'Salute to America': Trump set to showcase US military strength on July 4 Independence Day

Automobile industry legend Lee Iacocca, who is credited with creating the iconic Ford Mustang and saving Chrysler from bankruptcy, died Tuesday at the age of 94, US media reported.

Iacocca died at his home in Bel-Air, a neighbourhood of Los Angeles, from complications of Parkinson's disease, his family told local media.

Chrysler said in a statement that the company "is saddened" by news of Iacocca's death.

"He played a historic role in steering Chrysler through the crisis and making it a competitive force," the statement read.

"Lee gave us a mindset that still drives us today one that is characterized by hard work, dedication and grit. His legacy is the resilience and unshakeable faith in the future that live on" in the company's employees.

The man behind the Ford Mustang&nbsp;

Iacocca began his career in 1946 at the Ford Motor Company, first as an engineer and then in sales.

It was his talent in marketing that helped realize his full potential.

Iacocca's first sales campaign in the mid-1950s was so successful that it attracted the attention of company executives and brought him to the Ford headquarters in Dearborn, Michigan.

Iacocca had reaped in massive sales over his career, particularly with the Ford Mustang that he designed in 1957.

However, he was accused of plotting against Chairman Henry Ford II in a quest to reach the top company position.

In a 1992 interview, when Iacocca was asked about the seemingly Machiavellian scheme, he snapped back with characteristic sharpness: "Machiavelli my ass!"

Ford fired him in 1978 -- so Iacocca moved to the floundering Chrysler Corporation.

&nbsp;'If you see a better car, buy it!'&nbsp;

In 1979, the US government bailed Chrysler out of a potential bankruptcy with $1.5 billion in secured loans. Iacocca took the reins once more and implemented a painful restructuring process.

He had twisted Congress's arm for the loan, and he successfully brought Chrysler back from the brink - then paid off the loan ahead of schedule.

Under his leadership, Chrysler invented the minivan and later the suburban utility vehicle (SUV).

His famous line in Chrysler ads "If you find a better car, buy it!" he would say, pointing at the viewer turned him into a legend.

Iacocca fierce anti-Japanese views he viewed their commercial practices as detrimental to the US at the time earned him support from Democrats and labour unions.

But by the late 1980s, Chrysler took a downturn, and thousands of employees were laid off in order to save the company.

He left Chrysler at the start of the 1990s, and later launched an ultimately unsuccessful hostile takeover bid of the company with billionaire Kirk Kerkorian.

Iacocca said that the Great Depression of the 1930s had a lasting impact on his outlook, especially after his family &nbsp;Italian immigrants lost everything.

"The Depression turned me into a materialist. I was after the bucks," he said.&nbsp;

When Chrysler was in trouble, he accepted a $1 salary. But when the company recovered, he took home as much as $20 million a year.

"No matter what you have," he once said, "it's never enough."

Automobile industry legend Lee Iacocca, who is credited with creating the iconic Ford Mustang and saving Chrysler from bankruptcy, died Tuesday at the age of 94, US media reported.

Automobile industry legend Lee Iacocca, who is credited with creating the iconic Ford Mustang and saving Chrysler from bankruptcy, died Tuesday at the age of 94, US media reported. Iacocca died at his home in Bel-Air, a neighbourhood of Los Angeles, from complications of Parkinson's disease, his family told local media. Chrysler said in a statement that the company "is saddened" by news of Iacocca's death. "He played a historic role in steering Chrysler through the crisis and making it a competitive force," the statement read. "Lee gave us a mindset that still drives us today one that is characterized by hard work, dedication and grit. His legacy is the resilience and unshakeable faith in the future that live on" in the company's employees. The man behind the Ford Mustang Iacocca began his career in 1946 at the Ford Motor Company, first as an engineer and then in sales. It was his talent in marketing that helped realize his full potential. Iacocca's first sales campaign in the mid-1950s was so successful that it attracted the attention of company executives and brought him to the Ford headquarters in Dearborn, Michigan. Iacocca had reaped in massive sales over his career, particularly with the Ford Mustang that he designed in 1957. However, he was accused of plotting against Chairman Henry Ford II in a quest to reach the top company position. In a 1992 interview, when Iacocca was asked about the seemingly Machiavellian scheme, he snapped back with characteristic sharpness: "Machiavelli my ass!" Ford fired him in 1978 -- so Iacocca moved to the floundering Chrysler Corporation. 'If you see a better car, buy it!' In 1979, the US government bailed Chrysler out of a potential bankruptcy with $1.5 billion in secured loans. Iacocca took the reins once more and implemented a painful restructuring process. He had twisted Congress's arm for the loan, and he successfully brought Chrysler back from the brink - then paid off the loan ahead of schedule. Under his leadership, Chrysler invented the minivan and later the suburban utility vehicle (SUV). His famous line in Chrysler ads "If you find a better car, buy it!" he would say, pointing at the viewer turned him into a legend. Iacocca fierce anti-Japanese views he viewed their commercial practices as detrimental to the US at the time earned him support from Democrats and labour unions. But by the late 1980s, Chrysler took a downturn, and thousands of employees were laid off in order to save the company. He left Chrysler at the start of the 1990s, and later launched an ultimately unsuccessful hostile takeover bid of the company with billionaire Kirk Kerkorian. Iacocca said that the Great Depression of the 1930s had a lasting impact on his outlook, especially after his family Italian immigrants lost everything. "The Depression turned me into a materialist. I was after the bucks," he said. When Chrysler was in trouble, he accepted a $1 salary. But when the company recovered, he took home as much as $20 million a year. "No matter what you have," he once said, "it's never enough."

United States auto industry legend Lee Iacocca dies age 94

Two people were shot and two others hurt on Tuesday when at least one gunman opened fire at a mall in the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/watch-kamala-harris-dances-at-san-francisco-pride-parade-232005">San Francisco</a> suburb of San Bruno before apparently fleeing on a nearby train, police said.

Two people were taken to San Francisco General Hospital with gunshot wounds to their lower bodies in stable condition, San Bruno Police Chief Ed Barberini told reporters at a late-afternoon news conference.

"It was a senseless act," Barberini said, adding that opening fire in a crowded shopping mall near a Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station showed a "true disregard for human life."

Two other people were treated at the scene for minor injuries they suffered in fleeing from the gunmen.

Barberini said police were searching for one or possibly two gunmen who may have fled the scene by getting on a BART train headed for Oakland.

The shopping mall in San Bruno, located south of San Francisco, was closed after the gunfire, police said on Twitter.

The Bay Area Rapid Transit authority said one of its commuter stops was shut down as a precaution after the shooting.

Two people were shot and two others hurt on Tuesday when at least one gunman opened fire at a mall in the San Francisco suburb of San Bruno before apparently fleeing on a nearby train, police said.

Two people were shot and two others hurt on Tuesday when at least one gunman opened fire at a mall in the San Francisco suburb of San Bruno before apparently fleeing on a nearby train, police said. Two people were taken to San Francisco General Hospital with gunshot wounds to their lower bodies in stable condition, San Bruno Police Chief Ed Barberini told reporters at a late-afternoon news conference. "It was a senseless act," Barberini said, adding that opening fire in a crowded shopping mall near a Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station showed a "true disregard for human life." Two other people were treated at the scene for minor injuries they suffered in fleeing from the gunmen. Barberini said police were searching for one or possibly two gunmen who may have fled the scene by getting on a BART train headed for Oakland. The shopping mall in San Bruno, located south of San Francisco, was closed after the gunfire, police said on Twitter. The Bay Area Rapid Transit authority said one of its commuter stops was shut down as a precaution after the shooting.

Two shot, two others hurt in San Francisco-area shopping mall

The US is underestimating the scope of "hybrid warfare" being waged by Russia to undermine democracies in Europe, Central Asia, Africa, and Latin America, a Pentagon white paper has said.

According to the Hill, the over 150-page white paper was prepared by Joint Chiefs of Staff of the Pentagon and independent strategists. The study points to Russia's use of propaganda and disinformation to sway public opinion across Europe, Central Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

"Overall, Russia's influence abroad is growing, and the Kremlin has mastered the use of hybrid warfare in driving Russia's foreign policy (Lamoreaux)," reads the document entitled 'The Future of Global Competition and Conflict' prepared as part of the Strategic Multilayer Assessment.

"Russia utilizes a variety of grey zone tactics around the globe. These include the use of paramilitary forces and other proxies, interference in political processes, economic and energy exploitation (particularly in Africa), espionage, and media and propaganda manipulation," it said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin "is also adept at blending military and civilian elements for maximum impact", it added.

The white paper also highlights the danger of alignment between Russia and China, both of which fear the United States' international alliances and share an affinity for "authoritarian stability".

"Russia has turned to China as a growing and necessary key strategic partner. Russia and China share a fear of, and common hostility toward the US and its system of alliances," according to it.

Beijing and Moscow share an affinity for "authoritarian stability and aligned views on opposing international norms regarding human rights, cyber and space", the paper contended.

The study recommends the State Department should spearhead "influence operations," including "sowing divisions" between Moscow and Beijing.

"The US should bilaterally engage Russia to peel them away from China's orbit. The US can work with Russia in ways that improve the US-Russia relationship without detracting from European efforts to balance and deter," it said.

Though the study does not offer any direct criticism of President Donald Trump, it has come days after Trump's meeting with Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping.

The study also said that Russia has launched "several cyber and electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attacks".

It felt that the US should work with European allies to strengthen telecommunications and electrical infrastructure to preclude "Russian preemptive attacks".

The US is underestimating the scope of "hybrid warfare" being waged by Russia to undermine democracies in Europe, Central Asia, Africa, and Latin America, a Pentagon white paper has said.

The US is underestimating the scope of "hybrid warfare" being waged by Russia to undermine democracies in Europe, Central Asia, Africa, and Latin America, a Pentagon white paper has said. According to the Hill, the over 150-page white paper was prepared by Joint Chiefs of Staff of the Pentagon and independent strategists. The study points to Russia's use of propaganda and disinformation to sway public opinion across Europe, Central Asia, Africa, and Latin America. "Overall, Russia's influence abroad is growing, and the Kremlin has mastered the use of hybrid warfare in driving Russia's foreign policy (Lamoreaux)," reads the document entitled 'The Future of Global Competition and Conflict' prepared as part of the Strategic Multilayer Assessment. "Russia utilizes a variety of grey zone tactics around the globe. These include the use of paramilitary forces and other proxies, interference in political processes, economic and energy exploitation (particularly in Africa), espionage, and media and propaganda manipulation," it said. Russian President Vladimir Putin "is also adept at blending military and civilian elements for maximum impact", it added. The white paper also highlights the danger of alignment between Russia and China, both of which fear the United States' international alliances and share an affinity for "authoritarian stability". "Russia has turned to China as a growing and necessary key strategic partner. Russia and China share a fear of, and common hostility toward the US and its system of alliances," according to it. Beijing and Moscow share an affinity for "authoritarian stability and aligned views on opposing international norms regarding human rights, cyber and space", the paper contended. The study recommends the State Department should spearhead "influence operations," including "sowing divisions" between Moscow and Beijing. "The US should bilaterally engage Russia to peel them away from China's orbit. The US can work with Russia in ways that improve the US-Russia relationship without detracting from European efforts to balance and deter," it said. Though the study does not offer any direct criticism of President Donald Trump, it has come days after Trump's meeting with Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The study also said that Russia has launched "several cyber and electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attacks". It felt that the US should work with European allies to strengthen telecommunications and electrical infrastructure to preclude "Russian preemptive attacks".

United States underestimating Russia's 'hybrid warfare': Pentagon white paper

China's state planning agency on Sunday said it has cut the number of sectors subject to foreign investment restrictions, as <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-china-report-progress-in-beijing-trade-talks-206635">Beijing</a> moved to fulfil its promise to open major industries.

The loosening in curbs, though widely anticipated, comes after the United States and <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/us-recession-risk-rises-as-us-china-trade-tensions-heat-up-report-219279">China</a> agreed on the weekend to restart trade talks with <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/us-china-trade-war-points-to-the-real-crisis-that-global-leaders-must-confront-at-g20-summit-231112">US President Donald Trump</a> offering concessions on tariffs and an easing of restrictions on tech company Huawei.

The National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) said it has eased foreign investment curbs on sectors including petroleum and gas exploration and widened access to agriculture, mining and manufacturing.

NDRC published on its website the new, shorter so-called negative list that sets out industries where foreign investment is limited or prohibited.

The number of sectors and subsectors on the negative list was cut to 40 from 48 in the previous version, which was published in June last year. The new list takes effect on July 30.

The NDRC document said domestic shipping agencies, gas and heat pipelines in cities with more than 500,000 people, cinemas and performance agencies no longer needed to be controlled by Chinese entities. It also widened access to petroleum and gas exploration, agriculture and some metals resources exploration.

China has repeatedly promised to further open its markets to foreign investment but has stressed such decisions would be based on the economy's own needs and not due to external pressure.

It shortened the negative list last year, easing curbs on sectors including banking, the automotive and heavy industries, while also allowing 100% foreign ownership in some industries where ownership caps previously applied.

Foreign investment in China was previously assessed on a case-by-case basis with approval granted by the local branch of the commerce ministry. Under the negative list system, only investments in industries specified in the list are prohibited or subject to review.

Despite the reforms of recent years, foreign businesses say progress has been slow with foreign investment in many industries still restricted while fresh promises of greater access do little more than repeat earlier pledges.

China's state planning agency on Sunday said it has cut the number of sectors subject to foreign investment restrictions, as Beijing moved to fulfil its promise to open major industries.

China's state planning agency on Sunday said it has cut the number of sectors subject to foreign investment restrictions, as Beijing moved to fulfil its promise to open major industries. The loosening in curbs, though widely anticipated, comes after the United States and China agreed on the weekend to restart trade talks with US President Donald Trump offering concessions on tariffs and an easing of restrictions on tech company Huawei. The National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) said it has eased foreign investment curbs on sectors including petroleum and gas exploration and widened access to agriculture, mining and manufacturing. NDRC published on its website the new, shorter so-called negative list that sets out industries where foreign investment is limited or prohibited. The number of sectors and subsectors on the negative list was cut to 40 from 48 in the previous version, which was published in June last year. The new list takes effect on July 30. The NDRC document said domestic shipping agencies, gas and heat pipelines in cities with more than 500,000 people, cinemas and performance agencies no longer needed to be controlled by Chinese entities. It also widened access to petroleum and gas exploration, agriculture and some metals resources exploration. China has repeatedly promised to further open its markets to foreign investment but has stressed such decisions would be based on the economy's own needs and not due to external pressure. It shortened the negative list last year, easing curbs on sectors including banking, the automotive and heavy industries, while also allowing 100% foreign ownership in some industries where ownership caps previously applied. Foreign investment in China was previously assessed on a case-by-case basis with approval granted by the local branch of the commerce ministry. Under the negative list system, only investments in industries specified in the list are prohibited or subject to review. Despite the reforms of recent years, foreign businesses say progress has been slow with foreign investment in many industries still restricted while fresh promises of greater access do little more than repeat earlier pledges.

China eases foreign investment curbs amid cooling trade tensions

US President Donald Trump Saturday praised Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, saying he was doing a "spectacular job" as the pair met on the sidelines of the G20 summit.

"You have done a spectacular job," Trump told the powerful crown prince, referring to him as "a friend of mine".

The young royal has faced international pressure after US-based dissident Saudi writer Jamal Khashoggi was murdered in the kingdom's consulate in Istanbul last year.

But Trump ignored questions from the media about whether he would raise the journalist's murder during his working breakfast with the prince.

Riyadh has hit back against claims that Prince Mohammed bears responsibility in the murder of Khashoggi, who was killed and dismembered in what Saudi authorities have described as a rogue operation.

A UN expert report has said that the "execution of Mr Khashoggi was the responsibility of the state of Saudi Arabia", and that Prince Mohammed must have been aware of attempts to cover up the crime after the fact, including a forensic cleaning of the consulate.

The report urged a formal criminal investigation into the case.

But Saudi prosecutors say all those to blame are already on trial, citing proceedings against 11 unnamed individuals in the kingdom.

Five of those face the death penalty in the trial, which has been held secretly, with only a handful of diplomats allowed to attend.

US President Donald Trump Saturday praised Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, saying he was doing a "spectacular job" as the pair met on the sidelines of the G20 summit.

US President Donald Trump Saturday praised Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, saying he was doing a "spectacular job" as the pair met on the sidelines of the G20 summit. "You have done a spectacular job," Trump told the powerful crown prince, referring to him as "a friend of mine". The young royal has faced international pressure after US-based dissident Saudi writer Jamal Khashoggi was murdered in the kingdom's consulate in Istanbul last year. But Trump ignored questions from the media about whether he would raise the journalist's murder during his working breakfast with the prince. Riyadh has hit back against claims that Prince Mohammed bears responsibility in the murder of Khashoggi, who was killed and dismembered in what Saudi authorities have described as a rogue operation. A UN expert report has said that the "execution of Mr Khashoggi was the responsibility of the state of Saudi Arabia", and that Prince Mohammed must have been aware of attempts to cover up the crime after the fact, including a forensic cleaning of the consulate. The report urged a formal criminal investigation into the case. But Saudi prosecutors say all those to blame are already on trial, citing proceedings against 11 unnamed individuals in the kingdom. Five of those face the death penalty in the trial, which has been held secretly, with only a handful of diplomats allowed to attend.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman doing 'spectacular job': Donald Trump

US semiconductor firm <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-lawmakers-introduce-bipartisan-bills-targeting-chinas-huawei-and-zte-190862">Micron Technology</a> said Tuesday it has resumed some sales to Chinese technology giant Huawei despite a ban imposed by President Donald Trump on national security grounds.

The comments from Micron came as the New York Times reported that some American firms have found ways to get around the sanctions on Huawei.

Sanjay Mehrotra, chief executive of Micron, said a company review determined "that we could lawfully resume shipping a subset of current products" not affected by the export restrictions.

"We have started shipping some orders of those products to <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/huawei-willing-to-sign-no-spy-agreement-with-us-government-chairman-224403">Huawei</a> in the last two weeks," he said.

"However, there are considerable ongoing uncertainties surrounding the Huawei situation and we are unable to predict the volumes or time periods over which we will be able to ship products to Huawei."

The New York Times, citing unnamed sources, said US chip makers and others have found ways to continue sales, getting around the sanctions by selling goods made outside the United States.

According to the report, the products made by American companies overseas are considered exempt from the prohibition, which could allow Huawei to continue to sell products such as smartphones and servers.

The Commerce Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

John Neuffer of the Semiconductor Industry Association, a US-based trade group, said in a statement last week that its members "are committed to rigorous compliance" with the sanctions, but noted that "it is now clear some items may be supplied to Huawei" based on the current legal framework.

"Each company is impacted differently based on their specific products and supply chains, and each company must evaluate how best to conduct its business and remain in compliance," Neuffer said.

Huawei founder and CEO Ren Zhengfei said earlier this month that its overseas smartphone sales had fallen by up to 40 per cent as a result of the ban.

Trump's administration has essentially banned Huawei from the huge US market.

Last month it also added Huawei to an "entity list" of companies barred from receiving US-made components without permission from Washington.

The lack of access to certain technology such as the Google Android system and chip design from British-based ARM Holdings could be crippling for Huawei, which last year was the number two smartphone producer.

The US fears that systems made by Huawei could be used by China's government for espionage via secret security "back doors" built into telecom networking equipment, allegations that the company vigorously denied.

US semiconductor firm Micron Technology said Tuesday it has resumed some sales to Chinese technology giant Huawei despite a ban imposed by President Donald Trump on national security grounds.

US semiconductor firm Micron Technology said Tuesday it has resumed some sales to Chinese technology giant Huawei despite a ban imposed by President Donald Trump on national security grounds. The comments from Micron came as the New York Times reported that some American firms have found ways to get around the sanctions on Huawei. Sanjay Mehrotra, chief executive of Micron, said a company review determined "that we could lawfully resume shipping a subset of current products" not affected by the export restrictions. "We have started shipping some orders of those products to Huawei in the last two weeks," he said. "However, there are considerable ongoing uncertainties surrounding the Huawei situation and we are unable to predict the volumes or time periods over which we will be able to ship products to Huawei." The New York Times, citing unnamed sources, said US chip makers and others have found ways to continue sales, getting around the sanctions by selling goods made outside the United States. According to the report, the products made by American companies overseas are considered exempt from the prohibition, which could allow Huawei to continue to sell products such as smartphones and servers. The Commerce Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. John Neuffer of the Semiconductor Industry Association, a US-based trade group, said in a statement last week that its members "are committed to rigorous compliance" with the sanctions, but noted that "it is now clear some items may be supplied to Huawei" based on the current legal framework. "Each company is impacted differently based on their specific products and supply chains, and each company must evaluate how best to conduct its business and remain in compliance," Neuffer said. Huawei founder and CEO Ren Zhengfei said earlier this month that its overseas smartphone sales had fallen by up to 40 per cent as a result of the ban. Trump's administration has essentially banned Huawei from the huge US market. Last month it also added Huawei to an "entity list" of companies barred from receiving US-made components without permission from Washington. The lack of access to certain technology such as the Google Android system and chip design from British-based ARM Holdings could be crippling for Huawei, which last year was the number two smartphone producer. The US fears that systems made by Huawei could be used by China's government for espionage via secret security "back doors" built into telecom networking equipment, allegations that the company vigorously denied.

United States chip firm says it can 'lawfully' sell some items to Huawei

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-macron-honour-d-day-veterans-who-fought-through-fires-of-hell-225003">French president Emmanuel Macron</a> will send a replacement oak tree to <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-relations-with-macron-outstanding-225049">US President Donald Trump</a> after the original was dug up from the White House garden and died.&nbsp;

The French leader offered the young oak to Trump during a state visit to Washington in 2018, and the two shovelled dirt around it under the watchful eyes of their wives and cameras from around the world.

It was a symbolic gesture: the tree came from a northern French forest where 2,000 US Marines died during World War I.

But after the cameras left, the young oak was dug up and placed in quarantine, where it died soon after, with many seeing it as a symbol of US-France ties, which have since frayed over issues ranging from Iran to trade.

"The poor thing did not survive," Macron said Tuesday when he also asked reporters not to "look for meaning where there is none".

"I will send another."

The two leaders recently marked the 75th anniversary of D-Day together, with Macron -- who has been an outspoken critic of Trump's nationalism and isolationist tendencies -- using the occasion to send a message to his American visitor.

"America is never as big as when it is fighting for the freedom of others," he said.

French president Emmanuel Macron will send a replacement oak tree to US President Donald Trump after the original was dug up from the White House garden and died.

French president Emmanuel Macron will send a replacement oak tree to US President Donald Trump after the original was dug up from the White House garden and died. The French leader offered the young oak to Trump during a state visit to Washington in 2018, and the two shovelled dirt around it under the watchful eyes of their wives and cameras from around the world. It was a symbolic gesture: the tree came from a northern French forest where 2,000 US Marines died during World War I. But after the cameras left, the young oak was dug up and placed in quarantine, where it died soon after, with many seeing it as a symbol of US-France ties, which have since frayed over issues ranging from Iran to trade. "The poor thing did not survive," Macron said Tuesday when he also asked reporters not to "look for meaning where there is none". "I will send another." The two leaders recently marked the 75th anniversary of D-Day together, with Macron -- who has been an outspoken critic of Trump's nationalism and isolationist tendencies -- using the occasion to send a message to his American visitor. "America is never as big as when it is fighting for the freedom of others," he said.

Let's tree again: Macron offers Trump replacement for 'friendship' oak

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/mark-zuckerbergs-deepfake-video-posted-on-instagram-226388">Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg</a> did not knowingly violate an agreement with the regulator supervising the company's management of users' personal data, the social media giant said Wednesday as it addressed an issue that has been under federal investigation for the past year.

Facebook was required to provide the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) with emails, some from 2012, suggesting that Zuckerberg was personally aware of but neglected to address the fact that external applications had access to massive amounts of personal data without Facebook users' knowledge, the Wall Street Journal reported.

The newspaper added that it did not have access to the documents but that anonymous sources had described their contents.

"We have fully cooperated with the FTC's investigation to date and provided tens of thousands of documents, emails and files," said a Facebook spokesperson.

"At no point did Mark or any other Facebook employee knowingly violate the company's obligations under the FTC consent order nor do any emails exist that indicate they did."

The FTC reopened investigations into whether Facebook violated a 2011 settlement with the regulator on protecting user data following revelations last year that personal data from tens of millions of users was hijacked by the political consultancy Cambridge Analytica as it worked on Donald Trump's presidential campaign.

The 2011 court-approved agreement required Facebook to notify users when it shares data with third parties and bars the social network from deceptive practices.

The investigation could result in a record fine running into billions of dollars.

Despite the controversies, some 2.7 billion people use at least one of the "family" of the company's applications, including the core Facebook network, Instagram, and messaging applications WhatsApp and Messenger.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg did not knowingly violate an agreement with the regulator supervising the company's management of users' personal data, the social media giant said Wednesday as it addressed an issue that has been under federal investigation for the past year.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg did not knowingly violate an agreement with the regulator supervising the company's management of users' personal data, the social media giant said Wednesday as it addressed an issue that has been under federal investigation for the past year. Facebook was required to provide the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) with emails, some from 2012, suggesting that Zuckerberg was personally aware of but neglected to address the fact that external applications had access to massive amounts of personal data without Facebook users' knowledge, the Wall Street Journal reported. The newspaper added that it did not have access to the documents but that anonymous sources had described their contents. "We have fully cooperated with the FTC's investigation to date and provided tens of thousands of documents, emails and files," said a Facebook spokesperson. "At no point did Mark or any other Facebook employee knowingly violate the company's obligations under the FTC consent order nor do any emails exist that indicate they did." The FTC reopened investigations into whether Facebook violated a 2011 settlement with the regulator on protecting user data following revelations last year that personal data from tens of millions of users was hijacked by the political consultancy Cambridge Analytica as it worked on Donald Trump's presidential campaign. The 2011 court-approved agreement required Facebook to notify users when it shares data with third parties and bars the social network from deceptive practices. The investigation could result in a record fine running into billions of dollars. Despite the controversies, some 2.7 billion people use at least one of the "family" of the company's applications, including the core Facebook network, Instagram, and messaging applications WhatsApp and Messenger.

Facebook says CEO did not ignore personal data issues

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/great-respect-between-us-and-north-korea-donald-trump-221859">The United States</a> on Wednesday accused North Korea of violating a UN-imposed ceiling on fuel imports by conducting dozens of ship-to-ship transfers at sea that broke international sanctions.

CNN reported that Washington in a report submitted to the United Nations Security Council Sanctions Committee on <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/south-korea-to-work-with-us-and-north-korea-after-failed-nuclear-talks-200409">North Korea</a> also urged more than a dozen other countries to immediately halt fuel shipments to North Korea.&nbsp;

The accusations came a day after President Donald Trump said that he received another `beautiful letter` from <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/donald-trump-kim-jong-un-summits-other-aim-was-to-sell-vietnam-model-to-north-korea-208086">North Korean leader Kim Jong-un</a>, the first since the February summit in Hanoi ended abruptly between the two leaders without finalising a deal.

&nbsp;An administration official described the letter as a "birthday greeting." Trump`s birthday is on Friday and the official says Kim wished the President good health.&nbsp;

The letter also rekindled new hopes on the possibility of future talks between Trump and Kim after the US President last month declared North Korea was "not ready to negotiate" after months of stalled diplomacy.&nbsp;

Meanwhile, the UN report said Pyongyang has already exceeded the allowed annual cap of importing 500,000 barrels of fuel this year.&nbsp;

Quoting a UN diplomat, familiar with the case, CNN reported that at least eight illegal ship to ship transfers have occurred involving North Korean flagged tankers.&nbsp;

The diplomat said there were 72 cases of violations which were also being tracked. The diplomat gave North Korea an "F" grade regarding the implementation of the sanctions cap on fuel import.&nbsp;

The diplomat added, "Not only is DPRK [North Korea] circumventing the petroleum ban it has systematically circumvented it all last year and is systematically circumventing it this year and, unstopped, it will have basically achieved the same amount of refined petroleum smuggled into North Korea as it did last year.

"Under the UN sanctions rules, countries are required to report monthly sales of petroleum refined products to the committee.&nbsp;

It was reported by the sanctions committee panel of experts that there was a "massive increase in the illegal ship to ship transfers of petroleum products and coal".

&nbsp;However, attempts by Washington to take action were blocked by Russia and China.&nbsp;

The United States on Wednesday accused North Korea of violating a UN-imposed ceiling on fuel imports by conducting dozens of ship-to-ship transfers at sea that broke international sanctions.

The United States on Wednesday accused North Korea of violating a UN-imposed ceiling on fuel imports by conducting dozens of ship-to-ship transfers at sea that broke international sanctions. CNN reported that Washington in a report submitted to the United Nations Security Council Sanctions Committee on North Korea also urged more than a dozen other countries to immediately halt fuel shipments to North Korea. The accusations came a day after President Donald Trump said that he received another `beautiful letter` from North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, the first since the February summit in Hanoi ended abruptly between the two leaders without finalising a deal. An administration official described the letter as a "birthday greeting." Trump`s birthday is on Friday and the official says Kim wished the President good health. The letter also rekindled new hopes on the possibility of future talks between Trump and Kim after the US President last month declared North Korea was "not ready to negotiate" after months of stalled diplomacy. Meanwhile, the UN report said Pyongyang has already exceeded the allowed annual cap of importing 500,000 barrels of fuel this year. Quoting a UN diplomat, familiar with the case, CNN reported that at least eight illegal ship to ship transfers have occurred involving North Korean flagged tankers. The diplomat said there were 72 cases of violations which were also being tracked. The diplomat gave North Korea an "F" grade regarding the implementation of the sanctions cap on fuel import. The diplomat added, "Not only is DPRK [North Korea] circumventing the petroleum ban it has systematically circumvented it all last year and is systematically circumventing it this year and, unstopped, it will have basically achieved the same amount of refined petroleum smuggled into North Korea as it did last year. "Under the UN sanctions rules, countries are required to report monthly sales of petroleum refined products to the committee. It was reported by the sanctions committee panel of experts that there was a "massive increase in the illegal ship to ship transfers of petroleum products and coal". However, attempts by Washington to take action were blocked by Russia and China.

United States accuses North Korea of breaching UN fuel cap

China's President&nbsp;Xi&nbsp;Jinping and<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-plans-5-tariff-on-mexican-imports-over-illegal-immigration-222998"> US President Donald&nbsp;Trump</a>&nbsp;are likely to find it "difficult" to&nbsp;make&nbsp;major&nbsp;progress&nbsp;towards ending their countries'&nbsp;trade&nbsp;war when they meet at a G20 summit in Japan in June, a&nbsp;former&nbsp;Chinese&nbsp;central&nbsp;bank&nbsp;chief&nbsp;said on Friday.

Trade&nbsp;tensions between Washington and Beijing escalated sharply earlier this month after the&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;administration accused&nbsp;China&nbsp;of having "reneged" on its previous promises to make structural changes to its economic practices.

Washington later slapped additional tariffs of up to 25% on $200 billion of Chinese goods, prompting Beijing to hit back with additional levies on around $60 billion of US imports due to take effect on Saturday.

Dai&nbsp;Xianglong, who headed the People's&nbsp;Bank&nbsp;of&nbsp;China&nbsp;(PBOC) from 1995-2002 and remains an influential figure in&nbsp;China, told a seminar in Beijing that&nbsp;China-US trade&nbsp;friction was a long-term issue.

China&nbsp;has approached the&nbsp;trade&nbsp;talks with the principles of equality and cooperation, whereas the US&nbsp;approach has been "bullying and America First", Dai said.

"It's&nbsp;hard&nbsp;to reconcile these," he added.

"I expect that next month's meeting of the leaders in Japan it will be difficult to achieve major&nbsp;progress."

Dai said he did not rule out stronger retaliation by&nbsp;China.

Trump&nbsp;has said he is planning on meeting&nbsp;Xi&nbsp;during the G20 summit, set for June 28-29 in Osaka, though&nbsp;China&nbsp;has not formally confirmed this.

Since the latest round of US&nbsp;tariffs, which caught Beijing by surprise, Chinese state media has gone on the offensive.

The People's Daily, the ruling Communist Party's flagship newspaper, warned this week that&nbsp;China&nbsp;was ready to use its dominance of rare earth, crucial minerals used in electronics, to strike back in the&nbsp;trade&nbsp;war.

The increasingly intense public relations battle with the United States with the deluge of sharply worded commentaries and warnings out of&nbsp;China&nbsp;in the last two weeks risks complicating the run-up to any&nbsp;Xi-Trump&nbsp;meeting in Japan.

At the Beijing seminar on Friday,&nbsp;former&nbsp;Chinese vice commerce minister Wei Jianguo said initiating a&nbsp;trade&nbsp;war with&nbsp;China&nbsp;might be the biggest strategic mistake made by the United States since World War II or even it's founding.

There is a need to prepare for the likelihood for the&nbsp;trade&nbsp;war to ratchet up tensions to geopolitical areas including the South&nbsp;China&nbsp;Sea, said Wei, adding that the&nbsp;trade&nbsp;conflict might last for 30 years or even half a century.

China's President Xi Jinping and US President Donald Trump are likely to find it "difficult" to make major progress towards ending their countries' trade war when they meet at a G20 summit in Japan in June, a former Chinese central bank chief said on Friday.

China's President Xi Jinping and US President Donald Trump are likely to find it "difficult" to make major progress towards ending their countries' trade war when they meet at a G20 summit in Japan in June, a former Chinese central bank chief said on Friday. Trade tensions between Washington and Beijing escalated sharply earlier this month after the Trump administration accused China of having "reneged" on its previous promises to make structural changes to its economic practices. Washington later slapped additional tariffs of up to 25% on $200 billion of Chinese goods, prompting Beijing to hit back with additional levies on around $60 billion of US imports due to take effect on Saturday. Dai Xianglong, who headed the People's Bank of China (PBOC) from 1995-2002 and remains an influential figure in China, told a seminar in Beijing that China-US trade friction was a long-term issue. China has approached the trade talks with the principles of equality and cooperation, whereas the US approach has been "bullying and America First", Dai said. "It's hard to reconcile these," he added. "I expect that next month's meeting of the leaders in Japan it will be difficult to achieve major progress." Dai said he did not rule out stronger retaliation by China. Trump has said he is planning on meeting Xi during the G20 summit, set for June 28-29 in Osaka, though China has not formally confirmed this. Since the latest round of US tariffs, which caught Beijing by surprise, Chinese state media has gone on the offensive. The People's Daily, the ruling Communist Party's flagship newspaper, warned this week that China was ready to use its dominance of rare earth, crucial minerals used in electronics, to strike back in the trade war. The increasingly intense public relations battle with the United States with the deluge of sharply worded commentaries and warnings out of China in the last two weeks risks complicating the run-up to any Xi-Trump meeting in Japan. At the Beijing seminar on Friday, former Chinese vice commerce minister Wei Jianguo said initiating a trade war with China might be the biggest strategic mistake made by the United States since World War II or even it's founding. There is a need to prepare for the likelihood for the trade war to ratchet up tensions to geopolitical areas including the South China Sea, said Wei, adding that the trade conflict might last for 30 years or even half a century.

Hard for Xi, Trump to make progress on trade: Former China central bank chief

By Ian Sheldon

Soybeans may not seem all that useful in a war. Nonetheless, they’ve become China’s most important weapon in its ever-worsening trade conflict with the US.

China, the world’s biggest buyer of the crop, has reportedly stopped purchasing any American soybeans in retaliation for the Trump administration raising tariffs on $250 billion of Chinese goods. This is very bad news for US farmers.

While China’s targeting of soybeans may have come as something of a surprise to most Americans, to a professor of agricultural economics who studies international commodity markets for a living, this was not at all unexpected.

Even before the conclusion of the 2016 presidential race, trade analysts were already weighing the possibility that China might impose an embargo on US&nbsp;soybean imports based on protectionist rhetoric from both candidates.

As a result, with the trade war in full swing, American soybean farmers are now among its biggest losers. 
 
Here are a few figures that show why.

Soybeans, by the numbers

Soybeans are a crucial part of the global food chain, particularly as a source of protein in the production of hogs and poultry.

The importance of China as a market for soybeans has been driven by an explosion in demand for meat as consumers switch from a diet dominated by rice to one where pork, poultry and beef play an important part. Chinese production of meat from those three animals surged 250 per cent&nbsp;from 1986 to 2012 and is projected to increase another 30 per cent by the end of the current decade. However, China is unable to produce enough animal feed itself, hence the need to import soybeans from the United States and Brazil.

In 2017, the US accounted for $21.4 billion worth of global soybean exports, the second largest after its main competitor Brazil, which exported $25.7 billion.

Back in 2017, that was good news for American farmers, when US&nbsp;exports made up about a third of Chinese purchases, or $13.9 billion. That made soybeans the United States’ second-most valuable export to China after airplanes.

But US exports to China have fallen dramatically since China slapped a 25 per cent tariff on Americans soybeans last April as part of its initial response to President Donald Trump’s trade war.

In the current farm marketing year, which began September&nbsp;1, US farmers have exported just 5.9 million metric tons of soybeans to China, compared with an average of 29 million at the same point during the previous three years – or about 80 per cent less.

That’s why the tariffs have tremendous potential to hurt farmers in my state of Ohio, where soybeans were the number one agricultural export in 2017 at $1.3 billion. China is the state’s largest export market.

And yet nationally, Ohio is just the seventh-largest exporter of soybeans, after Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Indiana and Missouri, all of which are suffering from the tariffs.

Not only do farmers stand to lose out by giving up market share to Brazilian farmers, but soybean prices at the port of New Orleans have fallen as well and are currently $9.35 a bushel compared with $10.82 per b\ushel a year ago. This has hurt incomes and created a double whammy for Midwest farms.

(Ian Sheldon is Chair in Agricultural Marketing, Trade and Policy, The Ohio State University)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-soybeans-became-chinas-most-powerful-weapon-in-trumps-trade-war-118088">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp;

By Ian Sheldon Soybeans may not seem all that useful in a war. Nonetheless, they’ve become China’s most important weapon in its ever-worsening trade conflict with the US.

By Ian Sheldon Soybeans may not seem all that useful in a war. Nonetheless, they’ve become China’s most important weapon in its ever-worsening trade conflict with the US. China, the world’s biggest buyer of the crop, has reportedly stopped purchasing any American soybeans in retaliation for the Trump administration raising tariffs on $250 billion of Chinese goods. This is very bad news for US farmers. While China’s targeting of soybeans may have come as something of a surprise to most Americans, to a professor of agricultural economics who studies international commodity markets for a living, this was not at all unexpected. Even before the conclusion of the 2016 presidential race, trade analysts were already weighing the possibility that China might impose an embargo on US soybean imports based on protectionist rhetoric from both candidates. As a result, with the trade war in full swing, American soybean farmers are now among its biggest losers. Here are a few figures that show why. Soybeans, by the numbers Soybeans are a crucial part of the global food chain, particularly as a source of protein in the production of hogs and poultry. The importance of China as a market for soybeans has been driven by an explosion in demand for meat as consumers switch from a diet dominated by rice to one where pork, poultry and beef play an important part. Chinese production of meat from those three animals surged 250 per cent from 1986 to 2012 and is projected to increase another 30 per cent by the end of the current decade. However, China is unable to produce enough animal feed itself, hence the need to import soybeans from the United States and Brazil. In 2017, the US accounted for $21.4 billion worth of global soybean exports, the second largest after its main competitor Brazil, which exported $25.7 billion. Back in 2017, that was good news for American farmers, when US exports made up about a third of Chinese purchases, or $13.9 billion. That made soybeans the United States’ second-most valuable export to China after airplanes. But US exports to China have fallen dramatically since China slapped a 25 per cent tariff on Americans soybeans last April as part of its initial response to President Donald Trump’s trade war. In the current farm marketing year, which began September 1, US farmers have exported just 5.9 million metric tons of soybeans to China, compared with an average of 29 million at the same point during the previous three years – or about 80 per cent less. That’s why the tariffs have tremendous potential to hurt farmers in my state of Ohio, where soybeans were the number one agricultural export in 2017 at $1.3 billion. China is the state’s largest export market. And yet nationally, Ohio is just the seventh-largest exporter of soybeans, after Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Indiana and Missouri, all of which are suffering from the tariffs. Not only do farmers stand to lose out by giving up market share to Brazilian farmers, but soybean prices at the port of New Orleans have fallen as well and are currently $9.35 a bushel compared with $10.82 per b\ushel a year ago. This has hurt incomes and created a double whammy for Midwest farms. (Ian Sheldon is Chair in Agricultural Marketing, Trade and Policy, The Ohio State University) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

How soybeans became China’s most powerful weapon in Trump’s trade war

As the one true known quantity in the Democratic nomination race, former vice president Joe Biden sits atop the pack of 2020 presidential contenders, relishing the prime position as he hosts a kickoff rally Saturday.

No one knows whether the man who served as number two to popular Democratic president Barack Obama for eight years will run away with this contest -- his third White House bid in as many decades -- or fade out in the months-long test of political skill and stamina to come.

But the former longtime senator and lion of the Democratic Party are gearing up for what is certain to be a titanic battle against <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-proposes-new-us-immigration-plan-favouring-skills-over-family-ties-219269">President Donald Trump</a>.

After a month of modest events at union halls and pizza joints in early-voting states like Iowa, Biden is counting on making a splash at a rally in Philadelphia, the largest city in must-win Pennsylvania, a state Trump snatched from Democrats in 2016.

He has made Philadelphia his campaign headquarters, in a further sign of the importance, he is placing on winning back the state for his party in 2020.

His kickoff will be held near the Philadelphia art museum steps immortalized by the scrappy boxer's run in the movie "Rocky."

Biden was born and raised in Pennsylvania, and the rally is a nod to his modest roots.

But far from being the underdog, Biden is looking to cement his status as the man to beat, the blue-collar voter whisperer who is best positioned to take on and defeat Trump.

And while his delayed entry into the race drew criticism that he might not be ready to mount a thoroughly energized campaign, the slow-and-steady strategy appears to be paying off.

By setting his own terms, limiting media engagements and minimizing chances for going off-script, the gaffe-prone Biden is emphasizing his status as preeminent party dignitary.

Polls give Biden, 76, a comfortable lead over the 22 other hopefuls.

The latest RealClearPolitics aggregate puts him at 39.1 per cent support, more than double the 16.4 per cent of his nearest rival, liberal Senator Bernie Sanders.

No one else is in double digits.

After a deeply divisive 2016 race, Democratic voters may be looking for an antidote to Trump, the brash politically inexperienced billionaire.

"What matters to them at the moment is a safe choice, a known entity, and somebody who they believe could beat President Trump at his own game," Lara Brown, director of George Washington University's Graduate School of Political Management, told AFP.

Nearly nine months before the first nomination votes are cast, Biden is the lone Democrat, aside from perhaps Sanders, with the celebrity status that comes close to Trump's.

But as voters start paying more attention, Biden -- who to date has campaigned mostly in broad strokes -- will be under pressure to flesh out positions on everything from health care and wages to immigration.

"Biden is the right man for the moment," Brown said. "Whether he will be the right Democrat eight months from now is still really up in the air."

BLUE COLLAR APPEAL

Biden's dominance has already changed the race's dynamic, with its early stars like senators Sanders, Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren forced to play catch up and levelling criticism at the frontrunner.

Warren and Sanders, each of whom is highlighting the need to narrow the nation's economic inequalities, are expected to ramp up criticism of Biden as the embodiment of the Washington establishment.

Several rivals are from a newer generation, putting them at odds with the old-school Biden, whose major challenge may well be appealing to younger voters.

And while candidates like ex-congressman Beto O'Rourke are keeping up relentless schedules, honing their messages at town halls and meet-and-greets, Biden has opted for more protected environments.

"Let's see what happens when he's taking questions that haven't been vetted," Brown said.

Doing so will require fleshing out his policies, something that has already sparked controversy.

Biden caught flak from liberal groups and candidates for failing to embrace more progressive positions on climate change. He says he will lay out a climate policy in the coming weeks.&nbsp;

He has aligned himself closely with Obama, drawing major support from African American voters, a crucial constituency.

But he will also need to be prepared to lean leftward to acknowledge the party's more progressive tilt.

At the same time, he styles himself, like Trump, as an ardent defender of working-class Americans, someone who can win back the Midwestern white, male blue-collar voters who went for the Republican in 2016.

"If you're appealing to older, more mainstream voters, I think the story that's emerging from his campaign is not that he's the agent of radical change, but that he's going to be a more stable leader," said political science professor Robert Boatright of Clark University.

As the one true known quantity in the Democratic nomination race, former vice president Joe Biden sits atop the pack of 2020 presidential contenders, relishing the prime position as he hosts a kickoff rally Saturday.

As the one true known quantity in the Democratic nomination race, former vice president Joe Biden sits atop the pack of 2020 presidential contenders, relishing the prime position as he hosts a kickoff rally Saturday. No one knows whether the man who served as number two to popular Democratic president Barack Obama for eight years will run away with this contest -- his third White House bid in as many decades -- or fade out in the months-long test of political skill and stamina to come. But the former longtime senator and lion of the Democratic Party are gearing up for what is certain to be a titanic battle against President Donald Trump. After a month of modest events at union halls and pizza joints in early-voting states like Iowa, Biden is counting on making a splash at a rally in Philadelphia, the largest city in must-win Pennsylvania, a state Trump snatched from Democrats in 2016. He has made Philadelphia his campaign headquarters, in a further sign of the importance, he is placing on winning back the state for his party in 2020. His kickoff will be held near the Philadelphia art museum steps immortalized by the scrappy boxer's run in the movie "Rocky." Biden was born and raised in Pennsylvania, and the rally is a nod to his modest roots. But far from being the underdog, Biden is looking to cement his status as the man to beat, the blue-collar voter whisperer who is best positioned to take on and defeat Trump. And while his delayed entry into the race drew criticism that he might not be ready to mount a thoroughly energized campaign, the slow-and-steady strategy appears to be paying off. By setting his own terms, limiting media engagements and minimizing chances for going off-script, the gaffe-prone Biden is emphasizing his status as preeminent party dignitary. Polls give Biden, 76, a comfortable lead over the 22 other hopefuls. The latest RealClearPolitics aggregate puts him at 39.1 per cent support, more than double the 16.4 per cent of his nearest rival, liberal Senator Bernie Sanders. No one else is in double digits. After a deeply divisive 2016 race, Democratic voters may be looking for an antidote to Trump, the brash politically inexperienced billionaire. "What matters to them at the moment is a safe choice, a known entity, and somebody who they believe could beat President Trump at his own game," Lara Brown, director of George Washington University's Graduate School of Political Management, told AFP. Nearly nine months before the first nomination votes are cast, Biden is the lone Democrat, aside from perhaps Sanders, with the celebrity status that comes close to Trump's. But as voters start paying more attention, Biden -- who to date has campaigned mostly in broad strokes -- will be under pressure to flesh out positions on everything from health care and wages to immigration. "Biden is the right man for the moment," Brown said. "Whether he will be the right Democrat eight months from now is still really up in the air." BLUE COLLAR APPEAL Biden's dominance has already changed the race's dynamic, with its early stars like senators Sanders, Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren forced to play catch up and levelling criticism at the frontrunner. Warren and Sanders, each of whom is highlighting the need to narrow the nation's economic inequalities, are expected to ramp up criticism of Biden as the embodiment of the Washington establishment. Several rivals are from a newer generation, putting them at odds with the old-school Biden, whose major challenge may well be appealing to younger voters. And while candidates like ex-congressman Beto O'Rourke are keeping up relentless schedules, honing their messages at town halls and meet-and-greets, Biden has opted for more protected environments. "Let's see what happens when he's taking questions that haven't been vetted," Brown said. Doing so will require fleshing out his policies, something that has already sparked controversy. Biden caught flak from liberal groups and candidates for failing to embrace more progressive positions on climate change. He says he will lay out a climate policy in the coming weeks. He has aligned himself closely with Obama, drawing major support from African American voters, a crucial constituency. But he will also need to be prepared to lean leftward to acknowledge the party's more progressive tilt. At the same time, he styles himself, like Trump, as an ardent defender of working-class Americans, someone who can win back the Midwestern white, male blue-collar voters who went for the Republican in 2016. "If you're appealing to older, more mainstream voters, I think the story that's emerging from his campaign is not that he's the agent of radical change, but that he's going to be a more stable leader," said political science professor Robert Boatright of Clark University.

Joementum: Biden ramps up 2020 bid with wind at his back

&nbsp;By Tony Walker 
 
The Chinese have a saying attributed to the philosopher and writer Lao Tzu: every journey begins with a single step.

If that is the case, US-China relations have taken a step backwards in negotiators’ failure to advance trade negotiations in the latest round of talks in Washington, which ended unsatisfactorily.

China has said it is willing to resume discussions. The US has sent mixed messages, including a series of bombastic tweets from President Donald Trump warning of a worse deal if an agreement is not reached before the next presidential election.

Washington responded to the inability of the two sides to bridge their differences by raising tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese imports to 25 per cent from 10 per cent already imposed.

The administration has threatened to extend tariff increases to virtually all Chinese imports. This would likely prompt a trade war.

Sharp differences remain over the wording of the trade agreement itself. Beijing regards the language as too harsh on intellectual property and trade secrets theft, forced technology transfers, competition policy, access to financial services, and currency manipulation.

China appears to have hardened its position on some of these issues in the course of the negotiations, after having earlier indicated more flexibility.

This does not augur well for an early resolution.

The US has also clearly resolved to increase pressure on China on other fronts, in what risks becoming deepening differences on a range of issues.

As trade negotiators convened in Washington two US warships sailed near disputed islands and island features claimed by China in the South China Sea. This is the third time this year the US has conducted freedom of navigation operations next to Chinese-claimed territory.

Coinciding with last week’s stalled trade talks, the US also barred the large Chinese telecommunications operator, China Mobile Ltd, from operating in the US. Washington cited security concerns.

This comes in the wake of the US decision to ban the Chinese telecommunication communications equipment supplier, Huawei, from participating in the buildout of its 5G network.

US pressure led to three other members of the so-called “five eyes” security partnership, including Australia, to bar Huawei as well. Britain, alone among the “five eyes”, has agreed to allow the Chinese company to participate in non-core aspects of the 5G buildout.

This will be viewed in Beijing as an indication the US is using its economic weight to confront China more broadly and encourage its allies to follow suit.

US attempts to extradite the daughter of the founder of Huawei from Canada to face charges for breaching sanctions against Iran risk further souring relations.

While it would be premature to describe a messy pause in US-China trade negotiations as an inflexion moment in an increasingly complex relationship, it is unarguable that US-China relations have entered a new and more fractious phase.

What is unclear is whether a more overtly competitive relationship is bringing closer the day when the gloves really do come off in a way that threatens global harmony.

In any case, it seems clear a period of relative amity, during which the US and China sought to achieve a reasonable balance between an old and a new global order, is over.

Benn Steil, director of the international economics program at the Council on Foreign Relations, told Bloomberg that rivalry between the US and China for control of everything from global trade routes to cyberspace will drive the relationship for years to come.

“The heady era of global integration is gone,” Steil said.

This view may prove alarmist, but, on latest indications, overcoming trade and other differences between Washington and Beijing will be easier said than done.

Trump’s arrival in the White House, with a team of trade advisers who have made careers railing against China’s uncompetitive trade practices, has brought trading differences more sharply into focus.

Disputes over intellectual property, market access, alleged currency manipulation and a host of other trade issues have been present ever since China began its inexorable rise.

US politicians of left and right agitate against what’s perceived to be China’s mercantilist trade policies. This is blamed for American jobs draining away from the country’s manufacturing heartland.

Prominent Democrats, including Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, support Trump’s tough stand on China. Democratic presidential hopefuls like Bernie Sanders have accused Trump of not delivering on his promises to upend US trading relationships.

Trump’s unhelpful response to the failure in Washington to achieve breakthrough points to an uncertain conclusion to complex negotiations that would lay the foundation for a more stable relationship.

This contribution to the debate provides an indication of the extent to which US-China relations have become enmeshed in American domestic politics.

Trade frictions with China risk becoming more – not less – intense as a presidential election year approaches in 2020.

Presidential campaigns tend to expose sharper differences on trade as the two sides compete for votes in the American rust belt, where factory closures have killed off tens of thousands of jobs.

One of Trump’s boasts is that he has reversed this trend by encouraging American business to reinvest onshore and bring jobs home. But disruptions to trade have their costs.

Trump’s tariff war against China has hit American farmers hard as the Chinese have retaliated by seeking alternative markets for agricultural commodities such as soybeans.

In other words, China is not without an ability to strike back at US attempts to strong-arm it over trade.

In the end, a resolution of a damaging US-China trade dispute that risks broader damage to a global trading system will require the intervention of respective leaders, Trump and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping. The two will meet in June at the Osaka G20 leaders’ summit.

What is complicating that scenario is that crude US attempts to ramp up pressure on Beijing may well prove counterproductive. In Chinese culture, the issue of “face” is important.

Xi will not want to lose “face” in negotiations with Trump by yielding ground unduly. As US academic Patrick Chovanec writes:

"If we want China to embrace structural reform that requires real commitment – it’s not something we can just twist their arm to do, they have to buy into it. When you basically strong-arm them into doing something they really don’t want to do, and they’re convinced it’s harmful to their interests, at some point they are going to cheat, push back, or scuttle it, it’s just a question of when, because they haven’t bought into it."

US-China trade negotiations risk-taking more than a few steps back. 
 
(Tony Walker is Adjunct Professor, School of Communications, La Trobe University)

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/stakes-are-high-as-us-ups-the-ante-on-trade-dispute-with-china-116985">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp;

 
 
 
 
 
&nbsp;

By Tony Walker The Chinese have a saying attributed to the philosopher and writer Lao Tzu: every journey begins with a single step. If that is the case, US-China relations have taken a step backwards in negotiators’ failure to advance trade negotiations in the latest round of talks in Washington, which ended unsatisfactorily.

By Tony Walker The Chinese have a saying attributed to the philosopher and writer Lao Tzu: every journey begins with a single step. If that is the case, US-China relations have taken a step backwards in negotiators’ failure to advance trade negotiations in the latest round of talks in Washington, which ended unsatisfactorily. China has said it is willing to resume discussions. The US has sent mixed messages, including a series of bombastic tweets from President Donald Trump warning of a worse deal if an agreement is not reached before the next presidential election. Washington responded to the inability of the two sides to bridge their differences by raising tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese imports to 25 per cent from 10 per cent already imposed. The administration has threatened to extend tariff increases to virtually all Chinese imports. This would likely prompt a trade war. Sharp differences remain over the wording of the trade agreement itself. Beijing regards the language as too harsh on intellectual property and trade secrets theft, forced technology transfers, competition policy, access to financial services, and currency manipulation. China appears to have hardened its position on some of these issues in the course of the negotiations, after having earlier indicated more flexibility. This does not augur well for an early resolution. The US has also clearly resolved to increase pressure on China on other fronts, in what risks becoming deepening differences on a range of issues. As trade negotiators convened in Washington two US warships sailed near disputed islands and island features claimed by China in the South China Sea. This is the third time this year the US has conducted freedom of navigation operations next to Chinese-claimed territory. Coinciding with last week’s stalled trade talks, the US also barred the large Chinese telecommunications operator, China Mobile Ltd, from operating in the US. Washington cited security concerns. This comes in the wake of the US decision to ban the Chinese telecommunication communications equipment supplier, Huawei, from participating in the buildout of its 5G network. US pressure led to three other members of the so-called “five eyes” security partnership, including Australia, to bar Huawei as well. Britain, alone among the “five eyes”, has agreed to allow the Chinese company to participate in non-core aspects of the 5G buildout. This will be viewed in Beijing as an indication the US is using its economic weight to confront China more broadly and encourage its allies to follow suit. US attempts to extradite the daughter of the founder of Huawei from Canada to face charges for breaching sanctions against Iran risk further souring relations. While it would be premature to describe a messy pause in US-China trade negotiations as an inflexion moment in an increasingly complex relationship, it is unarguable that US-China relations have entered a new and more fractious phase. What is unclear is whether a more overtly competitive relationship is bringing closer the day when the gloves really do come off in a way that threatens global harmony. In any case, it seems clear a period of relative amity, during which the US and China sought to achieve a reasonable balance between an old and a new global order, is over. Benn Steil, director of the international economics program at the Council on Foreign Relations, told Bloomberg that rivalry between the US and China for control of everything from global trade routes to cyberspace will drive the relationship for years to come. “The heady era of global integration is gone,” Steil said. This view may prove alarmist, but, on latest indications, overcoming trade and other differences between Washington and Beijing will be easier said than done. Trump’s arrival in the White House, with a team of trade advisers who have made careers railing against China’s uncompetitive trade practices, has brought trading differences more sharply into focus. Disputes over intellectual property, market access, alleged currency manipulation and a host of other trade issues have been present ever since China began its inexorable rise. US politicians of left and right agitate against what’s perceived to be China’s mercantilist trade policies. This is blamed for American jobs draining away from the country’s manufacturing heartland. Prominent Democrats, including Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, support Trump’s tough stand on China. Democratic presidential hopefuls like Bernie Sanders have accused Trump of not delivering on his promises to upend US trading relationships. Trump’s unhelpful response to the failure in Washington to achieve breakthrough points to an uncertain conclusion to complex negotiations that would lay the foundation for a more stable relationship. This contribution to the debate provides an indication of the extent to which US-China relations have become enmeshed in American domestic politics. Trade frictions with China risk becoming more – not less – intense as a presidential election year approaches in 2020. Presidential campaigns tend to expose sharper differences on trade as the two sides compete for votes in the American rust belt, where factory closures have killed off tens of thousands of jobs. One of Trump’s boasts is that he has reversed this trend by encouraging American business to reinvest onshore and bring jobs home. But disruptions to trade have their costs. Trump’s tariff war against China has hit American farmers hard as the Chinese have retaliated by seeking alternative markets for agricultural commodities such as soybeans. In other words, China is not without an ability to strike back at US attempts to strong-arm it over trade. In the end, a resolution of a damaging US-China trade dispute that risks broader damage to a global trading system will require the intervention of respective leaders, Trump and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping. The two will meet in June at the Osaka G20 leaders’ summit. What is complicating that scenario is that crude US attempts to ramp up pressure on Beijing may well prove counterproductive. In Chinese culture, the issue of “face” is important. Xi will not want to lose “face” in negotiations with Trump by yielding ground unduly. As US academic Patrick Chovanec writes: "If we want China to embrace structural reform that requires real commitment – it’s not something we can just twist their arm to do, they have to buy into it. When you basically strong-arm them into doing something they really don’t want to do, and they’re convinced it’s harmful to their interests, at some point they are going to cheat, push back, or scuttle it, it’s just a question of when, because they haven’t bought into it." US-China trade negotiations risk-taking more than a few steps back. (Tony Walker is Adjunct Professor, School of Communications, La Trobe University) (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Stakes are high as US ups the ante on trade dispute with China

The Pentagon announced Friday that it is deploying an amphibious assault ship and a Patriot missile battery to the Middle East to bolster an aircraft carrier force sent to counter alleged threats from Iran.

The USS Arlington, which transports marines, amphibious vehicles, conventional landing craft and rotary aircraft, and the Patriot air defence system will join the USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group and a<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/b-52-bombers-to-be-part-of-us-forces-sent-to-middle-east-over-iran-concerns-216934"> B-52 bomber task force</a> headed toward the Gulf after intelligence reports suggested Iran was planning some sort of attack in the region.

The deployment is "in response to indications of heightened Iranian readiness to conduct offensive operations against US forces and our interests," the Pentagon said in a statement.

"The Department of Defense continues to closely monitor the activities of the Iranian regime, their military and proxies," it said.

"The United States does not seek conflict with Iran, but we are postured and ready to defend US forces and interests in the region."

On Sunday US President Donald Trump's national security advisor John Bolton announced the deployment of the Lincoln group and bombers saying he wanted to send a "clear and unmistakable" message to Iran about any attack against the US or its partners in the region.&nbsp;

Washington though has not elaborated on the alleged threat, drawing criticism that it is overreacting and unnecessarily driving up tensions in the region.

Iran dismissed the deployment of the Lincoln as old news but followed it with an announcement that it would suspend some of its commitments under the landmark 2015 nuclear deal with major powers abandoned by Washington last year.

Amid the rising tensions, Trump said Thursday he is open to talks with Tehran's leadership.

"What I would like to see with Iran, I would like to see them call me," Trump told reporters at the White House.

The Pentagon announced Friday that it is deploying an amphibious assault ship and a Patriot missile battery to the Middle East to bolster an aircraft carrier force sent to counter alleged threats from Iran.

The Pentagon announced Friday that it is deploying an amphibious assault ship and a Patriot missile battery to the Middle East to bolster an aircraft carrier force sent to counter alleged threats from Iran. The USS Arlington, which transports marines, amphibious vehicles, conventional landing craft and rotary aircraft, and the Patriot air defence system will join the USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group and a B-52 bomber task force headed toward the Gulf after intelligence reports suggested Iran was planning some sort of attack in the region. The deployment is "in response to indications of heightened Iranian readiness to conduct offensive operations against US forces and our interests," the Pentagon said in a statement. "The Department of Defense continues to closely monitor the activities of the Iranian regime, their military and proxies," it said. "The United States does not seek conflict with Iran, but we are postured and ready to defend US forces and interests in the region." On Sunday US President Donald Trump's national security advisor John Bolton announced the deployment of the Lincoln group and bombers saying he wanted to send a "clear and unmistakable" message to Iran about any attack against the US or its partners in the region. Washington though has not elaborated on the alleged threat, drawing criticism that it is overreacting and unnecessarily driving up tensions in the region. Iran dismissed the deployment of the Lincoln as old news but followed it with an announcement that it would suspend some of its commitments under the landmark 2015 nuclear deal with major powers abandoned by Washington last year. Amid the rising tensions, Trump said Thursday he is open to talks with Tehran's leadership. "What I would like to see with Iran, I would like to see them call me," Trump told reporters at the White House.

US builds deterrent force against possible Iranian attack; sends assault ship, missiles to Mideast

US President<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-says-to-hold-more-trade-talks-with-us-in-beijing-217628"> Donald Trump</a> cranked up the heat in a trade battle with China on Friday, ordering a tariff hike on almost all remaining imports from the world's second-biggest economy, but Beijing said talks would continue to resolve the row.

After tweeting that two days of trade talks in Washington had been "candid and constructive," the businessman-turned-politician changed tack and followed through on a threat he had been making for months.

"The President... ordered us to begin the process of raising tariffs on essentially all remaining imports from China, which are valued at approximately $300 billion," US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said in a statement.

The move came less than 24 hours after Washington increased punitive duties on $200 billion worth of Chinese imports, raising them to 25 per cent from 10 per cent, days after the Trump administration accused Beijing of reneging on its commitments.

Details on the process for public notice and comment will be posted Monday, ahead of a final decision on the new tariffs, Lighthizer said. They were not expected to go into effect for several months.

China's top trade negotiator, Vice Premier Liu He, had warned earlier that Beijing "must respond" to any US tariffs.&nbsp;

The developments came like two days of talks to resolve the trade battle ended Friday with no deal, but no immediate breakdown either, offering a glimmer of hope that Washington and Beijing could find a way to avert damage to the global economy.

"Over the course of the past two days, the United States and China have held candid and constructive conversations on the status of the trade relationship between both countries," Trump tweeted.&nbsp;

"The relationship between President Xi (Jinping) and myself remains a very strong one, and conversations into the future will continue."

The tariffs on China "may or may not be removed depending on what happens with respect to future negotiations!"

Three disagreements&nbsp;

Liu told reporters the talks had been "productive" and said the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-says-to-hold-more-trade-talks-with-us-in-beijing-217628">two sides would meet again in Beijing</a> at an unspecified date, but he warned that China would make no concessions on "important principles."

"Negotiations have not broken down, but rather, on the contrary, this is only a normal twist in the negotiations between the two countries, it is inevitable," Liu said.

The seemingly positive messages -- coming before the announcement that Trump had ordered the latest round of tariffs -- had cheered Wall Street with shares rising after being under pressure all week.&nbsp;

US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Lighthizer met for about two hours with Liu on Friday and then headed for the White House to brief Trump, who had said he was in no hurry to reach a deal, arguing the United States was negotiating from a position of strength.

"We have a consensus in lots of areas but to speak frankly there are areas we have differences on, and we believe these concern big principles," Liu said.

Liu pointed to three major areas of disagreement: whether to cancel all trade war tariffs when an agreement is reached, the exact size of Chinese purchases of US goods, and a "balanced" agreement text.

"Any country needs its own dignity, so the text must be balanced," Liu said.

Liu and his backer Xi cannot be seen as giving in too much with trade concessions to the US in fear of triggering comparisons to past "unequal treaties" forced on China in the 19th and 20th centuries.&nbsp;

"Every country has important principles, and we will not make concessions on matters of principle," Liu said

'Darkness before dawn'&nbsp;

Yang Delong, the chief economist at First Seafront Fund Management in Shanghai, told AFP that the "sudden hardening" of Trump's tone is likely linked to the 2020 US presidential election.

"The US hopes China will make greater concessions in many areas, these concessions might harm a foundation of our economic development or impact our institutional reform," Yang said.

"When it comes to core interests China is not able to yield," he said.

Washington is pressing China to change its policies on protections for intellectual property, as well as massive subsidies for state-owned firms, and to reduce the yawning trade deficit.

After weeks of rising optimism about the chances for an agreement, the tone out of the White House has veered from anger to nonchalance.&nbsp;

In a series of early morning tweets Friday, Trump said there was "absolutely no need to rush" towards a deal.

The US leader continues to argue that tariffs could in some ways be preferable to reaching a trade deal.

"Tariffs will bring in FAR MORE wealth to our country than even a phenomenal deal of the traditional kind," Trump wrote.

Since last year the United States and China have exchanged tariffs on more than $360 billion in two-way trade, weighing on both countries' economies.

Economists stress that duties are paid by US companies and consumers and result in higher prices, while farmers and manufacturers complain about the loss of markets for their exports due to retaliation from China.

Liu compared the negotiations to a marathon: "When you get to the last stage it is comparatively the hardest stage, now we need to hold on, it is the darkness before dawn."

US President Donald Trump cranked up the heat in a trade battle with China on Friday, ordering a tariff hike on almost all remaining imports from the world's second-biggest economy, but Beijing said talks would continue to resolve the row.

US President Donald Trump cranked up the heat in a trade battle with China on Friday, ordering a tariff hike on almost all remaining imports from the world's second-biggest economy, but Beijing said talks would continue to resolve the row. After tweeting that two days of trade talks in Washington had been "candid and constructive," the businessman-turned-politician changed tack and followed through on a threat he had been making for months. "The President... ordered us to begin the process of raising tariffs on essentially all remaining imports from China, which are valued at approximately $300 billion," US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said in a statement. The move came less than 24 hours after Washington increased punitive duties on $200 billion worth of Chinese imports, raising them to 25 per cent from 10 per cent, days after the Trump administration accused Beijing of reneging on its commitments. Details on the process for public notice and comment will be posted Monday, ahead of a final decision on the new tariffs, Lighthizer said. They were not expected to go into effect for several months. China's top trade negotiator, Vice Premier Liu He, had warned earlier that Beijing "must respond" to any US tariffs. The developments came like two days of talks to resolve the trade battle ended Friday with no deal, but no immediate breakdown either, offering a glimmer of hope that Washington and Beijing could find a way to avert damage to the global economy. "Over the course of the past two days, the United States and China have held candid and constructive conversations on the status of the trade relationship between both countries," Trump tweeted. "The relationship between President Xi (Jinping) and myself remains a very strong one, and conversations into the future will continue." The tariffs on China "may or may not be removed depending on what happens with respect to future negotiations!" Three disagreements Liu told reporters the talks had been "productive" and said the two sides would meet again in Beijing at an unspecified date, but he warned that China would make no concessions on "important principles." "Negotiations have not broken down, but rather, on the contrary, this is only a normal twist in the negotiations between the two countries, it is inevitable," Liu said. The seemingly positive messages -- coming before the announcement that Trump had ordered the latest round of tariffs -- had cheered Wall Street with shares rising after being under pressure all week. US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Lighthizer met for about two hours with Liu on Friday and then headed for the White House to brief Trump, who had said he was in no hurry to reach a deal, arguing the United States was negotiating from a position of strength. "We have a consensus in lots of areas but to speak frankly there are areas we have differences on, and we believe these concern big principles," Liu said. Liu pointed to three major areas of disagreement: whether to cancel all trade war tariffs when an agreement is reached, the exact size of Chinese purchases of US goods, and a "balanced" agreement text. "Any country needs its own dignity, so the text must be balanced," Liu said. Liu and his backer Xi cannot be seen as giving in too much with trade concessions to the US in fear of triggering comparisons to past "unequal treaties" forced on China in the 19th and 20th centuries. "Every country has important principles, and we will not make concessions on matters of principle," Liu said 'Darkness before dawn' Yang Delong, the chief economist at First Seafront Fund Management in Shanghai, told AFP that the "sudden hardening" of Trump's tone is likely linked to the 2020 US presidential election. "The US hopes China will make greater concessions in many areas, these concessions might harm a foundation of our economic development or impact our institutional reform," Yang said. "When it comes to core interests China is not able to yield," he said. Washington is pressing China to change its policies on protections for intellectual property, as well as massive subsidies for state-owned firms, and to reduce the yawning trade deficit. After weeks of rising optimism about the chances for an agreement, the tone out of the White House has veered from anger to nonchalance. In a series of early morning tweets Friday, Trump said there was "absolutely no need to rush" towards a deal. The US leader continues to argue that tariffs could in some ways be preferable to reaching a trade deal. "Tariffs will bring in FAR MORE wealth to our country than even a phenomenal deal of the traditional kind," Trump wrote. Since last year the United States and China have exchanged tariffs on more than $360 billion in two-way trade, weighing on both countries' economies. Economists stress that duties are paid by US companies and consumers and result in higher prices, while farmers and manufacturers complain about the loss of markets for their exports due to retaliation from China. Liu compared the negotiations to a marathon: "When you get to the last stage it is comparatively the hardest stage, now we need to hold on, it is the darkness before dawn."

Trump orders tariff hike on remaining Chinese imports

South Korea President Moon Jae-in is likely to place a call to US<a href="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/very-positive-venezuela-talks-with-russian-president-putin-donald-trump-215772&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjCn4-s7YjiAhV_6nMBHaocAx4QFjAHegQIAhAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw3dFoLjf5Qji68Sr9NgdYD3"> President Donald Trump</a> on Tuesday to discuss the rise in tension in the Korean peninsula region after the recent weapon tests by North Korea.

The leaders are expected to talk over the phone during Tuesday night (Seoul`s time), reported Yonhap News Agency. On May 4, North Korea launched several short-range projectiles off its east coast in the wake of stalled de-nuclearisation talks with the United States.

Following this,<a href="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-confident-north-koreas-kim-wont-break-promise-215949/amp&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjXnqK-7YjiAhUlSY8KHQ7hBcgQFjAFegQIABAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw0Bx7ybmDaLoZ0phJc0mFFi"> North Korea`s</a> state media reported that military drills had taken place in the country for "assessing (the military`s) ability to handle large-calibre long-range artillery and tactical guided weapons, as well as the accuracy of fire missions and the combat capability of defence units."

Despite the launches, US President Donald Trump reaffirmed his support to Kim, tweeting that the North Korean leader would not "break his promise." The reclusive state`s leader had vowed to completely denuclearise during the first US-North Korea summit held in Singapore last year.

The process has since been largely stalled, as the two states reportedly failed to resolve their differences on sanctions waivers. The reported disagreement also led to the abrupt ending of the second US-North Korea summit in Hanoi this year.

While Pyongyang has asked for relief in sanctions in exchange for the steps it has taken towards denuclearisation, the United States has remained cemented in its resolve to only grant sanction waivers once North Korea has completely denuclearised. The recent weapon launches by North Korea are being largely seen as a sign of Pyongyang`s frustration

South Korea President Moon Jae-in is likely to place a call to US President Donald Trump on Tuesday to discuss the rise in tension in the Korean peninsula region after the recent weapon tests by North Korea.

South Korea President Moon Jae-in is likely to place a call to US President Donald Trump on Tuesday to discuss the rise in tension in the Korean peninsula region after the recent weapon tests by North Korea. The leaders are expected to talk over the phone during Tuesday night (Seoul`s time), reported Yonhap News Agency. On May 4, North Korea launched several short-range projectiles off its east coast in the wake of stalled de-nuclearisation talks with the United States. Following this, North Korea`s state media reported that military drills had taken place in the country for "assessing (the military`s) ability to handle large-calibre long-range artillery and tactical guided weapons, as well as the accuracy of fire missions and the combat capability of defence units." Despite the launches, US President Donald Trump reaffirmed his support to Kim, tweeting that the North Korean leader would not "break his promise." The reclusive state`s leader had vowed to completely denuclearise during the first US-North Korea summit held in Singapore last year. The process has since been largely stalled, as the two states reportedly failed to resolve their differences on sanctions waivers. The reported disagreement also led to the abrupt ending of the second US-North Korea summit in Hanoi this year. While Pyongyang has asked for relief in sanctions in exchange for the steps it has taken towards denuclearisation, the United States has remained cemented in its resolve to only grant sanction waivers once North Korea has completely denuclearised. The recent weapon launches by North Korea are being largely seen as a sign of Pyongyang`s frustration

South Korean President Moon Jae-in expected to call Trump to discuss North Korea's weapon test

US congressional Democrats edged closer on Monday to fighting two legal battles - one over the Mueller report and one over <a href="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/very-positive-venezuela-talks-with-russian-president-putin-donald-trump-215772&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwi4x-uGhIniAhXEL48KHbZABIYQFjAHegQIABAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw1goYtvq3sLuL2HKvhTgeMl">President Donald Trump</a>`s tax returns - after administration officials stonewalled lawmakers` requests for those documents.

The House Judiciary Committee set a vote for Wednesday on whether to cite Attorney General William Barr with contempt over his refusal to provide the panel with a full, unredacted version of Special Counsel <a href="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/robert-mueller-should-not-testify-before-us-congress-trump-216223&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjQvvzsg4niAhUEknAKHQ-sDX8QFjABegQIDxAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw3cUrZBP4maVuMQFp13jMI3">Robert Mueller</a>`s Russia investigation report and underlying evidence from the probe.&nbsp;

Separately, US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said he would not provide the House Ways and Means Committee with six years of Trump`s individual and business tax returns, despite a formal request by Chairman Richard Neal under a law authorizing such actions.

"I have determined that the committee`s request lacks a legitimate legislative purpose ... the department is therefore not authorized to disclose the requested returns and return information," Mnuchin said in a letter on Monday to Neal.

Neal responded in a statement: "I will consult with counsel and determine the appropriate response.”

Both developments put the two oversight committees on a course leading to federal court action to obtain the documents, as the Trump administration escalated its push to block multiple probes by the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives.

Republicans in Congress have rejected the efforts of both Democratic-led committees as political gamesmanship intended to appeal to the Democratic Party`s voting base ahead of the 2020 presidential election, in which Trump is seeking re-election.&nbsp;

"The attorney general`s failure to comply with our subpoena ... leaves us no choice but to initiate contempt proceedings," House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler said in a statement released along with a committee report citing Barr with contempt of Congress.&nbsp;

"If the department presents us with a good faith offer for access to the full report and the underlying evidence, I reserve the right to postpone these proceedings," he said.&nbsp; 
If Nadler`s committee votes as expected to adopt a contempt citation on Wednesday, the measure will go to the full House for a floor vote that is likely to pass.

Lawmakers say such an outcome would lead to a civil court case against Barr, raising the possibility of fines and other legal actions for failure to comply.&nbsp;Democrats also expect Neal`s battle with Mnuchin over Trump`s tax returns to wind up in a lengthy court battle, although Neal could begin by issuing a subpoena for the documents.&nbsp;

OVERSIGHT EFFORTS

The Mueller report and Trump`s taxes are central to the oversight efforts of six Democratic-led House committees that are probing the president, his associates and his presidency.&nbsp;

The Mueller report detailed extensive contacts between Trump`s 2016 campaign and Moscow but did not find that there was a conspiracy between Moscow and the campaign. The report also describes actions Trump took to try to impede Mueller`s investigation.&nbsp;

If lawmakers established that Trump obstructed justice by seeking to impede Mueller, Nadler`s panel could move to impeachment proceedings against the president for high crimes and misdemeanours.

Democrats also want Trump`s returns as part of their investigations of possible conflicts of interest posed by his continued ownership of extensive business interests, even as he serves as president.

Trump broke with a decades-old precedent by refusing to release his tax returns as a presidential candidate in 2016 or since being elected, saying he could not do so while his taxes were being audited.&nbsp;

But his former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, told a House panel in February that he does not believe Trump`s taxes are under audit. Cohen said the president feared that releasing his returns could lead to an audit and IRS tax penalties.

US congressional Democrats edged closer on Monday to fighting two legal battles - one over the Mueller report and one over President Donald Trump`s tax returns - after administration officials stonewalled lawmakers` requests for those documents.

US congressional Democrats edged closer on Monday to fighting two legal battles - one over the Mueller report and one over President Donald Trump`s tax returns - after administration officials stonewalled lawmakers` requests for those documents. The House Judiciary Committee set a vote for Wednesday on whether to cite Attorney General William Barr with contempt over his refusal to provide the panel with a full, unredacted version of Special Counsel Robert Mueller`s Russia investigation report and underlying evidence from the probe. Separately, US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said he would not provide the House Ways and Means Committee with six years of Trump`s individual and business tax returns, despite a formal request by Chairman Richard Neal under a law authorizing such actions. "I have determined that the committee`s request lacks a legitimate legislative purpose ... the department is therefore not authorized to disclose the requested returns and return information," Mnuchin said in a letter on Monday to Neal. Neal responded in a statement: "I will consult with counsel and determine the appropriate response.” Both developments put the two oversight committees on a course leading to federal court action to obtain the documents, as the Trump administration escalated its push to block multiple probes by the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives. Republicans in Congress have rejected the efforts of both Democratic-led committees as political gamesmanship intended to appeal to the Democratic Party`s voting base ahead of the 2020 presidential election, in which Trump is seeking re-election. "The attorney general`s failure to comply with our subpoena ... leaves us no choice but to initiate contempt proceedings," House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler said in a statement released along with a committee report citing Barr with contempt of Congress. "If the department presents us with a good faith offer for access to the full report and the underlying evidence, I reserve the right to postpone these proceedings," he said. If Nadler`s committee votes as expected to adopt a contempt citation on Wednesday, the measure will go to the full House for a floor vote that is likely to pass. Lawmakers say such an outcome would lead to a civil court case against Barr, raising the possibility of fines and other legal actions for failure to comply. Democrats also expect Neal`s battle with Mnuchin over Trump`s tax returns to wind up in a lengthy court battle, although Neal could begin by issuing a subpoena for the documents. OVERSIGHT EFFORTS The Mueller report and Trump`s taxes are central to the oversight efforts of six Democratic-led House committees that are probing the president, his associates and his presidency. The Mueller report detailed extensive contacts between Trump`s 2016 campaign and Moscow but did not find that there was a conspiracy between Moscow and the campaign. The report also describes actions Trump took to try to impede Mueller`s investigation. If lawmakers established that Trump obstructed justice by seeking to impede Mueller, Nadler`s panel could move to impeachment proceedings against the president for high crimes and misdemeanours. Democrats also want Trump`s returns as part of their investigations of possible conflicts of interest posed by his continued ownership of extensive business interests, even as he serves as president. Trump broke with a decades-old precedent by refusing to release his tax returns as a presidential candidate in 2016 or since being elected, saying he could not do so while his taxes were being audited. But his former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, told a House panel in February that he does not believe Trump`s taxes are under audit. Cohen said the president feared that releasing his returns could lead to an audit and IRS tax penalties.

US Democrats edge toward court battles over Mueller, Trump's taxes

What is the Mueller report?

What the Mueller report says and what it does not

North Korea releases documentary on Kim Jong Un

The United States posted its widest monthly trade gap since 2008 in December and a record annual deficit in goods as sturdy economic growth underpinned higher spending by American consumers and businesses, according to a Dow Jones Newswires report made available to EFE on Wednesday. 
 
The international trade deficit in goods and services widened 19 per cent in December from the prior month to a seasonally adjusted $59.8 billion, the Commerce Department said Wednesday.&nbsp;

Economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal had expected a $57.3 billion gap.&nbsp; 
 
The shortfall grew last year despite President Trump's aim to reduce it. 
 
Over the course of 2018, Donald Trump imposed tariffs on a range of goods that the US imports from other countries, particularly China, in hopes of giving American producers a competitive edge.&nbsp; 
 
He publicly lambasted companies that outsourced jobs, renegotiated pacts with major US trade partners like Mexico, Canada, and South Korea, and rankled longtime European allies by deeming their steel and aluminum exports a threat to national security. 
 
Still, the trade gap swelled 12 per cent from 2017 to $621 billion.&nbsp;

Excluding services that the US sells to foreigners, such as tourism, intellectual property and banking, the deficit grew 10 per cent to $891.3 billion, the largest level on record.&nbsp; 
 
Economists say the shortfall was fueled, ironically, by another Trump administration policy: tax cuts and spending increases that juiced demand from US consumers and businesses at a time when growth in the rest of the world was slowing.&nbsp; 
 
Concern that the US economy could overheat prompted the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates four times in 2018, contributing to a strong dollar in the second half of the year that made foreign goods relatively cheap for Americans. 
 
As a result, US imports grew 7.5 per cent, while exports increased by just 6.3 per cent. 
&nbsp; 
"Higher take-home incomes for households have definitely proven to be very conducive to imports," said Pooja Sriram, an economist at Barclays. "The outcome has been in almost the opposite direction of what the administration has wanted."&nbsp; 
 
US imports of consumer goods last year jumped 7.7 per cent to $647.9 billion, fueled in part by a 22 per cent rise in inbound shipments of drugs.&nbsp; 
 
Industrial supplies like fuel and crude oil were another driver of the trade gap, with imports rising 13 per cent from 2017 to $575.7 billion.&nbsp; 
 
Highlighting the limitations of Trump's trade policies, the goods deficit widened most with China, the US's largest commercial partner and the main focus of White House efforts.&nbsp; 
 
That is partly because Chinese authorities responded to tariffs by drastically scaling back their country's purchases of key US exports like soybeans, cars and metals, production of which is concentrated in states that Trump won in the 2016 election.&nbsp; 
 
US goods exports to China fell 7.4 percent in 2018 to $120.3 billion, while imports from China grew 6.7 per cent to $539.5 billion as Americans increased their purchases of electronics, furniture, toys, and other products.&nbsp;

But the deficit in goods also widened in other countries where Trump aimed his trade war, including the European Union and Mexico.

The United States posted its widest monthly trade gap since 2008 in December and a record annual deficit in goods as sturdy economic growth underpinned higher spending by American consumers and businesses, according to a Dow Jones Newswires report made available to EFE on Wednesday.

The United States posted its widest monthly trade gap since 2008 in December and a record annual deficit in goods as sturdy economic growth underpinned higher spending by American consumers and businesses, according to a Dow Jones Newswires report made available to EFE on Wednesday. The international trade deficit in goods and services widened 19 per cent in December from the prior month to a seasonally adjusted $59.8 billion, the Commerce Department said Wednesday. Economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal had expected a $57.3 billion gap. The shortfall grew last year despite President Trump's aim to reduce it. Over the course of 2018, Donald Trump imposed tariffs on a range of goods that the US imports from other countries, particularly China, in hopes of giving American producers a competitive edge. He publicly lambasted companies that outsourced jobs, renegotiated pacts with major US trade partners like Mexico, Canada, and South Korea, and rankled longtime European allies by deeming their steel and aluminum exports a threat to national security. Still, the trade gap swelled 12 per cent from 2017 to $621 billion. Excluding services that the US sells to foreigners, such as tourism, intellectual property and banking, the deficit grew 10 per cent to $891.3 billion, the largest level on record. Economists say the shortfall was fueled, ironically, by another Trump administration policy: tax cuts and spending increases that juiced demand from US consumers and businesses at a time when growth in the rest of the world was slowing. Concern that the US economy could overheat prompted the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates four times in 2018, contributing to a strong dollar in the second half of the year that made foreign goods relatively cheap for Americans. As a result, US imports grew 7.5 per cent, while exports increased by just 6.3 per cent. "Higher take-home incomes for households have definitely proven to be very conducive to imports," said Pooja Sriram, an economist at Barclays. "The outcome has been in almost the opposite direction of what the administration has wanted." US imports of consumer goods last year jumped 7.7 per cent to $647.9 billion, fueled in part by a 22 per cent rise in inbound shipments of drugs. Industrial supplies like fuel and crude oil were another driver of the trade gap, with imports rising 13 per cent from 2017 to $575.7 billion. Highlighting the limitations of Trump's trade policies, the goods deficit widened most with China, the US's largest commercial partner and the main focus of White House efforts. That is partly because Chinese authorities responded to tariffs by drastically scaling back their country's purchases of key US exports like soybeans, cars and metals, production of which is concentrated in states that Trump won in the 2016 election. US goods exports to China fell 7.4 percent in 2018 to $120.3 billion, while imports from China grew 6.7 per cent to $539.5 billion as Americans increased their purchases of electronics, furniture, toys, and other products. But the deficit in goods also widened in other countries where Trump aimed his trade war, including the European Union and Mexico.

United States posts record annual trade deficit

By Abdulkader Sinno

The United States and the Taliban may be nearing an agreement to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan after more than 17 years of conflict.

In return, the Taliban would commit to refusing access to anti-American organisations such as Al-Qaida on its territory.

How did we get to this point – and what will be the consequences of such an agreement?

How did we get here?

As a longtime scholar of Afghanistan’s wars and conflict dynamics, I suggest beginning with a bit of history.

The current conflict began when the Bush administration invaded Afghanistan a few weeks after 9/11.

It was on Afghan soil that Osama bin Laden hatched the plot to attack the US. The Taliban, the de facto rulers of much of Afghanistan in the wake of a bloody civil war, had given bin Laden and his supporters'&nbsp;shelter.

Two months into the US invasion, Taliban state institutions and defensive positions crumbled and the United States formed new state institutions led by Afghans who had fought the Taliban. The US maintained a limited force to fight and capture Al-Qaida and Taliban leaders but otherwise invested little in the Afghan economy or society.

It took the Taliban four years to reconstitute itself as an effective force of insurgents to fight the US and the Afghan government, and they became stronger every year after 2004. As I explain in my research, the United States and the coalition of 42 countries it formed to defeat the resurgent Taliban was poorly organised, abusive and mismanaged.

Since 2001, the US-led coalition has spent $1 trillion dollars and committed a peak of 140,000 troops and 100,000 contractors to an unsuccessful attempt to defeat the Taliban. More than 5,000 American soldiers and contractors were killed.

Today, a US force of 14,000 troops and massive US Airforce assets are helping maintain the defensive positions of an Afghan government that is widely considered as one of the most corrupt in the world.

The Taliban are making territorial gains and killing hundreds of regime troops each month, and feel that they are on the cusp of victory.

Militias that recruit from the Hazara, Tajik and Uzbek minorities have rearmed in anticipation of the collapse of the regime in Kabul and fear of a coming civil war with the mostly Pushtun Taliban. Afghanistan is nearing an endgame.

What it means for the Taliban

An agreement between the Taliban and the US would be an impressive accomplishment for the Taliban. From their perspective, it would be their reward for fighting the world’s strongest military power to a stalemate.

They already were rewarded by getting to negotiate directly with the United States, as they have always requested, instead of the Afghan regime which they despise. If the negotiations are successful, they would also be getting precisely what they asked for: an American withdrawal.

In return, they are making a commitment to do something they would likely have done anyway. Al-Qaida’s attack on the US caused the Taliban to lose control of Afghanistan for years. They are not likely to risk having to pay that cost again once they regain control of Kabul, even if they don’t sign an agreement.

What it means for the US 
 
There is little hope for an outright US victory over the Taliban at this point.

The remaining force of 14,000 US troops is mostly meant to shore up Afghan state defences. It is too small to reverse momentum on the battlefield. An agreement and withdrawal would, therefore, be attractive for those who value less military spending and stress on the military, including General John Nicholson, the previous commander of the American and NATO forces in Afghanistan.

The agreement, however, could undermine US reputation in ways big and small. The Obama and Trump administrations never reversed a 2002 Bush executive order that added the Taliban to the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists, but they have simultaneously pleaded with them to negotiate in spite of claims that Washington does not negotiate with terrorists.

It also signals US weakness and inability to fight a dedicated force of insurgents. Militants elsewhere, including Islamic State leaders, could find this lesson instructive. I believe such an agreement may well be remembered as a turning point in America’s ability to successfully project its military power around the Muslim world.

An agreement could also signal that the US is an unreliable ally that abandons those who side with it. The United States is involved in numerous conflicts worldwide in places as diverse as Syria and Somalia, and many of its local allies would logically recalculate their own commitments after witnessing a US disengagement from Afghanistan.

What happens to the state

As I describe in my book “Organisations at War in Afghanistan,” governments tend to unravel quickly in Afghanistan when foreign support, both military and financial, ceases.

This is precisely what happened after the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan and stopped their support to the Najib regime in the early 1990s. As I report in greater detail in my book, different regime militias and military units either disintegrated, joined their erstwhile Mujahideen opponents or became independent militias.

Similarly, today’s Afghan state officials at all levels have long hedged their bets by maintaining ties with the Taliban, their nominal opponents and minority militias. If history is any indication, we can expect that entire agencies and units will either fragment or collectively join any of several strongman-led ethnic militias when the rewards of working for the regime stop outweighing the risks of facing the Taliban. Some may even defect to the Taliban. This is expected behaviour in dangerous environments such as Afghanistan, where everyone is expected to have a hedging strategy for survival.

Once the state gets pulled in all directions, Afghanistan will likely degenerate into a civil war very similar to the one that the United States interrupted when it invaded in late 2001. Other countries, including Russia, Iran and India will choose sides to back. I estimate that the Taliban, with their dedicated Pakistani and Arab Gulf backers, will win that conflict, just like they almost did in 2001. We may very well reach a point where we see the 17-year American occupation as merely a futile, bloody and costly interruption of the Afghan civil war.

I consider a US-Taliban agreement to be no more than a face-saving measure to conclude a failed and costly American military intervention. If there is a useful lesson to be learned from this misadventure, it is that leaders of even the world’s mightiest military power need to reconsider the merits of a militarised foreign policy in the Muslim world. US military interventions are stoking resentment and inflaming a perpetual transnational insurgency across Muslim countries. If it doesn’t change its course, the US may very well suffer more defeats such as the one in Afghanistan and will cause even more hurt and damage in other countries along the way.

(Abdulkader Sinno is Associate Professor of Political Science and Middle Eastern Studies, Indiana University)

(This article was originally published on the Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-will-come-after-a-us-withdrawal-from-afghanistan-111036">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

By Abdulkader Sinno The United States and the Taliban may be nearing an agreement to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan after more than 17 years of conflict. In return, the Taliban would commit to refusing access to anti-American organisations such as Al-Qaida on its territory.

By Abdulkader Sinno The United States and the Taliban may be nearing an agreement to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan after more than 17 years of conflict. In return, the Taliban would commit to refusing access to anti-American organisations such as Al-Qaida on its territory. How did we get to this point – and what will be the consequences of such an agreement? How did we get here? As a longtime scholar of Afghanistan’s wars and conflict dynamics, I suggest beginning with a bit of history. The current conflict began when the Bush administration invaded Afghanistan a few weeks after 9/11. It was on Afghan soil that Osama bin Laden hatched the plot to attack the US. The Taliban, the de facto rulers of much of Afghanistan in the wake of a bloody civil war, had given bin Laden and his supporters' shelter. Two months into the US invasion, Taliban state institutions and defensive positions crumbled and the United States formed new state institutions led by Afghans who had fought the Taliban. The US maintained a limited force to fight and capture Al-Qaida and Taliban leaders but otherwise invested little in the Afghan economy or society. It took the Taliban four years to reconstitute itself as an effective force of insurgents to fight the US and the Afghan government, and they became stronger every year after 2004. As I explain in my research, the United States and the coalition of 42 countries it formed to defeat the resurgent Taliban was poorly organised, abusive and mismanaged. Since 2001, the US-led coalition has spent $1 trillion dollars and committed a peak of 140,000 troops and 100,000 contractors to an unsuccessful attempt to defeat the Taliban. More than 5,000 American soldiers and contractors were killed. Today, a US force of 14,000 troops and massive US Airforce assets are helping maintain the defensive positions of an Afghan government that is widely considered as one of the most corrupt in the world. The Taliban are making territorial gains and killing hundreds of regime troops each month, and feel that they are on the cusp of victory. Militias that recruit from the Hazara, Tajik and Uzbek minorities have rearmed in anticipation of the collapse of the regime in Kabul and fear of a coming civil war with the mostly Pushtun Taliban. Afghanistan is nearing an endgame. What it means for the Taliban An agreement between the Taliban and the US would be an impressive accomplishment for the Taliban. From their perspective, it would be their reward for fighting the world’s strongest military power to a stalemate. They already were rewarded by getting to negotiate directly with the United States, as they have always requested, instead of the Afghan regime which they despise. If the negotiations are successful, they would also be getting precisely what they asked for: an American withdrawal. In return, they are making a commitment to do something they would likely have done anyway. Al-Qaida’s attack on the US caused the Taliban to lose control of Afghanistan for years. They are not likely to risk having to pay that cost again once they regain control of Kabul, even if they don’t sign an agreement. What it means for the US There is little hope for an outright US victory over the Taliban at this point. The remaining force of 14,000 US troops is mostly meant to shore up Afghan state defences. It is too small to reverse momentum on the battlefield. An agreement and withdrawal would, therefore, be attractive for those who value less military spending and stress on the military, including General John Nicholson, the previous commander of the American and NATO forces in Afghanistan. The agreement, however, could undermine US reputation in ways big and small. The Obama and Trump administrations never reversed a 2002 Bush executive order that added the Taliban to the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists, but they have simultaneously pleaded with them to negotiate in spite of claims that Washington does not negotiate with terrorists. It also signals US weakness and inability to fight a dedicated force of insurgents. Militants elsewhere, including Islamic State leaders, could find this lesson instructive. I believe such an agreement may well be remembered as a turning point in America’s ability to successfully project its military power around the Muslim world. An agreement could also signal that the US is an unreliable ally that abandons those who side with it. The United States is involved in numerous conflicts worldwide in places as diverse as Syria and Somalia, and many of its local allies would logically recalculate their own commitments after witnessing a US disengagement from Afghanistan. What happens to the state As I describe in my book “Organisations at War in Afghanistan,” governments tend to unravel quickly in Afghanistan when foreign support, both military and financial, ceases. This is precisely what happened after the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan and stopped their support to the Najib regime in the early 1990s. As I report in greater detail in my book, different regime militias and military units either disintegrated, joined their erstwhile Mujahideen opponents or became independent militias. Similarly, today’s Afghan state officials at all levels have long hedged their bets by maintaining ties with the Taliban, their nominal opponents and minority militias. If history is any indication, we can expect that entire agencies and units will either fragment or collectively join any of several strongman-led ethnic militias when the rewards of working for the regime stop outweighing the risks of facing the Taliban. Some may even defect to the Taliban. This is expected behaviour in dangerous environments such as Afghanistan, where everyone is expected to have a hedging strategy for survival. Once the state gets pulled in all directions, Afghanistan will likely degenerate into a civil war very similar to the one that the United States interrupted when it invaded in late 2001. Other countries, including Russia, Iran and India will choose sides to back. I estimate that the Taliban, with their dedicated Pakistani and Arab Gulf backers, will win that conflict, just like they almost did in 2001. We may very well reach a point where we see the 17-year American occupation as merely a futile, bloody and costly interruption of the Afghan civil war. I consider a US-Taliban agreement to be no more than a face-saving measure to conclude a failed and costly American military intervention. If there is a useful lesson to be learned from this misadventure, it is that leaders of even the world’s mightiest military power need to reconsider the merits of a militarised foreign policy in the Muslim world. US military interventions are stoking resentment and inflaming a perpetual transnational insurgency across Muslim countries. If it doesn’t change its course, the US may very well suffer more defeats such as the one in Afghanistan and will cause even more hurt and damage in other countries along the way. (Abdulkader Sinno is Associate Professor of Political Science and Middle Eastern Studies, Indiana University) (This article was originally published on the Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US-Taliban deal is a face-saving measure to conclude a failed American military intervention

&nbsp;Vietnam, which from Wednesday hosts a summit between the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-deal-with-kim-thwarted-by-north-korean-sanction-demands-200231">United States and North Korea</a>, is an ideal meeting point for the two sides due to its geographical location and its ties with both countries, but also for its economic model and experience in reunifying a divided country.

The second summit between US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in the Vietnamese capital is scheduled to conclude on Thursday.

The first point in favour of Hanoi has been its location, which is not too far from North Korea, helping Kim circumvent logistical limitations on his movement.

Kim covered the 4,500 kilometres (2,796 miles) separating Pyongyang and the China-Vietnam border by train during a journey that took three days.

"Hanoi is convenient for Kim and he has been able to make the journey by train," Trung Nguyen, director of the Center for International Studies in Ho Chi Minh City, told EFE.

The analyst stressed that Hanoi's proximity to the Chinese border - from where Kim drove the last leg - has been one of the factors in selecting the capital over the coastal city of Da Nang, 750 kilometres to the south, which would have made road transport difficult.

"Vietnam had even wanted to host the Singapore summit. Earlier it did not have the confidence for these events, but now it shows that it is capable of doing so as it did with APEC in 2017 in Da Nang," he added.

Like Singapore, which hosted the first summit between the two leaders on Jun. 12 last year, Vietnam met the indispensable requisite of having diplomatic ties with both countries.

It also has the distinctive feature of not having had diplomatic relations with the US for two decades following the conclusion of the US-Vietnam war in 1975 before amending ties, which, according to the experts, could offer some leads as to the way forward for Pyongyang and Washington.

Since the resumption of ties in 1995, Vietnam and the US have been steadily increasing economic and trade exchanges, marked by state visits to Hanoi by all the US presidents from Bill Clinton to Trump, who first travelled to the Vietnamese capital in November 2017.

At the same time, Hanoi has also maintained a relationship with Pyongyang, with whom it shares historic ties due to the communist roots of both regimes, and despite enormous political and economic differences.

Since Kim came to power, the friendship between the two nations has taken on a new momentum, after years of complications posed by Vietnam’s closeness with South Korea, one of the biggest investors in the Indochinese country.

"In the past, North Korea and Vietnam had a friendly relationship. Presidents Ho Chi Minh and Kim Il-sung exchanged visits in the 1950s, but North Korea did not approve of closeness towards South Korea, which has many investments in the country, and this led to a freezing of ties," said Trung Nguyen.

One of the reasons for the increasing closeness between Pyongyang and Hanoi could be the former's supposed interest in the Vietnamese economic model, which in the 1980s began a transition from orthodox communism to the current market economy set-up supervised by the US and with the Communist Party maintaining its hegemony.

This interest has increased speculation of possible visits by Kim to industrial complexes near Hanoi during his stay in the country.

Aside from the economic transition, which has helped Vietnam become one of the most thriving economies in Southeast Asia, the country's experience in reunifying North and South Vietnam after the end of the war in 1975 could also prove valuable.

In 2016, then-South Korean ambassador to Vietnam, Jeon Dae-ju, said at a forum on peace in Hanoi that the Indochinese country was a historic model for its efforts to reunify its people.

"Kim seems to have interest in Vietnam as an economic model, but also, from my interactions with South Korean diplomats, sees Vietnam as a possible model for the reunification of the two Koreas," said Trung Nguyen.

The country was separated into North Vietnam and South Vietnam in 1956 following the Geneva Agreements, and they reunified in 1975 after the war. North Korea and South Korea have been separated since the end of World War II in 1945.

Vietnam, which from Wednesday hosts a summit between the United States and North Korea, is an ideal meeting point for the two sides due to its geographical location and its ties with both countries, but also for its economic model and experience in reunifying a divided country.

Vietnam, which from Wednesday hosts a summit between the United States and North Korea, is an ideal meeting point for the two sides due to its geographical location and its ties with both countries, but also for its economic model and experience in reunifying a divided country. The second summit between US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in the Vietnamese capital is scheduled to conclude on Thursday. The first point in favour of Hanoi has been its location, which is not too far from North Korea, helping Kim circumvent logistical limitations on his movement. Kim covered the 4,500 kilometres (2,796 miles) separating Pyongyang and the China-Vietnam border by train during a journey that took three days. "Hanoi is convenient for Kim and he has been able to make the journey by train," Trung Nguyen, director of the Center for International Studies in Ho Chi Minh City, told EFE. The analyst stressed that Hanoi's proximity to the Chinese border - from where Kim drove the last leg - has been one of the factors in selecting the capital over the coastal city of Da Nang, 750 kilometres to the south, which would have made road transport difficult. "Vietnam had even wanted to host the Singapore summit. Earlier it did not have the confidence for these events, but now it shows that it is capable of doing so as it did with APEC in 2017 in Da Nang," he added. Like Singapore, which hosted the first summit between the two leaders on Jun. 12 last year, Vietnam met the indispensable requisite of having diplomatic ties with both countries. It also has the distinctive feature of not having had diplomatic relations with the US for two decades following the conclusion of the US-Vietnam war in 1975 before amending ties, which, according to the experts, could offer some leads as to the way forward for Pyongyang and Washington. Since the resumption of ties in 1995, Vietnam and the US have been steadily increasing economic and trade exchanges, marked by state visits to Hanoi by all the US presidents from Bill Clinton to Trump, who first travelled to the Vietnamese capital in November 2017. At the same time, Hanoi has also maintained a relationship with Pyongyang, with whom it shares historic ties due to the communist roots of both regimes, and despite enormous political and economic differences. Since Kim came to power, the friendship between the two nations has taken on a new momentum, after years of complications posed by Vietnam’s closeness with South Korea, one of the biggest investors in the Indochinese country. "In the past, North Korea and Vietnam had a friendly relationship. Presidents Ho Chi Minh and Kim Il-sung exchanged visits in the 1950s, but North Korea did not approve of closeness towards South Korea, which has many investments in the country, and this led to a freezing of ties," said Trung Nguyen. One of the reasons for the increasing closeness between Pyongyang and Hanoi could be the former's supposed interest in the Vietnamese economic model, which in the 1980s began a transition from orthodox communism to the current market economy set-up supervised by the US and with the Communist Party maintaining its hegemony. This interest has increased speculation of possible visits by Kim to industrial complexes near Hanoi during his stay in the country. Aside from the economic transition, which has helped Vietnam become one of the most thriving economies in Southeast Asia, the country's experience in reunifying North and South Vietnam after the end of the war in 1975 could also prove valuable. In 2016, then-South Korean ambassador to Vietnam, Jeon Dae-ju, said at a forum on peace in Hanoi that the Indochinese country was a historic model for its efforts to reunify its people. "Kim seems to have interest in Vietnam as an economic model, but also, from my interactions with South Korean diplomats, sees Vietnam as a possible model for the reunification of the two Koreas," said Trung Nguyen. The country was separated into North Vietnam and South Vietnam in 1956 following the Geneva Agreements, and they reunified in 1975 after the war. North Korea and South Korea have been separated since the end of World War II in 1945.

Vietnam much more than just a meeting point for Trump, Kim

President Donald Trump's border wall with Mexico has yet to be built and, on Wednesday, US authorities began demolishing the prototypes constructed for it in California 16 months ago.

The eight models of concrete and steel were unveiled in October 2017, at a cost of more than $300,000 each, on the edge of San Diego at the border with Tijuana, Mexico.

Trump himself inspected the 30-feet (nine-meter) full-scale models erected side-by-side when he visited California in March last year and pushed his signature campaign promise of a wall along the Mexican border.

He says the barrier is needed to keep out illegal immigrants, criminal gangs and drug traffickers.

The prototypes were built for testing and evaluation, which has now been completed, a Customs and Border Protection official said.&nbsp;

"They have served their purpose and are now being removed" while a new "secondary bollard wall" will go up in the same location, the official said.

"Removing the prototypes would be less expensive than integrating the prototypes into the new Secondary Border Wall."

Construction workers used machinery to knock down seven of the prototypes but were unable to topple the last one.

"They woke us up early when they were drilling," said a Tijuana resident who lives a few meters from the border, where the prototypes had become an attraction for tourists in Tijuana.

Unable to obtain all the congressional funding he seeks for his wall, Trump declared a "national emergency" that would enable him to find billions of dollars from other sources, in particular, the Pentagon budget for military construction.

On Tuesday the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives struck down the emergency declaration, which will also be considered by the Senate, which is controlled by Trump's Republican party. 
&nbsp;

President Donald Trump's border wall with Mexico has yet to be built and, on Wednesday, US authorities began demolishing the prototypes constructed for it in California 16 months ago.

President Donald Trump's border wall with Mexico has yet to be built and, on Wednesday, US authorities began demolishing the prototypes constructed for it in California 16 months ago. The eight models of concrete and steel were unveiled in October 2017, at a cost of more than $300,000 each, on the edge of San Diego at the border with Tijuana, Mexico. Trump himself inspected the 30-feet (nine-meter) full-scale models erected side-by-side when he visited California in March last year and pushed his signature campaign promise of a wall along the Mexican border. He says the barrier is needed to keep out illegal immigrants, criminal gangs and drug traffickers. The prototypes were built for testing and evaluation, which has now been completed, a Customs and Border Protection official said. "They have served their purpose and are now being removed" while a new "secondary bollard wall" will go up in the same location, the official said. "Removing the prototypes would be less expensive than integrating the prototypes into the new Secondary Border Wall." Construction workers used machinery to knock down seven of the prototypes but were unable to topple the last one. "They woke us up early when they were drilling," said a Tijuana resident who lives a few meters from the border, where the prototypes had become an attraction for tourists in Tijuana. Unable to obtain all the congressional funding he seeks for his wall, Trump declared a "national emergency" that would enable him to find billions of dollars from other sources, in particular, the Pentagon budget for military construction. On Tuesday the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives struck down the emergency declaration, which will also be considered by the Senate, which is controlled by Trump's Republican party.

US demolishes Trump's border wall prototypes

US Vice President Mike Pence passed on a message from Donald Trump to Venezuela's opposition leader<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/venezuelas-guaido-meets-with-foreign-allies-for-anti-maduro-strategy-199636"> Juan Guaido</a> on Monday, telling him "we are with you 100 per cent."

Pence and Guaido met in Colombia's capital during a meeting of regional allies to discuss their next move in response to the crisis in Venezuela.

Also read: <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-slaps-sanctions-on-venezuelan-governors-supporting-nicolas-maduro-199710">US</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-slaps-sanctions-on-venezuelan-governors-supporting-nicolas-maduro-199710"> imposes sanctions on Venezuelan governors supporting Nicolas Maduro</a>

Guaido warned against "indulging" Venezuela's President <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/as-4-people-die-in-venezuela-border-clashes-juan-guaido-proposes-to-consider-all-options-to-oust-maduro-199344">Nicolas Maduro</a>, saying to do so "would be a threat to all of America."

Colombia's President Ivan Duque, meanwhile, called on regional allies to create a "more powerful and effective" ring around Maduro to facilitate the transition of power "demanded by the Venezuelan people."

The Lima Group meeting is taking place following a bloody weekend in which Guaido failed to fulfil his pledge to bring humanitarian aid into Venezuela after a military blockade ordered by Maduro stood firm.

Four people died in clashes on Venezuela's border with Brazil between security forces and civilians seeking to bring in aid.

Several hundred more were injured in the confrontations at the borders with Colombia and Brazil.

Trump "sent me here to stand with you and to stand with our friends and allies in Venezuela," Pence told Guaido, who caused a sensation a month ago in declaring himself acting president.

That sparked a power struggle between the National Assembly speaker and Maduro, whom Guaido has branded illegitimate over his disputed reelection last May.

"It's important to recover democracy in Venezuela because those usurping power today are a threat to the continent's stability," said Guaido.

He said on Sunday he was heading to Bogota to ask allies to consider "all measures" in helping end Venezuela's humanitarian crisis.

Years of recession and hyperinflation have left people suffering shortages of desperately needed food and medicines.

Guaido says 300,000 people could die if the aid isn't urgently brought in.

Maduro has rejected the aid, though, claiming it would be a pretext to a US invasion.

Before the meeting began, Peru's Foreign Affairs Minister Hugo de Zela said the Lima Group's aim was "to find a peaceful solution" to the political impasse.

US Vice President Mike Pence passed on a message from Donald Trump to Venezuela's opposition leader Juan Guaido on Monday, telling him "we are with you 100 per cent.

US Vice President Mike Pence passed on a message from Donald Trump to Venezuela's opposition leader Juan Guaido on Monday, telling him "we are with you 100 per cent." Pence and Guaido met in Colombia's capital during a meeting of regional allies to discuss their next move in response to the crisis in Venezuela. Also read: US imposes sanctions on Venezuelan governors supporting Nicolas Maduro Guaido warned against "indulging" Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro, saying to do so "would be a threat to all of America." Colombia's President Ivan Duque, meanwhile, called on regional allies to create a "more powerful and effective" ring around Maduro to facilitate the transition of power "demanded by the Venezuelan people." The Lima Group meeting is taking place following a bloody weekend in which Guaido failed to fulfil his pledge to bring humanitarian aid into Venezuela after a military blockade ordered by Maduro stood firm. Four people died in clashes on Venezuela's border with Brazil between security forces and civilians seeking to bring in aid. Several hundred more were injured in the confrontations at the borders with Colombia and Brazil. Trump "sent me here to stand with you and to stand with our friends and allies in Venezuela," Pence told Guaido, who caused a sensation a month ago in declaring himself acting president. That sparked a power struggle between the National Assembly speaker and Maduro, whom Guaido has branded illegitimate over his disputed reelection last May. "It's important to recover democracy in Venezuela because those usurping power today are a threat to the continent's stability," said Guaido. He said on Sunday he was heading to Bogota to ask allies to consider "all measures" in helping end Venezuela's humanitarian crisis. Years of recession and hyperinflation have left people suffering shortages of desperately needed food and medicines. Guaido says 300,000 people could die if the aid isn't urgently brought in. Maduro has rejected the aid, though, claiming it would be a pretext to a US invasion. Before the meeting began, Peru's Foreign Affairs Minister Hugo de Zela said the Lima Group's aim was "to find a peaceful solution" to the political impasse.

Trump with you 100%: US Vice President Pence to Venezuela's Guaido

Watch: WION Gravitas, February 19th, 2019

Iran is ready to work with all of its neighbours to secure peace in the Middle East in the face of US&nbsp;and Israeli aggression, President Hassan Rouhani said on Sunday (February 17), in his latest attempt to weaken ties between regional rival Saudi Arabia and America.

Iran and Saudi Arabia have been fighting proxy wars for years, backing opposing sides in conflicts in Syria and Yemen.

But pressure is building on Tehran after US President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of a 2015 nuclear deal with six world powers and reimposed sanctions. Saudi Arabia welcomed the move.

In a public speech in the southern Hormozgan province, broadcast live on state TV, Rouhani said, "We want to establish brotherly ties with all countries of the region ... Iran has never started any aggression in the region."

Rouhani's previous overtures to Saudi Arabia, such as after his election in 2013 and efforts by his Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif in 2017, have had no success, and some analysts were sceptical his latest attempt would be different.

Iran accuses Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates of supporting militant Sunni groups that carry out attacks against Iranian forces, including a suicide bombing on Wednesday in Iran's southeastern province that borders Pakistan.

Sunni group Jaish al Adl (Army of Justice), which says it seeks greater rights and better living conditions for the ethnic minority Baluchis, claimed responsibility for the attack that killed 27 members of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards Corps.

The Revolutionary Guards have threatened Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Pakistan with retaliation.

Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Pakistan deny backing the militants. Iran's foreign ministry on Sunday summoned Pakistan's ambassador to protest about Wednesday's attack.

Iran is ready to work with all of its neighbours to secure peace in the Middle East in the face of US and Israeli aggression, President Hassan Rouhani said on Sunday (February 17), in his latest attempt to weaken ties between regional rival Saudi Arabia and America. Iran and Saudi Arabia have been fighting proxy wars for years, backing opposing sides in conflicts in Syria and Yemen. But pressure is building on Tehran after US President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of a 2015 nuclear deal with six world powers and reimposed sanctions. Saudi Arabia welcomed the move. In a public speech in the southern Hormozgan province, broadcast live on state TV, Rouhani said, "We want to establish brotherly ties with all countries of the region ... Iran has never started any aggression in the region." Rouhani's previous overtures to Saudi Arabia, such as after his election in 2013 and efforts by his Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif in 2017, have had no success, and some analysts were sceptical his latest attempt would be different. Iran accuses Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates of supporting militant Sunni groups that carry out attacks against Iranian forces, including a suicide bombing on Wednesday in Iran's southeastern province that borders Pakistan. Sunni group Jaish al Adl (Army of Justice), which says it seeks greater rights and better living conditions for the ethnic minority Baluchis, claimed responsibility for the attack that killed 27 members of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards Corps. The Revolutionary Guards have threatened Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Pakistan with retaliation. Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Pakistan deny backing the militants. Iran's foreign ministry on Sunday summoned Pakistan's ambassador to protest about Wednesday's attack.

Iran President Rouhani says Iran ready to improve ties with Gulf states

US-China trade talks: Donald trump may extend 1st March deadline

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning, February 15, 2019

Trump to meet Kim Jong-un in Hanoi

donald-trump-6

Donald Trump, News on Donald Trump, stories on Donald Trump, articles on Donald Trump, Donald Trump stories at Wion, Donald Trump news, Donald Trump latest news

donald trump-6