President Donald Trump heaped praise Tuesday on right-wing Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro —&nbsp;and received plenty back —&nbsp;in announcing a special relationship that he said could even see the Latin American country join NATO.

At a joint news conference on the sun-soaked Rose Garden lawn, Trump and the man dubbed "Trump of the Tropics" let the mutual compliments flow.

"I have always admired the United States of America. And this sense of admiration has just increased after you took office and the presidency," Bolsonaro said.

Trump, stressing Brazil's partnership in the US-led campaign to force hard-left Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro from power, said Bolsonaro was "doing a fantastic job" and had "brought the country together."

For years Bolsonaro was little more than a marginal congressman, but his Trump-like campaign in 2018, promising to combat corruption and crime, and to end politics as usual, propelled him to surprise victory.

His hard-right views, including frequent expressions of support for Brazil's past period of military rule, horrified the left and drove deep divisions in Latin America's biggest nation.

But at the press conference, his condemnation of what he called "fake news" -- opponents say he is referring merely to critical reports -- and references to deeply conservative social values pleased Trump.

"We have many views that are similar," Trump said.

Brazil in NATO? 
Trump spent much of the news conference discussing efforts to squeeze Venezuela's authorities, which he warned could face many more sanctions than those already imposed in an attempt to cripple the government's finances.

Brazil, which shares a long border with Venezuela, is important in the strategy. In Bolsonaro, an ex-soldier who idolizes the former leaders of Brazil's anti-communist military dictatorship, Trump has a ready ally against Maduro.

In return, Bolsonaro got one of the main items on his wish list: agreement for Brazil to be given NATO privileges. This "major non-NATO ally" status would ease Brazil's access to US weaponry and other military links.

But in the sunny spirit of the occasion, Trump then went much further, stretching the diplomatic and geographical possibilities to a degree that surprised many.

"I also intend to designate Brazil as a major non-NATO ally or even possibly, if you start thinking about it, maybe a NATO ally," Trump announced.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization already has 29 countries. None are from Latin America and none, like Brazil, are located in the South Atlantic.

"I have to talk to a lot of people," Trump said of his idea.

Longterm relationship 
Washington has had strained relations with Brazil's long string of leftist governments but the rise of Bolsonaro, who talks enthusiastically of combating socialists and communists, has opened a new door for the Trump administration.

A Trump-Bolsonaro bonding matters for Venezuela and for Washington's push back against growing Chinese economic influence in South America.

It could also have large-scale implications for the future of efforts to slow or reverse global warming: Brazil is home to much of the threatened Amazon rainforest and Bolsonaro, like Trump, is a climate change skeptic.

Trump has withdrawn the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement, an international deal on cutting carbon emissions. Bolsonaro is toying with following suit.

On Monday, Bolsonaro signed an agreement with US companies on technical safeguards to allow commercial satellite launches from Brazil's Alcantara base. But there are still major sticking points between the two countries, especially on trade, with Trump wanting Brazil to open up to more US products.

Whether what a White House official called a new north-south "axis" prospers may depend mostly on the personal relationship between its leaders.

For sure, the White House reception left Bolsonaro -- until last year a virtual unknown on the international stage -- expecting a long friendship.

Asked if he would manage to have equally close ties if a Democrat prevented Republican Trump's reelection in 2020, Bolsonaro said: "I do believe Donald Trump will be reelected fully."

Trump interrupted him -- just to show yet again that they were on the same wavelength.

"Thank you. I agree," he said.

President Donald Trump heaped praise Tuesday on right-wing Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro — and received plenty back — in announcing a special relationship that he said could even see the Latin American country join NATO.

President Donald Trump heaped praise Tuesday on right-wing Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro — and received plenty back — in announcing a special relationship that he said could even see the Latin American country join NATO. At a joint news conference on the sun-soaked Rose Garden lawn, Trump and the man dubbed "Trump of the Tropics" let the mutual compliments flow. "I have always admired the United States of America. And this sense of admiration has just increased after you took office and the presidency," Bolsonaro said. Trump, stressing Brazil's partnership in the US-led campaign to force hard-left Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro from power, said Bolsonaro was "doing a fantastic job" and had "brought the country together." For years Bolsonaro was little more than a marginal congressman, but his Trump-like campaign in 2018, promising to combat corruption and crime, and to end politics as usual, propelled him to surprise victory. His hard-right views, including frequent expressions of support for Brazil's past period of military rule, horrified the left and drove deep divisions in Latin America's biggest nation. But at the press conference, his condemnation of what he called "fake news" -- opponents say he is referring merely to critical reports -- and references to deeply conservative social values pleased Trump. "We have many views that are similar," Trump said. Brazil in NATO? Trump spent much of the news conference discussing efforts to squeeze Venezuela's authorities, which he warned could face many more sanctions than those already imposed in an attempt to cripple the government's finances. Brazil, which shares a long border with Venezuela, is important in the strategy. In Bolsonaro, an ex-soldier who idolizes the former leaders of Brazil's anti-communist military dictatorship, Trump has a ready ally against Maduro. In return, Bolsonaro got one of the main items on his wish list: agreement for Brazil to be given NATO privileges. This "major non-NATO ally" status would ease Brazil's access to US weaponry and other military links. But in the sunny spirit of the occasion, Trump then went much further, stretching the diplomatic and geographical possibilities to a degree that surprised many. "I also intend to designate Brazil as a major non-NATO ally or even possibly, if you start thinking about it, maybe a NATO ally," Trump announced. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization already has 29 countries. None are from Latin America and none, like Brazil, are located in the South Atlantic. "I have to talk to a lot of people," Trump said of his idea. Longterm relationship Washington has had strained relations with Brazil's long string of leftist governments but the rise of Bolsonaro, who talks enthusiastically of combating socialists and communists, has opened a new door for the Trump administration. A Trump-Bolsonaro bonding matters for Venezuela and for Washington's push back against growing Chinese economic influence in South America. It could also have large-scale implications for the future of efforts to slow or reverse global warming: Brazil is home to much of the threatened Amazon rainforest and Bolsonaro, like Trump, is a climate change skeptic. Trump has withdrawn the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement, an international deal on cutting carbon emissions. Bolsonaro is toying with following suit. On Monday, Bolsonaro signed an agreement with US companies on technical safeguards to allow commercial satellite launches from Brazil's Alcantara base. But there are still major sticking points between the two countries, especially on trade, with Trump wanting Brazil to open up to more US products. Whether what a White House official called a new north-south "axis" prospers may depend mostly on the personal relationship between its leaders. For sure, the White House reception left Bolsonaro -- until last year a virtual unknown on the international stage -- expecting a long friendship. Asked if he would manage to have equally close ties if a Democrat prevented Republican Trump's reelection in 2020, Bolsonaro said: "I do believe Donald Trump will be reelected fully." Trump interrupted him -- just to show yet again that they were on the same wavelength. "Thank you. I agree," he said.

Bolsonaro compliments Trump who replies Brazil could join NATO

US investigators sought warrants to read<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trumps-ex-lawyer-cohen-says-testimony-could-have-been-clearer-lawyer-203200"> Michael Cohen's emails </a>in July 2017, nine months before the FBI raided the home and office of President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer, according to documents made public on Tuesday.

The requests were made six months into Trump's presidency. Emails were sought by Special Counsel Robert Mueller's office as well as by the FBI, dating back as far as June 2015, according to the documents.

Mueller is investigating Russia's role in the 2016 US election and possible coordination with Trump campaign members.

The nearly 900 pages of documents released by a federal judge in New York provide more detailed accounts of Cohen's financial relationships than previously known.

Cohen had been Trump's personal lawyer and self-described fixer for more than a decade, but began cooperating with federal investigators soon after the April 2018 raids on his home, office and hotel room.

He later pleaded guilty in separate prosecutions to lying to Congress, bank fraud and campaign finance violations. The latter included paying hush money to silence two women who said they had sexual encounters with Trump.

Cohen is scheduled to begin a three-year prison term on May 6.

Trump has denied having had sexual relationships with the two women: Stormy Daniels, the porn actress whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, and former Playboy model Karen McDougal.

Much of the discussion about campaign finance issues in the released documents was redacted.

They were released after US District Judge William Pauley on Monday ordered prosecutors to make redacted versions public, in response to requests by news media organizations.

Lanny Davis, a lawyer for Cohen, said in a statement on Monday night that the document release "only furthers his interest in continuing to cooperate and providing information and the truth about Donald Trump and the Trump organization to law enforcement and Congress."

Since pleading guilty, Cohen has publicly turned on Trump, telling the House Committee on Oversight and Reform on Feb. 27 that his former boss was a "racist," "con man" and "cheat."

In his congressional testimony, Cohen said he was "ashamed of my weakness and misplaced loyalty, of the things I did for Mr. Trump in an effort to protect and promote him."

Cohen began working for Trump in 2007. The Republican president in December called his former lawyer "a rat" and in January said Cohen was "lying to reduce his jail time."

Moscow has denied meddling in the 2016 election, though US intelligence agencies have concluded that it interfered to help Trump win.

Trump has denied that his campaign colluded with Russia, and described the Mueller probe as a political witch hunt.

The newly released documents showed how the FBI made extensive use of its access to Cohen's Apple iCloud account, which allowed him to coordinate his work across such devices as an iPhone, iPad Mini and laptop.

FBI agents said they located a hotel room in New York's Loews Regency Hotel where Cohen was staying by using a device known as a Triggerfish that mimics cell phone towers to find a specific device.

The bank fraud case stemmed from Cohen dealings unrelated to Trump, and suggest that his financial situation was dire.

According to the documents, Cohen was in default by December 2017 on more than $20 million in loans backed by New York taxicab medallions he owned.

The FBI believed Cohen misrepresented his finances to banks he owed money to.

According to the documents, Cohen concealed fees being paid to Essential Consultants, a firm he controlled, for political consulting, including from international clients with issues pending before the Trump administration.

Among the payments Cohen was believed to have received was $600,000 from AT&amp;T Inc for consulting about "political issues, including net neutrality, the merger between AT&amp;T and Time Warner and tax reform."

Another $583,333 came from an investment firm controlled by Russian businessman Viktor Vekselberg, the documents showed.

Republicans in Congress have criticized Cohen's consulting work, arguing he should have made his contracts public through disclosures. The warrant does not appear to detail any violations to lobbying disclosure laws.

Cohen also used Essential Consultants to pay hush money to Daniels.

US investigators sought warrants to read Michael Cohen's emails in July 2017, nine months before the FBI raided the home and office of President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer, according to documents made public on Tuesday.

US investigators sought warrants to read Michael Cohen's emails in July 2017, nine months before the FBI raided the home and office of President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer, according to documents made public on Tuesday. The requests were made six months into Trump's presidency. Emails were sought by Special Counsel Robert Mueller's office as well as by the FBI, dating back as far as June 2015, according to the documents. Mueller is investigating Russia's role in the 2016 US election and possible coordination with Trump campaign members. The nearly 900 pages of documents released by a federal judge in New York provide more detailed accounts of Cohen's financial relationships than previously known. Cohen had been Trump's personal lawyer and self-described fixer for more than a decade, but began cooperating with federal investigators soon after the April 2018 raids on his home, office and hotel room. He later pleaded guilty in separate prosecutions to lying to Congress, bank fraud and campaign finance violations. The latter included paying hush money to silence two women who said they had sexual encounters with Trump. Cohen is scheduled to begin a three-year prison term on May 6. Trump has denied having had sexual relationships with the two women: Stormy Daniels, the porn actress whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, and former Playboy model Karen McDougal. Much of the discussion about campaign finance issues in the released documents was redacted. They were released after US District Judge William Pauley on Monday ordered prosecutors to make redacted versions public, in response to requests by news media organizations. Lanny Davis, a lawyer for Cohen, said in a statement on Monday night that the document release "only furthers his interest in continuing to cooperate and providing information and the truth about Donald Trump and the Trump organization to law enforcement and Congress." Since pleading guilty, Cohen has publicly turned on Trump, telling the House Committee on Oversight and Reform on Feb. 27 that his former boss was a "racist," "con man" and "cheat." In his congressional testimony, Cohen said he was "ashamed of my weakness and misplaced loyalty, of the things I did for Mr. Trump in an effort to protect and promote him." Cohen began working for Trump in 2007. The Republican president in December called his former lawyer "a rat" and in January said Cohen was "lying to reduce his jail time." Moscow has denied meddling in the 2016 election, though US intelligence agencies have concluded that it interfered to help Trump win. Trump has denied that his campaign colluded with Russia, and described the Mueller probe as a political witch hunt. The newly released documents showed how the FBI made extensive use of its access to Cohen's Apple iCloud account, which allowed him to coordinate his work across such devices as an iPhone, iPad Mini and laptop. FBI agents said they located a hotel room in New York's Loews Regency Hotel where Cohen was staying by using a device known as a Triggerfish that mimics cell phone towers to find a specific device. The bank fraud case stemmed from Cohen dealings unrelated to Trump, and suggest that his financial situation was dire. According to the documents, Cohen was in default by December 2017 on more than $20 million in loans backed by New York taxicab medallions he owned. The FBI believed Cohen misrepresented his finances to banks he owed money to. According to the documents, Cohen concealed fees being paid to Essential Consultants, a firm he controlled, for political consulting, including from international clients with issues pending before the Trump administration. Among the payments Cohen was believed to have received was $600,000 from AT&T Inc for consulting about "political issues, including net neutrality, the merger between AT&T and Time Warner and tax reform." Another $583,333 came from an investment firm controlled by Russian businessman Viktor Vekselberg, the documents showed. Republicans in Congress have criticized Cohen's consulting work, arguing he should have made his contracts public through disclosures. The warrant does not appear to detail any violations to lobbying disclosure laws. Cohen also used Essential Consultants to pay hush money to Daniels.

US investigators sought ex-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's emails months before raids

At a dinner party in Kabul's high-security 'green zone'&nbsp;in March, a senior European diplomat poured himself a glass of red wine and pulled up a photograph on his iPhone.

Released by Qatar's foreign ministry on February 25, it showed seven Qatari officials alongside US&nbsp;and Taliban negotiators as talks on ending the 17-year-old war in Afghanistan had restarted in the Gulf state the previous day.

'If Qatari officials can be at the negotiating table, then how did the US&nbsp;forget to invite its key allies who have fought the Afghan war since 2001 ?'&nbsp;said the diplomat, whose nation has contributed hundreds of troops to NATO's mission in the country.

'We continue to pour millions of dollars as an act of solidarity, but when it comes to peace talks, the US decided to go solo.'

Reuters spoke with 10 diplomats from countries spanning three continents that are among the 39 that provide military personnel to the NATO training operation, known as Resolute Support, in Afghanistan, and those that provide development aid.

Many of those countries are significant, consistent donors. Most of the diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the situation.

The diplomats interviewed said their governments were broadly rethinking their commitments to rebuilding the country. That process had been hastened by feeling excluded from peace talks, and also by a weariness for supporting the Afghan campaign among voters and lawmakers in their respective countries, they said.

Asked about those comments, a US&nbsp;State Department spokesperson said regular reviews of foreign assistance was 'good practice'&nbsp;and Afghanistan's development remained in the interest of the international community.

'We see no signs that interest and investment are wavering,'&nbsp;said the spokesperson, adding that US&nbsp;Special Representative Zalmay Khalilzad has briefed NATO allies and other partners three times since December, and effective coordination remained a priority.

Nick Kay, NATO's newly appointed senior civilian representative in Afghanistan, said NATO allies 'fully support'&nbsp;Khalilzad's efforts to negotiate a settlement.

But even the Afghan government has complained of being left out. President Ashraf Ghani's national security adviser on Thursday accused Khalilzad of "delegitimizing" the Kabul government by excluding it from deliberations.

Qatari officials did not respond to a request for comment.

In 2017, US development aid for Afghanistan totalled about $1.2 billion, well ahead of the next biggest donors Germany, European Union institutions, Britain and Japan, according to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) data. But the United States' junior aid partners collectively contributed nearly two-thirds of all development assistance, highlighting their critical if less visible importance to the country's future.

CHANGING PRIORITIES

US and Taliban negotiators wrapped up their longest round of peace talks on Tuesday with the progress made but no agreement on when foreign troops might withdraw.&nbsp;

Whether funding countries keep investing in Afghanistan could prove pivotal to sustaining any peace. Diplomats say that, after troops leave, it may be the only leverage they have to retain influence over future Afghan governments.

Since the 2001 US-led invasion, Afghanistan has been among the top recipients of foreign government aid to promote economic and social development. In 2016, international donors pledged $15.2 billion in aid for Afghanistan until 2020.

With those pledges due to expire, many countries are re-evaluating their military and funding commitments.

"Priorities have changed for every EU nation," a European diplomat said, adding that countries besides Afghanistan needed support.

"The donor fatigue is intense and no one is in the mood to overlook it after 2020," another diplomat said.

A third diplomat said their country was re-evaluating its future aid with different scenarios in mind, including whether to continue development if the Taliban joins Afghanistan's government and what to do if peace talks fail.

Any drop-off in international aid would be disastrous for Afghanistan since much of it funds basic health and education services, said Adele Khodr, country representative for Unicef.

'It is definitely something we are concerned about. Imagine what would happen - (Afghanistan) would be Yemen,'&nbsp;Khodr said. '(By) pulling out, the international community will pay a much higher price in insecurity across the world.'

Ninety per cent of the money spent on the health sector in Afghanistan comes from the international community, said Toby Lanzer, deputy special representative in Afghanistan for the UN.

An official in Ghani's office in Kabul declined to comment on potential risks to future aid.

He said the government was making every effort to hold peace talks with the Taliban. The militant group said on Tuesday that such talks would have to wait until after a troop withdrawal plan is set.

'CRUCIAL TO STICK TOGETHER'

Some diplomats caution against a quick retreat.

'If we leave the country hastily, all these (advances) will go down the drain, 'Ambassador Markus Potzel, Germany's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan and one of the 10 diplomats interviewed, told Reuters in Kabul.

Potzel was referring to gains such as Afghan girls' attendance in school and new employment opportunities.

Maintaining aid was also critical to holding influence in Afghanistan, he said.

"That's our leverage. We can attach strings," Potzel said. "It is crucial to stick together."

A spokesperson at the British Embassy in Kabul said any changes to Britain's troop contribution would be made in consultation with coalition partners.

As of March 2019, 39 countries contributed 17,034 foreign forces in Afghanistan for Resolute Support, of which the US&nbsp;provided 50 percent, according to NATO. US&nbsp;troops are also deployed in a separate mission directed against groups such as al Qaeda and Islamic State.

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump's questioning of NATO's value to Washington, along with the absence of allies at the negotiating table, has deepened the unease within the military alliance created in 1949 by the United States, Canada, and Western European nations.

'The concern is that we need to be appraised of the progress of the discussions and to be involved. We have invested a lot,'said a European diplomat. 'This commitment should be reflected in influence or at least information on the peace talks.'

The diplomat said it was understandable that access to the negotiating table was narrow right now, but "what I would find abnormal is that we would be served a deal in which we had nothing to say and then be asked to foot the bill".

SHRINKING FOOTPRINT?

The senior diplomats interviewed by Reuters, who is based in Kabul and Islamabad, said their governments were finding it harder to justify the continuing presence of their troops and the steady drain of aid funding to Afghanistan.

'It is increasingly difficult to tell our people why we are still here especially when they read reports about more than half of country being under the Taliban control,'&nbsp;said a Western diplomat. 'Almost all NATO countries are now struggling to justify their presence in Afghanistan to voters back home.'

The war's long duration has also weakened commitment.

'If we had known that the war could go on as it has been for 18 years, we would have had a rethink in 2001,'&nbsp;the Western diplomat said.

The withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan has always been the Taliban's main demand, and Trump's interest in drawing down US&nbsp;troops has stimulated efforts to end the war.

'The prime concern is that we may wake up one day to a tweet by Trump about a unilateral withdrawal of US&nbsp;troops before a peace agreement has been negotiated,'&nbsp;said a diplomat whose country supports Afghan healthcare projects.

Neighbouring Pakistan sees a similar danger, Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said.

'An immediate vacuum can also be detrimental for peace and security and an indefinite presence is also not acceptable, so this is the detail that has to be worked out,' he said.

NATO members and partners said they also expect regional powers to share costs and step up their roles in Afghanistan to prevent civil war after foreign forces depart.

"China has been sitting on the bleachers for a long time now," a diplomat said.

The Chinese embassy in Kabul did not respond to requests for comment.

Michael Kugelman, a South Asia expert at the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson Center, said the US&nbsp;continues to count on friends to share the burden in Afghanistan.

'But so long as the war continues with no peace deal, that supply of states willing to assist will shrink,'&nbsp;said Kugelman.

At a dinner party in Kabul's high-security 'green zone' in March, a senior European diplomat poured himself a glass of red wine and pulled up a photograph on his iPhone.

At a dinner party in Kabul's high-security 'green zone' in March, a senior European diplomat poured himself a glass of red wine and pulled up a photograph on his iPhone. Released by Qatar's foreign ministry on February 25, it showed seven Qatari officials alongside US and Taliban negotiators as talks on ending the 17-year-old war in Afghanistan had restarted in the Gulf state the previous day. 'If Qatari officials can be at the negotiating table, then how did the US forget to invite its key allies who have fought the Afghan war since 2001 ?' said the diplomat, whose nation has contributed hundreds of troops to NATO's mission in the country. 'We continue to pour millions of dollars as an act of solidarity, but when it comes to peace talks, the US decided to go solo.' Reuters spoke with 10 diplomats from countries spanning three continents that are among the 39 that provide military personnel to the NATO training operation, known as Resolute Support, in Afghanistan, and those that provide development aid. Many of those countries are significant, consistent donors. Most of the diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the situation. The diplomats interviewed said their governments were broadly rethinking their commitments to rebuilding the country. That process had been hastened by feeling excluded from peace talks, and also by a weariness for supporting the Afghan campaign among voters and lawmakers in their respective countries, they said. Asked about those comments, a US State Department spokesperson said regular reviews of foreign assistance was 'good practice' and Afghanistan's development remained in the interest of the international community. 'We see no signs that interest and investment are wavering,' said the spokesperson, adding that US Special Representative Zalmay Khalilzad has briefed NATO allies and other partners three times since December, and effective coordination remained a priority. Nick Kay, NATO's newly appointed senior civilian representative in Afghanistan, said NATO allies 'fully support' Khalilzad's efforts to negotiate a settlement. But even the Afghan government has complained of being left out. President Ashraf Ghani's national security adviser on Thursday accused Khalilzad of "delegitimizing" the Kabul government by excluding it from deliberations. Qatari officials did not respond to a request for comment. In 2017, US development aid for Afghanistan totalled about $1.2 billion, well ahead of the next biggest donors Germany, European Union institutions, Britain and Japan, according to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) data. But the United States' junior aid partners collectively contributed nearly two-thirds of all development assistance, highlighting their critical if less visible importance to the country's future. CHANGING PRIORITIES US and Taliban negotiators wrapped up their longest round of peace talks on Tuesday with the progress made but no agreement on when foreign troops might withdraw. Whether funding countries keep investing in Afghanistan could prove pivotal to sustaining any peace. Diplomats say that, after troops leave, it may be the only leverage they have to retain influence over future Afghan governments. Since the 2001 US-led invasion, Afghanistan has been among the top recipients of foreign government aid to promote economic and social development. In 2016, international donors pledged $15.2 billion in aid for Afghanistan until 2020. With those pledges due to expire, many countries are re-evaluating their military and funding commitments. "Priorities have changed for every EU nation," a European diplomat said, adding that countries besides Afghanistan needed support. "The donor fatigue is intense and no one is in the mood to overlook it after 2020," another diplomat said. A third diplomat said their country was re-evaluating its future aid with different scenarios in mind, including whether to continue development if the Taliban joins Afghanistan's government and what to do if peace talks fail. Any drop-off in international aid would be disastrous for Afghanistan since much of it funds basic health and education services, said Adele Khodr, country representative for Unicef. 'It is definitely something we are concerned about. Imagine what would happen - (Afghanistan) would be Yemen,' Khodr said. '(By) pulling out, the international community will pay a much higher price in insecurity across the world.' Ninety per cent of the money spent on the health sector in Afghanistan comes from the international community, said Toby Lanzer, deputy special representative in Afghanistan for the UN. An official in Ghani's office in Kabul declined to comment on potential risks to future aid. He said the government was making every effort to hold peace talks with the Taliban. The militant group said on Tuesday that such talks would have to wait until after a troop withdrawal plan is set. 'CRUCIAL TO STICK TOGETHER' Some diplomats caution against a quick retreat. 'If we leave the country hastily, all these (advances) will go down the drain, 'Ambassador Markus Potzel, Germany's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan and one of the 10 diplomats interviewed, told Reuters in Kabul. Potzel was referring to gains such as Afghan girls' attendance in school and new employment opportunities. Maintaining aid was also critical to holding influence in Afghanistan, he said. "That's our leverage. We can attach strings," Potzel said. "It is crucial to stick together." A spokesperson at the British Embassy in Kabul said any changes to Britain's troop contribution would be made in consultation with coalition partners. As of March 2019, 39 countries contributed 17,034 foreign forces in Afghanistan for Resolute Support, of which the US provided 50 percent, according to NATO. US troops are also deployed in a separate mission directed against groups such as al Qaeda and Islamic State. US President Donald Trump's questioning of NATO's value to Washington, along with the absence of allies at the negotiating table, has deepened the unease within the military alliance created in 1949 by the United States, Canada, and Western European nations. 'The concern is that we need to be appraised of the progress of the discussions and to be involved. We have invested a lot,'said a European diplomat. 'This commitment should be reflected in influence or at least information on the peace talks.' The diplomat said it was understandable that access to the negotiating table was narrow right now, but "what I would find abnormal is that we would be served a deal in which we had nothing to say and then be asked to foot the bill". SHRINKING FOOTPRINT? The senior diplomats interviewed by Reuters, who is based in Kabul and Islamabad, said their governments were finding it harder to justify the continuing presence of their troops and the steady drain of aid funding to Afghanistan. 'It is increasingly difficult to tell our people why we are still here especially when they read reports about more than half of country being under the Taliban control,' said a Western diplomat. 'Almost all NATO countries are now struggling to justify their presence in Afghanistan to voters back home.' The war's long duration has also weakened commitment. 'If we had known that the war could go on as it has been for 18 years, we would have had a rethink in 2001,' the Western diplomat said. The withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan has always been the Taliban's main demand, and Trump's interest in drawing down US troops has stimulated efforts to end the war. 'The prime concern is that we may wake up one day to a tweet by Trump about a unilateral withdrawal of US troops before a peace agreement has been negotiated,' said a diplomat whose country supports Afghan healthcare projects. Neighbouring Pakistan sees a similar danger, Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said. 'An immediate vacuum can also be detrimental for peace and security and an indefinite presence is also not acceptable, so this is the detail that has to be worked out,' he said. NATO members and partners said they also expect regional powers to share costs and step up their roles in Afghanistan to prevent civil war after foreign forces depart. "China has been sitting on the bleachers for a long time now," a diplomat said. The Chinese embassy in Kabul did not respond to requests for comment. Michael Kugelman, a South Asia expert at the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson Center, said the US continues to count on friends to share the burden in Afghanistan. 'But so long as the war continues with no peace deal, that supply of states willing to assist will shrink,' said Kugelman.

Left out of peace talks, US allies reassess Afghan support

An apparent case of "friendly fire" between Afghan and US troops led to an airstrike which killed five Afghan soldiers, officials said Wednesday, with the defense ministry citing a "lack of proper coordination".

The incident occurred Wednesday when a US and Afghan patrol came under fire near an Afghan army post on the outskirts of Tarin Kot, the capital of Uruzgan province, a NATO spokesman in Kabul told AFP.&nbsp;

They called in airstrikes which hit the army post, killing five and seriously wounding a further 10 Afghan soldiers, said Karim Karimi, deputy head of the Uruzgan provincial council.&nbsp;&nbsp;

"As the American patrol approached the base, the ANA (Afghan National Army) soldiers probably thought it was the Taliban approaching them," he told AFP.

Large parts of Uruzgan province remain under the Taliban control. In recent years the militants have also made repeated incursions into the provincial capital.&nbsp;

Seventeen soldiers had been at the post in total, with only two managing to flee unhurt, Karimi said.

The Afghan defense ministry confirmed the toll, saying that Afghan and US forces had been conducting a "joint operation" in the area at the time.

"Because of a lack of proper coordination of the army, an ANA post was hit," a ministry statement said, adding that an investigation is ongoing.

The NATO spokesman said the US had carried out "precision self-defense air strikes on people firing on Afghan and American forces conducting a ground movement near an ANA checkpoint in Tarin Kot".

"The strikes were conducted after Afghan and US forces came under effective small arms and rocket-propelled grenade fire and requested air support in self-defense," a spokesman told AFP by email.

"Afghan and US forces attempted to de-escalate the situation but they continued to be fired upon. We are operating in a complex environment where enemy fighters do not wear uniforms and use stolen military vehicles to attack government forces."

"I counted that the planes were shooting at the base for some 30 minutes," Haji Lal Agha, a local resident, told AFP over the phone.

Incidents known as "friendly fire" are not unheard of in Afghanistan and have bred deep mistrust between local and foreign forces.

In one of the deadliest, 16 Afghan policemen were killed in July 2017, when they were mistakenly targeted by US airstrikes in neighboring Helmand province.

An apparent case of "friendly fire" between Afghan and US troops led to an airstrike which killed five Afghan soldiers, officials said Wednesday, with the defense ministry citing a "lack of proper coordination".

An apparent case of "friendly fire" between Afghan and US troops led to an airstrike which killed five Afghan soldiers, officials said Wednesday, with the defense ministry citing a "lack of proper coordination". The incident occurred Wednesday when a US and Afghan patrol came under fire near an Afghan army post on the outskirts of Tarin Kot, the capital of Uruzgan province, a NATO spokesman in Kabul told AFP. They called in airstrikes which hit the army post, killing five and seriously wounding a further 10 Afghan soldiers, said Karim Karimi, deputy head of the Uruzgan provincial council. "As the American patrol approached the base, the ANA (Afghan National Army) soldiers probably thought it was the Taliban approaching them," he told AFP. Large parts of Uruzgan province remain under the Taliban control. In recent years the militants have also made repeated incursions into the provincial capital. Seventeen soldiers had been at the post in total, with only two managing to flee unhurt, Karimi said. The Afghan defense ministry confirmed the toll, saying that Afghan and US forces had been conducting a "joint operation" in the area at the time. "Because of a lack of proper coordination of the army, an ANA post was hit," a ministry statement said, adding that an investigation is ongoing. The NATO spokesman said the US had carried out "precision self-defense air strikes on people firing on Afghan and American forces conducting a ground movement near an ANA checkpoint in Tarin Kot". "The strikes were conducted after Afghan and US forces came under effective small arms and rocket-propelled grenade fire and requested air support in self-defense," a spokesman told AFP by email. "Afghan and US forces attempted to de-escalate the situation but they continued to be fired upon. We are operating in a complex environment where enemy fighters do not wear uniforms and use stolen military vehicles to attack government forces." "I counted that the planes were shooting at the base for some 30 minutes," Haji Lal Agha, a local resident, told AFP over the phone. Incidents known as "friendly fire" are not unheard of in Afghanistan and have bred deep mistrust between local and foreign forces. In one of the deadliest, 16 Afghan policemen were killed in July 2017, when they were mistakenly targeted by US airstrikes in neighboring Helmand province.

Afghan soldiers killed in 'friendly fire' gunfight, United States airstrike

Taliban fighters have stepped up pressure on Afghan forces in the western province of Badghis, killing 20 soldiers and capturing 20, an official said on Tuesday, as the militants make advances even as they hold peace talks with US officials.

A large number of Taliban insurgents launched attacks on several army posts in the province's Bala Murghab district, beginning on Saturday night, said Qais Mangal, spokesman for the defence ministry in Kabul.

"The fighting is still on," Mangal said, adding that the Taliban had overrun four posts and government reinforcement backed by air support had been sent to prevent the whole area from falling to the insurgents.

A member of the Badghis provincial council, Abdul Aziz Beg, said 20 soldiers had been killed, 10 wounded and 20 captured by the hardline Islamist group.

The Taliban claimed responsibility for the attacks in Badghis, which is on the border with Turkmenistan.

Taliban spokesman Qari Yousuf Ahmadi said 20 soldiers had been killed, 28 captured and a large supply of weapons and ammunition seized.

The Taliban, ousted in 2001, say they are fighting to expel foreign troops, topple the Western-backed Afghan government and restore their version of Islamic law.

Talks with US officials to end the war continued on Tuesday in Qatar, with the focus on the withdrawal of foreign troops, a guarantee Afghanistan will not be used as a springboard for militant attacks and a ceasefire.

The Taliban have refused to talk to Afghan government officials, labelling them a puppet of the United States.

Southeast of the Afghan capital, Kabul, in Ghazni city, an air strike on a vehicle killed seven Taliban on Tuesday, including a commander, said Mohammad Arif Noori, spokesman for Ghazni's provincial governor. He said the strike happened close to a mosque and may have left civilian casualties.

Dr. Zaher Shah Nekmal, health director for Ghazni province, said he had received a report of 16 dead but had not yet received the bodies.

In a statement, the Taliban said one air strike hit a minibus and a second followed quickly, killing a total of 12 people and wounding six.

A NATO spokesperson could not be immediately reached for comment.

As many as 200 people were accompanying tractors that pulled a number of bodies on trailers to the provincial governor's compound, said Waris Naimi, a spokesman for the Ghazni police, adding that police were trying to block the protest.

As the snow begins to melt, Taliban and Afghan security forces have stepped up attacks on each other but the extent of government losses is a major concern.

In January, President Ashraf Ghani, speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, said 45,000 members of the security forces had been killed since he took office in September 2014.

Some 14,000 US troops are based in Afghanistan as part of a US-led NATO mission to train, assist and advise Afghan forces. Some US forces also carry out counter-terrorism operations.

Taliban fighters have stepped up pressure on Afghan forces in the western province of Badghis, killing 20 soldiers and capturing 20, an official said on Tuesday, as the militants make advances even as they hold peace talks with US officials.

Taliban fighters have stepped up pressure on Afghan forces in the western province of Badghis, killing 20 soldiers and capturing 20, an official said on Tuesday, as the militants make advances even as they hold peace talks with US officials. A large number of Taliban insurgents launched attacks on several army posts in the province's Bala Murghab district, beginning on Saturday night, said Qais Mangal, spokesman for the defence ministry in Kabul. "The fighting is still on," Mangal said, adding that the Taliban had overrun four posts and government reinforcement backed by air support had been sent to prevent the whole area from falling to the insurgents. A member of the Badghis provincial council, Abdul Aziz Beg, said 20 soldiers had been killed, 10 wounded and 20 captured by the hardline Islamist group. The Taliban claimed responsibility for the attacks in Badghis, which is on the border with Turkmenistan. Taliban spokesman Qari Yousuf Ahmadi said 20 soldiers had been killed, 28 captured and a large supply of weapons and ammunition seized. The Taliban, ousted in 2001, say they are fighting to expel foreign troops, topple the Western-backed Afghan government and restore their version of Islamic law. Talks with US officials to end the war continued on Tuesday in Qatar, with the focus on the withdrawal of foreign troops, a guarantee Afghanistan will not be used as a springboard for militant attacks and a ceasefire. The Taliban have refused to talk to Afghan government officials, labelling them a puppet of the United States. Southeast of the Afghan capital, Kabul, in Ghazni city, an air strike on a vehicle killed seven Taliban on Tuesday, including a commander, said Mohammad Arif Noori, spokesman for Ghazni's provincial governor. He said the strike happened close to a mosque and may have left civilian casualties. Dr. Zaher Shah Nekmal, health director for Ghazni province, said he had received a report of 16 dead but had not yet received the bodies. In a statement, the Taliban said one air strike hit a minibus and a second followed quickly, killing a total of 12 people and wounding six. A NATO spokesperson could not be immediately reached for comment. As many as 200 people were accompanying tractors that pulled a number of bodies on trailers to the provincial governor's compound, said Waris Naimi, a spokesman for the Ghazni police, adding that police were trying to block the protest. As the snow begins to melt, Taliban and Afghan security forces have stepped up attacks on each other but the extent of government losses is a major concern. In January, President Ashraf Ghani, speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, said 45,000 members of the security forces had been killed since he took office in September 2014. Some 14,000 US troops are based in Afghanistan as part of a US-led NATO mission to train, assist and advise Afghan forces. Some US forces also carry out counter-terrorism operations.

Taliban pile pressure on government forces in western Afghanistan

NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg said on Friday the military alliance needs to be ready for a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/nato-condemns-unacceptable-putin-missile-threats-198630">world with more Russian missiles</a>, after a UN warning that the global arms control system is collapsing.

"NATO does not want a new Cold war, we don't want a new arms race. And therefore we call on Russia to come back into compliance with the INF (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces) treaty," Stoltenberg told reporters during a visit to the Bulgarian capital Sofia.

"At the same time we need to be prepared for a world without the INF treaty and with more Russian missiles," he added.

The US began the process of exiting the key missile treaty last month in response to Moscow's deployment of a new missile -- the 9M729 -- that NATO says breaches the pact.

In response, Russia announced its own withdrawal from the cornerstone treaty signed in 1987, which banned ground-launched missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometres.

The crisis has sparked fears of a new arms race in Europe.

Earlier this week, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres warned that "key components of the international arms control architecture are collapsing".

"These new Russian missiles are nuclear capable, they can reach European cities, they are hard to detect and they have little warning time so they reduce the threshold for any potential use of nuclear weapons in an armed conflict," Stoltenberg said on Friday.

Bulgaria's Prime Minister Boyko Borisov, who will host his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev on Monday, added that he had agreed "to use to the maximum the strength of diplomacy, our bilateral ties (...) to prevent an arms race with these monstrous missiles."

Bulgaria -- an EU and NATO member -- has also preserved close economic and energy cooperation with Russia, reflecting deep historical and cultural ties between the two countries.

But Borisov reiterated on Friday his country's loyalty to NATO.

"Bulgaria is not Russia's Trojan horse in NATO - on the contrary, Bulgaria is among NATO's most disciplined and most loyal members," Borisov said.

NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg said on Friday the military alliance needs to be ready for a world with more Russian missiles, after a UN warning that the global arms control system is collapsing.

NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg said on Friday the military alliance needs to be ready for a world with more Russian missiles, after a UN warning that the global arms control system is collapsing. "NATO does not want a new Cold war, we don't want a new arms race. And therefore we call on Russia to come back into compliance with the INF (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces) treaty," Stoltenberg told reporters during a visit to the Bulgarian capital Sofia. "At the same time we need to be prepared for a world without the INF treaty and with more Russian missiles," he added. The US began the process of exiting the key missile treaty last month in response to Moscow's deployment of a new missile -- the 9M729 -- that NATO says breaches the pact. In response, Russia announced its own withdrawal from the cornerstone treaty signed in 1987, which banned ground-launched missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometres. The crisis has sparked fears of a new arms race in Europe. Earlier this week, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres warned that "key components of the international arms control architecture are collapsing". "These new Russian missiles are nuclear capable, they can reach European cities, they are hard to detect and they have little warning time so they reduce the threshold for any potential use of nuclear weapons in an armed conflict," Stoltenberg said on Friday. Bulgaria's Prime Minister Boyko Borisov, who will host his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev on Monday, added that he had agreed "to use to the maximum the strength of diplomacy, our bilateral ties (...) to prevent an arms race with these monstrous missiles." Bulgaria -- an EU and NATO member -- has also preserved close economic and energy cooperation with Russia, reflecting deep historical and cultural ties between the two countries. But Borisov reiterated on Friday his country's loyalty to NATO. "Bulgaria is not Russia's Trojan horse in NATO - on the contrary, Bulgaria is among NATO's most disciplined and most loyal members," Borisov said.

Should be ready for a world with more Russian missiles: NATO chief

The US and the Taliban have paused negotiations in Doha, with the diplomatic push aimed at ending the war in Afghanistan set to restart over the weekend following "solid" talks between the adversaries.

The latest meetings follow marathon talks last month that saw the US and the Taliban walk away with a "draft framework" focused on a potential US troop withdrawal and a pact to prevent Afghanistan from harbouring terrorists.&nbsp;

"Emerging from three solid days of talks with the Taliban in #Doha. Meetings were productive," tweeted US special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, who is leading the American side during the negotiations.

"We continue to take slow, steady steps toward understanding and eventually #peace," he said.

"Both sides will take the next two days for internal deliberations, with plans to regroup on Saturday," Khalilzad added.

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid confirmed the pause, adding the insurgents were "committed to the current peace process along with peace".

The US has continued to push for a ceasefire in the war-torn country and the opening of negotiations between the Taliban and the Kabul government.&nbsp;

The Taliban, however, has repeatedly refused to meet with officials of the Afghan government, whom they dismiss as "puppets".

Khalilzad hinted that headway was being made on the issue, tweeting "there is also progress on forming a national team in #Kabul ready to engage in intra-Afghan dialogue and talks with the Taliban".&nbsp;

Earlier in the week, the special envoy met with the Taliban's top political leader Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar in Doha, in what has been touted as the highest-level engagement between the two sides in the months-long diplomatic thrust. &nbsp;

Khalilzad welcomed the presence of Baradar -- a co-founder of the Islamist movement -- at the table, calling the militants' negotiating side a "more authoritative Taliban delegation".

Baradar is believed to be widely respected by the Taliban’s various factions and analysts said his participation would help garner support for any deal from insurgents on the frontlines.&nbsp;

General Scott Miller, the top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, is also attending the talks.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly voiced his eagerness to end America's involvement in Afghanistan, where 14,000 US troops are still deployed.

Afghanistan has been enmeshed in nearly constant conflict since the Soviet invasion of 1979, which was followed by civil war, the Taliban regime, and the US invasion in late 2001.

The US and the Taliban have paused negotiations in Doha, with the diplomatic push aimed at ending the war in Afghanistan set to restart over the weekend following "solid" talks between the adversaries.

The US and the Taliban have paused negotiations in Doha, with the diplomatic push aimed at ending the war in Afghanistan set to restart over the weekend following "solid" talks between the adversaries. The latest meetings follow marathon talks last month that saw the US and the Taliban walk away with a "draft framework" focused on a potential US troop withdrawal and a pact to prevent Afghanistan from harbouring terrorists. "Emerging from three solid days of talks with the Taliban in #Doha. Meetings were productive," tweeted US special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, who is leading the American side during the negotiations. "We continue to take slow, steady steps toward understanding and eventually #peace," he said. "Both sides will take the next two days for internal deliberations, with plans to regroup on Saturday," Khalilzad added. Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid confirmed the pause, adding the insurgents were "committed to the current peace process along with peace". The US has continued to push for a ceasefire in the war-torn country and the opening of negotiations between the Taliban and the Kabul government. The Taliban, however, has repeatedly refused to meet with officials of the Afghan government, whom they dismiss as "puppets". Khalilzad hinted that headway was being made on the issue, tweeting "there is also progress on forming a national team in #Kabul ready to engage in intra-Afghan dialogue and talks with the Taliban". Earlier in the week, the special envoy met with the Taliban's top political leader Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar in Doha, in what has been touted as the highest-level engagement between the two sides in the months-long diplomatic thrust. Khalilzad welcomed the presence of Baradar -- a co-founder of the Islamist movement -- at the table, calling the militants' negotiating side a "more authoritative Taliban delegation". Baradar is believed to be widely respected by the Taliban’s various factions and analysts said his participation would help garner support for any deal from insurgents on the frontlines. General Scott Miller, the top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, is also attending the talks. President Donald Trump has repeatedly voiced his eagerness to end America's involvement in Afghanistan, where 14,000 US troops are still deployed. Afghanistan has been enmeshed in nearly constant conflict since the Soviet invasion of 1979, which was followed by civil war, the Taliban regime, and the US invasion in late 2001.

US, Taliban pause negotiations in Doha following 'solid' talks

Afghan Taliban leaders said on Thursday that their new political chief will not be attending <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/russia-offers-to-help-us-on-afghan-peace-talks-with-taliban-ria-195886">peace talks with US envoys due to take place in Qatar</a> next week.

US officials had been keen to negotiate with Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, hoping the Taliban's co-founder and military veteran would add momentum and have the clout to discuss tough issues surrounding the end of America's longest war.

But senior Taliban leaders said Baradar would not be travelling to Qatar, citing different reasons including problems obtaining travel documents as well difference among the leadership over his precise role in the talks.

Baradar was released from a Pakistani jail in October and his appointment was widely seen as marking a new push by the Taliban to emerge from the political and diplomatic shadows.

Baradar, who earlier led the insurgent group’s military operations in southern Afghanistan, was arrested in 2010 by a team from Pakistan and US intelligence agencies. A co-founder of the movement, he was a close friend of the reclusive late Taliban leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar, who gave him his nom de guerre, "Baradar" or "brother".

"Actually Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar wanted to go to Qatar and personally head the peace talks but due to a host of reasons, he would not be able to travel to Qatar and participate in talks," one leader told Reuters on condition of anonymity.

Taliban spokesman Sohail Shahin said earlier this week that he was unable to say whether Baradar would be attending.

January talks

The last round of talks ended in Qatar in January with both the hardline Islamist movement and US special peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad hailing progress after a longer-than-expected six-day session.

US officials familiar with discussions said they were hoping to get more details over fresh assurances from the Taliban that they would not allow Afghanistan to be used by groups such as al-Qaeda and Islamic State to attack the United States and its allies - a key demand by Washington.

The timing of a ceasefire and the withdrawal of foreign forces remain sticking points, while Washington is also pushing the Taliban to talk to the Afghan government.

The movement has so far boycotted the government, saying it is a puppet of the United States - a position that has alarmed Afghan President Ashraf Ghani.

Another Taliban official said they were not expecting breakthroughs in the coming talks, adding that they also wanted to discuss the exchange of prisoners and lifting bans on the movement of Taliban leaders.

The Taliban side will continue to be headed by lead negotiator Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, a figure who has been increasingly active diplomatically and who recently met Afghan opposition politicians in Moscow.

The movement earlier announced that its team would meet US negotiators this week in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, as well holding talks with Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan. The meetings did not take place for reasons that remain unclear.

Staging near-daily attacks against the Western-backed Afghan government and its security forces, the Taliban contest or control nearly half of Afghanistan and are widely seen as more powerful than at any time since being toppled from power in the 2001 US-led invasion.

The United States has nearly 14,000 troops in Afghanistan as part of a US-led NATO mission to train, assist and advise Afghan defence and security forces as well as a separate counter-terrorism effort.

Afghan Taliban leaders said on Thursday that their new political chief will not be attending peace talks with US envoys due to take place in Qatar next week. US officials had been keen to negotiate with Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, hoping the Taliban's co-founder and military veteran would add momentum and have the clout to discuss tough issues surrounding the end of America's longest war.

Afghan Taliban leaders said on Thursday that their new political chief will not be attending peace talks with US envoys due to take place in Qatar next week. US officials had been keen to negotiate with Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, hoping the Taliban's co-founder and military veteran would add momentum and have the clout to discuss tough issues surrounding the end of America's longest war. But senior Taliban leaders said Baradar would not be travelling to Qatar, citing different reasons including problems obtaining travel documents as well difference among the leadership over his precise role in the talks. Baradar was released from a Pakistani jail in October and his appointment was widely seen as marking a new push by the Taliban to emerge from the political and diplomatic shadows. Baradar, who earlier led the insurgent group’s military operations in southern Afghanistan, was arrested in 2010 by a team from Pakistan and US intelligence agencies. A co-founder of the movement, he was a close friend of the reclusive late Taliban leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar, who gave him his nom de guerre, "Baradar" or "brother". "Actually Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar wanted to go to Qatar and personally head the peace talks but due to a host of reasons, he would not be able to travel to Qatar and participate in talks," one leader told Reuters on condition of anonymity. Taliban spokesman Sohail Shahin said earlier this week that he was unable to say whether Baradar would be attending. January talks The last round of talks ended in Qatar in January with both the hardline Islamist movement and US special peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad hailing progress after a longer-than-expected six-day session. US officials familiar with discussions said they were hoping to get more details over fresh assurances from the Taliban that they would not allow Afghanistan to be used by groups such as al-Qaeda and Islamic State to attack the United States and its allies - a key demand by Washington. The timing of a ceasefire and the withdrawal of foreign forces remain sticking points, while Washington is also pushing the Taliban to talk to the Afghan government. The movement has so far boycotted the government, saying it is a puppet of the United States - a position that has alarmed Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. Another Taliban official said they were not expecting breakthroughs in the coming talks, adding that they also wanted to discuss the exchange of prisoners and lifting bans on the movement of Taliban leaders. The Taliban side will continue to be headed by lead negotiator Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, a figure who has been increasingly active diplomatically and who recently met Afghan opposition politicians in Moscow. The movement earlier announced that its team would meet US negotiators this week in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, as well holding talks with Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan. The meetings did not take place for reasons that remain unclear. Staging near-daily attacks against the Western-backed Afghan government and its security forces, the Taliban contest or control nearly half of Afghanistan and are widely seen as more powerful than at any time since being toppled from power in the 2001 US-led invasion. The United States has nearly 14,000 troops in Afghanistan as part of a US-led NATO mission to train, assist and advise Afghan defence and security forces as well as a separate counter-terrorism effort.

New Taliban political chief to miss upcoming Afghan peace talks with US envoys in Qatar

NATO on Wednesday condemned as "unacceptable" threats by Russian President Vladimir Putin to deploy new missiles against Western capitals, as a key Cold War arms control treaty crumbles.

The Russian leader struck a combative note in a state of the nation address, warning Washington against deploying new missiles in Europe after the collapse of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, saying <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/well-target-us-if-washington-deploys-missiles-in-europe-putin-198553">Moscow would install its own weapons targeting "decision-making centres"</a>.

"Russian statements threatening to target Allies are unacceptable. We call on Russia to focus on returning to compliance with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty," NATO deputy spokesman Piers Cazalet said in a statement.

"NATO is a defensive alliance, which stands ready to defend all members against any threat. We do not want a new arms race, and allies have repeatedly called on Russia to verifiably destroy its intermediate-range missiles."

The US announced earlier this month it was withdrawing from the INF treaty saying Russia had been in breach of the agreement for several years by deploying a new missile system. Russia, which insists the system complies with the INF, said it would pull out too.

NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg has said several times in recent weeks that the alliance would not deploy any new land-based nuclear weapons in response to the Russian missiles. 
&nbsp;

NATO on Wednesday condemned as "unacceptable" threats by Russian President Vladimir Putin to deploy new missiles against Western capitals, as a key Cold War arms control treaty crumbles.

NATO on Wednesday condemned as "unacceptable" threats by Russian President Vladimir Putin to deploy new missiles against Western capitals, as a key Cold War arms control treaty crumbles. The Russian leader struck a combative note in a state of the nation address, warning Washington against deploying new missiles in Europe after the collapse of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, saying Moscow would install its own weapons targeting "decision-making centres". "Russian statements threatening to target Allies are unacceptable. We call on Russia to focus on returning to compliance with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty," NATO deputy spokesman Piers Cazalet said in a statement. "NATO is a defensive alliance, which stands ready to defend all members against any threat. We do not want a new arms race, and allies have repeatedly called on Russia to verifiably destroy its intermediate-range missiles." The US announced earlier this month it was withdrawing from the INF treaty saying Russia had been in breach of the agreement for several years by deploying a new missile system. Russia, which insists the system complies with the INF, said it would pull out too. NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg has said several times in recent weeks that the alliance would not deploy any new land-based nuclear weapons in response to the Russian missiles.

NATO condemns 'unacceptable' Putin missile threats

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sought Tuesday to reassure Europeans that there is broad-based and long-term US support for the transatlantic alliance despite President Donald Trump's harsh criticism.

In an implicit message, the Republican president is not omnipotent, the most powerful Democrat said she and fellow visiting congressmen were asserting the role of their legislative branch as co-equal to the executive.

The congressmen are "reaffirming our commitment to the transatlantic alliance, our commitment to NATO, our respect for the European Union and our ability and desire for us all to work together to strengthen our alliance," Pelosi told a press conference in Brussels.

The congressmen spent Monday and Tuesday in Brussels, headquarters of NATO and the European Union, where they attended a meeting of members of parliament from NATO nations as well as talks with EU officials.

Before Belgium, Pelosi had been in Germany as part of a larger group of Democratic and Republican lawmakers who attended the Munich Security Conference to support the transatlantic alliance.

Pelosi said the new Democratic-led house, which followed last November's mid-term elections, was helping assert itself in line with the constitution.

"We have Article 1, the legislative branch, the first branch of government, co-equal to the other branches and we have asserted ourselves in that way," Pelosi said.

With Democrats in control of the House, she said, the Republican minority came into line behind the NATO Support Act, which she said passed by an overwhelming 357 votes to 22.

The Democratic congressmen met EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini and her boss, European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker.&nbsp;

Mogherini's office said the US and EU sides "confirmed the crucial importance of maintaining a strong transatlantic partnership."

It said this would happen through "continued cooperation and dialogue" in areas like trade, climate change and human rights.&nbsp;

Both Mogherini and Pelosi "confirmed the importance of safeguarding multilateralism and the international rules-based order in promoting democratic values," Mogherini's office said.

Washington's European allies in NATO remain on edge since Trump, during a summit in July, reportedly threatened to "go it alone" unless they boosted defence spending.

Trump's "America First" approach to trade, including tariffs on metals and threats of tariffs on autos, has also worried Europeans he will abandon the alliance.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sought Tuesday to reassure Europeans that there is broad-based and long-term US support for the transatlantic alliance despite President Donald Trump's harsh criticism.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sought Tuesday to reassure Europeans that there is broad-based and long-term US support for the transatlantic alliance despite President Donald Trump's harsh criticism. In an implicit message, the Republican president is not omnipotent, the most powerful Democrat said she and fellow visiting congressmen were asserting the role of their legislative branch as co-equal to the executive. The congressmen are "reaffirming our commitment to the transatlantic alliance, our commitment to NATO, our respect for the European Union and our ability and desire for us all to work together to strengthen our alliance," Pelosi told a press conference in Brussels. The congressmen spent Monday and Tuesday in Brussels, headquarters of NATO and the European Union, where they attended a meeting of members of parliament from NATO nations as well as talks with EU officials. Before Belgium, Pelosi had been in Germany as part of a larger group of Democratic and Republican lawmakers who attended the Munich Security Conference to support the transatlantic alliance. Pelosi said the new Democratic-led house, which followed last November's mid-term elections, was helping assert itself in line with the constitution. "We have Article 1, the legislative branch, the first branch of government, co-equal to the other branches and we have asserted ourselves in that way," Pelosi said. With Democrats in control of the House, she said, the Republican minority came into line behind the NATO Support Act, which she said passed by an overwhelming 357 votes to 22. The Democratic congressmen met EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini and her boss, European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker. Mogherini's office said the US and EU sides "confirmed the crucial importance of maintaining a strong transatlantic partnership." It said this would happen through "continued cooperation and dialogue" in areas like trade, climate change and human rights. Both Mogherini and Pelosi "confirmed the importance of safeguarding multilateralism and the international rules-based order in promoting democratic values," Mogherini's office said. Washington's European allies in NATO remain on edge since Trump, during a summit in July, reportedly threatened to "go it alone" unless they boosted defence spending. Trump's "America First" approach to trade, including tariffs on metals and threats of tariffs on autos, has also worried Europeans he will abandon the alliance.

Pelosi pledges long-term US backing of NATO, EU

Turkey will not turn back from its deal to buy S-400 missile systems from Russia, President Tayyip Erdogan was quoted as saying on Saturday, a day after an informal deadline Washington set for Ankara to respond to a rival offer passed.

NATO member Turkey has repeatedly said it is committed to buying the Russian missile defence system, despite warnings from the US-led alliance that the S-400s cannot be integrated into the NATO air defence system.

US officials had set an informal deadline of February 15 for Ankara to respond to the rival US offer and have said that if Turkey proceeds with the S-400 purchase, Washington will withdraw its offer to sell a $3.5 billion Raytheon Co-Patriot missile package.

They have also said it would jeopardize Turkey's purchase of Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter jets and possibly result in the United States imposing sanctions.

However, speaking to reporters on the flight back from the Russian resort of Sochi, where a three-way summit on Syria between Turkey, Russia and Iran was held, Erdogan said Ankara would press on with the S-400 purchases.

"We made the S-400 deal with Russia, so it out of the question for us to turn back. That's done," Erdogan said, according to broadcaster NTV.

He said Turkey was open to purchasing Patriot systems from the United States as long as the deal served Turkey's interests but added there were issues on delivery and production that were still being discussed with Washington.

"The US administration views the early delivery issue positively, but they won't say anything about joint production or a credit. We continue our work based on the promise of the S-400 deliveries in July."

The formal US offer for Turkey's purchase of Patriot systems expires at the end of March, US officials have told Reuters, after which a new offer would have to be submitted.

The United States asked Turkey to give at least an informal answer on whether it would go ahead with its S-400 purchase by February 15, one US official said.

It was not immediately clear whether Turkey had responded to the US offer.

Turkey will not turn back from its deal to buy S-400 missile systems from Russia, President Tayyip Erdogan was quoted as saying on Saturday, a day after an informal deadline Washington set for Ankara to respond to a rival offer passed.

Turkey will not turn back from its deal to buy S-400 missile systems from Russia, President Tayyip Erdogan was quoted as saying on Saturday, a day after an informal deadline Washington set for Ankara to respond to a rival offer passed. NATO member Turkey has repeatedly said it is committed to buying the Russian missile defence system, despite warnings from the US-led alliance that the S-400s cannot be integrated into the NATO air defence system. US officials had set an informal deadline of February 15 for Ankara to respond to the rival US offer and have said that if Turkey proceeds with the S-400 purchase, Washington will withdraw its offer to sell a $3.5 billion Raytheon Co-Patriot missile package. They have also said it would jeopardize Turkey's purchase of Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter jets and possibly result in the United States imposing sanctions. However, speaking to reporters on the flight back from the Russian resort of Sochi, where a three-way summit on Syria between Turkey, Russia and Iran was held, Erdogan said Ankara would press on with the S-400 purchases. "We made the S-400 deal with Russia, so it out of the question for us to turn back. That's done," Erdogan said, according to broadcaster NTV. He said Turkey was open to purchasing Patriot systems from the United States as long as the deal served Turkey's interests but added there were issues on delivery and production that were still being discussed with Washington. "The US administration views the early delivery issue positively, but they won't say anything about joint production or a credit. We continue our work based on the promise of the S-400 deliveries in July." The formal US offer for Turkey's purchase of Patriot systems expires at the end of March, US officials have told Reuters, after which a new offer would have to be submitted. The United States asked Turkey to give at least an informal answer on whether it would go ahead with its S-400 purchase by February 15, one US official said. It was not immediately clear whether Turkey had responded to the US offer.

Turkey's Erdogan says no going back from S-400 deal with Russia: Source

The US carried out an air strike against <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-increases-bounty-to-10-million-for-information-on-al-qaeda-leader-172217">Islamist group Al-Qaeda in southern Libya </a>on Wednesday night, Tripoli's UN-backed government of national accord said.

The strike near the town of Ubari, some 900 kilometres (550 miles) south of the capital, was coordinated with the GNA, said President Fayez al-Sarraj's spokesman.&nbsp;

It targeted "a number of members of terrorist organisation Al-Qaeda", Mohamad al-Sallak said in a statement, giving no further details.

Libya has been wracked by violence and torn between rival administrations since the NATO-backed overthrow and killing of dictator Moamer Kadhafi in 2011.

The GNA was formed following a UN-backed deal in December 2015, but it has struggled to impose its power across the country.

The US military regularly carries out air strikes in Libya against Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State group.

Last year in August it said it had killed an IS member described by a source as a former local leader of the jihadists.

In June the US said it had killed four members of an IS affiliate near the northern town of Bani Walid, while in March the Pentagon confirmed a senior Al-Qaeda operative and another jihadist died in a US air strike. 
&nbsp;

The US carried out an air strike against Islamist group Al-Qaeda in southern Libya on Wednesday night, Tripoli's UN-backed government of national accord said. The strike near the town of Ubari, some 900 kilometres (550 miles) south of the capital, was coordinated with the GNA, said President Fayez al-Sarraj's spokesman.

The US carried out an air strike against Islamist group Al-Qaeda in southern Libya on Wednesday night, Tripoli's UN-backed government of national accord said. The strike near the town of Ubari, some 900 kilometres (550 miles) south of the capital, was coordinated with the GNA, said President Fayez al-Sarraj's spokesman. It targeted "a number of members of terrorist organisation Al-Qaeda", Mohamad al-Sallak said in a statement, giving no further details. Libya has been wracked by violence and torn between rival administrations since the NATO-backed overthrow and killing of dictator Moamer Kadhafi in 2011. The GNA was formed following a UN-backed deal in December 2015, but it has struggled to impose its power across the country. The US military regularly carries out air strikes in Libya against Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State group. Last year in August it said it had killed an IS member described by a source as a former local leader of the jihadists. In June the US said it had killed four members of an IS affiliate near the northern town of Bani Walid, while in March the Pentagon confirmed a senior Al-Qaeda operative and another jihadist died in a US air strike.

US targeted al-Qaeda in air strikes over Libya: UN-backed govt

Estonia is one of the most advanced digital societies in the world. In 2007, a small country in Europe, Estonia was under a cyberattack. The attack paralysed the entire digital network of the country and brought it to a standstill.&nbsp;

More than ten years later, the country is showing the world way forward in cybersecurity and digitisation.&nbsp;

WION's Principal Diplomatic correspondent Sidhant Sibal spoke to Estonia's ambassador to India, Riho Kruuv on security in the cyberspace and dealing with privacy on social media platforms.

WION: What lessons you learned from the 2007 cyberattacks?

Riho Kruuv: One of the lessons you can get from Estonia is when life gives you lemons turn it into lemonade. As u mentioned, cyber attack, guess one year later we had our government services covered with blockchain technology. There was also NATO cybersecurity centre established in Estonia. We used the attack as a major lesson to learn. Also, what is important to mention is we are very advance in technology, that is true, and everyone understands that. But we see as a major guiding principle is that you have to focus on security also. Digital solutions and cybersecurity two sides of the same coin. We save 2% of GDP just by going digital. It comes from making processes faster and less corruption.

WION: What can Estonia give to New Delhi?

Riho Kruuv: We have worked very closely with India. We have seen a lot of interest from union and state government's side to come and explore how Estonia dealing with e-governance, cybersecurity and blockchain. We just hosted two delegations. We would like to bring our companies and develop customer solutions for India.

WION: How do you see India's digital India or Aadhar programmes?

Riho Kruuv: I have been in India since August 2016. And to be honest, when I came to India, Aadhar was launched, of course, Digital India was started earlier. But it was the time things had started popping up and major development started. Was impressed by the speed how India was moving particularly on the penetration of Mobil Technology. And a number of Mobil subscribers and number of smartphones. In Estonia, we have leapfrogged many technology platforms. Electronic election Machine, we don't use them at all. We have developed a solution of voting over the internet. &nbsp;We used it since 2005. Many opportunities were we can work together and learn from each other. This Aadhar card, the concept of Indian digital identification, I love it a lot.

WION: Privacy and security on the social media platform have been a concern. How do you deal with it?

Riho Kruuv: Well, of course, we all use Google, Facebook and other technology platform or applications. It seems to be that, people give much more information to those social media platform than to the government. What comes is a high level of trust between government and people in Estonia. Personal data of Estonians having digital identities has never been compromised. Level of security of the system, you can understand, when we use for election, it must be good and trusted. It 30% of the population use the internet to cast vote.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

Estonia is one of the most advanced digital societies in the world. In 2007, a small country in Europe, Estonia was under a cyberattack. The attack paralysed the entire digital network of the country and brought it to a standstill.

Estonia is one of the most advanced digital societies in the world. In 2007, a small country in Europe, Estonia was under a cyberattack. The attack paralysed the entire digital network of the country and brought it to a standstill. More than ten years later, the country is showing the world way forward in cybersecurity and digitisation. WION's Principal Diplomatic correspondent Sidhant Sibal spoke to Estonia's ambassador to India, Riho Kruuv on security in the cyberspace and dealing with privacy on social media platforms. WION: What lessons you learned from the 2007 cyberattacks? Riho Kruuv: One of the lessons you can get from Estonia is when life gives you lemons turn it into lemonade. As u mentioned, cyber attack, guess one year later we had our government services covered with blockchain technology. There was also NATO cybersecurity centre established in Estonia. We used the attack as a major lesson to learn. Also, what is important to mention is we are very advance in technology, that is true, and everyone understands that. But we see as a major guiding principle is that you have to focus on security also. Digital solutions and cybersecurity two sides of the same coin. We save 2% of GDP just by going digital. It comes from making processes faster and less corruption. WION: What can Estonia give to New Delhi? Riho Kruuv: We have worked very closely with India. We have seen a lot of interest from union and state government's side to come and explore how Estonia dealing with e-governance, cybersecurity and blockchain. We just hosted two delegations. We would like to bring our companies and develop customer solutions for India. WION: How do you see India's digital India or Aadhar programmes? Riho Kruuv: I have been in India since August 2016. And to be honest, when I came to India, Aadhar was launched, of course, Digital India was started earlier. But it was the time things had started popping up and major development started. Was impressed by the speed how India was moving particularly on the penetration of Mobil Technology. And a number of Mobil subscribers and number of smartphones. In Estonia, we have leapfrogged many technology platforms. Electronic election Machine, we don't use them at all. We have developed a solution of voting over the internet. We used it since 2005. Many opportunities were we can work together and learn from each other. This Aadhar card, the concept of Indian digital identification, I love it a lot. WION: Privacy and security on the social media platform have been a concern. How do you deal with it? Riho Kruuv: Well, of course, we all use Google, Facebook and other technology platform or applications. It seems to be that, people give much more information to those social media platform than to the government. What comes is a high level of trust between government and people in Estonia. Personal data of Estonians having digital identities has never been compromised. Level of security of the system, you can understand, when we use for election, it must be good and trusted. It 30% of the population use the internet to cast vote.

When life gives you lemons, turn them into lemonade: Estonian ambassador to WION on cyber attacks

Britain is ready to do "all that is required" to neutralise the threat from the Islamic State group, defence minister Gavin Williamson said Wednesday after the US suggested creating a new international mission in northeast Syria.

Acting US defence secretary Patrick Shanahan said he would consult with allies at a meeting of NATO defence ministers in Brussels about the "potential" for an observer force in northeast Syria after American forces pull out.

US-backed forces are currently in the fifth day of a fierce battle to expel IS fighters from their last holdout in eastern Syria -- the final remaining scrap of the "caliphate" the jihadists declared in 2014.

But the US is set to withdraw its 2,000 troops from the country, as announced by President Donald Trump in December, in a move that shocked America's allies and raised security fears for the region.&nbsp;

Asked if Britain would support an observer force with boots on the ground, Williamson did not demur but pledged to carry on the fight against IS, also known as Daesh.

"We recognise the fact the threat of Daesh is going to evolve and it's going to change and it's going to disperse," Williamson said as he arrived for the NATO meeting.

"We will continue to do all that is required to ensure that Britain and our allies remain safe."

Shanahan visited Baghdad on Tuesday to reassure Iraqi leaders after President Donald Trump angered many by saying he wanted to maintain some troops at the Al-Asad airbase, northwest of Baghdad, to keep an eye on Iran.

Afterwards, Shanahan said he would use the NATO meeting to discuss "where we can take advantage of the opportunities there... in terms of the potential in the northeast, Syria to establish an observer force" to ensure stability in the longer term.

The international anti-IS coalition, which includes the US and many NATO countries as well as Middle Eastern nations, could be an option for the proposed force, Shanahan said. 
&nbsp;

Britain is ready to do "all that is required" to neutralise the threat from the Islamic State group, defence minister Gavin Williamson said Wednesday after the US suggested creating a new international mission in northeast Syria.

Britain is ready to do "all that is required" to neutralise the threat from the Islamic State group, defence minister Gavin Williamson said Wednesday after the US suggested creating a new international mission in northeast Syria. Acting US defence secretary Patrick Shanahan said he would consult with allies at a meeting of NATO defence ministers in Brussels about the "potential" for an observer force in northeast Syria after American forces pull out. US-backed forces are currently in the fifth day of a fierce battle to expel IS fighters from their last holdout in eastern Syria -- the final remaining scrap of the "caliphate" the jihadists declared in 2014. But the US is set to withdraw its 2,000 troops from the country, as announced by President Donald Trump in December, in a move that shocked America's allies and raised security fears for the region. Asked if Britain would support an observer force with boots on the ground, Williamson did not demur but pledged to carry on the fight against IS, also known as Daesh. "We recognise the fact the threat of Daesh is going to evolve and it's going to change and it's going to disperse," Williamson said as he arrived for the NATO meeting. "We will continue to do all that is required to ensure that Britain and our allies remain safe." Shanahan visited Baghdad on Tuesday to reassure Iraqi leaders after President Donald Trump angered many by saying he wanted to maintain some troops at the Al-Asad airbase, northwest of Baghdad, to keep an eye on Iran. Afterwards, Shanahan said he would use the NATO meeting to discuss "where we can take advantage of the opportunities there... in terms of the potential in the northeast, Syria to establish an observer force" to ensure stability in the longer term. The international anti-IS coalition, which includes the US and many NATO countries as well as Middle Eastern nations, could be an option for the proposed force, Shanahan said.

Britain will 'do what it takes' to beat IS: Defence minister Gavin Williamson

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has no intention of deploying new ground-based nuclear missiles in Europe in the event that a Soviet-era treaty aimed at eliminating short- and medium-range missiles is abandoned, the head of the Alliance said Tuesday.

Jens Stoltenberg told reporters in Brussels ahead of a meeting with NATO defence ministers that Russia's "violation" of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty) would be one of the topics on the agenda.

"We do not intend to deploy new ground-based nuclear missiles in Europe," Stoltenberg said. "At the same time, we remain committed to meaningful arms control and non-proliferation efforts."&nbsp;

"NATO does not want a new arms race, because that would be in nobody's interest," added Stoltenberg.

The NATO chief said the United States and other allies had called on Moscow to abide by the treaty "over many years," and that was why the US recently announced its intention to abandon the treaty within six months.&nbsp;

"We all know that a treaty that is only respected by one side cannot keep us safe," said the politician.

He urged Russia to "take the responsible path" and "return to compliance and save the INF Treaty," something that was being offered as a "last opportunity."

The Norwegian politician acknowledged, however, that NATO allies were "planning for a world without the INF Treaty."

NATO defence ministers were to meet in the Belgian capital on Wednesday and Thursday.

Stoltenberg said other topics on the agenda would be NATO missions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo.

Ministers would also attend a session on NATO-European Union cooperation and EU defence efforts, the head of the Alliance said.

"Of course, EU efforts on defence cannot replace NATO," he said, adding that any EU efforts must complement and not compete with existing ones.

The chief ended his speech by welcoming the defence minister of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Radmila Sekerinska, whose country joined a NATO meeting for the first time after member states last week signed an accession protocol for the eastern European nation.&nbsp;

The INF Treaty was signed on December 8, 1987, between the US and Soviet Union, an agreement aimed to eliminate short-range missiles (covering a range of up to 1,000 kilometres; 620 miles) and intermediate ones (up to 5,500 km; 3,420 miles). 
&nbsp;

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has no intention of deploying new ground-based nuclear missiles in Europe in the event that a Soviet-era treaty aimed at eliminating short- and medium-range missiles is abandoned, the head of the Alliance said Tuesday.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has no intention of deploying new ground-based nuclear missiles in Europe in the event that a Soviet-era treaty aimed at eliminating short- and medium-range missiles is abandoned, the head of the Alliance said Tuesday. Jens Stoltenberg told reporters in Brussels ahead of a meeting with NATO defence ministers that Russia's "violation" of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty) would be one of the topics on the agenda. "We do not intend to deploy new ground-based nuclear missiles in Europe," Stoltenberg said. "At the same time, we remain committed to meaningful arms control and non-proliferation efforts." "NATO does not want a new arms race, because that would be in nobody's interest," added Stoltenberg. The NATO chief said the United States and other allies had called on Moscow to abide by the treaty "over many years," and that was why the US recently announced its intention to abandon the treaty within six months. "We all know that a treaty that is only respected by one side cannot keep us safe," said the politician. He urged Russia to "take the responsible path" and "return to compliance and save the INF Treaty," something that was being offered as a "last opportunity." The Norwegian politician acknowledged, however, that NATO allies were "planning for a world without the INF Treaty." NATO defence ministers were to meet in the Belgian capital on Wednesday and Thursday. Stoltenberg said other topics on the agenda would be NATO missions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo. Ministers would also attend a session on NATO-European Union cooperation and EU defence efforts, the head of the Alliance said. "Of course, EU efforts on defence cannot replace NATO," he said, adding that any EU efforts must complement and not compete with existing ones. The chief ended his speech by welcoming the defence minister of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Radmila Sekerinska, whose country joined a NATO meeting for the first time after member states last week signed an accession protocol for the eastern European nation. The INF Treaty was signed on December 8, 1987, between the US and Soviet Union, an agreement aimed to eliminate short-range missiles (covering a range of up to 1,000 kilometres; 620 miles) and intermediate ones (up to 5,500 km; 3,420 miles).

NATO rules out new missiles in Europe, says it does not want arms race

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is hoping to stall inroads of Russian and Chinese influence as he visits two of the European Union's most quarrelsome members, Hungary and Poland.

The top US diplomat arrives Monday in Hungary and will also visit Slovakia and Poland, in each NATO ally highlighting Washington's role in the fall of communism 30 years ago.

Poland, eager for a strong US relationship amid a resurgent Russia, is teaming up with Pompeo to hold a two-day conference on the Middle East, which has drawn limited interest as Europeans balk at President Donald Trump's hawkish line on Iran.

Hungary has drawn especially deep concerns among Western powers as Prime Minister Viktor Orban shows growing authoritarianism, buddies up with Russian President Vladimir Putin despite Western worries over Ukraine and willfully exercises Hungary's veto within the 28-member EU.

A US official said Pompeo will raise concerns about Orban's support for the Russian-backed TurkStream gas pipeline, Moscow's financing of the Paks nuclear plant in Hungary — and especially the country's agreement to let Huawei develop its 5G mobile networks, as Washington accuses the Chinese telecom giant of undermining global security.

Populist praise for Trump&nbsp;

The right-wing leaders of Poland and Hungary have been among the few Europeans to praise Trump, sharing his hard line against refugees, his extolling of Christian values and his antipathy toward the power of multilateral bodies such as the EU.

The Trump administration initially welcomed engagement with Orban, who received the cold shoulder from former US president Barack Obama, but concerns have mounted in Washington that Hungary has moved no closer into the US orbit.

Last year, Hungary disappointed the United States by sending two suspected Russian arms dealers wanted by Washington back home.

And despite the US ambassador's intervention, Budapest's renowned Central European University last year said it was moving key programs to Vienna due to tough requirements imposed by Orban on institutions it considers foreign.

The university was founded by US-Hungarian billionaire philanthropist George Soros, an outspoken proponent of liberal values, who is vilified by the far-right in both countries with imagery that is at times anti-Semitic.

The State Department said that Pompeo would not shy away from raising concerns with Orban and would meet in Hungary with civil society groups.

Orban's chief of staff Gergely Gulyas scoffed at Pompeo's meeting with non-governmental groups, telling reporters: "If a US foreign minister meets organizations receiving support from America, then no one should be surprised about that."

'Show up or lose'&nbsp;

The US official adamantly defended engagement with Hungary, saying the Obama administration paid too little attention to Central Europe while Putin visited Budapest twice last year alone.

"We have to show up or expect to lose," the official said.

"Those vacuums that were created by the US not being more strongly present in these places, they do get filled and they have gotten filled," he said.&nbsp;

But Joerg Forbrig, an expert on Central Europe at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, said that Orban is a wily politician who knows that Washington has even less leverage over him than the EU, which he has defied for years despite the bloc's power of the purse over Hungary.

"This small country called Hungary, whether it's on Western values or traditional partnerships or existing integration schemes like NATO and the EU, they are completely spitting at this, and very consciously," Forbrig said.

He doubted that the United States and European Union could coordinate much on Hungary in light of Trump's poor relationships with major European allies such as Germany and France.

"I'm not sure Orban will be quite laughing Pompeo out the door, but I'm not sure he's taking his trip very seriously," Forbrig said.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is hoping to stall inroads of Russian and Chinese influence as he visits two of the European Union's most quarrelsome members, Hungary and Poland.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is hoping to stall inroads of Russian and Chinese influence as he visits two of the European Union's most quarrelsome members, Hungary and Poland. The top US diplomat arrives Monday in Hungary and will also visit Slovakia and Poland, in each NATO ally highlighting Washington's role in the fall of communism 30 years ago. Poland, eager for a strong US relationship amid a resurgent Russia, is teaming up with Pompeo to hold a two-day conference on the Middle East, which has drawn limited interest as Europeans balk at President Donald Trump's hawkish line on Iran. Hungary has drawn especially deep concerns among Western powers as Prime Minister Viktor Orban shows growing authoritarianism, buddies up with Russian President Vladimir Putin despite Western worries over Ukraine and willfully exercises Hungary's veto within the 28-member EU. A US official said Pompeo will raise concerns about Orban's support for the Russian-backed TurkStream gas pipeline, Moscow's financing of the Paks nuclear plant in Hungary — and especially the country's agreement to let Huawei develop its 5G mobile networks, as Washington accuses the Chinese telecom giant of undermining global security. Populist praise for Trump The right-wing leaders of Poland and Hungary have been among the few Europeans to praise Trump, sharing his hard line against refugees, his extolling of Christian values and his antipathy toward the power of multilateral bodies such as the EU. The Trump administration initially welcomed engagement with Orban, who received the cold shoulder from former US president Barack Obama, but concerns have mounted in Washington that Hungary has moved no closer into the US orbit. Last year, Hungary disappointed the United States by sending two suspected Russian arms dealers wanted by Washington back home. And despite the US ambassador's intervention, Budapest's renowned Central European University last year said it was moving key programs to Vienna due to tough requirements imposed by Orban on institutions it considers foreign. The university was founded by US-Hungarian billionaire philanthropist George Soros, an outspoken proponent of liberal values, who is vilified by the far-right in both countries with imagery that is at times anti-Semitic. The State Department said that Pompeo would not shy away from raising concerns with Orban and would meet in Hungary with civil society groups. Orban's chief of staff Gergely Gulyas scoffed at Pompeo's meeting with non-governmental groups, telling reporters: "If a US foreign minister meets organizations receiving support from America, then no one should be surprised about that." 'Show up or lose' The US official adamantly defended engagement with Hungary, saying the Obama administration paid too little attention to Central Europe while Putin visited Budapest twice last year alone. "We have to show up or expect to lose," the official said. "Those vacuums that were created by the US not being more strongly present in these places, they do get filled and they have gotten filled," he said. But Joerg Forbrig, an expert on Central Europe at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, said that Orban is a wily politician who knows that Washington has even less leverage over him than the EU, which he has defied for years despite the bloc's power of the purse over Hungary. "This small country called Hungary, whether it's on Western values or traditional partnerships or existing integration schemes like NATO and the EU, they are completely spitting at this, and very consciously," Forbrig said. He doubted that the United States and European Union could coordinate much on Hungary in light of Trump's poor relationships with major European allies such as Germany and France. "I'm not sure Orban will be quite laughing Pompeo out the door, but I'm not sure he's taking his trip very seriously," Forbrig said.

Pompeo seeks to end Hungary's eastward drift on Europe trip

Permanent representatives of the 29 members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) on Wednesday signed the Accession Protocol for the Republic of North Macedonia in Brussels, clearing the way for the Balkan nation to become the alliance's 30th member.

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg and Macedonia's Foreign Minister Nikola Dimitrov led the accession protocol signing ceremony at the alliance's headquarters in the Belgian capital.

Following the signing of the protocol, North Macedonia can take part in NATO activities as an invitee, said NATO in a statement published on its website.

The accession process now moves to the capitals of the 29 NATO members, where the protocol will be ratified according to national procedures. North Macedonia will become a member of NATO as soon as all members have ratified the protocol, said the statement.

Greece had previously blocked its neighbour's NATO membership over a name dispute. Athens saw the former Yugoslav republic's name as a threat to its own administrative region of Macedonia.

The Balkan nation has agreed to change its name to "Republic of North Macedonia" to gain access to NATO and the European Union (EU).

Permanent representatives of the 29 members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) on Wednesday signed the Accession Protocol for the Republic of North Macedonia in Brussels, clearing the way for the Balkan nation to become the alliance's 30th member.

Permanent representatives of the 29 members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) on Wednesday signed the Accession Protocol for the Republic of North Macedonia in Brussels, clearing the way for the Balkan nation to become the alliance's 30th member. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg and Macedonia's Foreign Minister Nikola Dimitrov led the accession protocol signing ceremony at the alliance's headquarters in the Belgian capital. Following the signing of the protocol, North Macedonia can take part in NATO activities as an invitee, said NATO in a statement published on its website. The accession process now moves to the capitals of the 29 NATO members, where the protocol will be ratified according to national procedures. North Macedonia will become a member of NATO as soon as all members have ratified the protocol, said the statement. Greece had previously blocked its neighbour's NATO membership over a name dispute. Athens saw the former Yugoslav republic's name as a threat to its own administrative region of Macedonia. The Balkan nation has agreed to change its name to "Republic of North Macedonia" to gain access to NATO and the European Union (EU).

NATO signs accession protocol with Macedonia to become alliance partner

NATO Secretary General, Jons Stoltenberg, has stated that alliance troops would not stay "longer than necessary" in Afghanistan.

"We will not stay longer than necessary, but we will not leave before we have a situation, which enables to leave or reduce the number of troops without jeopardizing the main goal of our presence," Sputnik quoted Stoltenberg as saying during a meeting with the US acting Defence Secretary Patrick Shanahan on Monday."

''We strongly support those efforts…We are in close contact with the United States…Our military presence, the purpose of that is to create the conditions for the political solution, and we hope that we will be able to achieve that," the NATO chief remarked during the meeting.

He outlined that it is "too early to speculate" about the withdrawal of NATO alliance troops from Afghanistan, noting that it was imperative to reach a peaceful solution in Afghanistan.

This comes after the United States put forth that there had been significant progress during talks with the Taliban recently.

Furthermore, both the United States and Taliban agreed in principle to chalk out a framework for a deal that could eventually end the 17-year conflict in Afghanistan.

Previously, reports suggesting the exit of US troops have been dismissed by the White House, with authorities iterating that the US President, Donald Trump, had no such plans.

There are currently around 14,000 US troops and 16,000 personnel from NATO and its allies in Afghanistan.

NATO Secretary General, Jons Stoltenberg, has stated that alliance troops would not stay "longer than necessary" in Afghanistan. "We will not stay longer than necessary, but we will not leave before we have a situation, which enables to leave or reduce the number of troops without jeopardizing the main goal of our presence," Sputnik quoted Stoltenberg as saying during a meeting with the US acting Defence Secretary Patrick Shanahan on Monday.

NATO Secretary General, Jons Stoltenberg, has stated that alliance troops would not stay "longer than necessary" in Afghanistan. "We will not stay longer than necessary, but we will not leave before we have a situation, which enables to leave or reduce the number of troops without jeopardizing the main goal of our presence," Sputnik quoted Stoltenberg as saying during a meeting with the US acting Defence Secretary Patrick Shanahan on Monday." ''We strongly support those efforts…We are in close contact with the United States…Our military presence, the purpose of that is to create the conditions for the political solution, and we hope that we will be able to achieve that," the NATO chief remarked during the meeting. He outlined that it is "too early to speculate" about the withdrawal of NATO alliance troops from Afghanistan, noting that it was imperative to reach a peaceful solution in Afghanistan. This comes after the United States put forth that there had been significant progress during talks with the Taliban recently. Furthermore, both the United States and Taliban agreed in principle to chalk out a framework for a deal that could eventually end the 17-year conflict in Afghanistan. Previously, reports suggesting the exit of US troops have been dismissed by the White House, with authorities iterating that the US President, Donald Trump, had no such plans. There are currently around 14,000 US troops and 16,000 personnel from NATO and its allies in Afghanistan.

Will not stay longer than necessary in Afghanistan: NATO Chief

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said Sunday that US President Donald Trump's regular complaints about the alliance had not undermined it -- adding that his criticism on defence spending was having a positive impact.&nbsp;

Trump has frequently blasted members of the 29-nation western security partnership for <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-tells-nato-allies-to-more-than-double-defence-spending-150940">not paying more into their national defence budgets</a>.&nbsp;

Before taking office, he called NATO "obsolete" and recent media reports said he spoke to senior officials last year about pulling out.

"President Trump has been very clear, he is committed to NATO. He stated that clearly just a few days ago and also at the NATO summit in July," Stoltenberg said on "Fox News Sunday."

"But at the same time, he has clearly stated that NATO allies need to invest more. And therefore at the summit in July last year, we agreed to do more to step up -- and now we see the results."

NATO members agreed in 2014 to spend two percent of their gross domestic product on defence by 2024 but around half are not on course to make that target.&nbsp;

Stoltenberg said, however, that by the end of 2020, NATO allies would have added $100 billion extra toward defence spending.&nbsp;

"So we see some real money and some real results. And we see that the clear message from President Trump is having an impact," he added.

"NATO allies have heard the president loud and clear and now NATO allies are stepping up. So this is good news meaning that we actually see more fair burden sharing." &nbsp;

Earlier this month Trump repeated his view that close allies had been taking advantage of the US security umbrella for decades and that it was his mission to stop that.

"We cannot be the fools for others. We cannot be. We don't want to be called that. And I will tell you for many years behind your backs, that is what they were saying," he said during an address to the Pentagon.

The president acknowledged Stoltenberg's positive feedback soon after the interview aired, tweeting that sharing defence costs had made NATO "more united."

"Dems &amp; Fake News like to portray the opposite!" he added.

Stoltenberg was in Washington for meetings with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, acting Defence Secretary Pat Shanahan and national security adviser John Bolton.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said Sunday that US President Donald Trump's regular complaints about the alliance had not undermined it -- adding that his criticism on defence spending was having a positive impact.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said Sunday that US President Donald Trump's regular complaints about the alliance had not undermined it -- adding that his criticism on defence spending was having a positive impact. Trump has frequently blasted members of the 29-nation western security partnership for not paying more into their national defence budgets. Before taking office, he called NATO "obsolete" and recent media reports said he spoke to senior officials last year about pulling out. "President Trump has been very clear, he is committed to NATO. He stated that clearly just a few days ago and also at the NATO summit in July," Stoltenberg said on "Fox News Sunday." "But at the same time, he has clearly stated that NATO allies need to invest more. And therefore at the summit in July last year, we agreed to do more to step up -- and now we see the results." NATO members agreed in 2014 to spend two percent of their gross domestic product on defence by 2024 but around half are not on course to make that target. Stoltenberg said, however, that by the end of 2020, NATO allies would have added $100 billion extra toward defence spending. "So we see some real money and some real results. And we see that the clear message from President Trump is having an impact," he added. "NATO allies have heard the president loud and clear and now NATO allies are stepping up. So this is good news meaning that we actually see more fair burden sharing." Earlier this month Trump repeated his view that close allies had been taking advantage of the US security umbrella for decades and that it was his mission to stop that. "We cannot be the fools for others. We cannot be. We don't want to be called that. And I will tell you for many years behind your backs, that is what they were saying," he said during an address to the Pentagon. The president acknowledged Stoltenberg's positive feedback soon after the interview aired, tweeting that sharing defence costs had made NATO "more united." "Dems & Fake News like to portray the opposite!" he added. Stoltenberg was in Washington for meetings with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, acting Defence Secretary Pat Shanahan and national security adviser John Bolton.

Trump complains about defence spending by allies, NATO chief says it's having a positive impact

There’s one thing Turkey and the US can definitely agree on these days: Unreliability is now the bedrock of their relationship. It’s perhaps not surprising when the two powers are led by notably unpredictable men — US President Donald Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

In the latest antagonism, Erdogan’s close adviser, Yasin Aktay, has spoken of the US as a “highly unreliable partner” due to its efforts to safeguard the Syrian Kurdish forces who have partnered with the US in defeating the Islamic State (IS) in Syria.

The criticism is a further illustration of the echo chambers in which diplomacy is being conducted at the moment. Far from seeking to reduce friction (the usual role of diplomacy), such statements are part of the new prickly nationalism that is everywhere in the ascendant.

The most glaring dimension of Aktay’s statement is its subjectivity. Trump’s announcement in December 2018 of the US troop withdrawal from Syria really did put America’s Syrian Kurdish allies in potential harm’s way, at the hands of the Turkish army. The recent move to safeguard that ally could be viewed, in fact, as reliability.

But of course, Atkay is speaking from within the echo chamber of Turkish politics. Within that chamber, the US has deserted its NATO ally in favour of a Syrian Kurdish militia with strong ties to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) — a movement within Turkey designated a terrorist organisation.

His assessment discounts the fact that the threat from IS was very real. The US needed local allies on the ground in order to counter it. Indeed, it was a long time before the Turkish government decided to give the fight against the Islamic State the same priority that it gave the fight against Kurdish groups.

Yet the Turkish displeasure with its NATO ally is not all paranoia and blinkered Turkish nationalism. President Trump has been cavalier in his diplomacy within the international body. He has also been transparently shortsighted in his engagement with the Middle East.

In line with his “America First” policies, Trump was quick to single out IS as a grave threat to be addressed, largely because it had the capacity to impact America itself and American lives. Trump and his predecessor, Barack Obama, have been far less eager to address Syria’s civil war.

From the Turkish viewpoint, this looks a lot like abandonment. The war on its southern frontier has been highly porous. It has deeply impacted Turkey in terms of terrorist atrocities, refugee flows, political destabilisation, economic impact and the very real threat of escalation from the Assad regime’s allies, Russia and Iran. None of this seems to have moved the US greatly.

Every man for himself

The result is a zero-sum environment in which all the key actors have gradually amassed leaders who see the best strategy as entrenchment and national defence. This may have been led by Russian President Vladimir Putin — the past master of such tactics — but it has been a domino effect.

President Erdogan has veered sharply in the same direction ever since the start of the Syrian conflict in 2011. With the election of Donald Trump to the US presidency in November 2016, the world’s key superpower has followed suit. In the current dispute, the only real losers are likely to be the Kurds.

The Turkish government position has ossified. It cannot easily roll back on its war with the Syrian Kurdish militia now. The US position is more fluid. As President Trump as demonstrated, Washington is quite capable of dropping the Syrian Kurdish militia.

The reason the US government has so far stepped back from leaving the Syrian Kurds at the full mercy of other powers in Syria is not altruism. The Syrian Kurds merely offered the right guns for hire at the right time. But to drop them would hand valuable power to US adversaries.

In the cases of Russia and Iran, that would stick in the craw of the US administration. The irony is, as things stand, the other “adversary” who would clearly benefit is a country — Turkey — that is supposed to be an erstwhile NATO ally and a bulwark in the Middle East.

(Nathaniel Handy is a writer and academic)

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/region/middle_east_north_africa/turkey-us-relations-syrian-kurds-syria-civil-war-islamic-state-world-news-57293/">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

There’s one thing Turkey and the US can definitely agree on these days: Unreliability is now the bedrock of their relationship. It’s perhaps not surprising when the two powers are led by notably unpredictable men — US President Donald Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

There’s one thing Turkey and the US can definitely agree on these days: Unreliability is now the bedrock of their relationship. It’s perhaps not surprising when the two powers are led by notably unpredictable men — US President Donald Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. In the latest antagonism, Erdogan’s close adviser, Yasin Aktay, has spoken of the US as a “highly unreliable partner” due to its efforts to safeguard the Syrian Kurdish forces who have partnered with the US in defeating the Islamic State (IS) in Syria. The criticism is a further illustration of the echo chambers in which diplomacy is being conducted at the moment. Far from seeking to reduce friction (the usual role of diplomacy), such statements are part of the new prickly nationalism that is everywhere in the ascendant. The most glaring dimension of Aktay’s statement is its subjectivity. Trump’s announcement in December 2018 of the US troop withdrawal from Syria really did put America’s Syrian Kurdish allies in potential harm’s way, at the hands of the Turkish army. The recent move to safeguard that ally could be viewed, in fact, as reliability. But of course, Atkay is speaking from within the echo chamber of Turkish politics. Within that chamber, the US has deserted its NATO ally in favour of a Syrian Kurdish militia with strong ties to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) — a movement within Turkey designated a terrorist organisation. His assessment discounts the fact that the threat from IS was very real. The US needed local allies on the ground in order to counter it. Indeed, it was a long time before the Turkish government decided to give the fight against the Islamic State the same priority that it gave the fight against Kurdish groups. Yet the Turkish displeasure with its NATO ally is not all paranoia and blinkered Turkish nationalism. President Trump has been cavalier in his diplomacy within the international body. He has also been transparently shortsighted in his engagement with the Middle East. In line with his “America First” policies, Trump was quick to single out IS as a grave threat to be addressed, largely because it had the capacity to impact America itself and American lives. Trump and his predecessor, Barack Obama, have been far less eager to address Syria’s civil war. From the Turkish viewpoint, this looks a lot like abandonment. The war on its southern frontier has been highly porous. It has deeply impacted Turkey in terms of terrorist atrocities, refugee flows, political destabilisation, economic impact and the very real threat of escalation from the Assad regime’s allies, Russia and Iran. None of this seems to have moved the US greatly. Every man for himself The result is a zero-sum environment in which all the key actors have gradually amassed leaders who see the best strategy as entrenchment and national defence. This may have been led by Russian President Vladimir Putin — the past master of such tactics — but it has been a domino effect. President Erdogan has veered sharply in the same direction ever since the start of the Syrian conflict in 2011. With the election of Donald Trump to the US presidency in November 2016, the world’s key superpower has followed suit. In the current dispute, the only real losers are likely to be the Kurds. The Turkish government position has ossified. It cannot easily roll back on its war with the Syrian Kurdish militia now. The US position is more fluid. As President Trump as demonstrated, Washington is quite capable of dropping the Syrian Kurdish militia. The reason the US government has so far stepped back from leaving the Syrian Kurds at the full mercy of other powers in Syria is not altruism. The Syrian Kurds merely offered the right guns for hire at the right time. But to drop them would hand valuable power to US adversaries. In the cases of Russia and Iran, that would stick in the craw of the US administration. The irony is, as things stand, the other “adversary” who would clearly benefit is a country — Turkey — that is supposed to be an erstwhile NATO ally and a bulwark in the Middle East. (Nathaniel Handy is a writer and academic) (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Why the US is still losing Turkey

Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tspiras Sunday called an "immediate" no-confidence vote in parliament over the resignation of a top minister opposed to the country's name change deal with Macedonia.

"We will proceed immediately to the renewal of the confidence in our government by the parliament in order to proceed with the major issues for our country," he said.

Tsipras earlier Sunday accepted the resignation of Defence Minister Panos Kammenos, who is head of his main coalition ally in government, the nationalist Independent Greeks party (ANEL).

The semi-official ANA news agency said the debate on a no-confidence vote could begin as early as Tuesday and could be concluded by Thursday.

Kammenos said that he would vote against the government as supporting it would imply backing for the name deal with Macedonia.

The nationalist ANEL has supported the Tsipras administration with its seven lawmakers and has six ministers and junior ministers in the government.

Kammenos had threatened to pull out of the government when the name deal comes to a vote in Athens from the moment Tsipras signed it with Macedonian Prime Minister Zoran Zaev in the border Prespes region in June. However, some of his ANEL party's MPs remain ambivalent.

Macedonian lawmakers voted late on Friday to rename their country the Republic of North Macedonia but the agreement now needs backing from the Greek parliament to come into effect.

For the Greeks, Macedonia is the name of a history-rich northern province that was the cradle of Alexander the Great's ancient empire.

Greece has blocked its neighbour's accession to NATO and the European Union ever since Macedonia broke away from the former Yugoslavia in 1991.

"We will do everything to block the ratification of the Prespes deal," Kammenos told a news conference Sunday after announcing his resignation.&nbsp;

He charged that the agreement was "anti-constitutional" and called for a referendum on the issue to coincide with EU elections in May.

After meeting with Tsipras earlier Sunday, Kammenos said, "the Macedonia issue does not allow me not to sacrifice my post".

Tsipras believes the agreement can be ratified with the 145 lawmakers of his leftist Syriza party plus the votes of the small pro-EU To Potami party as well as some ANEL lawmakers who disagree with Kammenos's position.

The main opposition New Democracy party is vehemently against the agreement.&nbsp;

Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tspiras Sunday called an "immediate" no-confidence vote in parliament over the resignation of a top minister opposed to the country's name change deal with Macedonia.

Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tspiras Sunday called an "immediate" no-confidence vote in parliament over the resignation of a top minister opposed to the country's name change deal with Macedonia. "We will proceed immediately to the renewal of the confidence in our government by the parliament in order to proceed with the major issues for our country," he said. Tsipras earlier Sunday accepted the resignation of Defence Minister Panos Kammenos, who is head of his main coalition ally in government, the nationalist Independent Greeks party (ANEL). The semi-official ANA news agency said the debate on a no-confidence vote could begin as early as Tuesday and could be concluded by Thursday. Kammenos said that he would vote against the government as supporting it would imply backing for the name deal with Macedonia. The nationalist ANEL has supported the Tsipras administration with its seven lawmakers and has six ministers and junior ministers in the government. Kammenos had threatened to pull out of the government when the name deal comes to a vote in Athens from the moment Tsipras signed it with Macedonian Prime Minister Zoran Zaev in the border Prespes region in June. However, some of his ANEL party's MPs remain ambivalent. Macedonian lawmakers voted late on Friday to rename their country the Republic of North Macedonia but the agreement now needs backing from the Greek parliament to come into effect. For the Greeks, Macedonia is the name of a history-rich northern province that was the cradle of Alexander the Great's ancient empire. Greece has blocked its neighbour's accession to NATO and the European Union ever since Macedonia broke away from the former Yugoslavia in 1991. "We will do everything to block the ratification of the Prespes deal," Kammenos told a news conference Sunday after announcing his resignation. He charged that the agreement was "anti-constitutional" and called for a referendum on the issue to coincide with EU elections in May. After meeting with Tsipras earlier Sunday, Kammenos said, "the Macedonia issue does not allow me not to sacrifice my post". Tsipras believes the agreement can be ratified with the 145 lawmakers of his leftist Syriza party plus the votes of the small pro-EU To Potami party as well as some ANEL lawmakers who disagree with Kammenos's position. The main opposition New Democracy party is vehemently against the agreement.

Greek PM calls confidence vote after minister quits over Macedonia deal

Macedonian Prime Minister Zoran Zaev on Saturday called on Greece to end their nations' decades-long dispute by ratifying the deal to rename his country "The Republic of North Macedonia".&nbsp;

Macedonian lawmakers voted through the agreement late on Friday and it now needs backing from the Greek parliament to come into effect.&nbsp;

"Our parliament found the strength but it wasn't easy. But I am convinced that the Greek parliament will also find the strength to make the decision," Zaev told a press conference in Skopje.&nbsp;

During the vote, 81 of the Macedonian parliament's 120 MPs backed the name change, securing the required two-thirds majority to push it through.

Zaev, who came to power in May 2017, is now looking to his Greek counterpart Alexis Tsipras to uphold his end of the deal, which the pair brokered last year.&nbsp;

"Within 10 days... if we see everything is in order, we will vote," Tsipras said on Friday evening.

Athens has promised to lift its veto on Skopje's attempts to join NATO and the European Union if Macedonia changes its name.

Zaev said he was "convinced that Greek lawmakers will recognise the historical significance of the agreement".

The accord aims to start unravelling one of the world's longest diplomatic disputes, which began nearly three decades ago with Macedonia's declaration of independence but whose roots date back centuries.

Since 1991, Athens has objected to its neighbour being called Macedonia because it has its own northern province of the same name, which in ancient times was the cradle of Alexander the Great's empire -- a source of intense pride for modern-day Greeks.

Last June, Zaev and Tsipras reached a landmark compromise over the name dispute, with the pair nominated for the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts.&nbsp;

Macedonian Prime Minister Zoran Zaev on Saturday called on Greece to end their nations' decades-long dispute by ratifying the deal to rename his country "The Republic of North Macedonia".

Macedonian Prime Minister Zoran Zaev on Saturday called on Greece to end their nations' decades-long dispute by ratifying the deal to rename his country "The Republic of North Macedonia". Macedonian lawmakers voted through the agreement late on Friday and it now needs backing from the Greek parliament to come into effect. "Our parliament found the strength but it wasn't easy. But I am convinced that the Greek parliament will also find the strength to make the decision," Zaev told a press conference in Skopje. During the vote, 81 of the Macedonian parliament's 120 MPs backed the name change, securing the required two-thirds majority to push it through. Zaev, who came to power in May 2017, is now looking to his Greek counterpart Alexis Tsipras to uphold his end of the deal, which the pair brokered last year. "Within 10 days... if we see everything is in order, we will vote," Tsipras said on Friday evening. Athens has promised to lift its veto on Skopje's attempts to join NATO and the European Union if Macedonia changes its name. Zaev said he was "convinced that Greek lawmakers will recognise the historical significance of the agreement". The accord aims to start unravelling one of the world's longest diplomatic disputes, which began nearly three decades ago with Macedonia's declaration of independence but whose roots date back centuries. Since 1991, Athens has objected to its neighbour being called Macedonia because it has its own northern province of the same name, which in ancient times was the cradle of Alexander the Great's empire -- a source of intense pride for modern-day Greeks. Last June, Zaev and Tsipras reached a landmark compromise over the name dispute, with the pair nominated for the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts.

Macedonia PM urges Greek MPs to ratify name deal

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/syrian-army-enters-manbij-in-new-alliance-with-kurds-187070">US commanders</a> planning for the withdrawal of <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/syrian-army-claims-entering-key-city-manbij-in-new-alliance-with-kurds-187101">US troops from Syria </a>are recommending that Kurdish fighters battling Islamic State be allowed to keep US-supplied weapons, four US officials said, a move that would likely anger NATO ally Turkey.

Three of the officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the recommendations were part of discussions on a draft plan by<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/syrian-army-not-in-manbij-city-us-military-187071"> the US military</a>. It is unclear what the Pentagon will ultimately recommend to the White House.

Discussions are still at an early stage inside the Pentagon and no decision has yet been made, the officials said. The plan will then be presented to the White House in the coming days with US President Donald Trump making the final decision.

The Pentagon said it would be "inappropriate" and premature to comment on what will happen with the weapons.&nbsp;

"Planning is ongoing, and focused on executing a deliberate and controlled withdrawal of forces while taking all measures possible to ensure our troops'&nbsp;safety," said Commander Sean Robertson, a Pentagon spokesman.

The White House did not comment.&nbsp;

Trump last week abruptly ordered a complete withdrawal of US troops from Syria, drawing widespread criticism and prompting Defense Secretary Jim Mattis'&nbsp;resignation.

The US officials said Trump's announcement has upset US commanders, who view his decision as a betrayal of the Kurdish YPG militia, which has led the fight to eradicate Islamic State from northeastern Syria.

Ankara views the YPG as an extension of a Kurdish insurgency inside Turkey. Turkey has threatened to launch an offensive against the YPG, raising fears of a surge in violence that could harm hundreds of thousands of civilians.&nbsp;

The United States told the YPG that they would be armed by Washington until the fight against Islamic State was completed, one of the US officials said.

"The fight isn't over. We can't simply start asking for the weapons back," said the official.

The proposal to leave US-supplied weapons with the YPG, which could include anti-tank missiles, armoured vehicles and mortars, would reassure Kurdish allies that they were not being abandoned.

But Turkey wants the United States to take the weapons back, so the commanders'&nbsp;recommendation, if confirmed, could complicate Trump's plan to allow Turkey to finish off the fight against Islamic State inside Syria.

The Pentagon keeps records of the weapons it has supplied to the YPG and their chain of custody. But, the US officials said, it would be nearly impossible to locate all of the equipment.

"How are we going to get them back and who is going to take them back?" one of the officials asked.

The debate over whether to leave weapons with the YPG coincides with Trump's national security adviser John Bolton's visit to Turkey and Israel next week for talks on Syria.

In May 2017, the United States started distributing arms and equipment to the YPG for an offensive against Raqqa, the de facto capital of the self-declared caliphate that Islamic State overran in Iraq and Syria in 2014.

The United States told Turkey that it would take back the weapons after the defeat of Islamic State, which has lost all but a few slivers of territory in northeastern Syria.

"The idea that we'd be able to recover them is asinine. So we leave them where they are," said a US&nbsp;official.

A person familiar with the discussions of the US withdrawal plan said the White House and Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan would oppose the proposal to allow the YPG to keep its US-supplied weapons.

The recommendation "is a rejection of Trump's policy to withdraw from Syria," said the person, who asked not to be further identified.

Turkey has said weapons supplied to the YPG have in the past ended up in&nbsp;the hands of its Kurdish separatists, and described any weapon given to the insurgents as a threat to Turkey's security.

A phone call between Trump and Erdogan led to the decision to withdraw all US forces from Syria.&nbsp;

In the call two weeks ago, Trump had been expected to deliver a standard warning to the Turkish president over his plan to launch a cross-border attack targeting US-backed Kurdish forces in northeast Syria, US officials said.

Instead, in the course of the conversation, Trump reshaped US policy in the Middle East, abandoning a quarter of Syrian territory and handing Turkey the job of finishing off Islamic State in Syria.

US commanders planning for the withdrawal of US troops from Syria are recommending that Kurdish fighters battling Islamic State be allowed to keep US-supplied weapons, four US officials said, a move that would likely anger NATO ally Turkey.

US commanders planning for the withdrawal of US troops from Syria are recommending that Kurdish fighters battling Islamic State be allowed to keep US-supplied weapons, four US officials said, a move that would likely anger NATO ally Turkey. Three of the officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the recommendations were part of discussions on a draft plan by the US military. It is unclear what the Pentagon will ultimately recommend to the White House. Discussions are still at an early stage inside the Pentagon and no decision has yet been made, the officials said. The plan will then be presented to the White House in the coming days with US President Donald Trump making the final decision. The Pentagon said it would be "inappropriate" and premature to comment on what will happen with the weapons. "Planning is ongoing, and focused on executing a deliberate and controlled withdrawal of forces while taking all measures possible to ensure our troops' safety," said Commander Sean Robertson, a Pentagon spokesman. The White House did not comment. Trump last week abruptly ordered a complete withdrawal of US troops from Syria, drawing widespread criticism and prompting Defense Secretary Jim Mattis' resignation. The US officials said Trump's announcement has upset US commanders, who view his decision as a betrayal of the Kurdish YPG militia, which has led the fight to eradicate Islamic State from northeastern Syria. Ankara views the YPG as an extension of a Kurdish insurgency inside Turkey. Turkey has threatened to launch an offensive against the YPG, raising fears of a surge in violence that could harm hundreds of thousands of civilians. The United States told the YPG that they would be armed by Washington until the fight against Islamic State was completed, one of the US officials said. "The fight isn't over. We can't simply start asking for the weapons back," said the official. The proposal to leave US-supplied weapons with the YPG, which could include anti-tank missiles, armoured vehicles and mortars, would reassure Kurdish allies that they were not being abandoned. But Turkey wants the United States to take the weapons back, so the commanders' recommendation, if confirmed, could complicate Trump's plan to allow Turkey to finish off the fight against Islamic State inside Syria. The Pentagon keeps records of the weapons it has supplied to the YPG and their chain of custody. But, the US officials said, it would be nearly impossible to locate all of the equipment. "How are we going to get them back and who is going to take them back?" one of the officials asked. The debate over whether to leave weapons with the YPG coincides with Trump's national security adviser John Bolton's visit to Turkey and Israel next week for talks on Syria. In May 2017, the United States started distributing arms and equipment to the YPG for an offensive against Raqqa, the de facto capital of the self-declared caliphate that Islamic State overran in Iraq and Syria in 2014. The United States told Turkey that it would take back the weapons after the defeat of Islamic State, which has lost all but a few slivers of territory in northeastern Syria. "The idea that we'd be able to recover them is asinine. So we leave them where they are," said a US official. A person familiar with the discussions of the US withdrawal plan said the White House and Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan would oppose the proposal to allow the YPG to keep its US-supplied weapons. The recommendation "is a rejection of Trump's policy to withdraw from Syria," said the person, who asked not to be further identified. Turkey has said weapons supplied to the YPG have in the past ended up in the hands of its Kurdish separatists, and described any weapon given to the insurgents as a threat to Turkey's security. A phone call between Trump and Erdogan led to the decision to withdraw all US forces from Syria. In the call two weeks ago, Trump had been expected to deliver a standard warning to the Turkish president over his plan to launch a cross-border attack targeting US-backed Kurdish forces in northeast Syria, US officials said. Instead, in the course of the conversation, Trump reshaped US policy in the Middle East, abandoning a quarter of Syrian territory and handing Turkey the job of finishing off Islamic State in Syria.

US commanders recommend Kurdish fighters in Syria to go on keeping weapons

The top US commander in Afghanistan has not received orders to <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-troops-withdrawal-will-not-have-security-impact-on-afghanistan-presidential-spokesman-185677">pull forces out of the war-torn country</a>, NATO confirmed Monday, days after President Donald Trump's plan to withdraw 7,000 troops leaked to the media. &nbsp;

General Scott Miller's remarks on Sunday capped a tumultuous few days for Afghanistan as foreign diplomats and <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghanistan-leader-replaces-top-security-chiefs-in-major-shake-up-186004">Afghan officials </a>digested the possibility of the United States exiting the 17-year war it started and is now leading efforts to end.&nbsp;

An American official told AFP late last week that Trump had decided to pull out "roughly half" of the 14,000 US forces in the country, but the White House has so far not confirmed the widely-publicised move.

"I have no orders, so nothing has changed," said Miller, who is also the top NATO commander in Afghanistan, during a meeting with the governor of the eastern province of Nangarhar, according to Tolo News.&nbsp;

The remarks were confirmed by NATO's Resolute Support mission in Kabul.&nbsp;

"But if I do get orders, I think it is important for you to know that we are still with the security forces. Even if I have to get a little bit smaller, we will be okay," Miller continued.

US troops make up the bulk of the Resolute Support mission to train and advise local forces fighting the Taliban and the Islamic State group.

Others are part of a US-led counter-terrorism mission.

While there has been no official announcement of a US drawdown, the mere suggestion of the United States reducing its military presence has rattled the Afghan capital.&nbsp;

Trump's decision apparently came Tuesday as US peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad met with the Taliban in Abu Dhabi, part of efforts to bring the militants to the negotiating table with Kabul.

The Taliban has not issued a formal statement on Trump's plan, but a senior commander told AFP the group was "more than happy".

There are fears the hasty move could undermine Khalilzad's negotiating position, embolden the Taliban, and further erode morale among Afghan forces, which are suffering record losses.

Many Afghans are worried that President Ashraf Ghani's fragile unity government would collapse if US troops pulled out, enabling the Taliban to return to power and potentially sparking another bloody civil war.&nbsp;

A day after Miller's remarks, Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi arrived in Kabul for the start of a four-nation tour to discuss, among other things, peace efforts in Afghanistan.

Qureshi, who had hailed Trump's decision to slash troop numbers in Afghanistan as "a step forward" in the peace effort, will also visit Iran, China and Russia.&nbsp;

The top US commander in Afghanistan has not received orders to pull forces out of the war-torn country, NATO confirmed Monday, days after President Donald Trump's plan to withdraw 7,000 troops leaked to the media.

The top US commander in Afghanistan has not received orders to pull forces out of the war-torn country, NATO confirmed Monday, days after President Donald Trump's plan to withdraw 7,000 troops leaked to the media. General Scott Miller's remarks on Sunday capped a tumultuous few days for Afghanistan as foreign diplomats and Afghan officials digested the possibility of the United States exiting the 17-year war it started and is now leading efforts to end. An American official told AFP late last week that Trump had decided to pull out "roughly half" of the 14,000 US forces in the country, but the White House has so far not confirmed the widely-publicised move. "I have no orders, so nothing has changed," said Miller, who is also the top NATO commander in Afghanistan, during a meeting with the governor of the eastern province of Nangarhar, according to Tolo News. The remarks were confirmed by NATO's Resolute Support mission in Kabul. "But if I do get orders, I think it is important for you to know that we are still with the security forces. Even if I have to get a little bit smaller, we will be okay," Miller continued. US troops make up the bulk of the Resolute Support mission to train and advise local forces fighting the Taliban and the Islamic State group. Others are part of a US-led counter-terrorism mission. While there has been no official announcement of a US drawdown, the mere suggestion of the United States reducing its military presence has rattled the Afghan capital. Trump's decision apparently came Tuesday as US peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad met with the Taliban in Abu Dhabi, part of efforts to bring the militants to the negotiating table with Kabul. The Taliban has not issued a formal statement on Trump's plan, but a senior commander told AFP the group was "more than happy". There are fears the hasty move could undermine Khalilzad's negotiating position, embolden the Taliban, and further erode morale among Afghan forces, which are suffering record losses. Many Afghans are worried that President Ashraf Ghani's fragile unity government would collapse if US troops pulled out, enabling the Taliban to return to power and potentially sparking another bloody civil war. A day after Miller's remarks, Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi arrived in Kabul for the start of a four-nation tour to discuss, among other things, peace efforts in Afghanistan. Qureshi, who had hailed Trump's decision to slash troop numbers in Afghanistan as "a step forward" in the peace effort, will also visit Iran, China and Russia.

No orders to pull out: Top US commander in Afghanistan

The NATO alliance stressed its continued commitment to its support mission in Afghanistan on Friday as Washington prepared to withdraw thousands of US troops.

NATO's spokeswoman Oana Lungescu would not comment on US President Donald Trump's plan to bring home a chunk of the 14,000 US troops deployed in Afghanistan.

But she said NATO foreign ministers met as recently as this month to express "steadfast commitment to ensuring long-term security and stability in Afghanistan."

"Our engagement is important to ensure that Afghanistan never again becomes a safe haven for international terrorists who could threaten us at home," she said.

Some of the US forces deployed in Afghanistan are part of the NATO-led Resolute Support mission, training and advising the local Afghan forces fighting Taliban rebels.

Others are part of a US-led counter-terrorism mission, and it is not clear from initial reports which of the troops will be the first to come home.

A US official told AFP that a "decision has been made. There will be a significant withdrawal."

Separately, the Wall Street Journal and other US media reported that more than 7,000 troops would return.

"We have seen the reports. For any comments, I refer you to the US authorities," Lungescu said.

Trump has often been at loggerheads with fellow NATO leaders, accusing European allies like Germany of not pulling their weight in terms of defence spending.

'European anxiety'

But in July, at a NATO summit, all members agreed to extend funding for the embattled Afghan security forces until 2024.

Brussels-based expert Ian Lesser said European NATO members may be surprised by Trump's tactics but not his overall intention to reduce troops in Afghanistan, which he made clear after becoming president.

"Many within the alliance frankly are there because the United States has pressed them to be there, but, left to their own decision making, would probably have left," Lesser told AFP.

Lesser, who heads the European office of the German Marshall Fund of the United States, said the resignation on Thursday of US Defence Secretary Jim Mattis will also cause more unease.&nbsp;

"Within an administration that has not produced a lot of predictability, General Mattis was seen as something of an anchor," Lesser said.

"And so his departure will only increase European anxiety about the future of US strategy in Europe but also on Europe's periphery in places like Syria," he added.

Syria and the broader Middle East are central to EU concerns about terrorism and migration.

Lungescu stressed how important the former Marine Corps general had been to NATO.

"Secretary Mattis has made a key contribution to keeping NATO strong and ready to deal with the significant security challenges we face," the NATO spokeswoman said.

"He is widely respected as a soldier and a diplomat... We are grateful for the iron-clad commitment of the United States to NATO. US leadership keeps our transatlantic alliance strong."

The NATO alliance stressed its continued commitment to its support mission in Afghanistan on Friday as Washington prepared to withdraw thousands of US troops. NATO's spokeswoman Oana Lungescu would not comment on US President Donald Trump's plan to bring home a chunk of the 14,000 US troops deployed in Afghanistan.

The NATO alliance stressed its continued commitment to its support mission in Afghanistan on Friday as Washington prepared to withdraw thousands of US troops. NATO's spokeswoman Oana Lungescu would not comment on US President Donald Trump's plan to bring home a chunk of the 14,000 US troops deployed in Afghanistan. But she said NATO foreign ministers met as recently as this month to express "steadfast commitment to ensuring long-term security and stability in Afghanistan." "Our engagement is important to ensure that Afghanistan never again becomes a safe haven for international terrorists who could threaten us at home," she said. Some of the US forces deployed in Afghanistan are part of the NATO-led Resolute Support mission, training and advising the local Afghan forces fighting Taliban rebels. Others are part of a US-led counter-terrorism mission, and it is not clear from initial reports which of the troops will be the first to come home. A US official told AFP that a "decision has been made. There will be a significant withdrawal." Separately, the Wall Street Journal and other US media reported that more than 7,000 troops would return. "We have seen the reports. For any comments, I refer you to the US authorities," Lungescu said. Trump has often been at loggerheads with fellow NATO leaders, accusing European allies like Germany of not pulling their weight in terms of defence spending. 'European anxiety' But in July, at a NATO summit, all members agreed to extend funding for the embattled Afghan security forces until 2024. Brussels-based expert Ian Lesser said European NATO members may be surprised by Trump's tactics but not his overall intention to reduce troops in Afghanistan, which he made clear after becoming president. "Many within the alliance frankly are there because the United States has pressed them to be there, but, left to their own decision making, would probably have left," Lesser told AFP. Lesser, who heads the European office of the German Marshall Fund of the United States, said the resignation on Thursday of US Defence Secretary Jim Mattis will also cause more unease. "Within an administration that has not produced a lot of predictability, General Mattis was seen as something of an anchor," Lesser said. "And so his departure will only increase European anxiety about the future of US strategy in Europe but also on Europe's periphery in places like Syria," he added. Syria and the broader Middle East are central to EU concerns about terrorism and migration. Lungescu stressed how important the former Marine Corps general had been to NATO. "Secretary Mattis has made a key contribution to keeping NATO strong and ready to deal with the significant security challenges we face," the NATO spokeswoman said. "He is widely respected as a soldier and a diplomat... We are grateful for the iron-clad commitment of the United States to NATO. US leadership keeps our transatlantic alliance strong."

NATO stresses Afghan commitment despite US withdrawal

President Donald Trump has decided to pull a significant number of troops from Afghanistan, a US official told AFP on Thursday, a day after he announced a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-islamic-state-defeated-us-will-pull-all-forces-out-of-syira-185369">withdrawal from Syria</a>.

"That decision has been made. There will be a significant withdrawal," the official told AFP on condition of anonymity.

Currently, the United States has about 14,000 troops in Afghanistan working either with a NATO mission to support Afghan forces or in separate counter-terrorism operations.&nbsp;

Also read: <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/it-is-right-for-me-to-step-down-us-defense-secretary-jim-mattis-quits-185565">It is right for me to step down, says US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis&nbsp;</a>

Trump made his decision Tuesday, the same time he told the Pentagon he wanted to pull all US forces out of Syria.&nbsp;

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis quit earlier Thursday, saying his views were no longer reconcilable with Trump's.

The president's twin foreign policy decisions on Syria and Afghanistan are nothing less than epic, and could begin to unspool a series of cascading and unpredictable events across the Middle East and in Afghanistan.

Mattis and other top military advisors last year persuaded Trump to commit thousands of new troops to Afghanistan, where the Taliban were slaughtering local forces in the thousands and making major gains.

Trump at the time said his instinct was to get out of Afghanistan.

The Wall Street Journal reported that more than 7,000 troops would be returning from Afghanistan.

The pullout comes as the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-envoy-doubts-afghan-talibans-desire-for-peace-185562">US pushes for a peace deal with the Taliban</a>.

President Donald Trump has decided to pull a significant number of troops from Afghanistan, a US official told AFP on Thursday, a day after he announced a withdrawal from Syria.

President Donald Trump has decided to pull a significant number of troops from Afghanistan, a US official told AFP on Thursday, a day after he announced a withdrawal from Syria. "That decision has been made. There will be a significant withdrawal," the official told AFP on condition of anonymity. Currently, the United States has about 14,000 troops in Afghanistan working either with a NATO mission to support Afghan forces or in separate counter-terrorism operations. Also read: It is right for me to step down, says US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis Trump made his decision Tuesday, the same time he told the Pentagon he wanted to pull all US forces out of Syria. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis quit earlier Thursday, saying his views were no longer reconcilable with Trump's. The president's twin foreign policy decisions on Syria and Afghanistan are nothing less than epic, and could begin to unspool a series of cascading and unpredictable events across the Middle East and in Afghanistan. Mattis and other top military advisors last year persuaded Trump to commit thousands of new troops to Afghanistan, where the Taliban were slaughtering local forces in the thousands and making major gains. Trump at the time said his instinct was to get out of Afghanistan. The Wall Street Journal reported that more than 7,000 troops would be returning from Afghanistan. The pullout comes as the US pushes for a peace deal with the Taliban.

Trump to cut troops in Afghanistan: US official

There is a stark difference in India's relationship with the US since the 1998 nuclear tests and bilateral ties are now very good, the outgoing Indian envoy here has said.

Navtej Singh Sarna, India's Ambassador to the US since November 2016, is retiring later this month after an illustrious career spanning 38 years.

In his previous stint in the US from September 1998 to June 2002, Sarna served as the minister/counsellor at the Indian Embassy in Washington DC. During that time India was slapped with US sanctions in the aftermath of the nuclear tests.&nbsp;

"Well, it's night and day, if I can say that," Sarna said in response to a question when asked about the difference in the India-US relationship in the past 20 years.&nbsp;

After the nuclear tests, he said though the country was slapped with sanctions, there was new respect and understanding for India.

"There was a new understanding of India's potential as an economy. There was a new understanding of India's power as an IT, particularly around Y2K, when suddenly Indians were the ones who were sorting out major problems. And there was an understanding that India had to do its nuclear tests because it lived in a tough neighbourhood," he said.&nbsp;

Sarna said the visit of the Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the US last year gave tremendous impetus to the bilateral relationship.&nbsp;

Describing Modi's visit to the US as the highlight of his ambassadorship, Sarna said the visit was a tremendous success.&nbsp;

"Today, I think the relationship is in a very good place," he told the select audience.&nbsp;

Referring to the recent visit of Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, Sarna said India-US defence relationship has strengthened under the Trump administration.&nbsp;

Early this year, he pointed out, the US renamed one of its commands as US IndoPacific Command. India was given STA-1 Status, he said adding that this is the long run, perhaps may be a hugely significant step. It is very satisfying that India is the only non-NATO country in that category to date.

India was given the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/granting-sta-1-status-to-india-by-us-continued-policy-of-discrimination-against-pak-foreign-office--156692">Strategic Trade Authorisation-1 (STA-1) status in August</a>, paving the way for high-technology product sales to the country, particularly in civil space and defence sectors.

In his remarks, Sarna urged the business community, one of the prime drivers of the relationship, to create and sustain good feelings about India across the United States.&nbsp;

Sarna also served as the longest-serving spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs and country's Ambassador to the United Kingdom and Israel.

There is a stark difference in India's relationship with the US since the 1998 nuclear tests and bilateral ties are now very good, the outgoing Indian envoy here has said.

There is a stark difference in India's relationship with the US since the 1998 nuclear tests and bilateral ties are now very good, the outgoing Indian envoy here has said. Navtej Singh Sarna, India's Ambassador to the US since November 2016, is retiring later this month after an illustrious career spanning 38 years. In his previous stint in the US from September 1998 to June 2002, Sarna served as the minister/counsellor at the Indian Embassy in Washington DC. During that time India was slapped with US sanctions in the aftermath of the nuclear tests. "Well, it's night and day, if I can say that," Sarna said in response to a question when asked about the difference in the India-US relationship in the past 20 years. After the nuclear tests, he said though the country was slapped with sanctions, there was new respect and understanding for India. "There was a new understanding of India's potential as an economy. There was a new understanding of India's power as an IT, particularly around Y2K, when suddenly Indians were the ones who were sorting out major problems. And there was an understanding that India had to do its nuclear tests because it lived in a tough neighbourhood," he said. Sarna said the visit of the Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the US last year gave tremendous impetus to the bilateral relationship. Describing Modi's visit to the US as the highlight of his ambassadorship, Sarna said the visit was a tremendous success. "Today, I think the relationship is in a very good place," he told the select audience. Referring to the recent visit of Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, Sarna said India-US defence relationship has strengthened under the Trump administration. Early this year, he pointed out, the US renamed one of its commands as US IndoPacific Command. India was given STA-1 Status, he said adding that this is the long run, perhaps may be a hugely significant step. It is very satisfying that India is the only non-NATO country in that category to date. India was given the Strategic Trade Authorisation-1 (STA-1) status in August, paving the way for high-technology product sales to the country, particularly in civil space and defence sectors. In his remarks, Sarna urged the business community, one of the prime drivers of the relationship, to create and sustain good feelings about India across the United States. Sarna also served as the longest-serving spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs and country's Ambassador to the United Kingdom and Israel.

Stark difference in Indo-US ties since 1998 nuclear tests: Outgoing Indian envoy

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/ukraine-asks-nato-to-send-ships-to-back-it-in-conflict-with-russia-180117">Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko</a> on Thursday accused Russia's Vladimir Putin of wanting to annex his entire country and called for NATO to deploy warships to a sea shared by the two nations.

Poroshenko's comments to German media were part of a concerted push by Kiev aimed at gaining Western support for more sanctions against Moscow, securing tangible Western military help, and rallying opposition to a Russian gas pipeline that threatens to deprive Ukraine of important transit revenue.

His Western allies have so far not offered to give him any of these things soon, despite his warnings of a possible invasion by Russia after Moscow seized three Ukrainian naval ships and their crews on Sunday.

Moscow and Kiev blame each other for the Black Sea incident, which took place off Russian-annexed Crimea.

"Don't believe Putin's lies," Poroshenko told Bild, Germany's biggest-selling paper, comparing Russia's protestations of innocence in the affair to Moscow's 2014 denial that it had soldiers in Crimea even as they moved to annex it.

"Putin wants the old Russian empire back," he said. "Crimea, Donbass, the whole country. As Russian Tsar, as he sees himself, his empire cannot function without Ukraine. He sees us as his colony."

Volodymyr Omelyan, Ukraine's infrastructure minister, on Thursday accused Russia of imposing a de facto blockade on two Ukrainian ports on the Sea of Azov by barring ships from leaving and entering the sea via the Russian-controlled Kerch Strait.

The Kremlin denied it was restricting shipping, saying it had not heard of any problems. If there were any delays they were due to bad weather rather than politics, it said.

Poroshenko told Bild he also wanted NATO to deploy warships to the Sea of Azov. There was no immediate reaction from the alliance, which has condemned Russia's seizure of the Ukrainian ships. The Kremlin said Poroshenko's request looked designed to cause more tensions in the area.

'FORTRESS CRIMEA'

There were further signs that Russia was pressing ahead with its plans to fortify Crimea and turn it into what Kremlin-backed media have called a fortress.

Russia on Thursday deployed a new battalion of advanced S-400 surface-to-air missile systems in Crimea, its fourth such, TASS news agency cited a spokesman for Russia's Black Sea Fleet as saying.

Citing a Crimean security source, Interfax news agency also reported Russian plans to build a new missile early-warning radar station in Crimea next year that would be able to track ballistic and cruise missiles from a long distance.

Russia was also working on a new technical system to allow it to better track shipping around the peninsula in order to protect its maritime borders, Interfax said.

The United States and the EU have both imposed sanctions on Russia over its conduct towards Ukraine since 2014, when Moscow seized and annexed Crimea after a pro-Russian leader was toppled in Kiev.

Moscow later backed pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine in a conflict in which more than 10,000 people have been killed. Major fighting ended with a 2015 ceasefire but deadly exchanges of fire are still frequent.

Poroshenko, whom Putin has accused of manufacturing the Black Sea crisis to boost his flagging ratings before an election next year, called on Germany to halt an undersea pipeline project that would allow Russia to supply more gas to Germany directly.

The Nord Stream 2 project is a potentially serious problem for Ukraine which currently earns large transit fees from piping Russian gas to Europe and stands to lose out.

"We need a strong, resolute and clear reaction to Russia's aggressive behaviour," Poroshenko told Funke. "That also means stopping the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project."

But Germany's economy minister dismissed the idea that his country's commitment to the pipeline undermined efforts to de-escalate the Ukraine crisis.

"These are two separate questions," Peter Altmaier told the ARD public broadcaster.

Poroshenko's attempts to get the EU to impose new sanctions on Russia appeared to be falling flat.

Heeding his suggestion, the EU's hawks have called for more sanctions but the divided bloc is not going to act swiftly, if at all, diplomatic sources have said.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she would raise the Black Sea issue with Putin at a G20 summit which starts in Argentina on Friday where the Russian leader is also due to hold talks with U.S. President Donald Trump.

NATO has urged Russia to release the three Ukrainian navy ships and their crews, saying there was no justification for Moscow's actions. But the military alliance, which Ukraine one day hopes to join, has stopped short of offering to deploy new forces in the area to deter Russia.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko on Thursday accused Russia's Vladimir Putin of wanting to annex his entire country and called for NATO to deploy warships to a sea shared by the two nations.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko on Thursday accused Russia's Vladimir Putin of wanting to annex his entire country and called for NATO to deploy warships to a sea shared by the two nations. Poroshenko's comments to German media were part of a concerted push by Kiev aimed at gaining Western support for more sanctions against Moscow, securing tangible Western military help, and rallying opposition to a Russian gas pipeline that threatens to deprive Ukraine of important transit revenue. His Western allies have so far not offered to give him any of these things soon, despite his warnings of a possible invasion by Russia after Moscow seized three Ukrainian naval ships and their crews on Sunday. Moscow and Kiev blame each other for the Black Sea incident, which took place off Russian-annexed Crimea. "Don't believe Putin's lies," Poroshenko told Bild, Germany's biggest-selling paper, comparing Russia's protestations of innocence in the affair to Moscow's 2014 denial that it had soldiers in Crimea even as they moved to annex it. "Putin wants the old Russian empire back," he said. "Crimea, Donbass, the whole country. As Russian Tsar, as he sees himself, his empire cannot function without Ukraine. He sees us as his colony." Volodymyr Omelyan, Ukraine's infrastructure minister, on Thursday accused Russia of imposing a de facto blockade on two Ukrainian ports on the Sea of Azov by barring ships from leaving and entering the sea via the Russian-controlled Kerch Strait. The Kremlin denied it was restricting shipping, saying it had not heard of any problems. If there were any delays they were due to bad weather rather than politics, it said. Poroshenko told Bild he also wanted NATO to deploy warships to the Sea of Azov. There was no immediate reaction from the alliance, which has condemned Russia's seizure of the Ukrainian ships. The Kremlin said Poroshenko's request looked designed to cause more tensions in the area. 'FORTRESS CRIMEA' There were further signs that Russia was pressing ahead with its plans to fortify Crimea and turn it into what Kremlin-backed media have called a fortress. Russia on Thursday deployed a new battalion of advanced S-400 surface-to-air missile systems in Crimea, its fourth such, TASS news agency cited a spokesman for Russia's Black Sea Fleet as saying. Citing a Crimean security source, Interfax news agency also reported Russian plans to build a new missile early-warning radar station in Crimea next year that would be able to track ballistic and cruise missiles from a long distance. Russia was also working on a new technical system to allow it to better track shipping around the peninsula in order to protect its maritime borders, Interfax said. The United States and the EU have both imposed sanctions on Russia over its conduct towards Ukraine since 2014, when Moscow seized and annexed Crimea after a pro-Russian leader was toppled in Kiev. Moscow later backed pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine in a conflict in which more than 10,000 people have been killed. Major fighting ended with a 2015 ceasefire but deadly exchanges of fire are still frequent. Poroshenko, whom Putin has accused of manufacturing the Black Sea crisis to boost his flagging ratings before an election next year, called on Germany to halt an undersea pipeline project that would allow Russia to supply more gas to Germany directly. The Nord Stream 2 project is a potentially serious problem for Ukraine which currently earns large transit fees from piping Russian gas to Europe and stands to lose out. "We need a strong, resolute and clear reaction to Russia's aggressive behaviour," Poroshenko told Funke. "That also means stopping the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project." But Germany's economy minister dismissed the idea that his country's commitment to the pipeline undermined efforts to de-escalate the Ukraine crisis. "These are two separate questions," Peter Altmaier told the ARD public broadcaster. Poroshenko's attempts to get the EU to impose new sanctions on Russia appeared to be falling flat. Heeding his suggestion, the EU's hawks have called for more sanctions but the divided bloc is not going to act swiftly, if at all, diplomatic sources have said. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she would raise the Black Sea issue with Putin at a G20 summit which starts in Argentina on Friday where the Russian leader is also due to hold talks with U.S. President Donald Trump. NATO has urged Russia to release the three Ukrainian navy ships and their crews, saying there was no justification for Moscow's actions. But the military alliance, which Ukraine one day hopes to join, has stopped short of offering to deploy new forces in the area to deter Russia.

Putin wants my whole country, says Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko

Three US soldiers were killed and three wounded by a bomb in Afghanistan Tuesday, NATO said, taking the number of American service personnel to die in the war-torn country this year to 12.&nbsp;

NATO's Resolute Support mission would not immediately release any details about the soldiers, but said they had been killed when an improvised explosive device (IED) detonated near Ghazni city in central Afghanistan.

An American contractor was also wounded, it said, adding that the four injured in the blast were receiving medical care.&nbsp;

The casualties come just days after another US soldier was killed in Afghanistan's Nimroz province on Saturday.

An initial review showed the soldier was "likely accidentally shot by our Afghan partner force", a NATO statement said Tuesday, adding that the "tragic" incident occurred as they engaged in a battle with al Qaeda militants.

"There are no indications he was shot intentionally," the statement added, naming the soldier as Sgt Jasso without giving a first name.

General Scott Miller, the top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, said Jasso was killed "defending our nation, fighting al Qaeda alongside our Afghan partners".

Jasso's death follows a spate of so-called "insider attacks" that have rattled foreign troops tasked with training and assisting Afghanistan's military.

More than 2,200 American soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since the 2001 US-led invasion that toppled the Taliban regime from power. 
The number of American casualties has fallen dramatically since the end of 2014 when Afghan forces took over from US-led NATO combat troops to secure the country.&nbsp;

Since the start of 2015, 58 Americans have been killed, President Ashraf Ghani said earlier this month.

In the same time period, nearly 30,000 Afghan police and soldiers have died, Ghani said -- a figure much higher than any previously acknowledged. 
The shocking mortality rate, which some experts warn is unsustainable, has sent already shaky morale to new lows.

The Taliban have intensified attacks on Afghan forces even as the United States ratchets up efforts to engage the militants in peace talks. 
Washington is trying to find a way out of the conflict more than 17 years since it began.

US envoy Zalmay Khalilzad is spearheading efforts to strike a peace deal with the Taliban before Afghanistan's presidential election, scheduled for April next year though officials have said it could be postponed until July.&nbsp; 
A Taliban delegation met with Khalilzad in Doha in October and November to discuss ending the Afghan conflict. Khalilzad has said he is "cautiously optimistic" for an end to the conflict.&nbsp;

Three US soldiers were killed and three wounded by a bomb in Afghanistan Tuesday, NATO said, taking the number of American service personnel to die in the war-torn country this year to 12.

Three US soldiers were killed and three wounded by a bomb in Afghanistan Tuesday, NATO said, taking the number of American service personnel to die in the war-torn country this year to 12. NATO's Resolute Support mission would not immediately release any details about the soldiers, but said they had been killed when an improvised explosive device (IED) detonated near Ghazni city in central Afghanistan. An American contractor was also wounded, it said, adding that the four injured in the blast were receiving medical care. The casualties come just days after another US soldier was killed in Afghanistan's Nimroz province on Saturday. An initial review showed the soldier was "likely accidentally shot by our Afghan partner force", a NATO statement said Tuesday, adding that the "tragic" incident occurred as they engaged in a battle with al Qaeda militants. "There are no indications he was shot intentionally," the statement added, naming the soldier as Sgt Jasso without giving a first name. General Scott Miller, the top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, said Jasso was killed "defending our nation, fighting al Qaeda alongside our Afghan partners". Jasso's death follows a spate of so-called "insider attacks" that have rattled foreign troops tasked with training and assisting Afghanistan's military. More than 2,200 American soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since the 2001 US-led invasion that toppled the Taliban regime from power. The number of American casualties has fallen dramatically since the end of 2014 when Afghan forces took over from US-led NATO combat troops to secure the country. Since the start of 2015, 58 Americans have been killed, President Ashraf Ghani said earlier this month. In the same time period, nearly 30,000 Afghan police and soldiers have died, Ghani said -- a figure much higher than any previously acknowledged. The shocking mortality rate, which some experts warn is unsustainable, has sent already shaky morale to new lows. The Taliban have intensified attacks on Afghan forces even as the United States ratchets up efforts to engage the militants in peace talks. Washington is trying to find a way out of the conflict more than 17 years since it began. US envoy Zalmay Khalilzad is spearheading efforts to strike a peace deal with the Taliban before Afghanistan's presidential election, scheduled for April next year though officials have said it could be postponed until July. A Taliban delegation met with Khalilzad in Doha in October and November to discuss ending the Afghan conflict. Khalilzad has said he is "cautiously optimistic" for an end to the conflict.

Three US soldiers killed in Afghanistan: NATO

A US soldier was killed in Afghanistan on Saturday, NATO said, taking the number of American service personnel to die in the war-torn country this year to nine.

NATO's Resolute Support mission would not immediately release any details about the soldier -- the second US service member to be killed in Afghanistan this month -- or the circumstances of their death.

But it follows a spate of so-called "insider attacks" that have rattled foreign troops tasked with training and assisting Afghanistan's military.

Brent Taylor, the mayor of North Ogden in Utah state and a father of seven, was shot dead in an apparent insider attack in Kabul on November 3.&nbsp;

That came after two similar attacks in October, one on NATO personnel in the western province of Herat and another on a high-level security meeting in the southern province of Kandahar that was attended by General Scott Miller, the top NATO and US commander in Afghanistan.

Miller narrowly escaped unhurt but a powerful Afghan police chief was killed.&nbsp;

More than 2,200 American soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since the 2001 US-led invasion that toppled the Taliban regime from power.

The number of American casualties has fallen dramatically since the end of 2014 when Afghan forces took over from US-led NATO combat troops to secure the country.&nbsp;

Since the start of 2015, 58 Americans have been killed, President Ashraf Ghani said this month.

In the same time period, nearly 30,000 Afghan police and soldiers have died, Ghani said -- a figure much higher than anything previously acknowledged.&nbsp;

The Taliban have intensified attacks on Afghan forces, inflicting record casualties even as the United States ratchets up efforts to engage the militants in peace talks.

More than 17 years since the start of the conflict, the US is trying to find a way out of the war.

US envoy Zalmay Khalilzad is spearheading efforts to strike a peace deal with the Taliban before Afghanistan's April presidential election.&nbsp;

A Taliban delegation met with Khalilzad in Doha in October and November to discuss ending the Afghan conflict. 
&nbsp;

A US soldier was killed in Afghanistan on Saturday, NATO said, taking the number of American service personnel to die in the war-torn country this year to nine. NATO's Resolute Support mission would not immediately release any details about the soldier -- the second US service member to be killed in Afghanistan this month -- or the circumstances of their death.

A US soldier was killed in Afghanistan on Saturday, NATO said, taking the number of American service personnel to die in the war-torn country this year to nine. NATO's Resolute Support mission would not immediately release any details about the soldier -- the second US service member to be killed in Afghanistan this month -- or the circumstances of their death. But it follows a spate of so-called "insider attacks" that have rattled foreign troops tasked with training and assisting Afghanistan's military. Brent Taylor, the mayor of North Ogden in Utah state and a father of seven, was shot dead in an apparent insider attack in Kabul on November 3. That came after two similar attacks in October, one on NATO personnel in the western province of Herat and another on a high-level security meeting in the southern province of Kandahar that was attended by General Scott Miller, the top NATO and US commander in Afghanistan. Miller narrowly escaped unhurt but a powerful Afghan police chief was killed. More than 2,200 American soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since the 2001 US-led invasion that toppled the Taliban regime from power. The number of American casualties has fallen dramatically since the end of 2014 when Afghan forces took over from US-led NATO combat troops to secure the country. Since the start of 2015, 58 Americans have been killed, President Ashraf Ghani said this month. In the same time period, nearly 30,000 Afghan police and soldiers have died, Ghani said -- a figure much higher than anything previously acknowledged. The Taliban have intensified attacks on Afghan forces, inflicting record casualties even as the United States ratchets up efforts to engage the militants in peace talks. More than 17 years since the start of the conflict, the US is trying to find a way out of the war. US envoy Zalmay Khalilzad is spearheading efforts to strike a peace deal with the Taliban before Afghanistan's April presidential election. A Taliban delegation met with Khalilzad in Doha in October and November to discuss ending the Afghan conflict.

US soldier killed in Afghanistan: NATO

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump hinted on Thursday he may visit Afghanistan, scene of one of America's longest wars but a country he has yet to visit almost two years into his presidency.

Delivering a Thanksgiving holiday message by teleconference to troops in Afghanistan, Trump told a US&nbsp;Air Force general he would see him back in the United States, before adding: "Or maybe I'll even see you over there. You never know what's going to happen."

Recent US&nbsp;commanders-in-chief have routinely visited troops in active war zones. Trump has come under criticism for failing to do so, though Vice President Mike Pence made a surprise trip to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan last December to visit troops.

By this point in his presidency, former President Barack Obama had made a trip to Iraq and two to Afghanistan. Former President George W&nbsp;Bush travelled to Afghanistan twice and Iraq four times during his two terms in office.

Trump was criticized when he scrapped a planned visit to a major US&nbsp;military cemetery during a visit to Paris this month because his helicopter was grounded by bad weather during a trip that marked the 100th anniversary of the end of World War One.

Back in Washington on Veterans Day, he failed to visit Arlington National Cemetery, saying later that he was "extremely busy" but admitting that he should have.

Asked by a reporter whether he would visit a war zone, Trump said: "At the appropriate time, we`ll be doing some very interesting things."

He was then asked whether he knew the timing: "I do, but can't tell you. You're the last people I can tell," he told reporters.

Presidential trips to war zones are normally cloaked in secrecy for security reasons, revealed only when the commander in chiefs have landed, and sometimes only after they have safely left the region.

Responding to criticism that phoning the troops on Thanksgiving was not enough, Trump defended his actions, arguing that he had hiked spending on the military and veterans.

US&nbsp;Defense Secretary Jim Mattis on Wednesday was asked by reporters whether he thought Trump should visit troops in war zones.

"The president is the commander in chief and he decides where he needs to go. There are times I don`t want him in certain locations to be frank with you, for his security and the troops` security," Mattis said.

The United States has some 14,000 troops in Afghanistan, serving in the NATO-led Resolute Support training and advisory mission as well as in separate counter-terrorism operations against militant groups like Islamic State.

US&nbsp;troops arrived in Afghanistan in 2001 as part of the campaign to topple the Taliban following the September 11 attacks in the United States.

 
&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump hinted on Thursday he may visit Afghanistan, scene of one of America's longest wars but a country he has yet to visit almost two years into his presidency.

US President Donald Trump hinted on Thursday he may visit Afghanistan, scene of one of America's longest wars but a country he has yet to visit almost two years into his presidency. Delivering a Thanksgiving holiday message by teleconference to troops in Afghanistan, Trump told a US Air Force general he would see him back in the United States, before adding: "Or maybe I'll even see you over there. You never know what's going to happen." Recent US commanders-in-chief have routinely visited troops in active war zones. Trump has come under criticism for failing to do so, though Vice President Mike Pence made a surprise trip to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan last December to visit troops. By this point in his presidency, former President Barack Obama had made a trip to Iraq and two to Afghanistan. Former President George W Bush travelled to Afghanistan twice and Iraq four times during his two terms in office. Trump was criticized when he scrapped a planned visit to a major US military cemetery during a visit to Paris this month because his helicopter was grounded by bad weather during a trip that marked the 100th anniversary of the end of World War One. Back in Washington on Veterans Day, he failed to visit Arlington National Cemetery, saying later that he was "extremely busy" but admitting that he should have. Asked by a reporter whether he would visit a war zone, Trump said: "At the appropriate time, we`ll be doing some very interesting things." He was then asked whether he knew the timing: "I do, but can't tell you. You're the last people I can tell," he told reporters. Presidential trips to war zones are normally cloaked in secrecy for security reasons, revealed only when the commander in chiefs have landed, and sometimes only after they have safely left the region. Responding to criticism that phoning the troops on Thanksgiving was not enough, Trump defended his actions, arguing that he had hiked spending on the military and veterans. US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis on Wednesday was asked by reporters whether he thought Trump should visit troops in war zones. "The president is the commander in chief and he decides where he needs to go. There are times I don`t want him in certain locations to be frank with you, for his security and the troops` security," Mattis said. The United States has some 14,000 troops in Afghanistan, serving in the NATO-led Resolute Support training and advisory mission as well as in separate counter-terrorism operations against militant groups like Islamic State. US troops arrived in Afghanistan in 2001 as part of the campaign to topple the Taliban following the September 11 attacks in the United States.

Trump hints at visiting Afghanistan during Thanksgiving message to US general

nato

Nato, News on Nato, stories on Nato, articles on Nato, Nato stories at Wion, Nato news, Nato latest news