned, "The Russian doping system is an unprecedented attack on the integrity of the Olympic games and sports." The purpose of Olympic games is to spread the philosophy of creating a peaceful and better world. Those nations which were engaged in a war or violated human rights have been banished from the games. But the case of Russia has gone far beyond. The doping case may not be a grievous crime against humanity or it might not cause a war but it may snag a healthy competition and deal a critical blow to the prestige of the Olympics. But this punishment is too severe to handle. There are 32 games where Russian contenders have a very high chance of winning, and this harsh decision could completely jeopardise that possibility. Biathlon, Cross-Country Skiing, Curling, Figure Skating, Freestyle Skiing, Ice Hockey, Luge, Short Track Speedskating, Skeleton, Snowboard and Speedskating are the games where Russian team had the best chances of getting the medal. Russia has already been banned for the Winter Paralympic Games by the International Paralympic Committee for the same doping charges. Many in the sports circuit and beyond is raising the question whether such actions are really an attempt to keep international sporting events clean of drugs or is it a deliberate attempt to politicise the event? After all, the western world which controls such august sporting bodies has not been in best of terms with Putin's Russia. So a pertinent question could well be, is Russia suffering Putin's punishment. It is yet to be seen how Vladimir Putin, one of the most influential leaders in the world, responds to this ban. He is not known to be taking national humiliation quietly. × The IOC is banning Russian officials from attending the event too. It is yet to be seen how Vladimir Putin, one of the most influential leaders in the world, responds to this ban. He is not known to be taking national humiliation quietly. It will indeed be very unfortunate if the arena of Olympics sports turns into another Cold War between Russia and the West. Athletes are requesting people not to judge other athletes if they participate in the games. Recently, two-time Olympic champion, Sergei Chepikov, urged people not to criticise the athletes who eventually decide to compete under a neutral flag at the Winter Olympics. But if the IOC is banning Russia, then why it is inviting athlete to play as an individual--deprived of their flag, national anthem and their pride. After all, the main motivation for a participating player is to hear one's own national anthem during the ceremony. Player represent their nation, not their individuality. Whether it is a war against drugs or war against Russia, this chain of events has created a state of pain and anger for all Russian sportspersons and related authorities. There is definitely a need to punish those who are violating the guidelines of such big and expensive events but this collective punishment and to ban a country from participation is not the solution. (Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

Opinion: Ban on Russia, why is Putin silent?

From a Yemeni missile attack to the resignation of Lebanon&#39;s prime minister, the &quot;Cold War&quot; between the Middle East rivals Saudi Arabia and Iran has been heating up.

Experts believe the risk of a direct military clash is low, but why have tensions escalated now and how will the crisis evolve?

What are the origins of the rivalry?&nbsp;

Sunni powerhouse Saudi Arabia and Iran, the predominant Shiite power, have a long-standing rivalry based as much on geostrategic interests as religious differences.

Facing off across the Gulf, the two energy-rich powers have for decades stood on opposing sides of conflicts in the Middle East.

The Iranian revolution of 1979 and the advent of the Islamic Republic -- with its fiercely anti-American slant -- were perceived as a double threat to the conservative Sunni monarchies of the Arabian Peninsula, allied with the United States.

Saudi Arabia was a key financial backer of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein during his 1980-1988 war with Iran.

With Iraq weakened following the 1991 Gulf War, Saudi Arabia and Iran became &quot;the two main regional powers&quot;, said Clement Therme, a researcher at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS).

How have tensions escalated recently?&nbsp;

The latest round of tensions began when Riyadh and Tehran broke off diplomatic relations in January 2016, after Iranians stormed Saudi Arabia&#39;s embassy and consulate in response to the execution of a prominent Shiite cleric.

That followed the 2015 nuclear deal between Tehran and six world powers, which Riyadh feared was a step towards ending Iran&#39;s international isolation.

Rhetoric between the two grew increasingly belligerent, including over Saudi Arabia&#39;s Gulf neighbour Qatar. Riyadh and several of its Sunni allies broke off diplomatic relations with Qatar in June 2017, accusing Doha of support for extremism and links with Iran, claims that it denies.

On the first weekend of November, the animosity reached new heights. First, the Saudi-supported prime minister of Lebanon, Saad Hariri, in a broadcast from Riyadh announced his resignation, blaming Iran&#39;s &quot;grip&quot; on his country via Shiite movement Hezbollah.

Several hours later, Saudi Arabia said its air defences near Riyadh intercepted and destroyed a missile fired from Yemen, where a Saudi-led coalition is battling Iran-backed Shiite rebels.

That set off a fierce war of words between Riyadh and Tehran, with Saudi Arabia&#39;s powerful Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman accusing Iran of &quot;direct military aggression&quot;. Tehran denied any involvement in the missile attack, with President Hassan Rouhani warned that Iranian &quot;might&quot; would fend off any challenge.

Why now?&nbsp;

&quot;The main cause of the current tensions is related to the proxy confrontation between Iran and Saudi Arabia,&quot; Therme said, pointing to wars in Iraq, Syria and Yemen.

Recent months have seen changes in these confrontations that appear to have brought the tensions to a head.

In Iraq and Syria, the increasingly successful campaign against the Islamic State group has changed the situation on the ground. Offensives in both countries have forced the jihadists from nearly all the territory they seized in mid-2014.

As the threat from a common enemy &quot;has imploded, tensions between these historic adversaries have escalated&quot;, said Max Abrahms, professor of political science at Northeastern University in Boston.

As Iraq looks to a post-IS era, Riyadh has been taking steps to build stronger ties with the country&#39;s Shiite-dominated government. A flurry of visits between the two countries this year saw talk of a warming of ties, including a trip by Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi to Riyadh in late October.

In Syria, meanwhile, the Iran-backed government of President Bashar al-Assad has over the past year managed to reassert control over large parts of the country by defeating, among others, rebel groups backed by Riyadh.

&quot;The Saudi-Iranian rivalry has become the organising principle for Mideast alliances, reminiscent of how the Cold War divided countries along with US and Soviet lines,&quot; Abrahms said.

Analysts said the election as US president a year ago of Donald Trump has also contributed to the rise in tensions. Trump&#39;s open hostility towards Tehran has &quot;released anti-Iranian energies in the Arabian Peninsula&quot; and emboldened Riyadh, Therme said.

How important is the Sunni-Shiite divide?&nbsp;

The Sunni-Shiite divide between Saudi Arabia and Tehran is a crucial factor in conflicts between the two countries.

Religious tensions have heightened since the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq that brought the majority Shiites to power in Baghdad instead of Saddam&#39;s Sunni-dominated regime.

The 2011 Arab Spring uprisings, which saw Iran support the demands of sizeable Shiite minorities in Gulf monarchies, was another turning point, Therme said.

&quot;Arab states appeared vulnerable and Iran was then defined as the main threat to regional stability,&quot; he said.

Iran has even called into doubt the suitability of the Saudi royal family to serve as custodians of Mecca and Medina, the holiest cities in Islam -- especially after a stampede at the annual hajj pilgrimage in 2015 left hundreds of Iranians dead.

How will the crisis evolve?&nbsp;

While the increase in tensions has raised serious concerns, few expect an outright military confrontation.

&quot;A broader regional conflict remains unlikely,&quot; said Graham Griffiths, a senior analyst at consulting firm Control Risks, saying Riyadh would instead look to use the latest missile incident to push for further sanctions against Tehran.

Therme agreed that both sides would steer clear of open conflict.

&quot;Iran has experience of the war with Iraq... and Saudi Arabia is bogged down in Yemen, after failing to define the future of the Syrian revolution... and counter Iran&#39;s influence in Iraq,&quot; he said.

&quot;Saudi Arabia&#39;s rhetoric does not necessarily reflect the interest in war,&quot; consulting firm Eurasia Group said, pointing to a potential domestic reason for Riyadh&#39;s combative tone.

Prince Mohammed is looking to &quot;leverage the nationalist rhetoric to solidify his position&quot; as he pursues an anti-corruption purge some see as an attempt to cement his hold on power, the group said.

&quot;At the same time, escalatory statements against Iran help shift the media attention away from the domestic power struggle,&quot; it said.

Experts believe the risk of a direct military clash is low, but why have tensions escalated now and how will the crisis evolve?

From a Yemeni missile attack to the resignation of Lebanon's prime minister, the "Cold War" between the Middle East rivals Saudi Arabia and Iran has been heating up. Experts believe the risk of a direct military clash is low, but why have tensions escalated now and how will the crisis evolve? What are the origins of the rivalry? Sunni powerhouse Saudi Arabia and Iran, the predominant Shiite power, have a long-standing rivalry based as much on geostrategic interests as religious differences. Facing off across the Gulf, the two energy-rich powers have for decades stood on opposing sides of conflicts in the Middle East. The Iranian revolution of 1979 and the advent of the Islamic Republic -- with its fiercely anti-American slant -- were perceived as a double threat to the conservative Sunni monarchies of the Arabian Peninsula, allied with the United States. Saudi Arabia was a key financial backer of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein during his 1980-1988 war with Iran. With Iraq weakened following the 1991 Gulf War, Saudi Arabia and Iran became "the two main regional powers", said Clement Therme, a researcher at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). How have tensions escalated recently? The latest round of tensions began when Riyadh and Tehran broke off diplomatic relations in January 2016, after Iranians stormed Saudi Arabia's embassy and consulate in response to the execution of a prominent Shiite cleric. That followed the 2015 nuclear deal between Tehran and six world powers, which Riyadh feared was a step towards ending Iran's international isolation. Rhetoric between the two grew increasingly belligerent, including over Saudi Arabia's Gulf neighbour Qatar. Riyadh and several of its Sunni allies broke off diplomatic relations with Qatar in June 2017, accusing Doha of support for extremism and links with Iran, claims that it denies. On the first weekend of November, the animosity reached new heights. First, the Saudi-supported prime minister of Lebanon, Saad Hariri, in a broadcast from Riyadh announced his resignation, blaming Iran's "grip" on his country via Shiite movement Hezbollah. Several hours later, Saudi Arabia said its air defences near Riyadh intercepted and destroyed a missile fired from Yemen, where a Saudi-led coalition is battling Iran-backed Shiite rebels. That set off a fierce war of words between Riyadh and Tehran, with Saudi Arabia's powerful Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman accusing Iran of "direct military aggression". Tehran denied any involvement in the missile attack, with President Hassan Rouhani warned that Iranian "might" would fend off any challenge. Why now? "The main cause of the current tensions is related to the proxy confrontation between Iran and Saudi Arabia," Therme said, pointing to wars in Iraq, Syria and Yemen. Recent months have seen changes in these confrontations that appear to have brought the tensions to a head. In Iraq and Syria, the increasingly successful campaign against the Islamic State group has changed the situation on the ground. Offensives in both countries have forced the jihadists from nearly all the territory they seized in mid-2014. As the threat from a common enemy "has imploded, tensions between these historic adversaries have escalated", said Max Abrahms, professor of political science at Northeastern University in Boston. As Iraq looks to a post-IS era, Riyadh has been taking steps to build stronger ties with the country's Shiite-dominated government. A flurry of visits between the two countries this year saw talk of a warming of ties, including a trip by Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi to Riyadh in late October. In Syria, meanwhile, the Iran-backed government of President Bashar al-Assad has over the past year managed to reassert control over large parts of the country by defeating, among others, rebel groups backed by Riyadh. "The Saudi-Iranian rivalry has become the organising principle for Mideast alliances, reminiscent of how the Cold War divided countries along with US and Soviet lines," Abrahms said. Analysts said the election as US president a year ago of Donald Trump has also contributed to the rise in tensions. Trump's open hostility towards Tehran has "released anti-Iranian energies in the Arabian Peninsula" and emboldened Riyadh, Therme said. How important is the Sunni-Shiite divide? The Sunni-Shiite divide between Saudi Arabia and Tehran is a crucial factor in conflicts between the two countries. Religious tensions have heightened since the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq that brought the majority Shiites to power in Baghdad instead of Saddam's Sunni-dominated regime. The 2011 Arab Spring uprisings, which saw Iran support the demands of sizeable Shiite minorities in Gulf monarchies, was another turning point, Therme said. "Arab states appeared vulnerable and Iran was then defined as the main threat to regional stability," he said. Iran has even called into doubt the suitability of the Saudi royal family to serve as custodians of Mecca and Medina, the holiest cities in Islam -- especially after a stampede at the annual hajj pilgrimage in 2015 left hundreds of Iranians dead. How will the crisis evolve? While the increase in tensions has raised serious concerns, few expect an outright military confrontation. "A broader regional conflict remains unlikely," said Graham Griffiths, a senior analyst at consulting firm Control Risks, saying Riyadh would instead look to use the latest missile incident to push for further sanctions against Tehran. Therme agreed that both sides would steer clear of open conflict. "Iran has experience of the war with Iraq... and Saudi Arabia is bogged down in Yemen, after failing to define the future of the Syrian revolution... and counter Iran's influence in Iraq," he said. "Saudi Arabia's rhetoric does not necessarily reflect the interest in war," consulting firm Eurasia Group said, pointing to a potential domestic reason for Riyadh's combative tone. Prince Mohammed is looking to "leverage the nationalist rhetoric to solidify his position" as he pursues an anti-corruption purge some see as an attempt to cement his hold on power, the group said. "At the same time, escalatory statements against Iran help shift the media attention away from the domestic power struggle," it said.

As Iran-Saudi 'Cold War' heats up, what next?

The US&nbsp;government made it tougher on <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/cuba-undeterred-amid-trumps-tightening-of-sanctions-16924">Wednesday for Americans to visit Cuba and do business </a>in the country, making good on a pledge by President Donald Trump to roll back his Democratic predecessor&rsquo;s move toward warmer ties with Havana.

The restrictions, which take effect on Thursday, are aimed at preventing the military, intelligence and security arms of Cuba&rsquo;s Communist government from benefiting from American tourists and trade, the White House said.

They fill in the regulatory detail on a Trump policy speech in June, in which the Republican president called for a tightening of restrictions. He said then that the Cuban government continued to oppress its people and former President Barack Obama had made too many concessions in his 2014 diplomatic breakthrough with Washington&rsquo;s former Cold War foe.

The regulations include a ban on Americans doing business with some 180 Cuban government entities, holding companies, and tourism companies. The list includes 83 state-owned hotels, including famous hotels in Old Havana such as Ernest Hemingway&rsquo;s erstwhile favorite haunt the Hotel Ambos Mundos, as well as the city&rsquo;s new luxury shopping mall.

&ldquo;All these measures hurt the Cuban people,&rdquo; said Cuba&rsquo;s Foreign Ministry chief for U.S. Affairs Josefina Vidal. She said that government revenue funds Cuba&rsquo;s free education and healthcare systems.

Speaking to reporters in Havana, she called the list &ldquo;arbitrary&rdquo; and the regulations a further &ldquo;setback&rdquo; in U.S.-Cuban relations.

The new rules were criticized as too lax by Republican leaders who favor a hard line, but as counterproductive by those who agreed with Obama&rsquo;s rationale for the detente: that Washington&rsquo;s many decades of isolating the Caribbean island failed to force change.

The Cuban hotels listed included those run by military-linked chains Gaviota and Habaguanex. Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, a Cuban-American, said the list failed to go far enough because it omitted companies like Gran Caribe Hotel Group and Cubanacan that have ties to the Cuban government.

Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy said the regulations were unfair to Cuba, coming as Trump was being &ldquo;feted in Beijing&rdquo; by a Communist government &ldquo;in a country to which Americans can travel freely.&rdquo;

&ldquo;The hypocrisy of the White House ideologues is glaring,&rdquo; Leahy said in a statement.

The US government made it tougher on Wednesday for Americans to visit Cuba and do business in the country, making good on a pledge by President Donald Trump to roll back his Democratic predecessor?s move toward warmer ties with Havana.

The US government made it tougher on Wednesday for Americans to visit Cuba and do business in the country, making good on a pledge by President Donald Trump to roll back his Democratic predecessor’s move toward warmer ties with Havana. The restrictions, which take effect on Thursday, are aimed at preventing the military, intelligence and security arms of Cuba’s Communist government from benefiting from American tourists and trade, the White House said. They fill in the regulatory detail on a Trump policy speech in June, in which the Republican president called for a tightening of restrictions. He said then that the Cuban government continued to oppress its people and former President Barack Obama had made too many concessions in his 2014 diplomatic breakthrough with Washington’s former Cold War foe. The regulations include a ban on Americans doing business with some 180 Cuban government entities, holding companies, and tourism companies. The list includes 83 state-owned hotels, including famous hotels in Old Havana such as Ernest Hemingway’s erstwhile favorite haunt the Hotel Ambos Mundos, as well as the city’s new luxury shopping mall. “All these measures hurt the Cuban people,” said Cuba’s Foreign Ministry chief for U.S. Affairs Josefina Vidal. She said that government revenue funds Cuba’s free education and healthcare systems. Speaking to reporters in Havana, she called the list “arbitrary” and the regulations a further “setback” in U.S.-Cuban relations. The new rules were criticized as too lax by Republican leaders who favor a hard line, but as counterproductive by those who agreed with Obama’s rationale for the detente: that Washington’s many decades of isolating the Caribbean island failed to force change. The Cuban hotels listed included those run by military-linked chains Gaviota and Habaguanex. Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, a Cuban-American, said the list failed to go far enough because it omitted companies like Gran Caribe Hotel Group and Cubanacan that have ties to the Cuban government. Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy said the regulations were unfair to Cuba, coming as Trump was being “feted in Beijing” by a Communist government “in a country to which Americans can travel freely.” “The hypocrisy of the White House ideologues is glaring,” Leahy said in a statement.

US government restricts travel and trade with Cuba

As news broke that Hugh Hefner, founder of Playboy, had died aged 91, many instantly pointed out to the complicated legacy of both the magazine and the man behind it. Widely portrayed as one with a bevy of young lovers and infamous parties at the Playboy mansion, it would be easy to dismiss Hefner as merely an enduring barrier to the fight for gender equality. Yet to do so would to overlook the significant cultural impact of both Hefner and Playboy, particularly during the 1950s under the shroud of Cold War anxieties.

Born April 9, 1926 in Chicago, Illinois, Hefner&rsquo;s entry into the world of journalism came as a teenager writing for a military magazine during World War II. After graduating from the University of Illinois, he began working as a copy-editor for men&rsquo;s magazine Esquire, before a pay dispute motivated him to leave the magazine in 1952.

He took out a mortgage and borrowed money from his mother to launch Playboy in 1953. The first issue, which famously featured Marilyn Monroe in the centrefold, indicated the magazine&rsquo;s explicit engagement with matters of sex, fun, and consumerism. In doing so, it challenged the idea of masculinity that had evolved around the nuclear family, and that held particular purchase in the early years of Cold War America.

A new man

The nuclear family - a mum, dad, and kids - was seen as an important barrier to communism in the years after World War II. This relied on specific roles for men and women to uphold the strength of the family and, by extension, the security of the nation.

<figure class="align-right zoomable"><a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/files/187951/area14mp/file-20170928-1476-1kibkhs.jpg"><img alt="" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/files/187951/width237/file-20170928-1476-1kibkhs.jpg" /></a>

<figcaption>
The first cover of Playboy magazine in 1953. <a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playboy">Wikimedia</a>

For American men who had returned from war, being a &ldquo;proper&rdquo; man meant marriage, procreation, and breadwinning. Women were in control of the domestic space. To fall short of this was, as the scholar <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books/about/The_Hearts_of_Men.html?id=3SBFAAAAYAAJ&amp;redir_esc=y">Barbara Ehrenreich</a> notes, to be &ldquo;less than grown up &hellip; the man who willingly deviated was judged to be somehow &lsquo;less than a man&rsquo;.&rdquo;
</figcaption>
</figure>

Playboy dared to go beyond these expectations. Rather than restricting masculinity to the suburban malaise of postwar America, Playboy offered a model of manhood that was intelligent, fun, and sexy and, crucially, set in opposition to marriage.

Such a model was surely inspired by Hefner&rsquo;s own restlessness. Married to Mildred &ldquo;Millie&rdquo; Williams in 1949, he was already feeling the monotony of suburban life. The conventional markers of masculine success &ndash; a beautiful wife, a successful job, and an impressive home &ndash; left him, points our Hefner&#39;s biographer Russell Miller, &ldquo;bored beyond belief&rdquo;. They divorced in 1959.

Hefner, through his life and Playboy, turned the home from a woman&rsquo;s domain to an expression of a man&rsquo;s sophistication and &ldquo;urbane personality&rdquo;. This man could be interested in art, foreign films and literature (the magazine is famously remembered for publishing the works of authors like Ray Bradbury and Jack Kerouac), and took pleasure in bachelorhood, eagerly eschewing marriage and family.

In contrast, the mid-century Australian periodical Man magazine, was a place for men to dream of a life outside marriage, but ultimately accept their fate. Playboy rejected these notions.

Hefner and women

Of course, Playboy&rsquo;s attitude towards women is rightly remembered as problematic at best. The early years of the magazine portrayed American women as emasculating, money-hungry and obsessed with tricking a man into marriage. Such representations are surely offensive, but they speak to an uncertainty and tension that was circulating in the cultural landscape of the postwar US.

As the historian Carrie Pitzulo notes, to say that Playboy is sexist is nothing new. Indeed in his later years, surrounded by a throng of young, attractive women, Hefner seemed to embrace the lifestyle that Playboy advocated to an almost parodic extent. More recently, Playboy&rsquo;s attitude to women has been demonstrated by its on-off association with nudity.

<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84841/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" width="1" />However, we might look at Playboy&rsquo;s early years as evidence that masculinity in the 1950s was more complex than popular memories acknowledge, and of the cultural upheaval that Hefner and his iconic publication produced.

&nbsp;

This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" nofollow="" rel="">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/hugh-hefner-playboy-and-being-a-man-during-the-cold-war-84841" nofollow="" rel="">original article</a>.

&nbsp;

Playboy?s early years is evidence that masculinity is more complex than popular memories acknowledge, and of the cultural upheaval that Hefner and his iconic publication produced.

As news broke that Hugh Hefner, founder of Playboy, had died aged 91, many instantly pointed out to the complicated legacy of both the magazine and the man behind it. Widely portrayed as one with a bevy of young lovers and infamous parties at the Playboy mansion, it would be easy to dismiss Hefner as merely an enduring barrier to the fight for gender equality. Yet to do so would to overlook the significant cultural impact of both Hefner and Playboy, particularly during the 1950s under the shroud of Cold War anxieties. Born April 9, 1926 in Chicago, Illinois, Hefner’s entry into the world of journalism came as a teenager writing for a military magazine during World War II. After graduating from the University of Illinois, he began working as a copy-editor for men’s magazine Esquire, before a pay dispute motivated him to leave the magazine in 1952. He took out a mortgage and borrowed money from his mother to launch Playboy in 1953. The first issue, which famously featured Marilyn Monroe in the centrefold, indicated the magazine’s explicit engagement with matters of sex, fun, and consumerism. In doing so, it challenged the idea of masculinity that had evolved around the nuclear family, and that held particular purchase in the early years of Cold War America. A new man The nuclear family - a mum, dad, and kids - was seen as an important barrier to communism in the years after World War II. This relied on specific roles for men and women to uphold the strength of the family and, by extension, the security of the nation. The first cover of Playboy magazine in 1953. Wikimedia For American men who had returned from war, being a “proper” man meant marriage, procreation, and breadwinning. Women were in control of the domestic space. To fall short of this was, as the scholar Barbara Ehrenreich notes, to be “less than grown up … the man who willingly deviated was judged to be somehow ‘less than a man’.” Playboy dared to go beyond these expectations. Rather than restricting masculinity to the suburban malaise of postwar America, Playboy offered a model of manhood that was intelligent, fun, and sexy and, crucially, set in opposition to marriage. Such a model was surely inspired by Hefner’s own restlessness. Married to Mildred “Millie” Williams in 1949, he was already feeling the monotony of suburban life. The conventional markers of masculine success – a beautiful wife, a successful job, and an impressive home – left him, points our Hefner's biographer Russell Miller, “bored beyond belief”. They divorced in 1959. Hefner, through his life and Playboy, turned the home from a woman’s domain to an expression of a man’s sophistication and “urbane personality”. This man could be interested in art, foreign films and literature (the magazine is famously remembered for publishing the works of authors like Ray Bradbury and Jack Kerouac), and took pleasure in bachelorhood, eagerly eschewing marriage and family. In contrast, the mid-century Australian periodical Man magazine, was a place for men to dream of a life outside marriage, but ultimately accept their fate. Playboy rejected these notions. Hefner and women Of course, Playboy’s attitude towards women is rightly remembered as problematic at best. The early years of the magazine portrayed American women as emasculating, money-hungry and obsessed with tricking a man into marriage. Such representations are surely offensive, but they speak to an uncertainty and tension that was circulating in the cultural landscape of the postwar US. As the historian Carrie Pitzulo notes, to say that Playboy is sexist is nothing new. Indeed in his later years, surrounded by a throng of young, attractive women, Hefner seemed to embrace the lifestyle that Playboy advocated to an almost parodic extent. More recently, Playboy’s attitude to women has been demonstrated by its on-off association with nudity. However, we might look at Playboy’s early years as evidence that masculinity in the 1950s was more complex than popular memories acknowledge, and of the cultural upheaval that Hefner and his iconic publication produced. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Hefner's Playboy: Being a man during the Cold War

A sudden surge in clashes between Ukrainian forces and Russian-backed rebels killed at least seven people on Monday despite a tattered truce in Ukraine&#39;s war-scarred east.

The overall death toll reported for the past two days rose to 12 after the bloodiest outburst of violence since the former Soviet republic and its foes last month agreed an &quot;indefinite&quot; ceasefire.

The fighting came as Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko urged German Chancellor Angela Merkel to step up economic sanctions against Moscow, and fears grew in Kiev that US support could wane should President Donald Trump draw closer to Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

But Poroshenko cut short his visit to Berlin after hearing news of the deaths, his spokesman told AFP.

&quot;Since Sunday, there have been continuing clashes and heavy attacks on our positions,&quot; Ukraine&#39;s 72nd army brigade spokeswoman Olena Mokrynchuk told AFP.

The military in Kiev said three of its soldiers had died overnight.

An AFP reporter in the town of Avdiivka near the de facto rebel capital Donetsk saw Kiev troops capture three rebels on Monday. Two of them later died of their wounds.

The electricity has been off since Sunday and water supplies are sporadic in Avdiivka amid the shelling and gunfire.

The separatists also reported two civilians deaths from Ukrainian fire around Donetsk.

The bloodshed put at risk yet another attempt by exasperated mediators to end one of Europe&#39;s bloodiest conflicts since the 1990s Balkans wars.The violence coincided with Poroshenko&#39;s visit to Berlin to meet ally Merkel -- the German leader who along with French President Francois Hollande helped hammer out a 2015 peace deal in the Belarusian capital Minsk that has failed to achieve results.

&quot;We are certain that today we need decisive and united action that can motivate Russia to sit at the negotiating table and fully implement the Minsk agreements -- particularly its security component -- to stop civilians from dying,&quot; Poroshenko said in Berlin before entering the meeting.

&quot;We believe that not only should the sanctions be maintained, but they should be intensified as well,&quot; he added.

Merkel said she found the situation &quot;worrying&quot; but gave no indication on whether she intended to add to the pressure on Putin.

The east of Ukraine comprises coal mines and steel mills whose possession is coveted by both sides of the war, which broke out in April 2014.

The clashes started in the Russian-border regions of Donetsk and Lugansk after a February 2014 revolution ousted Ukraine&#39;s Moscow-backed leader and put Kiev on a pro-Western course.

The sides have since agreed to a series of temporary ceasefires and an &quot;indefinite&quot; one on December 23, but none have been respected.

The conflict has killed nearly 10,000 people -- more than half of them civilians -- and plunged Moscow`s relations with the West to a post-Cold War low.

Russia denies backing the insurgents and only admits that &quot;volunteers&quot; and off duty soldiers had entered the war zone of their own free will.

(AFP)

Death toll in the violence rose to 12 even as Ukraine's President, on a visit to Germany, pressed for more sanctions against Moscow

A sudden surge in clashes between Ukrainian forces and Russian-backed rebels killed at least seven people on Monday despite a tattered truce in Ukraine's war-scarred east. The overall death toll reported for the past two days rose to 12 after the bloodiest outburst of violence since the former Soviet republic and its foes last month agreed an "indefinite" ceasefire. The fighting came as Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko urged German Chancellor Angela Merkel to step up economic sanctions against Moscow, and fears grew in Kiev that US support could wane should President Donald Trump draw closer to Russian leader Vladimir Putin. But Poroshenko cut short his visit to Berlin after hearing news of the deaths, his spokesman told AFP. "Since Sunday, there have been continuing clashes and heavy attacks on our positions," Ukraine's 72nd army brigade spokeswoman Olena Mokrynchuk told AFP. The military in Kiev said three of its soldiers had died overnight. An AFP reporter in the town of Avdiivka near the de facto rebel capital Donetsk saw Kiev troops capture three rebels on Monday. Two of them later died of their wounds. The electricity has been off since Sunday and water supplies are sporadic in Avdiivka amid the shelling and gunfire. The separatists also reported two civilians deaths from Ukrainian fire around Donetsk. The bloodshed put at risk yet another attempt by exasperated mediators to end one of Europe's bloodiest conflicts since the 1990s Balkans wars.The violence coincided with Poroshenko's visit to Berlin to meet ally Merkel -- the German leader who along with French President Francois Hollande helped hammer out a 2015 peace deal in the Belarusian capital Minsk that has failed to achieve results. "We are certain that today we need decisive and united action that can motivate Russia to sit at the negotiating table and fully implement the Minsk agreements -- particularly its security component -- to stop civilians from dying," Poroshenko said in Berlin before entering the meeting. "We believe that not only should the sanctions be maintained, but they should be intensified as well," he added. Merkel said she found the situation "worrying" but gave no indication on whether she intended to add to the pressure on Putin. The east of Ukraine comprises coal mines and steel mills whose possession is coveted by both sides of the war, which broke out in April 2014. The clashes started in the Russian-border regions of Donetsk and Lugansk after a February 2014 revolution ousted Ukraine's Moscow-backed leader and put Kiev on a pro-Western course. The sides have since agreed to a series of temporary ceasefires and an "indefinite" one on December 23, but none have been respected. The conflict has killed nearly 10,000 people -- more than half of them civilians -- and plunged Moscow`s relations with the West to a post-Cold War low. Russia denies backing the insurgents and only admits that "volunteers" and off duty soldiers had entered the war zone of their own free will. (AFP)

Ukraine: Fresh violence erupts between govt forces and Russia-backed rebels as month-long truce frays

President-elect Donald Trump indicated Friday he did not fear a new arms race and warned the United States would match any move by another country to boost its nuclear arsenal, in a spectacular new foray into foreign policy.

His stunning -- and initially unexplained -- use of language reminiscent of the Cold War rocked the Washington establishment two days before Christmas, and left Americans baffled by the seemingly mixed messages Trump is sending Russia.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Matters were not helped after his aides struggled to come up with a coherent take on what Trump meant</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Matters were not helped after his aides struggled to come up with a coherent take on what Trump meant" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

Trump began upping the nuclear rhetoric with a bombshell tweet Thursday calling for America to &quot;greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes.&quot;

Anti-proliferation campaigners and lawmakers were aghast at the sabre-rattling talk, though some observers wondered how much stock to put into Trump&#39;s words -- and even whether they may be part of a deliberate strategy to bring about a promised rapprochement with Russia.

Matters were not helped after his aides struggled to come up with a coherent take on what Trump meant, leaving Americans scrambling to make sense of the president-elect&#39;s tweet which, as has often been the case since his election, landed without context or detail.

His remarks came hours after President Vladimir Putin declared Russia needs to &quot;strengthen the military potential of strategic nuclear forces,&quot; and a day after the president-elect met with Pentagon brass.

When asked for clarity, Sean Spicer, the incoming White House press secretary, said Trump would not tolerate other countries increasing their nuclear arsenal without responding.

&quot;There&#39;s a few countries around the globe, Russia being one of them, China, others, that have talked about increasing their nuclear capabilities,&quot; Spicer told the MSNBC news network.

&quot;The president-elect&#39;s point is unless these guys come to their senses and recognise that this is not a smart move, increasing the nuclear stockpile around the globe is not good for anybody, the US is not going to sit back and take it.&quot;

In a subsequent interview on CNN, Spicer warned: &quot;If another country wants to threaten our sovereignty or our safety, he will act.&quot;

Putin sees &#39;nothing unusual&#39;

Early Friday, Trump was quoted telling MSNBC -- when asked in an off-air telephone call to clarify his nuclear policy tweet -- that his administration had no reservations about entering &quot;an arms race.&quot;&nbsp;

&quot;This morning he told me on the phone, &#39;Let it be an arms race. We&#39;ll outmatch them at every pass and outlast them all,&#39;&quot; network host Mika Brzezinksi said.

On Thursday, Trump spokesman Jason Miller had tried to nuance Trump&#39;s tweet and claimed he was actually &quot;referring to the threat of nuclear proliferation and the critical need to prevent it -- particularly to and among terrorist organisations and unstable and rogue regimes.&quot;

The debate marks a jarring departure from the stance of President Barack Obama, who in a famous 2009 speech in Prague called for the elimination of nuclear weapons.

In 2010, Obama and Russia&#39;s then-president Dmitry Medvedev signed the so-called New START treaty that calls for a significant reduction in the nuclear arsenals of both countries.

Ties between Moscow and Washington hit their lowest point since the Cold War under Obama due to the Ukraine crisis and Russia&#39;s military intervention in Syria.

But on Friday, Putin said he found &quot;nothing unusual&quot; about Trump&#39;s call to boost America&#39;s nuclear capability.

&quot;During his election campaign he spoke about the necessity of strengthening the nuclear component of the United States, to strengthen the armed forces,&quot; the Russian leader told his annual year-end press conference.

More at play?

Even as the country reeled from his Twitter outburst, Trump sowed further confusion Friday by releasing a copy of what he called a &quot;very nice letter&quot; in which the Kremlin strongman offered him Christmas greetings and called for greater bilateral cooperation.

Trump has often said he admires Putin&#39;s leadership qualities and the US intelligence community concluded that Russia was responsible for cyber attacks ahead of November&#39;s election that sought to tip the balance in favour of the Republican.

Democratic Congressman Brad Sherman, a senior member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, suggested something more was at play between Trump and Putin.

&quot;One possibility is that this isn&#39;t all nonsense or even a mistake, but rather is part of a choreographed effort&quot; between Putin and Trump, he said on MSNBC.

&quot;One could imagine that they simply re-sign the START treaty, tell us, &#39;Look, we solved this nuclear problem or at least played it down, and now is the time to eliminate sanctions and make other concessions to Russia.&#39;&quot;

Trump&#39;s transition team did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Moves by Trump to ratchet up nuclear capabilities may meet stiff opposition from Democratic lawmakers, though options for blocking him will be limited with Republican majorities in the House and the Senate.

&quot;Congress must not allow the Tweeter in Chief to unleash a dangerous and costly nuclear arms race,&quot; Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders said in a tweet.

(AFP)

After he says US 'must greatly strengthen... nuclear capability', Americans left baffled by mixed message he is sending Russia

President-elect Donald Trump indicated Friday he did not fear a new arms race and warned the United States would match any move by another country to boost its nuclear arsenal, in a spectacular new foray into foreign policy. His stunning -- and initially unexplained -- use of language reminiscent of the Cold War rocked the Washington establishment two days before Christmas, and left Americans baffled by the seemingly mixed messages Trump is sending Russia. Matters were not helped after his aides struggled to come up with a coherent take on what Trump meant × Trump began upping the nuclear rhetoric with a bombshell tweet Thursday calling for America to "greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes." Anti-proliferation campaigners and lawmakers were aghast at the sabre-rattling talk, though some observers wondered how much stock to put into Trump's words -- and even whether they may be part of a deliberate strategy to bring about a promised rapprochement with Russia. Matters were not helped after his aides struggled to come up with a coherent take on what Trump meant, leaving Americans scrambling to make sense of the president-elect's tweet which, as has often been the case since his election, landed without context or detail. His remarks came hours after President Vladimir Putin declared Russia needs to "strengthen the military potential of strategic nuclear forces," and a day after the president-elect met with Pentagon brass. When asked for clarity, Sean Spicer, the incoming White House press secretary, said Trump would not tolerate other countries increasing their nuclear arsenal without responding. "There's a few countries around the globe, Russia being one of them, China, others, that have talked about increasing their nuclear capabilities," Spicer told the MSNBC news network. "The president-elect's point is unless these guys come to their senses and recognise that this is not a smart move, increasing the nuclear stockpile around the globe is not good for anybody, the US is not going to sit back and take it." In a subsequent interview on CNN, Spicer warned: "If another country wants to threaten our sovereignty or our safety, he will act." Putin sees 'nothing unusual' Early Friday, Trump was quoted telling MSNBC -- when asked in an off-air telephone call to clarify his nuclear policy tweet -- that his administration had no reservations about entering "an arms race." "This morning he told me on the phone, 'Let it be an arms race. We'll outmatch them at every pass and outlast them all,'" network host Mika Brzezinksi said. On Thursday, Trump spokesman Jason Miller had tried to nuance Trump's tweet and claimed he was actually "referring to the threat of nuclear proliferation and the critical need to prevent it -- particularly to and among terrorist organisations and unstable and rogue regimes." The debate marks a jarring departure from the stance of President Barack Obama, who in a famous 2009 speech in Prague called for the elimination of nuclear weapons. In 2010, Obama and Russia's then-president Dmitry Medvedev signed the so-called New START treaty that calls for a significant reduction in the nuclear arsenals of both countries. Ties between Moscow and Washington hit their lowest point since the Cold War under Obama due to the Ukraine crisis and Russia's military intervention in Syria. But on Friday, Putin said he found "nothing unusual" about Trump's call to boost America's nuclear capability. "During his election campaign he spoke about the necessity of strengthening the nuclear component of the United States, to strengthen the armed forces," the Russian leader told his annual year-end press conference. More at play? Even as the country reeled from his Twitter outburst, Trump sowed further confusion Friday by releasing a copy of what he called a "very nice letter" in which the Kremlin strongman offered him Christmas greetings and called for greater bilateral cooperation. Trump has often said he admires Putin's leadership qualities and the US intelligence community concluded that Russia was responsible for cyber attacks ahead of November's election that sought to tip the balance in favour of the Republican. Democratic Congressman Brad Sherman, a senior member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, suggested something more was at play between Trump and Putin. "One possibility is that this isn't all nonsense or even a mistake, but rather is part of a choreographed effort" between Putin and Trump, he said on MSNBC. "One could imagine that they simply re-sign the START treaty, tell us, 'Look, we solved this nuclear problem or at least played it down, and now is the time to eliminate sanctions and make other concessions to Russia.'" Trump's transition team did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Moves by Trump to ratchet up nuclear capabilities may meet stiff opposition from Democratic lawmakers, though options for blocking him will be limited with Republican majorities in the House and the Senate. "Congress must not allow the Tweeter in Chief to unleash a dangerous and costly nuclear arms race," Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders said in a tweet. (AFP)

But what did Trump mean?

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will visit Cuba next week to strengthen ties and boost trade, four decades after his father made a historic visit to the Communist-ruled island and struck up a friendship with revolutionary leader Fidel Castro.

Canada has long been one of Cuba&#39;s closest Western allies. Trudeau will meet with Raul Castro, Fidel&#39;s younger brother and successor as president, during his visit, Trudeau&#39;s office said.

Pierre Elliott Trudeau, a former prime minister, in 1976 became the first NATO leader to visit the island since its revolution, at one point exhorting &quot;Viva Castro!&quot;

Pierre Trudeau&#39;s trip was controversial in view of the Cold War enmity between Cuba and the United States. His son&#39;s visit is not viewed as such, given the resumption of US-Cuban diplomatic ties last year and a landmark visit by US&nbsp;President Barack Obama in March.

Justin Trudeau will follow his stay in Havana with a visit to Argentina, ruled by centre-right President Mauricio Macri, on his way to Peru to participate in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation leaders meeting.

&quot;Cuba and Argentina are two of our closest partners in the hemisphere,&quot; Trudeau said in a statement.

&quot;I look forward to working with President Castro and President Macri to stimulate more trade and investment with Canada, grow the middle class, and foster closer people-to-people ties for the benefit of all our citizens.&rdquo;

Canada and Mexico were the only two nations in the Americas to have kept ties with Cuba after the 1959 revolution, and trade, tourism and investment from the two countries has filled in some gaps from the US&nbsp;embargo.

Cuba and Canada trade over $1 billion worth of goods per year and Canadian companies have significant investments in mining, power, oil and gas, agribusiness and tourism in Cuba.

Many countries are rushing to renew ties with Cuba since its detente with the United States in hopes of capturing a share of Cuban business.

A string of foreign leaders including the Iranian president and Japanese prime minister have visited the island in recent months, meeting with Raul and Fidel Castro.

It was not yet clear whether Trudeau will meet with Fidel, 90, who became friends with his father and was an honorary pallbearer at his funeral in Montreal in 2000.

(Reuters)

Trudeau will meet with Raul Castro, Fidel's younger brother and successor as president to strengthen ties and boost trade

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will visit Cuba next week to strengthen ties and boost trade, four decades after his father made a historic visit to the Communist-ruled island and struck up a friendship with revolutionary leader Fidel Castro. Canada has long been one of Cuba's closest Western allies. Trudeau will meet with Raul Castro, Fidel's younger brother and successor as president, during his visit, Trudeau's office said. Pierre Elliott Trudeau, a former prime minister, in 1976 became the first NATO leader to visit the island since its revolution, at one point exhorting "Viva Castro!" Pierre Trudeau's trip was controversial in view of the Cold War enmity between Cuba and the United States. His son's visit is not viewed as such, given the resumption of US-Cuban diplomatic ties last year and a landmark visit by US President Barack Obama in March. Justin Trudeau will follow his stay in Havana with a visit to Argentina, ruled by centre-right President Mauricio Macri, on his way to Peru to participate in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation leaders meeting. "Cuba and Argentina are two of our closest partners in the hemisphere," Trudeau said in a statement. "I look forward to working with President Castro and President Macri to stimulate more trade and investment with Canada, grow the middle class, and foster closer people-to-people ties for the benefit of all our citizens.” Canada and Mexico were the only two nations in the Americas to have kept ties with Cuba after the 1959 revolution, and trade, tourism and investment from the two countries has filled in some gaps from the US embargo. Cuba and Canada trade over $1 billion worth of goods per year and Canadian companies have significant investments in mining, power, oil and gas, agribusiness and tourism in Cuba. Many countries are rushing to renew ties with Cuba since its detente with the United States in hopes of capturing a share of Cuban business. A string of foreign leaders including the Iranian president and Japanese prime minister have visited the island in recent months, meeting with Raul and Fidel Castro. It was not yet clear whether Trudeau will meet with Fidel, 90, who became friends with his father and was an honorary pallbearer at his funeral in Montreal in 2000. (Reuters)

Canada's Trudeau to visit Cuba 40 years after father's historic trip

Cuban revolutionary leader Fidel Castro revived old enmities with the United States as he celebrated his 90th birthday today, skewering Havana&#39;s Cold War foe for its repeated attempts on his life. 
 
Castro, who retired from public life in 2006 due to ill health and appointed his brother Raul in his place, criticised US President Barack Obama for failing to explicitly apologise during his historic visit to Japan in May for Washington&#39;s decision to drop the atomic bomb. 
 
&quot;The US president&#39;s speech in Japan lacked the words to apologise for the killing of hundreds of thousands of people in Hiroshima, even though they (the United States) knew the effects of the bomb,&quot; the ex-leader said in an article published by official media. 
 
(In his speech, Obama did decry the resort to war and called for a world without nuclear weapons.) 
 
Castro condemned as &quot;equally criminal&quot; the bombing of Nagasaki three days later on August 9, 1945. 
 
&quot;That&#39;s why you have to stress the need to preserve peace and that no power has the right to kill millions of people,&quot; Castro said. 
 
Castro recalled his own youth and confrontation with the United States while he headed the communist island. 
 
&quot;I almost laughed at the Machiavellian plans of US presidents,&quot; Castro said in the article published late yesterday. 
 
According to Cuban intelligence services, Castro faced 634 plots between 1958 and 2000. Several of those have been substantiated by US officials; some reportedly involved slipping poisoned or explosive cigars to the cigar-loving Cuban leader. 
 
Castro&#39;s brother Raul restored diplomatic relations with Washington last year. 
 
Castro warned in his article about the risks of global overpopulation, calling it &quot;the greatest threat in the history of mankind.&quot; 
 
He singled out China and Russia as &quot;great powers that cannot be subjected to threats of deploying nuclear weapons.&quot; 
 
Castro was last seen in public on April 19 at the close of the Cuban Communist Party Congress. 
 
Dressed in a blue tracksuit and speaking in a trembling voice, he seemed to say goodbye. 
 
&quot;Soon I&#39;ll be like all the rest,&quot; he said. &quot;Everyone&#39;s turn comes.&quot; 
 
After Barack Obama visited Cuba in March, Fidel Castro recalled the island&#39;s long enmity with the US, including Washington&#39;s backing for the failed invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs in 1961. 
 
His bitterness over that botched CIA plot played a part in pushing the world to the brink of nuclear war during the Cuban missile crisis the following year. 
 
The Soviet Union agreed to his request to send ballistic missiles to Cuba, and removed them only after a tense standoff with the United States. 
 
(AFP)

Fidel Castro recalled his own youth and confrontation with the United States while he headed the communist island of Cuba

Cuban revolutionary leader Fidel Castro revived old enmities with the United States as he celebrated his 90th birthday today, skewering Havana's Cold War foe for its repeated attempts on his life. Castro, who retired from public life in 2006 due to ill health and appointed his brother Raul in his place, criticised US President Barack Obama for failing to explicitly apologise during his historic visit to Japan in May for Washington's decision to drop the atomic bomb. "The US president's speech in Japan lacked the words to apologise for the killing of hundreds of thousands of people in Hiroshima, even though they (the United States) knew the effects of the bomb," the ex-leader said in an article published by official media. (In his speech, Obama did decry the resort to war and called for a world without nuclear weapons.) Castro condemned as "equally criminal" the bombing of Nagasaki three days later on August 9, 1945. "That's why you have to stress the need to preserve peace and that no power has the right to kill millions of people," Castro said. Castro recalled his own youth and confrontation with the United States while he headed the communist island. "I almost laughed at the Machiavellian plans of US presidents," Castro said in the article published late yesterday. According to Cuban intelligence services, Castro faced 634 plots between 1958 and 2000. Several of those have been substantiated by US officials; some reportedly involved slipping poisoned or explosive cigars to the cigar-loving Cuban leader. Castro's brother Raul restored diplomatic relations with Washington last year. Castro warned in his article about the risks of global overpopulation, calling it "the greatest threat in the history of mankind." He singled out China and Russia as "great powers that cannot be subjected to threats of deploying nuclear weapons." Castro was last seen in public on April 19 at the close of the Cuban Communist Party Congress. Dressed in a blue tracksuit and speaking in a trembling voice, he seemed to say goodbye. "Soon I'll be like all the rest," he said. "Everyone's turn comes." After Barack Obama visited Cuba in March, Fidel Castro recalled the island's long enmity with the US, including Washington's backing for the failed invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs in 1961. His bitterness over that botched CIA plot played a part in pushing the world to the brink of nuclear war during the Cuban missile crisis the following year. The Soviet Union agreed to his request to send ballistic missiles to Cuba, and removed them only after a tense standoff with the United States. (AFP)

Castro lashes out at US on 90th birthday, says Obama's speech lacked apology for Japan nuclear bombing

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

cold war