The<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-special-representative-arrives-in-doha-for-us-taliban-peace-talks-240395"> US and the Taliban </a>will seek to thrash out elements of a deal to bring a close to Afghanistan's 18-year conflict in the second day of renewed talks in Doha on Sunday.

The US, which invaded Afghanistan and toppled the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/taliban-indicated-a-willingness-to-strike-a-peace-deal-khalilzad-240391">Taliban</a> in 2001, wants to withdraw thousands of troops and turn the page on its longest-ever war.

But it would first seek assurances from the insurgents that they would renounce Al-Qaeda and stop other militants like the Islamic State group using the country as a haven.

The talks, now in their eighth round, began on Saturday and were due to resume Sunday morning after pausing overnight, US and Taliban sources told AFP.

A Taliban source also said efforts were underway to organise a direct meeting between US envoy for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad and Taliban co-founder Mullah Baradar, who heads the movement's political wing.

A coalition led by Washington ousted the Taliban in late 2001 accusing it of harbouring Al-Qaeda jihadists who claimed the September 11 attacks against the US that killed almost 3,000 people.

But despite a rapid conclusion to the conventional phase of the war, the Taliban have proved formidable insurgents, bogging down US troops for years.

Washington is hoping to strike a peace deal with the Taliban by September 1 -- ahead of Afghan polls due the same month, and US presidential elections due in 2020.

US President Donald Trump told reporters at the White House on Friday that "we've made a lot of progress. We're talking".&nbsp;

"We are pursuing a peace agreement not a withdrawal agreement, a peace agreement that enables withdrawal," Khalilzad tweeted on Friday as he arrived in Doha after talks with Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan in Islamabad.

"Our presence in Afghanistan is conditions-based, and any withdrawal will be conditions-based."

In another sign of progress, the Afghan government has formed a negotiating team for separate peace talks with the Taliban that diplomats hope could be held as early as later this month.

- 'Negotiations will be tough' -

The Washington Post reported Thursday that an initial deal to end the war would see the US force in Afghanistan reduced to as low as 8,000 from the current level of around 14,000.

In exchange, the Taliban would abide by a ceasefire, renounce Al-Qaeda, and talk to the Kabul administration.

An Afghan official hinted last week that the government of President Ashraf Ghani was preparing for direct talks with the Taliban, the details of which have yet to be announced.

"We have no preconditions to begin talks, but the peace agreement is not without conditions," Ghani wrote in Pashto on his Facebook page on Friday ahead of the talks.

"We want a republic government not an emirate," he said, a challenge to the Taliban which has insisted on reverting to the "Islamic Emirate" name Afghanistan bore under its rule.

"The negotiations will be tough, and the Taliban should know that no Afghan is inferior in religion or courage to them."

The thorny issues of power-sharing with the Taliban, the role of regional powers including Pakistan and India, and the fate of Ghani's administration also remain unresolved.

The latest US-Taliban encounter follows last month's talks between influential Afghans and the Taliban which agreed a "roadmap for peace" -- but stopped short of calling for a ceasefire.

Kabul resident Somaya Mustafa, 20, said her country desperately needed a peace deal, but only one in which the Taliban "accept women and their achievements".&nbsp;

"It is a total mess in our country right now. And if it continues, women will suffer more than anyone else."&nbsp;

The United Nations has said that civilian casualty rates across Afghanistan matched record levels last month, following a dip earlier in the year.

The US and the Taliban will seek to thrash out elements of a deal to bring a close to Afghanistan's 18-year conflict in the second day of renewed talks in Doha on Sunday.

The US and the Taliban will seek to thrash out elements of a deal to bring a close to Afghanistan's 18-year conflict in the second day of renewed talks in Doha on Sunday. The US, which invaded Afghanistan and toppled the Taliban in 2001, wants to withdraw thousands of troops and turn the page on its longest-ever war. But it would first seek assurances from the insurgents that they would renounce Al-Qaeda and stop other militants like the Islamic State group using the country as a haven. The talks, now in their eighth round, began on Saturday and were due to resume Sunday morning after pausing overnight, US and Taliban sources told AFP. A Taliban source also said efforts were underway to organise a direct meeting between US envoy for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad and Taliban co-founder Mullah Baradar, who heads the movement's political wing. A coalition led by Washington ousted the Taliban in late 2001 accusing it of harbouring Al-Qaeda jihadists who claimed the September 11 attacks against the US that killed almost 3,000 people. But despite a rapid conclusion to the conventional phase of the war, the Taliban have proved formidable insurgents, bogging down US troops for years. Washington is hoping to strike a peace deal with the Taliban by September 1 -- ahead of Afghan polls due the same month, and US presidential elections due in 2020. US President Donald Trump told reporters at the White House on Friday that "we've made a lot of progress. We're talking". "We are pursuing a peace agreement not a withdrawal agreement, a peace agreement that enables withdrawal," Khalilzad tweeted on Friday as he arrived in Doha after talks with Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan in Islamabad. "Our presence in Afghanistan is conditions-based, and any withdrawal will be conditions-based." In another sign of progress, the Afghan government has formed a negotiating team for separate peace talks with the Taliban that diplomats hope could be held as early as later this month. - 'Negotiations will be tough' - The Washington Post reported Thursday that an initial deal to end the war would see the US force in Afghanistan reduced to as low as 8,000 from the current level of around 14,000. In exchange, the Taliban would abide by a ceasefire, renounce Al-Qaeda, and talk to the Kabul administration. An Afghan official hinted last week that the government of President Ashraf Ghani was preparing for direct talks with the Taliban, the details of which have yet to be announced. "We have no preconditions to begin talks, but the peace agreement is not without conditions," Ghani wrote in Pashto on his Facebook page on Friday ahead of the talks. "We want a republic government not an emirate," he said, a challenge to the Taliban which has insisted on reverting to the "Islamic Emirate" name Afghanistan bore under its rule. "The negotiations will be tough, and the Taliban should know that no Afghan is inferior in religion or courage to them." The thorny issues of power-sharing with the Taliban, the role of regional powers including Pakistan and India, and the fate of Ghani's administration also remain unresolved. The latest US-Taliban encounter follows last month's talks between influential Afghans and the Taliban which agreed a "roadmap for peace" -- but stopped short of calling for a ceasefire. Kabul resident Somaya Mustafa, 20, said her country desperately needed a peace deal, but only one in which the Taliban "accept women and their achievements". "It is a total mess in our country right now. And if it continues, women will suffer more than anyone else." The United Nations has said that civilian casualty rates across Afghanistan matched record levels last month, following a dip earlier in the year.

US, Taliban push for peace in day 2 of renewed talks in Doha

US-Taliban has resumed a fresh round of US-Taliban peace talks in Doha. The US Special representative, Zalmay Khalilzad arrived in Doha on Friday night for the 8th round of US-Taliban peace talks. Watch this video to know more.

8th round of US-Taliban peace talks

This segment of WION brings to you top stories of the morning from across the globe. Watch this video to get updated with the latest information.

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning - August 4th, 2019

United States bloody history of mass shootings. Watch video to know more.

United States bloody history of mass shootings

Nine killed in Ohio in second US mass shooting in 24 hours. Watch video to know more.

Nine killed in Ohio in second US mass shooting in 24 hours

Police in Ohio on Sunday said that nine people have been killed in the second mass shooting in the U.S. in less than 24 hours. Dayton's deputy police chief Matt Carper announced that the suspect was also dead. Watch this video to know more.

Mass shooting in Ohio, 9 casualties reported

The grounding of the 737 MAX for more than four months after two deadly accidents has tarnished Boeing's reputation, but it still has the confidence of US policymakers.

This is despite the fact that one of the MAX flight systems, the MCAS, has been cited in both accidents.

Is this an indication that the American aerospace giant is too big to fail?&nbsp;

President Donald Trump, whose mantra is "America first," certainly criticized Boeing early in his administration over the presidential plane, Air Force One, but he has been largely silent about the recent woes.

The wave of negative press about the flaws that caused the deaths of 346 people did not prompt legislators to summon Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg before Congress to inflict on him the kind of humiliation Wall Street bankers were subject to following the global financial crisis.&nbsp;

"Boeing is one of the engines of the US economy, it's way too big and too important for the United States," said Michel Merluzeau, an expert at Air Insight Research.

Political ties

If American politicians were to attack the manufacturer, they would be shooting themselves in the foot, Merluzeau said, because "there are many jobs involved, a very, very numerous supply chain and it cannot be replaced with Facebook or Google that don't produce anything tangible."&nbsp;

Founded 103 years ago, Boeing employs more than 150,000 people around the world, the vast majority in the United States.&nbsp;

In addition to direct jobs, its subcontractors -- like General Electric (GE), United Technologies and Spirit Aerosystems -- are large US industrial employers.&nbsp;

The location of Boeing plants resembles a political campaign map, with facilities in Republican strongholds like Alabama, South Carolina and Texas, and Democratic areas like California and Washington, as well as states that helped Trump win the election: Pennsylvania and Arizona.&nbsp;

And Muilenburg has shown political savvy in his picks for the company's board of directors, naming Nikki Haley, former governor of South Carolina and Trump's former ambassador to the United Nations, and Caroline Kennedy, an ally of former President Barack Obama and daughter of former president John F. Kennedy.&nbsp;

Air Force One

Boeing is a dominant player not just in civilian aircraft but in the defence and space industries and is a major supplier to the Pentagon.

The company produced the famous B-17 and B-29 bombers of World War II and the B-52 used the Vietnam War.

Today it produces a variety of aircraft including the F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jet, Apache attack helicopters, the B-1 bomber and combat drones.&nbsp;

It also is part of SpaceX, which will manage travel to the International Space Station.

And Boeing manufactures the presidential plane, the iconic Air Force One.

But Boeing also "can be used as a strategic tool," said Arthur Wheaton, a professor at Cornell University in New York.&nbsp;

Chinese purchases of Boeing aircraft are part of trade negotiations with Beijing, according to a source, since that can be a fast way to reduce the US trade deficit.&nbsp;

US civilian aircraft exports fell 12 per cent to $20.4 billion in May, due to the MAX crisis, which affected the GDP, according to government data.

The grounding of the 737 MAX for more than four months after two deadly accidents has tarnished Boeing's reputation, but it still has the confidence of US policymakers.

The grounding of the 737 MAX for more than four months after two deadly accidents has tarnished Boeing's reputation, but it still has the confidence of US policymakers. This is despite the fact that one of the MAX flight systems, the MCAS, has been cited in both accidents. Is this an indication that the American aerospace giant is too big to fail? President Donald Trump, whose mantra is "America first," certainly criticized Boeing early in his administration over the presidential plane, Air Force One, but he has been largely silent about the recent woes. The wave of negative press about the flaws that caused the deaths of 346 people did not prompt legislators to summon Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg before Congress to inflict on him the kind of humiliation Wall Street bankers were subject to following the global financial crisis. "Boeing is one of the engines of the US economy, it's way too big and too important for the United States," said Michel Merluzeau, an expert at Air Insight Research. Political ties If American politicians were to attack the manufacturer, they would be shooting themselves in the foot, Merluzeau said, because "there are many jobs involved, a very, very numerous supply chain and it cannot be replaced with Facebook or Google that don't produce anything tangible." Founded 103 years ago, Boeing employs more than 150,000 people around the world, the vast majority in the United States. In addition to direct jobs, its subcontractors -- like General Electric (GE), United Technologies and Spirit Aerosystems -- are large US industrial employers. The location of Boeing plants resembles a political campaign map, with facilities in Republican strongholds like Alabama, South Carolina and Texas, and Democratic areas like California and Washington, as well as states that helped Trump win the election: Pennsylvania and Arizona. And Muilenburg has shown political savvy in his picks for the company's board of directors, naming Nikki Haley, former governor of South Carolina and Trump's former ambassador to the United Nations, and Caroline Kennedy, an ally of former President Barack Obama and daughter of former president John F. Kennedy. Air Force One Boeing is a dominant player not just in civilian aircraft but in the defence and space industries and is a major supplier to the Pentagon. The company produced the famous B-17 and B-29 bombers of World War II and the B-52 used the Vietnam War. Today it produces a variety of aircraft including the F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jet, Apache attack helicopters, the B-1 bomber and combat drones. It also is part of SpaceX, which will manage travel to the International Space Station. And Boeing manufactures the presidential plane, the iconic Air Force One. But Boeing also "can be used as a strategic tool," said Arthur Wheaton, a professor at Cornell University in New York. Chinese purchases of Boeing aircraft are part of trade negotiations with Beijing, according to a source, since that can be a fast way to reduce the US trade deficit. US civilian aircraft exports fell 12 per cent to $20.4 billion in May, due to the MAX crisis, which affected the GDP, according to government data.

Is Boeing too big to fail?

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/how-cpec-is-used-to-traffic-young-pakistani-women-to-china-210874">China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)</a> is not an investment into Pakistan but is structured as a resource extraction exercise, a US based frontier, and emerging market analyst has said.

In an article published by Medium.com, Farooq Tirmizi wrote that the majority of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-denies-cpec-intensified-pakistans-economic-risks-208789">Chinese investment in Pakistan</a> is self-proclaimed and is not benefitting the local economy.

"China announces that it has invested in a project in Pakistan worth, let's say US $1 billion. That US $1 billion, however, is required to mostly be spent on Chinese equipment, and labor, a significant portion of which is to be imported from China as well, with very little by way of supplies coming from the local economy," Tirmizi said.

That said amount, therefore, never hits Pakistan's economy as an investment, and goes from the Chinese government or state-owned company to a state-owned company within China to pay for equipment.&nbsp;

Even Chinese labor gets its salaries deposited into bank accounts within China.

"The money, in other words, stays completely within China and so never shows up as foreign investment into Pakistan", said Tirmizi.

The analyst believes that the majority of people in Pakistan are willing to join hands with Washington rather having faith in Beijing.

"If ever there was thought within Pakistan`s leadership political, military, and business that Beijing could replace Washington as the foreign capital with the most influence in Islamabad, that idea is now firmly dead. We just have not gotten around to telling China yet," Tirmizi added.

"Over the past few weeks, Profit has spoken to several sources in both Pakistan's business elite circles as well as people who are familiar with the thought process of the military leadership and the picture emerging is not a favorable one of the relationship with China: the more Pakistanis learn about the true costs of the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), the less inclined they are to want to participate any further than we already have," the article read.

The analyst also believes that there is a growing imbalance in trade between Pakistan and China.

"Pakistan's imports from China have dramatically increased since 2013 when CPEC was first announced. Prior to 2013, Pakistan`s imports from China had been rising because of the 2007 China Pakistan Free Trade Agreement but had stabilized to around $6.6 billion a year. After 2013, the rise has been very steep," the article added.

Since 2013, China's net investment into Pakistan has been US $2.5 billion, which is much higher than the US $813 million China invested in Pakistan in the 10 years prior to 2013, but still a relatively small sum compared to the wild projections and promises that the Pakistani press and government wanted to believe when it was first announced.

While Pakistan's civilian and military leadership is prone to making bad decisions, they are not completely stupid.&nbsp;

They can see these numbers, and they are privy to far more details than have been told to the public about the specific terms of the agreements with China for CPEC projects.

&nbsp;And it is becoming increasingly clear that they are becoming deeply uncomfortable with the direction this has taken Pakistan.

"Neither the civilian politicians nor the military leadership wants to accept the blame for what is clearly a massive blunder on the part of the government of Pakistan in negotiating the CPEC contracts. If any lawyers reviewed them, it is unclear if they understood them, or if their views were taken into consideration at all by the decision makers", said the analyst.&nbsp;

"The deed is done now, however, and Pakistan cannot easily extricate itself from these arrangements. But, sources familiar with the military leadership's thinking tell Profit, the leadership in the military has decided to start following the first rule of being in a hole: stop digging" he added.

"A public renunciation of CPEC would be too embarrassing for the government both the politicians and the Army but they are certainly not willing to undertake any further agreements with the government of China", the analyst concluded.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is not an investment into Pakistan but is structured as a resource extraction exercise, a US based frontier, and emerging market analyst has said.

China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is not an investment into Pakistan but is structured as a resource extraction exercise, a US based frontier, and emerging market analyst has said. In an article published by Medium.com, Farooq Tirmizi wrote that the majority of Chinese investment in Pakistan is self-proclaimed and is not benefitting the local economy. "China announces that it has invested in a project in Pakistan worth, let's say US $1 billion. That US $1 billion, however, is required to mostly be spent on Chinese equipment, and labor, a significant portion of which is to be imported from China as well, with very little by way of supplies coming from the local economy," Tirmizi said. That said amount, therefore, never hits Pakistan's economy as an investment, and goes from the Chinese government or state-owned company to a state-owned company within China to pay for equipment. Even Chinese labor gets its salaries deposited into bank accounts within China. "The money, in other words, stays completely within China and so never shows up as foreign investment into Pakistan", said Tirmizi. The analyst believes that the majority of people in Pakistan are willing to join hands with Washington rather having faith in Beijing. "If ever there was thought within Pakistan`s leadership political, military, and business that Beijing could replace Washington as the foreign capital with the most influence in Islamabad, that idea is now firmly dead. We just have not gotten around to telling China yet," Tirmizi added. "Over the past few weeks, Profit has spoken to several sources in both Pakistan's business elite circles as well as people who are familiar with the thought process of the military leadership and the picture emerging is not a favorable one of the relationship with China: the more Pakistanis learn about the true costs of the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), the less inclined they are to want to participate any further than we already have," the article read. The analyst also believes that there is a growing imbalance in trade between Pakistan and China. "Pakistan's imports from China have dramatically increased since 2013 when CPEC was first announced. Prior to 2013, Pakistan`s imports from China had been rising because of the 2007 China Pakistan Free Trade Agreement but had stabilized to around $6.6 billion a year. After 2013, the rise has been very steep," the article added. Since 2013, China's net investment into Pakistan has been US $2.5 billion, which is much higher than the US $813 million China invested in Pakistan in the 10 years prior to 2013, but still a relatively small sum compared to the wild projections and promises that the Pakistani press and government wanted to believe when it was first announced. While Pakistan's civilian and military leadership is prone to making bad decisions, they are not completely stupid. They can see these numbers, and they are privy to far more details than have been told to the public about the specific terms of the agreements with China for CPEC projects. And it is becoming increasingly clear that they are becoming deeply uncomfortable with the direction this has taken Pakistan. "Neither the civilian politicians nor the military leadership wants to accept the blame for what is clearly a massive blunder on the part of the government of Pakistan in negotiating the CPEC contracts. If any lawyers reviewed them, it is unclear if they understood them, or if their views were taken into consideration at all by the decision makers", said the analyst. "The deed is done now, however, and Pakistan cannot easily extricate itself from these arrangements. But, sources familiar with the military leadership's thinking tell Profit, the leadership in the military has decided to start following the first rule of being in a hole: stop digging" he added. "A public renunciation of CPEC would be too embarrassing for the government both the politicians and the Army but they are certainly not willing to undertake any further agreements with the government of China", the analyst concluded.

CPEC structured as a resource extraction exercise: Expert

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-demands-social-media-details-email-addresses-for-5-years-from-visa-applicants-223685">United States</a> and North Korea are in regular communication for the resumption of working-level talks to revive denuclearisation negotiations, and are working on establishing a time and location for the meet, a senior US State Department official said on Friday.

"While we would like to be further along in restarting working-level negotiations, we are in regular contact with the North Koreans," the official said, according to a transcript released by the State Department.

"And I think it`s fair to say that (President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-defends-attack-on-african-american-us-lawmaker-elijah-cummings-239036">Donald Trump</a> and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo) are expecting that we will be resuming those negotiations relatively soon," he added, as cited by Yonhap news agency.&nbsp;

The official added that the US has not changed its goal of denuclearising North Korea in exchange for a "brighter future", meaning sanctions relief and other concessions.

On June 30, Trump and Kim had held an impromptu meeting at the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) where the two leaders agreed to resume working-level talks to put denuclearisation talks back on track.

However, North Korea has warned that the future of talks will depend on whether South Korea and the US will go ahead with the joint military exercises planned for next month.

In the past 8 days, North Korea has conducted three tests of projectiles, including short-range ballistic missiles, signalling its displeasure with South Korea-U.S. military exercises planned for this month.

The United States and North Korea are in regular communication for the resumption of working-level talks to revive denuclearisation negotiations, and are working on establishing a time and location for the meet, a senior US State Department official said on Friday.

The United States and North Korea are in regular communication for the resumption of working-level talks to revive denuclearisation negotiations, and are working on establishing a time and location for the meet, a senior US State Department official said on Friday. "While we would like to be further along in restarting working-level negotiations, we are in regular contact with the North Koreans," the official said, according to a transcript released by the State Department. "And I think it`s fair to say that (President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo) are expecting that we will be resuming those negotiations relatively soon," he added, as cited by Yonhap news agency. The official added that the US has not changed its goal of denuclearising North Korea in exchange for a "brighter future", meaning sanctions relief and other concessions. On June 30, Trump and Kim had held an impromptu meeting at the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) where the two leaders agreed to resume working-level talks to put denuclearisation talks back on track. However, North Korea has warned that the future of talks will depend on whether South Korea and the US will go ahead with the joint military exercises planned for next month. In the past 8 days, North Korea has conducted three tests of projectiles, including short-range ballistic missiles, signalling its displeasure with South Korea-U.S. military exercises planned for this month.

US, North Korea in regular communication for resumption of denuclearisation talks: Official

The US could reduce troops station by 8-9 thousand in Afghanistan. Sources in Pakistan have told WION that proposal was discussed by the special representative for Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad.

US could reduce troops by 8-9 thousand in Afghanistan

US-Taliban is set to resume peace talks on Afghanistan. The US Special representative, Zalmay Khalilzad has arrived in Doha for the 8th round of US-Taliban peace talks. Watch this video to know more.

U.S-Taliban peace talks: Trump flags progress

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning - August 3rd, 2019

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/sri-lanka-president-vetoes-military-deal-with-washington-that-allows-us-troops-free-access-to-islands-ports-233571">Washington</a> is hoping for a breakthrough as talks between the US and the Taliban resumed in Doha on Saturday in a bid to end 18 years of war in Afghanistan.

The US, which invaded Afghanistan and toppled the Taliban in 2001, wants to withdraw thousands of troops but only in return for the insurgent group renouncing Al-Qaeda and curbing attacks.&nbsp;

Washington is hoping to strike a peace deal with the Taliban by September 1 ahead of Afghan polls due the same month, and US presidential polls due in 2020.

US President Donald Trump told reporters at the White House on Friday that "we've made a lot of progress. We're talking".&nbsp;

A coalition led by Washington ousted the Taliban accusing it of harboring <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/al-qaeda-attack-kills-19-soldiers-in-south-yemen-security-officials-240119">Al-Qaeda </a>jihadists who claimed the September 11, 2001 attacks against the US that killed almost 3,000 people.

"We are pursuing a peace agreement not a withdrawal agreement, a peace agreement that enables withdrawal," US envoy for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad tweeted on Friday as he arrived in Doha after talks with Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan in Islamabad.

"Our presence in Afghanistan is conditions-based, and any withdrawal will be conditions based."

In another sign of progress, the Afghan government has formed a negotiating team for separate peace talks with the Taliban, that diplomats hope could be held as early as later this month.

The Washington Post reported Thursday that an initial deal to end the war would see the US forces in Afghanistan reduced to as low as 8,000 from the current level of around 14,000.

In exchange, the Taliban would abide by a ceasefire and renounce Al-Qaeda, the Post reported, citing US officials.

The proposed agreement would also require the Taliban to broker a separate peace deal with the Afghan government, with which it has so far refused to speak, Fox News reported.

However, an Afghan official hinted last week that the government of President Ashraf Ghani was preparing for direct talks with the Taliban, the details of which have yet to be announced.

Council on Foreign Relations counter terrorism expert Bruce Hoffman said that he doubted the Taliban would ever renounce Al-Qaeda potentially hindering any deal.

- 'Cruel and oppressive' - 
"I believe that the Taliban and Al-Qaeda will remain joined at the hip," he told AFP, questioning the sense of "believing the word of terrorist organizations".

"The Taliban can negotiate with the United States," he added but suggested that the Taliban would be unlikely to break their personal pledges to Al-Qaeda.

"It means that Al-Qaeda was going to continue fighting, counting on that once the US left Afghanistan it (the US) wasn't going to come back.&nbsp;

"Al-Qaeda and the Taliban would have free rein. It's not a far fetched assumption."

The thorny issues of power-sharing with the Taliban, the role of regional powers including Pakistan and India, and the fate of Ghani's administration also remain unresolved.

The latest US Taliban encounter follows last month's talks between influential Afghans and the Taliban which agreed a "roadmap for peace" but stopped short of calling for a ceasefire.

That gathering, also in Doha, called for a monitored peace process, the return of internally displaced people to their homes and non-interference by regional powers in Afghanistan.

"Assuring women rights in political, social, economic, educational, cultural affairs as per (and) within the Islamic framework of Islamic values," also featured in the joint text.

Younger Afghans, whose lives have been overshadowed by almost two decades of war, are skeptical any deal will bring peace.

"We cannot trust the Taliban and their commitments because they were cruel and oppressive in their regime," said Abdul Jamil Qureshi, a 23 year old psychology student at Kabul University.

Apparently believing they have the upper hand in the war, the Taliban have kept up attacks even while talking to the United States and agreeing to the Afghan dialogue.

The United Nations said Saturday that civilian casualty rates across Afghanistan jumped back to record levels last month, following a dip earlier in the year.

More than 1,500 civilians were killed or wounded in the conflict in July, the highest monthly toll so far in 2019 and the deadliest single month since May 2017.

On Wednesday, at least 34 people were killed in western Afghanistan when their bus hit a roadside bomb blamed by officials on the Taliban.

Most of the dead were women and children. 
&nbsp;

Washington is hoping for a breakthrough as talks between the US and the Taliban resumed in Doha on Saturday in a bid to end 18 years of war in Afghanistan. The US, which invaded Afghanistan and toppled the Taliban in 2001, wants to withdraw thousands of troops but only in return for the insurgent group renouncing Al-Qaeda and curbing attacks.

Washington is hoping for a breakthrough as talks between the US and the Taliban resumed in Doha on Saturday in a bid to end 18 years of war in Afghanistan. The US, which invaded Afghanistan and toppled the Taliban in 2001, wants to withdraw thousands of troops but only in return for the insurgent group renouncing Al-Qaeda and curbing attacks. Washington is hoping to strike a peace deal with the Taliban by September 1 ahead of Afghan polls due the same month, and US presidential polls due in 2020. US President Donald Trump told reporters at the White House on Friday that "we've made a lot of progress. We're talking". A coalition led by Washington ousted the Taliban accusing it of harboring Al-Qaeda jihadists who claimed the September 11, 2001 attacks against the US that killed almost 3,000 people. "We are pursuing a peace agreement not a withdrawal agreement, a peace agreement that enables withdrawal," US envoy for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad tweeted on Friday as he arrived in Doha after talks with Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan in Islamabad. "Our presence in Afghanistan is conditions-based, and any withdrawal will be conditions based." In another sign of progress, the Afghan government has formed a negotiating team for separate peace talks with the Taliban, that diplomats hope could be held as early as later this month. The Washington Post reported Thursday that an initial deal to end the war would see the US forces in Afghanistan reduced to as low as 8,000 from the current level of around 14,000. In exchange, the Taliban would abide by a ceasefire and renounce Al-Qaeda, the Post reported, citing US officials. The proposed agreement would also require the Taliban to broker a separate peace deal with the Afghan government, with which it has so far refused to speak, Fox News reported. However, an Afghan official hinted last week that the government of President Ashraf Ghani was preparing for direct talks with the Taliban, the details of which have yet to be announced. Council on Foreign Relations counter terrorism expert Bruce Hoffman said that he doubted the Taliban would ever renounce Al-Qaeda potentially hindering any deal. - 'Cruel and oppressive' - "I believe that the Taliban and Al-Qaeda will remain joined at the hip," he told AFP, questioning the sense of "believing the word of terrorist organizations". "The Taliban can negotiate with the United States," he added but suggested that the Taliban would be unlikely to break their personal pledges to Al-Qaeda. "It means that Al-Qaeda was going to continue fighting, counting on that once the US left Afghanistan it (the US) wasn't going to come back. "Al-Qaeda and the Taliban would have free rein. It's not a far fetched assumption." The thorny issues of power-sharing with the Taliban, the role of regional powers including Pakistan and India, and the fate of Ghani's administration also remain unresolved. The latest US Taliban encounter follows last month's talks between influential Afghans and the Taliban which agreed a "roadmap for peace" but stopped short of calling for a ceasefire. That gathering, also in Doha, called for a monitored peace process, the return of internally displaced people to their homes and non-interference by regional powers in Afghanistan. "Assuring women rights in political, social, economic, educational, cultural affairs as per (and) within the Islamic framework of Islamic values," also featured in the joint text. Younger Afghans, whose lives have been overshadowed by almost two decades of war, are skeptical any deal will bring peace. "We cannot trust the Taliban and their commitments because they were cruel and oppressive in their regime," said Abdul Jamil Qureshi, a 23 year old psychology student at Kabul University. Apparently believing they have the upper hand in the war, the Taliban have kept up attacks even while talking to the United States and agreeing to the Afghan dialogue. The United Nations said Saturday that civilian casualty rates across Afghanistan jumped back to record levels last month, following a dip earlier in the year. More than 1,500 civilians were killed or wounded in the conflict in July, the highest monthly toll so far in 2019 and the deadliest single month since May 2017. On Wednesday, at least 34 people were killed in western Afghanistan when their bus hit a roadside bomb blamed by officials on the Taliban. Most of the dead were women and children.

US eyes breakthrough in the push for peace with Taliban

After 32 years-old nuclear treaty got undone between U.S-Soviet Union, U.S Prez wants a new nuclear treaty including both China and Russia as well.

After 32 years-old treaty undone, U.S Prez wants new nuclear treaty including China

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/us-taliban-peace-talks-the-only-losers-in-the-settlement-will-be-afghans-236552">Taliban</a> have indicated that they are willing to sign the peace agreement, US Special Representative for Peace in Afghanistan <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/zalmay-khalilzad-to-visit-afghanistan-to-finalise-us-taliban-peace-deal-possibly-by-september-1-237275">Zalmay Khalilzad</a> said on Friday.

"The Taliban are signaling they would like to conclude an agreement. We are ready for a good agreement", Khalilzad wrote on Twitter.

The Ambassador arrived in Qatar`s capital city of Doha earlier in the day for a crucial round of peace negotiations between the US and the Taliban aimed at ending the 18 year long war in Afghanistan.

The two sides are getting closer to a deal centered around the latter`s promise to withdraw its troops from the war torn country, in exchange for the guarantee by the former that the Afghan soil, particularly the areas under the Taliban`s control, would not become a platform for transnational terrorism.

In a separate tweet, Khalilzad said that the US sees the deal as a "peace agreement" and the withdrawal of its troops would be "conditions based".

"Just got to #Doha to resume talks with the Taliban. We are pursuing a #peace agreement not a withdrawal agreement; a peace agreement that enables withdrawal. Our presence in #Afghanistan is conditions-based, and any withdrawal will be conditions-based," Khalilzad wrote.

Suhail Shaheen, the spokesperson for the Taliban's political office in Qatar, had recently told the Voice of America that they are hopeful of reaching an agreement with the United States during the upcoming talks.

Shaheen added that the Taliban negotiators have done their part and it is now up to the American side whether they have "made up their mind" and take the next step of winding up the dialogue process.

Understandably, once the agreement between the US and the Taliban is inked, it will require the latter to immediately enter into negotiations with Afghan stakeholders.

It may be noted that the Taliban, so far, have consistently refused to hold direct talks with President Ashraf Ghani's government, denouncing it as a puppet administration.&nbsp;

The Taliban have indicated that they are willing to sign the peace agreement, US Special Representative for Peace in Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad said on Friday.

The Taliban have indicated that they are willing to sign the peace agreement, US Special Representative for Peace in Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad said on Friday. "The Taliban are signaling they would like to conclude an agreement. We are ready for a good agreement", Khalilzad wrote on Twitter. The Ambassador arrived in Qatar`s capital city of Doha earlier in the day for a crucial round of peace negotiations between the US and the Taliban aimed at ending the 18 year long war in Afghanistan. The two sides are getting closer to a deal centered around the latter`s promise to withdraw its troops from the war torn country, in exchange for the guarantee by the former that the Afghan soil, particularly the areas under the Taliban`s control, would not become a platform for transnational terrorism. In a separate tweet, Khalilzad said that the US sees the deal as a "peace agreement" and the withdrawal of its troops would be "conditions based". "Just got to #Doha to resume talks with the Taliban. We are pursuing a #peace agreement not a withdrawal agreement; a peace agreement that enables withdrawal. Our presence in #Afghanistan is conditions-based, and any withdrawal will be conditions-based," Khalilzad wrote. Suhail Shaheen, the spokesperson for the Taliban's political office in Qatar, had recently told the Voice of America that they are hopeful of reaching an agreement with the United States during the upcoming talks. Shaheen added that the Taliban negotiators have done their part and it is now up to the American side whether they have "made up their mind" and take the next step of winding up the dialogue process. Understandably, once the agreement between the US and the Taliban is inked, it will require the latter to immediately enter into negotiations with Afghan stakeholders. It may be noted that the Taliban, so far, have consistently refused to hold direct talks with President Ashraf Ghani's government, denouncing it as a puppet administration.

Taliban indicated a willingness to strike a peace deal: Zalmay Khalilzad

US-Taliban is set to resume peace talks on Afghanistan. The US Special representative, Zalmay Khalilzad has arrived in Doha for 8th round of US-Taliban peace talks. Watch this video to know more.

US Special representative arrives in Doha for US-Taliban peace talks

A fresh round of US <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/wion-edit-taliban-us-violence-for-upper-hand-in-afghan-deal-237189">Taliban </a>peace talks will start in Qatar`s capital Doha on Saturday, officials said, describing it to be the "most crucial" phase of negotiations to end the 18 year war in Afghanistan.

Senior officials privy to the talks said a peace agreement could be expected at the end of the eighth round of talks and would enable foreign forces to be withdrawn from the war torn country.

Zalmay Khalilzad, the US peace envoy for Afghanistan who has held a series of meetings with Taliban leaders since last year, reached Doha on Friday night.

"Just got to Doha to resume talks with the Taliban. We are pursuing a peace agreement not a withdrawal agreement," Khalilzad wrote on Twitter.

"A peace agreement that enables withdrawal. Our (US) presence in Afghanistan is conditions based, and any withdrawal will be conditions based," he said, adding the Taliban are signalling they would conclude an agreement.

"We are ready for a good agreement."Two sources with knowledge of the talks said an agreement on the withdrawal of foreign forces in exchange for security guarantees by the Taliban is expected before August 31.

About 20,000 foreign troops, most of them American, are now in Afghanistan as part of a US led <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/nato-blames-russia-for-inf-pact-demise-vows-measured-response-240181">NATO</a> mission to train, assist and advise Afghan forces.&nbsp;

The hardline Islamist Taliban group now controls more territory than at any point since the United States bombed them out of power in 2001. 
&nbsp;

A fresh round of US Taliban peace talks will start in Qatar`s capital Doha on Saturday, officials said, describing it to be the "most crucial" phase of negotiations to end the 18 year war in Afghanistan.

A fresh round of US Taliban peace talks will start in Qatar`s capital Doha on Saturday, officials said, describing it to be the "most crucial" phase of negotiations to end the 18 year war in Afghanistan. Senior officials privy to the talks said a peace agreement could be expected at the end of the eighth round of talks and would enable foreign forces to be withdrawn from the war torn country. Zalmay Khalilzad, the US peace envoy for Afghanistan who has held a series of meetings with Taliban leaders since last year, reached Doha on Friday night. "Just got to Doha to resume talks with the Taliban. We are pursuing a peace agreement not a withdrawal agreement," Khalilzad wrote on Twitter. "A peace agreement that enables withdrawal. Our (US) presence in Afghanistan is conditions based, and any withdrawal will be conditions based," he said, adding the Taliban are signalling they would conclude an agreement. "We are ready for a good agreement."Two sources with knowledge of the talks said an agreement on the withdrawal of foreign forces in exchange for security guarantees by the Taliban is expected before August 31. About 20,000 foreign troops, most of them American, are now in Afghanistan as part of a US led NATO mission to train, assist and advise Afghan forces. The hardline Islamist Taliban group now controls more territory than at any point since the United States bombed them out of power in 2001.

Eighth round of US, Taliban peace talks to start in Doha August 3 - Officials

Levi Strauss &amp; Co has been "deliberate and diligent" in moving production out of China because of uncertainty hanging over tariffs on goods imported from China, Chief Executive Officer Chip Bergh said in an interview with Reuters.

Just 1% or 2% of Levi's product sold in the United States are manufactured in China, Bergh said, compared to 16% two years ago.

Bergh was speaking one day before President Donald Trump said he would impose tariffs on another $300 billion of Chinese goods, including apparel.

Trump has used tariffs as a tool to negotiate better trade terms, saying bad deals cost millions of US jobs.

Along with apparel, the new tariffs hit consumer goods such as electronics and toys and come in addition to those already imposed on $250 billion of other goods imported from China.

The on-again, off-again nature of the U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods had created uncertainty for many US&nbsp;retailers, Bergh said.

"Every day is a new day," he said. "Sometimes it looks like it's definitely going to happen and then other days you think it's off, it's not going to happen."

San Francisco-based Levi's, which returned to the public markets in March, is part of a wave of retailers that have been shifting supply chains out of China to countries such as Vietnam and Bangladesh.

The trend was initially in response to higher Chinese wages but the exodus is expected to be accelerated by the new tariffs, which Trump said will go into effect Sept. 1.

They are expected to increase consumers' costs and have an impact across the entire retail industry.

Apparel retailers like Gap Inc, handbag brand Steve Madden Ltd and department store Macy's Inc also have acted to move production out of China.

However, China still is a big supplier to the industry with 42% of apparel and 69% of footwear sold in the United States made in China, according to the American Apparel and Footwear Association.

Following the latest tariff news, several large retail trade groups warned the levied tariffs will hurt consumer purchases, raise prices and limit hiring.

Levi's has two of its own factories in Poland and South Africa but mostly uses third-party vendors or suppliers spread across 22 different countries, said Bergh, who joined the company in September 2011.

"We've narrowed down our supplier base during the time that I've been here to really develop deeper, more strategic relationships with many of our suppliers," he said.

Many of Levi's suppliers in China are publicly traded companies that have multi-country footprints, said Bergh, that has diversified risk by building factories in places like Vietnam and Cambodia.

Among Levi's best-selling products are the 501 men's jeans, which go for between $39.99 and $49.99, according to Levi's website.

Trump also has threatened to impose tariffs on Mexico in retaliation for illegal immigration largely from Central America, across the US-Mexican border. He is pushing Congress to approve the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), a deal his administration reached to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

Levi Strauss & Co has been "deliberate and diligent" in moving production out of China because of uncertainty hanging over tariffs on goods imported from China, Chief Executive Officer Chip Bergh said in an interview with Reuters.

Levi Strauss & Co has been "deliberate and diligent" in moving production out of China because of uncertainty hanging over tariffs on goods imported from China, Chief Executive Officer Chip Bergh said in an interview with Reuters. Just 1% or 2% of Levi's product sold in the United States are manufactured in China, Bergh said, compared to 16% two years ago. Bergh was speaking one day before President Donald Trump said he would impose tariffs on another $300 billion of Chinese goods, including apparel. Trump has used tariffs as a tool to negotiate better trade terms, saying bad deals cost millions of US jobs. Along with apparel, the new tariffs hit consumer goods such as electronics and toys and come in addition to those already imposed on $250 billion of other goods imported from China. The on-again, off-again nature of the U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods had created uncertainty for many US retailers, Bergh said. "Every day is a new day," he said. "Sometimes it looks like it's definitely going to happen and then other days you think it's off, it's not going to happen." San Francisco-based Levi's, which returned to the public markets in March, is part of a wave of retailers that have been shifting supply chains out of China to countries such as Vietnam and Bangladesh. The trend was initially in response to higher Chinese wages but the exodus is expected to be accelerated by the new tariffs, which Trump said will go into effect Sept. 1. They are expected to increase consumers' costs and have an impact across the entire retail industry. Apparel retailers like Gap Inc, handbag brand Steve Madden Ltd and department store Macy's Inc also have acted to move production out of China. However, China still is a big supplier to the industry with 42% of apparel and 69% of footwear sold in the United States made in China, according to the American Apparel and Footwear Association. Following the latest tariff news, several large retail trade groups warned the levied tariffs will hurt consumer purchases, raise prices and limit hiring. Levi's has two of its own factories in Poland and South Africa but mostly uses third-party vendors or suppliers spread across 22 different countries, said Bergh, who joined the company in September 2011. "We've narrowed down our supplier base during the time that I've been here to really develop deeper, more strategic relationships with many of our suppliers," he said. Many of Levi's suppliers in China are publicly traded companies that have multi-country footprints, said Bergh, that has diversified risk by building factories in places like Vietnam and Cambodia. Among Levi's best-selling products are the 501 men's jeans, which go for between $39.99 and $49.99, according to Levi's website. Trump also has threatened to impose tariffs on Mexico in retaliation for illegal immigration largely from Central America, across the US-Mexican border. He is pushing Congress to approve the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), a deal his administration reached to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

Levi's slims down China supply chain exposure as trade war rages on

United States President Donald Trump once again reiterated his offer to mediate in the Kashmir conflict between India and Pakistan, but added that is up to Prime Minister Narendra Modi to accept the offer of assistance.

Donald Trump offers to mediate over Kashmir issue

With momentum apparently building for a breakthrough in talks between Washington and the Taliban, younger Afghans whose lives have been overshadowed by nearly 18 years of war are sceptical any deal will bring them peace.

Instead many fear that the US, in its haste to exit its longest war, is pushing for a deal that will see the insurgents regaining some level of power in Kabul.&nbsp;

"We cannot trust the Taliban and their commitments because they were cruel and oppressive in their regime," said Abdul Jamil Qureshi, a 23-year-old psychology student at Kabul University.

"We are worried for the lives of women and girls who have fought hard for their rights following the fall of the Taliban."

Zalmay Khalilzad, the US special envoy leading America's push for peace with its longtime adversary, is expected to meet the Taliban in Doha this weekend for the latest in a months-long series of talks, with expectations high.

A peace deal between the US and the Taliban would be built around the premise that America and other foreign forces would slash their Afghanistan presence.

No numbers have been announced, but The Washington Post reported Thursday that an initial deal to end the war could see US troop numbers fall to as low as 8,000 from their current level of around 14,000.

In return, the Taliban would vow to prevent Afghanistan being used as a safe haven for various terror groups including Al-Qaeda, which conducted the September 11, 2001 attacks that triggered the US-led invasion.

Abdul Hadi, 32, who runs a stall selling energy drinks and cigarettes in the capital, worried what would happen to the Afghan army if their American benefactors and trainers leave.&nbsp;

"The withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan is not the solution, because the Afghan forces are not prepared to tackle Taliban and Daesh fighters in the country," he said, using an alternate name for the Islamic State group.

'Want to be free'&nbsp;

Afghan forces have suffered devastating casualties -- in the tens of thousands -- since they assumed responsibility for their country's security at the end of 2014.&nbsp;

Even after years of training and equipping by foreign experts, many units remain beset with corruption and desertions.

Ahmad Jawed, 25, another Kabul University student, said he saw America as "running away" and ceding Afghanistan to the Taliban, throwing into doubt any number of hard-won gains for ordinary Afghans.

"They are seeking a monopoly of power that is unacceptable for us," Jawed said.&nbsp;

"This is not Afghanistan of the '90s. We live in the 21st century. We do not trust the Taliban and their commitments."

But Abdullah, a 20-year-old who like many Afghans uses only one name, said he would welcome a deal if it leads to durable peace.

"We&nbsp;do not have a military solution for our country, the talks are the only way we can resolve the issues in Afghanistan," said Abdullah, who works for a private firm in Kabul.

We want to be "free from foreign countries' interference. If the Taliban do not oppose women working and the education of girls and leave them to be the way they are now, we will be happy to have them in Afghan society."

Mohammad Ashraf, 27, a Kabul taxi driver said all he wanted was an end to Afghanistan's raging violence.

"We don't care if the Taliban comes or not, we only want peace and security. That is all we want," Ashraf said.

With momentum apparently building for a breakthrough in talks between Washington and the Taliban, younger Afghans whose lives have been overshadowed by nearly 18 years of war are sceptical any deal will bring them peace.

With momentum apparently building for a breakthrough in talks between Washington and the Taliban, younger Afghans whose lives have been overshadowed by nearly 18 years of war are sceptical any deal will bring them peace. Instead many fear that the US, in its haste to exit its longest war, is pushing for a deal that will see the insurgents regaining some level of power in Kabul. "We cannot trust the Taliban and their commitments because they were cruel and oppressive in their regime," said Abdul Jamil Qureshi, a 23-year-old psychology student at Kabul University. "We are worried for the lives of women and girls who have fought hard for their rights following the fall of the Taliban." Zalmay Khalilzad, the US special envoy leading America's push for peace with its longtime adversary, is expected to meet the Taliban in Doha this weekend for the latest in a months-long series of talks, with expectations high. A peace deal between the US and the Taliban would be built around the premise that America and other foreign forces would slash their Afghanistan presence. No numbers have been announced, but The Washington Post reported Thursday that an initial deal to end the war could see US troop numbers fall to as low as 8,000 from their current level of around 14,000. In return, the Taliban would vow to prevent Afghanistan being used as a safe haven for various terror groups including Al-Qaeda, which conducted the September 11, 2001 attacks that triggered the US-led invasion. Abdul Hadi, 32, who runs a stall selling energy drinks and cigarettes in the capital, worried what would happen to the Afghan army if their American benefactors and trainers leave. "The withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan is not the solution, because the Afghan forces are not prepared to tackle Taliban and Daesh fighters in the country," he said, using an alternate name for the Islamic State group. 'Want to be free' Afghan forces have suffered devastating casualties -- in the tens of thousands -- since they assumed responsibility for their country's security at the end of 2014. Even after years of training and equipping by foreign experts, many units remain beset with corruption and desertions. Ahmad Jawed, 25, another Kabul University student, said he saw America as "running away" and ceding Afghanistan to the Taliban, throwing into doubt any number of hard-won gains for ordinary Afghans. "They are seeking a monopoly of power that is unacceptable for us," Jawed said. "This is not Afghanistan of the '90s. We live in the 21st century. We do not trust the Taliban and their commitments." But Abdullah, a 20-year-old who like many Afghans uses only one name, said he would welcome a deal if it leads to durable peace. "We do not have a military solution for our country, the talks are the only way we can resolve the issues in Afghanistan," said Abdullah, who works for a private firm in Kabul. We want to be "free from foreign countries' interference. If the Taliban do not oppose women working and the education of girls and leave them to be the way they are now, we will be happy to have them in Afghan society." Mohammad Ashraf, 27, a Kabul taxi driver said all he wanted was an end to Afghanistan's raging violence. "We don't care if the Taliban comes or not, we only want peace and security. That is all we want," Ashraf said.

Young Afghans wary as possible US-Taliban deal nears

US stocks slumped and bond prices spiked after US President Donald Trump imposed a new 10% tariff on $300 billion worth of goods from China beginning next month. Watch this video to know more.

Trump to impose fresh tariffs on China

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning - August 2nd, 2019

&nbsp;US&nbsp;job growth slowed in July and wages picked up moderately, which together with an escalation in<a href="https://www.wionews.com/.../us-china-trade-war-is-making-china-stronger- 234526"> trade tensions between the United States and Chin</a>a could give the Federal Reserve ammunition to cut interest rates again next month.

The Labour Department's closely watched monthly employment report on Friday came a day after President Donald Trump announced an additional 10% tariff on $300 billion worth of Chinese imports starting September 1, a move that led financial markets to almost fully price in a rate cut in September.

The U.S. central bank on Wednesday cut its short-term interest rate for the first time since 2008. Fed Chairman Jerome Powell described the widely anticipated 25-basis-point monetary policy easing as insurance against downside risks to the 10-year-old economic expansion, the longest in history, from trade tensions and slowing global growth. (Full Story)

Nonfarm payrolls increased by 164,000 jobs last month, the government said.

The economy created 41,000 fewer jobs in May and June than previously reported. July's job gains were in line with economists' expectations.

The average workweek fell to its lowest level in nearly two years.

Before the release of the employment report, fed funds futures implied traders saw a 96% chance of the Fed cutting rates again next month, according to CME Group's FedWatch tool.

The US-China trade war is taking a toll on manufacturing, with production declining for two straight quarters.

Business investment has also been hit, contracting in the second quarter for the first time in more than three years and contributing to holding back the economy to a 2.1% annualized growth rate.

The economy grew at a 3.1% pace in the first quarter.

July payrolls marked a further deceleration in job growth from an average of 223,000 per month in 2018.

Economists say it is unclear whether the loss of momentum in hiring was due to ebbing demand for labour or a shortage of qualified workers.

Still, the pace of job growth remains well above the roughly 100,000 needed per month to keep up with growth in the working-age population.

The unemployment rate was unchanged at 3.7% in July.

Despite the lowest jobless rate in nearly 50 years, wage growth remains moderate, contributing to a tame inflation environment, which could be supportive of another rate cut next month.

Inflation has undershot the Fed's 2% target this year, rising 1.6% on a year-on-year basis in June after gaining 1.5% in May.

Average hourly earnings rose 8 cents, or 0.3% in July, after the same increase in June.

That lifted the annual increase in wages to 3.2% in July from 3.1% in June.

The trend in wage gains has slowed from late 2018 when wages were rising at their fastest rate in a decade.

Even with the step-down in job and wage gains, the labour market is supporting the economy as the stimulus from last year's $1.5 trillion tax cut package fades. Economic growth in the third quarter is seen at around a 1.5% rate.

Construction payrolls increased by 4,000 jobs after shooting up by 18,000 jobs in June.

Manufacturing employment rose by 16,000 jobs after increasing by 12,000 in June.

The strong manufacturing job gains are at odds with weakening activity in the sector.

A survey on Thursday showed manufacturing employment hit its lowest level since November 2016 in July.

The sector, which accounts for more than 12% of the US&nbsp;economy, is being hobbled by trade tensions, weakening global growth, an inventory bulge - concentrated in the automotive industry - and design problems at aerospace giant Boeing Co BA.N.

Factory workers put in fewer hours last month.

The manufacturing workweek dropped 0.3 hours to 40.4 hours, the lowest since November 2011.

That contributed to the overall average workweek falling to 34.3 hours, the fewest since September 2017, from 34.4 hours in June.

Government employment increased by 16,000 jobs in July, adding to June's gain of 14,000.

US job growth slowed in July and wages picked up moderately, which together with an escalation in trade tensions between the United States and China could give the Federal Reserve ammunition to cut interest rates again next month.

US job growth slowed in July and wages picked up moderately, which together with an escalation in trade tensions between the United States and China could give the Federal Reserve ammunition to cut interest rates again next month. The Labour Department's closely watched monthly employment report on Friday came a day after President Donald Trump announced an additional 10% tariff on $300 billion worth of Chinese imports starting September 1, a move that led financial markets to almost fully price in a rate cut in September. The U.S. central bank on Wednesday cut its short-term interest rate for the first time since 2008. Fed Chairman Jerome Powell described the widely anticipated 25-basis-point monetary policy easing as insurance against downside risks to the 10-year-old economic expansion, the longest in history, from trade tensions and slowing global growth. (Full Story) Nonfarm payrolls increased by 164,000 jobs last month, the government said. The economy created 41,000 fewer jobs in May and June than previously reported. July's job gains were in line with economists' expectations. The average workweek fell to its lowest level in nearly two years. Before the release of the employment report, fed funds futures implied traders saw a 96% chance of the Fed cutting rates again next month, according to CME Group's FedWatch tool. The US-China trade war is taking a toll on manufacturing, with production declining for two straight quarters. Business investment has also been hit, contracting in the second quarter for the first time in more than three years and contributing to holding back the economy to a 2.1% annualized growth rate. The economy grew at a 3.1% pace in the first quarter. July payrolls marked a further deceleration in job growth from an average of 223,000 per month in 2018. Economists say it is unclear whether the loss of momentum in hiring was due to ebbing demand for labour or a shortage of qualified workers. Still, the pace of job growth remains well above the roughly 100,000 needed per month to keep up with growth in the working-age population. The unemployment rate was unchanged at 3.7% in July. Despite the lowest jobless rate in nearly 50 years, wage growth remains moderate, contributing to a tame inflation environment, which could be supportive of another rate cut next month. Inflation has undershot the Fed's 2% target this year, rising 1.6% on a year-on-year basis in June after gaining 1.5% in May. Average hourly earnings rose 8 cents, or 0.3% in July, after the same increase in June. That lifted the annual increase in wages to 3.2% in July from 3.1% in June. The trend in wage gains has slowed from late 2018 when wages were rising at their fastest rate in a decade. Even with the step-down in job and wage gains, the labour market is supporting the economy as the stimulus from last year's $1.5 trillion tax cut package fades. Economic growth in the third quarter is seen at around a 1.5% rate. Construction payrolls increased by 4,000 jobs after shooting up by 18,000 jobs in June. Manufacturing employment rose by 16,000 jobs after increasing by 12,000 in June. The strong manufacturing job gains are at odds with weakening activity in the sector. A survey on Thursday showed manufacturing employment hit its lowest level since November 2016 in July. The sector, which accounts for more than 12% of the US economy, is being hobbled by trade tensions, weakening global growth, an inventory bulge - concentrated in the automotive industry - and design problems at aerospace giant Boeing Co BA.N. Factory workers put in fewer hours last month. The manufacturing workweek dropped 0.3 hours to 40.4 hours, the lowest since November 2011. That contributed to the overall average workweek falling to 34.3 hours, the fewest since September 2017, from 34.4 hours in June. Government employment increased by 16,000 jobs in July, adding to June's gain of 14,000.

US employment growth slows in July; wages pick up

This time, he didn't quite go there.

President Donald Trump on Thursday briefly renewed his criticism of four minority Democratic congresswomen at his first rally since the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/after-rebuke-trump-says-i-dont-have-a-racist-bone-in-my-body-236506">controversy erupted</a> when a crowd at a rally last month broke into a chant of "Send her back" about a US lawmaker who immigrated to the United States from Somalia.

But he did not name or dwell on them. The crowd as a whole did not chant, and the president - who was being watched for his response if such a unified cry erupted - did not have to show whether he would try to stop his supporters from engaging in a call that critics view as racist.

"While Republicans are working every day to build up our country, the rage-filled Democrat Party is trying to tear America apart. The Democrat Party is now being led by four left-wing extremists who reject everything that we hold dear," Trump told the crowd in Ohio, making reference to US Representative Ilhan Omar and three colleagues are known as "the Squad."

"No one has paid a higher price for the far-left's destructive agenda than Americans living in our nation's inner cities," he said.

And that was that. Trump continued on a long riff about Democrats' performance in inner cities, but he did not name Elijah Cummings, a black US congressman from Baltimore and civil rights champion, whom Trump has also recently criticized.

Trump still had plenty to say about his opponents, and the enthusiastic crowd chanted, "Lock Her Up!" when the president criticized his 2016 Democratic presidential rival, Hillary Clinton.

The Republican president also picked up on a theme from Wednesday night's Democratic presidential debate, in which former Democratic President Barack Obama's legacy came under criticism from some candidates seeking their party's nomination to run against Trump next year. Trump said they spent more time attacking Obama than they did attack him.

Democrats have criticized the attacks by Trump on Omar and the three other progressive congresswomen as racist. The attacks started with Trump's tweets last month saying they should "go back" to where they came from. Many Republicans have shrugged off the remarks.

All four are US citizens and Omar is the only one not born in the United States.

Trump looked on when supporters chanted: "Send Her back!" at a July 17 North Carolina rally after he recounted past comments by Omar. The next day, he said he disagreed with the chant, but later resumed his criticism of the congresswomen, saying they had said horrible things about the United States and defending the North Carolina crowd as "incredible patriots."

Before he left for Cincinnati, Trump was asked by reporters at the White House whether he would stop rally participants if they started that chant.

"I don’t know that you can stop people. ... I’d prefer that they don’t. But if they do it, we’ll have to make a decision then."

This time, he didn't quite go there. President Donald Trump on Thursday briefly renewed his criticism of four minority Democratic congresswomen at his first rally since the controversy erupted when a crowd at a rally last month broke into a chant of "Send her back" about a US lawmaker who immigrated to the United States from Somalia.

This time, he didn't quite go there. President Donald Trump on Thursday briefly renewed his criticism of four minority Democratic congresswomen at his first rally since the controversy erupted when a crowd at a rally last month broke into a chant of "Send her back" about a US lawmaker who immigrated to the United States from Somalia. But he did not name or dwell on them. The crowd as a whole did not chant, and the president - who was being watched for his response if such a unified cry erupted - did not have to show whether he would try to stop his supporters from engaging in a call that critics view as racist. "While Republicans are working every day to build up our country, the rage-filled Democrat Party is trying to tear America apart. The Democrat Party is now being led by four left-wing extremists who reject everything that we hold dear," Trump told the crowd in Ohio, making reference to US Representative Ilhan Omar and three colleagues are known as "the Squad." "No one has paid a higher price for the far-left's destructive agenda than Americans living in our nation's inner cities," he said. And that was that. Trump continued on a long riff about Democrats' performance in inner cities, but he did not name Elijah Cummings, a black US congressman from Baltimore and civil rights champion, whom Trump has also recently criticized. Trump still had plenty to say about his opponents, and the enthusiastic crowd chanted, "Lock Her Up!" when the president criticized his 2016 Democratic presidential rival, Hillary Clinton. The Republican president also picked up on a theme from Wednesday night's Democratic presidential debate, in which former Democratic President Barack Obama's legacy came under criticism from some candidates seeking their party's nomination to run against Trump next year. Trump said they spent more time attacking Obama than they did attack him. Democrats have criticized the attacks by Trump on Omar and the three other progressive congresswomen as racist. The attacks started with Trump's tweets last month saying they should "go back" to where they came from. Many Republicans have shrugged off the remarks. All four are US citizens and Omar is the only one not born in the United States. Trump looked on when supporters chanted: "Send Her back!" at a July 17 North Carolina rally after he recounted past comments by Omar. The next day, he said he disagreed with the chant, but later resumed his criticism of the congresswomen, saying they had said horrible things about the United States and defending the North Carolina crowd as "incredible patriots." Before he left for Cincinnati, Trump was asked by reporters at the White House whether he would stop rally participants if they started that chant. "I don’t know that you can stop people. ... I’d prefer that they don’t. But if they do it, we’ll have to make a decision then."

'Lock Her Up!' but no 'Send her Back!' chant at Trump rally in Ohio

Oil prices rose more than 2% on Friday, regaining some ground after their biggest falls in years on US&nbsp;President Donald Trump's threat to impose more tariffs on Chinese imports.

The move, due to take effect on September&nbsp;1, intensifies a trade war between the world's top two economies and oil consumers that has disrupted global supply chains and roiled financial markets.

Any resulting economic slowdown could dent oil demand.

Benchmark Brent rose $1.56, or 2.6%, to $62.06 a barrel by 1210 GMT on Friday, after slumping more than 7% on Thursday, their steepest drop in more than three years.

US crude gained $1.29, or 2.4%, to $55.24 on Friday, after tumbling nearly 8% the previous day when they posted their biggest drop in more than four years.

Thursday's slide ended a fragile rally built on steady drawdowns in US inventories, even though global demand looked shaky due to the trade dispute.

"Given the latest turn in US-Sino trade relations, sustaining this uplift may be subject to how China chooses to respond to President Trump's new tariff initiative", said Harry Tchilinguirian, global oil strategist at BNP Paribas in London.

"The rise in oil prices may be simply the result of a technical bounce back from an oversold close," he told the Reuters Global Oil Forum, referring to Thursday's tumble.

Trump said on Thursday he would impose a 10% tariff on $300 billion of Chinese imports and could raise tariffs further if China's President Xi Jinping failed to move more quickly to strike a trade deal.

The announcement extends Trump's tariffs to nearly all of China's imports into the United States.

China said it would not accept any "intimidation or blackmail" and pledged countermeasures should the tariffs go into effect.

The US&nbsp;economy expanded by 2.1% in the second quarter, government data showed on July 26, beating economists' expectations although it was lower than first-quarter growth.

Still, there are signs of the economic toll of the trade dispute between the United States and China, which this week reported slowing manufacturing activity in July.

US&nbsp;manufacturing activity also slipped last month, dropping to a near three-year low, and construction spending fell in June as an investment in private construction projects tumbled to its lowest level in 1-1/2 years, data showed.

Oil prices rose more than 2% on Friday, regaining some ground after their biggest falls in years on US President Donald Trump's threat to impose more tariffs on Chinese imports.

Oil prices rose more than 2% on Friday, regaining some ground after their biggest falls in years on US President Donald Trump's threat to impose more tariffs on Chinese imports. The move, due to take effect on September 1, intensifies a trade war between the world's top two economies and oil consumers that has disrupted global supply chains and roiled financial markets. Any resulting economic slowdown could dent oil demand. Benchmark Brent rose $1.56, or 2.6%, to $62.06 a barrel by 1210 GMT on Friday, after slumping more than 7% on Thursday, their steepest drop in more than three years. US crude gained $1.29, or 2.4%, to $55.24 on Friday, after tumbling nearly 8% the previous day when they posted their biggest drop in more than four years. Thursday's slide ended a fragile rally built on steady drawdowns in US inventories, even though global demand looked shaky due to the trade dispute. "Given the latest turn in US-Sino trade relations, sustaining this uplift may be subject to how China chooses to respond to President Trump's new tariff initiative", said Harry Tchilinguirian, global oil strategist at BNP Paribas in London. "The rise in oil prices may be simply the result of a technical bounce back from an oversold close," he told the Reuters Global Oil Forum, referring to Thursday's tumble. Trump said on Thursday he would impose a 10% tariff on $300 billion of Chinese imports and could raise tariffs further if China's President Xi Jinping failed to move more quickly to strike a trade deal. The announcement extends Trump's tariffs to nearly all of China's imports into the United States. China said it would not accept any "intimidation or blackmail" and pledged countermeasures should the tariffs go into effect. The US economy expanded by 2.1% in the second quarter, government data showed on July 26, beating economists' expectations although it was lower than first-quarter growth. Still, there are signs of the economic toll of the trade dispute between the United States and China, which this week reported slowing manufacturing activity in July. US manufacturing activity also slipped last month, dropping to a near three-year low, and construction spending fell in June as an investment in private construction projects tumbled to its lowest level in 1-1/2 years, data showed.

Oil prices rebound more than 2% after plunging on Donald Trump's tariff plan

U.S Pulls out of cold war-era treaty, 32-year old treaty becomes obsolete.

U.S Pulls out of cold war-era treaty

Investors continued to pump in money into bonds and shunned equities in the past week, Bank of America Merrill Lynch (BAML) said on Friday, amid worries of a corporate earnings recession and trade tensions across the world.

BAML said its global earnings per share (EPS) "growth model" suggested an earnings recession. The model forecasts a 7.5% drop in EPS in the next 12 months.

With all major central banks coming out with less-dovish guidance, in the week to July 31 investors played it safe by pouring $10.5 billion into bonds while pulling some $1.7 billion money out of equities.

The US was the only region to attract investors, who pumped $4.8 billion into equities, while European and Japan stocks had outflows. Money has flowed out of European equities in 70 of the past 73 weeks.

Global equities were roiled last week by central bank comments that fell-short of expectations. European markets took a sharp hit after the European Central Bank kept interest&nbsp;rates intact and its outlook on easing came in below market expectations.

The US Federal Reserve cut interest rates in line with market expectations on Wednesday but poured cold water on market expectations of a lengthy easing cycle sending global stocks lower.

Investors continued to pump in money into bonds and shunned equities in the past week, Bank of America Merrill Lynch (BAML) said on Friday, amid worries of a corporate earnings recession and trade tensions across the world.

Investors continued to pump in money into bonds and shunned equities in the past week, Bank of America Merrill Lynch (BAML) said on Friday, amid worries of a corporate earnings recession and trade tensions across the world. BAML said its global earnings per share (EPS) "growth model" suggested an earnings recession. The model forecasts a 7.5% drop in EPS in the next 12 months. With all major central banks coming out with less-dovish guidance, in the week to July 31 investors played it safe by pouring $10.5 billion into bonds while pulling some $1.7 billion money out of equities. The US was the only region to attract investors, who pumped $4.8 billion into equities, while European and Japan stocks had outflows. Money has flowed out of European equities in 70 of the past 73 weeks. Global equities were roiled last week by central bank comments that fell-short of expectations. European markets took a sharp hit after the European Central Bank kept interest rates intact and its outlook on easing came in below market expectations. The US Federal Reserve cut interest rates in line with market expectations on Wednesday but poured cold water on market expectations of a lengthy easing cycle sending global stocks lower.

Fears of earnings recession keep investors away from stocks: Bank of America Merrill Lynch

US President Donald Trump announced to impose a new 10% tariff on $300 billion worth of goods from China beginning next month. Watch this video to know more.

Donald Trump to impose fresh tariffs on China

Trump to impose new 10% tariff on $300 billion Chinese goods

There has been a sharp drop in the size of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-peace-envoy-for-afghanistan-set-to-resume-talks-with-taliban-sources-239765">Afghanistan</a>`s National Defense Security Forces in the past few months due to changes in the way<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-soldier-killed-in-action-in-afghanistan-169758"> troops </a>are counted and an effort to reduce the number of so-called "ghost" soldiers, a US government watchdog said on Thursday.&nbsp;

The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) said in a report that ANDSF personnel size had gone down by nearly 10 percentage points in the most recent quarter compared to the previous trimester.&nbsp;

The number of ANDSF troops fell by nearly 42,000 compared to roughly the same period, between April and the end of June last year, the report said.

The disclosure comes as Washington attempts to clinch a framework peace agreement with Taliban insurgents that is expected to include a timeline for withdrawing US troops, which now number about 14,000 in Afghanistan.&nbsp;

Some 9,000 of those forces are involved with training, advising and assisting Afghan security forces. US officials have long expressed concerns about the strength and capability of the Afghan forces, especially without adequate international support.

SIGAR, citing information from the US-led coalition, said the decline in Afghan force levels owed to a move by the ANDSF to switch their reporting of personnel strength to the number of biometrically validated forces, rather than just the number reported on-hand by officials in the field.&nbsp;

"The change was part of an effort by the United States and its partners to reduce opportunities for corrupt ANDSF officials to report `ghost` (nonexistent) soldiers and police on personnel rolls in order to pocket the salaries," the report said.&nbsp;

With a potential US drawdown looming, recent Taliban attacks in Afghanistan have underscored pressure on Afghanistan’s overstretched security forces.

There has been a sharp drop in the size of Afghanistan`s National Defense Security Forces in the past few months due to changes in the way troops are counted and an effort to reduce the number of so-called "ghost" soldiers, a US government watchdog said on Thursday.

There has been a sharp drop in the size of Afghanistan`s National Defense Security Forces in the past few months due to changes in the way troops are counted and an effort to reduce the number of so-called "ghost" soldiers, a US government watchdog said on Thursday. The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) said in a report that ANDSF personnel size had gone down by nearly 10 percentage points in the most recent quarter compared to the previous trimester. The number of ANDSF troops fell by nearly 42,000 compared to roughly the same period, between April and the end of June last year, the report said. The disclosure comes as Washington attempts to clinch a framework peace agreement with Taliban insurgents that is expected to include a timeline for withdrawing US troops, which now number about 14,000 in Afghanistan. Some 9,000 of those forces are involved with training, advising and assisting Afghan security forces. US officials have long expressed concerns about the strength and capability of the Afghan forces, especially without adequate international support. SIGAR, citing information from the US-led coalition, said the decline in Afghan force levels owed to a move by the ANDSF to switch their reporting of personnel strength to the number of biometrically validated forces, rather than just the number reported on-hand by officials in the field. "The change was part of an effort by the United States and its partners to reduce opportunities for corrupt ANDSF officials to report `ghost` (nonexistent) soldiers and police on personnel rolls in order to pocket the salaries," the report said. With a potential US drawdown looming, recent Taliban attacks in Afghanistan have underscored pressure on Afghanistan’s overstretched security forces.

Afghan troop numbers drop sharply in crackdown on 'ghost' soldiers

Watch our report on the rise and fall of al-Qaeda, which pioneered the franchise model of terrorism.

The resurgence of Al-Qaeda

us-1

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

us 1