US Presidents who have visited India

Former US president Jimmy Carter warned Monday of the risks of sliding into a Cold War with China and called on the powers to find common cause on African development.

Marking the 40th anniversary of his January 1979 normalization of relations with Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, Carter voiced concern that both countries were increasingly describing each other as threats.

"If top government officials embrace these dangerous notions, a modern Cold War between our two nations is not inconceivable," the 94-year-old former president wrote in The Washington Post.

"At this sensitive moment, misperceptions, miscalculations and failure to follow carefully defined rules of engagement in areas such as the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea could escalate into military conflict, creating a worldwide catastrophe," he warned.

Carter, who has devoted his post-presidential career to eradicating poverty, said that the "easiest route" to cooperation between the United States and China was in Africa.

"Both countries are already heavily involved there in fighting disease, building infrastructure and keeping peace — sometimes cooperatively. Yet each nation has accused the other of economic exploitation or political manipulation," Carter wrote.

"Africans -- like billions of other people around the world -- do not want to be forced to choose a side."

"By working together with Africans, the United States and China would also be helping themselves overcome distrust and rebuild this vital relationship," he wrote.

The United States has stepped up warnings to developing countries about Chinese assistance, accusing Beijing of wooing countries with projects that become debt traps.

US-China tensions have soared in 2018 over trade disputes, although President Donald Trump has frozen the latest planned tariff hike and on Saturday reported "big progress."

Former US president Jimmy Carter warned Monday of the risks of sliding into a Cold War with China and called on the powers to find common cause on African development.

Former US president Jimmy Carter warned Monday of the risks of sliding into a Cold War with China and called on the powers to find common cause on African development. Marking the 40th anniversary of his January 1979 normalization of relations with Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, Carter voiced concern that both countries were increasingly describing each other as threats. "If top government officials embrace these dangerous notions, a modern Cold War between our two nations is not inconceivable," the 94-year-old former president wrote in The Washington Post. "At this sensitive moment, misperceptions, miscalculations and failure to follow carefully defined rules of engagement in areas such as the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea could escalate into military conflict, creating a worldwide catastrophe," he warned. Carter, who has devoted his post-presidential career to eradicating poverty, said that the "easiest route" to cooperation between the United States and China was in Africa. "Both countries are already heavily involved there in fighting disease, building infrastructure and keeping peace — sometimes cooperatively. Yet each nation has accused the other of economic exploitation or political manipulation," Carter wrote. "Africans -- like billions of other people around the world -- do not want to be forced to choose a side." "By working together with Africans, the United States and China would also be helping themselves overcome distrust and rebuild this vital relationship," he wrote. The United States has stepped up warnings to developing countries about Chinese assistance, accusing Beijing of wooing countries with projects that become debt traps. US-China tensions have soared in 2018 over trade disputes, although President Donald Trump has frozen the latest planned tariff hike and on Saturday reported "big progress."

Former US president Jimmy Carter says US, China should partner in Africa

“Human identity is no longer defined by what one does but what one owns,” this harrowing truth about our existence was pronounced by former US President Jimmy Carter in one of his public addresses almost four decades ago.

Humans are wired to get dissatisfied -- especially in a world fraught with distractions and things that offer speedier, quicker, faster results -- one tends to get bored easily. With so many options available, our hunger to own more expands exponentially. Unfortunately, at the core of this saddening reality, an ugly truth stares right back – more of us are intrinsically unhappy even while working in fancy multinationals, clad in couture and commuting by fanciest of cars.

This ever-growing sense of dissatisfaction seems to have an answer in a growing school of thought which, according to me, makes total sense. Now is the time to adopt ‘minimalism’ like never before.

Look around and all that the eye can meet is clutter. Our mind, on an average, produces as many as 70,000 thoughts in a day – most of it just fans unnecessary anxiety and stress. We have enough food but we want more, we have a comfortable house but we want a bigger one, another car and of course, the latest iPhone.

Matt D’Avella’s documentary on minimalism&nbsp;becomes a must watch for all of us as it introduces to the virtue of having less and why having less is more. The short film features a young duo, Joshua Fields Millburn and Ryan Nicodemus, who quit their six-figure, fancy jobs in the United States and packed their lives in just about two suitcases to live with as little as possible. The duo calls itself 'The Minimalists' and goes around the country talking about their book and the importance of embracing the movement that emphasises de-cluttering lives and embracing simplicity.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>When our standard of living is improving by the day, why is that we still want more? Why are we so restless and why do we feel like not getting enough?</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=When our standard of living is improving by the day, why is that we still want more? Why are we so restless and why do we feel like not getting enough? " target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">×</a></div>
</div>
</div>

The documentary, 'Minimalism: A documentary about the important things,' raises a valid point – when our standard of living is improving by the day, why is that we still want more? Why are we so restless and why do we feel like not getting enough? All the flashy things that are out there, we don’t really need those things for survival; they have been marketed to us for years, to trick us into believing that we need those things.

What is the true meaning of being successful? Experts suggest that over decades the idea of the ‘Big American Dream’ has come around to have completely different connotations. America was once seen as a land of enormous opportunities for one and all. A nation where one starts at rock-bottom, work hard and do well. With time, the idea became more materialistic in nature – increasingly about getting a six-figure job, that is how success is measured today across the globe, sadly.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The concept of 'minimalism'&nbsp;rests in the fact that one should be able to justify the existence of things in life.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The concept of 'minimalism' rests in the fact that one should be able to justify the existence of things in life." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">×</a></div>
</div>
</div>

The concept of minimalism&nbsp;rests in the fact that one should be able to justify the existence of things in life. Ask yourself, does this item, commodity or even a relationship add any value to life? If the answer is in negative then, “I should be willing enough to part with it, to let it go,” Joshua notes in the documentary.

It is interesting to see how an art movement, essentially an American visual arts movement of the mid-twentieth century, gained prominence to actually inspire a movement with a potential to make our lives better and instil meaning and substance.

Minimalism&nbsp;can be applied to every aspect of life, think out loud to yourself – is your closet too cluttered, do you really need all those pairs of shoes or the latest version of that pricey smartphone? Do you have quality and meaningful relationships with anyone in the crowd that you call ‘friends’? Is your daily routine meaningful and adds value to your existence?

Always remember, we cannot be happy with having too little, having too much is never going to bring contentment, you and I seek that fine balance of having just about enough and maintaining that equilibrium for life -- that is minimalism, your key to happiness.&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

“Human identity is no longer defined by what one does but what one owns,” this harrowing truth about our existence was pronounced by former US President Jimmy Carter in one of his public addresses almost four decades ago.

“Human identity is no longer defined by what one does but what one owns,” this harrowing truth about our existence was pronounced by former US President Jimmy Carter in one of his public addresses almost four decades ago. Humans are wired to get dissatisfied -- especially in a world fraught with distractions and things that offer speedier, quicker, faster results -- one tends to get bored easily. With so many options available, our hunger to own more expands exponentially. Unfortunately, at the core of this saddening reality, an ugly truth stares right back – more of us are intrinsically unhappy even while working in fancy multinationals, clad in couture and commuting by fanciest of cars. This ever-growing sense of dissatisfaction seems to have an answer in a growing school of thought which, according to me, makes total sense. Now is the time to adopt ‘minimalism’ like never before. Look around and all that the eye can meet is clutter. Our mind, on an average, produces as many as 70,000 thoughts in a day – most of it just fans unnecessary anxiety and stress. We have enough food but we want more, we have a comfortable house but we want a bigger one, another car and of course, the latest iPhone. Matt D’Avella’s documentary on minimalism becomes a must watch for all of us as it introduces to the virtue of having less and why having less is more. The short film features a young duo, Joshua Fields Millburn and Ryan Nicodemus, who quit their six-figure, fancy jobs in the United States and packed their lives in just about two suitcases to live with as little as possible. The duo calls itself 'The Minimalists' and goes around the country talking about their book and the importance of embracing the movement that emphasises de-cluttering lives and embracing simplicity. When our standard of living is improving by the day, why is that we still want more? Why are we so restless and why do we feel like not getting enough? × The documentary, 'Minimalism: A documentary about the important things,' raises a valid point – when our standard of living is improving by the day, why is that we still want more? Why are we so restless and why do we feel like not getting enough? All the flashy things that are out there, we don’t really need those things for survival; they have been marketed to us for years, to trick us into believing that we need those things. What is the true meaning of being successful? Experts suggest that over decades the idea of the ‘Big American Dream’ has come around to have completely different connotations. America was once seen as a land of enormous opportunities for one and all. A nation where one starts at rock-bottom, work hard and do well. With time, the idea became more materialistic in nature – increasingly about getting a six-figure job, that is how success is measured today across the globe, sadly. The concept of 'minimalism' rests in the fact that one should be able to justify the existence of things in life. × The concept of minimalism rests in the fact that one should be able to justify the existence of things in life. Ask yourself, does this item, commodity or even a relationship add any value to life? If the answer is in negative then, “I should be willing enough to part with it, to let it go,” Joshua notes in the documentary. It is interesting to see how an art movement, essentially an American visual arts movement of the mid-twentieth century, gained prominence to actually inspire a movement with a potential to make our lives better and instil meaning and substance. Minimalism can be applied to every aspect of life, think out loud to yourself – is your closet too cluttered, do you really need all those pairs of shoes or the latest version of that pricey smartphone? Do you have quality and meaningful relationships with anyone in the crowd that you call ‘friends’? Is your daily routine meaningful and adds value to your existence? Always remember, we cannot be happy with having too little, having too much is never going to bring contentment, you and I seek that fine balance of having just about enough and maintaining that equilibrium for life -- that is minimalism, your key to happiness. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Now is the time to embrace 'minimalism'; why having less is actually more

By:&nbsp;Charles Hermann*

The United States will withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal, according to a May 8 announcement by President Donald Trump. The decision reverses a hard-won agreement that President Barack Obama negotiated with European allies, Russia, Iran and other nations in 2015.

This is hardly Trump’s first foreign policy turnaround.

The president plans to meet with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, something no sitting U.S. president has ever done. He also scrapped the Trans-Pacific Partnership, relocated the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and decreed tariffs on imported steel and aluminum.

All of these decisions have triggered vehement criticism.

But is Trump really such an outlier? As a scholar of American foreign policy, I know that many American presidents have reoriented international relations.

Some of those policies succeeded. Many faced opposition. Ultimately, though, my research shows that what matters more to U.S. national security is how those presidents responded when their foreign policy shifts failed.

From Truman to Bush

History has sometimes redeemed foreign policy shifts that seemed radical at first blush.

In 1947, President Harry Truman, a Democrat who stumbled into the presidency when Franklin Roosevelt died in office, asked Congress to authorise major military and economic assistance to Greece, Turkey and other countries where Communism was making inroads.

In the end, the “Truman Doctrine” – which held the U.S. should provide political, military and economic assistance to all nations under threat from authoritarianism – became a cornerstone of U.S. policy. Republicans in Congress, who wanted to enact steep federal budget cuts, opposed Truman’s request. Critics on the left said the U.S. should not assist non-democracies.

Three decades later, President Jimmy Carter paid a steep political price for agreeing to return the Panama Canal – at the time owned and operated by the U.S. – to Panama. Polls showed that a majority of respondents opposed the agreement.

The Senate approved the Panama Treaties by one vote. Several lawmakers who supported Carter subsequently lost their seats. In 1980, California governor Ronald Reagan – who criticised Carter’s return of the canal – handily defeated him for the presidency. Today, it seems logical that the Panama Canal belongs to Panama.

Another major shift in foreign policy occurred in 1989, with the fall of the Berlin Wall. President George H.W. Bush had to decide whether the U.S. should support the reunification of Communist East Germany with democratic West Germany.

European allies, vividly remembering that Germany had caused two global wars earlier that century, objected strenuously to reunification. So did Russian President Mikael Gorbachev. U.S. newspapers editorialised caution.

President Bush prevailed. A single, democratic Germany entered NATO. It is now the leader of democratic Europe.

Carter’s risk-taking

Presidents who upend foreign policy do so for different reasons.

Truman was responding to an international crisis. Carter saw himself as an outsider elected to transform America’s global role. Bush wanted to end the Cold War. Some presidential changes are designed to boost approval with core supporters.

Trump’s own policy shifts are probably driven by a variety of such factors.

Whatever his motivation, in my experience the most critical question now is: What happens if a Trump policy goes badly?

History confirms that the wrong reaction can be dangerous.

Take the Iran hostage crisis of 1979, when some 50 U.S. diplomats were detained at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran hostage.

After diplomatic negotiations failed to obtain their release, President Carter’s advisors presented him with several options, including levying sanctions, blockading Iran or attempting a rescue mission estimated to risk significant casualties.

Carter’s chose the rescue attempt, illustrating a well-researched insight into human decision-making: When people experience loss, they will take substantial risks in an attempt to recover.

The Iran hostage rescue mission was aborted almost immediately after several helicopters failed to reach the refueling point. Two other aircraft collided, killing eight men and badly burning four others.

Bush’s escalation

George W. Bush’s behavior during the Iraq War demonstrates another kind of potentially dangerous behavior, called escalation of commitment.

When people find that their initial idea is not working well, they must either double down or change course. Regardless of how bad the news, many opt to increase their commitment.

By 2006, the U.S. faced losing the war initiated against Saddam Hussein’s regime in 2003. Fifty-seven percent of voters that year disapproved of Bush’s performance. Roughly the same percentage favored withdrawing from Iraq.

Many of Bush’s top military advisors urged him to reduce military involvement in Iraq and turn most combat over to Iraqi forces. Instead, in 2006, he changed his field commander and “surged” U.S. combat troops. The surge achieved some success, but the war continued.

What will Trump do?

I have identified two forces that help presidents avoid these dangerous decision-making behaviors.

The first is strong, independent-minded advisers. During the Cuban missile crisis, when Soviet offensive missiles were discovered in Cuba, President John F. Kennedy faced an agonising decision. Should he do air strikes, an invasion or a blockade?

More than a dozen Kennedy advisers vigorously debated the strengths and weaknesses of each possible response. Their willingness to criticise, question and speak out may have saved the U.S. from nuclear war.

Trump, on the other hand, famously demands loyalty of his advisers. Those who question his decisions risk losing their position.

Presidents can also avert crises by flexibly responding to changing facts on the ground.

For example, in 1983, President Reagan ordered U.S. Marines to return to an international peacekeeping mission in Lebanon, which had descended into civil war. Reagan thought neutral troops could restore order.

Instead, the Marines became targets. More than 200 died when their barracks were bombed on October 23, 1983. So Reagan recalculated, pulling out U.S. troops.

In Trump’s Iran decision, I perceive an unwillingness to re-evaluate policy choices when outside evidence contradicts his original cost-benefit analysis.

When Trump first threatened to scrap the multinational agreement, he assumed the other signatories would agree to re-impose sanctions on Iran, as the U.S. will.

But European countries strongly oppose that idea. They even said they would refuse to renew their sanctions. Still, Trump’s analysis did not change.

Presidential history strongly warns of danger for this White House. Inevitably, some of this president’s policies will fail. Attempts to save them could take the U.S. down a deadly path.

*Charles Hermann, Senior Professor, and Brent Scowcroft Chair Emeritus, Bush School of Government & Public Service, Texas A&M University

(This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/presidents-often-reverse-us-foreign-policy-how-trump-handles-setbacks-is-what-matters-most-now-95580">original article</a>.)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Many presidents have radically changed US foreign policy. Truman created his own doctrine. Carter gave up the Panama Canal. But a presidential historian sees danger in Trump's decision-making style

By: Charles Hermann* The United States will withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal, according to a May 8 announcement by President Donald Trump. The decision reverses a hard-won agreement that President Barack Obama negotiated with European allies, Russia, Iran and other nations in 2015. This is hardly Trump’s first foreign policy turnaround. The president plans to meet with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, something no sitting U.S. president has ever done. He also scrapped the Trans-Pacific Partnership, relocated the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem and decreed tariffs on imported steel and aluminum. All of these decisions have triggered vehement criticism. But is Trump really such an outlier? As a scholar of American foreign policy, I know that many American presidents have reoriented international relations. Some of those policies succeeded. Many faced opposition. Ultimately, though, my research shows that what matters more to U.S. national security is how those presidents responded when their foreign policy shifts failed. From Truman to Bush History has sometimes redeemed foreign policy shifts that seemed radical at first blush. In 1947, President Harry Truman, a Democrat who stumbled into the presidency when Franklin Roosevelt died in office, asked Congress to authorise major military and economic assistance to Greece, Turkey and other countries where Communism was making inroads. In the end, the “Truman Doctrine” – which held the U.S. should provide political, military and economic assistance to all nations under threat from authoritarianism – became a cornerstone of U.S. policy. Republicans in Congress, who wanted to enact steep federal budget cuts, opposed Truman’s request. Critics on the left said the U.S. should not assist non-democracies. Three decades later, President Jimmy Carter paid a steep political price for agreeing to return the Panama Canal – at the time owned and operated by the U.S. – to Panama. Polls showed that a majority of respondents opposed the agreement. The Senate approved the Panama Treaties by one vote. Several lawmakers who supported Carter subsequently lost their seats. In 1980, California governor Ronald Reagan – who criticised Carter’s return of the canal – handily defeated him for the presidency. Today, it seems logical that the Panama Canal belongs to Panama. Another major shift in foreign policy occurred in 1989, with the fall of the Berlin Wall. President George H.W. Bush had to decide whether the U.S. should support the reunification of Communist East Germany with democratic West Germany. European allies, vividly remembering that Germany had caused two global wars earlier that century, objected strenuously to reunification. So did Russian President Mikael Gorbachev. U.S. newspapers editorialised caution. President Bush prevailed. A single, democratic Germany entered NATO. It is now the leader of democratic Europe. Carter’s risk-taking Presidents who upend foreign policy do so for different reasons. Truman was responding to an international crisis. Carter saw himself as an outsider elected to transform America’s global role. Bush wanted to end the Cold War. Some presidential changes are designed to boost approval with core supporters. Trump’s own policy shifts are probably driven by a variety of such factors. Whatever his motivation, in my experience the most critical question now is: What happens if a Trump policy goes badly? History confirms that the wrong reaction can be dangerous. Take the Iran hostage crisis of 1979, when some 50 U.S. diplomats were detained at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran hostage. After diplomatic negotiations failed to obtain their release, President Carter’s advisors presented him with several options, including levying sanctions, blockading Iran or attempting a rescue mission estimated to risk significant casualties. Carter’s chose the rescue attempt, illustrating a well-researched insight into human decision-making: When people experience loss, they will take substantial risks in an attempt to recover. The Iran hostage rescue mission was aborted almost immediately after several helicopters failed to reach the refueling point. Two other aircraft collided, killing eight men and badly burning four others. Bush’s escalation George W. Bush’s behavior during the Iraq War demonstrates another kind of potentially dangerous behavior, called escalation of commitment. When people find that their initial idea is not working well, they must either double down or change course. Regardless of how bad the news, many opt to increase their commitment. By 2006, the U.S. faced losing the war initiated against Saddam Hussein’s regime in 2003. Fifty-seven percent of voters that year disapproved of Bush’s performance. Roughly the same percentage favored withdrawing from Iraq. Many of Bush’s top military advisors urged him to reduce military involvement in Iraq and turn most combat over to Iraqi forces. Instead, in 2006, he changed his field commander and “surged” U.S. combat troops. The surge achieved some success, but the war continued. What will Trump do? I have identified two forces that help presidents avoid these dangerous decision-making behaviors. The first is strong, independent-minded advisers. During the Cuban missile crisis, when Soviet offensive missiles were discovered in Cuba, President John F. Kennedy faced an agonising decision. Should he do air strikes, an invasion or a blockade? More than a dozen Kennedy advisers vigorously debated the strengths and weaknesses of each possible response. Their willingness to criticise, question and speak out may have saved the U.S. from nuclear war. Trump, on the other hand, famously demands loyalty of his advisers. Those who question his decisions risk losing their position. Presidents can also avert crises by flexibly responding to changing facts on the ground. For example, in 1983, President Reagan ordered U.S. Marines to return to an international peacekeeping mission in Lebanon, which had descended into civil war. Reagan thought neutral troops could restore order. Instead, the Marines became targets. More than 200 died when their barracks were bombed on October 23, 1983. So Reagan recalculated, pulling out U.S. troops. In Trump’s Iran decision, I perceive an unwillingness to re-evaluate policy choices when outside evidence contradicts his original cost-benefit analysis. When Trump first threatened to scrap the multinational agreement, he assumed the other signatories would agree to re-impose sanctions on Iran, as the U.S. will. But European countries strongly oppose that idea. They even said they would refuse to renew their sanctions. Still, Trump’s analysis did not change. Presidential history strongly warns of danger for this White House. Inevitably, some of this president’s policies will fail. Attempts to save them could take the U.S. down a deadly path. *Charles Hermann, Senior Professor, and Brent Scowcroft Chair Emeritus, Bush School of Government & Public Service, Texas A&M 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)

Opinion: After Iran deal turnaround, how Trump handles setbacks is what matters now

Former first lady Barbara Bush was remembered on Saturday as a sharp-tongued but caring figure whose devotion to her family was matched only by her commitment to public service.

Four former US&nbsppresidents were among some 1,500 mourners who gathered at a Houston church for her funeral, after the matriarch of one of the country's most prominent political dynasties died on Tuesday at age 92.

Bush, the wife of the 41st president of the United States, George HW&nbspBush, and the mother of the 43rd, George W&nbspBush, was lauded at a televised but invitation-only service at St Martin's Episcopal Church, where she and her family have been members since the 1950s.&nbsp

"She was candid and comforting, steadfast and straightforward, honest and loving," said the historian and author Jon Meacham, who wrote a biography of George HW&nbspBush and was one of three eulogists whom Barbara Bush herself selected before her death.

"Barbara Bush and George Bush put country above party, the common good above political gain and service to others above the settling of scores," he said.

Former Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, current first lady Melania Trump, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former first lady Michelle Obama were all on hand for the service.

President Donald Trump, who clashed with the Bush family during his 2016 campaign, did not travel to Houston. The White House said this week he wanted to avoid disrupting the service with added security.

In a Twitter post, Trump said his "thoughts and prayers are with the entire Bush family."

Former President Jimmy Carter was overseas and unable to attend.

Another of Bush's sons, former Florida governor and 2016 presidential candidate Jeb Bush, also delivered a eulogy, as did her longtime friend Susan Baker, the wife of former Secretary of State James Baker.

In their remarks, Meacham and Baker emphasized Bush's role as a mother and grandmother, with Baker describing her as a "tough but loving enforcer" whose 73-year marriage to her husband was a real-life fairy tale.

Hours before the service`s scheduled start at 11 am&nbsplocal time (1600 GMT), security was tight, with bomb-sniffing dogs checking media equipment and police officers searching bags.

Guests arrived at a different church several miles away to be bussed to the venue, walking past a throng of media.

Bush made it possible for her husband to have "the arc of his life," said Karl Rove, who served as a chief political adviser for George W&nbspBush and spoke with him a few days ago.

"This is a family of great faith, of great conviction," Rove said. "He has every comfort, every confidence of where his mother is."

Following Saturday`s service, Bush will be buried on the grounds of the George HW&nbspBush Library and Museum at Texas A&M University in College Station, next to her daughter, Robin, who died of leukemia at the age of 3. The motorcade carrying her body will traverse both

George Bush Drive and Barbara Bush Drive on its way to the burial site.

Members of the public paid their respects on Friday when Bush lay in repose at the church. The 93-year-old George HW&nbspBush, seated in a wheelchair in front of the casket, greeted mourners in turn with a handshake.

Four former US presidents were among some 1,500 mourners who gathered at a Houston church for her funeral, after the matriarch of one of the country's most prominent political dynasties died on Tuesday at age 92

Former first lady Barbara Bush was remembered on Saturday as a sharp-tongued but caring figure whose devotion to her family was matched only by her commitment to public service. Four former US&nbsppresidents were among some 1,500 mourners who gathered at a Houston church for her funeral, after the matriarch of one of the country's most prominent political dynasties died on Tuesday at age 92. Bush, the wife of the 41st president of the United States, George HW&nbspBush, and the mother of the 43rd, George W&nbspBush, was lauded at a televised but invitation-only service at St Martin's Episcopal Church, where she and her family have been members since the 1950s. "She was candid and comforting, steadfast and straightforward, honest and loving," said the historian and author Jon Meacham, who wrote a biography of George HW&nbspBush and was one of three eulogists whom Barbara Bush herself selected before her death. "Barbara Bush and George Bush put country above party, the common good above political gain and service to others above the settling of scores," he said. Former Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, current first lady Melania Trump, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former first lady Michelle Obama were all on hand for the service. President Donald Trump, who clashed with the Bush family during his 2016 campaign, did not travel to Houston. The White House said this week he wanted to avoid disrupting the service with added security. In a Twitter post, Trump said his "thoughts and prayers are with the entire Bush family." Former President Jimmy Carter was overseas and unable to attend. Another of Bush's sons, former Florida governor and 2016 presidential candidate Jeb Bush, also delivered a eulogy, as did her longtime friend Susan Baker, the wife of former Secretary of State James Baker. In their remarks, Meacham and Baker emphasized Bush's role as a mother and grandmother, with Baker describing her as a "tough but loving enforcer" whose 73-year marriage to her husband was a real-life fairy tale. Hours before the service`s scheduled start at 11 am&nbsplocal time (1600 GMT), security was tight, with bomb-sniffing dogs checking media equipment and police officers searching bags. Guests arrived at a different church several miles away to be bussed to the venue, walking past a throng of media. Bush made it possible for her husband to have "the arc of his life," said Karl Rove, who served as a chief political adviser for George W&nbspBush and spoke with him a few days ago. "This is a family of great faith, of great conviction," Rove said. "He has every comfort, every confidence of where his mother is." Following Saturday`s service, Bush will be buried on the grounds of the George HW&nbspBush Library and Museum at Texas A&M University in College Station, next to her daughter, Robin, who died of leukemia at the age of 3. The motorcade carrying her body will traverse both George Bush Drive and Barbara Bush Drive on its way to the burial site. Members of the public paid their respects on Friday when Bush lay in repose at the church. The 93-year-old George HW&nbspBush, seated in a wheelchair in front of the casket, greeted mourners in turn with a handshake.

Ex-US presidents among mourners as Barbara Bush lauded at funeral

All five of America&#39;s living former presidents took the stage Saturday at a benefit concert in Texas to raise money for victims of the hurricane-ravaged southern United States and Caribbean.

Former presidents Barack Obama, George W&nbsp;Bush, Bill Clinton, George HW&nbsp;Bush and Jimmy Carter appeared together onstage at Texas A&amp;M, praising Americans for their willingness to help fellow citizens and urging them to do more.

The effort by the three Democrats and two Republicans has raised over $31 million from 80,000 donors for the victims of hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria, George H.W. Bush&#39;s office said.

&quot;All of us on this stage here tonight could not be prouder of the response of Americans. When they see their neighbors and they see their friends, they see strangers in need, Americans step up,&quot; Obama said.

&quot;Let&#39;s all work together and make America still a greater volunteer nation,&quot; said Carter, making an apparent play on President Donald Trump&#39;s &quot;Make America Great Again&quot; campaign slogan.

The Georgia native said that Habitat for Humanity, a nonprofit he&#39;s worked with for 36 years, would build 6,000 homes in hard-hit areas. It&#39;s raised $20 million of the $100 million sought, he said.

And &quot;I too am here to urge you to give to this fine fund, and I want to thank all the volunteers,&quot; the younger Bush said.

&quot;There&#39;s still work to do,&quot; Clinton said. &quot;It can be a new beginning if we just do what we ought to do and prove that the heart of America, without race or religion or political party, is greater than our problems.&quot;

&#39;We need each other&#39;&nbsp;

Former first ladies Barbara and Laura Bush both attended the event, as did vice president Dick Cheney, ex-secretary of state James A.Baker, Senator Ted Cruz, and Texas Governor Greg Abbott.

Lady Gaga gave a surprise performance at the concert, announcing that she would make a $1 million donation and that a &quot;mental health and emotional trauma surviving program&quot; would be set up for hurricane survivors.

&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/000_tm2e9-20171022075448.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
Lady Gaga gave a surprise performance at the concert. (AFP)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

&nbsp;

&quot;Pain is such an equalizer. And in a time of catastrophe, we all put our differences aside and we come together, &#39;cause we need each other, or we can&#39;t survive,&quot; she said.

Lee Greenwood opened the concert and served as master of ceremonies for the event, titled &quot;Deep From the Heart: The One America Appeal,&quot; which also featured artists including The Gatlin Brothers, Yolanda Adams, Robert Earl Keen and Sam Moore.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/000_tm2i7-20171022075845.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
Singer Lee Greenwood performs during the Hurricane Relief concert in College Station, Texas. (AFP)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Trump did not attend the concert, but praised the effort in a video message released earlier, terming it a &quot;wonderful&quot; and &quot;vital effort.&quot;

&quot;As we begin to rebuild, some of America&#39;s finest public servants are spearheading the One America Appeal,&quot; said Trump, whose administration&#39;s response to the heavy storm damage in Puerto Rico has drawn fire.

&quot;Melania and I want to express our deep gratitude for your tremendous assistance,&quot; he said.

Ticket-sale receipts were to benefit organisations in Texas, Florida, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands.

Former presidents Barack Obama, George W?Bush, Bill Clinton, George HW?Bush and Jimmy Carter appeared together onstage at Texas A&M , praising Americans for their willingness to help fellow citizens

All five of America's living former presidents took the stage Saturday at a benefit concert in Texas to raise money for victims of the hurricane-ravaged southern United States and Caribbean. Former presidents Barack Obama, George W Bush, Bill Clinton, George HW Bush and Jimmy Carter appeared together onstage at Texas A&M, praising Americans for their willingness to help fellow citizens and urging them to do more. The effort by the three Democrats and two Republicans has raised over $31 million from 80,000 donors for the victims of hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria, George H.W. Bush's office said. "All of us on this stage here tonight could not be prouder of the response of Americans. When they see their neighbors and they see their friends, they see strangers in need, Americans step up," Obama said. "Let's all work together and make America still a greater volunteer nation," said Carter, making an apparent play on President Donald Trump's "Make America Great Again" campaign slogan. The Georgia native said that Habitat for Humanity, a nonprofit he's worked with for 36 years, would build 6,000 homes in hard-hit areas. It's raised $20 million of the $100 million sought, he said. And "I too am here to urge you to give to this fine fund, and I want to thank all the volunteers," the younger Bush said. "There's still work to do," Clinton said. "It can be a new beginning if we just do what we ought to do and prove that the heart of America, without race or religion or political party, is greater than our problems." 'We need each other' Former first ladies Barbara and Laura Bush both attended the event, as did vice president Dick Cheney, ex-secretary of state James A.Baker, Senator Ted Cruz, and Texas Governor Greg Abbott. Lady Gaga gave a surprise performance at the concert, announcing that she would make a $1 million donation and that a "mental health and emotional trauma surviving program" would be set up for hurricane survivors. Lady Gaga gave a surprise performance at the concert. (AFP) × "Pain is such an equalizer. And in a time of catastrophe, we all put our differences aside and we come together, 'cause we need each other, or we can't survive," she said. Lee Greenwood opened the concert and served as master of ceremonies for the event, titled "Deep From the Heart: The One America Appeal," which also featured artists including The Gatlin Brothers, Yolanda Adams, Robert Earl Keen and Sam Moore. Singer Lee Greenwood performs during the Hurricane Relief concert in College Station, Texas. (AFP) × Trump did not attend the concert, but praised the effort in a video message released earlier, terming it a "wonderful" and "vital effort." "As we begin to rebuild, some of America's finest public servants are spearheading the One America Appeal," said Trump, whose administration's response to the heavy storm damage in Puerto Rico has drawn fire. "Melania and I want to express our deep gratitude for your tremendous assistance," he said. Ticket-sale receipts were to benefit organisations in Texas, Florida, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands.

Five former US presidents share the stage at hurricane benefit concert

jimmy-carter

Jimmy Carter, News on Jimmy Carter, stories on Jimmy Carter, articles on Jimmy Carter, Jimmy Carter stories at Wion, Jimmy Carter news, Jimmy Carter latest news