A federal court judge in California on Monday blocked an executive order from President Donald Trump to deny some federal grants to so-called sanctuary cities, undermining the administration&#39;s crackdown on illegal immigration.

The judge, who blocked the order provisionally in April, issued a permanent injunction in the suit brought by the city and county of San Francisco and Santa Clara County, which said the order was unconstitutional.

&quot;The Counties have demonstrated that the Executive Order has caused and will cause them constitutional injuries by violating the separation of powers doctrine and depriving them of their Tenth and Fifth Amendment rights,&quot; US&nbsp;District Judge William Orrick for the Northern District of California wrote in his order.

Trump issued the order in January, shortly after he was inaugurated, slashing funding to jurisdictions that refuse to comply with a statute that requires local governments to share information with US&nbsp;immigration authorities.

As part of that policy, the Justice Department has sought to punish cities and other local jurisdictions that have joined a growing &quot;sanctuary&quot; movement aimed at shielding illegal immigrants from stepped-up deportation efforts.

&quot;The district court exceeded its authority today when it barred the president from instructing his cabinet members to enforce existing law,&quot; Department of Justice spokesman Devin O&rsquo;Malley said in a statement. &quot;The Justice Department will vindicate the president&rsquo;s lawful authority to direct the executive branch.&quot;

The department has already appealed the judge&#39;s prior ruling from April.

The Trump administration contends local authorities endanger public safety when they decline to hand over for deportation illegal immigrants arrested for crimes.

Dozens of local governments and cities, including New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, have joined the growing &quot;sanctuary&quot; movement.

Supporters of the sanctuary policy argue enlisting police cooperation in rounding up immigrants for removal undermines communities&#39; trust in local police, particularly among Latinos.

The Justice Department is concerned about localities&#39; compliance with US&nbsp;Immigration and Customs Enforcement requests to detain people up to 48 hours beyond their scheduled release time so that immigration officials can pick them up.

Some cities say they will only honor such requests when accompanied by criminal warrants, and that compliance is voluntary and not required under the statute.

Chicago also sued the federal government in August over the threats of funding cuts by the Justice Department. A federal judge sided with the city in September and issued a preliminary injunction barring the US&nbsp;government from denying the public-safety grants.

A federal court judge in California on Monday blocked an executive order from President Donald Trump to deny some federal grants to so-called sanctuary cities, undermining the administration's crackdown on illegal immigration

A federal court judge in California on Monday blocked an executive order from President Donald Trump to deny some federal grants to so-called sanctuary cities, undermining the administration's crackdown on illegal immigration. The judge, who blocked the order provisionally in April, issued a permanent injunction in the suit brought by the city and county of San Francisco and Santa Clara County, which said the order was unconstitutional. "The Counties have demonstrated that the Executive Order has caused and will cause them constitutional injuries by violating the separation of powers doctrine and depriving them of their Tenth and Fifth Amendment rights," US District Judge William Orrick for the Northern District of California wrote in his order. Trump issued the order in January, shortly after he was inaugurated, slashing funding to jurisdictions that refuse to comply with a statute that requires local governments to share information with US immigration authorities. As part of that policy, the Justice Department has sought to punish cities and other local jurisdictions that have joined a growing "sanctuary" movement aimed at shielding illegal immigrants from stepped-up deportation efforts. "The district court exceeded its authority today when it barred the president from instructing his cabinet members to enforce existing law," Department of Justice spokesman Devin O’Malley said in a statement. "The Justice Department will vindicate the president’s lawful authority to direct the executive branch." The department has already appealed the judge's prior ruling from April. The Trump administration contends local authorities endanger public safety when they decline to hand over for deportation illegal immigrants arrested for crimes. Dozens of local governments and cities, including New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, have joined the growing "sanctuary" movement. Supporters of the sanctuary policy argue enlisting police cooperation in rounding up immigrants for removal undermines communities' trust in local police, particularly among Latinos. The Justice Department is concerned about localities' compliance with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement requests to detain people up to 48 hours beyond their scheduled release time so that immigration officials can pick them up. Some cities say they will only honor such requests when accompanied by criminal warrants, and that compliance is voluntary and not required under the statute. Chicago also sued the federal government in August over the threats of funding cuts by the Justice Department. A federal judge sided with the city in September and issued a preliminary injunction barring the US government from denying the public-safety grants.

US judge in California blocks Trump's order on sanctuary cities

China will raise foreign ownership limits in financial firms in a step granting access to a tantalizing multi-trillion dollar financial services market, as the world&rsquo;s second-biggest economy seeks to position itself as a major global finance hub.

The move announced on Friday by vice finance minister Zhu Guangyao, comes a day after U.S. President Donald Trump reiterated calls for better access to Chinese markets in meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Xi is driving broad economic reforms by opening up China&rsquo;s capital markets, internationalizing the yuan currency, and seeking technical know-how through the pursuit of massive inbound and outbound investments.

The latest changes include raising the limit on foreign ownership in joint-venture firms involved in the futures, securities and funds markets to 51 percent from the current 49 percent.

They will take effect immediately following the drafting of specific related rules, Zhu told a news conference, adding China is &ldquo;formulating a timetable and roadmap for financial sector reform and opening up&rdquo;.

The foreign business community gave a cautious welcome to the news.

&ldquo;Financial services further opening definitely has been high on our list,&rdquo; said Ken Jarrett, President of American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai.

&ldquo;It&rsquo;s a step in the right direction. We&rsquo;ll have to see the detailed rules. In China, you always have to pay attention to the fine print to see how quickly it moves, but to finally ease up on the cap is something that is welcome.&rdquo;

Peter Alexander, managing director of Z-Ben Advisors, a Shanghai-based consultant for the fund industry, sees Friday&rsquo;s announcement as a measured step towards bigger changes down the road.

&ldquo;This is part of a methodical and deliberate process. We fully expect foreign asset managers at some point in the next several years to have full control of their own ventures.&rdquo;

The plan to ease ownership restrictions comes as Beijing faces mounting pressure from Western governments and business lobbies to remove investment barriers and onerous regulations that restrict overseas companies&rsquo; operations in its markets.

During his trip to Beijing this week, Trump said that trade between the two nations was unfair, and called for greater market access for U.S. companies.

&ldquo;We really have to look at access, forced technology transfer, and the theft of intellectual property, which just, by and of itself, is costing the United States and its companies at least $300 billion a year,&rdquo; Trump said.

&ldquo;Both the United States and China will have a more prosperous future if we can achieve a level economic playing field. Right now, unfortunately, it is a very one-sided and unfair one.&rdquo;

<h3>&nbsp;</h3>

Reuters reported on Tuesday that China planned to allow global banks to take a stake of up to 51 percent in their onshore securities ventures for the first time and tie up with local non-financial firms.

China has been sluggish to give foreign players more access to its financial sector, but has promised to quicken the pace as foreign investment into Asia&rsquo;s economic powerhouse slows.

China has implemented strict capital controls to contain capital outflows, while opening up new channels for foreign money to come into the domestic markets.

Foreign financial firms are still small players in the financial sector, and the sheer size of the market is a big lure for overseas players.

Foreign banks account for just 1.4 percent of the total 181.7 trillion yuan ($27.37 trillion) of banking assets in China, according to a 2017 study by KPMG. Their average returns on assets and on equity, were about half the level of their domestic rivals, said the study.

UBS, which holds a 25 percent interest in domestic firm UBS Securities Co Ltd, said the changes were an important step in further opening up China&rsquo;s financial sector.

&ldquo;China is a key market for UBS and, as indicated previously, we continue to work towards increasing our stake in UBS Securities Co Ltd&rdquo;, said Eugene Qian, Chairman of UBS China Strategy Board and Member of the Asia Pacific Executive Committee.

A spokesperson for JPMorgan, which sold its 33.3 percent stake in its China securities JV to First Capital in December 2016, said the company &ldquo;welcomes any decision made by the Chinese Government that looks to liberalize its financial sector further&rdquo;.

<h3>&nbsp;</h3>

Some industry watchers said the changes are too little too late.

&ldquo;This looks good, but in reality it is pretty small and it is too late,&rdquo; said Keith Pogson, head of the Asia financial services team at EY.

&ldquo;If you are an international investment bank, you will be there for the sake of your global franchise and having it as part of your network, not because you think you will make much money in China.&rdquo;

All the same, markets reacted positively to the news, with insurers and futures-related firms rallying strongly.

New China Life Insurance jumped nearly 6 percent after the announcement, while Ping An Insurance &nbsp;advanced more than 4 per cent and China Pacific Insurance Group&nbsp;rose over 3 percent.

China will drop foreign ownership restrictions on local banks and asset management companies, Zhu said.

Full foreign ownership of local firms involved in the futures, securities and funds markets will not be permitted until after three years, while full overseas ownership of insurance firms will be allowed only after five years.

For most foreign investment banks, including the likes of Goldman Sachs, the prospect of playing in a huge market seemed too good to pass up.

&ldquo;We welcome today&rsquo;s announcement and look forward to playing a greater role in China&rsquo;s capital markets,&rdquo; a spokesperson for Goldman Sachs said.

&nbsp;

The move announced on Friday by vice finance minister Zhu Guangyao, comes a day after U.S. President Donald Trump reiterated calls for better access to Chinese markets in meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping

China will raise foreign ownership limits in financial firms in a step granting access to a tantalizing multi-trillion dollar financial services market, as the world’s second-biggest economy seeks to position itself as a major global finance hub. The move announced on Friday by vice finance minister Zhu Guangyao, comes a day after U.S. President Donald Trump reiterated calls for better access to Chinese markets in meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Xi is driving broad economic reforms by opening up China’s capital markets, internationalizing the yuan currency, and seeking technical know-how through the pursuit of massive inbound and outbound investments. The latest changes include raising the limit on foreign ownership in joint-venture firms involved in the futures, securities and funds markets to 51 percent from the current 49 percent. They will take effect immediately following the drafting of specific related rules, Zhu told a news conference, adding China is “formulating a timetable and roadmap for financial sector reform and opening up”. The foreign business community gave a cautious welcome to the news. “Financial services further opening definitely has been high on our list,” said Ken Jarrett, President of American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai. “It’s a step in the right direction. We’ll have to see the detailed rules. In China, you always have to pay attention to the fine print to see how quickly it moves, but to finally ease up on the cap is something that is welcome.” Peter Alexander, managing director of Z-Ben Advisors, a Shanghai-based consultant for the fund industry, sees Friday’s announcement as a measured step towards bigger changes down the road. “This is part of a methodical and deliberate process. We fully expect foreign asset managers at some point in the next several years to have full control of their own ventures.” The plan to ease ownership restrictions comes as Beijing faces mounting pressure from Western governments and business lobbies to remove investment barriers and onerous regulations that restrict overseas companies’ operations in its markets. During his trip to Beijing this week, Trump said that trade between the two nations was unfair, and called for greater market access for U.S. companies. “We really have to look at access, forced technology transfer, and the theft of intellectual property, which just, by and of itself, is costing the United States and its companies at least $300 billion a year,” Trump said. “Both the United States and China will have a more prosperous future if we can achieve a level economic playing field. Right now, unfortunately, it is a very one-sided and unfair one.” Reuters reported on Tuesday that China planned to allow global banks to take a stake of up to 51 percent in their onshore securities ventures for the first time and tie up with local non-financial firms. China has been sluggish to give foreign players more access to its financial sector, but has promised to quicken the pace as foreign investment into Asia’s economic powerhouse slows. China has implemented strict capital controls to contain capital outflows, while opening up new channels for foreign money to come into the domestic markets. Foreign financial firms are still small players in the financial sector, and the sheer size of the market is a big lure for overseas players. Foreign banks account for just 1.4 percent of the total 181.7 trillion yuan ($27.37 trillion) of banking assets in China, according to a 2017 study by KPMG. Their average returns on assets and on equity, were about half the level of their domestic rivals, said the study. UBS, which holds a 25 percent interest in domestic firm UBS Securities Co Ltd, said the changes were an important step in further opening up China’s financial sector. “China is a key market for UBS and, as indicated previously, we continue to work towards increasing our stake in UBS Securities Co Ltd”, said Eugene Qian, Chairman of UBS China Strategy Board and Member of the Asia Pacific Executive Committee. A spokesperson for JPMorgan, which sold its 33.3 percent stake in its China securities JV to First Capital in December 2016, said the company “welcomes any decision made by the Chinese Government that looks to liberalize its financial sector further”. Some industry watchers said the changes are too little too late. “This looks good, but in reality it is pretty small and it is too late,” said Keith Pogson, head of the Asia financial services team at EY. “If you are an international investment bank, you will be there for the sake of your global franchise and having it as part of your network, not because you think you will make much money in China.” All the same, markets reacted positively to the news, with insurers and futures-related firms rallying strongly. New China Life Insurance jumped nearly 6 percent after the announcement, while Ping An Insurance advanced more than 4 per cent and China Pacific Insurance Group rose over 3 percent. China will drop foreign ownership restrictions on local banks and asset management companies, Zhu said. Full foreign ownership of local firms involved in the futures, securities and funds markets will not be permitted until after three years, while full overseas ownership of insurance firms will be allowed only after five years. For most foreign investment banks, including the likes of Goldman Sachs, the prospect of playing in a huge market seemed too good to pass up. “We welcome today’s announcement and look forward to playing a greater role in China’s capital markets,” a spokesperson for Goldman Sachs said.

China widens foreign access to its giant financial sector

China said Thursday the United States should &quot;abandon its biased <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/india-must-take-leadership-role-in-regional-security-tillerson-22611">views&quot; towards the country, as it hit back at cutting remarks made</a> by US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

Ahead of his visit to India next week, <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/chinas-xi-pledges-to-build-modern-socialist-country-ruled-by-party-but-open-to-world-22592">President Donald Trump&#39;s top diplomat stated the US preference</a> to work with New Delhi over Beijing during the next century to promote a &quot;free and open&quot; Asia-Pacific region led by prosperous democracies.

The speech was perceived as a warning to the world&#39;s second-largest economy that Washington will build regional alliances to counter Beijing&#39;s ever-growing power.

Tillerson also took the opportunity to compare China with its giant neighbour and criticised Beijing for its &quot;provocative actions&quot; in the South China Sea.

&quot;China, while rising alongside India, has done so less responsibly, at times undermining the international, rules-based order,&quot; the US diplomat said.

Beijing responded Thursday by saying that America was biased.

&quot;We hope the US side can look at China&#39;s development and role in the international community in an objective way, and abandon its biased views of China,&quot; foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang said during a regular press briefing.

&quot;Based on the purposes and principles of the UN charter, we will firmly uphold multilateralism, yet we will also firmly safeguard our own rights and interests.&quot;

Tillerson&#39;s comments were seen as particularly provocative as they came the same day that China&#39;s ruling Communist Party opened its 19th National Congress -- a twice-a-decade meeting of party delegates expected to give President Xi Jinping a second five-year term and consolidate his already formidable power.

They also followed a months-long military standoff between China and India in a disputed Himalayan border area in the summer.

Tillerson did not directly address the stand-off but vowed that Washington &quot;won&#39;t shrink from China&#39;s challenges to the rules-based order, or where China subverts the sovereignty of neighbouring countries&quot;.

Trump is due to visit Beijing next month.

 
&nbsp;

Ahead of his visit to India next week, President Donald Trump's top diplomat stated the US preference to work with New Delhi over Beijing during the next century to promote a "free and open" Asia-Pacific region led by prosperous democracies.

China said Thursday the United States should "abandon its biased views" towards the country, as it hit back at cutting remarks made by US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. Ahead of his visit to India next week, President Donald Trump's top diplomat stated the US preference to work with New Delhi over Beijing during the next century to promote a "free and open" Asia-Pacific region led by prosperous democracies. The speech was perceived as a warning to the world's second-largest economy that Washington will build regional alliances to counter Beijing's ever-growing power. Tillerson also took the opportunity to compare China with its giant neighbour and criticised Beijing for its "provocative actions" in the South China Sea. "China, while rising alongside India, has done so less responsibly, at times undermining the international, rules-based order," the US diplomat said. Beijing responded Thursday by saying that America was biased. "We hope the US side can look at China's development and role in the international community in an objective way, and abandon its biased views of China," foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang said during a regular press briefing. "Based on the purposes and principles of the UN charter, we will firmly uphold multilateralism, yet we will also firmly safeguard our own rights and interests." Tillerson's comments were seen as particularly provocative as they came the same day that China's ruling Communist Party opened its 19th National Congress -- a twice-a-decade meeting of party delegates expected to give President Xi Jinping a second five-year term and consolidate his already formidable power. They also followed a months-long military standoff between China and India in a disputed Himalayan border area in the summer. Tillerson did not directly address the stand-off but vowed that Washington "won't shrink from China's challenges to the rules-based order, or where China subverts the sovereignty of neighbouring countries". Trump is due to visit Beijing next month.

China hits back at US over Rex Tillerson's remark

White House chief of staff John Kelly slapped down rumours that he was about to resign or be fired and said on Thursday his push to bring more order to the West Wing does not extend to controlling President Donald Trump or his social media habits.

In a rare appearance before reporters, the retired general sought to project an aura of calm in a White House that has been criticised as chaotic.

&quot;Unless things change, I&#39;m not quitting, I`m not getting fired, and I don`t think I`ll fire anyone tomorrow,&quot; Kelly told reporters.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-replaces-chief-of-staff-reince-priebus-with-john-kelly-18371" target="_blank">Kelly replaced Trump&#39;s first chief of staff, Reince Priebus,</a> after a tumultuous first six months in office and sought to bring order to an often chaotic operation at the White House.

Under his watch, Trump parted ways with chief strategist Steve Bannon and other top officials, while new restrictions were set to streamline meetings and material for the president.&nbsp;

But reports of both Kelly&#39;s and the president&#39;s frustrations have persisted, sparking continued speculation of pending shakeups.&nbsp;

Trump has confided to friends that he has felt constrained by some of Kelly&rsquo;s moves to limit access to him and some administration officials have privately chafed at the restrictions as well, sources familiar with the internal dynamics of the White House have said.

Disarray within the executive branch has concerned officials outside the administration. Republican Senator Bob Corker has said Kelly is one of three officials including Secretary of Defense James Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson as &quot;those people that help separate our country from chaos.&quot;

He later told the New York Times that Trump risked setting the nation &quot;on the path to World War Three.&quot;

Critics of the president say his frequent use of Twitter has contributed to a sense of chaos.&nbsp;

But the retired Marine made clear that he did not see his job as the arbiter of Trump&#39;s tweets, pushing back at criticism that his penchant for order and organisation had not extended to control over the president`s favourite mode of social media communication.

&quot;I was not brought to this job to control anything but the flow of information to our president so that he can make the best decisions,&quot; Kelly told reporters.

&quot;I was not sent in to or brought in to control him and you should not measure my effectiveness as a chief of staff by what you think I should be doing,&quot; he said.

John Kelly slapped down rumours that he was about to resign or be fired by saying his push to bring more order to the West Wing does not extend to controlling President Donald Trump or his social media habits

White House chief of staff John Kelly slapped down rumours that he was about to resign or be fired and said on Thursday his push to bring more order to the West Wing does not extend to controlling President Donald Trump or his social media habits. In a rare appearance before reporters, the retired general sought to project an aura of calm in a White House that has been criticised as chaotic. "Unless things change, I'm not quitting, I`m not getting fired, and I don`t think I`ll fire anyone tomorrow," Kelly told reporters. Kelly replaced Trump's first chief of staff, Reince Priebus, after a tumultuous first six months in office and sought to bring order to an often chaotic operation at the White House. Under his watch, Trump parted ways with chief strategist Steve Bannon and other top officials, while new restrictions were set to streamline meetings and material for the president. But reports of both Kelly's and the president's frustrations have persisted, sparking continued speculation of pending shakeups. Trump has confided to friends that he has felt constrained by some of Kelly’s moves to limit access to him and some administration officials have privately chafed at the restrictions as well, sources familiar with the internal dynamics of the White House have said. Disarray within the executive branch has concerned officials outside the administration. Republican Senator Bob Corker has said Kelly is one of three officials including Secretary of Defense James Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson as "those people that help separate our country from chaos." He later told the New York Times that Trump risked setting the nation "on the path to World War Three." Critics of the president say his frequent use of Twitter has contributed to a sense of chaos. But the retired Marine made clear that he did not see his job as the arbiter of Trump's tweets, pushing back at criticism that his penchant for order and organisation had not extended to control over the president`s favourite mode of social media communication. "I was not brought to this job to control anything but the flow of information to our president so that he can make the best decisions," Kelly told reporters. "I was not sent in to or brought in to control him and you should not measure my effectiveness as a chief of staff by what you think I should be doing," he said.

White House chief of staff not quitting, says job is not to control Trump

The White House has launched an internal probe of the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/white-house-advisers-used-private-email-accounts-to-discuss-government-related-issues-nyt-20672" target="_blank">use of private email for official business </a>by senior aides to President Donald Trump, news outlet Politico reported Thursday.

The administration is scouring the White House server for emails to and from private email accounts of these aides, Politico said, quoting four people familiar with the probe.

Politico said at least five current and former White House officials used private email to conduct government business, Trump&#39;s son in law and adviser Jared Kushner, daughter Ivanka, economic adviser Gary Cohn, former strategic adviser Steve Bannon and former chief of staff Reince Priebus.

Politico said the probe began this week after it reported<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/kushner-used-personal-email-for-wh-business-20613" target="_blank"> private email use by Kushner</a>.

The internal probe could take weeks or even months, it said.

Trump&#39;s White House legal staff is reviewing the accounts to see if any of the messages sent relate to the Russia probes being carried out by two congressional panels and special counsel Robert Mueller, Politico quoted one of its sources as saying.

As a candidate, Trump routinely attacked his Democrat rival Hillary Clinton over her use of a private email server while she was secretary of state, telling supporters &quot;she has to go to jail&quot; over the affair.

Politico reported Monday that Kushner used a personal account to send messages to senior White House officials and outside advisers about media coverage, planning events, and other issues.

There is no suggestion the emails contained highly sensitive information or were classified, it added, but they could fall foul of the Presidential Records Act, which requires all documents related to the president&#39;s personal and political activities to be archived.

Kushner&#39;s numerous responsibilities within the Trump administration include trying to broker peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In addition to the email controversy, Kushner is facing scrutiny over the Trump campaign&#39;s alleged collusion with Russia to interfere in the 2016 US election, which is the subject of the probes in Congress and by Mueller.

The White House has launched an internal probe of the use of private email for official business by senior aides to President Donald Trump, news outlet Politico reported

The White House has launched an internal probe of the use of private email for official business by senior aides to President Donald Trump, news outlet Politico reported Thursday. The administration is scouring the White House server for emails to and from private email accounts of these aides, Politico said, quoting four people familiar with the probe. Politico said at least five current and former White House officials used private email to conduct government business, Trump's son in law and adviser Jared Kushner, daughter Ivanka, economic adviser Gary Cohn, former strategic adviser Steve Bannon and former chief of staff Reince Priebus. Politico said the probe began this week after it reported private email use by Kushner. The internal probe could take weeks or even months, it said. Trump's White House legal staff is reviewing the accounts to see if any of the messages sent relate to the Russia probes being carried out by two congressional panels and special counsel Robert Mueller, Politico quoted one of its sources as saying. As a candidate, Trump routinely attacked his Democrat rival Hillary Clinton over her use of a private email server while she was secretary of state, telling supporters "she has to go to jail" over the affair. Politico reported Monday that Kushner used a personal account to send messages to senior White House officials and outside advisers about media coverage, planning events, and other issues. There is no suggestion the emails contained highly sensitive information or were classified, it added, but they could fall foul of the Presidential Records Act, which requires all documents related to the president's personal and political activities to be archived. Kushner's numerous responsibilities within the Trump administration include trying to broker peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In addition to the email controversy, Kushner is facing scrutiny over the Trump campaign's alleged collusion with Russia to interfere in the 2016 US election, which is the subject of the probes in Congress and by Mueller.

White House probing use of private email by Trump aides: Report

In a move to improve its services and help in cutting Government waste, President Donald Trump today held a meeting with the chief executives of technology companies including Apple Inc and Amazon.com. 
&nbsp;

In the meeting with nearly 20 chief executives, the White House pushes to shrink government, cut federal employees and eliminate regulations. The White House claims that they could have saved up to $ 1 trillion in 10 years by cutting expenses on the Government As a consequence of this, many business executives are eager to work with the new administration as they face numerous regulatory and other policy issues.

In May, Trump created an &quot;American Technology Council,&quot; the latest in a series of efforts to modernize the U.S. government. He signed a separate order in March to overhaul the federal government and tapped son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner to lead a White House Office of American Innovation to leverage business ideas and potentially privatize some government functions.

&nbsp;Trump asked lawmakers to cut $3.6 trillion in government spending over the next decade. He assured that the healthcare, defence, and food assistance programs were boosted in the budget.

A 2016 US Government Accountability Office report estimated the U.S. government spent more than $80 billion on IT annually, excluding classified operations. In 2015, there were at least 7,000 separate IT investments by the U.S. government and some agencies were using systems that had components at least 50 years old.

&nbsp;

The tech CEOs and White House also plan to discuss Trump&#39;s review announced in April of the U.S. visa program for bringing high-skilled foreign workers into the country.

The council also seeks to boost the cybersecurity of U.S. Government IT systems and wants to learn from private-sector practices. In 2015, hackers exposed the personal information of 22 million people from U.S. Government databases.

In a document outlining the working-group sessions, the White House said the federal government should require &quot;making it easy for agencies to use the cloud.&quot;

The White House thinks it can take lessons from credit card companies in significantly reducing fraud. A 2016 government audit found that in Medicaid alone, there was $29 billion in fraud in a single year.

Following Trump&#39;s June 1 decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accords, Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk and Walt Disney CEO Robert Iger stepped down from White House advisory panels. White House officials said the dispute had little impact and that they had to turn away tech leaders from Monday&#39;s event because of lack of space.

White House looks to the private sector for help in cutting government waste and improving services

In a move to improve its services and help in cutting Government waste, President Donald Trump today held a meeting with the chief executives of technology companies including Apple Inc and Amazon.com. In the meeting with nearly 20 chief executives, the White House pushes to shrink government, cut federal employees and eliminate regulations. The White House claims that they could have saved up to $ 1 trillion in 10 years by cutting expenses on the Government As a consequence of this, many business executives are eager to work with the new administration as they face numerous regulatory and other policy issues. In May, Trump created an "American Technology Council," the latest in a series of efforts to modernize the U.S. government. He signed a separate order in March to overhaul the federal government and tapped son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner to lead a White House Office of American Innovation to leverage business ideas and potentially privatize some government functions. Trump asked lawmakers to cut $3.6 trillion in government spending over the next decade. He assured that the healthcare, defence, and food assistance programs were boosted in the budget. A 2016 US Government Accountability Office report estimated the U.S. government spent more than $80 billion on IT annually, excluding classified operations. In 2015, there were at least 7,000 separate IT investments by the U.S. government and some agencies were using systems that had components at least 50 years old. The tech CEOs and White House also plan to discuss Trump's review announced in April of the U.S. visa program for bringing high-skilled foreign workers into the country. The council also seeks to boost the cybersecurity of U.S. Government IT systems and wants to learn from private-sector practices. In 2015, hackers exposed the personal information of 22 million people from U.S. Government databases. In a document outlining the working-group sessions, the White House said the federal government should require "making it easy for agencies to use the cloud." The White House thinks it can take lessons from credit card companies in significantly reducing fraud. A 2016 government audit found that in Medicaid alone, there was $29 billion in fraud in a single year. Following Trump's June 1 decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accords, Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk and Walt Disney CEO Robert Iger stepped down from White House advisory panels. White House officials said the dispute had little impact and that they had to turn away tech leaders from Monday's event because of lack of space.

President Donald Trump meets the chief executives of technology companies

This is the worst diplomatic crisis in the Gulf region in decades.

On June 5, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Egypt decided to break off ties with Qatar, accusing the Gulf state of supporting terrorism and of destabilising the whole region.

Qatar had fired the opening shot by what seemed to be open criticism of the Saudi-led and US-assisted anti-Iran alliance &nbsp;pushed by Donald Trump after his visit to Riyadh on May 21.

On May 24, Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, the ruler of Qatar, allegedly criticised the US-Saudi move and described Iran as an &ldquo;Islamic power&rdquo;. The Qatar News Agency quoted the emir as saying, &ldquo;There is no wisdom in harbouring hostility towards Iran&rdquo;. This infuriated Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

Qatar then questioned the veracity of the comments and said its news agency was hacked. Nevertheless, the diplomatic rift been deepening, culminating in the current crisis.

Not the first diplomatic imbroglio

This is not the first time that Qatar, a thumb-shaped emirate of the size of the US state of Connecticut, has become embroiled a diplomatic imbroglio with its Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) partners Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

These three Gulf Arab states withdrew their ambassadors from Qatar&rsquo;s capital Doha in early 2014, on the pretext that the country had links to the Muslim Brotherhood and gave refuge to its leaders after the fall of Egypt&rsquo;s first democratically elected government in July 2013.

Saudi Arabia declared the Muslim Brotherhood, which it views as an alternative source of authority that&rsquo;s opposed to hereditary monarchical rule, a terrorist organisation in early March 2014.

But the current crisis is much more serious than the 2014 diplomatic spat, which was resolved after eight months, with Saudi, Emirati and Bahraini ambassadors returning to Doha in November of the same year on the condition that Qatar would never allow the Muslim Brotherhood to operate from its territory.

Iran in the centre

Unlike the 2014 crisis, the current Qatari&ndash;Saudi rift is not just an intra-GCC falling out, as it involves Saudi Arabia&rsquo;s regional rival Iran.

Qatar is seen by the Saudi government and its Emirati and Bahraini counterparts as a spoiler of efforts to forge a unified Arab&ndash;Muslim position, undergirded by the Trump administration, against Iran&rsquo;s so-called &ldquo;terrorist agenda&rdquo; in Arab countries.

A week before US President Donald Trump visited Riyadh to consolidate the anti-Iran alliance, the Saudi Arabic-language daily newspaper Okaz reported a secret meeting between the Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammad Bin Abdul Rahman Al Thani, who was officially visiting Baghdad at the time, and the Iranian Quds Force Commander Qasim Sulaimani.

The newspaper accused Qatar of exiting &ldquo;early from the Arab-Islamic consensus&rdquo; on Iran, adding &ldquo;its defence of the Iranian terrorist regime shows the secret Doha-Tehran alliance intends to strike at Arab and Islamic solidarity.&rdquo;

All of this while Qatar signed the anti-Iran Riyadh Declaration issued after the Arab-Islamic-America summit on May 21 2017.

But why would Qatar, a country that hosts the largest US air force base in the Middle East (Al-Udeid), veer off the Saudi-led GCC military and diplomatic track?

Gulf watchers know that Qatar is suspicious of Saudi goals under the GCC umbrella, and it wants an independent foreign policy, free from Saudi or Iranian influence.

Qatar hardly sees Saudi Arabia as a harmless neighbour. Tensions in Saudi-Qatar relations started right after the former emir Sheikh Hamad Bin Khaifa Al Thani (1995 &ndash; 2013) came to power via a bloodless coup in 1995 by overthrowing his father Sheikh Khalifa Bin Hamad Al Thani. Sheikh Khalifa was visiting Saudi Arabia at the time, which embarrassed the Saudi government.

Sheikh Hamad&rsquo;s takeover in 1995 was preceded by a Saudi attack on a Qatari border security post in September 1992, in violation of a mutual defence treaty the two states had signed in 1982.

Riyadh also thwarted Qatari initiatives to export liquefied gas to other GCC member states in the 1990s. Emir Sheikh Hamad began to pull Qatar out of the Saudi shadow, a policy that Emir Sheikh Tamim is also pursuing.

Qatari satellite news channel Al Jazeera occasionally broadcasts programs criticising Saudi Arabia and, much to the anger of Riyadh, it hosted Saudi dissidents in a popular talk show in June 2002.

The incident led to Saudi Arabia recalling its ambassador from Doha in September 2002. Full diplomatic relations between the two countries were restored five years later, in September 2007, on Qatari assurance that Al Jazeera would refrain from broadcasting anti-Saudi programs.

A big push in the region

At the same time, Qatar, with the massive amount of oil and gas-generated income in its coffers (US$191 billion GDP in 2012), has been pushing for a bigger foreign policy and diplomatic profile in the region.

Doha successfully mediated a series of conflicts in the 2000s. It broke the political impasse in Lebanon by persuading the Sunni-led Lebanese government and the opposition Hezbollah to sign the May 2008 Doha Agreement; it mediated the conflict between the Yemeni government and Houthis in February 2008 (though it failed subsequently to find a permanent solution to the conflict); and, in February 2010, it facilitated a ceasefire agreement between the Sudanese government and the opposition Justice and Equality Movement.

<figure><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dhg5iQ2az94?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" width="440"></iframe>

<figcaption>
&nbsp;
</figcaption>
</figure>

These successful mediations brought the tiny country enviable diplomatic plaudits from home and abroad.

In 2011, to the surprise of many regional states, the Qatar military participated in the NATO-led intervention to dislodge the Gaddafi government in Libya. It wanted to achieve a similar goal in Syria &ndash; to topple the Bashar Al-Assad government &ndash; but did not succeed primarily due to Iranian and Russian opposition.

Despite being an autocracy, Qatar presented itself as a frontline Arab state for politically transforming the Arab world, under the rubric of the Arab Spring movements.

Its objective was to strengthen Qatari national security and foreign policy autonomy in the Gulf region, a neighbourhood dominated by giants such as Iran and Saudi Arabia.

What next?

Nonetheless, the diplomatic spat with Saudi Arabia does not bode well for Qatar. The Saudi-led diplomatic offensive has isolated it from the rest of GCC and the Middle East region by cutting off air, land and sea routes to Doha.

Doha has been accused again of supporting regional terror groups &ndash; al-Qaeda and ISIL in Iraq and Syria - and cooperating with Iran.

Qatar has always denied funding extremist groups, but the small country has been accused in the last few years of allowing terrorist financiers &nbsp;to operate within its territory with impunity.

The Qatari government has also pledged support for Hamas, the Palestinian group regarded as a liberation force against Israeli occupation by most Muslim countries, but as a terrorist organisation by the United States, Israel, Egypt and Canada.

Qatar can expect no serious help from Iran either, as any possible Iranian political or diplomatic help runs the risk of further embittering Saudi-Qatar relations and permanently subject Doha to Saudi wrath.

The Trump administration is definitely not on Qatar&rsquo;s side, as Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, speaking in Australia, indirectly hoped to resolve the intra-GCC irritants and put Qatar back in the Saudi-driven GCC orbit.

Cracks in the Saudi-Qatar relationship would undercut the joint Arab-US fight against regional terror and extremist groups. It&rsquo;s difficult to say how long Qatar would be in the position to resist the Saudi diplomatic offensive.

But backing down from the fight with Riyadh looks set to produce two outcomes. First, Doha would be obliged to downgrade its support to rebel groups in Syria, linked to either Muslim Brotherhood or al-Qaeda. And second, it must be willing to shed some degree of its foreign policy autonomy to participate in the Saudi-led offensive against Iran.

<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/78894/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" width="1" />In either case, Qatar has undermined the anti-Iran alliance, giving Tehran more time to reassess the situation and consider its options.

This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/saudi-rift-with-qatar-exposes-growing-division-in-the-anti-iran-alliance-78894">original article</a>.

This is the worst diplomatic crisis in the Gulf region in decades.

This is the worst diplomatic crisis in the Gulf region in decades. On June 5, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Egypt decided to break off ties with Qatar, accusing the Gulf state of supporting terrorism and of destabilising the whole region. Qatar had fired the opening shot by what seemed to be open criticism of the Saudi-led and US-assisted anti-Iran alliance pushed by Donald Trump after his visit to Riyadh on May 21. On May 24, Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, the ruler of Qatar, allegedly criticised the US-Saudi move and described Iran as an “Islamic power”. The Qatar News Agency quoted the emir as saying, “There is no wisdom in harbouring hostility towards Iran”. This infuriated Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Qatar then questioned the veracity of the comments and said its news agency was hacked. Nevertheless, the diplomatic rift been deepening, culminating in the current crisis. Not the first diplomatic imbroglio This is not the first time that Qatar, a thumb-shaped emirate of the size of the US state of Connecticut, has become embroiled a diplomatic imbroglio with its Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) partners Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. These three Gulf Arab states withdrew their ambassadors from Qatar’s capital Doha in early 2014, on the pretext that the country had links to the Muslim Brotherhood and gave refuge to its leaders after the fall of Egypt’s first democratically elected government in July 2013. Saudi Arabia declared the Muslim Brotherhood, which it views as an alternative source of authority that’s opposed to hereditary monarchical rule, a terrorist organisation in early March 2014. But the current crisis is much more serious than the 2014 diplomatic spat, which was resolved after eight months, with Saudi, Emirati and Bahraini ambassadors returning to Doha in November of the same year on the condition that Qatar would never allow the Muslim Brotherhood to operate from its territory. Iran in the centre Unlike the 2014 crisis, the current Qatari–Saudi rift is not just an intra-GCC falling out, as it involves Saudi Arabia’s regional rival Iran. Qatar is seen by the Saudi government and its Emirati and Bahraini counterparts as a spoiler of efforts to forge a unified Arab–Muslim position, undergirded by the Trump administration, against Iran’s so-called “terrorist agenda” in Arab countries. A week before US President Donald Trump visited Riyadh to consolidate the anti-Iran alliance, the Saudi Arabic-language daily newspaper Okaz reported a secret meeting between the Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammad Bin Abdul Rahman Al Thani, who was officially visiting Baghdad at the time, and the Iranian Quds Force Commander Qasim Sulaimani. The newspaper accused Qatar of exiting “early from the Arab-Islamic consensus” on Iran, adding “its defence of the Iranian terrorist regime shows the secret Doha-Tehran alliance intends to strike at Arab and Islamic solidarity.” All of this while Qatar signed the anti-Iran Riyadh Declaration issued after the Arab-Islamic-America summit on May 21 2017. But why would Qatar, a country that hosts the largest US air force base in the Middle East (Al-Udeid), veer off the Saudi-led GCC military and diplomatic track? Gulf watchers know that Qatar is suspicious of Saudi goals under the GCC umbrella, and it wants an independent foreign policy, free from Saudi or Iranian influence. Qatar hardly sees Saudi Arabia as a harmless neighbour. Tensions in Saudi-Qatar relations started right after the former emir Sheikh Hamad Bin Khaifa Al Thani (1995 – 2013) came to power via a bloodless coup in 1995 by overthrowing his father Sheikh Khalifa Bin Hamad Al Thani. Sheikh Khalifa was visiting Saudi Arabia at the time, which embarrassed the Saudi government. Sheikh Hamad’s takeover in 1995 was preceded by a Saudi attack on a Qatari border security post in September 1992, in violation of a mutual defence treaty the two states had signed in 1982. Riyadh also thwarted Qatari initiatives to export liquefied gas to other GCC member states in the 1990s. Emir Sheikh Hamad began to pull Qatar out of the Saudi shadow, a policy that Emir Sheikh Tamim is also pursuing. Qatari satellite news channel Al Jazeera occasionally broadcasts programs criticising Saudi Arabia and, much to the anger of Riyadh, it hosted Saudi dissidents in a popular talk show in June 2002. The incident led to Saudi Arabia recalling its ambassador from Doha in September 2002. Full diplomatic relations between the two countries were restored five years later, in September 2007, on Qatari assurance that Al Jazeera would refrain from broadcasting anti-Saudi programs. A big push in the region At the same time, Qatar, with the massive amount of oil and gas-generated income in its coffers (US$191 billion GDP in 2012), has been pushing for a bigger foreign policy and diplomatic profile in the region. Doha successfully mediated a series of conflicts in the 2000s. It broke the political impasse in Lebanon by persuading the Sunni-led Lebanese government and the opposition Hezbollah to sign the May 2008 Doha Agreement; it mediated the conflict between the Yemeni government and Houthis in February 2008 (though it failed subsequently to find a permanent solution to the conflict); and, in February 2010, it facilitated a ceasefire agreement between the Sudanese government and the opposition Justice and Equality Movement. These successful mediations brought the tiny country enviable diplomatic plaudits from home and abroad. In 2011, to the surprise of many regional states, the Qatar military participated in the NATO-led intervention to dislodge the Gaddafi government in Libya. It wanted to achieve a similar goal in Syria – to topple the Bashar Al-Assad government – but did not succeed primarily due to Iranian and Russian opposition. Despite being an autocracy, Qatar presented itself as a frontline Arab state for politically transforming the Arab world, under the rubric of the Arab Spring movements. Its objective was to strengthen Qatari national security and foreign policy autonomy in the Gulf region, a neighbourhood dominated by giants such as Iran and Saudi Arabia. What next? Nonetheless, the diplomatic spat with Saudi Arabia does not bode well for Qatar. The Saudi-led diplomatic offensive has isolated it from the rest of GCC and the Middle East region by cutting off air, land and sea routes to Doha. Doha has been accused again of supporting regional terror groups – al-Qaeda and ISIL in Iraq and Syria - and cooperating with Iran. Qatar has always denied funding extremist groups, but the small country has been accused in the last few years of allowing terrorist financiers to operate within its territory with impunity. The Qatari government has also pledged support for Hamas, the Palestinian group regarded as a liberation force against Israeli occupation by most Muslim countries, but as a terrorist organisation by the United States, Israel, Egypt and Canada. Qatar can expect no serious help from Iran either, as any possible Iranian political or diplomatic help runs the risk of further embittering Saudi-Qatar relations and permanently subject Doha to Saudi wrath. The Trump administration is definitely not on Qatar’s side, as Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, speaking in Australia, indirectly hoped to resolve the intra-GCC irritants and put Qatar back in the Saudi-driven GCC orbit. Cracks in the Saudi-Qatar relationship would undercut the joint Arab-US fight against regional terror and extremist groups. It’s difficult to say how long Qatar would be in the position to resist the Saudi diplomatic offensive. But backing down from the fight with Riyadh looks set to produce two outcomes. First, Doha would be obliged to downgrade its support to rebel groups in Syria, linked to either Muslim Brotherhood or al-Qaeda. And second, it must be willing to shed some degree of its foreign policy autonomy to participate in the Saudi-led offensive against Iran. In either case, Qatar has undermined the anti-Iran alliance, giving Tehran more time to reassess the situation and consider its options. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Saudi rift with Qatar exposes growing division in the anti-Iran alliance

The United States rekindled an old trade conflict with Canada when it announced Monday that it was slapping new tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber imports.

Officials in Canada, the second most important US trade partner, rejected claims of subsidies. The US Commerce Department said that in 2016 softwood lumber imports from Canada were valued at $5.66 billion.

The US Commerce Department said it had reached a &quot;preliminary determination&quot; that Canada is improperly subsidising softwood lumber exports to the United States. Softwood lumber is used mainly for home building.

The Commerce Department said that, after talks failed to reach an agreement, it would impose &quot;countervailing duties&quot; of between three and 24 per cent.

The department &quot;will instruct US Customs and Border Protection to collect cash deposits based on these preliminary rates.&quot;&nbsp;

Furthermore, &quot;certain companies will be subject to the retroactive collection of cash deposits&quot; for up to 90 days.

&nbsp;

&#39;Unfair,&#39; &#39;punitive&#39;&nbsp;

&quot;Canada disagrees strongly with the US Department of Commerce&#39;s decision to impose an unfair and punitive duty. The accusations are baseless and unfounded,&quot; a statement signed by Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland and Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr read.

&quot;This decision will negatively affect workers on both sides of the border, and will ultimately increase costs for American families who want to build or renovate homes.&quot;

Canada &quot;will vigorously defend the interests of the Canadian softwood lumber industry, including through litigation,&quot; it said, adding that it has prevailed in international tribunals on the issue since 1983.

The softwood lumber dispute between Washington and Ottawa has seen many twists and turns for nearly 35 years, with US producers accusing their Canadian counterparts of exporting lumber at subsidised prices.

Canada, the United States and Mexico are part of the North American Free Trade Agreement. However, Canadian softwood exports are regulated under a bilateral agreement reached in 2006, which expired in 2015.

President Donald Trump, who took office in January, spent much of his campaign blasting the NAFTA agreement and stating that he would renegotiate it to get a better deal.

Trump&#39;s campaign attacks focused mainly on Mexico, but recently he has focused on Canada, especially over dairy imports.

&nbsp;

&#39;Bad week&#39;&nbsp;

&quot;It has been a bad week for US-Canada trade relations,&quot; US Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said in a statement.&nbsp;

On April 17 &quot;it became apparent that Canada intends to effectively cut off the last dairy products being exported from the United States. Today (Monday), in a different matter, the Department of Commerce determined a need to impose countervailing duties of roughly $1 billion on Canadian softwood lumber exports to us.&nbsp;

&quot;This is not our idea of a properly functioning Free Trade Agreement,&quot; Ross said.

Following these emergency measures, the Commerce Department said it will conduct a thorough investigation and confirm its position by September 27.&nbsp;

If confirmed, the tariffs would then have to be approved by the US International Trade Commission (USITC).

Ross said that he and the Canadian ministers &quot;tried to negotiate a settlement but we were unable&quot;.

Canada &quot;has put forward a number of reasonable proposals to the current US administration that is responsive to views expressed by US industry,&quot; the statement from Canada&#39;s Freeland and Carr read.

&quot;We remain confident that a negotiated settlement is not only possible but in the best interests of both countries.&quot;

Trump has said he believes too many US industrial jobs have gone abroad, especially to Mexico, and that the United States is the victim of unfair trade practices by both of its NAFTA neighbours.

Last week Trump suggested possible sanctions in the steel sector, stating that he believes the decline in domestic steel production due to cheaper imports is a national security issue.

(AFP)

President Trump has spent much time blasting NAFTA, saying he would renegotiate it to get a better better deal for Americans

The United States rekindled an old trade conflict with Canada when it announced Monday that it was slapping new tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber imports. Officials in Canada, the second most important US trade partner, rejected claims of subsidies. The US Commerce Department said that in 2016 softwood lumber imports from Canada were valued at $5.66 billion. The US Commerce Department said it had reached a "preliminary determination" that Canada is improperly subsidising softwood lumber exports to the United States. Softwood lumber is used mainly for home building. The Commerce Department said that, after talks failed to reach an agreement, it would impose "countervailing duties" of between three and 24 per cent. The department "will instruct US Customs and Border Protection to collect cash deposits based on these preliminary rates." Furthermore, "certain companies will be subject to the retroactive collection of cash deposits" for up to 90 days. 'Unfair,' 'punitive' "Canada disagrees strongly with the US Department of Commerce's decision to impose an unfair and punitive duty. The accusations are baseless and unfounded," a statement signed by Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland and Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr read. "This decision will negatively affect workers on both sides of the border, and will ultimately increase costs for American families who want to build or renovate homes." Canada "will vigorously defend the interests of the Canadian softwood lumber industry, including through litigation," it said, adding that it has prevailed in international tribunals on the issue since 1983. The softwood lumber dispute between Washington and Ottawa has seen many twists and turns for nearly 35 years, with US producers accusing their Canadian counterparts of exporting lumber at subsidised prices. Canada, the United States and Mexico are part of the North American Free Trade Agreement. However, Canadian softwood exports are regulated under a bilateral agreement reached in 2006, which expired in 2015. President Donald Trump, who took office in January, spent much of his campaign blasting the NAFTA agreement and stating that he would renegotiate it to get a better deal. Trump's campaign attacks focused mainly on Mexico, but recently he has focused on Canada, especially over dairy imports. 'Bad week' "It has been a bad week for US-Canada trade relations," US Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said in a statement. On April 17 "it became apparent that Canada intends to effectively cut off the last dairy products being exported from the United States. Today (Monday), in a different matter, the Department of Commerce determined a need to impose countervailing duties of roughly $1 billion on Canadian softwood lumber exports to us. "This is not our idea of a properly functioning Free Trade Agreement," Ross said. Following these emergency measures, the Commerce Department said it will conduct a thorough investigation and confirm its position by September 27. If confirmed, the tariffs would then have to be approved by the US International Trade Commission (USITC). Ross said that he and the Canadian ministers "tried to negotiate a settlement but we were unable". Canada "has put forward a number of reasonable proposals to the current US administration that is responsive to views expressed by US industry," the statement from Canada's Freeland and Carr read. "We remain confident that a negotiated settlement is not only possible but in the best interests of both countries." Trump has said he believes too many US industrial jobs have gone abroad, especially to Mexico, and that the United States is the victim of unfair trade practices by both of its NAFTA neighbours. Last week Trump suggested possible sanctions in the steel sector, stating that he believes the decline in domestic steel production due to cheaper imports is a national security issue. (AFP)

US rekindles trade conflict with Canada over lumber

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump has ordered an inter-agency review of whether the lifting of sanctions against Iran under a 2015 nuclear deal was in the United States&#39; national security interests, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said on Tuesday.

Tillerson said in a statement that Iran remained compliant with its commitments under the deal to rein in its nuclear programme but there were concerns about its role as a state sponsor of terrorism.

He said he had notified US&nbsp;House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan, the top Republican in Congress, of the decision on Tuesday and of Iran&#39;s compliance under the deal, clinched under the Obama administration.

&quot;President Donald J&nbsp;Trump has directed a National Security Council-led interagency review of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action that will evaluate whether suspension of sanctions related to Iran pursuant to the JCPOA is vital to the national security interests of the United States,&quot; Tillerson said in the statement.

&quot;It remains a leading state sponsor of terror, through many platforms and methods,&quot; Tillerson said.

The 2015 deal between Iran and six major powers restricts Tehran&#39;s nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of international economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic.

Trump has called the agreement &quot;the worst deal ever negotiated&quot;.

(Reuters)

Tillerson said Iran remained compliant with its commitments to rein in its nuclear programme, but is a state sponsor of terrorism

US President Donald Trump has ordered an inter-agency review of whether the lifting of sanctions against Iran under a 2015 nuclear deal was in the United States' national security interests, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said on Tuesday. Tillerson said in a statement that Iran remained compliant with its commitments under the deal to rein in its nuclear programme but there were concerns about its role as a state sponsor of terrorism. He said he had notified US House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan, the top Republican in Congress, of the decision on Tuesday and of Iran's compliance under the deal, clinched under the Obama administration. "President Donald J Trump has directed a National Security Council-led interagency review of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action that will evaluate whether suspension of sanctions related to Iran pursuant to the JCPOA is vital to the national security interests of the United States," Tillerson said in the statement. "It remains a leading state sponsor of terror, through many platforms and methods," Tillerson said. The 2015 deal between Iran and six major powers restricts Tehran's nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of international economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic. Trump has called the agreement "the worst deal ever negotiated". (Reuters)

Trump orders review of lifting sanctions against Iran: Tillerson

A federal appeals court on Monday rejected a US Department of Justice request to place on hold an appeal over President Donald Trump&#39;s travel ban on people from seven majority-Muslim countries.

The order from the 9th US&nbsp;Circuit Court of Appeals could increase pressure on the Trump administration to clarify its intentions regarding the controversial executive order.

The 9th Circuit suspended Trump&#39;s travel ban earlier this month while litigation over the measure proceeds. Trump has said he will soon issue a new executive order that addresses concerns raised by the appeals court judges.

The president&#39;s January 27 order caused chaos at airports<a class="XrfTgygujN6UR vZtwXx7tVAcJ" href="#70016889" style="z-index: 2147483647;" title="Click to Continue &gt; by Advertisement"> around the world&nbsp;</a>as visa holders heading to the United States were pulled off planes or turned around upon arrival at US airports.

Trump has said travel limitations are necessary to protect the United States from attacks by Islamist militants. His original order barred people from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering the country for 90 days. Refugees were banned for 120 days, except those from Syria, who were banned indefinitely.

Americans were deeply divided over the measure, which was condemned by prominent US companies and allies and challenged in court by the state of Washington.

The 9th Circuit had directed the Justice Department to file a legal brief defending the travel ban later this week. Given Trump&#39;s intention to issue a new order, however, the Justice Department asked last week for the appeal to be placed on hold.

In a response, the state of Washington said the Trump administration has said both that it would pursue an appeal, and that it would issue a new order.

&quot;Throughout these proceedings, there appears to have been a lack of communication between the Department of Justice and the White House,&quot; the Washington attorney general&#39;s office said.&nbsp;Representatives for the Justice Department declined to comment.

After stating that a new travel ban would be issued last week, a White House official said on Wednesday that a new order would come sometime this week.

Reports say President Trump is expected to sign the new immigration and refugee executive order this week. The new ban may come into place as early as Wednesday.

(Reuters with agency inputs)

The court order could increase pressure on the Trump administration to clarify its intentions regarding the travel ban

A federal appeals court on Monday rejected a US Department of Justice request to place on hold an appeal over President Donald Trump's travel ban on people from seven majority-Muslim countries. The order from the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals could increase pressure on the Trump administration to clarify its intentions regarding the controversial executive order. The 9th Circuit suspended Trump's travel ban earlier this month while litigation over the measure proceeds. Trump has said he will soon issue a new executive order that addresses concerns raised by the appeals court judges. The president's January 27 order caused chaos at airports around the world as visa holders heading to the United States were pulled off planes or turned around upon arrival at US airports. Trump has said travel limitations are necessary to protect the United States from attacks by Islamist militants. His original order barred people from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering the country for 90 days. Refugees were banned for 120 days, except those from Syria, who were banned indefinitely. Americans were deeply divided over the measure, which was condemned by prominent US companies and allies and challenged in court by the state of Washington. The 9th Circuit had directed the Justice Department to file a legal brief defending the travel ban later this week. Given Trump's intention to issue a new order, however, the Justice Department asked last week for the appeal to be placed on hold. In a response, the state of Washington said the Trump administration has said both that it would pursue an appeal, and that it would issue a new order. "Throughout these proceedings, there appears to have been a lack of communication between the Department of Justice and the White House," the Washington attorney general's office said. Representatives for the Justice Department declined to comment. After stating that a new travel ban would be issued last week, a White House official said on Wednesday that a new order would come sometime this week. Reports say President Trump is expected to sign the new immigration and refugee executive order this week. The new ban may come into place as early as Wednesday. (Reuters with agency inputs)

US appeals court refuses to put Trump travel ban on hold

president-donald-trump

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

president donald-trump