Japanese police Monday arrested a man suspected of stabbing a police officer in the chest and stealing his gun near Osaka, just days before world leaders fly into the city for a G20 summit.

The 33-year-old suspect, who denies the charges, was in possession of an ID document showing he was mentally disabled, an Osaka regional police detective told AFP.

The police officer, 22, is still in a coma, the detective added. His gun was found later with one bullet missing.

The incident, a rare case of violent crime in Japan, hit national headlines due to the proximity of the attack to the G20, which will be held in the western city on June 28 and 29.

"We have not yet studied what impact this will have on the G20 security plan," Takahisa Ishida, chief of the Osaka police, told local media.

US President Donald Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping will be among the leaders jetting in for the summit, with tens of thousands of aides in tow.&nbsp;

More than 25,000 police officers will reportedly be mobilised to provide security in Osaka during the summit meetings.

"We will do our best on security measures ahead of the G20 next week," top government spokesman Yoshihide Suga told reporters Monday when asked about the incident.

A recent meeting of G20 finance ministers in the western city of Fukuoka was held under extremely high security, with areas around the meeting in total lockdown.

Japanese police Monday arrested a man suspected of stabbing a police officer in the chest and stealing his gun near Osaka, just days before world leaders fly into the city for a G20 summit.

Japanese police Monday arrested a man suspected of stabbing a police officer in the chest and stealing his gun near Osaka, just days before world leaders fly into the city for a G20 summit. The 33-year-old suspect, who denies the charges, was in possession of an ID document showing he was mentally disabled, an Osaka regional police detective told AFP. The police officer, 22, is still in a coma, the detective added. His gun was found later with one bullet missing. The incident, a rare case of violent crime in Japan, hit national headlines due to the proximity of the attack to the G20, which will be held in the western city on June 28 and 29. "We have not yet studied what impact this will have on the G20 security plan," Takahisa Ishida, chief of the Osaka police, told local media. US President Donald Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping will be among the leaders jetting in for the summit, with tens of thousands of aides in tow. More than 25,000 police officers will reportedly be mobilised to provide security in Osaka during the summit meetings. "We will do our best on security measures ahead of the G20 next week," top government spokesman Yoshihide Suga told reporters Monday when asked about the incident. A recent meeting of G20 finance ministers in the western city of Fukuoka was held under extremely high security, with areas around the meeting in total lockdown.

Police officer stabbed ahead of G20 summit in Japan

President Donald Trump warned Monday he will slap huge new tariffs on China if his counterpart <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/china-exports-grow-despite-us-tariffs-but-import-slump-most-in-nearly-three-years-225842">Xi Jinping </a>doesn't show up for a planned face-to-face meeting later this month and insisted the Chinese economy will never overtake the United States.

Trump delivered his hardline message ahead of the G20 summit on June 28-29 in Osaka, Japan, which could mark a turning point in the trade dispute between the world's two biggest economies.

Asked if a failure by Xi to come to the summit would lead to tariffs kicking in on a further $300 billion in Chinese imports, Trump told CNBC television,&nbsp;"Yes it would."

Trump said the meeting was "scheduled" and that he expects Xi to attend.

"I would be surprised if he didn't go," Trump said. "I think he's going, I haven't heard that he's not."

However, as US-Chinese tensions mount, a spokesman for Xi's government said last month that he had "no information at present" on Trump-Xi talks.

Trump has been trying to strongarm China into fundamental change on trade policies that the president argues have for decades put the United States at an unfair disadvantage.

The two sides seemed to be close to striking a bargain until talks stalled last month. Washington says that Beijing walked away at the last minute, while the Chinese side has signalled it is prepared for a long fight against unreasonable demands.

Trump has already imposed 25 per cent duties on $200 billion of Chinese imports. China has responded with punitive tariffs on $60 billion in US goods.

Last month he threatened to slap tariffs on a further $300 billion of goods -- virtually everything American companies import from China -- if no breakthrough is achieved.

The US Trade Representative office has launched the process to impose the huge new duties, with a hearing scheduled for June 17 -- but Trump has said he has yet to decide whether he will ultimately impose the levies.

'They'll never catch us'

Trump has made tariffs a pillar of his foreign policy, arguing that US economic power puts him in a win-win situation when he threatens rivals like China and even close allies, such as Canada, the European Union and Mexico.

The United States says that China cheats in bilateral trade by forcing US importers to give up intellectual property, subsidizing its own companies, and running a huge trade surplus with Washington.

Trump told CNBC that by ratcheting up tariffs, he can ultimately force manufacturers to leave China.

"Those companies are going to move into other locations and there won't be a tariff," he said.

In a game of tit-for-tat, Trump added, China will lose simply because they have far fewer US imports they can target. "We have the big, big advantage," he said.

"China's going to make a deal because they're going to have to make a deal."

Trump's tariff rattling has spooked global markets and also run into pushback from many in Congress.

But in his lengthy CNBC interview, Trump said he is doing what previous presidents avoided because they "either didn't understand it or they were bored by it or they weren't smart enough."

His overall aim, the Republican said, is to ensure that China never overtakes the United States as the world's top economy.&nbsp;

"Had a Democrat gotten in..., China would have caught us," he said. Now "they'll never catch us."

President Donald Trump warned Monday he will slap huge new tariffs on China if his counterpart Xi Jinping doesn't show up for a planned face-to-face meeting later this month and insisted the Chinese economy will never overtake the United States.

President Donald Trump warned Monday he will slap huge new tariffs on China if his counterpart Xi Jinping doesn't show up for a planned face-to-face meeting later this month and insisted the Chinese economy will never overtake the United States. Trump delivered his hardline message ahead of the G20 summit on June 28-29 in Osaka, Japan, which could mark a turning point in the trade dispute between the world's two biggest economies. Asked if a failure by Xi to come to the summit would lead to tariffs kicking in on a further $300 billion in Chinese imports, Trump told CNBC television, "Yes it would." Trump said the meeting was "scheduled" and that he expects Xi to attend. "I would be surprised if he didn't go," Trump said. "I think he's going, I haven't heard that he's not." However, as US-Chinese tensions mount, a spokesman for Xi's government said last month that he had "no information at present" on Trump-Xi talks. Trump has been trying to strongarm China into fundamental change on trade policies that the president argues have for decades put the United States at an unfair disadvantage. The two sides seemed to be close to striking a bargain until talks stalled last month. Washington says that Beijing walked away at the last minute, while the Chinese side has signalled it is prepared for a long fight against unreasonable demands. Trump has already imposed 25 per cent duties on $200 billion of Chinese imports. China has responded with punitive tariffs on $60 billion in US goods. Last month he threatened to slap tariffs on a further $300 billion of goods -- virtually everything American companies import from China -- if no breakthrough is achieved. The US Trade Representative office has launched the process to impose the huge new duties, with a hearing scheduled for June 17 -- but Trump has said he has yet to decide whether he will ultimately impose the levies. 'They'll never catch us' Trump has made tariffs a pillar of his foreign policy, arguing that US economic power puts him in a win-win situation when he threatens rivals like China and even close allies, such as Canada, the European Union and Mexico. The United States says that China cheats in bilateral trade by forcing US importers to give up intellectual property, subsidizing its own companies, and running a huge trade surplus with Washington. Trump told CNBC that by ratcheting up tariffs, he can ultimately force manufacturers to leave China. "Those companies are going to move into other locations and there won't be a tariff," he said. In a game of tit-for-tat, Trump added, China will lose simply because they have far fewer US imports they can target. "We have the big, big advantage," he said. "China's going to make a deal because they're going to have to make a deal." Trump's tariff rattling has spooked global markets and also run into pushback from many in Congress. But in his lengthy CNBC interview, Trump said he is doing what previous presidents avoided because they "either didn't understand it or they were bored by it or they weren't smart enough." His overall aim, the Republican said, is to ensure that China never overtakes the United States as the world's top economy. "Had a Democrat gotten in..., China would have caught us," he said. Now "they'll never catch us."

Will slap huge new tariffs on China if president Xi doesn't show up: Trump ahead of G20 meet

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-general-elections-2019/piyush-goyal-retains-railways-likely-to-focus-on-safety-non-fare-revenue-223134">Union Minister of Commerce and Industry Piyush Goyal</a> will lead the Indian delegation for the G20 Ministerial Meeting on Trade and Digital Economy being held from June 8 to 9 at Tsukuba city along the Ibaraki prefecture in Japan.

He will discuss developments in the global trade situation, WTO matters and digital trade. Goyal will also hold dialogue with other participating trade ministers on current international trade and investments.

For the first time, ministers of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) and Commerce will participate in a joint session on digital economy, according to a statement issued by the government on Thursday.

The G20 trade ministers deliberations will form part of the G20 summit leaders agenda in the formal discussions and will also be a part of the summit declaration.

Ever since G20 was formed, India has been actively participating in the meetings. Although there are no binding commitments in G20, it sets the agenda for multilateral trade relations.

Over 50 trade and digital economy ministers will discuss how G20 economies can promote trade and investment and maximise benefits from the development of digital technologies to ensure sustainable growth of the global economy.

Digitalisation is expected to continue to create benefits for our economies and societies as a whole and help achieve the inclusive, innovative and human-centred future society 'Society 5.0.'

The Trade and Digital Economy meeting is one of the eight ministerial meetings taking place in Japan alongside the 2019 G20 Summit. The G20 members represent two-thirds of the world's people and 85 per cent of its economy.

Union Minister of Commerce and Industry Piyush Goyal will lead the Indian delegation for the G20 Ministerial Meeting on Trade and Digital Economy being held from June 8 to 9 at Tsukuba city along the Ibaraki prefecture in Japan.

Union Minister of Commerce and Industry Piyush Goyal will lead the Indian delegation for the G20 Ministerial Meeting on Trade and Digital Economy being held from June 8 to 9 at Tsukuba city along the Ibaraki prefecture in Japan. He will discuss developments in the global trade situation, WTO matters and digital trade. Goyal will also hold dialogue with other participating trade ministers on current international trade and investments. For the first time, ministers of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) and Commerce will participate in a joint session on digital economy, according to a statement issued by the government on Thursday. The G20 trade ministers deliberations will form part of the G20 summit leaders agenda in the formal discussions and will also be a part of the summit declaration. Ever since G20 was formed, India has been actively participating in the meetings. Although there are no binding commitments in G20, it sets the agenda for multilateral trade relations. Over 50 trade and digital economy ministers will discuss how G20 economies can promote trade and investment and maximise benefits from the development of digital technologies to ensure sustainable growth of the global economy. Digitalisation is expected to continue to create benefits for our economies and societies as a whole and help achieve the inclusive, innovative and human-centred future society 'Society 5.0.' The Trade and Digital Economy meeting is one of the eight ministerial meetings taking place in Japan alongside the 2019 G20 Summit. The G20 members represent two-thirds of the world's people and 85 per cent of its economy.

Union Minister Piyush Goyal to lead Indian delegation for G20 ministerial meet in Japan

President Donald Trump said Monday he expects to meet with the presidents of Russia and China next month at the Group of 20 summit in Japan.

As the trade conflict with China escalates, Trump said of the expected encounter with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, "we'll be meeting at the G20 in Japan. And that will be I think probably a very fruitful meeting."

Speaking to reporters at the White House as he met with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Trump also said he expected to meet with Russia's Vladimir Putin.

However, the Kremlin responded immediately saying there was no agreement on a meeting.

US Secretary of State <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-state-secretary-pompeo-to-visit-brussels-monday-to-discuss-iran-official-218245">Mike Pompeo made a last-minute change of plan</a>, scrapping a trip to Moscow that had been planned for Tuesday, meeting instead with counterparts from European allies who have been critical of US policy on Iran.

Despite Trump's conciliatory attitude toward Putin, Washington and Moscow are at loggerheads on an array of urgent strategic questions, including the Venezuelan crisis, the Syrian civil war and the conflict in Ukraine.

US officials have demanded for weeks that <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/russia-accuses-us-of-plotting-coup-in-venezuela-205616">Moscow cease its support for Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro</a>, whom Washington opposes, accusing him of running a corrupt and incompetent leftist regime.

Trump said early this month that Putin had assured him that Russia was not involved in Venezuela.

President Donald Trump said Monday he expects to meet with the presidents of Russia and China next month at the Group of 20 summit in Japan. As the trade conflict with China escalates, Trump said of the expected encounter with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, "we'll be meeting at the G20 in Japan.

President Donald Trump said Monday he expects to meet with the presidents of Russia and China next month at the Group of 20 summit in Japan. As the trade conflict with China escalates, Trump said of the expected encounter with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, "we'll be meeting at the G20 in Japan. And that will be I think probably a very fruitful meeting." Speaking to reporters at the White House as he met with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Trump also said he expected to meet with Russia's Vladimir Putin. However, the Kremlin responded immediately saying there was no agreement on a meeting. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made a last-minute change of plan, scrapping a trip to Moscow that had been planned for Tuesday, meeting instead with counterparts from European allies who have been critical of US policy on Iran. Despite Trump's conciliatory attitude toward Putin, Washington and Moscow are at loggerheads on an array of urgent strategic questions, including the Venezuelan crisis, the Syrian civil war and the conflict in Ukraine. US officials have demanded for weeks that Moscow cease its support for Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, whom Washington opposes, accusing him of running a corrupt and incompetent leftist regime. Trump said early this month that Putin had assured him that Russia was not involved in Venezuela.

Trump will meet Putin, Xi at G20 summit in Japan; says, we'll be very fruitful meeting

Argentine President Mauricio Macri will be visiting India on Sunday. The visit comes after PM Modi's visit to the South American country last year in November for the G20 Summit. Ahead of the visit, WION's diplomatic correspondent Sidhant Sibal spoke to Argentina's envoy to India Daniel Chuburu.&nbsp;

WION: How do you see bilateral ties with India?

Chuburu: As you know, this year is the 70th anniversary of the diplomatic relationship between Argentina and India. So it is a great occasion to think about the relationship where it stands and where we are looking to go with all the partnership we have with India. Let me tell you, we are good friends with India, and have worked politically for many many years in a lot of different places. We firmly believe the potential our relations can achieve is not being done. We have small trade, concentrated in one product; we have to step up the relationship, strengthen it and step up on the quality of the relationship.&nbsp;

WION: What is the programme of the President?&nbsp;

Chuburu: The official programme is on February 18 when he is in Delhi. On February 19 he will be in Mumbai. First is a protocol visit, meeting with the PM, dinner with the President, lunch with the PM. In addition to that, a series of discussions between the two delegations will take place. We have to make a strategic partnership. Three issues will be discussed: One is sectoral agricultural on food security. One is in the field of energy, taking into consideration energy security. The third one is in cooperation with high technology. We will be discussing the agreement in the areas of defence, nuclear energy, in the peaceful use of outer space. The President will take part in the business forum.&nbsp;

WION: What is the focus area during the visit?&nbsp;

Chuburu: Common focus is to have a strategic partnership. We can't do anything about the distance (over 15,000kms) that separate both of the countries, that is the reality of life. We are working on an MoU on air services. We have to work on the quality of the relationship. &nbsp;

WION: You hosted G20, any suggestion for India?&nbsp;

Chuburu: We are at the disposal of India to share any kind of and all the experience that we have. When you have the summit you have 30 leaders visiting your country. Summit is just the last expression. Question is how you plan the whole year. It is a lot of work. India will do it pretty well, you have a lot of experience. There will be no problem.&nbsp;

Argentine President Mauricio Macri will be visiting India on Sunday. The visit comes after PM Modi's visit to the South American country last year in November for the G20 Summit.

Argentine President Mauricio Macri will be visiting India on Sunday. The visit comes after PM Modi's visit to the South American country last year in November for the G20 Summit. Ahead of the visit, WION's diplomatic correspondent Sidhant Sibal spoke to Argentina's envoy to India Daniel Chuburu. WION: How do you see bilateral ties with India? Chuburu: As you know, this year is the 70th anniversary of the diplomatic relationship between Argentina and India. So it is a great occasion to think about the relationship where it stands and where we are looking to go with all the partnership we have with India. Let me tell you, we are good friends with India, and have worked politically for many many years in a lot of different places. We firmly believe the potential our relations can achieve is not being done. We have small trade, concentrated in one product; we have to step up the relationship, strengthen it and step up on the quality of the relationship. WION: What is the programme of the President? Chuburu: The official programme is on February 18 when he is in Delhi. On February 19 he will be in Mumbai. First is a protocol visit, meeting with the PM, dinner with the President, lunch with the PM. In addition to that, a series of discussions between the two delegations will take place. We have to make a strategic partnership. Three issues will be discussed: One is sectoral agricultural on food security. One is in the field of energy, taking into consideration energy security. The third one is in cooperation with high technology. We will be discussing the agreement in the areas of defence, nuclear energy, in the peaceful use of outer space. The President will take part in the business forum. WION: What is the focus area during the visit? Chuburu: Common focus is to have a strategic partnership. We can't do anything about the distance (over 15,000kms) that separate both of the countries, that is the reality of life. We are working on an MoU on air services. We have to work on the quality of the relationship. WION: You hosted G20, any suggestion for India? Chuburu: We are at the disposal of India to share any kind of and all the experience that we have. When you have the summit you have 30 leaders visiting your country. Summit is just the last expression. Question is how you plan the whole year. It is a lot of work. India will do it pretty well, you have a lot of experience. There will be no problem.

India will do pretty well in hosting G20 summit 2022: Argentine envoy to WION

By Rejeanne Lacroix

Last year, the 70-year-long territorial dispute between Russia and Japan over the Kuril Islands again rose to prominence. On September 12, at an economic development conference in Vladivostok, Russian President Vladimir Putin extended the surprising offer to mutually resolve the quarrel to his Japanese counterpart, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. From this point, a flurry of diplomatic engagements, such as the November 14 meeting in Singapore and a Putin-Abe tete-a-tete on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Buenos Aires, gained significant meaning. High-level discourse is expected to continue for the foreseeable future, with Russian and Japanese foreign ministers meeting on January 14, and special envoys focused on a peace treaty to officially put an end to World War II have been established.

Much of this fresh urgency to resolve the decades-long territorial dispute presents hypothetical scenarios that a peace accord could follow. It is easy to fall into a trap that such an extended disagreement could be solved speedily and opportunely.&nbsp;

Diplomatic efforts seeking mutually acceptable solutions dotted the 20th century, and the title to the Kuril Islands remains an elusive political dilemma. Impediments to a Russo-Japanese agreement are more palpable in the current international order, with security a key factor.

Past diplomatic attempts

The Southern Kurils — or Chishima Retto, known as the Northern Territories in Japan — is a small segment of Russia’s Far-Eastern Sakhalin region. Both Russia and Japan claim sovereignty over the islands as they are located in the Sea of Okhotsk between northern Hokkaido and southern Kamchatka. Nonetheless, it is important to note that Japan unequivocally claims its rights to Iturup, Habomai, Kunashir and Shikotan islands of the archipelago.

In the waning days of World War II, the Soviet army captured the now-contested islands during the Kuril Landing Operation that took place between August 18 and September 1, 1945. Ensuing international efforts attempted to regulate a world order thrown into disarray by years of conflict and resolve the numerous questions over sovereignty in the postwar period. The Yalta Agreement (February 1945), the Potsdam Declaration (July 1945) and the Treaty of San Francisco (September 1951) provided elementary diplomatic resources for managing questions over the Kuril Islands, but they were vague and politically tarnished.

For instance, the Japanese disagreed with the indistinct wording in its terms of surrender, signed at Potsdam, which stated that “Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and such minor islands as we determine.” Further, the previous agreement in Yalta, in which it was ordered the Kuril Islands be transferred to the Soviet Union, became obsolete by the time Cold War rhetoric entrenched the Allied-Japanese peace treaty in San Francisco.

On October 19, 1956, the USSR and Japan signed the Soviet-Japanese Joint Declaration. This is an important document in regard to contemporary diplomatic undertakings, as it has been offered as the basis for a resolution. Article 9 states that the Soviet Union — succeeded now by the Russian Federation — agreed to transfer the islands of Habomai and Shikotan after the conclusion of a peace treaty. Notably missing from the arrangement are the other islands of Iturup and Kunashir. As a result, it was assumed that Japan abandoned its claims to these lands, resulting in interference by the United States. Unwilling to cede an inch&nbsp;to the USSR, Washington leveraged that if the Japanese signed the two islands over to the Soviets, the Americans would retain Okinawa. No deal could be finalized under such a coercive arrangement.

In 1960, Japan and the United States signed the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security. The US adopted the role of guarantor of Japanese security and laid the foundations for continued American military presence in the Pacific. An angered Moscow reacted by rescinding any agreements previously made to transfer Habomai and Shikotan to Japanese jurisdiction. This position would stand as long as foreign military installations and forces operated on Japanese territory. The influence of the United States foreshadows the stumbling blocks to a Russo-Japanese deal today.

Disparate demands

Many variables that hindered a resolution to the Kuril Islands dispute remain at the centre of contemporary diplomatic hurdles. Japan demands that questions over sovereignty must be addressed prior to any discussions of land exchange. Abe firmly stated this sentiment after the offer he made in Vladivostok in September. Tokyo brings a historical geographic case, while Moscow argues that the islands were absorbed into Russian territory as part of its wartime operations and postwar agreements. Matters of sovereignty must be resolved. However, a more pressing query must be handled first: Which components of the Pacific security framework are up for negotiation in a state of geopolitical mistrust between Russia and the United States?

Both countries find themselves in a situation where neither will wholly achieve its desired objectives. Abe stated that he is determined to facilitate negotiations on a peace treaty when he meets with Putin. Further, there are reports that Tokyo seeks to waive Russia’s responsibility to pay compensation over the displacement of Japanese citizens that once inhabited the islands. This is a positive and conciliatory development in solving the historic disagreement, however, it assumes that Russia would relinquish its claims to sovereignty over the islands before effective negotiations are complete. This clashes with Moscow’s long-stated assessment that Japan must accept the current arrangement, which is backed by international law. As sovereignty remains at the core of Japan’s claims, unless some great diplomatic feat is accomplished, issues that stymied resolution in the past will persist.

Nevertheless, Japan must negotiate under the influence of its close relationship and security pact with the United States. Putin recently asserted that US military involvement in Japan complicates any forthcoming agreement and expressed his concerns over the strategic use of an American air defense system in Japan. Abe contends that a Kuril Islands peace treaty would have a positive overall effect on the security framework of the Asia-Pacific region, which would be most beneficial to the United States. While this sounds advantageous to the Japanese public and officials in Washington, it does little to stimulate concessions from Moscow. Russia will be steadfast in its demands that the exchanged territories be exempt from the US-Japan security treaty, and that Habomai and Shikotan are off-limits to military development. This would see a continuance of rhetoric like that in Eastern Europe, where Moscow voices its displeasure of US military installations in bordering states.

As a result, Japanese concessions to Russian demands are unlikely when their guarantor of security is the United States. Mutual mistrust between Washington and Moscow under the shadow of the current geopolitical atmosphere means that Tokyo is in a difficult position to negotiate freely. Abe can speak optimistically about the security advantages in store for America. However, Russian lawmakers, such as Senator Frants Klintsevich, in turn argue in favor of preserving Russian borders and security in “broad terms.” Additionally, subsequent and separate Japanese-American discussions would be required if the two states conclusively decide to omit Habomai and Shikotan from the coverage of the security treaty. Not only is this unlikely, but it would extend the diplomatic effort needed to settle the Kuril Islands stalemate in its entirety.

Russia must also negotiate carefully. Recent precedents, such as the transfer of Tarabarov Island and a part of Bolshoy Ussuriysky Island to China in 2004 demonstrate that Moscow is capable of settling decades-old land claims. It was during this timeframe that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov subsequently extended an offer to exchange small islands in the Kuril chain for a peace treaty with Japan. Nevertheless, the political climate was more optimistic then, and American influence over Asia-Pacific security was inapplicable to that situation.

While Japanese public opinion strongly supports the recuperation of its perceived territory, Russian polling demonstrates a robust dissatisfaction were Moscow to relinquish sovereignty of the Kuril Islands. Residents of the Sakhalin region are markedly in disagreement with any proposed exchange of sovereignty. Since the official announcements to reopen the issue emerged, citizens have sent letters to Putin, and the local branch of the Communist Party organized a protest. Any sort of finalized Russo-Japanese peace treaty without consulting the affected population will be an additional example of the Russian Far East feeling further disconnected from Moscow. Authorities focus on the economic potential of the region and thus give adequate attention to these matters. However, it seems as though little thought is directed toward deeper disenfranchisement in the Far East if a settlement is reached.

Island-scale militarisation

Japan stresses that the Kuril Islands must be demilitarised if any serious proposals are to come to fruition. That is a lofty demand. Moscow’s security outlook incorporates strategic use of the isles as a part of its Pacific defence operations. In this case, Moscow follows its evident modus operandi of establishing military installations in disputed areas. While not a part of Russia proper like the Kuril Islands, Russia established military bases in South Ossetia and Abkhazia under similar pretences. Use of this tactic enhances the reach of Moscow’s security framework from the mainland and, in this case, the Pacific region.

US involvement in the Pacific, as well as ongoing security concerns in the region, provides Russia with strong arguments to only accept a deal that protects its interests and security. Subsequently, it is safe to predict that Russia will stick to the claim that its sovereignty over the South Kurils is non-negotiable, as Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov reiterated today, and a settlement to the dispute does not mean any territory will be exchanged.

While touting Russian Arctic military capabilities, Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu recently noted the continued construction of military infrastructure on the Kurils. This is part of a steady Russification of the lands and falls in step with previous Russian government announcements. For example, on February 10, 2011, then-President Dmitry Medvedev instructed that sophisticated weaponry be deployed to the offshore bases as part of an overall security plan for greater Russia. Following this, in 2016, it was announced that the Kremlin would deploy Bal and Bastion rocket systems on Iturup and utilize Eleron-3 drones for the purposes of Pacific defense. Thus, a complete demilitarization of the South Kurils where Russia would retain command seems unlikely. This will be one of those hurdles where vast differences hinder a peace accord that leaves both parties satisfied.

Russia and Japan have disparate views on the Kuril Islands that can only be overcome through significant concessions. A singular view of sovereignty must be acknowledged prior to any handover of territory. However, this is a primary roadblock. Neither state wants to back down from its title even under the umbrella of the 1956 Soviet-Japanese Joint Declaration as the mutual baseline for discussion. The current global political atmosphere adds yet another confounding layer to the security arrangements established in the region.

A renewed interest in finally achieving peace after 70 years of the territorial standoff is an admirable undertaking, but it would be foolish to think entitlement to the Kuril Islands could be achieved either quickly or smoothly. Russia and Japan will understandably argue in favour of a resolution that does not infringe upon their respective national security plans or demands. Each state will have its set limits where security trumps any exchange of ownership. In the end, diplomacy is fluid, and one can reticently hope for a viable outcome to a postwar problem.

(Rejeanne Lacroix is a Canadian independent researcher focusing on international security and the post-Soviet space)

(This article was originally published on The Fair Observer. Read the <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/region/asia_pacific/japan-russia-kuril-islands-dispute-asia-pacific-security-news-17551/">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 Rejeanne Lacroix Last year, the 70-year-long territorial dispute between Russia and Japan over the Kuril Islands again rose to prominence. On September 12, at an economic development conference in Vladivostok, Russian President Vladimir Putin extended the surprising offer to mutually resolve the quarrel to his Japanese counterpart, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

By Rejeanne Lacroix Last year, the 70-year-long territorial dispute between Russia and Japan over the Kuril Islands again rose to prominence. On September 12, at an economic development conference in Vladivostok, Russian President Vladimir Putin extended the surprising offer to mutually resolve the quarrel to his Japanese counterpart, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. From this point, a flurry of diplomatic engagements, such as the November 14 meeting in Singapore and a Putin-Abe tete-a-tete on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Buenos Aires, gained significant meaning. High-level discourse is expected to continue for the foreseeable future, with Russian and Japanese foreign ministers meeting on January 14, and special envoys focused on a peace treaty to officially put an end to World War II have been established. Much of this fresh urgency to resolve the decades-long territorial dispute presents hypothetical scenarios that a peace accord could follow. It is easy to fall into a trap that such an extended disagreement could be solved speedily and opportunely. Diplomatic efforts seeking mutually acceptable solutions dotted the 20th century, and the title to the Kuril Islands remains an elusive political dilemma. Impediments to a Russo-Japanese agreement are more palpable in the current international order, with security a key factor. Past diplomatic attempts The Southern Kurils — or Chishima Retto, known as the Northern Territories in Japan — is a small segment of Russia’s Far-Eastern Sakhalin region. Both Russia and Japan claim sovereignty over the islands as they are located in the Sea of Okhotsk between northern Hokkaido and southern Kamchatka. Nonetheless, it is important to note that Japan unequivocally claims its rights to Iturup, Habomai, Kunashir and Shikotan islands of the archipelago. In the waning days of World War II, the Soviet army captured the now-contested islands during the Kuril Landing Operation that took place between August 18 and September 1, 1945. Ensuing international efforts attempted to regulate a world order thrown into disarray by years of conflict and resolve the numerous questions over sovereignty in the postwar period. The Yalta Agreement (February 1945), the Potsdam Declaration (July 1945) and the Treaty of San Francisco (September 1951) provided elementary diplomatic resources for managing questions over the Kuril Islands, but they were vague and politically tarnished. For instance, the Japanese disagreed with the indistinct wording in its terms of surrender, signed at Potsdam, which stated that “Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and such minor islands as we determine.” Further, the previous agreement in Yalta, in which it was ordered the Kuril Islands be transferred to the Soviet Union, became obsolete by the time Cold War rhetoric entrenched the Allied-Japanese peace treaty in San Francisco. On October 19, 1956, the USSR and Japan signed the Soviet-Japanese Joint Declaration. This is an important document in regard to contemporary diplomatic undertakings, as it has been offered as the basis for a resolution. Article 9 states that the Soviet Union — succeeded now by the Russian Federation — agreed to transfer the islands of Habomai and Shikotan after the conclusion of a peace treaty. Notably missing from the arrangement are the other islands of Iturup and Kunashir. As a result, it was assumed that Japan abandoned its claims to these lands, resulting in interference by the United States. Unwilling to cede an inch to the USSR, Washington leveraged that if the Japanese signed the two islands over to the Soviets, the Americans would retain Okinawa. No deal could be finalized under such a coercive arrangement. In 1960, Japan and the United States signed the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security. The US adopted the role of guarantor of Japanese security and laid the foundations for continued American military presence in the Pacific. An angered Moscow reacted by rescinding any agreements previously made to transfer Habomai and Shikotan to Japanese jurisdiction. This position would stand as long as foreign military installations and forces operated on Japanese territory. The influence of the United States foreshadows the stumbling blocks to a Russo-Japanese deal today. Disparate demands Many variables that hindered a resolution to the Kuril Islands dispute remain at the centre of contemporary diplomatic hurdles. Japan demands that questions over sovereignty must be addressed prior to any discussions of land exchange. Abe firmly stated this sentiment after the offer he made in Vladivostok in September. Tokyo brings a historical geographic case, while Moscow argues that the islands were absorbed into Russian territory as part of its wartime operations and postwar agreements. Matters of sovereignty must be resolved. However, a more pressing query must be handled first: Which components of the Pacific security framework are up for negotiation in a state of geopolitical mistrust between Russia and the United States? Both countries find themselves in a situation where neither will wholly achieve its desired objectives. Abe stated that he is determined to facilitate negotiations on a peace treaty when he meets with Putin. Further, there are reports that Tokyo seeks to waive Russia’s responsibility to pay compensation over the displacement of Japanese citizens that once inhabited the islands. This is a positive and conciliatory development in solving the historic disagreement, however, it assumes that Russia would relinquish its claims to sovereignty over the islands before effective negotiations are complete. This clashes with Moscow’s long-stated assessment that Japan must accept the current arrangement, which is backed by international law. As sovereignty remains at the core of Japan’s claims, unless some great diplomatic feat is accomplished, issues that stymied resolution in the past will persist. Nevertheless, Japan must negotiate under the influence of its close relationship and security pact with the United States. Putin recently asserted that US military involvement in Japan complicates any forthcoming agreement and expressed his concerns over the strategic use of an American air defense system in Japan. Abe contends that a Kuril Islands peace treaty would have a positive overall effect on the security framework of the Asia-Pacific region, which would be most beneficial to the United States. While this sounds advantageous to the Japanese public and officials in Washington, it does little to stimulate concessions from Moscow. Russia will be steadfast in its demands that the exchanged territories be exempt from the US-Japan security treaty, and that Habomai and Shikotan are off-limits to military development. This would see a continuance of rhetoric like that in Eastern Europe, where Moscow voices its displeasure of US military installations in bordering states. As a result, Japanese concessions to Russian demands are unlikely when their guarantor of security is the United States. Mutual mistrust between Washington and Moscow under the shadow of the current geopolitical atmosphere means that Tokyo is in a difficult position to negotiate freely. Abe can speak optimistically about the security advantages in store for America. However, Russian lawmakers, such as Senator Frants Klintsevich, in turn argue in favor of preserving Russian borders and security in “broad terms.” Additionally, subsequent and separate Japanese-American discussions would be required if the two states conclusively decide to omit Habomai and Shikotan from the coverage of the security treaty. Not only is this unlikely, but it would extend the diplomatic effort needed to settle the Kuril Islands stalemate in its entirety. Russia must also negotiate carefully. Recent precedents, such as the transfer of Tarabarov Island and a part of Bolshoy Ussuriysky Island to China in 2004 demonstrate that Moscow is capable of settling decades-old land claims. It was during this timeframe that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov subsequently extended an offer to exchange small islands in the Kuril chain for a peace treaty with Japan. Nevertheless, the political climate was more optimistic then, and American influence over Asia-Pacific security was inapplicable to that situation. While Japanese public opinion strongly supports the recuperation of its perceived territory, Russian polling demonstrates a robust dissatisfaction were Moscow to relinquish sovereignty of the Kuril Islands. Residents of the Sakhalin region are markedly in disagreement with any proposed exchange of sovereignty. Since the official announcements to reopen the issue emerged, citizens have sent letters to Putin, and the local branch of the Communist Party organized a protest. Any sort of finalized Russo-Japanese peace treaty without consulting the affected population will be an additional example of the Russian Far East feeling further disconnected from Moscow. Authorities focus on the economic potential of the region and thus give adequate attention to these matters. However, it seems as though little thought is directed toward deeper disenfranchisement in the Far East if a settlement is reached. Island-scale militarisation Japan stresses that the Kuril Islands must be demilitarised if any serious proposals are to come to fruition. That is a lofty demand. Moscow’s security outlook incorporates strategic use of the isles as a part of its Pacific defence operations. In this case, Moscow follows its evident modus operandi of establishing military installations in disputed areas. While not a part of Russia proper like the Kuril Islands, Russia established military bases in South Ossetia and Abkhazia under similar pretences. Use of this tactic enhances the reach of Moscow’s security framework from the mainland and, in this case, the Pacific region. US involvement in the Pacific, as well as ongoing security concerns in the region, provides Russia with strong arguments to only accept a deal that protects its interests and security. Subsequently, it is safe to predict that Russia will stick to the claim that its sovereignty over the South Kurils is non-negotiable, as Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov reiterated today, and a settlement to the dispute does not mean any territory will be exchanged. While touting Russian Arctic military capabilities, Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu recently noted the continued construction of military infrastructure on the Kurils. This is part of a steady Russification of the lands and falls in step with previous Russian government announcements. For example, on February 10, 2011, then-President Dmitry Medvedev instructed that sophisticated weaponry be deployed to the offshore bases as part of an overall security plan for greater Russia. Following this, in 2016, it was announced that the Kremlin would deploy Bal and Bastion rocket systems on Iturup and utilize Eleron-3 drones for the purposes of Pacific defense. Thus, a complete demilitarization of the South Kurils where Russia would retain command seems unlikely. This will be one of those hurdles where vast differences hinder a peace accord that leaves both parties satisfied. Russia and Japan have disparate views on the Kuril Islands that can only be overcome through significant concessions. A singular view of sovereignty must be acknowledged prior to any handover of territory. However, this is a primary roadblock. Neither state wants to back down from its title even under the umbrella of the 1956 Soviet-Japanese Joint Declaration as the mutual baseline for discussion. The current global political atmosphere adds yet another confounding layer to the security arrangements established in the region. A renewed interest in finally achieving peace after 70 years of the territorial standoff is an admirable undertaking, but it would be foolish to think entitlement to the Kuril Islands could be achieved either quickly or smoothly. Russia and Japan will understandably argue in favour of a resolution that does not infringe upon their respective national security plans or demands. Each state will have its set limits where security trumps any exchange of ownership. In the end, diplomacy is fluid, and one can reticently hope for a viable outcome to a postwar problem. (Rejeanne Lacroix is a Canadian independent researcher focusing on international security and the post-Soviet space) (This article was originally published on The Fair Observer. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Are Japan and Russia ready to resolve the Kuril Islands dispute?

Indian foreign policy is in a sweet spot these days. Wooed by major powers of all hues, it can afford to work with everyone, even if at times the pulls and pressures seem contradictory.&nbsp;

This was reflected at the G20 where New Delhi managed to pull off two seemingly contradictory trilaterals. Modi met with United States President Donald Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (Japan, America and India, christened JAI) to underscore India’s firm commitment to make the Indo-Pacific a region for shared economic growth, prosperity and security.&nbsp;

The Indo-Pacific construct is now at the centre of strategic jockeying in the region and the three nations have been trying to define the exact scope of their engagement. Modi had explained India’s stand on the strategic Indo-Pacific region in his keynote address at the Shangri La Dialogue in Singapore in June.

&nbsp;“India does not see the Indo-Pacific Region as a strategy or as a club of limited members. Nor as a grouping that seeks to dominate,” he had said. But China’s rapid rise and the challenge it is posing to geopolitical stability is at the heart of the evolution of the Indo-Pacific and the trilateral in Argentina reinforced the desire of the three states to take it forward. Hours after the ‘JAI’ trilateral, Modi joined Chinese president Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin for another trilateral – the ‘RIC’ - the second among the three countries after a gap of 12 years. The underlying rationale for this trilateral was quite different as the three nations discussed enhancing mutual cooperation at international forums. According to the Ministry of External Affairs, “They agreed on the importance of reform and strengthening of multilateral institutions that had benefitted the world, including the United Nations, WTO and well-established as well as new global financial institutions.”

While China is the one driving ‘JAI,’ it is the Trump Administration’s challenge to the global economic order that is largely behind India’s outreach to China and Russia. The fact that New Delhi managed to pull this off is a tribute to Modi’s astute investment in managing major power relations over the last few years. This is a period of fluid partnerships and Indian diplomacy will have to be nimble enough if her interests are to be preserved. Modi’s engagements at the G-20 underline that New Delhi is capable of managing this fluidity. India’s defence diplomacy is also being shaped by this reality. 
 
By the end of this year, India would have held military exercises with all P5 countries - US, Russia, China, France and the UK. So on one hand, there is the proposed military exercise with Russia and China, on the other 'Cope India’ between the Indian and US air forces has been restarted after a gap of nine years, showcasing “US and India’s efforts and commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific region.”India and Russia conducted Indo-Russia Joint Military Exercise-Indra 2018 in Madhya Pradesh last week while Indo-UK Konkan naval exercise is currently underway, off Goa, which is focusing on Anti-Air warfare, Anti-Surface Warfare, Anti-Submarine Warfare, Visit Board Search and Seizure (VBSS) and Seamanship Evolutions.&nbsp;

The Japanese Air Self Defence Force (JASDF) is in India for a bilateral air exercise “SHINYUU Maitri-18” with the Indian Air Force (IAF). Defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman is visiting the US Indo-Pacific Command in Hawaii to chart the course for the first ever India-US tri-service military exercise off the Bay of Bengal in May-June, 2019. At the same time, the armies of India and China will be resuming their annual bilateral military exercise ‘Hand in Hand’ in December. 
 
India’s defence diplomacy has become truly ‘multivector’ and it is aimed at enhancing her strategic partnerships. It is a sign of India’s growing global profile that most powers want to engage with India on military and defence issues. The more partnerships India has, the better leverage it will have within diplomacy. But it is also important to recognise the challenges that come with this. Ultimately, India will have to enhance military interoperability with like-minded countries and that’s unlikely to happen if New Delhi will continue to keep its eggs in multiple baskets. It is good to be in a position where everyone wants to befriend us, but Indian policymakers should be aware of the fundamental challenge: which of these countries would come for help in face of an existential challenge?

(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-india-s-profile-is-attracting-engagement-on-military-issues-2692655">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Indian foreign policy is in a sweet spot these days. Wooed by major powers of all hues, it can afford to work with everyone, even if at times the pulls and pressures seem contradictory.

Indian foreign policy is in a sweet spot these days. Wooed by major powers of all hues, it can afford to work with everyone, even if at times the pulls and pressures seem contradictory. This was reflected at the G20 where New Delhi managed to pull off two seemingly contradictory trilaterals. Modi met with United States President Donald Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (Japan, America and India, christened JAI) to underscore India’s firm commitment to make the Indo-Pacific a region for shared economic growth, prosperity and security. The Indo-Pacific construct is now at the centre of strategic jockeying in the region and the three nations have been trying to define the exact scope of their engagement. Modi had explained India’s stand on the strategic Indo-Pacific region in his keynote address at the Shangri La Dialogue in Singapore in June. “India does not see the Indo-Pacific Region as a strategy or as a club of limited members. Nor as a grouping that seeks to dominate,” he had said. But China’s rapid rise and the challenge it is posing to geopolitical stability is at the heart of the evolution of the Indo-Pacific and the trilateral in Argentina reinforced the desire of the three states to take it forward. Hours after the ‘JAI’ trilateral, Modi joined Chinese president Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin for another trilateral – the ‘RIC’ - the second among the three countries after a gap of 12 years. The underlying rationale for this trilateral was quite different as the three nations discussed enhancing mutual cooperation at international forums. According to the Ministry of External Affairs, “They agreed on the importance of reform and strengthening of multilateral institutions that had benefitted the world, including the United Nations, WTO and well-established as well as new global financial institutions.” While China is the one driving ‘JAI,’ it is the Trump Administration’s challenge to the global economic order that is largely behind India’s outreach to China and Russia. The fact that New Delhi managed to pull this off is a tribute to Modi’s astute investment in managing major power relations over the last few years. This is a period of fluid partnerships and Indian diplomacy will have to be nimble enough if her interests are to be preserved. Modi’s engagements at the G-20 underline that New Delhi is capable of managing this fluidity. India’s defence diplomacy is also being shaped by this reality. By the end of this year, India would have held military exercises with all P5 countries - US, Russia, China, France and the UK. So on one hand, there is the proposed military exercise with Russia and China, on the other 'Cope India’ between the Indian and US air forces has been restarted after a gap of nine years, showcasing “US and India’s efforts and commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific region.”India and Russia conducted Indo-Russia Joint Military Exercise-Indra 2018 in Madhya Pradesh last week while Indo-UK Konkan naval exercise is currently underway, off Goa, which is focusing on Anti-Air warfare, Anti-Surface Warfare, Anti-Submarine Warfare, Visit Board Search and Seizure (VBSS) and Seamanship Evolutions. The Japanese Air Self Defence Force (JASDF) is in India for a bilateral air exercise “SHINYUU Maitri-18” with the Indian Air Force (IAF). Defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman is visiting the US Indo-Pacific Command in Hawaii to chart the course for the first ever India-US tri-service military exercise off the Bay of Bengal in May-June, 2019. At the same time, the armies of India and China will be resuming their annual bilateral military exercise ‘Hand in Hand’ in December. India’s defence diplomacy has become truly ‘multivector’ and it is aimed at enhancing her strategic partnerships. It is a sign of India’s growing global profile that most powers want to engage with India on military and defence issues. The more partnerships India has, the better leverage it will have within diplomacy. But it is also important to recognise the challenges that come with this. Ultimately, India will have to enhance military interoperability with like-minded countries and that’s unlikely to happen if New Delhi will continue to keep its eggs in multiple baskets. It is good to be in a position where everyone wants to befriend us, but Indian policymakers should be aware of the fundamental challenge: which of these countries would come for help in face of an existential challenge? (This article was originally published on 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)

India’s profile is attracting engagement on military issues

A draft US Senate resolution effectively portraying Saudi policy as detrimental to US interests and values and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman as “complicit” in the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, if adopted and implemented, potentially could change the dynamics of the region's politics and create an initial exit from almost a decade of mayhem, conflict and bloodshed.

The six-page draft also holds Prince Mohammed accountable for the devastating war in Yemen that has sparked one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises, the failure to end the 17-month-old Saudi-United Arab Emirates-led economic and diplomatic boycott of Qatar, and the jailing and torture of Saudi dissidents and activists.

In doing so, the resolution confronts not only Prince Mohammed's policies but also by implication those of his closest ally, UAE crown prince Mohammed bin Zayed. The UAE was the first country that Saudi leader visited after the Khashoggi killing.

By in effect challenging the position of king-in-waiting Prince Mohammed, the resolution raises the question whether some of his closest allies, including the UAE crown prince, will in future want to be identified that closely with him.

Moreover, by demanding the release of activist Raif bin Muhammad Badawi, better known as Raif Badawi, and women's rights activists, the resolution further the challenges fundamentals of Prince Mohammed's iron-fisted repression of his critics, the extent of his proposed social reforms as part of his drive to diversify and streamline the Saudi economy, and the kingdom's human rights record.

A 34-year-old blogger who named his website Free Saudi Liberals, Badawi was barred from travel and had his assets frozen in 2009, arrested in 2012, and sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes for insulting Islam. His sister, Samar Badawi, a women’s rights activist, was detained earlier this year. Badawi’s wife and children were granted asylum and citizenship in Canada.

A diplomatic row that stunned many erupted in August when Saudi Arabia expelled the Canadian ambassador after the foreign ministry in Ottawa demanded in a tweet the release of Badawi and other activists.

Prince Mohammed and Saudi Arabia, even prior to the introduction of the Senate resolution, were discovering that the Khashoggi killing had weakened the kingdom internationally and had made it more vulnerable to pressure.

Talks in Sweden between the Saudi-backed Yemeni government and Houthi rebels to end the war is the most immediate consequence of the kingdom's changing position.

So is the resolution that is unprecedented in the scope and harshness of the criticism of a long-standing ally.&nbsp;

While the resolution is likely to spark initial anger among some of Prince's Mohammed's allies, it nevertheless, if adopted and/or implemented, could persuade some like UAE crown prince Mohammed to rethink their fundamental strategies.

The relationship between the two Mohammeds constituted a cornerstone of the UAE leader's strategy to achieve his political, foreign policy and defence goals.

These include projecting the Emirates as a guiding light of cutting-edge Arab and Muslim modernity; ensuring that the Middle East fits the crown prince's autocratic, anti-Islamist mould; and enabling the UAE, described by US defence secretary Jim Mattis as 'Little Sparta,' to punch above its weight politically, diplomatically and militarily.

To compensate for the Emirates’ small size, Prince Mohammed opted to pursue his goals in part by working through the Saudi royal court. In leaked emails, UAE ambassador to Washington Yousef al-Otaiba, a close associate of Prince Mohammed, said of the Saudi crown prince that

“I don’t think we’ll ever see a more pragmatic leader in that country.”

Al-Otaiba went on to say: “I think in the long term we might be a good influence on KSA (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia), at least with certain people there. Our relationship with them is based on strategic depth, shared interests, and most importantly the hope that we could influence them. Not the other way around.”

The impact of the Senate resolution and what it means for the US policy will to a large extent depend on the politics of the differences between the Congress and President Donald J Trump who has so far sought to shield the Saudi crown prince.

To further do so, Trump, with or without the resolution, would likely have to pressure Saudi Arabia to give him something tangible to work with such as an immediate release of imprisoned activists followed by a resolution of the Qatar crisis as well as some indication that the Yemen peace negotiations are progressing.

Whichever way, the fallout of the Khashoggi killing, culminating in unprecedented Congressional anger against Prince Mohammed and the kingdom, is likely to have significant consequences not only for the Saudi crown prince but potentially also for the strategy of his UAE counterpart.

That in turn could create light at the end of the Middle East's tunnel of almost a decade of volatility and violent and bloody conflict that has been driven by Saudi and UAE assertiveness in countering dissent at home and abroad in the wake of the 2011 popular Arab revolts as well as Iran that has played its part in countries like Syria and Yemen in fuelling destruction and bloodshed.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

A draft US Senate resolution effectively portraying Saudi policy as detrimental to US interests and values and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman as “complicit” in the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, if adopted and implemented, potentially could change the dynamics of the region's politics and create an initial exit from almost a decade of mayhem, conflict and bloodshed.

A draft US Senate resolution effectively portraying Saudi policy as detrimental to US interests and values and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman as “complicit” in the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, if adopted and implemented, potentially could change the dynamics of the region's politics and create an initial exit from almost a decade of mayhem, conflict and bloodshed. The six-page draft also holds Prince Mohammed accountable for the devastating war in Yemen that has sparked one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises, the failure to end the 17-month-old Saudi-United Arab Emirates-led economic and diplomatic boycott of Qatar, and the jailing and torture of Saudi dissidents and activists. In doing so, the resolution confronts not only Prince Mohammed's policies but also by implication those of his closest ally, UAE crown prince Mohammed bin Zayed. The UAE was the first country that Saudi leader visited after the Khashoggi killing. By in effect challenging the position of king-in-waiting Prince Mohammed, the resolution raises the question whether some of his closest allies, including the UAE crown prince, will in future want to be identified that closely with him. Moreover, by demanding the release of activist Raif bin Muhammad Badawi, better known as Raif Badawi, and women's rights activists, the resolution further the challenges fundamentals of Prince Mohammed's iron-fisted repression of his critics, the extent of his proposed social reforms as part of his drive to diversify and streamline the Saudi economy, and the kingdom's human rights record. A 34-year-old blogger who named his website Free Saudi Liberals, Badawi was barred from travel and had his assets frozen in 2009, arrested in 2012, and sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes for insulting Islam. His sister, Samar Badawi, a women’s rights activist, was detained earlier this year. Badawi’s wife and children were granted asylum and citizenship in Canada. A diplomatic row that stunned many erupted in August when Saudi Arabia expelled the Canadian ambassador after the foreign ministry in Ottawa demanded in a tweet the release of Badawi and other activists. Prince Mohammed and Saudi Arabia, even prior to the introduction of the Senate resolution, were discovering that the Khashoggi killing had weakened the kingdom internationally and had made it more vulnerable to pressure. Talks in Sweden between the Saudi-backed Yemeni government and Houthi rebels to end the war is the most immediate consequence of the kingdom's changing position. So is the resolution that is unprecedented in the scope and harshness of the criticism of a long-standing ally. While the resolution is likely to spark initial anger among some of Prince's Mohammed's allies, it nevertheless, if adopted and/or implemented, could persuade some like UAE crown prince Mohammed to rethink their fundamental strategies. The relationship between the two Mohammeds constituted a cornerstone of the UAE leader's strategy to achieve his political, foreign policy and defence goals. These include projecting the Emirates as a guiding light of cutting-edge Arab and Muslim modernity; ensuring that the Middle East fits the crown prince's autocratic, anti-Islamist mould; and enabling the UAE, described by US defence secretary Jim Mattis as 'Little Sparta,' to punch above its weight politically, diplomatically and militarily. To compensate for the Emirates’ small size, Prince Mohammed opted to pursue his goals in part by working through the Saudi royal court. In leaked emails, UAE ambassador to Washington Yousef al-Otaiba, a close associate of Prince Mohammed, said of the Saudi crown prince that “I don’t think we’ll ever see a more pragmatic leader in that country.” Al-Otaiba went on to say: “I think in the long term we might be a good influence on KSA (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia), at least with certain people there. Our relationship with them is based on strategic depth, shared interests, and most importantly the hope that we could influence them. Not the other way around.” The impact of the Senate resolution and what it means for the US policy will to a large extent depend on the politics of the differences between the Congress and President Donald J Trump who has so far sought to shield the Saudi crown prince. To further do so, Trump, with or without the resolution, would likely have to pressure Saudi Arabia to give him something tangible to work with such as an immediate release of imprisoned activists followed by a resolution of the Qatar crisis as well as some indication that the Yemen peace negotiations are progressing. Whichever way, the fallout of the Khashoggi killing, culminating in unprecedented Congressional anger against Prince Mohammed and the kingdom, is likely to have significant consequences not only for the Saudi crown prince but potentially also for the strategy of his UAE counterpart. That in turn could create light at the end of the Middle East's tunnel of almost a decade of volatility and violent and bloody conflict that has been driven by Saudi and UAE assertiveness in countering dissent at home and abroad in the wake of the 2011 popular Arab revolts as well as Iran that has played its part in countries like Syria and Yemen in fuelling destruction and bloodshed. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US Senate resolution potentially changes Middle East dynamics

After the recent G20 summit in Argentina, it is clear that global groups do not have the ability, strength and willingness to collaborate for creating a better world.&nbsp;

World powers are hopelessly divided over several issues. The deep divisions between Russia, US, EU, China, India, the oil majors and emerging economies is creating an environment where no one can really depend on anyone else.&nbsp;

And this does not include the increasingly irrelevant United Kingdom, which is still thrashing around with the Brexit noose around its neck. &nbsp;

The relationships between all these countries will become more complex before it eases off. For decades, western powers evangelised a type of globalisation that benefitted them more than the others. As Asian economies began to realise the unjust rules that had been foisted on the world, they revolted.&nbsp;

When they demanded equal access to their markets, western countries had to step back. Much of this tussle led to the near collapse of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), which appeared to have been created only to open emerging economies while protecting western markets.&nbsp;

Despite this, countries like India, China and Brazil managed to create economic strengths that could rival, or at least threaten the control of western economies.&nbsp;

As manufacturing shifted to China and services moved to countries like India and South East Asia, Europe and the US realised the weaknesses in their own economies.&nbsp;

Western powers used WTO to attack protectionism in emerging markets for decades. It was normal for visiting delegations to demand greater access in sectors with higher FDI limits. Now, the biggest howls to protect markets are emerging from EU and US.&nbsp;

The trade war between China and the US is the most prominent symbol of such a shift in attitudes. In many ways, China is clearing the way for emerging economies to follow. Develop internal strengths that can compete with the best in the world.&nbsp;

Security is the other dimension that grabbed the attention of the G20 leaders. However, there is not much that they can do. Russia is having its way in Ukraine. Saudi Arabia continues with its illiberal ways. US is refusing to fund NATO even as the EU wonders whether it has the resources to manage its own security.&nbsp;

In such a scenario, it is important that Asia determines its own future. Long dependent and impacted by the policies of the West, it is time that it created a new Asian order for itself.&nbsp;

At the recent Horasis Asia Summit in Vietnam, the former Director General of WTO and ex-Secretary General of UNCTAD, Supachai Panitchpakdi, was emphatic about self-reliance in the region. “We need a spirit of collaboration in Asia that can allow it to overcome its differences to become a formidable force in the world,” he stated.&nbsp;

For this, Asian countries have to create new frameworks of collaboration, which allow healthy competition and cooperation. The centre of economic gravity is shifting to Asia.&nbsp;

According to IMF’s regional economic outlook, China’s growth is projected to ease to 6.6 per cent, partly reflecting the authorities’ financial, housing, and fiscal tightening measures.&nbsp;

Progress in Japan has been above potential for eight consecutive quarters and is expected to remain strong this year at 1.2 per cent. And in India, growth is expected to rebound to 7.4 per cent, following temporary disruptions related to the currency exchange initiative and the rollout of the Goods and Services Tax.

The IMF goes on to say that Asia is expected to grow by around 5½ per cent this year, accounting for nearly two-thirds of global growth, and the region remains the world’s most dynamic by a considerable margin.

Add to this, growing consuming populations. A study by Brookings points out that half the world is now middle class or wealthier and most of it will be in Asia.&nbsp;

Calculations by authors Homi Kharas and Kristofer Hamel suggest that the middle-class markets in China and India in 2030 will account for $14.1 trillion and $12.3 trillion respectively, comparable in size to a US middle-class market at that time of $15.9 trillion.

The implication is clear. Asia will lead the world consumption and thus set the tone for economic growth.&nbsp;

Several initiatives have come up in recent years to bring Asia closer together. The most important among these is the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). &nbsp;RCEP has the potential to become more than a free trade agreement and become a binding force for Asian economic giants. If negotiated in a fair manner, the agreement will enhance internal trade, investment and security linkages within Asia.&nbsp;

Several experts have cautioned India against being part of RCEP. The Indian government itself is in the process of listening to experts on the best way ahead at regional trade grouping. For India, it does make eminent sense to be an active and important voice in RCEP. This could help in creating an Asian order that decides its own future.&nbsp;

Even as the western economies resolve their internal issues, Asia has the opportunity to make the most of its resources to be the economic centre of gravity of the world.&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-time-for-a-new-asian-order-2692343">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

After the recent G20 summit in Argentina, it is clear that global groups do not have the ability, strength and willingness to collaborate for creating a better world.

After the recent G20 summit in Argentina, it is clear that global groups do not have the ability, strength and willingness to collaborate for creating a better world. World powers are hopelessly divided over several issues. The deep divisions between Russia, US, EU, China, India, the oil majors and emerging economies is creating an environment where no one can really depend on anyone else. And this does not include the increasingly irrelevant United Kingdom, which is still thrashing around with the Brexit noose around its neck. The relationships between all these countries will become more complex before it eases off. For decades, western powers evangelised a type of globalisation that benefitted them more than the others. As Asian economies began to realise the unjust rules that had been foisted on the world, they revolted. When they demanded equal access to their markets, western countries had to step back. Much of this tussle led to the near collapse of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), which appeared to have been created only to open emerging economies while protecting western markets. Despite this, countries like India, China and Brazil managed to create economic strengths that could rival, or at least threaten the control of western economies. As manufacturing shifted to China and services moved to countries like India and South East Asia, Europe and the US realised the weaknesses in their own economies. Western powers used WTO to attack protectionism in emerging markets for decades. It was normal for visiting delegations to demand greater access in sectors with higher FDI limits. Now, the biggest howls to protect markets are emerging from EU and US. The trade war between China and the US is the most prominent symbol of such a shift in attitudes. In many ways, China is clearing the way for emerging economies to follow. Develop internal strengths that can compete with the best in the world. Security is the other dimension that grabbed the attention of the G20 leaders. However, there is not much that they can do. Russia is having its way in Ukraine. Saudi Arabia continues with its illiberal ways. US is refusing to fund NATO even as the EU wonders whether it has the resources to manage its own security. In such a scenario, it is important that Asia determines its own future. Long dependent and impacted by the policies of the West, it is time that it created a new Asian order for itself. At the recent Horasis Asia Summit in Vietnam, the former Director General of WTO and ex-Secretary General of UNCTAD, Supachai Panitchpakdi, was emphatic about self-reliance in the region. “We need a spirit of collaboration in Asia that can allow it to overcome its differences to become a formidable force in the world,” he stated. For this, Asian countries have to create new frameworks of collaboration, which allow healthy competition and cooperation. The centre of economic gravity is shifting to Asia. According to IMF’s regional economic outlook, China’s growth is projected to ease to 6.6 per cent, partly reflecting the authorities’ financial, housing, and fiscal tightening measures. Progress in Japan has been above potential for eight consecutive quarters and is expected to remain strong this year at 1.2 per cent. And in India, growth is expected to rebound to 7.4 per cent, following temporary disruptions related to the currency exchange initiative and the rollout of the Goods and Services Tax. The IMF goes on to say that Asia is expected to grow by around 5½ per cent this year, accounting for nearly two-thirds of global growth, and the region remains the world’s most dynamic by a considerable margin. Add to this, growing consuming populations. A study by Brookings points out that half the world is now middle class or wealthier and most of it will be in Asia. Calculations by authors Homi Kharas and Kristofer Hamel suggest that the middle-class markets in China and India in 2030 will account for $14.1 trillion and $12.3 trillion respectively, comparable in size to a US middle-class market at that time of $15.9 trillion. The implication is clear. Asia will lead the world consumption and thus set the tone for economic growth. Several initiatives have come up in recent years to bring Asia closer together. The most important among these is the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). RCEP has the potential to become more than a free trade agreement and become a binding force for Asian economic giants. If negotiated in a fair manner, the agreement will enhance internal trade, investment and security linkages within Asia. Several experts have cautioned India against being part of RCEP. The Indian government itself is in the process of listening to experts on the best way ahead at regional trade grouping. For India, it does make eminent sense to be an active and important voice in RCEP. This could help in creating an Asian order that decides its own future. Even as the western economies resolve their internal issues, Asia has the opportunity to make the most of its resources to be the economic centre of gravity of the world. (This article was originally published on 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)

Centre of economic gravity is shifting to Asia

At the recently held G20 Summit, India’s participation in the Quad meeting and Prime Minister Narendra Modi's informal meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and US Vice President Mike Pence can be seen as an effort to build balanced and cordial relationships with the major global players.

India has a set of convergences and divergences of interests with China, USA and Russia. We have so far been able to keep these relations separate from one another.&nbsp;

India’s differences with China on certain aspects of Sino-Pak nexus, South China Sea row and India's entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) can also be viewed as a convergence of interests with the US.&nbsp;

Similarly, India’s differences with the US on trade, climate change, and CAATSA, in the context of Russia, can be seen as the convergence of interests with China.

The silver lining is that the US, being our strategic partner, will like to have India's support it in its military operations in case Pakistan does not serve its strategic interest. The US waiver on Chabahar port and import of Iranian oil for the next six months is a welcome step by the US towards India. &nbsp;

After India's suggestion to expand the scope and dimension of QUAD, opening it up to other affected countries, there is a general feeling amongst other QUAD members that India is perhaps getting softer towards China.&nbsp;

The reality is that India has an independent foreign policy. &nbsp;In the Indo-Pacific region, it stands with US, Japan and Australia in checking Chinese encroachment of global commons like the South China Sea. India seeks to enable seamless movement in international water and rule-based order.&nbsp;

India, therefore, has to maintain harmonious relations with all its strategic partners and neighbours to pursue its national interest. Despite such complexities, the silver lining is that the US, as well as China, want better relations with India.

Russia also will not like to lose the largest purchaser of its military hardware and a strategic partnership which stood the test of time even in ‘Heated Cold War’ era.

 The number of bilateral and trilateral meetings attended by India at the G20 Summit clearly explains the balanced diplomatic exercises carried out by India as per its national interest. Indian participation in two significant trilateral meetings - US-Japan-India and China-Russia-India clearly indicates the efforts required to balance relations with two separate groupings.&nbsp;

At G20, India flagged the issue of cooperation in dealing with the fugitive offenders and countering terrorism besides many other issues that represent India’s strategic interest. 
 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

At the recently held G20 Summit, India’s participation in the Quad meeting and Prime Minister Narendra Modi's informal meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and US Vice President Mike Pence can be seen as an effort to build balanced and cordial relationships with the major global players.

At the recently held G20 Summit, India’s participation in the Quad meeting and Prime Minister Narendra Modi's informal meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and US Vice President Mike Pence can be seen as an effort to build balanced and cordial relationships with the major global players. India has a set of convergences and divergences of interests with China, USA and Russia. We have so far been able to keep these relations separate from one another. India’s differences with China on certain aspects of Sino-Pak nexus, South China Sea row and India's entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) can also be viewed as a convergence of interests with the US. Similarly, India’s differences with the US on trade, climate change, and CAATSA, in the context of Russia, can be seen as the convergence of interests with China. The silver lining is that the US, being our strategic partner, will like to have India's support it in its military operations in case Pakistan does not serve its strategic interest. The US waiver on Chabahar port and import of Iranian oil for the next six months is a welcome step by the US towards India. After India's suggestion to expand the scope and dimension of QUAD, opening it up to other affected countries, there is a general feeling amongst other QUAD members that India is perhaps getting softer towards China. The reality is that India has an independent foreign policy. In the Indo-Pacific region, it stands with US, Japan and Australia in checking Chinese encroachment of global commons like the South China Sea. India seeks to enable seamless movement in international water and rule-based order. India, therefore, has to maintain harmonious relations with all its strategic partners and neighbours to pursue its national interest. Despite such complexities, the silver lining is that the US, as well as China, want better relations with India. Russia also will not like to lose the largest purchaser of its military hardware and a strategic partnership which stood the test of time even in ‘Heated Cold War’ era.  The number of bilateral and trilateral meetings attended by India at the G20 Summit clearly explains the balanced diplomatic exercises carried out by India as per its national interest. Indian participation in two significant trilateral meetings - US-Japan-India and China-Russia-India clearly indicates the efforts required to balance relations with two separate groupings. At G20, India flagged the issue of cooperation in dealing with the fugitive offenders and countering terrorism besides many other issues that represent India’s strategic interest. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

India displayed smart diplomacy at G20 Summit

At the G20 Summit, there was a high-five from Vladimir Putin. And for Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi, it was business as usual.

At home, Saudi Arabia’s media trumpeted Mohammed bin Salman’s meetings with world leaders, tweeting pictures of his encounters, which also included the presidents of South Korea, Mexico, and South Africa.

However, Western leaders appeared to avoid the crown prince during the family photo at the Group of 20 summit in Buenos Aires – after almost two months of global outrage at the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The only Arab leader there, the prince stood rather isolated at the end of the line, at times looking uncertain and nervous.

US President Donald Trump, Prince Mohammed’s most vocal backer, did not have time for a one-on-one meeting. Argentina’s President Mauricio Macri kept the prince hanging on when it came to finding time to talk.

During an informal conversation on the sidelines of the summit, French President Emmanuel Macron was overheard admonishing Mohammed, saying he “never listened”, while the crown prince tried to assure him that “it’s OK”. French officials later said the men were discussing the killing of Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and the war in Yemen.

Similarly, British Prime Minister Theresa May opted to focus on those two topics, rather than economics and trade as her country struggles with the uncertainty of Brexit, the UK’s departure from the European Union. May insisted Riyadh needed “to build confidence that such a deplorable incident could not happen again”, referring to the Saudi team sent to Turkey to murder Khashoggi.

The message Prince Mohammed probably took home from the G20 summit was that illiberal democratic, authoritarian and autocratic leaders were happy to do business with the kingdom and the crown prince despite persistent assertions that he ordered the killing.

Trump and western Europe’s leaders appeared to play to public opinion but do nothing to threaten their relations with the kingdom. The US president also chose not to have a formal meeting with Prince Mohammed’s foremost detractor, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

The crown prince may also have been heartened that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada, which Saudi Arabia had a diplomatic row with earlier this year, was the only leader to raise the Khashoggi issue during the G20’s formal proceedings.

Other US allies made clear the kingdom’s financial largesse and willingness to guarantee the flow of oil would go a long way to ensure they would choose realism above principle.

The Saudi Press Agency reported after Mohammed’s meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi that the crown prince pledged to meet India’s oil and petroleum product needs.

Prince Mohammed may have achieved his goal of showing Saudi Arabia – specifically himself – remained a player by attending the G20 summit, despite the storm surrounding Khashoggi’s death still raging.

But the prince is not out of the woods yet. The kingdom, eager to project itself as a regional and world power, has suffered significant damage to its reputation which will take time and hard work to repair.

Just how hard depends on whether the US Congress decides to sanction Riyadh, if the Europeans will follow suit, and on Turkey successfully pushing for an international investigation into the killing.

“We have never seen Khashoggi’s murder as a political issue,” Erdogan told a news conference in Buenos Aires. “For Turkey, the incident is and will remain a flagrant murder within the Islamic world. International public opinion will not be satisfied until all those responsible for his death are revealed.”

He described Saudi Arabia’s response to the killing as “unbelievable”.

The US Senate, meanwhile, pushed forward last week – despite opposition from Trump – with a resolution that would end American military support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen, a conflict which has cause a major humanitarian crisis.

Prince Mohammed’s case was not helped by the leak of a CIA report saying he sent 11 messages to Saud al-Qahtani – a former close aide – at the time Khashoggi was killed. However, the intelligence agency admitted it lacked direct evidence of the crown prince “issuing a kill order”.

Qahtani has been accused of overseeing the killing and been fired from his position as Mohammed’s adviser and information tsar. He has also been sanctioned by Washington.

The CIA claims Prince Mohammed told associates in August 2017 they “could possibly lure [Khashoggi] outside Saudi Arabia and make arrangements” if the Washington Post columnist refused to return to the kingdom from the US.

Nevertheless, the G20 summit suggests Prince Mohammed and the kingdom have taken their first step towards putting the Khashoggi affair behind them. Even if US lawmakers slap sanctions on the kingdom, the prince is likely to remain secure in his position as king-in-waiting.

Keeping Khashoggi in the headlines will prove increasingly difficult as it seems much of the world has signalled that it is moving on. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

At the G20 Summit, there was a high-five from Vladimir Putin. And for Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi, it was business as usual. At home, Saudi Arabia’s media trumpeted Mohammed bin Salman’s meetings with world leaders, tweeting pictures of his encounters, which also included the presidents of South Korea, Mexico, and South Africa.

At the G20 Summit, there was a high-five from Vladimir Putin. And for Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi, it was business as usual. At home, Saudi Arabia’s media trumpeted Mohammed bin Salman’s meetings with world leaders, tweeting pictures of his encounters, which also included the presidents of South Korea, Mexico, and South Africa. However, Western leaders appeared to avoid the crown prince during the family photo at the Group of 20 summit in Buenos Aires – after almost two months of global outrage at the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The only Arab leader there, the prince stood rather isolated at the end of the line, at times looking uncertain and nervous. US President Donald Trump, Prince Mohammed’s most vocal backer, did not have time for a one-on-one meeting. Argentina’s President Mauricio Macri kept the prince hanging on when it came to finding time to talk. During an informal conversation on the sidelines of the summit, French President Emmanuel Macron was overheard admonishing Mohammed, saying he “never listened”, while the crown prince tried to assure him that “it’s OK”. French officials later said the men were discussing the killing of Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and the war in Yemen. Similarly, British Prime Minister Theresa May opted to focus on those two topics, rather than economics and trade as her country struggles with the uncertainty of Brexit, the UK’s departure from the European Union. May insisted Riyadh needed “to build confidence that such a deplorable incident could not happen again”, referring to the Saudi team sent to Turkey to murder Khashoggi. The message Prince Mohammed probably took home from the G20 summit was that illiberal democratic, authoritarian and autocratic leaders were happy to do business with the kingdom and the crown prince despite persistent assertions that he ordered the killing. Trump and western Europe’s leaders appeared to play to public opinion but do nothing to threaten their relations with the kingdom. The US president also chose not to have a formal meeting with Prince Mohammed’s foremost detractor, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The crown prince may also have been heartened that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada, which Saudi Arabia had a diplomatic row with earlier this year, was the only leader to raise the Khashoggi issue during the G20’s formal proceedings. Other US allies made clear the kingdom’s financial largesse and willingness to guarantee the flow of oil would go a long way to ensure they would choose realism above principle. The Saudi Press Agency reported after Mohammed’s meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi that the crown prince pledged to meet India’s oil and petroleum product needs. Prince Mohammed may have achieved his goal of showing Saudi Arabia – specifically himself – remained a player by attending the G20 summit, despite the storm surrounding Khashoggi’s death still raging. But the prince is not out of the woods yet. The kingdom, eager to project itself as a regional and world power, has suffered significant damage to its reputation which will take time and hard work to repair. Just how hard depends on whether the US Congress decides to sanction Riyadh, if the Europeans will follow suit, and on Turkey successfully pushing for an international investigation into the killing. “We have never seen Khashoggi’s murder as a political issue,” Erdogan told a news conference in Buenos Aires. “For Turkey, the incident is and will remain a flagrant murder within the Islamic world. International public opinion will not be satisfied until all those responsible for his death are revealed.” He described Saudi Arabia’s response to the killing as “unbelievable”. The US Senate, meanwhile, pushed forward last week – despite opposition from Trump – with a resolution that would end American military support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen, a conflict which has cause a major humanitarian crisis. Prince Mohammed’s case was not helped by the leak of a CIA report saying he sent 11 messages to Saud al-Qahtani – a former close aide – at the time Khashoggi was killed. However, the intelligence agency admitted it lacked direct evidence of the crown prince “issuing a kill order”. Qahtani has been accused of overseeing the killing and been fired from his position as Mohammed’s adviser and information tsar. He has also been sanctioned by Washington. The CIA claims Prince Mohammed told associates in August 2017 they “could possibly lure [Khashoggi] outside Saudi Arabia and make arrangements” if the Washington Post columnist refused to return to the kingdom from the US. Nevertheless, the G20 summit suggests Prince Mohammed and the kingdom have taken their first step towards putting the Khashoggi affair behind them. Even if US lawmakers slap sanctions on the kingdom, the prince is likely to remain secure in his position as king-in-waiting. Keeping Khashoggi in the headlines will prove increasingly difficult as it seems much of the world has signalled that it is moving on. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Royal road ahead: It was business as usual for Saudi Crown Prince at G20 summit

Kremlin defends Putin-Saudi Crown prince high-five

The G20 Summit 2018, besides its normal proceedings, will be remembered for a large number of bilateral and trilateral meetings on the sidelines, which seem to be even more significant than the main purpose of the meet.&nbsp;

There were some high profile bilateral meetings like US-China in the context of trade war. Meanwhile, US–Russia meeting (scheduling of which saw many flip-flops) finally could not take place due to Ukraine crisis&nbsp;and ongoing investigations into alleged Russia's involvement in the US elections.&nbsp;

The two trilateral meetings involving US-Japan-India and China-Russia-India were also very significant because of the peculiarity of Indian position in both the meetings. One of the reasons for this phenomenon is that the world has become more interconnected, hence even bilateral relations between global powers impact the world directly or indirectly.&nbsp;

For an instance, when a large number of countries including US allies, strategic and trade partners joined The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), against the wishes of the US, it was quite evident that a time has come when many countries will like to have alternate sources of funding other than west dominated IMF or Japan-led Asian Development Bank (ADB). Similarly, when China exhibited aggressive design of converting atolls into artificial islands ignoring international laws, a group of democratic countries huddled together to form 'the QUAD' with a potential to counterbalance such moves.

The international relationships and strategic interests of most countries in the interlinked world today are so interwoven, that it is difficult to count countries only in one grouping; hence, many new issue based groupings have emerged in last few decades. &nbsp; &nbsp;

In the exuberance of pursuing ‘America First’ policy, in the last few years, the US has been highly critical of some of its allies, strategic and trade partners. In some cases, it used threatening gestures, while some others were slapped with sanctions. The policy got a major jolt when America literally threatened everyone to support their decision of shifting embassy to Jerusalem, but many countries junked the threat and voted as per their own perception. Pulling out of the Paris Accord for Climate Change, Iran Nuclear deal, TPP are some more examples when many of US allies were not on the same page with the Trump Administration.&nbsp;

The last G7 Summit was not a pleasant experience for the US allies due to alleged self-centred economic approach of America. The NATO allies are also relatively lesser confident of the US-backing and keep waiting for next surprise from Trump Administration. Under these circumstances, Is Trump's Concept of ‘With US’ or ‘Against the US’ is outdated in the interlinked world?&nbsp;

On the other hand, Chinese after announcing Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in 2013, with the elevation of President Xi Jinping from ‘Chairman of everything’ to ‘Core’ and ‘Leader for life’, exhibited its expeditionary design starting from the South China Sea to land grabbing. With its fast growth, it tried to showcase that its methodology of governance was better than the democratic model. Its ‘Incremental Encroachment Strategy’ in Doklam and the South China Sea, exhibited Chinese ambitions exceeding beyond peaceful growth to the arena of global strategic dominance; hence it started facing opposition from a group of democratic countries.

In the case of Russia also, we find Germany, a US ally, drawing gas from them. Furthermore, Russia and China helped out North Korea with fuel and essentialities immediately after Singapore Summit between President Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. Russia - a strategic partner of India supplies military hardware to Pakistan. A cross-pollination of relations is therefore quite evident.&nbsp;

The time has come when most countries want to manage their international relations as per their own national interests and do not want their strategic choices to be dictated by others. It is also a fact that as the world becoming more interconnected, the trend of issue-based relationships is increasing. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The G20 Summit 2018, besides its normal proceedings, will be remembered for a large number of bilateral and trilateral meetings on the sidelines, which seem to be even more significant than the main purpose of the meet.

The G20 Summit 2018, besides its normal proceedings, will be remembered for a large number of bilateral and trilateral meetings on the sidelines, which seem to be even more significant than the main purpose of the meet. There were some high profile bilateral meetings like US-China in the context of trade war. Meanwhile, US–Russia meeting (scheduling of which saw many flip-flops) finally could not take place due to Ukraine crisis and ongoing investigations into alleged Russia's involvement in the US elections. The two trilateral meetings involving US-Japan-India and China-Russia-India were also very significant because of the peculiarity of Indian position in both the meetings. One of the reasons for this phenomenon is that the world has become more interconnected, hence even bilateral relations between global powers impact the world directly or indirectly. For an instance, when a large number of countries including US allies, strategic and trade partners joined The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), against the wishes of the US, it was quite evident that a time has come when many countries will like to have alternate sources of funding other than west dominated IMF or Japan-led Asian Development Bank (ADB). Similarly, when China exhibited aggressive design of converting atolls into artificial islands ignoring international laws, a group of democratic countries huddled together to form 'the QUAD' with a potential to counterbalance such moves. The international relationships and strategic interests of most countries in the interlinked world today are so interwoven, that it is difficult to count countries only in one grouping; hence, many new issue based groupings have emerged in last few decades. In the exuberance of pursuing ‘America First’ policy, in the last few years, the US has been highly critical of some of its allies, strategic and trade partners. In some cases, it used threatening gestures, while some others were slapped with sanctions. The policy got a major jolt when America literally threatened everyone to support their decision of shifting embassy to Jerusalem, but many countries junked the threat and voted as per their own perception. Pulling out of the Paris Accord for Climate Change, Iran Nuclear deal, TPP are some more examples when many of US allies were not on the same page with the Trump Administration. The last G7 Summit was not a pleasant experience for the US allies due to alleged self-centred economic approach of America. The NATO allies are also relatively lesser confident of the US-backing and keep waiting for next surprise from Trump Administration. Under these circumstances, Is Trump's Concept of ‘With US’ or ‘Against the US’ is outdated in the interlinked world? On the other hand, Chinese after announcing Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in 2013, with the elevation of President Xi Jinping from ‘Chairman of everything’ to ‘Core’ and ‘Leader for life’, exhibited its expeditionary design starting from the South China Sea to land grabbing. With its fast growth, it tried to showcase that its methodology of governance was better than the democratic model. Its ‘Incremental Encroachment Strategy’ in Doklam and the South China Sea, exhibited Chinese ambitions exceeding beyond peaceful growth to the arena of global strategic dominance; hence it started facing opposition from a group of democratic countries. In the case of Russia also, we find Germany, a US ally, drawing gas from them. Furthermore, Russia and China helped out North Korea with fuel and essentialities immediately after Singapore Summit between President Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. Russia - a strategic partner of India supplies military hardware to Pakistan. A cross-pollination of relations is therefore quite evident. The time has come when most countries want to manage their international relations as per their own national interests and do not want their strategic choices to be dictated by others. It is also a fact that as the world becoming more interconnected, the trend of issue-based relationships is increasing. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The importance of strategic balance in an interconnected world

By Tony Walker

The United States and China have arrived at a temporary truce in a trade conflict that was threatening to further destabilise world equity markets, entrench a global slowdown and cause more damage to a rules-based international order.

Agreement by US President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, to allow further negotiations before threatened tariff increases on Chinese imports coming into effect, is a welcome development.

However, this is a temporary respite, a short-term fix, not a long-term solution to myriad trade and other tensions that have put the US and China at odds with each other.

For their own purposes and in their own interests, Trump and Xi have come away from the Argentine capital with a deal that papers over differences that extend from China’s activities in the South China Sea to its mercantilist trade policies.

As far as we know, China’s ruthless assertion of its sovereignty over disputed waters in the South China Sea was not a material subject for discussion in Buenos Aires except, possibly, in passing.

China’s rise and America’s relative decline ensure these global economic superpowers will continue to bump up against each other.

So, what was achieved and what are the prospects for an accord reached on the sidelines of the G20?

In their efforts to lower trade tensions and prevent a further erosion of global confidence, Trump and Xi agreed to a 90-day extension on the imposition of additional US tariffs on some $200 billion of Chinese imports.

Trump had threatened to increase tariffs from 10 per cent to 25 per cent on an initial batch of Chinese imports from January 1. He had also flagged his intention to impose levies on another $267 billion worth of imports if progress was not made in resolving broad-based trade differences.

A joint statement laid out a timeline for continuing negotiations. It reads:

"Both parties agree that they will endeavour to have this transaction completed within the next 90 days. If, at the end of this period of time, the parties are unable to reach an agreement, the 10 per cent tariffs will be raised to 25 percent."

In return for these temporary concessions, China agreed to:

"… purchase a not yet agreed upon, but very substantial, amount of agricultural, energy, industrial, and other product from the United States to reduce the trade imbalance between the two countries. China has agreed to start purchasing agricultural product immediately."

China also agreed to crack down on sales of Fentanyl by making it a controlled substance. The US is battling an opioid crisis in which Fentanyl is a lethal component.

In retaliation for US trade actions, China had imposed duties on US$110 billion of imports. A principal component of this is soybeans, effectively killing one of America’s more lucrative export markets.

Trump has been under huge pressure from his Mid-Western rural heartland over a collapse in the Chinese market for American agricultural products.

The two sides also agreed to address structural problems in the trading relationship. These extend to five areas – forced technology transfer, intellectual property protection, non-tariff barriers, cyber intrusions and cyber theft.

These are highly complex issues and unlikely to be resolved in the short term, if at all.

In the wash-up of the Xi-Trump discussions, it appears China has got more out of the deal than the US – at least for now. It has secured a stay of execution for the implementation of tariff increases and forestalled, for the time being, tariffs on an additional bloc of Chinese exports.

In return, it has agreed to buy unspecified quantities of US products and to talk about differences.

Trump’s willingness to compromise after months of bombast reflects pressures from a shellshocked grain-producing constituency and alarm on Wall Street at prospects of a full-blown trade war.

From Beijing’s perspective, China has demonstrated that its growing economic heft has enabled it to avoid the appearance of yielding to US pressure.

If not a “win-win” for China – as Chinese officials are fond of saying – it is certainly not a “lose-lose”.

In a statement at odds with months of fire-breathing rhetoric over China’s allegedly perfidious trade practices, Trump hailed his understanding with Xi. He said: "This was an amazing and productive meeting with unlimited possibilities for both the US and China."

For their part, Chinese officials were more circumspect.

Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the talks were conducted in a “friendly and candid atmosphere”. The presidents: "Agreed that the two sides can and must get bilateral relations right… China is willing to increase imports in accordance with the needs of its domestic market and the people’s needs."

Impetus for a face-saving deal in Buenos Aires has been prompted by growing concerns about the global economy. The signs of a slowdown are clear. Trade volumes had begun to moderate in the third quarter, heightening worries of a global retrenchment.

On the sidelines of the G20, the International Monetary Fund’s managing director, Christine Lagarde, noted:

"Pressures on emerging markets have been rising and trade tensions have begun to have a negative impact, increasing downside risks."

In its October Outlook statement, the IMF warned about threats to global growth due to trade disturbances.

In their final communique, G20 leaders danced around contentious issues on trade to accommodate American objections to having the word “protectionism” inserted in the document.

In the end, participants settled on the need for reform of the World Trade Organisation to describe a world trading system that is falling short of its objectives. Washington has been agitating for a review of the WTO to strengthen its dispute resolution and appeal procedures.

The US has also objected to a continuing description of China as a developing country, with concessions that enable it to take advantage of less developed country status in its access to global markets.

On climate change, Washington separated itself from the other G20 members. All, except the US, reaffirmed their commitment to the Paris Agreement. The US announced in 2017 it was pulling out of Paris.

Foreign policy specialists will be sceptical about a de-escalation of trade hostilities given the range of issues bedevilling the US-China relationship.

Reflecting a hardening of US attitudes towards China, and in contrast to the optimism that had prevailed for much of the past two decades, Ely Ratner in Foreign Affairs notes:

"Even if tariffs are put on hold, the United States will continue to restructure the US-China economic relationship through investment restrictions, export controls, and sustained law enforcement actions against Chinese industrial and cyber-espionage."

"At the same time, there are no serious prospects for Washington and Beijing to resolve other important areas of dispute, including the South China Sea, human rights and the larger contest over the norms, rules and institutions that govern relations in Asia."

A stiffening view in the US towards China is shared more or less across the board. In those circumstances, a temporary ceasefire in Buenos Aires is unlikely to be sustained.

 
(Tony Walker is Adjunct Professor, School of Communications, La Trobe University)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/g20-summit-bring-a-truce-in-us-china-trade-relations-but-its-likely-to-be-temporary-108017">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

By Tony Walker The United States and China have arrived at a temporary truce in a trade conflict that was threatening to further destabilise world equity markets, entrench a global slowdown and cause more damage to a rules-based international order.

By Tony Walker The United States and China have arrived at a temporary truce in a trade conflict that was threatening to further destabilise world equity markets, entrench a global slowdown and cause more damage to a rules-based international order. Agreement by US President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, to allow further negotiations before threatened tariff increases on Chinese imports coming into effect, is a welcome development. However, this is a temporary respite, a short-term fix, not a long-term solution to myriad trade and other tensions that have put the US and China at odds with each other. For their own purposes and in their own interests, Trump and Xi have come away from the Argentine capital with a deal that papers over differences that extend from China’s activities in the South China Sea to its mercantilist trade policies. As far as we know, China’s ruthless assertion of its sovereignty over disputed waters in the South China Sea was not a material subject for discussion in Buenos Aires except, possibly, in passing. China’s rise and America’s relative decline ensure these global economic superpowers will continue to bump up against each other. So, what was achieved and what are the prospects for an accord reached on the sidelines of the G20? In their efforts to lower trade tensions and prevent a further erosion of global confidence, Trump and Xi agreed to a 90-day extension on the imposition of additional US tariffs on some $200 billion of Chinese imports. Trump had threatened to increase tariffs from 10 per cent to 25 per cent on an initial batch of Chinese imports from January 1. He had also flagged his intention to impose levies on another $267 billion worth of imports if progress was not made in resolving broad-based trade differences. A joint statement laid out a timeline for continuing negotiations. It reads: "Both parties agree that they will endeavour to have this transaction completed within the next 90 days. If, at the end of this period of time, the parties are unable to reach an agreement, the 10 per cent tariffs will be raised to 25 percent." In return for these temporary concessions, China agreed to: "… purchase a not yet agreed upon, but very substantial, amount of agricultural, energy, industrial, and other product from the United States to reduce the trade imbalance between the two countries. China has agreed to start purchasing agricultural product immediately." China also agreed to crack down on sales of Fentanyl by making it a controlled substance. The US is battling an opioid crisis in which Fentanyl is a lethal component. In retaliation for US trade actions, China had imposed duties on US$110 billion of imports. A principal component of this is soybeans, effectively killing one of America’s more lucrative export markets. Trump has been under huge pressure from his Mid-Western rural heartland over a collapse in the Chinese market for American agricultural products. The two sides also agreed to address structural problems in the trading relationship. These extend to five areas – forced technology transfer, intellectual property protection, non-tariff barriers, cyber intrusions and cyber theft. These are highly complex issues and unlikely to be resolved in the short term, if at all. In the wash-up of the Xi-Trump discussions, it appears China has got more out of the deal than the US – at least for now. It has secured a stay of execution for the implementation of tariff increases and forestalled, for the time being, tariffs on an additional bloc of Chinese exports. In return, it has agreed to buy unspecified quantities of US products and to talk about differences. Trump’s willingness to compromise after months of bombast reflects pressures from a shellshocked grain-producing constituency and alarm on Wall Street at prospects of a full-blown trade war. From Beijing’s perspective, China has demonstrated that its growing economic heft has enabled it to avoid the appearance of yielding to US pressure. If not a “win-win” for China – as Chinese officials are fond of saying – it is certainly not a “lose-lose”. In a statement at odds with months of fire-breathing rhetoric over China’s allegedly perfidious trade practices, Trump hailed his understanding with Xi. He said: "This was an amazing and productive meeting with unlimited possibilities for both the US and China." For their part, Chinese officials were more circumspect. Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the talks were conducted in a “friendly and candid atmosphere”. The presidents: "Agreed that the two sides can and must get bilateral relations right… China is willing to increase imports in accordance with the needs of its domestic market and the people’s needs." Impetus for a face-saving deal in Buenos Aires has been prompted by growing concerns about the global economy. The signs of a slowdown are clear. Trade volumes had begun to moderate in the third quarter, heightening worries of a global retrenchment. On the sidelines of the G20, the International Monetary Fund’s managing director, Christine Lagarde, noted: "Pressures on emerging markets have been rising and trade tensions have begun to have a negative impact, increasing downside risks." In its October Outlook statement, the IMF warned about threats to global growth due to trade disturbances. In their final communique, G20 leaders danced around contentious issues on trade to accommodate American objections to having the word “protectionism” inserted in the document. In the end, participants settled on the need for reform of the World Trade Organisation to describe a world trading system that is falling short of its objectives. Washington has been agitating for a review of the WTO to strengthen its dispute resolution and appeal procedures. The US has also objected to a continuing description of China as a developing country, with concessions that enable it to take advantage of less developed country status in its access to global markets. On climate change, Washington separated itself from the other G20 members. All, except the US, reaffirmed their commitment to the Paris Agreement. The US announced in 2017 it was pulling out of Paris. Foreign policy specialists will be sceptical about a de-escalation of trade hostilities given the range of issues bedevilling the US-China relationship. Reflecting a hardening of US attitudes towards China, and in contrast to the optimism that had prevailed for much of the past two decades, Ely Ratner in Foreign Affairs notes: "Even if tariffs are put on hold, the United States will continue to restructure the US-China economic relationship through investment restrictions, export controls, and sustained law enforcement actions against Chinese industrial and cyber-espionage." "At the same time, there are no serious prospects for Washington and Beijing to resolve other important areas of dispute, including the South China Sea, human rights and the larger contest over the norms, rules and institutions that govern relations in Asia." A stiffening view in the US towards China is shared more or less across the board. In those circumstances, a temporary ceasefire in Buenos Aires is unlikely to be sustained. (Tony Walker is Adjunct Professor, School of Communications, La Trobe 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)

G20 summit brings a truce in US-China trade relations

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning 2nd December, 2018

G20 Summit: Trump, Xi Jinping break the ice; discuss trade tensions

The 13 G20 Summit ended with a number of big outcomes such as India being as the host for G20 in 2022 and Trump-Xi truce in the ongoing trade war.&nbsp;

India will be hosting the summit on the 75th Independence anniversary year.

Speaking at the G20 summit, India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi said "It's India's 75th Independence Day in 2022 &amp; we had requested Italy if we can get '22 instead of '21 (for hosting G20 summit). They accepted our request, others accepted it too.I'm grateful and I invite leadership from across the world to come to India in 2022"

Italy and India swapped year for hosting G20 summit. Italy will be hosting G20 Summit in 2021. Italian PM Giuseppe Conte said it was "very important for India to celebrate its 75th anniversary of Independence with our presence and therefore I decide to accept the swap".

In Asia, South Korea hosted G20 in 2010, followed by Turkey in 2015 and China in 2016.&nbsp;

GLOBAL OUTCOMES

On Global outcomes, US president and Chinese President met for almost two-and-a-half hours on a working dinner. Later in a press statement, the white house said, "President Trump has agreed that on January 1, 2019, he will leave the tariffs on $200 billion worth of product at the 10% rate, and not raise it to 25% at this time."

According to White House, China also agreed to purchase "very substantial" amount of agricultural, energy, industrial, and other product from the United States to "reduce the trade imbalance between our two countries."

US President has been calling on Bejing to reduce the trade deficit with Washington.

Trump &amp; Xi have also agreed to "immediately" begin negotiations on "structural changes" with respect to forced technology transfer, intellectual property protection, non-tariff barriers, cyber intrusions and cyber theft, services and agriculture. Both agreed that this will be completed within the next 90 days.

President Trump said, “This was an amazing and productive meeting with unlimited possibilities for both the United States and China. It is my great honour to be working with President Xi.”

India's Prime minister also spoke on the ongoing trade wars between world number one and number two economies in the world saying it has a "collateral" impact on emerging economies.

Terror and the issue of fugitive economic offenders remained the key focus by the PM with the PM calling on the need to "implement the 11 point action plan against terrorism which was issued as a stand-alone statement in last year's G20 summit (in Hamburg)".&nbsp;

India's Sherpa or Chief negotiator Shaktikanta Das, replying to WION's question on terror said, "PM raised the issue of terror and the way it undermines human life and also economies and society. PM emphasised that the Hamburg declaration should be implemented by all countries. "

PM had also given 9 point agenda to tackle fugitive economic offenders which called on Financial Action Task Force (FATF) &nbsp;to define economic offenders.&nbsp;

On the sidelines of G20, PM Modi also met a number of world leaders including Chinese President Xi for the fourth time since he assumed office and invited South African President Cyril Ramaphosa for the Republic day celebrations.

Speaking after the bilateral, Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale said, "PM extended South Africa Pres Cyril Ramaphosa invitation to be the chief guest for India's Republic Day in 2019 and Ramaphosa accepted."

The 13 G20 Summit ended with a number of big outcomes such as India being as the host for G20 in 2022 and Trump-Xi truce in the ongoing trade war. India will be hosting the summit on the 75th Independence anniversary year.

The 13 G20 Summit ended with a number of big outcomes such as India being as the host for G20 in 2022 and Trump-Xi truce in the ongoing trade war. India will be hosting the summit on the 75th Independence anniversary year. Speaking at the G20 summit, India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi said "It's India's 75th Independence Day in 2022 & we had requested Italy if we can get '22 instead of '21 (for hosting G20 summit). They accepted our request, others accepted it too.I'm grateful and I invite leadership from across the world to come to India in 2022" Italy and India swapped year for hosting G20 summit. Italy will be hosting G20 Summit in 2021. Italian PM Giuseppe Conte said it was "very important for India to celebrate its 75th anniversary of Independence with our presence and therefore I decide to accept the swap". In Asia, South Korea hosted G20 in 2010, followed by Turkey in 2015 and China in 2016. GLOBAL OUTCOMES On Global outcomes, US president and Chinese President met for almost two-and-a-half hours on a working dinner. Later in a press statement, the white house said, "President Trump has agreed that on January 1, 2019, he will leave the tariffs on $200 billion worth of product at the 10% rate, and not raise it to 25% at this time." According to White House, China also agreed to purchase "very substantial" amount of agricultural, energy, industrial, and other product from the United States to "reduce the trade imbalance between our two countries." US President has been calling on Bejing to reduce the trade deficit with Washington. Trump & Xi have also agreed to "immediately" begin negotiations on "structural changes" with respect to forced technology transfer, intellectual property protection, non-tariff barriers, cyber intrusions and cyber theft, services and agriculture. Both agreed that this will be completed within the next 90 days. President Trump said, “This was an amazing and productive meeting with unlimited possibilities for both the United States and China. It is my great honour to be working with President Xi.” India's Prime minister also spoke on the ongoing trade wars between world number one and number two economies in the world saying it has a "collateral" impact on emerging economies. Terror and the issue of fugitive economic offenders remained the key focus by the PM with the PM calling on the need to "implement the 11 point action plan against terrorism which was issued as a stand-alone statement in last year's G20 summit (in Hamburg)". India's Sherpa or Chief negotiator Shaktikanta Das, replying to WION's question on terror said, "PM raised the issue of terror and the way it undermines human life and also economies and society. PM emphasised that the Hamburg declaration should be implemented by all countries. " PM had also given 9 point agenda to tackle fugitive economic offenders which called on Financial Action Task Force (FATF) to define economic offenders. On the sidelines of G20, PM Modi also met a number of world leaders including Chinese President Xi for the fourth time since he assumed office and invited South African President Cyril Ramaphosa for the Republic day celebrations. Speaking after the bilateral, Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale said, "PM extended South Africa Pres Cyril Ramaphosa invitation to be the chief guest for India's Republic Day in 2019 and Ramaphosa accepted."

G20's big outcomes: India to host G20 in 2022, Trump-Xi's trade truce

US President Donald Trump met with his Chinese counterpart President Xi Jinping at a dinner meeting on Saturday on the sidelines of the 13th G20 Summit.

According to reports, the two leaders interacted and discussed the growing trade war between the two biggest economies in the world.&nbsp;

During the start of the dinner, which marked the end of the two-day-long, high-voltage summit, the US President described his relationship with the Chinese President as "very special."

"The relationship is very special — the relationship that I have with President Xi — and I think that is going to be a very primary reason why <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/china-us-agree-no-new-tariffs-after-january-1-chinese-media-180801">we will probably end up getting something that will be good</a> for China and the United States," Trump said.&nbsp;

Xi, on the other hand, called for mutual cooperation for better ties and easing of tensions. &nbsp;"Only with cooperation between us can we serve the interest of both peace and prosperity," Xi noted.&nbsp;

White House top economic advisor Larry Kudlow shared that the meeting went "very well" and that an official statement on Trump-Xi interaction will be issued shortly by White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders, news agency AFP reported.&nbsp;

(With inputs from AFP)&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump met with his Chinese counterpart President Xi Jinping at a dinner meeting on Saturday on the sidelines of the 13th G20 Summit. According to reports, the two leaders interacted and discussed the growing trade war between the two biggest economies in the world.

US President Donald Trump met with his Chinese counterpart President Xi Jinping at a dinner meeting on Saturday on the sidelines of the 13th G20 Summit. According to reports, the two leaders interacted and discussed the growing trade war between the two biggest economies in the world. During the start of the dinner, which marked the end of the two-day-long, high-voltage summit, the US President described his relationship with the Chinese President as "very special." "The relationship is very special — the relationship that I have with President Xi — and I think that is going to be a very primary reason why we will probably end up getting something that will be good for China and the United States," Trump said. Xi, on the other hand, called for mutual cooperation for better ties and easing of tensions. "Only with cooperation between us can we serve the interest of both peace and prosperity," Xi noted. White House top economic advisor Larry Kudlow shared that the meeting went "very well" and that an official statement on Trump-Xi interaction will be issued shortly by White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders, news agency AFP reported. (With inputs from AFP)

At G20 dinner with China's Xi, Trump says their relationship is 'very special'

G20 Summit: Members agree on overhauling WTO

India to host G20 summit in 2022

US President Donald Trump said he will have a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping on Saturday to discuss trade after the close of the G20 summit in Argentina.

"We will be meeting with President Xi tonight...and we'll be talking about a thing called trade and probably other things but primarily trade. It's a very important meeting," Trump said.

Trump also&nbsp;added that the death Friday of Bush, at 94, "really puts a damper on it, to be honest."

With markets watching nervously, Trump has described the talks as a deadline for China to meet his demands on opening up markets or risk more punitive tariffs.

Trump also said he would work to straighten out the trade imbalance in talks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Speaking alongside Trump at a joint news conference, Merkel added the two would address issues related to trade and the World Trade Organization, and discuss Ukraine, Syria, and the INF nuclear weapons pact with Russia.

US President Donald Trump said he will have a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping on Saturday to discuss trade after the close of the G20 summit in Argentina.

US President Donald Trump said he will have a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping on Saturday to discuss trade after the close of the G20 summit in Argentina. "We will be meeting with President Xi tonight...and we'll be talking about a thing called trade and probably other things but primarily trade. It's a very important meeting," Trump said. Trump also added that the death Friday of Bush, at 94, "really puts a damper on it, to be honest." With markets watching nervously, Trump has described the talks as a deadline for China to meet his demands on opening up markets or risk more punitive tariffs. Trump also said he would work to straighten out the trade imbalance in talks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Speaking alongside Trump at a joint news conference, Merkel added the two would address issues related to trade and the World Trade Organization, and discuss Ukraine, Syria, and the INF nuclear weapons pact with Russia.

G20 summit: Trump confirms meeting with China's Xi to discuss trade

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday participated in a trilateral meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the 13th G20 Summit in Argentina.&nbsp;

Speaking during the meeting, the Prime Minister stated that the world today is going through extraordinary changes and uncertainty. "The increase in geopolitical tension is affecting global governance," he noted.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
PM Narendra Modi while speaking at trilateral meeting with Chinese President and Russian President: There is no doubt that the world today is going through extraordinary changes&amp;uncertainty.The increase in geopolitical tension is affecting global governance. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/G20Summit?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#G20Summit</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Argentina?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Argentina</a> <a href="https://t.co/tTxe0C7kwc">pic.twitter.com/tTxe0C7kwc</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1068615976168476672?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 30, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

"WTO's Doha Development Agenda has been stalled, we haven't seen a financial commitment for developing countries from developed countries at an expected level since the Paris Accord. In this way, climate justice is being weakened," the Prime Minister stated.

Indian foreign secretary Vijay Gokhale shared further information about PM Modi's interaction with the Russian and the Chinese leader at the trilateral meet, adding that the leaders felt that the three countries "should coordinate in various areas to contribute to global peace."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Foreign Secy: They all felt that we should work together to steer global economic governance. They felt that 3 countries should work together in areas where we could promote peace and stability in regional crisis. We should work together on terrorism, disaster relief&amp;assistance <a href="https://t.co/vp09ZDwq1e">pic.twitter.com/vp09ZDwq1e</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1068631290667122688?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 30, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

"They all felt that we should work together to steer global economic governance. They felt that the three countries should work together in areas where we could promote peace and stability in the regional crisis. We should work together on terrorism, disaster relief and assistance," Gokhale added.&nbsp;

Meanwhile, <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/at-g20-india-suggests-ftaf-should-define-fugitive-economic-offenders-180588">Prime Minister Modi at the Summit suggested</a> that the&nbsp;Financial Action Task Force or FATF should formulate a standard definition of fugitive economic offenders.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday participated in a trilateral meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the 13th G20 Summit in Argentina.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday participated in a trilateral meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the 13th G20 Summit in Argentina. Speaking during the meeting, the Prime Minister stated that the world today is going through extraordinary changes and uncertainty. "The increase in geopolitical tension is affecting global governance," he noted. PM Narendra Modi while speaking at trilateral meeting with Chinese President and Russian President: There is no doubt that the world today is going through extraordinary changes&uncertainty.The increase in geopolitical tension is affecting global governance. #G20Summit #Argentina pic.twitter.com/tTxe0C7kwc — ANI (@ANI) November 30, 2018 × "WTO's Doha Development Agenda has been stalled, we haven't seen a financial commitment for developing countries from developed countries at an expected level since the Paris Accord. In this way, climate justice is being weakened," the Prime Minister stated. Indian foreign secretary Vijay Gokhale shared further information about PM Modi's interaction with the Russian and the Chinese leader at the trilateral meet, adding that the leaders felt that the three countries "should coordinate in various areas to contribute to global peace." Foreign Secy: They all felt that we should work together to steer global economic governance. They felt that 3 countries should work together in areas where we could promote peace and stability in regional crisis. We should work together on terrorism, disaster relief&assistance pic.twitter.com/vp09ZDwq1e — ANI (@ANI) November 30, 2018 × "They all felt that we should work together to steer global economic governance. They felt that the three countries should work together in areas where we could promote peace and stability in the regional crisis. We should work together on terrorism, disaster relief and assistance," Gokhale added. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Modi at the Summit suggested that the Financial Action Task Force or FATF should formulate a standard definition of fugitive economic offenders.

G20 Summit: Russia, India, China agree to work on terrorism, disaster relief, global peace

India has suggested that Financial Action Task Force (FATF) should formulate a standard definition of fugitive economic offenders. The focus should be on establishing international cooperation that leads to a&nbsp;timely exchange of information among other ways to deal with economic offenders. This was suggested by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his intervention at the 2nd session of G20 summit on international trade, international financial and tax system on Friday.&nbsp;

The nine-point agenda also suggests FATF should develop a set of commonly agreed and standardized procedures related to identification, extradition and judicial proceedings for dealing with economic offenders which will provide assistance to G20 countries.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
MEA: In his intervention at the 2nd session at <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/G20Summit?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#G20Summit</a> on international trade, international financial and tax systems, PM Narendra Modi presented a 9-point programme to take action against fugitive economic offenders. <a href="https://t.co/nsOwZiQyCq">pic.twitter.com/nsOwZiQyCq</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1068661939197394944?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 1, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Before the G20 Summit, <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/strengthening-fatf-bring-to-book-fugitive-economic-offender-indias-top-focus-at-g20-180325">India's Sherpa to G20 Shatikanta Das told WION</a>, "One must recognize how to further strengthen the implementation of FATF standards by non-compliant countries and jurisdictions"

The FATF&nbsp;is an inter-governmental body established in 1989. The objectives of the FATF are to set standards and promote effective implementation of legal, regulatory and operational measures for combating money laundering, terrorist financing and other related threats to the integrity of the international financial system. The FATF's decision-making body, the FATF Plenary, meets three times per year. &nbsp;

The development comes at a time when a fellow G20 country is hosting Nirav Modi and Vijay Mallya accused of duping Indian banks with billions of rupees. India has been trying to extradite both of them.

India also called for a joint effort by G20 countries to form a mechanism that denies entry and safe havens to all fugitive economic offenders. It also suggested that G20 forum should consider initiating work on locating properties of economic offenders who have a tax debt in the country of their residence for its recovery.

Last year at the 12th G20 summit in Hamburg, Prime Minister Modi suggested an 11 point agenda on terror which was finally adopted in final G20 papers.&nbsp;

India has suggested that Financial Action Task Force (FATF) should formulate a standard definition of fugitive economic offenders. The focus should be on establishing international cooperation that leads to a timely exchange of information among other ways to deal with economic offenders.

India has suggested that Financial Action Task Force (FATF) should formulate a standard definition of fugitive economic offenders. The focus should be on establishing international cooperation that leads to a timely exchange of information among other ways to deal with economic offenders. This was suggested by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his intervention at the 2nd session of G20 summit on international trade, international financial and tax system on Friday. The nine-point agenda also suggests FATF should develop a set of commonly agreed and standardized procedures related to identification, extradition and judicial proceedings for dealing with economic offenders which will provide assistance to G20 countries. MEA: In his intervention at the 2nd session at #G20Summit on international trade, international financial and tax systems, PM Narendra Modi presented a 9-point programme to take action against fugitive economic offenders. pic.twitter.com/nsOwZiQyCq — ANI (@ANI) December 1, 2018 × Before the G20 Summit, India's Sherpa to G20 Shatikanta Das told WION, "One must recognize how to further strengthen the implementation of FATF standards by non-compliant countries and jurisdictions" The FATF is an inter-governmental body established in 1989. The objectives of the FATF are to set standards and promote effective implementation of legal, regulatory and operational measures for combating money laundering, terrorist financing and other related threats to the integrity of the international financial system. The FATF's decision-making body, the FATF Plenary, meets three times per year. The development comes at a time when a fellow G20 country is hosting Nirav Modi and Vijay Mallya accused of duping Indian banks with billions of rupees. India has been trying to extradite both of them. India also called for a joint effort by G20 countries to form a mechanism that denies entry and safe havens to all fugitive economic offenders. It also suggested that G20 forum should consider initiating work on locating properties of economic offenders who have a tax debt in the country of their residence for its recovery. Last year at the 12th G20 summit in Hamburg, Prime Minister Modi suggested an 11 point agenda on terror which was finally adopted in final G20 papers.

At G20, India suggests FATF should define fugitive economic offenders

The first Japan, America, India or JAI trilateral to take place on the sidelines of the 13th G20 summit in Argentina focused on the Indo Pacific, an idea which is increasingly gaining currency in a region which is witnessing the emergence of new powers and rapid geopolitical development.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/WATCH?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#WATCH</a> PM Narendra Modi on meeting US President Trump and Japan PM Shinzo Abe says 'Both countries are our strategic partners and both leaders are my good friends. Japan, USA, India acronym is JAI, so Jai in India means success. This sends a good message.' <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/G20?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#G20</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Argentina?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Argentina</a> <a href="https://t.co/VhHPVXd1dB">pic.twitter.com/VhHPVXd1dB</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1068562749419073536?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 30, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Prime Minister Narendra Modi welcomed the Idea of JAI saying both Japan and US are "our strategic partners and both leaders are my good friends".On JAI he said "Japan, USA, India acronym is JAI, so Jai in India means success. This sends a good message."

The JAI meet comes on the back of 2nd Quad meet earlier this year on the sidelines of 13th East Asia Summit. The Quad was revived last year and Bejing views it with suspicion.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
JAI (Japan, America, India) trilateral marks the coming together of three friendly nations. 
 
Today's historic JAI meeting was a great beginning. PM <a href="https://twitter.com/AbeShinzo?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AbeShinzo</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> and I held fruitful talks aimed at furthering connectivity, maritime cooperation and a stable Indo-Pacific. <a href="https://t.co/8Lw7kj9waN">pic.twitter.com/8Lw7kj9waN</a>
— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) <a href="https://twitter.com/narendramodi/status/1068581708545576960?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 30, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Focusing on defence ties, US President said, "We just had a great meeting. Our relationship is extremely great, strong. It is stronger than ever. We are doing very well together, a lot of defences and military purchases"

This was the first meeting between India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi and US President Donald Trump after New Delhi signed the S400 deal with Moscow.

Later briefing the media, Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale said, "They all agreed that a free, open, inclusive and rules-based order is essential for the region's peace and prosperity. The PM offered some ideas on how we should take forward the concept of Indo-Pacific and how the three countries can work together to promote this concept."

Maintained on ASEAN centrality, Gokhale said, "The leaders also agreed on the central role of ASEAN. They also agreed to work on maritime and connectivity issues and to synergise efforts in this regard."

Both US President Trump and Japan PM Abe complimented PM Modi for the reforms he has introduced in India.

The first Japan, America, India or JAI trilateral to take place on the sidelines of the 13th G20 summit in Argentina focused on the Indo Pacific, an idea which is increasingly gaining currency in a region which is witnessing the emergence of new powers and rapid geopolitical development.

The first Japan, America, India or JAI trilateral to take place on the sidelines of the 13th G20 summit in Argentina focused on the Indo Pacific, an idea which is increasingly gaining currency in a region which is witnessing the emergence of new powers and rapid geopolitical development. #WATCH PM Narendra Modi on meeting US President Trump and Japan PM Shinzo Abe says 'Both countries are our strategic partners and both leaders are my good friends. Japan, USA, India acronym is JAI, so Jai in India means success. This sends a good message.' #G20 #Argentina pic.twitter.com/VhHPVXd1dB — ANI (@ANI) November 30, 2018 × Prime Minister Narendra Modi welcomed the Idea of JAI saying both Japan and US are "our strategic partners and both leaders are my good friends".On JAI he said "Japan, USA, India acronym is JAI, so Jai in India means success. This sends a good message." The JAI meet comes on the back of 2nd Quad meet earlier this year on the sidelines of 13th East Asia Summit. The Quad was revived last year and Bejing views it with suspicion. JAI (Japan, America, India) trilateral marks the coming together of three friendly nations. Today's historic JAI meeting was a great beginning. PM @AbeShinzo, @POTUS and I held fruitful talks aimed at furthering connectivity, maritime cooperation and a stable Indo-Pacific. pic.twitter.com/8Lw7kj9waN — Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) November 30, 2018 × Focusing on defence ties, US President said, "We just had a great meeting. Our relationship is extremely great, strong. It is stronger than ever. We are doing very well together, a lot of defences and military purchases" This was the first meeting between India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi and US President Donald Trump after New Delhi signed the S400 deal with Moscow. Later briefing the media, Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale said, "They all agreed that a free, open, inclusive and rules-based order is essential for the region's peace and prosperity. The PM offered some ideas on how we should take forward the concept of Indo-Pacific and how the three countries can work together to promote this concept." Maintained on ASEAN centrality, Gokhale said, "The leaders also agreed on the central role of ASEAN. They also agreed to work on maritime and connectivity issues and to synergise efforts in this regard." Both US President Trump and Japan PM Abe complimented PM Modi for the reforms he has introduced in India.

Japan, America, India trilateral focuses on Indo-Pacific; Trump talks about defence purchases

G20 Summit: Buenos Aires under security lock-down

Donald Trump's cancellation of weekend talks with his Russian counterpart is the latest in a series of collapsed efforts towards rapprochement.

After having promised during his 2016 electoral campaign to mend ties with Russia, the US president faced several global disputes that made a thaw difficult.

At the same time, the US special counsel's probe of possible collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia raised domestic suspicion over any efforts towards accommodation with his Kremlin counterpart.

Trump's own conciliatory attitude also stirred the hostility of an American Congress which has stood up to Moscow.

Sensitive matters

This time, it's the confrontation between Russia and Ukraine that intervened when the two leaders were supposed to meet Saturday at the G20 summit in Argentina.

After Russian forces last weekend seized three Ukrainian ships off the coast of Crimea, Trump on Thursday said "it would be best for all parties" to cancel his meeting with Putin.

Trump added that he looks forward to a "meaningful summit again as soon as this situation is resolved."

The Ukraine case reflects Washington's ambivalent attitude since the billionaire Republican property tycoon entered the White House early last year.

"The United States would welcome a normal relationship with Russia. But outlaw actions like this one continue to make that impossible," US Ambassador Nikki Haley told a UN Security Council meeting on Ukraine Monday.

Russia's annexation of the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine in 2014 has led to numerous rounds of US sanctions.

But when he met Putin for a summit in July this year in Helsinki, Trump was restrained on issues related to Ukraine.

On other matters, the two presidents would like to cooperate, starting with war-ravaged Syria.&nbsp;

The US and Russia have backed competing factions in Syria, but on the sidelines of an APEC summit one year ago in Vietnam -- where the two presidents chatted together -- they issued a joint presidential statement that there was "no military solution" to the war.

This embryonic entente was quickly contradicted on the battlefield.

In April Trump ordered the US military to launch joint missile strikes against Syrian targets, with France and Britain, after an alleged chemical weapons attack that left scores of Syrians dead.&nbsp;

The use of a nerve agent against former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter in England early this year also poisoned the warming of ties which Trump and Putin wanted.

In August the US said it was imposing new sanctions on Russia over the case. Washington also expelled 60 Russian diplomats for alleged spying, and Moscow retaliated in kind.

The Mueller probe

For Trump's detractors, the root concern is Russian interference in the 2016 election which brought him to power, and possible collusion between Moscow and Trump's campaign team -- an issue being investigated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

From the start, all the overtures Trump made in the direction of Putin were interpreted by his critics in light of suspected collusion.

Most of the more than 30 people charged by Mueller are Russians, but the investigator has also secured guilty pleas on various charges against former Trump aides.

Trump routinely denounces Mueller's investigation as a witch hunt and the White House has said it has polluted American-Russian relations.

As a result, questions are being raised as the Mueller probe seems to intensify -- and so do Trump's attacks on it.

"Did Trump cancel his meeting with Putin because of Russian attack on Ukraine or Cohen revelations?" the former US ambassador to Moscow, Michael McFaul, asked on Twitter.

Trump pulled out of the G20 Putin meeting after his former personal lawyer Michael Cohen pleaded guilty in court to lying to Congress about trying to negotiate a deal for a Trump Tower project in Moscow well into the middle of 2016.

At that time Trump had already secured the Republican nomination for president.

- Trump controversies - 
But it is often the attitude of Donald Trump himself that finally undermines efforts at rapprochement.

Both in Vietnam in November 2017, then in Helsinki last July, the US president seemed to give more weight to Russian denials of alleged interference than to accusations by his own intelligence agencies.

Trump then backpedalled.

While numerous officials acknowledge that it would be good to stand firm against Russia, most say Trump isn't capable of it.

His summit with Putin in Helsinki became controversial domestically after he and the Russian president held two hours of closed-door talks with no one else present but the interpreters.

"I would have suggested a different way," Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats said at the time.

The task is all the more complicated for the president because he has to work with a Congress that, even among his own Republican party, favors firmness towards Moscow.

Thursday's summit cancellation, therefore drew more praise than criticism.

"It's still a good decision for the US&nbsp;Very unlikely Trump would have delivered a stiff message to Putin personally," former diplomat Nicholas Burns said on Twitter.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

Donald Trump's cancellation of weekend talks with his Russian counterpart is the latest in a series of collapsed efforts towards rapprochement. After having promised during his 2016 electoral campaign to mend ties with Russia, the US president faced several global disputes that made a thaw difficult.

Donald Trump's cancellation of weekend talks with his Russian counterpart is the latest in a series of collapsed efforts towards rapprochement. After having promised during his 2016 electoral campaign to mend ties with Russia, the US president faced several global disputes that made a thaw difficult. At the same time, the US special counsel's probe of possible collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia raised domestic suspicion over any efforts towards accommodation with his Kremlin counterpart. Trump's own conciliatory attitude also stirred the hostility of an American Congress which has stood up to Moscow. Sensitive matters This time, it's the confrontation between Russia and Ukraine that intervened when the two leaders were supposed to meet Saturday at the G20 summit in Argentina. After Russian forces last weekend seized three Ukrainian ships off the coast of Crimea, Trump on Thursday said "it would be best for all parties" to cancel his meeting with Putin. Trump added that he looks forward to a "meaningful summit again as soon as this situation is resolved." The Ukraine case reflects Washington's ambivalent attitude since the billionaire Republican property tycoon entered the White House early last year. "The United States would welcome a normal relationship with Russia. But outlaw actions like this one continue to make that impossible," US Ambassador Nikki Haley told a UN Security Council meeting on Ukraine Monday. Russia's annexation of the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine in 2014 has led to numerous rounds of US sanctions. But when he met Putin for a summit in July this year in Helsinki, Trump was restrained on issues related to Ukraine. On other matters, the two presidents would like to cooperate, starting with war-ravaged Syria. The US and Russia have backed competing factions in Syria, but on the sidelines of an APEC summit one year ago in Vietnam -- where the two presidents chatted together -- they issued a joint presidential statement that there was "no military solution" to the war. This embryonic entente was quickly contradicted on the battlefield. In April Trump ordered the US military to launch joint missile strikes against Syrian targets, with France and Britain, after an alleged chemical weapons attack that left scores of Syrians dead. The use of a nerve agent against former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter in England early this year also poisoned the warming of ties which Trump and Putin wanted. In August the US said it was imposing new sanctions on Russia over the case. Washington also expelled 60 Russian diplomats for alleged spying, and Moscow retaliated in kind. The Mueller probe For Trump's detractors, the root concern is Russian interference in the 2016 election which brought him to power, and possible collusion between Moscow and Trump's campaign team -- an issue being investigated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. From the start, all the overtures Trump made in the direction of Putin were interpreted by his critics in light of suspected collusion. Most of the more than 30 people charged by Mueller are Russians, but the investigator has also secured guilty pleas on various charges against former Trump aides. Trump routinely denounces Mueller's investigation as a witch hunt and the White House has said it has polluted American-Russian relations. As a result, questions are being raised as the Mueller probe seems to intensify -- and so do Trump's attacks on it. "Did Trump cancel his meeting with Putin because of Russian attack on Ukraine or Cohen revelations?" the former US ambassador to Moscow, Michael McFaul, asked on Twitter. Trump pulled out of the G20 Putin meeting after his former personal lawyer Michael Cohen pleaded guilty in court to lying to Congress about trying to negotiate a deal for a Trump Tower project in Moscow well into the middle of 2016. At that time Trump had already secured the Republican nomination for president. - Trump controversies - But it is often the attitude of Donald Trump himself that finally undermines efforts at rapprochement. Both in Vietnam in November 2017, then in Helsinki last July, the US president seemed to give more weight to Russian denials of alleged interference than to accusations by his own intelligence agencies. Trump then backpedalled. While numerous officials acknowledge that it would be good to stand firm against Russia, most say Trump isn't capable of it. His summit with Putin in Helsinki became controversial domestically after he and the Russian president held two hours of closed-door talks with no one else present but the interpreters. "I would have suggested a different way," Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats said at the time. The task is all the more complicated for the president because he has to work with a Congress that, even among his own Republican party, favors firmness towards Moscow. Thursday's summit cancellation, therefore drew more praise than criticism. "It's still a good decision for the US Very unlikely Trump would have delivered a stiff message to Putin personally," former diplomat Nicholas Burns said on Twitter.

Trump-Putin: A rapprochement unrealised

Prime Minister Narendra&nbsp;Modi on the first day of G20 Summit in Argentina took part in BRICS informal meet<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/g20-pm-modi-discusses-global-climate-change-with-un-secretary-general-180330"> and met </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/g20-pm-modi-invites-president-xi-to-india-for-next-informal-summit-180529">Chinese&nbsp;President Xi Jinping</a>.

At the BRICS informal meet, which has become a tradition on the sidelines of G20, PM Modi raised the issue of terror and radicalisation. He said, "Terrorism and radicalism are a threat to the world, those who commit financial crimes are also a big threat. We have to work together against black money."

India has already been raising the issue of cross-border terrorism emanating&nbsp;from Pakistan from the various global forum.&nbsp;

Lauding <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/yoga-connecting-india-argentina-pm-modi-180331">BRICS as a grouping</a>, PM said, "We have to talk in one voice for the interest of developing nations in the United Nations and other multilateral organisations. This is the reason we have come together for BRICS".

Last year, informal BRICS meet on the sidelines of 12th G20 summit in Hamburg helped India and China break the ice on the Doklam issue. Indian PM and Chinese president had met on the sidelines of that BRICS informal meet.

Later, PM Modi met the&nbsp;Chinese president - the fourth meeting between the two leaders in this&nbsp;year. PM said,&nbsp;"This has been a good year for bilateral ties".&nbsp;

Recalling the Wuhan informal summit, PM Modi said, "it was&nbsp;a&nbsp;milestone and&nbsp;engagement&nbsp;between the two countries got new&nbsp;momentum".

He also invited Chinese&nbsp;President Xi Jinping to India for the 2019 informal meet.&nbsp;

Recalling his meet with Chinese&nbsp;president on the sidelines of SCO summit in China and BRICS summit in South Africa, PM hoped the momentum in ties continued.

Later briefing the media, foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale said, "fourth meeting between PM Modi and Chinese President Xi made progress on the economic side. On the political side as well both leaders&nbsp;felt that there has been a&nbsp;progress on border management, counter-terrorism agenda and people to people issues".

China is willing to exchange more on the hydrological issue. Remember India was alerted on Brahmaputra flow issue earlier this year. Both sides are also training Afghan diplomats as part of a first joint project between India and China agreed during the Wuhan summit.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the first day of G20 Summit in Argentina took part in BRICS informal meet and met Chinese President Xi Jinping. At the BRICS informal meet, which has become a tradition on the sidelines of G20, PM Modi raised the issue of terror and radicalisation.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the first day of G20 Summit in Argentina took part in BRICS informal meet and met Chinese President Xi Jinping. At the BRICS informal meet, which has become a tradition on the sidelines of G20, PM Modi raised the issue of terror and radicalisation. He said, "Terrorism and radicalism are a threat to the world, those who commit financial crimes are also a big threat. We have to work together against black money." India has already been raising the issue of cross-border terrorism emanating from Pakistan from the various global forum. Lauding BRICS as a grouping, PM said, "We have to talk in one voice for the interest of developing nations in the United Nations and other multilateral organisations. This is the reason we have come together for BRICS". Last year, informal BRICS meet on the sidelines of 12th G20 summit in Hamburg helped India and China break the ice on the Doklam issue. Indian PM and Chinese president had met on the sidelines of that BRICS informal meet. Later, PM Modi met the Chinese president - the fourth meeting between the two leaders in this year. PM said, "This has been a good year for bilateral ties". Recalling the Wuhan informal summit, PM Modi said, "it was a milestone and engagement between the two countries got new momentum". He also invited Chinese President Xi Jinping to India for the 2019 informal meet. Recalling his meet with Chinese president on the sidelines of SCO summit in China and BRICS summit in South Africa, PM hoped the momentum in ties continued. Later briefing the media, foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale said, "fourth meeting between PM Modi and Chinese President Xi made progress on the economic side. On the political side as well both leaders felt that there has been a progress on border management, counter-terrorism agenda and people to people issues". China is willing to exchange more on the hydrological issue. Remember India was alerted on Brahmaputra flow issue earlier this year. Both sides are also training Afghan diplomats as part of a first joint project between India and China agreed during the Wuhan summit.

PM Modi meets President Xi, takes part in BRICS meet as G20 summit begins

China and the United States can reach a trade agreement at the G20 meeting in Argentina this week, the state-run China Daily newspaper said in an editorial on Friday, but Washington must be "fair minded" if it wants to defuse spiralling tensions.

"Beijing wants a deal, just as Washington does. And it is willing to cooperate with Washington in dealing with concerns about trade if they are fair-minded," the paper said.

"Should there be any other aspirations, such as taking advantage of the trade spat to throttle Chinese growth, then an agreement is unlikely to be reached," it said.

World leaders started arriving in Buenos Aires on Thursday ahead of the gathering of the Group of 20, where global trade tensions, fuelled by US&nbsp;President Donald Trump's trade war with China, are expected to dominate the agenda.

Financial and commodities markets are closely watching the outcome of the summit, especially a planned meeting between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping on Saturday, although the outcome is far from certain.

The stakes are high for the world's two biggest economies. Official data on Friday showed that growth in China's manufacturing sector stalled for the first time in more than two years in November.

New export orders declined for a sixth straight month, according to an official survey of Chinese manufacturers.

"In terms of economic effects, Chinese export growth will likely weaken in coming months on payback from recent 'front-loading', and - unless a deal is reached - over time by some US&nbsp;substitution to non-Chinese suppliers," Goldman Sachs wrote in a note.

In the short term, US&nbsp;tariffs and the trade war would increase uncertainty for Chinese investment and durables consumption, according to Goldman.

Mixed signals

Trump sent mixed signals on Thursday about the prospects for a trade deal with China, saying an agreement was close but he was not sure he wanted one. China's commerce ministry said on Thursday it was hoping for "positive results".

Peter Navarro, Trump's hardline trade adviser, will attend the meeting between the leaders, a US&nbsp;official told Reuters. Another official said Navarro's addition was meant to send a message to China about the administration's resolve on trade. Navarro has advocated a tough stance against Beijing.

The China Daily editorial said even if a deal were struck it was unlikely to be a comprehensive solution to the trade impasse due to "diverging demands and agendas". It cited tensions over Chinese technological development, a focus of US&nbsp;concern.

"However, it should be feasible for some kind of agreement to be reached to prevent the dispute worsening if both sides are reasonable," it said.

A deal involving a total scrapping of all tariffs is not expected, although many observers have not ruled out a "pause" in the trade war where any planned tariff increases are put on hold while talks between the two sides continue.

The rising tensions have seen the two countries hit each other with tit-for-tariffs on goods worth hundreds of billions of dollars in sectors from automobiles to agriculture and energy, stymying trade and redrawing global supply chains.

The United States has levied additional duties of between 10 percent and 25 percent on $250 billion of Chinese goods this year as punishment for what it calls China's unfair trade practices, with the 10 percent tariffs set to climb to 25 percent next year. China has responded with its own tariffs.

China and the United States can reach a trade agreement at the G20 meeting in Argentina this week, the state-run China Daily newspaper said in an editorial on Friday, but Washington must be "fair minded" if it wants to defuse spiralling tensions.

China and the United States can reach a trade agreement at the G20 meeting in Argentina this week, the state-run China Daily newspaper said in an editorial on Friday, but Washington must be "fair minded" if it wants to defuse spiralling tensions. "Beijing wants a deal, just as Washington does. And it is willing to cooperate with Washington in dealing with concerns about trade if they are fair-minded," the paper said. "Should there be any other aspirations, such as taking advantage of the trade spat to throttle Chinese growth, then an agreement is unlikely to be reached," it said. World leaders started arriving in Buenos Aires on Thursday ahead of the gathering of the Group of 20, where global trade tensions, fuelled by US President Donald Trump's trade war with China, are expected to dominate the agenda. Financial and commodities markets are closely watching the outcome of the summit, especially a planned meeting between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping on Saturday, although the outcome is far from certain. The stakes are high for the world's two biggest economies. Official data on Friday showed that growth in China's manufacturing sector stalled for the first time in more than two years in November. New export orders declined for a sixth straight month, according to an official survey of Chinese manufacturers. "In terms of economic effects, Chinese export growth will likely weaken in coming months on payback from recent 'front-loading', and - unless a deal is reached - over time by some US substitution to non-Chinese suppliers," Goldman Sachs wrote in a note. In the short term, US tariffs and the trade war would increase uncertainty for Chinese investment and durables consumption, according to Goldman. Mixed signals Trump sent mixed signals on Thursday about the prospects for a trade deal with China, saying an agreement was close but he was not sure he wanted one. China's commerce ministry said on Thursday it was hoping for "positive results". Peter Navarro, Trump's hardline trade adviser, will attend the meeting between the leaders, a US official told Reuters. Another official said Navarro's addition was meant to send a message to China about the administration's resolve on trade. Navarro has advocated a tough stance against Beijing. The China Daily editorial said even if a deal were struck it was unlikely to be a comprehensive solution to the trade impasse due to "diverging demands and agendas". It cited tensions over Chinese technological development, a focus of US concern. "However, it should be feasible for some kind of agreement to be reached to prevent the dispute worsening if both sides are reasonable," it said. A deal involving a total scrapping of all tariffs is not expected, although many observers have not ruled out a "pause" in the trade war where any planned tariff increases are put on hold while talks between the two sides continue. The rising tensions have seen the two countries hit each other with tit-for-tariffs on goods worth hundreds of billions of dollars in sectors from automobiles to agriculture and energy, stymying trade and redrawing global supply chains. The United States has levied additional duties of between 10 percent and 25 percent on $250 billion of Chinese goods this year as punishment for what it calls China's unfair trade practices, with the 10 percent tariffs set to climb to 25 percent next year. China has responded with its own tariffs.

Trade deal possible at G20 but US must be 'fair minded': Chinese media

G20 powers open two days of summit talks in crisis-hit Argentina on Friday after a stormy buildup dominated by US President Donald Trump's consensus-bucking crusade to realign world trade.

Shortly before the summit kicks off, Trump's "America First" charge will bear fruit with the signing in Buenos Aires of a successor to the North American free trade pact NAFTA.&nbsp;

The revamped accord, called the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), looks a lot like the one it replaces. But enough has been tweaked for Trump to declare victory on behalf of the US workers he claims were cheated by NAFTA.

Yet, underlining that the new deal may not be quite the game-changer he professes, the signing will be executed by senior trade negotiators from the three countries rather than their leaders attending the G20.

After imposing punishing tariffs on Chinese goods and threatening more to come in January, Trump also has China in his sights as he prepares to meet President Xi Jinping on the G20 margins.

Following the USMCA signing, and once Argentina's President Mauricio Macri has opened the first of the summit's two days, a mass protest is planned for central Buenos Aires Friday afternoon.

Argentines are grappling with soaring inflation and unemployment caused by an economic crisis, which has led to a deeply unpopular bailout from the International Monetary Fund.

"There's a lot of people who don't have houses and don't have work. They are not focusing on the people who have needs," barber Ariel Villegas, 47, said at one protest Thursday outside the Argentine Congress building.

The government is vowing zero tolerance of violence as it hosts its biggest ever international gathering, and says it has won promises from the protest organizers to keep the streets calm.

- Merkel delayed by plane trouble - 
The G20 summit will be accompanied by an array of diplomatic initiatives with several bilateral meetings by the leaders attending, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.&nbsp;

German Chancellor Angela Merkel is one of the leaders due to sit down with Trump on Friday. But she will miss the summit's opening after her plane was forced to make an emergency landing in Cologne due to a technical problem.

Her temporary absence could complicate French President Emmanuel Macron's attempts to build a European front against Trump at a meeting of EU leaders attending the G20 on Friday morning.

But late on Thursday, Macron was defiant as he rejected those who wish to confront economic challenges by being "bellicose, isolationist and closing down borders," praising instead the poverty-slashing benefits accrued under the globalization of recent decades.

- Dispute on climate - 
The French leader also defended the Paris Agreement on climate change, which is under assault by Trump and by Jair Bolsonaro, the incoming, far-right president of G20 member Brazil.

G20 sources said climate change was emerging as the biggest stumbling block to agreement on a joint communique in Buenos Aires when the summit concludes on Saturday.

Trump has yanked the United States out of the Paris pact, and his opposition to collective action stands in defiance of scientists' increasingly urgent warnings that the planetary threat needs policy redress now.

But with a major UN meeting on climate change starting next week in Poland straight after the G20, UN chief Antonio Guterres said in Buenos Aires that "this is a make-it-or-break-it moment."

Two major summits this year, of the Group of Seven democracies and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, ended without the once-routine statements, with Trump refusing to go along with the G7 due to a feud with his host, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

"Will we even have a communique? It really is an open question," said former Canadian negotiator Thomas Bernes, a senior fellow at the Ontario-based Centre for International Governance Innovation.

jit/sct/wd 
&nbsp;

G20 powers open two days of summit talks in crisis-hit Argentina on Friday after a stormy buildup dominated by US President Donald Trump's consensus-bucking crusade to realign world trade.

G20 powers open two days of summit talks in crisis-hit Argentina on Friday after a stormy buildup dominated by US President Donald Trump's consensus-bucking crusade to realign world trade. Shortly before the summit kicks off, Trump's "America First" charge will bear fruit with the signing in Buenos Aires of a successor to the North American free trade pact NAFTA. The revamped accord, called the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), looks a lot like the one it replaces. But enough has been tweaked for Trump to declare victory on behalf of the US workers he claims were cheated by NAFTA. Yet, underlining that the new deal may not be quite the game-changer he professes, the signing will be executed by senior trade negotiators from the three countries rather than their leaders attending the G20. After imposing punishing tariffs on Chinese goods and threatening more to come in January, Trump also has China in his sights as he prepares to meet President Xi Jinping on the G20 margins. Following the USMCA signing, and once Argentina's President Mauricio Macri has opened the first of the summit's two days, a mass protest is planned for central Buenos Aires Friday afternoon. Argentines are grappling with soaring inflation and unemployment caused by an economic crisis, which has led to a deeply unpopular bailout from the International Monetary Fund. "There's a lot of people who don't have houses and don't have work. They are not focusing on the people who have needs," barber Ariel Villegas, 47, said at one protest Thursday outside the Argentine Congress building. The government is vowing zero tolerance of violence as it hosts its biggest ever international gathering, and says it has won promises from the protest organizers to keep the streets calm. - Merkel delayed by plane trouble - The G20 summit will be accompanied by an array of diplomatic initiatives with several bilateral meetings by the leaders attending, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. German Chancellor Angela Merkel is one of the leaders due to sit down with Trump on Friday. But she will miss the summit's opening after her plane was forced to make an emergency landing in Cologne due to a technical problem. Her temporary absence could complicate French President Emmanuel Macron's attempts to build a European front against Trump at a meeting of EU leaders attending the G20 on Friday morning. But late on Thursday, Macron was defiant as he rejected those who wish to confront economic challenges by being "bellicose, isolationist and closing down borders," praising instead the poverty-slashing benefits accrued under the globalization of recent decades. - Dispute on climate - The French leader also defended the Paris Agreement on climate change, which is under assault by Trump and by Jair Bolsonaro, the incoming, far-right president of G20 member Brazil. G20 sources said climate change was emerging as the biggest stumbling block to agreement on a joint communique in Buenos Aires when the summit concludes on Saturday. Trump has yanked the United States out of the Paris pact, and his opposition to collective action stands in defiance of scientists' increasingly urgent warnings that the planetary threat needs policy redress now. But with a major UN meeting on climate change starting next week in Poland straight after the G20, UN chief Antonio Guterres said in Buenos Aires that "this is a make-it-or-break-it moment." Two major summits this year, of the Group of Seven democracies and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, ended without the once-routine statements, with Trump refusing to go along with the G7 due to a feud with his host, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. "Will we even have a communique? It really is an open question," said former Canadian negotiator Thomas Bernes, a senior fellow at the Ontario-based Centre for International Governance Innovation. jit/sct/wd

G20 opens under assault from Trump on collective action

Experts believe international trade issues will be the first priority for the upcoming Group of 20 (G20) Summit in Argentina and expressed their expectations of China.

The G20 meeting, to be held from November&nbsp;30 to December 1 in Buenos Aires, is themed "Building Consensus for Fair and Sustainable Development." It will focus on issues like global economy, trade and investment, sustainable development, infrastructure and climate change.

As Latin American countries, international organizations and academic institutions were calling on the G20 mechanism to play its role, safeguard multilateralism and try to reach consensus on key issues, experts believe international trade issues will be an important topic in the meeting.

An expert from Brazil hopes all the countries could find solutions via dialogue.

"No government can solve problems with approaches to domestic problems, because such approaches will possibly hurt all countries in the chain of global economic system. We should understand that the current world economy is highly interconnected and interdependent. Not a single country can exist in isolation. No government or leader should think that problems can be solved by closing the door," said Alexandre Uehara, professor of international relations of the University of Sao Paulo.

Besides, Argentine politicians expressed expectations of China.

"We have high expectations of not only the bilateral relations between Argentina and China, but also China's participation in the G20 summit. This is because under the current international economic conditions, China has a great say and also a great potential for economic development. Besides, it is a main trading partner of Argentina," said Francisco Javier Quintana, secretary-general of the national council of the Republican Proposal Party of Argentina.

&nbsp;

Experts believe international trade issues will be the first priority for the upcoming Group of 20 (G20) Summit in Argentina and expressed their expectations of China.

Experts believe international trade issues will be the first priority for the upcoming Group of 20 (G20) Summit in Argentina and expressed their expectations of China. The G20 meeting, to be held from November 30 to December 1 in Buenos Aires, is themed "Building Consensus for Fair and Sustainable Development." It will focus on issues like global economy, trade and investment, sustainable development, infrastructure and climate change. As Latin American countries, international organizations and academic institutions were calling on the G20 mechanism to play its role, safeguard multilateralism and try to reach consensus on key issues, experts believe international trade issues will be an important topic in the meeting. An expert from Brazil hopes all the countries could find solutions via dialogue. "No government can solve problems with approaches to domestic problems, because such approaches will possibly hurt all countries in the chain of global economic system. We should understand that the current world economy is highly interconnected and interdependent. Not a single country can exist in isolation. No government or leader should think that problems can be solved by closing the door," said Alexandre Uehara, professor of international relations of the University of Sao Paulo. Besides, Argentine politicians expressed expectations of China. "We have high expectations of not only the bilateral relations between Argentina and China, but also China's participation in the G20 summit. This is because under the current international economic conditions, China has a great say and also a great potential for economic development. Besides, it is a main trading partner of Argentina," said Francisco Javier Quintana, secretary-general of the national council of the Republican Proposal Party of Argentina.

International trade issues to be first priority for G20 summit

g20-summit

G20 Summit, News on G20 Summit, stories on G20 Summit, articles on G20 Summit, G20 Summit stories at Wion, G20 Summit news, G20 Summit latest news

g20 summit

Police officer stabbed ahead of G20 summit in Japan

Will slap huge new tariffs on China if president Xi doesn't show up: Trump ahead of G20 meet

Union Minister Piyush Goyal to lead Indian delegation for G20 ministerial meet in Japan

Trump will meet Putin, Xi at G20 summit in Japan; says, we'll be very fruitful meeting

India will do pretty well in hosting G20 summit 2022: Argentine envoy to WION

Are Japan and Russia ready to resolve the Kuril Islands dispute?

India’s profile is attracting engagement on military issues

US Senate resolution potentially changes Middle East dynamics

Centre of economic gravity is shifting to Asia

India displayed smart diplomacy at G20 Summit

Royal road ahead: It was business as usual for Saudi Crown Prince at G20 summit

Kremlin defends Putin-Saudi Crown prince high-five

The importance of strategic balance in an interconnected world

G20 summit brings a truce in US-China trade relations

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning 2nd December, 2018

G20 Summit: Trump, Xi Jinping break the ice; discuss trade tensions

G20's big outcomes: India to host G20 in 2022, Trump-Xi's trade truce

At G20 dinner with China's Xi, Trump says their relationship is 'very special'

G20 Summit: Members agree on overhauling WTO

G20 Summit: Members agree on overhauling WTO

India to host G20 summit in 2022

G20 summit: Trump confirms meeting with China's Xi to discuss trade

G20 Summit: Russia, India, China agree to work on terrorism, disaster relief, global peace

At G20, India suggests FATF should define fugitive economic offenders

Japan, America, India trilateral focuses on Indo-Pacific; Trump talks about defence purchases

G20 Summit: Buenos Aires under security lock-down