It's time for Pakistan's leaders to stand up against extremists, Democratic presidential aspirant Tulsi Gabbard has said, as she slammed the country for providing terrorists with a safe haven which is causing tensions with India.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;

Tensions have escalated between India and Pakistan after the February 14 Pulwama attack claimed by Pakistan-based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM). Over forty CRPF soldiers were killed in the attack.&nbsp;

India carried out air strikes against the biggest training camp of JeM in Balakot. In the operation, the government said several JeM terrorists, trainers, senior commanders and groups of jihadis who were being trained for suicide attacks were killed.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
As long as Pakistan is providing terrorists with a safe haven, there will be heightened tensions between the two countries. It's time for Pakistan's leaders to stand up against the extremists and terrorists.
— Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) <a href="https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1101687578929950722?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 2, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

"As long as Pakistan is providing terrorists with a safe haven, there will be heightened tensions between the two countries," Gabbard said.

"It's time for Pakistan's leaders to stand up against the extremists and terrorists,"&nbsp;said Gabbard, a former co-chair of the House Caucus for India and Indian Americans. Gabbard is the four-time lawmaker from Hawaii.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
My heart goes out to the families of the suicide bombing victims in India &amp; the many victims of terror from these same groups that have killed hundreds of Indian and Pakistani civilians over the years. It's time for Pakistan's leaders to stop giving safe haven to these terrorists
— Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) <a href="https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1101695488397471744?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 2, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Congressman Ted Yoho also urged Pakistan to take meaningful steps to address terrorist groups.&nbsp;

"Congress and the Indo-Pacific region are carefully watching the latest tensions between India and Pakistan. The last thing the region and the world needs is a conflict between two countries armed with nuclear weapons,"&nbsp;he said.

"I urge Pakistan to take meaningful steps to address terrorist groups operating within their country and for both governments to resolve their differences peacefully,"&nbsp;said Yoho, Lead Republican for the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific, and Nonproliferation.&nbsp;

It's time for Pakistan's leaders to stand up against extremists, Democratic presidential aspirant Tulsi Gabbard has said, as she slammed the country for providing terrorists with a safe haven which is causing tensions with India.

It's time for Pakistan's leaders to stand up against extremists, Democratic presidential aspirant Tulsi Gabbard has said, as she slammed the country for providing terrorists with a safe haven which is causing tensions with India. Tensions have escalated between India and Pakistan after the February 14 Pulwama attack claimed by Pakistan-based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM). Over forty CRPF soldiers were killed in the attack. India carried out air strikes against the biggest training camp of JeM in Balakot. In the operation, the government said several JeM terrorists, trainers, senior commanders and groups of jihadis who were being trained for suicide attacks were killed. As long as Pakistan is providing terrorists with a safe haven, there will be heightened tensions between the two countries. It's time for Pakistan's leaders to stand up against the extremists and terrorists. — Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) March 2, 2019 × "As long as Pakistan is providing terrorists with a safe haven, there will be heightened tensions between the two countries," Gabbard said. "It's time for Pakistan's leaders to stand up against the extremists and terrorists," said Gabbard, a former co-chair of the House Caucus for India and Indian Americans. Gabbard is the four-time lawmaker from Hawaii. My heart goes out to the families of the suicide bombing victims in India & the many victims of terror from these same groups that have killed hundreds of Indian and Pakistani civilians over the years. It's time for Pakistan's leaders to stop giving safe haven to these terrorists — Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) March 2, 2019 × Congressman Ted Yoho also urged Pakistan to take meaningful steps to address terrorist groups. "Congress and the Indo-Pacific region are carefully watching the latest tensions between India and Pakistan. The last thing the region and the world needs is a conflict between two countries armed with nuclear weapons," he said. "I urge Pakistan to take meaningful steps to address terrorist groups operating within their country and for both governments to resolve their differences peacefully," said Yoho, Lead Republican for the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific, and Nonproliferation.

Time for Pakistan's leaders to stand up against extremists: Tulsi Gabbard

The United States has asked the world community to designate Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and its leadership which will cut resources to the group.&nbsp;

JeM is behind the February 14 terror attack in Pulwama that killed more than 40 of India's security personnel. JeM is also responsible for Indian Parliament attack in 2001, Pathankot and Uri terror attack in 2016.

US State Department's coordinator for counterterrorism Nathan Sales in a reply to a question said, "We call on the international community as a whole to follow our lead in designating the organisation and its leadership."

The US has already designated JeM and its leadership under its domestic laws.

Nathan said, "The US has designated JeM and its leadership...to cut of the flow of money and deprive them of the resources they need to commit attack like the one we witnessed a couple of weeks ago."

Urging the world community to "amplify those unilateral efforts", US is "taking under our own laws with multilateral efforts."

The US, France and UK on Thursday proposed to list JeM Chief Masood Azhar under the 1267 committee of the United Nations Security Council.

India has been proposing listing of Azhar since 2016 but the effort has been scuttled by China who has been citing lack of consensus.&nbsp;

 
Meanwhile, Pakistani foreign minister SM Qureshi speaking to a western media outlet earlier today said Azhar is in Pakistan but very unwell.

Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs Eliot L. Engel said Washington "remain extremely concerned about ongoing Pakistani support for terrorist groups, including Jaish-e-Mohammad" and "to avoid the kind of miscalculation Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan rightly fears, Pakistani leaders must take demonstrable action against Jaish-e-Mohammed and the terrorist infrastructure on Pakistan’s soil."

The United States has asked the world community to designate Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and its leadership which will cut resources to the group. JeM is behind the February 14 terror attack in Pulwama that killed more than 40 of India's security personnel.

The United States has asked the world community to designate Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and its leadership which will cut resources to the group. JeM is behind the February 14 terror attack in Pulwama that killed more than 40 of India's security personnel. JeM is also responsible for Indian Parliament attack in 2001, Pathankot and Uri terror attack in 2016. US State Department's coordinator for counterterrorism Nathan Sales in a reply to a question said, "We call on the international community as a whole to follow our lead in designating the organisation and its leadership." The US has already designated JeM and its leadership under its domestic laws. Nathan said, "The US has designated JeM and its leadership...to cut of the flow of money and deprive them of the resources they need to commit attack like the one we witnessed a couple of weeks ago." Urging the world community to "amplify those unilateral efforts", US is "taking under our own laws with multilateral efforts." The US, France and UK on Thursday proposed to list JeM Chief Masood Azhar under the 1267 committee of the United Nations Security Council. India has been proposing listing of Azhar since 2016 but the effort has been scuttled by China who has been citing lack of consensus. Meanwhile, Pakistani foreign minister SM Qureshi speaking to a western media outlet earlier today said Azhar is in Pakistan but very unwell. Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs Eliot L. Engel said Washington "remain extremely concerned about ongoing Pakistani support for terrorist groups, including Jaish-e-Mohammad" and "to avoid the kind of miscalculation Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan rightly fears, Pakistani leaders must take demonstrable action against Jaish-e-Mohammed and the terrorist infrastructure on Pakistan’s soil."

US asks world community to take action against JeM and its leadership 

The United States on Thursday offered a $1 million reward for information on a son of late Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, seeing him as an emerging face of extremism.

The location of Hamza bin Laden, sometimes dubbed the "crown prince of jihad," has been the subject of speculation for years with reports of him living in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria or under house arrest in Iran.

"Hamza bin Laden is the son of deceased former AQ leader Osama bin Laden and is emerging as a leader in the AQ franchise," a State Department statement said, referring to Al-Qaeda.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
WANTED. Up to $1 million for information on Hamza bin Laden, an emerging al-Qa'ida leader. Hamza is son of Usama bin Laden and has threatened attacks against the United States and allies. Relocation possible. Submit a tip, get paid. <a href="https://t.co/LtBVhsrwTc">https://t.co/LtBVhsrwTc</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/RFJ?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#RFJ</a> <a href="https://t.co/gmx5hkoSzQ">pic.twitter.com/gmx5hkoSzQ</a>
— Rewards for Justice (@Rewards4Justice) <a href="https://twitter.com/Rewards4Justice/status/1101239592903168006?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 28, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The State Department said that it would offer $1 million for information leading to his location in any country.

Bin Laden, who according to the United States is around 30, has threatened attacks against the United States to avenge the 2011 killing of his father, who was living in hiding in the Pakistani garrison town of Abbottabad, by US special forces.

US intelligence agencies increasingly see the younger bin Laden as a successor to his father for the mantle of global jihad, especially as the even more extreme Islamic State group is down to its last sliver of land in Syria.

In 2015, bin Laden released an audio message urging jihadists in Syria to unite, claiming that the fight in the war-torn country paves the way to "liberating Palestine."

And in a message a year later, following in the footsteps of his father, he urged the overthrow of the leadership in their native Saudi Arabia.

Osama bin Laden's three surviving wives and his children were quietly allowed to return to Saudi Arabia after his killing.

But Hamza bin Laden's whereabouts have been a matter of dispute. He is believed to have spent years along with his mother in Iran, despite Al-Qaeda's strident denunciations of the Shiite branch of Islam that dominates the country.

Observers say that the clerical regime in Tehran kept him under house arrest as a way to maintain pressure on rival Saudi Arabia as well as on Al-Qaeda, dissuading the Sunni militants from attacking Iran.

One of Hamza bin Laden's half-brothers told The Guardian last year that Hamza's whereabouts were unknown but that he may be in Afghanistan.

He also said that Hamza bin Laden married the daughter of Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker in Al-Qaeda's September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States that killed some 3,000 people and sparked the US intervention in Afghanistan.

The United States on Thursday offered a $1 million reward for information on a son of late Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, seeing him as an emerging face of extremism.

The United States on Thursday offered a $1 million reward for information on a son of late Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, seeing him as an emerging face of extremism. The location of Hamza bin Laden, sometimes dubbed the "crown prince of jihad," has been the subject of speculation for years with reports of him living in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria or under house arrest in Iran. "Hamza bin Laden is the son of deceased former AQ leader Osama bin Laden and is emerging as a leader in the AQ franchise," a State Department statement said, referring to Al-Qaeda. WANTED. Up to $1 million for information on Hamza bin Laden, an emerging al-Qa'ida leader. Hamza is son of Usama bin Laden and has threatened attacks against the United States and allies. Relocation possible. Submit a tip, get paid. https://t.co/LtBVhsrwTc #RFJ pic.twitter.com/gmx5hkoSzQ — Rewards for Justice (@Rewards4Justice) February 28, 2019 × The State Department said that it would offer $1 million for information leading to his location in any country. Bin Laden, who according to the United States is around 30, has threatened attacks against the United States to avenge the 2011 killing of his father, who was living in hiding in the Pakistani garrison town of Abbottabad, by US special forces. US intelligence agencies increasingly see the younger bin Laden as a successor to his father for the mantle of global jihad, especially as the even more extreme Islamic State group is down to its last sliver of land in Syria. In 2015, bin Laden released an audio message urging jihadists in Syria to unite, claiming that the fight in the war-torn country paves the way to "liberating Palestine." And in a message a year later, following in the footsteps of his father, he urged the overthrow of the leadership in their native Saudi Arabia. Osama bin Laden's three surviving wives and his children were quietly allowed to return to Saudi Arabia after his killing. But Hamza bin Laden's whereabouts have been a matter of dispute. He is believed to have spent years along with his mother in Iran, despite Al-Qaeda's strident denunciations of the Shiite branch of Islam that dominates the country. Observers say that the clerical regime in Tehran kept him under house arrest as a way to maintain pressure on rival Saudi Arabia as well as on Al-Qaeda, dissuading the Sunni militants from attacking Iran. One of Hamza bin Laden's half-brothers told The Guardian last year that Hamza's whereabouts were unknown but that he may be in Afghanistan. He also said that Hamza bin Laden married the daughter of Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker in Al-Qaeda's September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States that killed some 3,000 people and sparked the US intervention in Afghanistan.

US offers $1 million reward to find bin Laden's son

Two influential American Senators have asked US President Donald Trump to pursue a peaceful resolution to the conflict between India and Pakistan and ensure that Islamabad does more against the terrorist groups.

In a letter to Trump, Senators Jerry Moran from Kansas and Jeanne Shaheen from New Hampshire said that there is an urgency surrounding the dangerous situation between India and Pakistan in Kashmir.

"We affirm India's right to self-defence in response to attacks planned and executed by Pakistani-based terrorist groups designated by the United States and United Nations and welcome Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan's recent decision to release a captured Air Force officer from India, the two Senators wrote.

They also urged Trump to ensure that Pakistan does more against the terrorist groups.&nbsp;

Tensions between India and Pakistan rose following the February 14 terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama district in which 40 CRPF soldiers were killed. Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) terror group claimed responsibility for the attack.

Following the attack, India bombed and destroyed JeM's biggest training camp in Balakot in Pakistan's restive Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, about 80-km from the Line of Control (LoC) early Tuesday, killing a "very large number" of terrorists, trainers and senior commanders.

Pakistan detained Indian Air Force Pilot, Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman, Wednesday following a fierce engagement between air forces of the two sides along the Line of Control when his MiG 21 fighter jet was downed.

However, in a surprise announcement during a joint session of Parliament, Prime Minister Imran Khan said Thursday that the captured IAF pilot Varthaman will be released on Friday as a gesture of peace.

The two American Senators said that they were concerned that the crisis might scale into an all-out war given the thousands of troops amassed along the countries' border, heavy artillery barrages and gunfire recorded in the area and tank columns taking formation.

"We share your position that Pakistan must do more to combat these anti-India extremist groups that destabilise the region and urge you to use your authority to pursue a peaceful resolution to this conflict before it grows," Moran from the ruling Republican party and Shaheen from the Democratic party said.

In light of recent events, and the spectre of the use of nuclear weapons should Pakistan and India continue to escalate hostilities, we strongly implore the direct and sustained engagement of the highest levels of your administration, they said.

Noting that the US historically has conducted essential diplomacy to defuse previous crises in South Asia, the two Senators said that they are heartened by the Secretary of State's engagement and his recent statement that We've been in the middle to calm heightened tensions in Kashmir.

As in the past, the United States should continue to take a hands-on approach, and, when appropriate, should work with other interested regional actors to apply appropriate pressure on Islamabad and New Delhi to address the underlying causes of the conflict," the two senators said.

They pointed to the key positions lying vacant in the South and Central Asia Bureau of the State Department.

"We would be remiss if the issue of important State Department vacancies subject to Senate confirmation was not raised. Our nation currently lacks an ambassador to Pakistan, and despite her sterling reputation," Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Alice G. Wells remains serving in an 'acting' capacity, they said.

"We encourage you to submit expeditiously to the Senate nominees for these critical positions and am intent to confirm qualified nominees in a timely manner," the letter said.

"The United States must be well-positioned to assist in conflict prevention and mitigation that threatens the interests of our nation and our partners,? the Senators wrote.&nbsp;

Two influential American Senators have asked US President Donald Trump to pursue a peaceful resolution to the conflict between India and Pakistan and ensure that Islamabad does more against the terrorist groups.

Two influential American Senators have asked US President Donald Trump to pursue a peaceful resolution to the conflict between India and Pakistan and ensure that Islamabad does more against the terrorist groups. In a letter to Trump, Senators Jerry Moran from Kansas and Jeanne Shaheen from New Hampshire said that there is an urgency surrounding the dangerous situation between India and Pakistan in Kashmir. "We affirm India's right to self-defence in response to attacks planned and executed by Pakistani-based terrorist groups designated by the United States and United Nations and welcome Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan's recent decision to release a captured Air Force officer from India, the two Senators wrote. They also urged Trump to ensure that Pakistan does more against the terrorist groups. Tensions between India and Pakistan rose following the February 14 terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama district in which 40 CRPF soldiers were killed. Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) terror group claimed responsibility for the attack. Following the attack, India bombed and destroyed JeM's biggest training camp in Balakot in Pakistan's restive Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, about 80-km from the Line of Control (LoC) early Tuesday, killing a "very large number" of terrorists, trainers and senior commanders. Pakistan detained Indian Air Force Pilot, Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman, Wednesday following a fierce engagement between air forces of the two sides along the Line of Control when his MiG 21 fighter jet was downed. However, in a surprise announcement during a joint session of Parliament, Prime Minister Imran Khan said Thursday that the captured IAF pilot Varthaman will be released on Friday as a gesture of peace. The two American Senators said that they were concerned that the crisis might scale into an all-out war given the thousands of troops amassed along the countries' border, heavy artillery barrages and gunfire recorded in the area and tank columns taking formation. "We share your position that Pakistan must do more to combat these anti-India extremist groups that destabilise the region and urge you to use your authority to pursue a peaceful resolution to this conflict before it grows," Moran from the ruling Republican party and Shaheen from the Democratic party said. In light of recent events, and the spectre of the use of nuclear weapons should Pakistan and India continue to escalate hostilities, we strongly implore the direct and sustained engagement of the highest levels of your administration, they said. Noting that the US historically has conducted essential diplomacy to defuse previous crises in South Asia, the two Senators said that they are heartened by the Secretary of State's engagement and his recent statement that We've been in the middle to calm heightened tensions in Kashmir. As in the past, the United States should continue to take a hands-on approach, and, when appropriate, should work with other interested regional actors to apply appropriate pressure on Islamabad and New Delhi to address the underlying causes of the conflict," the two senators said. They pointed to the key positions lying vacant in the South and Central Asia Bureau of the State Department. "We would be remiss if the issue of important State Department vacancies subject to Senate confirmation was not raised. Our nation currently lacks an ambassador to Pakistan, and despite her sterling reputation," Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Alice G. Wells remains serving in an 'acting' capacity, they said. "We encourage you to submit expeditiously to the Senate nominees for these critical positions and am intent to confirm qualified nominees in a timely manner," the letter said. "The United States must be well-positioned to assist in conflict prevention and mitigation that threatens the interests of our nation and our partners,? the Senators wrote.

US Senators urge Trump to pursue peaceful resolution to India-Pak conflict

The US has reaffirmed its demand that Pakistan abide by its UN Security Council commitments to deny safe havens to terrorists and block their access to funds as it welcomed Islamabad's decision to release the captured Indian Air Force pilot.&nbsp;

In a surprise announcement during a joint session of Parliament on Thursday, Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan said that Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman will be released on Friday as a gesture of peace.

Pakistan detained Varthaman Wednesday following a fierce engagement between air forces of the two sides along the Line of Control when his MiG 21 fighter jet was downed.

"We welcome Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan's commitment that Pakistan will release on Friday the Indian pilot held in its custody," a State Department spokesperson told responding to a question on the announcement made by Khan in the Pakistani parliament.

Simultaneously, the US has urged both India and Pakistan to take immediate steps to de-escalate tensions.&nbsp;

"The United States continues to urge both sides to take immediate steps to de-escalate the situation, including through direct communication. Further military activity will exacerbate the situation," the State Department spokesperson said.&nbsp;

"We reiterate our call for Pakistan to abide by its United Nations Security Council commitments to deny terrorists safe haven and block their access to funds," the spokesperson said.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Thursday joined other lawmakers in expressing concern over the escalating tension between India and Pakistan.&nbsp;

"This is "a result of a Pakistan-based terrorist group's brutal attack", he said.

"I urge both countries to de-escalate the mounting tensions," Hoyer said.

Tensions have escalated between India and Pakistan in the wake of the February 14 Pulwama attack claimed by Pakistan-based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM). Forty CRPF soldiers were killed in the attack.

India carried out air strikes against the biggest training camp of JeM in Balakot. In the operation, a very large number of JeM terrorists, trainers, senior commanders and groups of jihadis who were being trained for suicide attacks were eliminated.

Pakistan on Wednesday claimed it shot down two Indian fighter jets over Pakistani air space and arrested an Indian Air Force pilot.&nbsp;

The US has reaffirmed its demand that Pakistan abide by its UN Security Council commitments to deny safe havens to terrorists and block their access to funds as it welcomed Islamabad's decision to release the captured Indian Air Force pilot.

The US has reaffirmed its demand that Pakistan abide by its UN Security Council commitments to deny safe havens to terrorists and block their access to funds as it welcomed Islamabad's decision to release the captured Indian Air Force pilot. In a surprise announcement during a joint session of Parliament on Thursday, Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan said that Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman will be released on Friday as a gesture of peace. Pakistan detained Varthaman Wednesday following a fierce engagement between air forces of the two sides along the Line of Control when his MiG 21 fighter jet was downed. "We welcome Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan's commitment that Pakistan will release on Friday the Indian pilot held in its custody," a State Department spokesperson told responding to a question on the announcement made by Khan in the Pakistani parliament. Simultaneously, the US has urged both India and Pakistan to take immediate steps to de-escalate tensions. "The United States continues to urge both sides to take immediate steps to de-escalate the situation, including through direct communication. Further military activity will exacerbate the situation," the State Department spokesperson said. "We reiterate our call for Pakistan to abide by its United Nations Security Council commitments to deny terrorists safe haven and block their access to funds," the spokesperson said. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Thursday joined other lawmakers in expressing concern over the escalating tension between India and Pakistan. "This is "a result of a Pakistan-based terrorist group's brutal attack", he said. "I urge both countries to de-escalate the mounting tensions," Hoyer said. Tensions have escalated between India and Pakistan in the wake of the February 14 Pulwama attack claimed by Pakistan-based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM). Forty CRPF soldiers were killed in the attack. India carried out air strikes against the biggest training camp of JeM in Balakot. In the operation, a very large number of JeM terrorists, trainers, senior commanders and groups of jihadis who were being trained for suicide attacks were eliminated. Pakistan on Wednesday claimed it shot down two Indian fighter jets over Pakistani air space and arrested an Indian Air Force pilot.

US again asks Pakistan to deny safe havens to terrorists

By Sojin Lim

The summit talks between North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, and US President&nbsp;Donald Trump, began in a climate of surprise and expectation in Singapore in June 2018. They have now ended (for the time being) in disappointment in Hanoi, Vietnam, with Trump walking out.

The US president said: “It was all about the sanctions. They wanted the sanctions lifted in their entirety and we couldn’t do that … Sometimes you have to walk and this was one of those times.”

But is this the full story? Time will tell.

Either way, when Kim and Trump first met last year in Singapore, it was viewed as a victory for Kim’s gesture politics and a ray of hope for stability in the region. But as the latest round of talks ends prematurely without agreement, it seems Vietnam, the host, is the only winner – thanks to the summit drawing attention to the recent success of that country’s impressive economic development.

But while the US, North Korea and Vietnam have been dominating headlines, where has South Korea – the other principal stakeholder – been? So far, it seems to have been conspicuously absent. Is this because South Korea was not a part of the armistice agreement (between North Korea, the US, China and the UN) that halted the Korean War? Or is it because South Korea ultimately wouldn’t benefit from any North Korea-US agreement?

Certainly, South Korea is an immediate victim of the failed Hanoi summit. As soon as Trump abandoned the talks, the South Korean stock market fell dramatically. If Kim now resumes missile tests, South Korea would be the nation most at threat.

Indeed, even if Trump agrees eventually to lift the sanctions on North Korea, it would likely be South Korea that would have to provide most of the financial support to North Korea. The only immediate benefit for South Korea, if future negotiations between Kim and Trump go well, would be a diminished threat of war.

Not all doom and gloom

But South Korea could also benefit economically – at least in the long term – in a post-sanction environment. It could, for example, reopen the joint Kaesong Industrial Complex, which would benefit some small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in South Korea. South Korea could also expect a rising employment rate, due to more business opportunities with North Korea and beyond, and market expansion through the Inter-Korean Cooperation Fund (IKCF). The IKCF was established in 1990 under the Inter-Korean Cooperation Fund Act to promote mutual understanding and socio-economic cooperation between the Koreas. Anticipating lifting of sanctions, South Korea increased its IKCF budget to $890.7m in 2019, a 15 per cent increase in 2018.

With sanctions lifted, South Korea could also expect increased trade and tourism profits by linking railways between the two Koreas. Indeed, one of the main reasons why Kim took the train from North Korea to Vietnam was to send a message to South Korea: if South Korea pushes for an end to sanctions, it could run its railways through the north and connect with trade routes in China, Russia and Vietnam.

But these benefits rely on one key caveat: they will only happen if either North Korea or the US gives way to the other. And until that happens, this chicken-or-egg dilemma will worsen relations between the two Koreas.

Will he or won’t he?

It seems unlikely that Kim will surrender his nuclear programme. As the second summit was staged, on February 27, news broke of another well-known nuclear state, Pakistan, reportedly shooting down Indian military aircraft over Kashmir. The Pakistani prime minister, Imran Khan, immediately called a meeting of Pakistan’s National Command Authority and ordered a no-fly zone over the country, later commenting that given “the weapons they (India) have and we have, can we afford a miscalculation?”

The two events may seem unconnected, but it is highly likely that this has reaffirmed to Kim why he needs nuclear weapons. Remaining a de facto nuclear state is key to Kim ensuring his regime’s survival. Nuclear capability is certainly not something he will readily concede.

It is also doubtful whether Trump truly wants to pay too much attention to North Korea’s denuclearisation and economic development. It’s more likely that Trump is using his summits with Kim to strengthen his own domestic standing. Trump announced he was shelving an earlier second summit last year so he could focus on the mid-term elections – a ploy, perhaps, to attract more votes. And it’s perfectly possible now that he’s using the Hanoi summit to distract people from his ongoing scandals at home. Again, on the day Trump met Kim, Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, was giving highly critical testimony to Congress about his dealings with Trump.

And so South Korean president Moon Jae-in seems stuck between North Korea and the US – neither of whom seem entirely committed to their summit’s success. Meanwhile, Moon will face growing domestic criticism from conservatives at home over his growing IKCF budget – and the ongoing lack of results. There is still hope for the Korean peninsula, but it is dwindling. And if Moon is to survive, and South Korea is to benefit, he will have to find novel ways of getting Kim and Trump back to the negotiating table. It will be no easy task.

(Sojin Lim is Senior Lecturer, Deputy Director of the International Institute of Korean Studies, University of Central Lancashire)

(This article was originally published on the Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/north-korea-us-summit-what-its-failure-means-for-the-peninsulas-future-112634">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

By Sojin Lim The summit talks between North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, and US President Donald Trump, began in a climate of surprise and expectation in Singapore in June 2018.

By Sojin Lim The summit talks between North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, and US President Donald Trump, began in a climate of surprise and expectation in Singapore in June 2018. They have now ended (for the time being) in disappointment in Hanoi, Vietnam, with Trump walking out. The US president said: “It was all about the sanctions. They wanted the sanctions lifted in their entirety and we couldn’t do that … Sometimes you have to walk and this was one of those times.” But is this the full story? Time will tell. Either way, when Kim and Trump first met last year in Singapore, it was viewed as a victory for Kim’s gesture politics and a ray of hope for stability in the region. But as the latest round of talks ends prematurely without agreement, it seems Vietnam, the host, is the only winner – thanks to the summit drawing attention to the recent success of that country’s impressive economic development. But while the US, North Korea and Vietnam have been dominating headlines, where has South Korea – the other principal stakeholder – been? So far, it seems to have been conspicuously absent. Is this because South Korea was not a part of the armistice agreement (between North Korea, the US, China and the UN) that halted the Korean War? Or is it because South Korea ultimately wouldn’t benefit from any North Korea-US agreement? Certainly, South Korea is an immediate victim of the failed Hanoi summit. As soon as Trump abandoned the talks, the South Korean stock market fell dramatically. If Kim now resumes missile tests, South Korea would be the nation most at threat. Indeed, even if Trump agrees eventually to lift the sanctions on North Korea, it would likely be South Korea that would have to provide most of the financial support to North Korea. The only immediate benefit for South Korea, if future negotiations between Kim and Trump go well, would be a diminished threat of war. Not all doom and gloom But South Korea could also benefit economically – at least in the long term – in a post-sanction environment. It could, for example, reopen the joint Kaesong Industrial Complex, which would benefit some small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in South Korea. South Korea could also expect a rising employment rate, due to more business opportunities with North Korea and beyond, and market expansion through the Inter-Korean Cooperation Fund (IKCF). The IKCF was established in 1990 under the Inter-Korean Cooperation Fund Act to promote mutual understanding and socio-economic cooperation between the Koreas. Anticipating lifting of sanctions, South Korea increased its IKCF budget to $890.7m in 2019, a 15 per cent increase in 2018. With sanctions lifted, South Korea could also expect increased trade and tourism profits by linking railways between the two Koreas. Indeed, one of the main reasons why Kim took the train from North Korea to Vietnam was to send a message to South Korea: if South Korea pushes for an end to sanctions, it could run its railways through the north and connect with trade routes in China, Russia and Vietnam. But these benefits rely on one key caveat: they will only happen if either North Korea or the US gives way to the other. And until that happens, this chicken-or-egg dilemma will worsen relations between the two Koreas. Will he or won’t he? It seems unlikely that Kim will surrender his nuclear programme. As the second summit was staged, on February 27, news broke of another well-known nuclear state, Pakistan, reportedly shooting down Indian military aircraft over Kashmir. The Pakistani prime minister, Imran Khan, immediately called a meeting of Pakistan’s National Command Authority and ordered a no-fly zone over the country, later commenting that given “the weapons they (India) have and we have, can we afford a miscalculation?” The two events may seem unconnected, but it is highly likely that this has reaffirmed to Kim why he needs nuclear weapons. Remaining a de facto nuclear state is key to Kim ensuring his regime’s survival. Nuclear capability is certainly not something he will readily concede. It is also doubtful whether Trump truly wants to pay too much attention to North Korea’s denuclearisation and economic development. It’s more likely that Trump is using his summits with Kim to strengthen his own domestic standing. Trump announced he was shelving an earlier second summit last year so he could focus on the mid-term elections – a ploy, perhaps, to attract more votes. And it’s perfectly possible now that he’s using the Hanoi summit to distract people from his ongoing scandals at home. Again, on the day Trump met Kim, Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, was giving highly critical testimony to Congress about his dealings with Trump. And so South Korean president Moon Jae-in seems stuck between North Korea and the US – neither of whom seem entirely committed to their summit’s success. Meanwhile, Moon will face growing domestic criticism from conservatives at home over his growing IKCF budget – and the ongoing lack of results. There is still hope for the Korean peninsula, but it is dwindling. And if Moon is to survive, and South Korea is to benefit, he will have to find novel ways of getting Kim and Trump back to the negotiating table. It will be no easy task. (Sojin Lim is Senior Lecturer, Deputy Director of the International Institute of Korean Studies, University of Central Lancashire) (This article was originally published on the Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

What does the failure of North Korea-US summit mean for Korean peninsula

The US has asked India and Pakistan to de-escalate their tension and avoid military to resolve their differences.

Responding to reporters questions over the current situation between India and Pakistan, a State Department spokesperson joined the White House and the Pentagon urging India and Pakistan to cease all cross-border military activity and for a return to stability, the spokesperson said.

''We urge both sides to take immediate steps to de-escalate the situation, including through direct communication. Further military activity will exacerbate the situation,'' the spokesperson added.&nbsp;

The US also asked Pakistan to abide by its UN Security Council commitments to deny terrorists safe haven and block their access to funds.

''Cross-border terrorism, such as the recent attack on India's CRPF on February 14, poses a grave threat to the security of the region. We reiterate our call for Pakistan to abide by its United Nations Security Council commitments to deny terrorists safe haven and block their access to funds, the spokesperson said.

This US statement came after India on Wednesday handed over to Pakistan a dossier on specific details" of involvement of the Jaish-e-Muhammed (JeM) in the Pulwama terror attack on Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) as also the presence of camps of the UN-proscribed terror outfit in that country.

The Ministry of External Affairs handed over the dossier Pakistan's Acting High Commissioner on Wednesday.

It was conveyed that India expects Pakistan to take immediate and verifiable action against terrorism emanating from territories under its control.

Forty CRPF personnel were killed in a suicide attack by Pakistan-based JeM in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama district on February 14, sparking outrage in the country.

With PTI inputs&nbsp;

The US has asked India and Pakistan to de-escalate their tension and avoid military to resolve their differences. Responding to reporters questions over the current situation between India and Pakistan, a State Department spokesperson joined the White House and the Pentagon urging India and Pakistan to cease all cross-border military activity and for a return to stability, the spokesperson said.

The US has asked India and Pakistan to de-escalate their tension and avoid military to resolve their differences. Responding to reporters questions over the current situation between India and Pakistan, a State Department spokesperson joined the White House and the Pentagon urging India and Pakistan to cease all cross-border military activity and for a return to stability, the spokesperson said. ''We urge both sides to take immediate steps to de-escalate the situation, including through direct communication. Further military activity will exacerbate the situation,'' the spokesperson added. The US also asked Pakistan to abide by its UN Security Council commitments to deny terrorists safe haven and block their access to funds. ''Cross-border terrorism, such as the recent attack on India's CRPF on February 14, poses a grave threat to the security of the region. We reiterate our call for Pakistan to abide by its United Nations Security Council commitments to deny terrorists safe haven and block their access to funds, the spokesperson said. This US statement came after India on Wednesday handed over to Pakistan a dossier on specific details" of involvement of the Jaish-e-Muhammed (JeM) in the Pulwama terror attack on Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) as also the presence of camps of the UN-proscribed terror outfit in that country. The Ministry of External Affairs handed over the dossier Pakistan's Acting High Commissioner on Wednesday. It was conveyed that India expects Pakistan to take immediate and verifiable action against terrorism emanating from territories under its control. Forty CRPF personnel were killed in a suicide attack by Pakistan-based JeM in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama district on February 14, sparking outrage in the country. With PTI inputs

US asks India and Pakistan to de-escalate tension, avoid military to resolve differences

Saudi Arabia plans to become a major gas exporter within a decade raise questions about what the real goal of the kingdom’s policy, and by extension that of the United States, is towards Iran.

Officially both Saudi Arabia and the US, which last year withdrew from the 2015 international accord that curbs the Islamic republic’s nuclear programme and imposed harsh economic sanctions, are demanding a change of Iran’s regional and defence policies rather than of its regime.

Yet, statements in recent years by some Saudi leaders and US officials as well a string of declarations at the recent US-sponsored ministerial to promote a future of peace and stability in the Middle East in Warsaw by officials of the Trump administration as well as Saudi Arabia, Israel, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain suggested that regime change was on their radar.

President Donald J Trump’s hard-line national security advisor John Bolton, a past advocate of regime change and a covert war to destabilise Iran, concluded an outline on the White House’s official Twitter account of Washington’s long list of grievances and accusations levelled at Iranian leaders by addressing supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, directly: “I don’t think you’ll have too many more anniversaries,” Bolton said as Iran celebrated the 40th anniversary of its Islamic revolution.

The notion that the real goal of Saudi and US policy is regime change prompted by the sanctions and a destabilisation campaign that would foster unrest among Iran’s ethnic minorities was bolstered by multiple indicators.

These include statements of Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman and Bolton before he became Trump’s advisor; a flow of funds from the kingdom to militant, ultra-conservative anti-Shiite, anti-Iranian madrassas or religious seminaries that dot the Iranian border in the troubled Pakistani province of Balochistan; US and Saudi support for an exiled Iranian group that demands regime change in Tehran; and a string of recent attacks inside Iran.

With Saudi Arabia, however, announcing that it will invest $150 billion to enable it to export three billion cubic metres of gas a year by 2030, suggests that imminent regime change may not be in the kingdom’s immediate interest.

Viewed through the lens of the timeline of Saudi Arabia’s gas plans, the Kingdom is likely to benefit more from an Iran that is isolated and weakened for years to come to give the Saudis the time to get up to speed on gas rather than an Iran that under a new more accommodating government returns to the international fold. A potential destabilisation campaign that is low-level and intermittent but not regime threatening would serve that purpose.

It would also extend the window of opportunity on which Saudi Arabia relies to assert regional leadership. That window of opportunity exists as long as the obvious regional powers – Iran, Turkey and Egypt – are in various degrees of disrepair. Punitive economic sanctions, international isolation and domestic turmoil serve to keep Iran weak and unable to leverage its assets.

The emergence of Saudi gas plans appears to put Saudi strategy towards Iran at cross purposes. If Saudi Arabia’s gas-driven interest is prolonged containment of Iran, operations at the Indian-backed Arabian Sea port of Chabahar were believed to have given the effort to achieve a change of Tehran’s regional and defence policy, if not its regime, a sense of urgency.

Pakistani militants reported the flow of Saudi funds to Baloch Madrassas at the time that a government-backed Saudi think-tank, the International Institute of Iranian Studies, argued in a study that Chabahar, a mere 70 kilometres up the coast from the Chinese-backed Pakistani port of Gwadar posed “a direct threat to the Arab Gulf states” that called for “immediate countermeasures.”

Written by Mohammed Hassan Husseinbor, identified as an Iranian political researcher, the study warned that Chabahar posed a threat because it would enable Iran to increase its market share in India for its oil exports at the expense of Saudi Arabia, raise foreign investment in the Islamic republic, increase government revenues, and allow Iran to project power in the Gulf and the Indian Ocean.

Pakistani analysts expect around $5 billion in Afghan trade to flow through Chabahar after India in December started handling the port’s operations. It could also further strain ties with Pakistan that accuses India of fomenting nationalist unrest in Balochistan. India and Pakistan are on the brink of a &nbsp;potentially escalating military conflict over Kashmir.

The perceived threat of Chabahar, however, pales against the opportunity that Saudi Arabia’s ability to be a major gas exporter would open up.

In a study published in 2015, energy scholar Micha’el Tanchum suggested that it would be gas supplies from Iran and Turkmenistan, two Caspian Sea states, rather than Saudi oil that would determine which way Eurasia’s future energy architecture tilts: China, the world’s third largest LNG importer, or Europe.

With 24.6 billion cubic metres potentially available for annual piped exports beyond its current supply commitments, Iran, unfettered by sanctions and with no Saudi competition, could emerge as Eurasia’s swing producer, which would significantly enhance its regional clout.

Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif’s resignation in recent days, had it been accepted by President Hasan Rouhani, would have amounted to a victory for hardliners and served the interest of the Saudis and their allies.

“Zarif went. We are rid of him,” Israeli prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu gloated prematurely on his Farsi-language Twitter account.

The departure of Zarif, a suave, US-educated moderate who was Iran’s main negotiator of the nuclear accord, would have enhanced the quest of Saudi Arabia and its allies even if their timelines for a change of Iranian policies, if not of the regime, differ.

His continued tenure as foreign minister is likely to encourage Europe, China and Russia in their efforts to salvage the nuclear deal but little to change Saudi or US long-term strategy. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Saudi Arabia plans to become a major gas exporter within a decade raise questions about what the real goal of the kingdom’s policy, and by extension that of the United States, is towards Iran.

Saudi Arabia plans to become a major gas exporter within a decade raise questions about what the real goal of the kingdom’s policy, and by extension that of the United States, is towards Iran. Officially both Saudi Arabia and the US, which last year withdrew from the 2015 international accord that curbs the Islamic republic’s nuclear programme and imposed harsh economic sanctions, are demanding a change of Iran’s regional and defence policies rather than of its regime. Yet, statements in recent years by some Saudi leaders and US officials as well a string of declarations at the recent US-sponsored ministerial to promote a future of peace and stability in the Middle East in Warsaw by officials of the Trump administration as well as Saudi Arabia, Israel, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain suggested that regime change was on their radar. President Donald J Trump’s hard-line national security advisor John Bolton, a past advocate of regime change and a covert war to destabilise Iran, concluded an outline on the White House’s official Twitter account of Washington’s long list of grievances and accusations levelled at Iranian leaders by addressing supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, directly: “I don’t think you’ll have too many more anniversaries,” Bolton said as Iran celebrated the 40th anniversary of its Islamic revolution. The notion that the real goal of Saudi and US policy is regime change prompted by the sanctions and a destabilisation campaign that would foster unrest among Iran’s ethnic minorities was bolstered by multiple indicators. These include statements of Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman and Bolton before he became Trump’s advisor; a flow of funds from the kingdom to militant, ultra-conservative anti-Shiite, anti-Iranian madrassas or religious seminaries that dot the Iranian border in the troubled Pakistani province of Balochistan; US and Saudi support for an exiled Iranian group that demands regime change in Tehran; and a string of recent attacks inside Iran. With Saudi Arabia, however, announcing that it will invest $150 billion to enable it to export three billion cubic metres of gas a year by 2030, suggests that imminent regime change may not be in the kingdom’s immediate interest. Viewed through the lens of the timeline of Saudi Arabia’s gas plans, the Kingdom is likely to benefit more from an Iran that is isolated and weakened for years to come to give the Saudis the time to get up to speed on gas rather than an Iran that under a new more accommodating government returns to the international fold. A potential destabilisation campaign that is low-level and intermittent but not regime threatening would serve that purpose. It would also extend the window of opportunity on which Saudi Arabia relies to assert regional leadership. That window of opportunity exists as long as the obvious regional powers – Iran, Turkey and Egypt – are in various degrees of disrepair. Punitive economic sanctions, international isolation and domestic turmoil serve to keep Iran weak and unable to leverage its assets. The emergence of Saudi gas plans appears to put Saudi strategy towards Iran at cross purposes. If Saudi Arabia’s gas-driven interest is prolonged containment of Iran, operations at the Indian-backed Arabian Sea port of Chabahar were believed to have given the effort to achieve a change of Tehran’s regional and defence policy, if not its regime, a sense of urgency. Pakistani militants reported the flow of Saudi funds to Baloch Madrassas at the time that a government-backed Saudi think-tank, the International Institute of Iranian Studies, argued in a study that Chabahar, a mere 70 kilometres up the coast from the Chinese-backed Pakistani port of Gwadar posed “a direct threat to the Arab Gulf states” that called for “immediate countermeasures.” Written by Mohammed Hassan Husseinbor, identified as an Iranian political researcher, the study warned that Chabahar posed a threat because it would enable Iran to increase its market share in India for its oil exports at the expense of Saudi Arabia, raise foreign investment in the Islamic republic, increase government revenues, and allow Iran to project power in the Gulf and the Indian Ocean. Pakistani analysts expect around $5 billion in Afghan trade to flow through Chabahar after India in December started handling the port’s operations. It could also further strain ties with Pakistan that accuses India of fomenting nationalist unrest in Balochistan. India and Pakistan are on the brink of a potentially escalating military conflict over Kashmir. The perceived threat of Chabahar, however, pales against the opportunity that Saudi Arabia’s ability to be a major gas exporter would open up. In a study published in 2015, energy scholar Micha’el Tanchum suggested that it would be gas supplies from Iran and Turkmenistan, two Caspian Sea states, rather than Saudi oil that would determine which way Eurasia’s future energy architecture tilts: China, the world’s third largest LNG importer, or Europe. With 24.6 billion cubic metres potentially available for annual piped exports beyond its current supply commitments, Iran, unfettered by sanctions and with no Saudi competition, could emerge as Eurasia’s swing producer, which would significantly enhance its regional clout. Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif’s resignation in recent days, had it been accepted by President Hasan Rouhani, would have amounted to a victory for hardliners and served the interest of the Saudis and their allies. “Zarif went. We are rid of him,” Israeli prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu gloated prematurely on his Farsi-language Twitter account. The departure of Zarif, a suave, US-educated moderate who was Iran’s main negotiator of the nuclear accord, would have enhanced the quest of Saudi Arabia and its allies even if their timelines for a change of Iranian policies, if not of the regime, differ. His continued tenure as foreign minister is likely to encourage Europe, China and Russia in their efforts to salvage the nuclear deal but little to change Saudi or US long-term strategy. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Saudi Arabia tends to intensify efforts to isolate Iran

The United States, Britain and France proposed on Wednesday that the United Nations Security Council blacklist the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/india-to-push-for-listing-jem-chief-masood-azhar-as-global-terrorist-at-ric-meet-in-china-199779">head of Pakistan-based militant group Jaish-e-Mohammad</a>, which said it attacked an Indian paramilitary convoy in disputed Kashmir.

However, the move is likely to be opposed by China, which previously prevented the Security Council's Islamic State and Al-Qaeda sanctions committee from sanctioning JeM leader Masood Azhar in 2016 and 2017.

Also read:<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/jem-chief-masood-azhar-shifted-to-facility-near-bahawalpur-from-rawalpindi-military-hospital-intel-sources-199732"> Masood Azhar shifted from military hospital to highly protected facility, says Intel sources</a>

China's UN mission did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the new proposal.

The February 14 attack, the most deadly in Kashmir during a 30-year-long insurgency, increased tensions between Pakistan and India with the nuclear-armed neighbours both saying they had shot down each other's fighter jets on Wednesday.

The <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/us-asks-india-and-pakistan-to-de-escalate-tension-avoid-military-to-resolve-differences-200141">United States</a>, Britain and France have asked the 15-member Security Council sanctions committee to subject Azhar to an arms embargo, global travel ban and asset freeze. The committee operates by consensus and members have until March 13 to raise objections, according to the proposal seen by Reuters. 
 
<a href="http://www.wionews.com/opinions/india-pakistan-tension-unless-nation-presents-united-front-terrorism-will-not-be-defeated-200191">Also read: Unless nation presents </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/opinions/india-pakistan-tension-unless-nation-presents-united-front-terrorism-will-not-be-defeated-200191">united</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/opinions/india-pakistan-tension-unless-nation-presents-united-front-terrorism-will-not-be-defeated-200191"> front, terrorism will not be defeated</a>

When the council committee previously considered blacklisting Azhar in 2017 the Chinese Foreign Ministry said there were clear rules for listing a person or group as a terrorist, and that China has always believed the relevant UN&nbsp;committee should operate on the principles of objectivity.

JeM is a primarily anti-India group that forged ties with Al-Qaeda and was blacklisted by the UN Security Council in 2001. In December 2001, Jaish fighters, along with members of another Pakistan-based militant group, Lashkar-e-Taiba, attacked India's parliament, which almost led to a fourth war.

The Security Council condemned the February&nbsp;14 attack in a statement last week, which was agreed after several days of negotiation. Diplomats said China had been opposed to a reference of JeM, however, the agreed statement did eventually note that JeM has claimed responsibility for the attack.

Pakistan's Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has written at least twice to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and they spoke on the phone on Tuesday. In a Feb. 26 letter, seen by Reuters, Qureshi called on Guterres and the Security Council to urge India to halt "acts of aggression."

India's UN Ambassador Syed Akbaruddin told Reuters on Wednesday: "Our efforts are focused on countering terrorism and we are working with many global partners in pursuit of that objective."

UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric told reporters that the United Nations has had contacts with India at "various levels." He said on Wednesday that Guterres was available to mediate should both parties agree.

"The United Nations message both publicly and privately to both sides is to urgently take steps to lower tensions through meaningful mutual engagement and meet the responsibilities to maintain peace and security in the region," Dujarric said.

The United States, Britain and France proposed on Wednesday that the United Nations Security Council blacklist the head of Pakistan-based militant group Jaish-e-Mohammad, which said it attacked an Indian paramilitary convoy in disputed Kashmir.

The United States, Britain and France proposed on Wednesday that the United Nations Security Council blacklist the head of Pakistan-based militant group Jaish-e-Mohammad, which said it attacked an Indian paramilitary convoy in disputed Kashmir. However, the move is likely to be opposed by China, which previously prevented the Security Council's Islamic State and Al-Qaeda sanctions committee from sanctioning JeM leader Masood Azhar in 2016 and 2017. Also read: Masood Azhar shifted from military hospital to highly protected facility, says Intel sources China's UN mission did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the new proposal. The February 14 attack, the most deadly in Kashmir during a 30-year-long insurgency, increased tensions between Pakistan and India with the nuclear-armed neighbours both saying they had shot down each other's fighter jets on Wednesday. The United States, Britain and France have asked the 15-member Security Council sanctions committee to subject Azhar to an arms embargo, global travel ban and asset freeze. The committee operates by consensus and members have until March 13 to raise objections, according to the proposal seen by Reuters. Also read: Unless nation presents united front, terrorism will not be defeated When the council committee previously considered blacklisting Azhar in 2017 the Chinese Foreign Ministry said there were clear rules for listing a person or group as a terrorist, and that China has always believed the relevant UN committee should operate on the principles of objectivity. JeM is a primarily anti-India group that forged ties with Al-Qaeda and was blacklisted by the UN Security Council in 2001. In December 2001, Jaish fighters, along with members of another Pakistan-based militant group, Lashkar-e-Taiba, attacked India's parliament, which almost led to a fourth war. The Security Council condemned the February 14 attack in a statement last week, which was agreed after several days of negotiation. Diplomats said China had been opposed to a reference of JeM, however, the agreed statement did eventually note that JeM has claimed responsibility for the attack. Pakistan's Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has written at least twice to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and they spoke on the phone on Tuesday. In a Feb. 26 letter, seen by Reuters, Qureshi called on Guterres and the Security Council to urge India to halt "acts of aggression." India's UN Ambassador Syed Akbaruddin told Reuters on Wednesday: "Our efforts are focused on countering terrorism and we are working with many global partners in pursuit of that objective." UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric told reporters that the United Nations has had contacts with India at "various levels." He said on Wednesday that Guterres was available to mediate should both parties agree. "The United Nations message both publicly and privately to both sides is to urgently take steps to lower tensions through meaningful mutual engagement and meet the responsibilities to maintain peace and security in the region," Dujarric said.

US, UK, France ask UN to blacklist JeM leader Masood Azhar; move likely to face opposition from China

The Taliban on Wednesday said ongoing <a href="http://cms.wionews.com/india-news/pakistan-fighter-planes-enter-indian-airspace-in-jk-pushed-back-by-indian-jets-199993">clashes between India and Pakistan</a> will affect the Afghan peace process and wanted India to prevent the further escalation of violence with its neighbour.

The hardline insurgent group issued the statement at the same time its leaders are holding peace talks with officials from the United States in Qatar to end the 17 years war in Afghanistan.

"The continuation of such conflict will affect the Afghanistan peace process," Taliban Spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said in a statement.

The talks, which kicked off in Doha on Monday with a meet-and-greet lunch, are seen as the most promising yet between the warring parties after the Taliban`s newly-appointed political chief Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar joined for the first time, flying in from Pakistan.

The Taliban on Wednesday said ongoing clashes between India and Pakistan will affect the Afghan peace process and wanted India to prevent the further escalation of violence with its neighbour.

The Taliban on Wednesday said ongoing clashes between India and Pakistan will affect the Afghan peace process and wanted India to prevent the further escalation of violence with its neighbour. The hardline insurgent group issued the statement at the same time its leaders are holding peace talks with officials from the United States in Qatar to end the 17 years war in Afghanistan. "The continuation of such conflict will affect the Afghanistan peace process," Taliban Spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said in a statement. The talks, which kicked off in Doha on Monday with a meet-and-greet lunch, are seen as the most promising yet between the warring parties after the Taliban`s newly-appointed political chief Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar joined for the first time, flying in from Pakistan.

Taliban says India, Pakistan clashes will affect Afghan peace process

As the city of Hanoi continued its frenzied preparations for a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-kim-ii-the-summit-the-script-and-the-sequel-199292">summit between the North Korean leader and </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-kim-ii-the-summit-the-script-and-the-sequel-199292">United</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-kim-ii-the-summit-the-script-and-the-sequel-199292"> States</a> president on Tuesday, the local Vietnamese population appears to admire the latter's vast wealth, uncompromising politics and strong personality.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-predicts-awesome-future-for-north-korea-if-kim-jong-un-gives-up-nukes-199965">Donald Trump</a> and Kim Jong-un are due to meet on Wednesday to discuss the denuclearization of the Pyongyang regime, as agreed on at their first summit held in Singapore in June last year.

"(Trump) is an intense, firm man, who gives everything for America and its people. He was already a millionaire before he became president. He is not there for money, he is making a sacrifice. I don't like Kim because he is a dictator and does not support policies of openness," An, a 40-year-old taxi driver, told EFE.

Trump's fortune is one of the main reasons for his popularity among the Vietnamese, who often consider wealth to be a personal virtue, and many people in Hanoi have decided to dye their hair to resemble the US president's.

"I like Trump more than Kim because he is rich and more powerful," says Duc, a 19-year-old student, who like his other 20 friends has been sporting the characteristic hair colour of the White House resident.

Artist Tram Lan Binh says he is fascinated by Trump, not because of his bank balance but because of his physical appearance, his facial expressions and his strong personality, and has painted 50 colourful portraits of the US president in acrylic over recent years.

Some of them have been displayed in the cafe that he runs on the outskirts of the capital, along with a life-size sculpture of Trump dressed in a striking yellow vest and shorts.

"We managed to get some exhibited a year ago in Washington, in front of the White House. The paintings are not for sale because I made them with a lot of heart and not for money. I feel a special fondness for Trump, his open and direct nature, his facial expressions and the way he deals with pressure inspires me. I am not bothered about what people say," explained the 37-year-old artist.

"I most enjoy painting his eyes and his facial expressions," he added.

The cafe has been specially decorated for the summit, with the flags of the US and North Korea, calls for peace and the portraits of Trump and Kim, another source of inspiration for Binh.

"I made these paintings when I learnt about the summit, but I have had an interest in Kim for a while. I began to draw his portrait even before his first meeting with Trump. He is intelligent, firm, direct and brave for agreeing to meet with Trump," he said.

The painter says he is especially drawn to the physical features of the North Korean leader, his "beautiful lips and round face," and went on to describe him as "a living masterpiece."

Even though Kim does not enjoy Trump's popularity in Vietnam, there was one place in Hanoi that on Tuesday was eagerly looking forward to the North Korean leader's arrival: the Kindergarten of Friendship between North Korea and Vietnam.

In Kim's honour, children between three and six years old along with their teachers performed a song and dance dressed in traditional Vietnamese attire, with the flags of both countries painted on their cheeks.

The kindergarten was built in 1978 with funds from Pyongyang, and is now one of the most prestigious preschools in Hanoi, with 450 students and 17 classrooms, one of them dedicated to Kim Il-sung, the founder of North Korea and Kim Jong-un's grandfather.

Some of the teachers hope that Kim's agenda, which has not been made public by North Korean officials, will include a visit to their kindergarten.

"We are all very hopeful; we don't know if he will come, but if he does, we will be prepared to give him a welcome," said one of the teachers.

As the city of Hanoi continued its frenzied preparations for a summit between the North Korean leader and United States president on Tuesday, the local Vietnamese population appears to admire the latter's vast wealth, uncompromising politics and strong personality.

As the city of Hanoi continued its frenzied preparations for a summit between the North Korean leader and United States president on Tuesday, the local Vietnamese population appears to admire the latter's vast wealth, uncompromising politics and strong personality. Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un are due to meet on Wednesday to discuss the denuclearization of the Pyongyang regime, as agreed on at their first summit held in Singapore in June last year. "(Trump) is an intense, firm man, who gives everything for America and its people. He was already a millionaire before he became president. He is not there for money, he is making a sacrifice. I don't like Kim because he is a dictator and does not support policies of openness," An, a 40-year-old taxi driver, told EFE. Trump's fortune is one of the main reasons for his popularity among the Vietnamese, who often consider wealth to be a personal virtue, and many people in Hanoi have decided to dye their hair to resemble the US president's. "I like Trump more than Kim because he is rich and more powerful," says Duc, a 19-year-old student, who like his other 20 friends has been sporting the characteristic hair colour of the White House resident. Artist Tram Lan Binh says he is fascinated by Trump, not because of his bank balance but because of his physical appearance, his facial expressions and his strong personality, and has painted 50 colourful portraits of the US president in acrylic over recent years. Some of them have been displayed in the cafe that he runs on the outskirts of the capital, along with a life-size sculpture of Trump dressed in a striking yellow vest and shorts. "We managed to get some exhibited a year ago in Washington, in front of the White House. The paintings are not for sale because I made them with a lot of heart and not for money. I feel a special fondness for Trump, his open and direct nature, his facial expressions and the way he deals with pressure inspires me. I am not bothered about what people say," explained the 37-year-old artist. "I most enjoy painting his eyes and his facial expressions," he added. The cafe has been specially decorated for the summit, with the flags of the US and North Korea, calls for peace and the portraits of Trump and Kim, another source of inspiration for Binh. "I made these paintings when I learnt about the summit, but I have had an interest in Kim for a while. I began to draw his portrait even before his first meeting with Trump. He is intelligent, firm, direct and brave for agreeing to meet with Trump," he said. The painter says he is especially drawn to the physical features of the North Korean leader, his "beautiful lips and round face," and went on to describe him as "a living masterpiece." Even though Kim does not enjoy Trump's popularity in Vietnam, there was one place in Hanoi that on Tuesday was eagerly looking forward to the North Korean leader's arrival: the Kindergarten of Friendship between North Korea and Vietnam. In Kim's honour, children between three and six years old along with their teachers performed a song and dance dressed in traditional Vietnamese attire, with the flags of both countries painted on their cheeks. The kindergarten was built in 1978 with funds from Pyongyang, and is now one of the most prestigious preschools in Hanoi, with 450 students and 17 classrooms, one of them dedicated to Kim Il-sung, the founder of North Korea and Kim Jong-un's grandfather. Some of the teachers hope that Kim's agenda, which has not been made public by North Korean officials, will include a visit to their kindergarten. "We are all very hopeful; we don't know if he will come, but if he does, we will be prepared to give him a welcome," said one of the teachers.

Trump trumps Kim in popularity among residents of Vietnamese capital

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/egypt-to-host-huaweis-first-mena-cloud-platform-cairo-199907">Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei</a> vehemently denied United States accusations that its ambitions to roll out 5G services around the world presented a security threat, one of its senior officials said at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona on Tuesday.

Washington's spat with Beijing over Huawei's aspirations, which was playing out to the backdrop of a wider bilateral trade dispute, is centered on allegations that the Chinese company would use the next generation communications technology, which will be used to connect everything from self-driving cars to manufacturing, as a way to gather backdoor information on other countries.&nbsp;

"Huawei is leading in 5G globally, but we understand, innovation is nothing without security," Guo Ping, Huawei's rotating chairman, told those attending the 2019 edition of the mobile world's most influential congress.

"Let me say this as clear as possible, Huawei has not and will never plant backdoors. And we will never allow anyone to do to so with our equipment," he said. "The US security accusation on our 5G has no evidence, nothing."&nbsp;

The US has increasingly called on its allies to avoid deals with the Chinese smartphone maker over accusations Beijing used the tech giant as a way to spy on foreign nations.&nbsp;

In January, Huawei fired sales director Wang Weijing after he was arrested in Poland on suspicion of espionage.&nbsp;

Meanwhile, in December 2018, Canadian authorities arrested Huawei chief financial officer and daughter of the company's founder, Meng Wanzhou, at Vancouver International Airport at the request of the US, which filed for her extradition for alleged fraud and for breaching sanctions on Iran.&nbsp;

China shortly afterwards sentenced a Canadian citizen to death for drug charges in what was an escalation in diplomatic tensions widely seen as retaliatory by observers.&nbsp;

Huawei was looking to ship its 5G technology around the world and had already signed 18 contracts in Europe.&nbsp;

"I fully understand what President Donald Trump said last week," Guo said. "The US needs powerful, faster and smarter 5G."

Washington and China were currently engaged in a tense series of bilateral trade talks aimed at staving off a trade war.&nbsp;

Trump recently said he expected to sign a trade deal "fairly soon."&nbsp;

He added that he planned to postpone his plans to hike import tariffs on Chinese goods worth around $200 billion, which were set to kick in March.&nbsp;

He announced he was pencilled to meet Chinese president, Xi Jinping, at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.&nbsp;

China had earlier pledge to buy $1.2 of American products.

Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei vehemently denied United States accusations that its ambitions to roll out 5G services around the world presented a security threat, one of its senior officials said at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona on Tuesday.

Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei vehemently denied United States accusations that its ambitions to roll out 5G services around the world presented a security threat, one of its senior officials said at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona on Tuesday. Washington's spat with Beijing over Huawei's aspirations, which was playing out to the backdrop of a wider bilateral trade dispute, is centered on allegations that the Chinese company would use the next generation communications technology, which will be used to connect everything from self-driving cars to manufacturing, as a way to gather backdoor information on other countries. "Huawei is leading in 5G globally, but we understand, innovation is nothing without security," Guo Ping, Huawei's rotating chairman, told those attending the 2019 edition of the mobile world's most influential congress. "Let me say this as clear as possible, Huawei has not and will never plant backdoors. And we will never allow anyone to do to so with our equipment," he said. "The US security accusation on our 5G has no evidence, nothing." The US has increasingly called on its allies to avoid deals with the Chinese smartphone maker over accusations Beijing used the tech giant as a way to spy on foreign nations. In January, Huawei fired sales director Wang Weijing after he was arrested in Poland on suspicion of espionage. Meanwhile, in December 2018, Canadian authorities arrested Huawei chief financial officer and daughter of the company's founder, Meng Wanzhou, at Vancouver International Airport at the request of the US, which filed for her extradition for alleged fraud and for breaching sanctions on Iran. China shortly afterwards sentenced a Canadian citizen to death for drug charges in what was an escalation in diplomatic tensions widely seen as retaliatory by observers. Huawei was looking to ship its 5G technology around the world and had already signed 18 contracts in Europe. "I fully understand what President Donald Trump said last week," Guo said. "The US needs powerful, faster and smarter 5G." Washington and China were currently engaged in a tense series of bilateral trade talks aimed at staving off a trade war. Trump recently said he expected to sign a trade deal "fairly soon." He added that he planned to postpone his plans to hike import tariffs on Chinese goods worth around $200 billion, which were set to kick in March. He announced he was pencilled to meet Chinese president, Xi Jinping, at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. China had earlier pledge to buy $1.2 of American products.

US has no evidence of backdoor spying in 5G technology: Huawei chairman

The US State Department refused more than 37,000 visa applications in 2018 due to the Trump administration's travel ban, up from less than 1,000 the previous year when the ban had not fully taken effect, according to agency data released on Tuesday.

The United States denies nearly 4 million visa applications a year for a variety of reasons, including for practising polygamy, abducting children or simply not qualifying for the visa in question. The data released Tuesday was the first comprehensive look at the human impact of Republican President Donald Trump's ban, imposed shortly after he took office and initially blocked by federal courts.

The ban has especially affected people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen, countries where the number of visas issued slid 80 per cent in 2018 from 2016, the last year without a travel ban.

Trump's initial January 2017 executive order banning entry to the United States by citizens of several Muslim-majority countries launched a fierce fight in federal courts over whether the policy amounts to an unlawful "Muslim ban" or is a legal exercise of presidential power.

The administration revised the policy following court challenges, and the Supreme Court allowed it to largely go into effect in December 2017 while legal challenges continued. In June 2018, the high court upheld the new version of the ban.

As a result, most people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen have not been able to enter the United States for well over a year. Venezuela and North Korea also were targeted in the current policy, but those restrictions were not challenged in court.

The figures released on Tuesday show the government denied 15,384 applications for immigrant visas - given to those who want to live permanently in the United States - due to the "2017 Executive Order on Immigration." A State Department spokeswoman confirmed that term referred to the travel ban policy.

In addition, 21,645 applications for non-immigrant visas - given to people coming for short-term visits for business, tourism or other reasons - were denied due to the ban.

Approximately 2,200 visa applications overcame denials based on the travel ban last year, but it was unclear how many of those applications were initially made last year or earlier.

The data did not include how many visa applications were made by citizens from countries affected by the travel ban.

Every month, the State Department releases the numbers of visas issued to citizens of all countries, including those under the travel ban, but it does not publish equivalent monthly information on the number of visa applications or denials by country.

Other, previously released data from the State Department shows that the number of US visas issued to citizens of the countries under the travel ban has dropped drastically as a result of its implementation.

In the fiscal year from October 1, 2017, through September 30, 2018, citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen - the five countries consistently on the travel ban list throughout its different iterations - received approximately 14,600 US visas. That is down 80 per cent from approximately 72,000 visas issued for citizens of those countries in the 2016 fiscal year when no such ban was in place.

The denials have affected people like Rasha Jarhum, a Yemeni human rights defender who applied for a US visitor visa in October to attend events on women's rights.

The US consular officer "refused to even take my passport to process anything," Jarhum said. The officer handed her a piece of paper citing the executive order as the reason for her visa denial, a picture of which Jarhum posted on Twitter.

Ahmad Shariftabrizi, a US citizen and oncologist in New York, is considering leaving the United States if his wife, an Iranian citizen, is unable to receive a visa to join him.

The couple, who wed in 2017, applied for her visa that year, and she was denied in December 2018, he said in a phone interview. The US government is now reviewing whether she is eligible for a waiver to the ban, which has been rarely granted.

The uncertainty and distance is extracting a huge emotional toll on the couple.

"The separation from my wife is making both of us break down psychologically," he said. "It's extremely difficult."

The US State Department refused more than 37,000 visa applications in 2018 due to the Trump administration's travel ban, up from less than 1,000 the previous year when the ban had not fully taken effect, according to agency data released on Tuesday.

The US State Department refused more than 37,000 visa applications in 2018 due to the Trump administration's travel ban, up from less than 1,000 the previous year when the ban had not fully taken effect, according to agency data released on Tuesday. The United States denies nearly 4 million visa applications a year for a variety of reasons, including for practising polygamy, abducting children or simply not qualifying for the visa in question. The data released Tuesday was the first comprehensive look at the human impact of Republican President Donald Trump's ban, imposed shortly after he took office and initially blocked by federal courts. The ban has especially affected people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen, countries where the number of visas issued slid 80 per cent in 2018 from 2016, the last year without a travel ban. Trump's initial January 2017 executive order banning entry to the United States by citizens of several Muslim-majority countries launched a fierce fight in federal courts over whether the policy amounts to an unlawful "Muslim ban" or is a legal exercise of presidential power. The administration revised the policy following court challenges, and the Supreme Court allowed it to largely go into effect in December 2017 while legal challenges continued. In June 2018, the high court upheld the new version of the ban. As a result, most people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen have not been able to enter the United States for well over a year. Venezuela and North Korea also were targeted in the current policy, but those restrictions were not challenged in court. The figures released on Tuesday show the government denied 15,384 applications for immigrant visas - given to those who want to live permanently in the United States - due to the "2017 Executive Order on Immigration." A State Department spokeswoman confirmed that term referred to the travel ban policy. In addition, 21,645 applications for non-immigrant visas - given to people coming for short-term visits for business, tourism or other reasons - were denied due to the ban. Approximately 2,200 visa applications overcame denials based on the travel ban last year, but it was unclear how many of those applications were initially made last year or earlier. The data did not include how many visa applications were made by citizens from countries affected by the travel ban. Every month, the State Department releases the numbers of visas issued to citizens of all countries, including those under the travel ban, but it does not publish equivalent monthly information on the number of visa applications or denials by country. Other, previously released data from the State Department shows that the number of US visas issued to citizens of the countries under the travel ban has dropped drastically as a result of its implementation. In the fiscal year from October 1, 2017, through September 30, 2018, citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen - the five countries consistently on the travel ban list throughout its different iterations - received approximately 14,600 US visas. That is down 80 per cent from approximately 72,000 visas issued for citizens of those countries in the 2016 fiscal year when no such ban was in place. The denials have affected people like Rasha Jarhum, a Yemeni human rights defender who applied for a US visitor visa in October to attend events on women's rights. The US consular officer "refused to even take my passport to process anything," Jarhum said. The officer handed her a piece of paper citing the executive order as the reason for her visa denial, a picture of which Jarhum posted on Twitter. Ahmad Shariftabrizi, a US citizen and oncologist in New York, is considering leaving the United States if his wife, an Iranian citizen, is unable to receive a visa to join him. The couple, who wed in 2017, applied for her visa that year, and she was denied in December 2018, he said in a phone interview. The US government is now reviewing whether she is eligible for a waiver to the ban, which has been rarely granted. The uncertainty and distance is extracting a huge emotional toll on the couple. "The separation from my wife is making both of us break down psychologically," he said. "It's extremely difficult."

US denied tens of thousands more visas in 2018 due to travel ban: Data

US aerospace manufacturer Boeing Co said on Tuesday it has nominated <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-to-not-give-aid-to-pakistan-until-it-stops-harbouring-terrorists-nikki-haley-199764">Nikki Haley</a>, former US ambassador to the United Nations and a close ally of President Donald Trump, to join its board of directors at the company's annual shareholders meeting on April 29.

If elected by Boeing shareholders, she would help guide the future of America's largest exporter, with a network of suppliers across the United States and the world, as Washington and Beijing have been locked in intense negotiations to end a trade war.

Viewed as a rising Republican Party star, Haley has often been mentioned as a future presidential candidate. Her counterparts at the United Nations saw her as a voice of clarity in the Trump administration.

In a statement, Chief Executive Officer Dennis Muilenburg praised Haley's record in government and industry partnership.

"Boeing will benefit greatly from her broad perspectives and combined diplomatic, government and business experience to help achieve our aspiration to be the best in aerospace and a global industrial champion," Muilenburg said.

Based on total compensation for Boeing's other 13 board members, Haley can expect to earn more than $300,000, well above her salary as UN ambassador.

Haley, 47, is the first female governor of South Carolina and a three-term legislator in the South Carolina House of Representatives. As governor in 2015, Haley was a key opponent of a campaign by Boeing's largest labour union to form a collective bargaining unit at its 787 Dreamliner factory in South Carolina - though the machinists were later successful in forming a small bargaining unit there.

Boeing has faced growing scrutiny over its links to the Trump administration after a former senior plane making executive, Pat Shanahan, was named deputy defence secretary and later acting defence secretary. The 31-year Boeing veteran has recused himself, however, from matters relating to the aerospace company.

The US&nbsp;government has been weighing the purchase of an advanced version of the F-15 Boeing fighter. Last year, Boeing's defence side had a series of wins, including the US Air Force's next training jet, which could be worth up to $9.2 billion, as well as a contract to replace UH-1N Huey helicopters worth $2.4 billion over the life of the programs.

Dan Grazier, a defence analyst with the Project on Government Oversight, said Haley's nomination "seems a bit curious" given her lack of aerospace experience.

"The practice of government employees trading on their public service to secure high-paying positions at the top levels of government contracting firms has been long established and it sets up all kinds of potential conflicts of interest," Grazier said.

Separately on Tuesday, the shareholders of Brazilian planemaker Embraer SA approved a deal to sell 80 per cent of the Sao Paulo-based company's commercial jet division to Boeing, a move that could reshape the global market for aircraft of up to 150 seats.

Boeing shares closed flat at $426.77 a share on the New York Stock Exchange.

US aerospace manufacturer Boeing Co said on Tuesday it has nominated Nikki Haley, former US ambassador to the United Nations and a close ally of President Donald Trump, to join its board of directors at the company's annual shareholders meeting on April 29.

US aerospace manufacturer Boeing Co said on Tuesday it has nominated Nikki Haley, former US ambassador to the United Nations and a close ally of President Donald Trump, to join its board of directors at the company's annual shareholders meeting on April 29. If elected by Boeing shareholders, she would help guide the future of America's largest exporter, with a network of suppliers across the United States and the world, as Washington and Beijing have been locked in intense negotiations to end a trade war. Viewed as a rising Republican Party star, Haley has often been mentioned as a future presidential candidate. Her counterparts at the United Nations saw her as a voice of clarity in the Trump administration. In a statement, Chief Executive Officer Dennis Muilenburg praised Haley's record in government and industry partnership. "Boeing will benefit greatly from her broad perspectives and combined diplomatic, government and business experience to help achieve our aspiration to be the best in aerospace and a global industrial champion," Muilenburg said. Based on total compensation for Boeing's other 13 board members, Haley can expect to earn more than $300,000, well above her salary as UN ambassador. Haley, 47, is the first female governor of South Carolina and a three-term legislator in the South Carolina House of Representatives. As governor in 2015, Haley was a key opponent of a campaign by Boeing's largest labour union to form a collective bargaining unit at its 787 Dreamliner factory in South Carolina - though the machinists were later successful in forming a small bargaining unit there. Boeing has faced growing scrutiny over its links to the Trump administration after a former senior plane making executive, Pat Shanahan, was named deputy defence secretary and later acting defence secretary. The 31-year Boeing veteran has recused himself, however, from matters relating to the aerospace company. The US government has been weighing the purchase of an advanced version of the F-15 Boeing fighter. Last year, Boeing's defence side had a series of wins, including the US Air Force's next training jet, which could be worth up to $9.2 billion, as well as a contract to replace UH-1N Huey helicopters worth $2.4 billion over the life of the programs. Dan Grazier, a defence analyst with the Project on Government Oversight, said Haley's nomination "seems a bit curious" given her lack of aerospace experience. "The practice of government employees trading on their public service to secure high-paying positions at the top levels of government contracting firms has been long established and it sets up all kinds of potential conflicts of interest," Grazier said. Separately on Tuesday, the shareholders of Brazilian planemaker Embraer SA approved a deal to sell 80 per cent of the Sao Paulo-based company's commercial jet division to Boeing, a move that could reshape the global market for aircraft of up to 150 seats. Boeing shares closed flat at $426.77 a share on the New York Stock Exchange.

Boeing nominates former UN ambassador Nikki Haley to join its board

By Ben Zissimos

Violence erupted at the Venezuela-Colombia border over the delivery of humanitarian aid to Venezuela, killing four people and injuring 24 on February 22.

US&nbsp;Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro that his “days are numbered,” and Trump officials reiterated that the US is considering all options, including military action, to address Venezuela’s crisis.

Almost 80 per cent of Venezuelans disapprove of Maduro, who was reinaugurated for a second six-year term in January after an election widely seen as fraudulent. Since taking power in 2013, he has led Venezuela into a deep economic crisis.

In late January, opposition leader Juan Guaidó declared Maduro a “usurper” and swore himself in as the country’s rightful president. More than 50 countries – including the United States, Europe and most of Latin America – want to replace Maduro’s regime with a Guaidó-led government.

Despite near global condemnation of Maduro, any US intervention in Venezuela would be controversial. The United States’ long history of interfering in Latin American politics suggests that its military operations generally usher in dictatorship and civil war – not democracy.

The Cuban-US Cold War

Cuba, the focus of my history research, is a prime example of this pattern.

US-Cuban relations have never recovered from President William McKinley’s intervention in Cuba’s war for independence over a century ago.

Before waging what in the US is known as the Spanish-American War in 1898, McKinley promised that “the people of the island of Cuba” would be “free and independent” from Spain and that his government had no “intention to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction or control over said Island.”

In the end, however, Cuba’s independence from Spain meant domination by the United States.

For 60 years after the Spanish-American War, the White House made repeated military and diplomatic interventions in Cuba, supporting politicians who protected US economic interests in sugar, utilities, banks or tourism and who backed American foreign policy in the Caribbean.

By 1952, when the US-backed Fulgencio Batista overthrew President Carlos Prío Socarrás, Cuba’s government had effectively become protectors of American businesses, according to my research. Batista had a warm relationship with both Washington, DC and the American organized crime groups that used to control Havana’s tourist industry.

A communist revolution led by Fidel Castro overthrew Batista’s military junta in 1959. Castro decried the “imperialist government of the United States” for turning Cuba into an “American colony.”

The Kennedy administration’s trade embargo against Cuba and the disastrous 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion – in which the US military trained Cuban dissidents in an attempt to unseat Castro – only pushed Cuba further into the orbit of Soviet Russia.

For the past six decades, the US and Cuba have remained locked in a Cold War, with a brief thaw under President Barack Obama.

Anti-communist coups

Fearing that communism would spread across the hemisphere, the US government repeatedly interfered in the politics of Latin American nations during the Cold War.

In 1954 the CIA worked with elements of the Guatemalan military to overthrow elected President Jacobo Árbenz, whom US policymakers considered dangerously left-wing. Decades of dictatorship and civil war followed, killing an estimated 200,000 people.

A peace agreement in 1996 restored democracy, but Guatemala has yet to recover economically, politically or psychologically from the bloodshed.

Then there is Chile’s US-supported coup d'etat. In 1973, the US government covertly assisted right-wing elements of the Chilean military in overthrowing the socialist president Salvador Allende.

General Augusto Pinochet took power with the quiet financial and political support of the United States. His dictatorship, which lasted until 1990, killed tens of thousands of Chileans.

The Dominican Republic and Panama

US intervention in Latin America did not start or end with the Cold War.

During World War I, the United States was concerned that Germany could use the Dominican Republic as a base of military operations. So American troops occupied the Caribbean island from 1916 to 1924. 
 
Though the American-led administration improved the finances and infrastructure of the Dominican Republic, it also created the national guard that helped to propel Gen. Rafael Trujillo into power. His 30-year reign was savage.

President George H W Bush’s 1989 invasion of Panama is the rare exception when U.S. intervention in Latin American affairs actually created stability.

Most Panamanians appear to have supported the 1989 U.S. military operation to remove the corrupt and brutal military strongman Manuel Noriega.

In the years since, Panama has enjoyed comparatively peaceful elections and transfers of power.

Anti-Americanism in Latin America

On balance, though, US military operations in Latin America have rarely brought democracy.

But they have created strong anti-American sentiment in the region, which leftist leaders from Fidel Castro to Hugo Chávez have adeptly harnessed to vilify their political opponents as mere US puppets.

Support for the US government is lower now than it has been in decades. Just 35 per cent of Argentines, 39 per cent of Chileans and 45 percent of Venezuelans view the US favourably, according to the Pew Research Center.

President Maduro, too, has used anti-imperialist rhetoric. He denounces US sanctions and other efforts to isolate his regime as a “gringo plot.”

A safer way to restore democracy

This history explains why a US intervention in Venezuela would be viewed with skepticism. Though Maduro is unpopular, 65 per cent of Venezuelans oppose any foreign military operation to remove Maduro, according to recent polling.

Rather than plan yet another coup d'etat, I believe US&nbsp;efforts in Venezuela should support the work of the Lima Group, a coalition of 12 Latin American countries, including Mexico, Guatemala and Brazil, plus Canada.

The Lima Group has ruled out military force in Venezuela. Its pressure campaign to force him out peacefully has included diplomatically isolating his regime and asking Venezuela’s soldiers to pledge loyalty to Guaidó.

A negotiated settlement leading to Maduro’s voluntary departure from office is their ultimate goal.

Regional diplomacy is much slower than foreign intervention. But it avoids further bloodshed and reduces the role of anti-Americanism in Venezuela’s crisis.

It may also open a new chapter in the history of US-Latin American relations – one in which the US takes its lead from the region, and not the other way around.

(Joseph J Gonzalez is Associate Professor, Global Studies, Appalachian State University)

(This article was originally published on the Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/venezuela-crisis-trump-threats-to-maduro-evoke-bloody-history-of-us-intervention-in-latin-america-111169">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

By Ben Zissimos Violence erupted at the Venezuela-Colombia border over the delivery of humanitarian aid to Venezuela, killing four people and injuring 24 on February 22.

By Ben Zissimos Violence erupted at the Venezuela-Colombia border over the delivery of humanitarian aid to Venezuela, killing four people and injuring 24 on February 22. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro that his “days are numbered,” and Trump officials reiterated that the US is considering all options, including military action, to address Venezuela’s crisis. Almost 80 per cent of Venezuelans disapprove of Maduro, who was reinaugurated for a second six-year term in January after an election widely seen as fraudulent. Since taking power in 2013, he has led Venezuela into a deep economic crisis. In late January, opposition leader Juan Guaidó declared Maduro a “usurper” and swore himself in as the country’s rightful president. More than 50 countries – including the United States, Europe and most of Latin America – want to replace Maduro’s regime with a Guaidó-led government. Despite near global condemnation of Maduro, any US intervention in Venezuela would be controversial. The United States’ long history of interfering in Latin American politics suggests that its military operations generally usher in dictatorship and civil war – not democracy. The Cuban-US Cold War Cuba, the focus of my history research, is a prime example of this pattern. US-Cuban relations have never recovered from President William McKinley’s intervention in Cuba’s war for independence over a century ago. Before waging what in the US is known as the Spanish-American War in 1898, McKinley promised that “the people of the island of Cuba” would be “free and independent” from Spain and that his government had no “intention to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction or control over said Island.” In the end, however, Cuba’s independence from Spain meant domination by the United States. For 60 years after the Spanish-American War, the White House made repeated military and diplomatic interventions in Cuba, supporting politicians who protected US economic interests in sugar, utilities, banks or tourism and who backed American foreign policy in the Caribbean. By 1952, when the US-backed Fulgencio Batista overthrew President Carlos Prío Socarrás, Cuba’s government had effectively become protectors of American businesses, according to my research. Batista had a warm relationship with both Washington, DC and the American organized crime groups that used to control Havana’s tourist industry. A communist revolution led by Fidel Castro overthrew Batista’s military junta in 1959. Castro decried the “imperialist government of the United States” for turning Cuba into an “American colony.” The Kennedy administration’s trade embargo against Cuba and the disastrous 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion – in which the US military trained Cuban dissidents in an attempt to unseat Castro – only pushed Cuba further into the orbit of Soviet Russia. For the past six decades, the US and Cuba have remained locked in a Cold War, with a brief thaw under President Barack Obama. Anti-communist coups Fearing that communism would spread across the hemisphere, the US government repeatedly interfered in the politics of Latin American nations during the Cold War. In 1954 the CIA worked with elements of the Guatemalan military to overthrow elected President Jacobo Árbenz, whom US policymakers considered dangerously left-wing. Decades of dictatorship and civil war followed, killing an estimated 200,000 people. A peace agreement in 1996 restored democracy, but Guatemala has yet to recover economically, politically or psychologically from the bloodshed. Then there is Chile’s US-supported coup d'etat. In 1973, the US government covertly assisted right-wing elements of the Chilean military in overthrowing the socialist president Salvador Allende. General Augusto Pinochet took power with the quiet financial and political support of the United States. His dictatorship, which lasted until 1990, killed tens of thousands of Chileans. The Dominican Republic and Panama US intervention in Latin America did not start or end with the Cold War. During World War I, the United States was concerned that Germany could use the Dominican Republic as a base of military operations. So American troops occupied the Caribbean island from 1916 to 1924. Though the American-led administration improved the finances and infrastructure of the Dominican Republic, it also created the national guard that helped to propel Gen. Rafael Trujillo into power. His 30-year reign was savage. President George H W Bush’s 1989 invasion of Panama is the rare exception when U.S. intervention in Latin American affairs actually created stability. Most Panamanians appear to have supported the 1989 U.S. military operation to remove the corrupt and brutal military strongman Manuel Noriega. In the years since, Panama has enjoyed comparatively peaceful elections and transfers of power. Anti-Americanism in Latin America On balance, though, US military operations in Latin America have rarely brought democracy. But they have created strong anti-American sentiment in the region, which leftist leaders from Fidel Castro to Hugo Chávez have adeptly harnessed to vilify their political opponents as mere US puppets. Support for the US government is lower now than it has been in decades. Just 35 per cent of Argentines, 39 per cent of Chileans and 45 percent of Venezuelans view the US favourably, according to the Pew Research Center. President Maduro, too, has used anti-imperialist rhetoric. He denounces US sanctions and other efforts to isolate his regime as a “gringo plot.” A safer way to restore democracy This history explains why a US intervention in Venezuela would be viewed with skepticism. Though Maduro is unpopular, 65 per cent of Venezuelans oppose any foreign military operation to remove Maduro, according to recent polling. Rather than plan yet another coup d'etat, I believe US efforts in Venezuela should support the work of the Lima Group, a coalition of 12 Latin American countries, including Mexico, Guatemala and Brazil, plus Canada. The Lima Group has ruled out military force in Venezuela. Its pressure campaign to force him out peacefully has included diplomatically isolating his regime and asking Venezuela’s soldiers to pledge loyalty to Guaidó. A negotiated settlement leading to Maduro’s voluntary departure from office is their ultimate goal. Regional diplomacy is much slower than foreign intervention. But it avoids further bloodshed and reduces the role of anti-Americanism in Venezuela’s crisis. It may also open a new chapter in the history of US-Latin American relations – one in which the US takes its lead from the region, and not the other way around. (Joseph J Gonzalez is Associate Professor, Global Studies, Appalachian State University) (This article was originally published on the Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Venezuela crisis: Donald Trump's threats to Nicolas Maduro evoke history of US intervention in Latin America

Pakistan has a long history of harbouring terrorists and America should not give Islamabad even a dollar until it corrects its behaviour, Indian-American former US envoy to the UN Nikki Haley has said as she praised the Trump administration for wisely restricting financial assistance to the country.

Haley, who has founded a new policy group 'Stand America Now' that will focus on how to keep the US safe, strong, and prosperous, wrote in an op-ed that when the US provides aid to nations, "it is more than fair to ask what the US Gets in return for our generosity" but instead Pakistan routinely opposed the US position at the UN on several issues.

"In 2017, Pakistan received nearly $1 billion in US foreign aid, the sixth most of any country. Much of the aid went to the Pakistani military. Some went for road, highway, and energy projects to assist the Pakistani people," Haley wrote in the op-ed 'Foreign Aid Should Only Go To Friends'.&nbsp;

"On all key votes at the UN, Pakistan opposed the American position 76 per cent of the time. Much more troubling, Pakistan also has a long history of harbouring terrorists who have killed US troops in Afghanistan," she said.&nbsp;

Haley, the former Governor of South Carolina, added that the Trump Administration has "already wisely restricted assistance to Pakistan, but there is much more to be done."&nbsp;

Haley, who had stepped down as the US envoy to the UN at the end of last year, has previously strongly criticised Pakistan for continuing to harbour terrorists that turn around and kill American soldiers while taking billions of dollars in foreign aid from the US.&nbsp;

In an interview to US magazine 'The Atlantic' in December, Haley had said the US did not need to give money to countries that wish harm to America, go behind its back and try and "stop us from doing things".&nbsp;

"The one example I'll give you is, look at Pakistan. Giving them over a billion dollars, and they continue to harbour terrorists that turn around and kill our soldiers that's never okay. We shouldn't even give them a dollar until they correct it. Use the billion dollars. That's not a small amount of change," she had said.&nbsp;

Last September, the Trump administration cancelled $300 million in military aid to Islamabad for not doing enough against terror groups active on its soil. Trump had defended his administration's decision to stop hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to Pakistan, saying Islamabad does not do "a damn thing" for the US and its government helped late al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden hide near its garrison city of Rawalpindi.&nbsp;

Haley's new policy group aims to promote public policies that strengthen America's economy, culture, and national security.&nbsp;

The group will provide information to grassroots Americans, to highlight the dangers and the opportunities they face domestically and internationally. It will advocate the policies that strengthen the US at all levels of government and in the broader media and culture.

Pakistan has a long history of harbouring terrorists and America should not give Islamabad even a dollar until it corrects its behaviour, Indian-American former US envoy to the UN Nikki Haley has said as she praised the Trump administration for wisely restricting financial assistance to the country.

Pakistan has a long history of harbouring terrorists and America should not give Islamabad even a dollar until it corrects its behaviour, Indian-American former US envoy to the UN Nikki Haley has said as she praised the Trump administration for wisely restricting financial assistance to the country. Haley, who has founded a new policy group 'Stand America Now' that will focus on how to keep the US safe, strong, and prosperous, wrote in an op-ed that when the US provides aid to nations, "it is more than fair to ask what the US Gets in return for our generosity" but instead Pakistan routinely opposed the US position at the UN on several issues. "In 2017, Pakistan received nearly $1 billion in US foreign aid, the sixth most of any country. Much of the aid went to the Pakistani military. Some went for road, highway, and energy projects to assist the Pakistani people," Haley wrote in the op-ed 'Foreign Aid Should Only Go To Friends'. "On all key votes at the UN, Pakistan opposed the American position 76 per cent of the time. Much more troubling, Pakistan also has a long history of harbouring terrorists who have killed US troops in Afghanistan," she said. Haley, the former Governor of South Carolina, added that the Trump Administration has "already wisely restricted assistance to Pakistan, but there is much more to be done." Haley, who had stepped down as the US envoy to the UN at the end of last year, has previously strongly criticised Pakistan for continuing to harbour terrorists that turn around and kill American soldiers while taking billions of dollars in foreign aid from the US. In an interview to US magazine 'The Atlantic' in December, Haley had said the US did not need to give money to countries that wish harm to America, go behind its back and try and "stop us from doing things". "The one example I'll give you is, look at Pakistan. Giving them over a billion dollars, and they continue to harbour terrorists that turn around and kill our soldiers that's never okay. We shouldn't even give them a dollar until they correct it. Use the billion dollars. That's not a small amount of change," she had said. Last September, the Trump administration cancelled $300 million in military aid to Islamabad for not doing enough against terror groups active on its soil. Trump had defended his administration's decision to stop hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to Pakistan, saying Islamabad does not do "a damn thing" for the US and its government helped late al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden hide near its garrison city of Rawalpindi. Haley's new policy group aims to promote public policies that strengthen America's economy, culture, and national security. The group will provide information to grassroots Americans, to highlight the dangers and the opportunities they face domestically and internationally. It will advocate the policies that strengthen the US at all levels of government and in the broader media and culture.

US should not give aid to Pakistan until it stops harbouring terrorists: Nikki Haley 

Several social networks including Pinterest and YouTube have detailed measures they are taking in response to pressure to combat disinformation on vaccines, which they have been accused of enabling.

Pinterest confirmed to AFP Monday it changed its policy last year with regards to anti-vaccine content, a development first disclosed last week by the Wall Street Journal.

The company said it had started blocking certain searches related to vaccinations and cancer cures last year because results were leading to harmful misinformation.

"We want Pinterest to be an inspiring place for people, and there's nothing inspiring about misinformation," a spokesperson said.

"That's why we continue to work on new ways of keeping misleading content off our platform and out of our recommendations engine."

Besides blocking search results, the site has also barred accounts and removed "pins" that violate its rules on medical disinformation, but the spokesperson was unable to give specific numbers.

YouTube announced Friday it was removing ads on anti-vaccine videos, thus eliminating a key way such videos make money.

"We have strict policies that govern what videos we allow ads to appear on, and videos that promote anti-vaccination content have been and remain a violation of our longstanding harmful or dangerous advertising policy," YouTube said in a statement.

Buzzfeed had drawn attention to instances in which YouTube's automated recommendations system had allowed some anti-vaccine videos to slip through.

Pressure is growing on social networks in the United States and elsewhere to take action in the face of criticism that they have enabled the development of an anti-vaccine movement.

Several outbreaks of measles in the US have sickened 159 people since the start of the year, including 65 in Clark County, Washington state. Most of the cases involved non-vaccinated children.

According to US health authorities, the percentage of children aged two or over who have not been vaccinated has gone from 0.9 per cent of children born in 2011, to 1.3 per cent of those born in 2015.

In 2017-2018, the number of requests for vaccination exemptions rose for the third school year in a row in the United States.

Democratic lawmaker Adam Schiff wrote to the heads of Facebook and Google about the issue on February 14. Facebook responded that it was looking at ways to reduce the visibility of anti-vaccine content.

Several social networks including Pinterest and YouTube have detailed measures they are taking in response to pressure to combat disinformation on vaccines, which they have been accused of enabling.

Several social networks including Pinterest and YouTube have detailed measures they are taking in response to pressure to combat disinformation on vaccines, which they have been accused of enabling. Pinterest confirmed to AFP Monday it changed its policy last year with regards to anti-vaccine content, a development first disclosed last week by the Wall Street Journal. The company said it had started blocking certain searches related to vaccinations and cancer cures last year because results were leading to harmful misinformation. "We want Pinterest to be an inspiring place for people, and there's nothing inspiring about misinformation," a spokesperson said. "That's why we continue to work on new ways of keeping misleading content off our platform and out of our recommendations engine." Besides blocking search results, the site has also barred accounts and removed "pins" that violate its rules on medical disinformation, but the spokesperson was unable to give specific numbers. YouTube announced Friday it was removing ads on anti-vaccine videos, thus eliminating a key way such videos make money. "We have strict policies that govern what videos we allow ads to appear on, and videos that promote anti-vaccination content have been and remain a violation of our longstanding harmful or dangerous advertising policy," YouTube said in a statement. Buzzfeed had drawn attention to instances in which YouTube's automated recommendations system had allowed some anti-vaccine videos to slip through. Pressure is growing on social networks in the United States and elsewhere to take action in the face of criticism that they have enabled the development of an anti-vaccine movement. Several outbreaks of measles in the US have sickened 159 people since the start of the year, including 65 in Clark County, Washington state. Most of the cases involved non-vaccinated children. According to US health authorities, the percentage of children aged two or over who have not been vaccinated has gone from 0.9 per cent of children born in 2011, to 1.3 per cent of those born in 2015. In 2017-2018, the number of requests for vaccination exemptions rose for the third school year in a row in the United States. Democratic lawmaker Adam Schiff wrote to the heads of Facebook and Google about the issue on February 14. Facebook responded that it was looking at ways to reduce the visibility of anti-vaccine content.

Pinterest, YouTube say acting against anti-vaccine messages

Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, the urbane, US-educated architect of its 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, announced his resignation unexpectedly on Monday on Instagram.

"Many thanks for the generosity of the dear and brave people of Iran and its authorities over the past 67 months. I sincerely apologise for the inability to continue serving and for all the shortcomings during my service. Be happy and worthy", he wrote on his Instagram page.

He gave no specific reasons for his decision.

Zarif played the lead role in striking the deal under which Iran agreed to curbs on its nuclear programme in return for the lifting of international financial sanctions.

He came under attack from anti-Western hardliners in Iran after the United States pulled out of the agreement last May and reimposed sanctions on Iran's economy and its lifeblood oil industry that were lifted under the deal.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, in a post on Twitter, dismissed Zarif and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani as "front men for a corrupt religious mafia."

"Our policy is unchanged - the regime must behave like a normal country and respect its people", Pompeo said.

A spokesman for the Iranian Mission to the United Nations, Alireza Miryousefi, confirmed the announcement of the resignation. There was no immediate word, however, on whether Rouhani would accept it.

Iran's semi-official Tasnim news agency said: "some sources have confirmed Zarif's resignation". A foreign ministry spokesman confirmed his resignation, Iran's state news agency IRNA reported.

If accepted, Zarif's resignation will further weaken pragmatist Rouhani, who is facing mounting pressure from his hardline rivals over the handling of Iran’s economic struggles.

Born in 1960, Zarif lived in the United States from the age of 17 as a student in San Francisco and Denver, and subsequently as a diplomat to the United Nations in New York, where he served as Iranian ambassador from 2002-07.

He was appointed a minister of foreign affairs in August 2013 after Rouhani won the presidency in a landslide on a promise to open up Iran to the outside world.

Although Rouhani, as the president, is responsible for choosing ministers, Iran's top authority Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei traditionally has the last say over appointment of key ministers, including the foreign minister.

Since taking charge of Iran's nuclear talks with major powers in late 2013, Zarif has been summoned to parliament several times by hardline lawmakers to explain about the negotiations.

In February 2014 he caused an uproar with public comments condemning the Holocaust and was subsequently summoned to parliament. Holocaust denial has been a staple of public speeches in Iran for decades.

Some hardliners even threatened Zarif with bodily harm after the nuclear deal was signed. Khamenei, guardedly backed the deal, under which Iran agreed to curb its sensitive nuclear work.

A former commander of Iran's hardline Revolutionary Guards Corps, Hassan Abbasi, said in a speech earlier this month he believed Iranian people would spit on Zarif and those officials who supported the nuclear pact with powers.

"Rouhani, Zarif and (parliament speaker Ali) Larijani, go to hell," Abbasi said in the central city of Karaj, Iranian media reported.

Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, the urbane, US-educated architect of its 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, announced his resignation unexpectedly on Monday on Instagram.

Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, the urbane, US-educated architect of its 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, announced his resignation unexpectedly on Monday on Instagram. "Many thanks for the generosity of the dear and brave people of Iran and its authorities over the past 67 months. I sincerely apologise for the inability to continue serving and for all the shortcomings during my service. Be happy and worthy", he wrote on his Instagram page. He gave no specific reasons for his decision. Zarif played the lead role in striking the deal under which Iran agreed to curbs on its nuclear programme in return for the lifting of international financial sanctions. He came under attack from anti-Western hardliners in Iran after the United States pulled out of the agreement last May and reimposed sanctions on Iran's economy and its lifeblood oil industry that were lifted under the deal. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, in a post on Twitter, dismissed Zarif and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani as "front men for a corrupt religious mafia." "Our policy is unchanged - the regime must behave like a normal country and respect its people", Pompeo said. A spokesman for the Iranian Mission to the United Nations, Alireza Miryousefi, confirmed the announcement of the resignation. There was no immediate word, however, on whether Rouhani would accept it. Iran's semi-official Tasnim news agency said: "some sources have confirmed Zarif's resignation". A foreign ministry spokesman confirmed his resignation, Iran's state news agency IRNA reported. If accepted, Zarif's resignation will further weaken pragmatist Rouhani, who is facing mounting pressure from his hardline rivals over the handling of Iran’s economic struggles. Born in 1960, Zarif lived in the United States from the age of 17 as a student in San Francisco and Denver, and subsequently as a diplomat to the United Nations in New York, where he served as Iranian ambassador from 2002-07. He was appointed a minister of foreign affairs in August 2013 after Rouhani won the presidency in a landslide on a promise to open up Iran to the outside world. Although Rouhani, as the president, is responsible for choosing ministers, Iran's top authority Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei traditionally has the last say over appointment of key ministers, including the foreign minister. Since taking charge of Iran's nuclear talks with major powers in late 2013, Zarif has been summoned to parliament several times by hardline lawmakers to explain about the negotiations. In February 2014 he caused an uproar with public comments condemning the Holocaust and was subsequently summoned to parliament. Holocaust denial has been a staple of public speeches in Iran for decades. Some hardliners even threatened Zarif with bodily harm after the nuclear deal was signed. Khamenei, guardedly backed the deal, under which Iran agreed to curb its sensitive nuclear work. A former commander of Iran's hardline Revolutionary Guards Corps, Hassan Abbasi, said in a speech earlier this month he believed Iranian people would spit on Zarif and those officials who supported the nuclear pact with powers. "Rouhani, Zarif and (parliament speaker Ali) Larijani, go to hell," Abbasi said in the central city of Karaj, Iranian media reported.

Iran's Foreign Minister Zarif announces unexpected resignation on Instagram

By Ben Zissimos

Venezuela stands close to the brink of another revolution. Acute shortages of food and medicine, along with quintuple-digit inflation, has led to an economic crisis.

With a large amount of much-needed humanitarian aid being held at Venezuela’s borders with Colombia and Brazil, things could turn very violent (some skirmishes have already taken place). The aid has been sent by the US and other international supporters of opposition leader Juan Guaidó. Together they brand President Nicolás Maduro a dictator, believing that he rigged his election in May 2018, and demand that he now stand down and restore democracy. But the army, so far, remains loyal to Maduro and troops have barricaded the border crossings to prevent aid from entering – something Maduro fears is a prelude to US invasion.

In applying my research to the situation in Venezuela, it’s clear that things could soon come to a head. My research shows how dictators can manipulate their trade policies to bolster their political survival, foreclosing democratisation in this process. Using an economic model, I strip these types of situations down to a few essential ingredients, simplifying an extremely complex set of circumstances to facilitate deeper insight into how they work. Using my model to think about Venezuela’s situation, we can see precisely the role that the world’s powerful countries play through their sanctions and aid in shaping Venezuela’s prospects for democracy. 
 
Keeping people happy

The basic logic of my model is that the Maduro regime, even as a dictatorship, has to keep the population happy just like any other political regime. After all, while democratic regimes worry about losing power at the ballot box, dictators fear revolution.

The model assumes that people have a sense of how life will be if they overthrew the Maduro regime, through a revolution, paving the way to democracy. Revolution is of course extremely costly and dangerous. But if life becomes so tough for ordinary people that they ultimately feel revolution is worth the costs, then Maduro has the threat of revolution on his hands.

Maduro’s options in the face of the threat of revolution include repression – something he has already experimented with. But, from his perspective, repressing his own people is extremely costly politically. It is also risky, especially when this entails turning against his own support base.

Plus, many members of the military are unwilling to turn their weapons on their own people. This elevates the danger that military repression will ultimately backfire and lead to Maduro’s downfall. More than 100 soldiers are said to have defected during the clashes over aid deliveries.

A better option for Maduro than military repression would be to try and improve the welfare of ordinary people, making them more prepared to live with the status quo of his rule and less inclined to spark a revolution. Adopting this approach is in line with Maduro’s claims that there isn’t any crisis in the country. This is where Venezuela’s vast oil reserves could help him.

One of the insights one gains from viewing this situation through the lens of my model is that dictators can stay in power by using commodities like oil to import food and hence placate the populace. Venezuela’s ability to produce oil has been badly curtailed by the economic chaos engulfing the country, but the oil it does still produce could help Maduro shore up his survival.

This is where international economic policy becomes critical. The EU and US have levied sanctions on Venezuela’s exports, which means they have committed not to buy Venezuela’s oil. This, in turn, hinders the regime’s ability to use its oil to buy the food that Maduro needs. Having food to offer to his population is what stands between Maduro and the threat of a full-blown revolution.

Seen through my model, the explicit purpose of sanctions is to deny Maduro that lifeline, pushing Venezuela to the brink of a revolution. Of course, China and Russia’s support for Venezuela works in precisely the opposite direction, turning Maduro’s survival into a tug of war between the world’s major powers.

Uncomfortable truths

The uncomfortable truth is that, although the purpose of sanctions is to put pressure on the Maduro regime, this glosses over an important aspect of how the pressure works. It works by pushing the Venezuelan people to the point of desperation where they are prepared to risk everything in a revolution rather than live with the status quo.

Yet a second uncomfortable truth arguably outweighs the first. Failing to push the Venezuelan people to the brink of revolution will probably lead to a longer period under the Maduro dictatorship, delaying democratisation in Venezuela and entrenching the current misery.

At first sight, US food aid seems to undermine the above rationale. If food is Maduro’s lifeline, and if the purpose of sanctions is to destabilise the Maduro regime by depriving it of food, why send food aid?

I don’t think there was ever any expectation that the Maduro regime would accept the aid. Its purpose was to draw Venezuelan troops to the Colombian border, away from the capital city Caracas, and that is exactly what it has done. This further reduces Maduro’s ability to use the military to repress an uprising in the capital Caracas, further heightening the risk of revolution. It also increases the Venezuelan people’s temptation to overthrow the Maduro regime, because then they could gain access to the food aid immediately.

Another revolution is neither inevitable nor desirable. But, in my view and following the logic of the model I have developed, Venezuela has to get to the brink of revolution before it has any hope of finding the path back to meaningful democracy.

(Ben Zissimos is Associate Professor of Economics, University of Exeter)

(This article was originally published on the Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/maduro-has-pushed-venezuela-to-the-brink-of-revolution-sanctions-and-aid-may-tip-it-over-the-edge-112324">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) 
&nbsp;

&nbsp;

By Ben Zissimos Venezuela stands close to the brink of another revolution. Acute shortages of food and medicine, along with quintuple-digit inflation, has led to an economic crisis.

By Ben Zissimos Venezuela stands close to the brink of another revolution. Acute shortages of food and medicine, along with quintuple-digit inflation, has led to an economic crisis. With a large amount of much-needed humanitarian aid being held at Venezuela’s borders with Colombia and Brazil, things could turn very violent (some skirmishes have already taken place). The aid has been sent by the US and other international supporters of opposition leader Juan Guaidó. Together they brand President Nicolás Maduro a dictator, believing that he rigged his election in May 2018, and demand that he now stand down and restore democracy. But the army, so far, remains loyal to Maduro and troops have barricaded the border crossings to prevent aid from entering – something Maduro fears is a prelude to US invasion. In applying my research to the situation in Venezuela, it’s clear that things could soon come to a head. My research shows how dictators can manipulate their trade policies to bolster their political survival, foreclosing democratisation in this process. Using an economic model, I strip these types of situations down to a few essential ingredients, simplifying an extremely complex set of circumstances to facilitate deeper insight into how they work. Using my model to think about Venezuela’s situation, we can see precisely the role that the world’s powerful countries play through their sanctions and aid in shaping Venezuela’s prospects for democracy. Keeping people happy The basic logic of my model is that the Maduro regime, even as a dictatorship, has to keep the population happy just like any other political regime. After all, while democratic regimes worry about losing power at the ballot box, dictators fear revolution. The model assumes that people have a sense of how life will be if they overthrew the Maduro regime, through a revolution, paving the way to democracy. Revolution is of course extremely costly and dangerous. But if life becomes so tough for ordinary people that they ultimately feel revolution is worth the costs, then Maduro has the threat of revolution on his hands. Maduro’s options in the face of the threat of revolution include repression – something he has already experimented with. But, from his perspective, repressing his own people is extremely costly politically. It is also risky, especially when this entails turning against his own support base. Plus, many members of the military are unwilling to turn their weapons on their own people. This elevates the danger that military repression will ultimately backfire and lead to Maduro’s downfall. More than 100 soldiers are said to have defected during the clashes over aid deliveries. A better option for Maduro than military repression would be to try and improve the welfare of ordinary people, making them more prepared to live with the status quo of his rule and less inclined to spark a revolution. Adopting this approach is in line with Maduro’s claims that there isn’t any crisis in the country. This is where Venezuela’s vast oil reserves could help him. One of the insights one gains from viewing this situation through the lens of my model is that dictators can stay in power by using commodities like oil to import food and hence placate the populace. Venezuela’s ability to produce oil has been badly curtailed by the economic chaos engulfing the country, but the oil it does still produce could help Maduro shore up his survival. This is where international economic policy becomes critical. The EU and US have levied sanctions on Venezuela’s exports, which means they have committed not to buy Venezuela’s oil. This, in turn, hinders the regime’s ability to use its oil to buy the food that Maduro needs. Having food to offer to his population is what stands between Maduro and the threat of a full-blown revolution. Seen through my model, the explicit purpose of sanctions is to deny Maduro that lifeline, pushing Venezuela to the brink of a revolution. Of course, China and Russia’s support for Venezuela works in precisely the opposite direction, turning Maduro’s survival into a tug of war between the world’s major powers. Uncomfortable truths The uncomfortable truth is that, although the purpose of sanctions is to put pressure on the Maduro regime, this glosses over an important aspect of how the pressure works. It works by pushing the Venezuelan people to the point of desperation where they are prepared to risk everything in a revolution rather than live with the status quo. Yet a second uncomfortable truth arguably outweighs the first. Failing to push the Venezuelan people to the brink of revolution will probably lead to a longer period under the Maduro dictatorship, delaying democratisation in Venezuela and entrenching the current misery. At first sight, US food aid seems to undermine the above rationale. If food is Maduro’s lifeline, and if the purpose of sanctions is to destabilise the Maduro regime by depriving it of food, why send food aid? I don’t think there was ever any expectation that the Maduro regime would accept the aid. Its purpose was to draw Venezuelan troops to the Colombian border, away from the capital city Caracas, and that is exactly what it has done. This further reduces Maduro’s ability to use the military to repress an uprising in the capital Caracas, further heightening the risk of revolution. It also increases the Venezuelan people’s temptation to overthrow the Maduro regime, because then they could gain access to the food aid immediately. Another revolution is neither inevitable nor desirable. But, in my view and following the logic of the model I have developed, Venezuela has to get to the brink of revolution before it has any hope of finding the path back to meaningful democracy. (Ben Zissimos is Associate Professor of Economics, University of Exeter) (This article was originally published on the Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Venezuela stands close to the brink of another revolution

At a time when US president Donald Trump is holding peace talks with the Taliban terrorists and has decided to withdraw 7,000 troops in the next few months, at least 40 CRPF personnel were killed in one of the deadliest terrorist attacks carried out by the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) in Pulwama. &nbsp;

While Indian security forces have killed the three main terrorists behind the Pulwama attack and the Indian government is weighing all possible options to dismantle terror outfits operating against India from across the border, this attack has once again reinforced the fact that the language of peace cannot be an effective tool to deal with terrorists. &nbsp; &nbsp;

In fact, ever since the Trump administration started peace talks with the Taliban, there were apprehensions in India, the US and elsewhere that such efforts would only embolden the Taliban. 
 
Sure, it was during the Obama administration that the US decided to hold talks with the Taliban and during the 2016 presidential election campaign, Trump too promised to end the war in Afghanistan.

Interestingly, the Trump Administration’s South Asia Policy released in 2017 underscored the need for US troops to stay on in Afghanistan. In fact, on the issue of promoting peace, security, stability and development in Afghanistan, Trump’s South Asia Policy mentioned that the US will deploy more troops in Afghanistan without fixing a timeline for the return of US forces.&nbsp;

However, over a year later in July 2018, President Trump shifted his position on Afghanistan issue with the intention of clinching a deal with the Taliban. It would give the US a morally legitimate reason to withdraw its troops.&nbsp;

At the same time, Russia and China’s efforts to hold talks with the Taliban was seen by the US as a major geo-strategic threat to its interests in the region.&nbsp;

While the possible re-emergence of the Taliban is being seen as the onset of another phase of darkness for that blighted country, for India, which has always supported the “Afghan-led, Afghan-owned and Afghan-controlled,” process with participation of the elected government in Kabul, peace talks between the US and the Taliban and Trump’s decision to withdraw US troops, now pose serious security challenges.

Ever since reconstruction work began in Afghanistan, India has invested over $3 billion building roads, hospitals, schools, providing training, arms and fighter aircraft to the Afghan armed forces.&nbsp;

Taliban’s arrival on the centre stage will not only put India’s economic interests at stake in Afghanistan, it will also pose a huge security threat to India because Pakistan’s prominence in Afghanistan will increase and Islamabad could use the Taliban against Indians there. &nbsp;

Since Russia has also moved to improve ties with Pakistan and is more than keen to play an important role in Afghanistan’s internal affairs, as evident from Moscow’s own peace talks with the Taliban last year, the possible emergence of a strategic China-Russia-Pakistan axis along the Taliban, could jeopardise India’s position.&nbsp;

The Pulwama attack has only validated India’s security concerns. Counter-terrorism experts in the US have argued that it has highlighted the utter failure of the Trump administration in pressurising Pakistan to act against terrorist organisations operating from its soil.

They have also argued that the ISI must have helped JeM in carrying out the Pulwama attack. Afghanistan has also complained to the UN Security Council against Pakistan’s recent engagement with the Taliban.

While US National Security Adviser John Bolton has told his Indian counterpart Ajit Doval that America supports India’s right to self-defence, with both sides reaffirming to work together to ensure that Pakistan ceases to be a safe haven for the JeM and other terror outfits, it remains to be seen how the Trump administration fulfills such promises.&nbsp;

At the same time, the Indian government needs to give up the tag of a soft-power state and take long-lasting punitive action against terrorist organisations and the country whose only aim is to destabilise India.&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-us-withdrawal-from-afghanistan-its-effects-on-india-2723612">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

At a time when US president Donald Trump is holding peace talks with the Taliban terrorists and has decided to withdraw 7,000 troops in the next few months, at least 40 CRPF personnel were killed in one of the deadliest terrorist attacks carried out by the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) in Pulwama.

At a time when US president Donald Trump is holding peace talks with the Taliban terrorists and has decided to withdraw 7,000 troops in the next few months, at least 40 CRPF personnel were killed in one of the deadliest terrorist attacks carried out by the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) in Pulwama. While Indian security forces have killed the three main terrorists behind the Pulwama attack and the Indian government is weighing all possible options to dismantle terror outfits operating against India from across the border, this attack has once again reinforced the fact that the language of peace cannot be an effective tool to deal with terrorists. In fact, ever since the Trump administration started peace talks with the Taliban, there were apprehensions in India, the US and elsewhere that such efforts would only embolden the Taliban. Sure, it was during the Obama administration that the US decided to hold talks with the Taliban and during the 2016 presidential election campaign, Trump too promised to end the war in Afghanistan. Interestingly, the Trump Administration’s South Asia Policy released in 2017 underscored the need for US troops to stay on in Afghanistan. In fact, on the issue of promoting peace, security, stability and development in Afghanistan, Trump’s South Asia Policy mentioned that the US will deploy more troops in Afghanistan without fixing a timeline for the return of US forces. However, over a year later in July 2018, President Trump shifted his position on Afghanistan issue with the intention of clinching a deal with the Taliban. It would give the US a morally legitimate reason to withdraw its troops. At the same time, Russia and China’s efforts to hold talks with the Taliban was seen by the US as a major geo-strategic threat to its interests in the region. While the possible re-emergence of the Taliban is being seen as the onset of another phase of darkness for that blighted country, for India, which has always supported the “Afghan-led, Afghan-owned and Afghan-controlled,” process with participation of the elected government in Kabul, peace talks between the US and the Taliban and Trump’s decision to withdraw US troops, now pose serious security challenges. Ever since reconstruction work began in Afghanistan, India has invested over $3 billion building roads, hospitals, schools, providing training, arms and fighter aircraft to the Afghan armed forces. Taliban’s arrival on the centre stage will not only put India’s economic interests at stake in Afghanistan, it will also pose a huge security threat to India because Pakistan’s prominence in Afghanistan will increase and Islamabad could use the Taliban against Indians there. Since Russia has also moved to improve ties with Pakistan and is more than keen to play an important role in Afghanistan’s internal affairs, as evident from Moscow’s own peace talks with the Taliban last year, the possible emergence of a strategic China-Russia-Pakistan axis along the Taliban, could jeopardise India’s position. The Pulwama attack has only validated India’s security concerns. Counter-terrorism experts in the US have argued that it has highlighted the utter failure of the Trump administration in pressurising Pakistan to act against terrorist organisations operating from its soil. They have also argued that the ISI must have helped JeM in carrying out the Pulwama attack. Afghanistan has also complained to the UN Security Council against Pakistan’s recent engagement with the Taliban. While US National Security Adviser John Bolton has told his Indian counterpart Ajit Doval that America supports India’s right to self-defence, with both sides reaffirming to work together to ensure that Pakistan ceases to be a safe haven for the JeM and other terror outfits, it remains to be seen how the Trump administration fulfills such promises. At the same time, the Indian government needs to give up the tag of a soft-power state and take long-lasting punitive action against terrorist organisations and the country whose only aim is to destabilise India. (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.)

US troop withdrawal from Afghanistan and its effects on India

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-to-delay-china-tariff-increase-trump-199444">Trump says he is delaying tariff increase on Chinese goods</a>

The United States is delaying a planned increase of tariffs on more than $200 billion in Chinese exports after both sides hailed "substantial progress" made in trade talks.

US President Donald Trump also said Sunday that he planned to hold a summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping at his Florida estate Mar-a-Lago to ink a deal.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/entertainment/oscars-2019-live-hollywoods-biggest-night-is-here-199432">Oscars 2019, Live: India-based 'Period: End Of Sentence' wins </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/entertainment/oscars-2019-live-hollywoods-biggest-night-is-here-199432">best</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/entertainment/oscars-2019-live-hollywoods-biggest-night-is-here-199432"> documentary short award</a>

Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga get a standing ovation as they sing a mesmerising version of 'Shallow' from their film 'A Star Is Born'.&nbsp;

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/give-peace-a-chance-imran-khan-to-pm-modi-199487">Give peace a chance: Imran Khan to PM Modi</a>

Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan on Sunday asked his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi to "give peace a chance" and assured him that he "stands by" his words and will "immediately act" if New Delhi provides Islamabad with "actionable intelligence" on the Pulwama attack.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/popes-vow-to-battle-child-sex-abuse-fails-to-appease-victims-199463">Pope vows to battle child sex abuse by </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/popes-vow-to-battle-child-sex-abuse-fails-to-appease-victims-199463">Catholic</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/popes-vow-to-battle-child-sex-abuse-fails-to-appease-victims-199463"> church but fails to appease victims</a>

Pope Francis on Sunday vowed to tackle every single case of sexual abuse by priests, comparing paedophilia to "human sacrifice", but drew an angry response from victims.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/photos/oscars-red-carpet-jennifer-lopez-chadwick-boseman-rami-malek-turn-up-the-heat-199465#rami-malek-and-lucy-boynton-199433">Oscars red carpet: Jennifer Lopez, Chadwick Boseman, Rami Malek turn up the heat</a>

The 91st Academy Awards kickstarted on a glamorous note as Hollywood biggies arrived at the red carpet. From Best Actor nominee Rami Malek to Chadwick Boseman who starred in the hit film 'Black Panther', the boys gave the girls a stiff competition.&nbsp;

Trump says he is delaying tariff increase on Chinese goods The United States is delaying a planned increase of tariffs on more than $200 billion in Chinese exports after both sides hailed "substantial progress" made in trade talks.

Trump says he is delaying tariff increase on Chinese goods The United States is delaying a planned increase of tariffs on more than $200 billion in Chinese exports after both sides hailed "substantial progress" made in trade talks. US President Donald Trump also said Sunday that he planned to hold a summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping at his Florida estate Mar-a-Lago to ink a deal. Oscars 2019, Live: India-based 'Period: End Of Sentence' wins best documentary short award Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga get a standing ovation as they sing a mesmerising version of 'Shallow' from their film 'A Star Is Born'. Give peace a chance: Imran Khan to PM Modi Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan on Sunday asked his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi to "give peace a chance" and assured him that he "stands by" his words and will "immediately act" if New Delhi provides Islamabad with "actionable intelligence" on the Pulwama attack. Pope vows to battle child sex abuse by Catholic church but fails to appease victims Pope Francis on Sunday vowed to tackle every single case of sexual abuse by priests, comparing paedophilia to "human sacrifice", but drew an angry response from victims. Oscars red carpet: Jennifer Lopez, Chadwick Boseman, Rami Malek turn up the heat The 91st Academy Awards kickstarted on a glamorous note as Hollywood biggies arrived at the red carpet. From Best Actor nominee Rami Malek to Chadwick Boseman who starred in the hit film 'Black Panther', the boys gave the girls a stiff competition.

News brief: Big stories of the day

Could the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/security-men-and-metal-detectors-vietnam-prepares-for-trump-kim-summit-199466">United States and North Korea</a> reach a historic accord -- or could it all fall to pieces?

As President Donald Trump prepares for a historic second summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, observers see a wide array of possible outcomes.

Here are some scenarios that could emerge from the summit, which opens Wednesday in Hanoi:

Complete breakdown considered unlikely&nbsp;

The US point man on North Korea, Stephen Biegun, and his counterpart Kim Hyok Chol are holding working-level talks in Hanoi to lay the groundwork for the leaders.

A complete collapse of the summit seems "unlikely because Trump and Kim are so invested in the meeting," said Viping Narang, an associate professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

But what comes out of the talks is another story. The two leaders' first summit in Singapore ended in a statement that agreed on "complete denuclearization" -- which Pyongyang defines broadly as an end to nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula.

The United States says it is seeking the "verifiable and irreversible" denuclearization of North Korea -- a formulation Pyongyang is sure to resist.

Repeat of Singapore is defeat for Trump

A simple repeat of the Singapore declaration would be widely seen in the United States as a defeat for Trump.

"What would be a failure is another vague statement about intentions with very little concrete action that each side is committed to take," said Jung Pak, a former CIA analyst who is now a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

Narang said that a repeat of Singapore would be the favoured outcome for North Korea, which would face no fresh constraints.

"There's a paradox: for the summit to be useful for the North Koreans, the working-level meetings need to be as vague and drawn-out as possible," Narang said.

"But for the summit to be useful for the US, the working-level meetings have to deliver something concrete."

A Western diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that if nothing major emerges by the US summer, hawks around Trump such as his national security adviser, John Bolton, could increasingly press to be done with talks and focus on pressure.

Or Trump yields ground&nbsp;

No matter how much Trump's team prepares him, this most untraditional of US presidents could reject expert advice and, as is his wont, go with his gut.

Such a scenario would be seen as a catastrophe by much of the Washington establishment, which has spent decades trying to figure out North Korea.

"A failure would be that the US gives more than it receives," said Abraham Denmark, director of the Asia program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Denmark voiced fear that Trump could declare a formal end to the 1950-53 Korean War -- which closed only with an armistice -- without significant action from Pyongyang.

"Declaring an end to the war is a significant concession and should not be done lightly," he said, fearing an effect on the dynamics between the two Koreas.

One major fear for South Korea and Japan is that Trump reaches a deal that only restricts intercontinental missiles that could hit the United States, while not taking up shorter-range weapons that threaten them.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has repeatedly spoken of the North Korea summit as a way to protect Americans, raising worries in the region.

US hopes for verifiable denuclearization

The best result for the United States would be a step-by-step, verifiable agreement in which the North Koreans commit to ending their nuclear program beyond verbal promises.

North Korean concessions over which the United States could cry victory include the suspension of all the regime's missile and nuclear sites and the destruction of some of them, Denmark said.

For Narang, the destruction of the Yongbyon complex -- North Korea's main nuclear centre -- would mark an important step.

But the key for Washington would be inspections by the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency to verify North Korea is getting rid of its nuclear weapons.

In return, Washington could open a liaison office in Pyongyang -- a step toward full diplomatic relations -- or declare an end to the war.

Kim's most urgent goal is the lifting of international sanctions that have held back his hopes of economic development.

The United States has so far insisted that it will not provide aid until denuclearization.

But Biegun recently hinted at early steps, saying, "We didn't say we won't do anything until you do everything."

Could the United States and North Korea reach a historic accord -- or could it all fall to pieces? As President Donald Trump prepares for a historic second summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, observers see a wide array of possible outcomes.

Could the United States and North Korea reach a historic accord -- or could it all fall to pieces? As President Donald Trump prepares for a historic second summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, observers see a wide array of possible outcomes. Here are some scenarios that could emerge from the summit, which opens Wednesday in Hanoi: Complete breakdown considered unlikely The US point man on North Korea, Stephen Biegun, and his counterpart Kim Hyok Chol are holding working-level talks in Hanoi to lay the groundwork for the leaders. A complete collapse of the summit seems "unlikely because Trump and Kim are so invested in the meeting," said Viping Narang, an associate professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. But what comes out of the talks is another story. The two leaders' first summit in Singapore ended in a statement that agreed on "complete denuclearization" -- which Pyongyang defines broadly as an end to nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula. The United States says it is seeking the "verifiable and irreversible" denuclearization of North Korea -- a formulation Pyongyang is sure to resist. Repeat of Singapore is defeat for Trump A simple repeat of the Singapore declaration would be widely seen in the United States as a defeat for Trump. "What would be a failure is another vague statement about intentions with very little concrete action that each side is committed to take," said Jung Pak, a former CIA analyst who is now a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Narang said that a repeat of Singapore would be the favoured outcome for North Korea, which would face no fresh constraints. "There's a paradox: for the summit to be useful for the North Koreans, the working-level meetings need to be as vague and drawn-out as possible," Narang said. "But for the summit to be useful for the US, the working-level meetings have to deliver something concrete." A Western diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that if nothing major emerges by the US summer, hawks around Trump such as his national security adviser, John Bolton, could increasingly press to be done with talks and focus on pressure. Or Trump yields ground No matter how much Trump's team prepares him, this most untraditional of US presidents could reject expert advice and, as is his wont, go with his gut. Such a scenario would be seen as a catastrophe by much of the Washington establishment, which has spent decades trying to figure out North Korea. "A failure would be that the US gives more than it receives," said Abraham Denmark, director of the Asia program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Denmark voiced fear that Trump could declare a formal end to the 1950-53 Korean War -- which closed only with an armistice -- without significant action from Pyongyang. "Declaring an end to the war is a significant concession and should not be done lightly," he said, fearing an effect on the dynamics between the two Koreas. One major fear for South Korea and Japan is that Trump reaches a deal that only restricts intercontinental missiles that could hit the United States, while not taking up shorter-range weapons that threaten them. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has repeatedly spoken of the North Korea summit as a way to protect Americans, raising worries in the region. US hopes for verifiable denuclearization The best result for the United States would be a step-by-step, verifiable agreement in which the North Koreans commit to ending their nuclear program beyond verbal promises. North Korean concessions over which the United States could cry victory include the suspension of all the regime's missile and nuclear sites and the destruction of some of them, Denmark said. For Narang, the destruction of the Yongbyon complex -- North Korea's main nuclear centre -- would mark an important step. But the key for Washington would be inspections by the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency to verify North Korea is getting rid of its nuclear weapons. In return, Washington could open a liaison office in Pyongyang -- a step toward full diplomatic relations -- or declare an end to the war. Kim's most urgent goal is the lifting of international sanctions that have held back his hopes of economic development. The United States has so far insisted that it will not provide aid until denuclearization. But Biegun recently hinted at early steps, saying, "We didn't say we won't do anything until you do everything."

Nuclear breakthrough or vague promises? Outcomes abound for Trump and Kim

The United States is delaying <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-china-has-agreed-to-cut-tariffs-on-us-made-cars-181113">a planned increase of tariffs on more than $200 billion in Chinese exports</a> after both sides hailed "substantial progress" made in trade talks.

US President Donald Trump also said Sunday that he planned to hold a summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping at his Florida estate Mar-a-Lago to ink a deal.

"I am pleased to report that the U.S. has made substantial progress in our trade talks with China on important structural issues including intellectual property protection, technology transfer, agriculture, services, currency, and many other issues," Trump wrote on Twitter.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
I am pleased to report that the U.S. has made substantial progress in our trade talks with China on important structural issues including intellectual property protection, technology transfer, agriculture, services, currency, and many other issues. As a result of these very......
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1099800961089003522?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
....productive talks, I will be delaying the U.S. increase in tariffs now scheduled for March 1. Assuming both sides make additional progress, we will be planning a Summit for President Xi and myself, at Mar-a-Lago, to conclude an agreement. A very good weekend for U.S. &amp; China!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1099803719435239426?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

After exchanging tit-for-tat tariffs on more than $300 billion in total two-way trade, Trump and Xi in December declared a truce and agreed to hold off on further tariffs or retaliation for 90 days.

Trump initiated the trade war, which ate into company profits and contributed to stock market plunges, because of complaints over unfair Chinese trade practices -- concerns shared by the European Union, Japan and others.

"As a result of these very productive talks, I will be delaying the U.S. increase in tariffs now scheduled for March 1. Assuming both sides make additional progress, we will be planning a Summit for President Xi and myself, at Mar-a-Lago, to conclude an agreement. A very good weekend for U.S. &amp; China!" Trump tweeted.

China's official Xinhua news agency echoed those sentiments, saying the two sides "made substantial progress on specific issues" such as the transfer of technology, intellectual property protection, non-tariff barriers, the services sector, agriculture and exchange rates.

The delegations "came a step closer to realizing the important consensus reached" by Trump and Xi when they agreed to the truce in December, it added.

The report said the parties also agreed to "carry out follow-ups in accordance with the instructions of the two heads of state."

Trump had already expressed optimism about the negotiations Friday after meeting with China's vice premier Liu He, who led the Chinese side for the talks that concluded Sunday.

Steps forward 
Tokyo stocks opened higher supported by optimism over the deal that also lifted US shares. The benchmark Nikkei 225 index gained 0.59 percent, or 125.58 points, at 21,551.09 in early trade, while the broader Topix index was up 0.58 percent, or 9.32 points, at 1,618.84.

The dollar fetched 110.76 yen in early Asian trade, against 110.75 yen in New York Friday.

In Tokyo, some China-linked shares were higher, with construction machinery maker Komatsu up 1.71 percent at 2,873 yen and electronic parts maker Rohm up 2.05 percent at 7,460 yen.

Xi also struck a positive tone in a letter Liu delivered to Trump, saying he hoped the negotiations would be held in a "win-win" spirit that would lead to a mutually beneficial agreement.

The Chinese president expressed hope that the talks maintain "a mutually respectful, cooperative and win-win attitude" and lead to a "mutually beneficial" agreement.

Trump said Friday that an agreement on currency manipulation will be included in the trade pact, but otherwise few details have been made public.

The seven-month-old trade war has rattled global markets and prompted stark warnings about the risks to the world economy.

Analysts say the two sides are likely to trumpet mutual agreements to resolve the easier parts of the trade dispute -- increasing purchases of American goods, more open investment in China and tougher protections for intellectual property and proprietary technology.

The harder parts covering issues such as scaling back China's ambitious industrial strategy for global preeminence, meanwhile, are another question.

Beijing has reportedly proposed a significant increase in its imports of US energy and agricultural exports. Still, a broader deal could be difficult given the US demands for far-reaching structural changes.

China's retaliation has hit US farm exports hard. The US Agriculture Department estimated this month that US soy exports would not return to their pre-trade war levels for another six years.

The United States is delaying a planned increase of tariffs on more than $200 billion in Chinese exports after both sides hailed "substantial progress" made in trade talks.

The United States is delaying a planned increase of tariffs on more than $200 billion in Chinese exports after both sides hailed "substantial progress" made in trade talks. US President Donald Trump also said Sunday that he planned to hold a summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping at his Florida estate Mar-a-Lago to ink a deal. "I am pleased to report that the U.S. has made substantial progress in our trade talks with China on important structural issues including intellectual property protection, technology transfer, agriculture, services, currency, and many other issues," Trump wrote on Twitter. I am pleased to report that the U.S. has made substantial progress in our trade talks with China on important structural issues including intellectual property protection, technology transfer, agriculture, services, currency, and many other issues. As a result of these very...... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 24, 2019 × ....productive talks, I will be delaying the U.S. increase in tariffs now scheduled for March 1. Assuming both sides make additional progress, we will be planning a Summit for President Xi and myself, at Mar-a-Lago, to conclude an agreement. A very good weekend for U.S. & China! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 24, 2019 × After exchanging tit-for-tat tariffs on more than $300 billion in total two-way trade, Trump and Xi in December declared a truce and agreed to hold off on further tariffs or retaliation for 90 days. Trump initiated the trade war, which ate into company profits and contributed to stock market plunges, because of complaints over unfair Chinese trade practices -- concerns shared by the European Union, Japan and others. "As a result of these very productive talks, I will be delaying the U.S. increase in tariffs now scheduled for March 1. Assuming both sides make additional progress, we will be planning a Summit for President Xi and myself, at Mar-a-Lago, to conclude an agreement. A very good weekend for U.S. & China!" Trump tweeted. China's official Xinhua news agency echoed those sentiments, saying the two sides "made substantial progress on specific issues" such as the transfer of technology, intellectual property protection, non-tariff barriers, the services sector, agriculture and exchange rates. The delegations "came a step closer to realizing the important consensus reached" by Trump and Xi when they agreed to the truce in December, it added. The report said the parties also agreed to "carry out follow-ups in accordance with the instructions of the two heads of state." Trump had already expressed optimism about the negotiations Friday after meeting with China's vice premier Liu He, who led the Chinese side for the talks that concluded Sunday. Steps forward Tokyo stocks opened higher supported by optimism over the deal that also lifted US shares. The benchmark Nikkei 225 index gained 0.59 percent, or 125.58 points, at 21,551.09 in early trade, while the broader Topix index was up 0.58 percent, or 9.32 points, at 1,618.84. The dollar fetched 110.76 yen in early Asian trade, against 110.75 yen in New York Friday. In Tokyo, some China-linked shares were higher, with construction machinery maker Komatsu up 1.71 percent at 2,873 yen and electronic parts maker Rohm up 2.05 percent at 7,460 yen. Xi also struck a positive tone in a letter Liu delivered to Trump, saying he hoped the negotiations would be held in a "win-win" spirit that would lead to a mutually beneficial agreement. The Chinese president expressed hope that the talks maintain "a mutually respectful, cooperative and win-win attitude" and lead to a "mutually beneficial" agreement. Trump said Friday that an agreement on currency manipulation will be included in the trade pact, but otherwise few details have been made public. The seven-month-old trade war has rattled global markets and prompted stark warnings about the risks to the world economy. Analysts say the two sides are likely to trumpet mutual agreements to resolve the easier parts of the trade dispute -- increasing purchases of American goods, more open investment in China and tougher protections for intellectual property and proprietary technology. The harder parts covering issues such as scaling back China's ambitious industrial strategy for global preeminence, meanwhile, are another question. Beijing has reportedly proposed a significant increase in its imports of US energy and agricultural exports. Still, a broader deal could be difficult given the US demands for far-reaching structural changes. China's retaliation has hit US farm exports hard. The US Agriculture Department estimated this month that US soy exports would not return to their pre-trade war levels for another six years.

Trump says he is delaying tariff increase on Chinese goods

A boat carrying aid from the United States docked at the island of Curacao on Sunday after officials said the Venezuelan military had stopped it reaching the crisis-hit country.

The shipment was part of a broader drive to take food and medicine into Venezuela in defiance of its <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/pompeo-confident-maduros-days-are-numbered-in-venezuela-199411">President Nicolas Maduro</a>.

The Midnight Stone supply ship, loaded with nine cargo containers, entered the harbour on the Caribbean island 65 kilometres&nbsp;from Venezuela's coast, AFP reporters saw.

Supporters of Venezuela's self-declared president Juan Guaido said it had sailed from Puerto Rico on Wednesday bound for Venezuela with 250 tons of aid.

Puerto Rico's governor Ricardo Rossello on Saturday said a Venezuelan navy vessel had threatened to fire at the boat as it approached Venezuela.

He said he had ordered the aid vessel to "leave the area temporarily." The sea shipments coincided with opposition efforts to truck aid into Venezuela by land.

Those bids led to bloody confrontations at the borders with Colombia and Brazil on Saturday. Maduro has branded Guaido's aid effort a "show" and a smokescreen for a US invasion.

He has ordered Venezuela's sea border with Curacao to be closed. The opposition and foreign powers backing Guaido say Maduro must let aid into Venezuela to relieve people suffering from shortages caused by an economic crisis.

Maduro blames US policies and sanctions for Venezuela's economic woes. Venezuelans in Curacao have also loaded a further 50 tons of aid onto a separate ship there, the Seven Seas.

Its captain told AFP on Sunday he would not sail for Venezuela with the shipment until authorities there opened the border.

A boat carrying aid from the United States docked at the island of Curacao on Sunday after officials said the Venezuelan military had stopped it reaching the crisis-hit country.

A boat carrying aid from the United States docked at the island of Curacao on Sunday after officials said the Venezuelan military had stopped it reaching the crisis-hit country. The shipment was part of a broader drive to take food and medicine into Venezuela in defiance of its President Nicolas Maduro. The Midnight Stone supply ship, loaded with nine cargo containers, entered the harbour on the Caribbean island 65 kilometres from Venezuela's coast, AFP reporters saw. Supporters of Venezuela's self-declared president Juan Guaido said it had sailed from Puerto Rico on Wednesday bound for Venezuela with 250 tons of aid. Puerto Rico's governor Ricardo Rossello on Saturday said a Venezuelan navy vessel had threatened to fire at the boat as it approached Venezuela. He said he had ordered the aid vessel to "leave the area temporarily." The sea shipments coincided with opposition efforts to truck aid into Venezuela by land. Those bids led to bloody confrontations at the borders with Colombia and Brazil on Saturday. Maduro has branded Guaido's aid effort a "show" and a smokescreen for a US invasion. He has ordered Venezuela's sea border with Curacao to be closed. The opposition and foreign powers backing Guaido say Maduro must let aid into Venezuela to relieve people suffering from shortages caused by an economic crisis. Maduro blames US policies and sanctions for Venezuela's economic woes. Venezuelans in Curacao have also loaded a further 50 tons of aid onto a separate ship there, the Seven Seas. Its captain told AFP on Sunday he would not sail for Venezuela with the shipment until authorities there opened the border.

Venezuela aid boat reaches Curacao after reported standoff

The latest round of peace talks between the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/fear-and-hoping-expectations-surge-ahead-of-new-us-taliban-talks-199246">United States and the Taliban</a> will begin in Doha this week and include Taliban political chief Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, Qatar said on Sunday, despite earlier reports suggesting his absence.

The talks are expected to centre around <a href="http://www.wionews.com/opinions/us-troop-withdrawal-from-afghanistan-its-effects-on-india-199574">a ceasefire to end America's longest war</a> and the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan and are expected to begin on February 25, according to diplomatic sources.

US officials have been keen to negotiate with Baradar, hoping the Taliban's co-founder and the military veteran would add momentum and have the clout to discuss tough issues surrounding the end of the 17-year war.

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.

The talks will be led on the US side by United States Special Representative for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad, the foreign ministry statement said.

US officials said that last month's talks in Doha had seen the most significant progress to date but that major sticking points remained over the timing of a ceasefire.

The Taliban have snubbed recent Afghan government attempts to participate, as well as an offer by Afghan President Ashraf Ghani to open a Taliban office in Afghanistan, with the group pushing instead for international recognition of its Doha office.

Some 14,000 US&nbsp;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.

The push for peace comes as the Taliban, ousted by US-led forces in 2001, have staged near-daily attacks and are in control of or contesting districts across nearly half the country.

The foreign presence in Afghanistan has been sharply reduced since its peak at more than 130,000 troops including 100,000 Americans in 2010. More than 2,300 Americans have died in Afghanistan and more than 1,100 troops from more than two dozen allied countries, including more than 450 British soldiers.

The United Nations, which has tallied civilian deaths since 2009, had counted nearly 30,000 by 2017. Tens of thousands of members of the Afghan security forces and an unknown number of insurgents have also died.

The latest round of peace talks between the United States and the Taliban will begin in Doha this week and include Taliban political chief Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, Qatar said on Sunday, despite earlier reports suggesting his absence.

The latest round of peace talks between the United States and the Taliban will begin in Doha this week and include Taliban political chief Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, Qatar said on Sunday, despite earlier reports suggesting his absence. The talks are expected to centre around a ceasefire to end America's longest war and the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan and are expected to begin on February 25, according to diplomatic sources. US officials have been keen to negotiate with Baradar, hoping the Taliban's co-founder and the military veteran would add momentum and have the clout to discuss tough issues surrounding the end of the 17-year war. 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. The talks will be led on the US side by United States Special Representative for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad, the foreign ministry statement said. US officials said that last month's talks in Doha had seen the most significant progress to date but that major sticking points remained over the timing of a ceasefire. The Taliban have snubbed recent Afghan government attempts to participate, as well as an offer by Afghan President Ashraf Ghani to open a Taliban office in Afghanistan, with the group pushing instead for international recognition of its Doha office. 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. The push for peace comes as the Taliban, ousted by US-led forces in 2001, have staged near-daily attacks and are in control of or contesting districts across nearly half the country. The foreign presence in Afghanistan has been sharply reduced since its peak at more than 130,000 troops including 100,000 Americans in 2010. More than 2,300 Americans have died in Afghanistan and more than 1,100 troops from more than two dozen allied countries, including more than 450 British soldiers. The United Nations, which has tallied civilian deaths since 2009, had counted nearly 30,000 by 2017. Tens of thousands of members of the Afghan security forces and an unknown number of insurgents have also died.

Taliban political chief to lead peace talks with US in Doha this week: Qatar

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/venezuela-crisis-us-will-take-action-says-mike-pompeo-199230">Venezuela crisis: US 'will take action', says Mike Pompeo</a>

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Saturday the United States "will take action" as he condemned violence perpetrated by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro's "thugs" after security forces fired on demonstrators.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/jk-tensions-peak-after-government-launches-crackdown-on-separatists-who-call-for-bandh-today-199250">J&amp;K: Tension mounts after </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/jk-tensions-peak-after-government-launches-crackdown-on-separatists-who-call-for-bandh-today-199250">government</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/jk-tensions-peak-after-government-launches-crackdown-on-separatists-who-call-for-bandh-today-199250"> crackdown, separatists call for bandh today</a>

Tension mounted in Kashmir on Saturday as the government launched a massive crackdown on separatists and detained over 150 people, mainly from the Jamaat-e-Islami Jammu and Kashmir, including its chief Abdul Hamid Fayaz, ahead of a hearing in the Supreme Court on Article 35-A of the Constitution.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-takes-u-turn-says-bahawalpur-seminary-not-linked-to-jem-199229">After claiming it has taken control of JeM headquarters, Pakistan makes U-turn, says it is 'seminary'</a>

Making a complete U-turn, the Pakistan government on Saturday dismissed its claim of having taken control of Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) headquarters in Bahawalpur. It instead said the complex has no link with the terror outfit, which had claimed responsibility for the Pulwama attack that killed 40 CRPF personnel in Jammu and Kashmir.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/ailing-goa-chief-minister-manohar-parrikar-hospitalised-again-199231">Ailing Goa Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar hospitalised again</a>

Ailing Goa Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar was admitted in the Goa Medical College and Hospital (GMCH) late Saturday night, a statement said.

The chief minister's office said in the statement that he was taken to GMCH for an upper GI endoscopy. "His health condition continues to be stable," the CMO said, adding Parrikar would be kept under observation for around 48 hours.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/entertainment/r-kelly-facing-sex-abuse-charges-gets-1-million-bail-199240">Singer R Kelly, accused of sexually abusing minor girls, gets $1 million bail</a>

A US judge set $1 million bail for R&amp;B superstar R Kelly on Saturday after prosecutors laid out graphic details of charges that he sexually abused four victims, three of them minors.&nbsp;

Venezuela crisis: US 'will take action', says Mike Pompeo US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Saturday the United States "will take action" as he condemned violence perpetrated by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro's "thugs" after security forces fired on demonstrators.

Venezuela crisis: US 'will take action', says Mike Pompeo US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Saturday the United States "will take action" as he condemned violence perpetrated by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro's "thugs" after security forces fired on demonstrators. J&K: Tension mounts after government crackdown, separatists call for bandh today Tension mounted in Kashmir on Saturday as the government launched a massive crackdown on separatists and detained over 150 people, mainly from the Jamaat-e-Islami Jammu and Kashmir, including its chief Abdul Hamid Fayaz, ahead of a hearing in the Supreme Court on Article 35-A of the Constitution. After claiming it has taken control of JeM headquarters, Pakistan makes U-turn, says it is 'seminary' Making a complete U-turn, the Pakistan government on Saturday dismissed its claim of having taken control of Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) headquarters in Bahawalpur. It instead said the complex has no link with the terror outfit, which had claimed responsibility for the Pulwama attack that killed 40 CRPF personnel in Jammu and Kashmir. Ailing Goa Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar hospitalised again Ailing Goa Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar was admitted in the Goa Medical College and Hospital (GMCH) late Saturday night, a statement said. The chief minister's office said in the statement that he was taken to GMCH for an upper GI endoscopy. "His health condition continues to be stable," the CMO said, adding Parrikar would be kept under observation for around 48 hours. Singer R Kelly, accused of sexually abusing minor girls, gets $1 million bail A US judge set $1 million bail for R&B superstar R Kelly on Saturday after prosecutors laid out graphic details of charges that he sexually abused four victims, three of them minors.

The US and the Taliban are to meet in Qatar for fresh talks Monday seeking an end to 17 years of grinding conflict in Afghanistan, with the stakes ratcheting higher as the spring fighting season approaches.

Marathon talks held in Doha last month have stoked hopes of a breakthrough after the two sides walked away with a "draft framework" that included a Taliban commitment to prevent Afghanistan from once again becoming a safe haven for international terror groups.

It was the most substantial engagement by Washington with the militants since US forces ousted them from power in 2001. But there is still no accord on a timetable for a US withdrawal or a ceasefire -- both major issues on which previous efforts have foundered.&nbsp;

This time Washington's special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, who has spearheaded the months-long effort, is expected to face an expanded Taliban negotiating team headed by Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, the Taliban's former deputy minister of foreign affairs.

Neither side has stated how long they expect the meetings to last or the details of what will be discussed.

Analysts say this round will likely see the Taliban push for the removal of its leaders from a UN travel blacklist, matched with pressure from the US for the militants to open a dialogue with the Afghan government.

"Both sides are going into this process with open minds and a sense of urgency as the weather gets warmer and fighting season draws closer," Graeme Smith, a consultant based with International Crisis Group, told AFP.

The Taliban have steadfastly refused to negotiate with Kabul, whom they dismiss as "puppets". They have also stated that, without a withdrawal timetable, further progress is "impossible".&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump's apparent eagerness to end America's longest war, the Afghan government's fear of being sidelined, and the coming of spring all weigh on the process. &nbsp; &nbsp;

"Eyes are on the Taliban to see if they are capable of compromising," said analyst Michael Semple.

"Can they come up with a sufficient compromise to agree to a formula for an intra-Afghan dialogue that absolutely involves the current Afghan government?"

Khalilzad, he added, "has stirred up the peace process in a way that nobody over the previous two decades had".

Pakistan's influence waning?&nbsp;

The gathering momentum has spurred fresh peace demonstrations and cautious hope in Afghanistan.

But there is also growing unease, with fears the government is being pushed aside and that progress which many Afghans have paid for with their lives could yet be undone if the US rushes for the exits.

Women's groups and civil society organisations have warned that a speedy withdrawal or lenient deal with the Taliban could pave the way for a return of their repressive rule, or an even bloodier civil war.

Many watched in astonishment earlier this month as Taliban militants shared meals and prayers with Afghan political leaders, including presidential contender Mohammad Atta Noor and former president Hamid Karzai, in Moscow.

But not one representative from the current administration of President Ashraf Ghani was present at the informal talks, deepening the sense of anxiety.

Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are also playing a role in the talks, as Russia and China watch closely, and many observers fear regional disputes could yet derail the process.

Pakistan, which has long wielded influence over the militants and been seen as key to any peace push, has already suggested that soaring tensions with its nuclear arch-rival India could disrupt the talks.&nbsp;

But Taliban expert Rahimullah Yusufzai said this time around Pakistan's stance may be more chest-thumping bravado than an actual threat.

He said that with the US and the Taliban talking to each other directly, "I think Pakistan's role will not be that important now."

'Challenging' climate

The talks have been buttressed by heavy snowfall across Afghanistan, sharply reducing fighting and providing much-needed space for negotiations.

But Yusufzai warned that another bloody fighting season will likely kick off once the snow melts, as the Taliban seeks to maintain its momentum on the battlefield to maximise pressure at the negotiating table. &nbsp;

"I think they have to keep up the momentum until a ceasefire," he said.

Others warned that more bloodshed might undercut the fragile gains the talks have achieved so far.

"It will be more challenging to pursue peace in the months that come if the Taliban... resort to a large-scale spring offensive," said Semple.

The US and the Taliban are to meet in Qatar for fresh talks Monday seeking an end to 17 years of grinding conflict in Afghanistan, with the stakes ratcheting higher as the spring fighting season approaches.

The US and the Taliban are to meet in Qatar for fresh talks Monday seeking an end to 17 years of grinding conflict in Afghanistan, with the stakes ratcheting higher as the spring fighting season approaches. Marathon talks held in Doha last month have stoked hopes of a breakthrough after the two sides walked away with a "draft framework" that included a Taliban commitment to prevent Afghanistan from once again becoming a safe haven for international terror groups. It was the most substantial engagement by Washington with the militants since US forces ousted them from power in 2001. But there is still no accord on a timetable for a US withdrawal or a ceasefire -- both major issues on which previous efforts have foundered. This time Washington's special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, who has spearheaded the months-long effort, is expected to face an expanded Taliban negotiating team headed by Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, the Taliban's former deputy minister of foreign affairs. Neither side has stated how long they expect the meetings to last or the details of what will be discussed. Analysts say this round will likely see the Taliban push for the removal of its leaders from a UN travel blacklist, matched with pressure from the US for the militants to open a dialogue with the Afghan government. "Both sides are going into this process with open minds and a sense of urgency as the weather gets warmer and fighting season draws closer," Graeme Smith, a consultant based with International Crisis Group, told AFP. The Taliban have steadfastly refused to negotiate with Kabul, whom they dismiss as "puppets". They have also stated that, without a withdrawal timetable, further progress is "impossible". US President Donald Trump's apparent eagerness to end America's longest war, the Afghan government's fear of being sidelined, and the coming of spring all weigh on the process. "Eyes are on the Taliban to see if they are capable of compromising," said analyst Michael Semple. "Can they come up with a sufficient compromise to agree to a formula for an intra-Afghan dialogue that absolutely involves the current Afghan government?" Khalilzad, he added, "has stirred up the peace process in a way that nobody over the previous two decades had". Pakistan's influence waning? The gathering momentum has spurred fresh peace demonstrations and cautious hope in Afghanistan. But there is also growing unease, with fears the government is being pushed aside and that progress which many Afghans have paid for with their lives could yet be undone if the US rushes for the exits. Women's groups and civil society organisations have warned that a speedy withdrawal or lenient deal with the Taliban could pave the way for a return of their repressive rule, or an even bloodier civil war. Many watched in astonishment earlier this month as Taliban militants shared meals and prayers with Afghan political leaders, including presidential contender Mohammad Atta Noor and former president Hamid Karzai, in Moscow. But not one representative from the current administration of President Ashraf Ghani was present at the informal talks, deepening the sense of anxiety. Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are also playing a role in the talks, as Russia and China watch closely, and many observers fear regional disputes could yet derail the process. Pakistan, which has long wielded influence over the militants and been seen as key to any peace push, has already suggested that soaring tensions with its nuclear arch-rival India could disrupt the talks. But Taliban expert Rahimullah Yusufzai said this time around Pakistan's stance may be more chest-thumping bravado than an actual threat. He said that with the US and the Taliban talking to each other directly, "I think Pakistan's role will not be that important now." 'Challenging' climate The talks have been buttressed by heavy snowfall across Afghanistan, sharply reducing fighting and providing much-needed space for negotiations. But Yusufzai warned that another bloody fighting season will likely kick off once the snow melts, as the Taliban seeks to maintain its momentum on the battlefield to maximise pressure at the negotiating table. "I think they have to keep up the momentum until a ceasefire," he said. Others warned that more bloodshed might undercut the fragile gains the talks have achieved so far. "It will be more challenging to pursue peace in the months that come if the Taliban... resort to a large-scale spring offensive," said Semple.

Fear and hoping: Expectations surge ahead of new US-Taliban talks

Saudi Arabia on Saturday named a princess as its first woman ambassador to the United States, a key appointment as the fallout over journalist Jamal Khashoggi's murder tests relations between the allies.

Princess Rima bint Bandar replaced Prince Khalid bin Salman, the younger brother of the powerful crown prince who was appointed vice defence minister in a flurry of late-night royal decrees announced on state media.

The reshuffle comes as Saudi Arabia seeks to quell an international outcry over Khashoggi's murder last October in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, which strained relations with its key ally Washington.

After initially denying they knew anything of Khashoggi's disappearance, the kingdom finally acknowledged that Saudi agents killed him inside the consulate, but described it as a rogue operation.

Princess Rima faces hostile US lawmakers who have threatened tough action against Saudi Arabia over the brutal killing amid claims that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman -- the kingdom's de-facto ruler -- was personally responsible.

The Saudi government has denied he had anything to do with the murder of Khashoggi, a royal insider-turned-critic who was a columnist with the Washington Post.

"The appointment of a new envoy signifies an attempt by Riyadh to try and re-set relations with Washington and draw a line under the Khashoggi affair, however unlikely that may be in practice, at least with Congress," Kristian Ulrichsen, a fellow at Rice University's Baker Institute in the United States, told AFP.

'First female ambassador'&nbsp;

Princess Rima, the daughter of a former long-time ambassador to the US, has been a leading advocate of female empowerment in the kingdom, which has faced intense criticism over the recent jailing of women activists -- and subsequent claims of sexual abuse and torture of some of them in detention.

The princess previously worked at the kingdom's General Sports Authority, where she led a campaign to increase women's participation in sports.

"Princess Rima becomes the first female ambassador in Saudi history and the first female with a rank of minister -- a strong signal to the integration of women into the government and workforce," Ali Shihabi, founder of the pro-Saudi think-tank Arabia Foundation, said on Twitter.

Prince Khalid, a son of the king who served as ambassador since 2017, had been expected to leave Washington for some time -- particularly after the global outcry over Khashoggi tarnished the kingdom's reputation.

His new appointment as deputy defence minister comes as a military coalition led by Saudi Arabia remains bogged down in a four-year conflict in neighbouring Yemen.

A separate royal decree on Saturday ordered a one-month salary bonus for frontline military officials on the kingdom's southern border.

'Difficult portfolio'

Prince Khalid, a former Saudi air force pilot, takes his post a year after the crown prince -- who also serves as the defence minister -- announced a military reform plan and a dramatic overhaul of top defence commanders.

"As the Yemen war drags on and the military reform programme continues to move painstakingly slow, Prince Khalid is gaining a difficult portfolio but one that is critical to his father, brother and the kingdom," Becca Wasser, a policy analyst at the US-based RAND Corporation, told AFP.

"Prince Mohammed has struggled to delegate authority within this file which has rendered some efforts -— chiefly military reform -- stagnant, and Prince Khalid's appointment may be an attempt to reinvigorate these initiatives."

Shihabi said Prince Khalid will virtually have the same authority as the defence minister, shouldering some of the burden on the crown prince.

Khashoggi's killing has refocused attention on the Saudi-led coalition's bombing campaign in Yemen, which is gripped by what the UN calls the world's worst humanitarian crisis.

A key challenge for Princess Rima will be to win over US lawmakers, who earlier this month voted overwhelmingly to end American involvement in the Saudi war effort in Yemen, dealing a rebuke to President Donald Trump who has publicly thrown his support behind the crown prince.

US lawmakers this month also said they were probing whether Trump was rushing to sell sensitive nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia, voicing fears that it could be misused to make an atomic bomb.

Saudi Arabia on Saturday named a princess as its first woman ambassador to the United States, a key appointment as the fallout over journalist Jamal Khashoggi's murder tests relations between the allies.

Saudi Arabia on Saturday named a princess as its first woman ambassador to the United States, a key appointment as the fallout over journalist Jamal Khashoggi's murder tests relations between the allies. Princess Rima bint Bandar replaced Prince Khalid bin Salman, the younger brother of the powerful crown prince who was appointed vice defence minister in a flurry of late-night royal decrees announced on state media. The reshuffle comes as Saudi Arabia seeks to quell an international outcry over Khashoggi's murder last October in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, which strained relations with its key ally Washington. After initially denying they knew anything of Khashoggi's disappearance, the kingdom finally acknowledged that Saudi agents killed him inside the consulate, but described it as a rogue operation. Princess Rima faces hostile US lawmakers who have threatened tough action against Saudi Arabia over the brutal killing amid claims that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman -- the kingdom's de-facto ruler -- was personally responsible. The Saudi government has denied he had anything to do with the murder of Khashoggi, a royal insider-turned-critic who was a columnist with the Washington Post. "The appointment of a new envoy signifies an attempt by Riyadh to try and re-set relations with Washington and draw a line under the Khashoggi affair, however unlikely that may be in practice, at least with Congress," Kristian Ulrichsen, a fellow at Rice University's Baker Institute in the United States, told AFP. 'First female ambassador' Princess Rima, the daughter of a former long-time ambassador to the US, has been a leading advocate of female empowerment in the kingdom, which has faced intense criticism over the recent jailing of women activists -- and subsequent claims of sexual abuse and torture of some of them in detention. The princess previously worked at the kingdom's General Sports Authority, where she led a campaign to increase women's participation in sports. "Princess Rima becomes the first female ambassador in Saudi history and the first female with a rank of minister -- a strong signal to the integration of women into the government and workforce," Ali Shihabi, founder of the pro-Saudi think-tank Arabia Foundation, said on Twitter. Prince Khalid, a son of the king who served as ambassador since 2017, had been expected to leave Washington for some time -- particularly after the global outcry over Khashoggi tarnished the kingdom's reputation. His new appointment as deputy defence minister comes as a military coalition led by Saudi Arabia remains bogged down in a four-year conflict in neighbouring Yemen. A separate royal decree on Saturday ordered a one-month salary bonus for frontline military officials on the kingdom's southern border. 'Difficult portfolio' Prince Khalid, a former Saudi air force pilot, takes his post a year after the crown prince -- who also serves as the defence minister -- announced a military reform plan and a dramatic overhaul of top defence commanders. "As the Yemen war drags on and the military reform programme continues to move painstakingly slow, Prince Khalid is gaining a difficult portfolio but one that is critical to his father, brother and the kingdom," Becca Wasser, a policy analyst at the US-based RAND Corporation, told AFP. "Prince Mohammed has struggled to delegate authority within this file which has rendered some efforts -— chiefly military reform -- stagnant, and Prince Khalid's appointment may be an attempt to reinvigorate these initiatives." Shihabi said Prince Khalid will virtually have the same authority as the defence minister, shouldering some of the burden on the crown prince. Khashoggi's killing has refocused attention on the Saudi-led coalition's bombing campaign in Yemen, which is gripped by what the UN calls the world's worst humanitarian crisis. A key challenge for Princess Rima will be to win over US lawmakers, who earlier this month voted overwhelmingly to end American involvement in the Saudi war effort in Yemen, dealing a rebuke to President Donald Trump who has publicly thrown his support behind the crown prince. US lawmakers this month also said they were probing whether Trump was rushing to sell sensitive nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia, voicing fears that it could be misused to make an atomic bomb.

Saudi Arabia names first woman envoy to Washington at critical time

The father of an Alabama woman who fled to Syria to marry an Islamic State fighter filed a lawsuit against Donald Trump's administration over her right to return with her 18-month-old baby after the US president said she will not be allowed back on American soil.

Hoda Muthana, 24, joined the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, in 2014 after telling her parents she was going to Atlanta, Georgia, as part of a field trip connected with her business studies at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

Instead, she withdrew from college and used her tuition reimbursement to purchase a plane ticket to Turkey, according to court documents.&nbsp;

From Turkey, she traveled to Syria, where she married twice, both times to ISIS fighters who later died in combat. Muthana fled to the al-Hawl refugee camp in December last year amid the collapse of the ISIS caliphate in Syria and Iraq.&nbsp;

"I have instructed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and he fully agrees, not to allow Hoda Muthana back into the Country!" Trump tweeted on Wednesday.

"She does not have any legal basis, no valid US&nbsp;Passport, no right to a passport, nor any visa to travel to the United States," Pompeo said in a statement. "We continue to strongly advise all US&nbsp;Citizens not to travel to Syria."

Ahmed Ali Muthana filed the lawsuit Thursday, accusing the Trump administration of an "unlawful attempt" to revoke Hoda Muthana's citizenship.

Muthana has said she is willing to face federal charges upon her return. 
But Trump has ordered officials to bar the former IS propagandist from entering the US.

The lawsuit emphasises that the woman's father is not arguing against any prosecution from the US government over her actions in Syria, but wants lawful recognition of her US citizenship and the citizenship of her child.

Muthana has "publicly acknowledged her actions and accepted full responsibility," a statement announcing the lawsuit said.

"In Ms Muthana's words, she recognises that she has 'ruined' her own life, but she does not want to ruin the life of her young child."

Pompeo said on Wednesday that Muthana had no "legal basis" or "right" to a passport or any US visa.

Pompeo confirmed her father's prior status as a Yemeni diplomat for the United Nations was behind the administration's decision.

Under US law, the children of diplomats are not considered US citizens.

The exact timeline of when Ahmed Ali Muthana stopped serving as a diplomat and when his daughter was born is now being contested by the Trump administration.

The family maintains Muthana was previously recognised as a citizen by the US Department of State and given a US passport in 2004.

Earlier this week, Muthana's lawyer, Hassan Shibly, shared a photo on Twitter of what he said was her US birth certificate.&nbsp;

The case has similarities to that of UK-born teenager Shamima Begum who has been stripped of her British citizenship. Begum fled London to join ISIS in 2015 but is now seeking to return to the UK.&nbsp;

The father of an Alabama woman who fled to Syria to marry an Islamic State fighter filed a lawsuit against Donald Trump's administration over her right to return with her 18-month-old baby after the US president said she will not be allowed back on American soil.

The father of an Alabama woman who fled to Syria to marry an Islamic State fighter filed a lawsuit against Donald Trump's administration over her right to return with her 18-month-old baby after the US president said she will not be allowed back on American soil. Hoda Muthana, 24, joined the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, in 2014 after telling her parents she was going to Atlanta, Georgia, as part of a field trip connected with her business studies at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. Instead, she withdrew from college and used her tuition reimbursement to purchase a plane ticket to Turkey, according to court documents. From Turkey, she traveled to Syria, where she married twice, both times to ISIS fighters who later died in combat. Muthana fled to the al-Hawl refugee camp in December last year amid the collapse of the ISIS caliphate in Syria and Iraq. "I have instructed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and he fully agrees, not to allow Hoda Muthana back into the Country!" Trump tweeted on Wednesday. "She does not have any legal basis, no valid US Passport, no right to a passport, nor any visa to travel to the United States," Pompeo said in a statement. "We continue to strongly advise all US Citizens not to travel to Syria." Ahmed Ali Muthana filed the lawsuit Thursday, accusing the Trump administration of an "unlawful attempt" to revoke Hoda Muthana's citizenship. Muthana has said she is willing to face federal charges upon her return. But Trump has ordered officials to bar the former IS propagandist from entering the US. The lawsuit emphasises that the woman's father is not arguing against any prosecution from the US government over her actions in Syria, but wants lawful recognition of her US citizenship and the citizenship of her child. Muthana has "publicly acknowledged her actions and accepted full responsibility," a statement announcing the lawsuit said. "In Ms Muthana's words, she recognises that she has 'ruined' her own life, but she does not want to ruin the life of her young child." Pompeo said on Wednesday that Muthana had no "legal basis" or "right" to a passport or any US visa. Pompeo confirmed her father's prior status as a Yemeni diplomat for the United Nations was behind the administration's decision. Under US law, the children of diplomats are not considered US citizens. The exact timeline of when Ahmed Ali Muthana stopped serving as a diplomat and when his daughter was born is now being contested by the Trump administration. The family maintains Muthana was previously recognised as a citizen by the US Department of State and given a US passport in 2004. Earlier this week, Muthana's lawyer, Hassan Shibly, shared a photo on Twitter of what he said was her US birth certificate. The case has similarities to that of UK-born teenager Shamima Begum who has been stripped of her British citizenship. Begum fled London to join ISIS in 2015 but is now seeking to return to the UK.

ISIS bride's family files lawsuit against Trump over her right to return to America

Iran successfully tested a cruise missile on Sunday during naval exercises near the Strait of Hormuz, Iran's state media reported, at a time of heightened tensions with the United States.

Tehran has in the past threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, a major oil shipping route at the mouth of the Gulf, in retaliation for any hostile US action, including attempts to halt Iranian oil exports through sanctions.

In August, Washington said Iran had test-fired a short-range anti-ship missile in the strait during naval drills it believed were intended as a warning following President Donald Trump's decision to reimpose sanctions on Tehran.

"On the third day of the ... exercises, a Ghadir-class Iranian navy submarine successfully launched a cruise missile," the official news agency IRNA reported.

Iran's other submarines, the Tareq and the new domestically built Fateh (Conqueror) have the same anti-ship capability, IRNA quoted a military statement as saying.

More than 100 vessels were taking part in the ongoing three-day war games in a vast area stretching from the Strait of Hormuz to the Indian Ocean, state media reported.

Trump pulled out of an international agreement on Iran’s nuclear programme last May and reimposed sanctions on Tehran.

Iran's expansion of its missile programme, particularly its ballistic missiles, has been met with expressions of concern by the United States and European countries. Tehran says the programme provides deterrent capabilities and is defensive.

The USS John C Stennis entered the Gulf in December, ending a long absence of US aircraft carriers in the waterway.

Western experts say Iran often exaggerates its weapons capabilities, although there are concerns about its long-range ballistic missiles.

Iran successfully tested a cruise missile on Sunday during naval exercises near the Strait of Hormuz, Iran's state media reported, at a time of heightened tensions with the United States.

Iran successfully tested a cruise missile on Sunday during naval exercises near the Strait of Hormuz, Iran's state media reported, at a time of heightened tensions with the United States. Tehran has in the past threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, a major oil shipping route at the mouth of the Gulf, in retaliation for any hostile US action, including attempts to halt Iranian oil exports through sanctions. In August, Washington said Iran had test-fired a short-range anti-ship missile in the strait during naval drills it believed were intended as a warning following President Donald Trump's decision to reimpose sanctions on Tehran. "On the third day of the ... exercises, a Ghadir-class Iranian navy submarine successfully launched a cruise missile," the official news agency IRNA reported. Iran's other submarines, the Tareq and the new domestically built Fateh (Conqueror) have the same anti-ship capability, IRNA quoted a military statement as saying. More than 100 vessels were taking part in the ongoing three-day war games in a vast area stretching from the Strait of Hormuz to the Indian Ocean, state media reported. Trump pulled out of an international agreement on Iran’s nuclear programme last May and reimposed sanctions on Tehran. Iran's expansion of its missile programme, particularly its ballistic missiles, has been met with expressions of concern by the United States and European countries. Tehran says the programme provides deterrent capabilities and is defensive. The USS John C Stennis entered the Gulf in December, ending a long absence of US aircraft carriers in the waterway. Western experts say Iran often exaggerates its weapons capabilities, although there are concerns about its long-range ballistic missiles.

Iran says successfully fires missile from submarine in Gulf war games

The US&nbsp;government could announce new sanctions to pressure Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro as early as next week unless his military defies orders to block convoys of humanitarian aid planned for this weekend, a senior administration official said on Friday.

US&nbsp;Vice President Mike Pence and other leaders in the Western Hemisphere will meet in Bogota on Monday. Depending on what happens on Venezuela's borders over the weekend, the leaders could dramatically boost aid pledges to the country - or take new steps to crack down, the official told reporters.

"If there is any type of violence, or if there is any type of negative reaction from the hierarchy of the Venezuela armed forces, there may also be measures that are announced by the vice president and other countries in regards to closing even further the international financial circle," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

In a sign of the importance of the issue to the White House, President Donald Trump's top national security adviser John Bolton canceled a weekend trip to South Korea to talk to allies ahead of a summit next week on North Korea's nuclear talks.

Bolton wanted to monitor the unfolding developments in Venezuela, his spokesman Garrett Marquis said.

Pence will lead the US&nbsp;delegation to the meeting of the Lima Group regional bloc, and so far has an "open script" for what he will propose, the official said.

"He has the carrots, but he's also ready with the sticks for those that promote or execute violence," the official said. "That will be announced not only by the United States, but by the rest of the region's democracies."

The United States has stockpiled aid on Colombia's border with Venezuela at the request of opposition leader Juan Guaido, whom Washington and other dozens of other Western governments have recognized as Venezuela's legitimate president since Maduro held elections last year decried as fraudulent.

Despite shortages of food and medicine, Maduro has denied there is a crisis in the country, and says the aid is aimed at undermining his government. He has ordered some of the country's borders closed to keep the aid from entering.

Tensions are running high and <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/un-chief-warns-venezuela-against-lethal-force-on-protesters-199058">there has been some violence</a>. Soldiers killed two people and injured 15 near the border with Brazil on Friday, witnesses said.

The Trump administration last month slapped sanctions on state-owned oil company Petroleos de Venezuela PDVSA.UL, known as PDVSA, to cut Maduro off from his government's main source of revenues.

The administration official declined to comment on future sanctions, but said the United States and other allies are looking at ways to expel family members of Venezuelan military officials who are living outside the country - including some in south Florida.

"They're going to face a situation where they and their families are going to have to go back to Venezuela," he said.

The US&nbsp;official described the aid convoys as a key test for the Venezuelan military as its leaders weigh whether to obey Maduro or Guaido, who has asked the military to let it pass.

"It's really the first order he gives to them as their commander in chief," the US&nbsp;official added. 
&nbsp;

The US government could announce new sanctions to pressure Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro as early as next week unless his military defies orders to block convoys of humanitarian aid planned for this weekend, a senior administration official said on Friday.

The US government could announce new sanctions to pressure Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro as early as next week unless his military defies orders to block convoys of humanitarian aid planned for this weekend, a senior administration official said on Friday. US Vice President Mike Pence and other leaders in the Western Hemisphere will meet in Bogota on Monday. Depending on what happens on Venezuela's borders over the weekend, the leaders could dramatically boost aid pledges to the country - or take new steps to crack down, the official told reporters. "If there is any type of violence, or if there is any type of negative reaction from the hierarchy of the Venezuela armed forces, there may also be measures that are announced by the vice president and other countries in regards to closing even further the international financial circle," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. In a sign of the importance of the issue to the White House, President Donald Trump's top national security adviser John Bolton canceled a weekend trip to South Korea to talk to allies ahead of a summit next week on North Korea's nuclear talks. Bolton wanted to monitor the unfolding developments in Venezuela, his spokesman Garrett Marquis said. Pence will lead the US delegation to the meeting of the Lima Group regional bloc, and so far has an "open script" for what he will propose, the official said. "He has the carrots, but he's also ready with the sticks for those that promote or execute violence," the official said. "That will be announced not only by the United States, but by the rest of the region's democracies." The United States has stockpiled aid on Colombia's border with Venezuela at the request of opposition leader Juan Guaido, whom Washington and other dozens of other Western governments have recognized as Venezuela's legitimate president since Maduro held elections last year decried as fraudulent. Despite shortages of food and medicine, Maduro has denied there is a crisis in the country, and says the aid is aimed at undermining his government. He has ordered some of the country's borders closed to keep the aid from entering. Tensions are running high and there has been some violence. Soldiers killed two people and injured 15 near the border with Brazil on Friday, witnesses said. The Trump administration last month slapped sanctions on state-owned oil company Petroleos de Venezuela PDVSA.UL, known as PDVSA, to cut Maduro off from his government's main source of revenues. The administration official declined to comment on future sanctions, but said the United States and other allies are looking at ways to expel family members of Venezuelan military officials who are living outside the country - including some in south Florida. "They're going to face a situation where they and their families are going to have to go back to Venezuela," he said. The US official described the aid convoys as a key test for the Venezuelan military as its leaders weigh whether to obey Maduro or Guaido, who has asked the military to let it pass. "It's really the first order he gives to them as their commander in chief," the US official added.

US threatens new sanctions on Venezuela if aid convoys blocked

united-states

United States, News on United States, stories on United States, articles on United States, United States stories at Wion, United States news, United States latest news

united states

Time for Pakistan's leaders to stand up against extremists: Tulsi Gabbard

US asks world community to take action against JeM and its leadership

US offers $1 million reward to find bin Laden's son

US Senators urge Trump to pursue peaceful resolution to India-Pak conflict

US again asks Pakistan to deny safe havens to terrorists

What does the failure of North Korea-US summit mean for Korean peninsula

US asks India and Pakistan to de-escalate tension, avoid military to resolve differences

Saudi Arabia tends to intensify efforts to isolate Iran

US, UK, France ask UN to blacklist JeM leader Masood Azhar; move likely to face opposition from China

Taliban says India, Pakistan clashes will affect Afghan peace process

Trump trumps Kim in popularity among residents of Vietnamese capital

US has no evidence of backdoor spying in 5G technology: Huawei chairman

US denied tens of thousands more visas in 2018 due to travel ban: Data

Boeing nominates former UN ambassador Nikki Haley to join its board

Venezuela crisis: Donald Trump's threats to Nicolas Maduro evoke history of US intervention in Latin America

US should not give aid to Pakistan until it stops harbouring terrorists: Nikki Haley

Pinterest, YouTube say acting against anti-vaccine messages

Iran's Foreign Minister Zarif announces unexpected resignation on Instagram

Venezuela stands close to the brink of another revolution

US troop withdrawal from Afghanistan and its effects on India

News brief: Big stories of the day

Nuclear breakthrough or vague promises? Outcomes abound for Trump and Kim

Trump says he is delaying tariff increase on Chinese goods

Venezuela aid boat reaches Curacao after reported standoff

Taliban political chief to lead peace talks with US in Doha this week: Qatar

News brief: Big stories of the day