Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen on Thursday invoked 'steadfast promise of the Taiwan-US partnership' as she oversaw commissioning of US-made advansed F-16 fighter jet squadron into country's air force. The induction of the advanced fighter jet is likely to strengthen Taiwan's defences against overly assertive China.

The ceremony&nbsp;took place at an airbase in Chiayi, a city in southern Taiwan. Sandra Oudkirk, Washington's de-facto ambassador to Taiwan was also present.

"I trust that in holding fast to democratic values, there will definitely be more countries with similar values who will stand with us on this front," said President Tsai Ing-wen.

The F-16V is an upgraded and much more sophisticated version of Taiwan's other ageing F-16 fighters which date back to the 1990s. The island also has French-made Mirage jets and its own indigenous warplane.

<img alt="Taiwan" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="b1d228cd-86a2-4e03-94a6-01ece747564c" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/000_9RV6E2.jpg" />

A fourth-generation multi-role fighter, the F-16V boasts more advanced radar systems as well as more sophisticated weaponry, navigation and electronic warfare systems.

It is however less advanced than fifth-generation fighters like China's J-20, Russia's Su-57 as well as the US-made F-22 and F-35 warplanes.

Taiwan is in the middle of upgrading 141 older F-16s to make them the V version and has also ordered 66 new F-16Vs.

Latest deployment of F-16s has come amid soaring tension between US and China over Taiwan.

The self-ruled democracy of 23 million is claimed by Beijing which has vowed to one day take the island, by force if needs.

The ceremony prompted a fiery response from Beijing at a press briefing, with an official saying "China opposes any official contact between the US and Taiwan".

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian urged the United States not to send "wrong signals to separatist forces", adding that those supporting Taiwan's independence "have spared no effort to split the motherland and collude with foreign forces".

"Their actions are akin to throwing an egg against a rock," he said.

(With inputs from agencies)

Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen on Thursday invoked 'steadfast promise of the Taiwan-US partnership' as she oversaw commissioning of US-made advansed F-16 fighter jet squadron into country's air force.

Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen on Thursday invoked 'steadfast promise of the Taiwan-US partnership' as she oversaw commissioning of US-made advansed F-16 fighter jet squadron into country's air force. The induction of the advanced fighter jet is likely to strengthen Taiwan's defences against overly assertive China. The ceremony took place at an airbase in Chiayi, a city in southern Taiwan. Sandra Oudkirk, Washington's de-facto ambassador to Taiwan was also present. "I trust that in holding fast to democratic values, there will definitely be more countries with similar values who will stand with us on this front," said President Tsai Ing-wen. The F-16V is an upgraded and much more sophisticated version of Taiwan's other ageing F-16 fighters which date back to the 1990s. The island also has French-made Mirage jets and its own indigenous warplane. A fourth-generation multi-role fighter, the F-16V boasts more advanced radar systems as well as more sophisticated weaponry, navigation and electronic warfare systems. It is however less advanced than fifth-generation fighters like China's J-20, Russia's Su-57 as well as the US-made F-22 and F-35 warplanes. Taiwan is in the middle of upgrading 141 older F-16s to make them the V version and has also ordered 66 new F-16Vs. Latest deployment of F-16s has come amid soaring tension between US and China over Taiwan. The self-ruled democracy of 23 million is claimed by Beijing which has vowed to one day take the island, by force if needs. The ceremony prompted a fiery response from Beijing at a press briefing, with an official saying "China opposes any official contact between the US and Taiwan". Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian urged the United States not to send "wrong signals to separatist forces", adding that those supporting Taiwan's independence "have spared no effort to split the motherland and collude with foreign forces". "Their actions are akin to throwing an egg against a rock," he said. (With inputs from agencies)

Taiwan president hails US-Taiwan friendship at F-16 fighter jet induction ceremony

Drunk driving has always been a major concern in the US as it kills more than 10,000 people every year. However, a new law that has been introduced aims at tackling this problem. The law makes it mandatory for every car to have an alcohol detection system.&nbsp;

The new law was introduced on Tuesday when President Joe Biden signed the infrastructure bill that requires new cars have the systems installed as standard equipment.&nbsp;

It was after Sarah Carmichael, who happens to be a victim, became an advocate for all other victims and along with anti-drunk-driving advocacy group, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) urged the federal legislation to make alcohol detection systems mandatory in all vehicles.

She explains how a crash in February 2008 changed her life forever. She was stopped at a light in Framingham when she was hit by a drunk driver.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/news-anchor-reacts-to-viral-you-confusion-video-was-the-joke-on-the-viewers-430279">Also read |&nbsp;News anchor reacts to viral 'You' confusion video; was the joke on the viewers?</a>

Speaking to CBS Boston, she said, "I was in a medically induced coma for about 10 days."

"C1 and C2 vertebrae in my neck were fractured as well as the base of my skull, both sides of my collarbone, 11 of my ribs, my pelvis was shattered,” she told WBZ-TV’s I-Team. “Doctors prepared my family that I was not going to live.”

It took her years to recover.

Alex Otte, national president of MADD said, "I'm crying tears of joy today."

"This is the beginning of the end of drunk driving," she wrote in a statement after Biden's law signing ceremony Monday at the White House.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/watch-facebook-founder-zuckerberg-tries-to-feel-objects-in-virtual-reality-with-haptic-glove-vr-headset-430192">Also read |&nbsp;Watch: Facebook founder Zuckerberg tries to feel objects in virtual reality with haptic glove, VR headset &nbsp;</a>

The DADDS initiative is a partnership between ACTS and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 
Laura Perrotta, president of the advocacy group American Highway Users Alliance, deemed it as a fine idea.

"Someone uses mouthwash and goes to turn on their car and can't get it to start, but then someone else has one too many drinks and it doesn't detect it," she said. "That could be a real problem."

Drunk driving has always been a major concern in the US as it kills more than 10,000 people every year. However, a new law that has been introduced aims at tackling this problem.

Drunk driving has always been a major concern in the US as it kills more than 10,000 people every year. However, a new law that has been introduced aims at tackling this problem. The law makes it mandatory for every car to have an alcohol detection system. The new law was introduced on Tuesday when President Joe Biden signed the infrastructure bill that requires new cars have the systems installed as standard equipment. It was after Sarah Carmichael, who happens to be a victim, became an advocate for all other victims and along with anti-drunk-driving advocacy group, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) urged the federal legislation to make alcohol detection systems mandatory in all vehicles. She explains how a crash in February 2008 changed her life forever. She was stopped at a light in Framingham when she was hit by a drunk driver. Also read | News anchor reacts to viral 'You' confusion video; was the joke on the viewers? Speaking to CBS Boston, she said, "I was in a medically induced coma for about 10 days." "C1 and C2 vertebrae in my neck were fractured as well as the base of my skull, both sides of my collarbone, 11 of my ribs, my pelvis was shattered,” she told WBZ-TV’s I-Team. “Doctors prepared my family that I was not going to live.” It took her years to recover. Alex Otte, national president of MADD said, "I'm crying tears of joy today." "This is the beginning of the end of drunk driving," she wrote in a statement after Biden's law signing ceremony Monday at the White House. Also read | Watch: Facebook founder Zuckerberg tries to feel objects in virtual reality with haptic glove, VR headset The DADDS initiative is a partnership between ACTS and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Laura Perrotta, president of the advocacy group American Highway Users Alliance, deemed it as a fine idea. "Someone uses mouthwash and goes to turn on their car and can't get it to start, but then someone else has one too many drinks and it doesn't detect it," she said. "That could be a real problem."

'A fine idea': Alcohol detection systems now mandatory for all vehicles in US

In what is being called by traditionalists as incursion of US-inspired “wokeism”, a French reference dictionary had given official recognition to a gender-inclusive pronoun. The dictionary has now defended its decision. &nbsp;&nbsp;

The everyday use of “iel”, a neologism combining the French words for he and she, has risen and is largely done for anecdotal purposes. The critics deem it to be a linguistic affront, which needs to be stopped. &nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/decathlon-stops-sale-of-canoes-in-northern-france-to-curb-migrant-crossings-430105" hreflang="en">Decathlon stops sale of canoes in northern France to curb migrant crossings</a>

The Petit Robert dictionary’s move has been denounced by the education minister. The minister supported a lawmaker’s demand that French-language guardians at the Académie Française should chip in. &nbsp;

On Twitter, Jean-Michel Blanquer, said, “Inclusive writing is not the future of the French language. Our students, who are consolidating their basic knowledge, cannot have that as a reference.” &nbsp;&nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/why-is-international-day-for-tolerance-observed-429818" hreflang="en">Why is International Day for Tolerance observed?</a>

François Jolivet, lawmaker in French President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist party seeking the ban by the Académie, wrote, “This type of initiative sullies our language, and ends up dividing its users instead of bringing them together.” &nbsp;&nbsp;

But the Robert’s director denied any activist motive. It said its specialists had noted a rise in the use of “iel” for months.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

In what is being called by traditionalists as incursion of US-inspired “wokeism”, a French reference dictionary had given official recognition to a gender-inclusive pronoun.

In what is being called by traditionalists as incursion of US-inspired “wokeism”, a French reference dictionary had given official recognition to a gender-inclusive pronoun. The dictionary has now defended its decision. The everyday use of “iel”, a neologism combining the French words for he and she, has risen and is largely done for anecdotal purposes. The critics deem it to be a linguistic affront, which needs to be stopped. Also Read: Decathlon stops sale of canoes in northern France to curb migrant crossings The Petit Robert dictionary’s move has been denounced by the education minister. The minister supported a lawmaker’s demand that French-language guardians at the Académie Française should chip in. On Twitter, Jean-Michel Blanquer, said, “Inclusive writing is not the future of the French language. Our students, who are consolidating their basic knowledge, cannot have that as a reference.” Also Read: Why is International Day for Tolerance observed? François Jolivet, lawmaker in French President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist party seeking the ban by the Académie, wrote, “This type of initiative sullies our language, and ends up dividing its users instead of bringing them together.” But the Robert’s director denied any activist motive. It said its specialists had noted a rise in the use of “iel” for months. (With inputs from agencies)

French dictionary defends move to recognise a gender-inclusive pronoun

Plastic is one of the biggest enemies of the planet, the pollution caused by plastic waste continues to have a devastating impact on marine life. In the wake of the crisis, the US has said that it will back talks to tackle plastic pollution.

US to step up efforts to tackle plastic waste as it continues to devastate marine life

In a striking assessment, it was revealed that more than 100,000 people have died due to the drug overdoses over a year-long period during the Covid pandemic.&nbsp;This is the highest death toll in a year from drugs ever recorded in the US.&nbsp;

Overdose deaths rose by 28.5% in 12 months ending on this past April, shows data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-transgender-woman-put-with-three-men-in-jail-cell-gets-beaten-suffers-broken-jaw-430264" hreflang="en">US transgender woman put with three men in jail cell, gets beaten, suffers broken jaw</a>&nbsp;

According to the experts, the overdoses had seen a sharp rise due to the psychological toll of the pandemic and more synthetic opioids like fentanyl in the supply. &nbsp;

Overdoses rose in 46 states of the US. The CDC estimated that 100,306 people died from April 2020 to same month in 2021 with the help of data from death certificates. Around 78,056 deaths were reported the year prior to it. &nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-house-censures-republican-paul-gosar-for-posting-violent-anime-video-of-killing-democrat-430213" hreflang="en">US House censures Republican Paul Gosar for posting violent anime video of killing Democrat</a>

The highest rise in overdose deaths was recorded in Vermont, where the fatalities rose by 70% to 209. The number of deaths in the country from drugs has surpassed those from car crashes, guns and the flu. &nbsp;

Katherine Keyes, a drug abuse expert and associate professor of epidemiology, Columbia University, told the BBC that although overdose deaths have been rising for several years, the pandemic "added fuel to that fire". &nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

In a striking assessment, it was revealed that more than 100,000 people have died due to the drug overdoses over a year-long period during the Covid pandemic. This is the highest death toll in a year from drugs ever recorded in the US.

In a striking assessment, it was revealed that more than 100,000 people have died due to the drug overdoses over a year-long period during the Covid pandemic. This is the highest death toll in a year from drugs ever recorded in the US. Overdose deaths rose by 28.5% in 12 months ending on this past April, shows data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Also Read: US transgender woman put with three men in jail cell, gets beaten, suffers broken jaw According to the experts, the overdoses had seen a sharp rise due to the psychological toll of the pandemic and more synthetic opioids like fentanyl in the supply. Overdoses rose in 46 states of the US. The CDC estimated that 100,306 people died from April 2020 to same month in 2021 with the help of data from death certificates. Around 78,056 deaths were reported the year prior to it. Also Read: US House censures Republican Paul Gosar for posting violent anime video of killing Democrat The highest rise in overdose deaths was recorded in Vermont, where the fatalities rose by 70% to 209. The number of deaths in the country from drugs has surpassed those from car crashes, guns and the flu. Katherine Keyes, a drug abuse expert and associate professor of epidemiology, Columbia University, told the BBC that although overdose deaths have been rising for several years, the pandemic "added fuel to that fire". (With inputs from agencies)

Drug overdoses killed a record 100,000 in US during COVID-19 pandemic

The Biden administration has asked some of the world`s largest oil consuming nations - including China, India and Japan - to consider releasing crude stockpiles in a coordinated effort to lower global energy prices, according to several people familiar with the matter.

The unusual request comes as US&nbsp;President Joe Biden fends off political pressure over rising pump prices and other consumer costs driven by a rebound in economic activity from lows plumbed early in the coronavirus pandemic.

It also reflects US&nbsp;frustration with members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies who have rebuffed repeated requests from Washington to speed up their production increases.

"We`re talking about the symbolism of the largest consumers of the world sending a message to OPEC that `you`ve got to change your behaviour," one of the sources said.

In Asia, where China said it is working on a crude release, oil prices extended declines prompted by the U.S. request, after settling on Wednesday further below seven-year highs struck in early October.

Biden and top aides have discussed the possibility of a coordinated release of stockpiled oil with close allies including Japan, South Korea and India, as well as with China, over the past several weeks, the sources said.

The US and allies have coordinated strategic petroleum reserve releases before, for example in 2011 during a war in OPEC member Libya.

But the current proposal represents an unprecedented challenge to OPEC, the cartel that has influenced oil prices for more than five decades, because it involves China, the world`s biggest importer of crude.

A Japanese industry ministry official said the United States has requested Tokyo`s cooperation in dealing with higher oil prices, but he could not confirm whether the request included coordinated releases of stockpiles. By law, Japan cannot use reserve releases to lower prices, the official said.

A senior cabinet official declined to comment.

China`s state reserve bureau said it was working on a release of crude oil reserves although it declined to comment on the U.S. request.

A South Korean official confirmed the United States had asked Seoul to release some oil reserves.

"We are thoroughly reviewing the U.S. request, however, we do not release oil reserve because of rising oil prices. We could release oil reserve in case of supply imbalance, but not to respond to rising oil prices," the official said.

The U.S. share of any potential release of reserves would need to be more than 20 million to 30 million barrels to affect markets, according to a U.S. source who participated in the discussions. Such a release could be in the form of a sale or a loan from the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve - or both.

The SPR was set up in the 1970s after the Arab Oil Embargo to ensure the United States has adequate supply to weather an emergency.

Several people familiar with the matter cautioned that negotiations over a coordinated supply release have not been finalized nor has any final decision been made about whether to pursue any specific course of action on oil prices.

The White House declined to comment on the detailed content of conversations with other countries.

After Reuters reported on the White House discussions, U.S. crude and global benchmark Brent slumped, with the latter dropping below 80% a barrel.&nbsp;

OPEC and other producers including Russia, known collectively as OPEC+, have been adding around 400,000 barrels per day to the market on a monthly basis, but have resisted Biden`s calls for more rapid increases, arguing the rebound in demand could be fragile.

OPEC Secretary General Mohammad Barkindo said on Tuesday he expected a global supply surplus to emerge as soon as December.

"These are signals that we have to be very, very careful," he told reporters.

Rising oil prices have vexed Biden ahead of the 2022 midterm elections which will determine whether his Democratic party maintains slim majorities in the U.S. Congress.

U.S. gasoline prices average $3.41 per gallon recently, according to AAA, more than 60% higher than a year ago as the economy has rebounded from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Several Biden aides attribute his falling public approval ratings in recent months to worsening inflation from energy to food and other areas. The consumer price index is up 6.2% over the last 12 months, with its energy components up 30%.

The Paris-based International Energy Agency, which monitors national SPRs for members that include the U.S. Japan and most western countries, declined to comment.

The IEA in the past has coordinated releases involving several countries.

The Biden administration has asked some of the world`s largest oil consuming nations - including China, India and Japan - to consider releasing crude stockpiles in a coordinated effort to lower global energy prices, according to several people familiar with the matter.

The Biden administration has asked some of the world`s largest oil consuming nations - including China, India and Japan - to consider releasing crude stockpiles in a coordinated effort to lower global energy prices, according to several people familiar with the matter. The unusual request comes as US President Joe Biden fends off political pressure over rising pump prices and other consumer costs driven by a rebound in economic activity from lows plumbed early in the coronavirus pandemic. It also reflects US frustration with members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies who have rebuffed repeated requests from Washington to speed up their production increases. "We`re talking about the symbolism of the largest consumers of the world sending a message to OPEC that `you`ve got to change your behaviour," one of the sources said. In Asia, where China said it is working on a crude release, oil prices extended declines prompted by the U.S. request, after settling on Wednesday further below seven-year highs struck in early October. Biden and top aides have discussed the possibility of a coordinated release of stockpiled oil with close allies including Japan, South Korea and India, as well as with China, over the past several weeks, the sources said. The US and allies have coordinated strategic petroleum reserve releases before, for example in 2011 during a war in OPEC member Libya. But the current proposal represents an unprecedented challenge to OPEC, the cartel that has influenced oil prices for more than five decades, because it involves China, the world`s biggest importer of crude. A Japanese industry ministry official said the United States has requested Tokyo`s cooperation in dealing with higher oil prices, but he could not confirm whether the request included coordinated releases of stockpiles. By law, Japan cannot use reserve releases to lower prices, the official said. A senior cabinet official declined to comment. China`s state reserve bureau said it was working on a release of crude oil reserves although it declined to comment on the U.S. request. A South Korean official confirmed the United States had asked Seoul to release some oil reserves. "We are thoroughly reviewing the U.S. request, however, we do not release oil reserve because of rising oil prices. We could release oil reserve in case of supply imbalance, but not to respond to rising oil prices," the official said. The U.S. share of any potential release of reserves would need to be more than 20 million to 30 million barrels to affect markets, according to a U.S. source who participated in the discussions. Such a release could be in the form of a sale or a loan from the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve - or both. The SPR was set up in the 1970s after the Arab Oil Embargo to ensure the United States has adequate supply to weather an emergency. Several people familiar with the matter cautioned that negotiations over a coordinated supply release have not been finalized nor has any final decision been made about whether to pursue any specific course of action on oil prices. The White House declined to comment on the detailed content of conversations with other countries. After Reuters reported on the White House discussions, U.S. crude and global benchmark Brent slumped, with the latter dropping below 80% a barrel. OPEC and other producers including Russia, known collectively as OPEC+, have been adding around 400,000 barrels per day to the market on a monthly basis, but have resisted Biden`s calls for more rapid increases, arguing the rebound in demand could be fragile. OPEC Secretary General Mohammad Barkindo said on Tuesday he expected a global supply surplus to emerge as soon as December. "These are signals that we have to be very, very careful," he told reporters. Rising oil prices have vexed Biden ahead of the 2022 midterm elections which will determine whether his Democratic party maintains slim majorities in the U.S. Congress. U.S. gasoline prices average $3.41 per gallon recently, according to AAA, more than 60% higher than a year ago as the economy has rebounded from the COVID-19 pandemic. Several Biden aides attribute his falling public approval ratings in recent months to worsening inflation from energy to food and other areas. The consumer price index is up 6.2% over the last 12 months, with its energy components up 30%. The Paris-based International Energy Agency, which monitors national SPRs for members that include the U.S. Japan and most western countries, declined to comment. The IEA in the past has coordinated releases involving several countries.

US asks India, China, others to consider tapping oil reserves

In a shocking incident, a transgender woman was left with a broken jaw after being viciously attacked on being put in a cell with three men by police, claimed a lawsuit filed by the victim. &nbsp;

After being booked in San Diego Central Jail in the US last November, Kristina Frost was initially held in a cell alone, claim federal court documents. &nbsp;

Frost says that she was remanded "without any reasonable justification" and against her will into a "minimally monitored cell" with three male inmates. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/for-posting-violent-anime-video-us-house-censures-republican-paul-gosar-with-223-207-vote-430213" hreflang="en">For posting violent anime video, US House censures Republican Paul Gosar with 223-207 vote</a>

The men in the cell hit her with "closed fists" until her jaw was broken. She suffered severe injuries and situation was such that her mouth had to be wired shut for long periods of time. She was left needing two separate surgeries, claims the victim. &nbsp;&nbsp;

The victim had told jailers that her identifying documents show that she is a woman, reveal the papers filed at the US District Court in Southern District of California. &nbsp;&nbsp;

She was also wearing high-cut shorts and bra at the time of arrest, which were described as "feminine" in the papers. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/judge-sentences-us-capitol-rioter-qanon-shaman-to-over-three-years-in-prison-430240" hreflang="en">Judge sentences US Capitol rioter 'QAnon Shaman' to over three years in prison</a>

This incident has brought to light the plight of the transgenders as they have been facing indifferent attitude in the jails of the country. &nbsp;&nbsp;

In an investigation last year, it was also revealed that the transgender detainees are very rarely housed as per their gender identity. &nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

In a shocking incident, a transgender woman was left with a broken jaw after being viciously attacked on being put in a cell with three men by police, claimed a lawsuit filed by the victim.

In a shocking incident, a transgender woman was left with a broken jaw after being viciously attacked on being put in a cell with three men by police, claimed a lawsuit filed by the victim. After being booked in San Diego Central Jail in the US last November, Kristina Frost was initially held in a cell alone, claim federal court documents. Frost says that she was remanded "without any reasonable justification" and against her will into a "minimally monitored cell" with three male inmates. Also Read: For posting violent anime video, US House censures Republican Paul Gosar with 223-207 vote The men in the cell hit her with "closed fists" until her jaw was broken. She suffered severe injuries and situation was such that her mouth had to be wired shut for long periods of time. She was left needing two separate surgeries, claims the victim. The victim had told jailers that her identifying documents show that she is a woman, reveal the papers filed at the US District Court in Southern District of California. She was also wearing high-cut shorts and bra at the time of arrest, which were described as "feminine" in the papers. Also Read: Judge sentences US Capitol rioter 'QAnon Shaman' to over three years in prison This incident has brought to light the plight of the transgenders as they have been facing indifferent attitude in the jails of the country. In an investigation last year, it was also revealed that the transgender detainees are very rarely housed as per their gender identity. (With inputs from agencies)

US transgender woman put with three men in jail cell, gets beaten, suffers broken jaw

A federal judge on Wednesday sentenced the U.S. Capitol rioter known as the "QAnon Shaman" for his horned headdress to 41 months in prison for his role in the deadly Jan. 6 attack by followers of then-President Donald Trump.

Prosecutors had asked U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth to impose a longer 51-month sentence on Jacob Chansley, who pleaded guilty in September to obstructing an official proceeding when he and thousands of others stormed the building to try to stop Congress from certifying President Joe Biden's election.

The sentence matches one Lamberth imposed on a former mixed martial artist filmed punching a police officer during violence, who was sentenced&nbsp;last week&nbsp;to 41 months in prison. The two are the stiffest sentences handed down in any of the roughly 675 riot prosecutions.

Lamberth said he believed Chansley, 34, had done a lot to convince the court he is "on the right track."

Chansley's attorney asked the judge for a sentence of time served for his client, who has been detained since his January arrest. Chansley appeared in court in a dark green prison jumpsuit, with a beard and shaved head.

"The hardest part of this is that I know I am to blame," Chansley said in a lengthy statement before he was sentenced, describing a difficult childhood and saying he had taken responsibility for his behavior.

"I thought I was going to get 20 years solitary confinement," he said, adding: "This trauma has done something to me ... I have the white hairs to prove it ... on my chest ... on my arms... I should not have white hairs your honor."

While in detention, Chansley was diagnosed by prison officials with transient schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and anxiety. When he entered his guilty plea, Chansley said he was disappointed Trump had not pardoned him.

Trump was impeached by the House of Representatives and acquitted by the Senate on a charge of inciting the Jan. 6 riot for a fiery speech that preceded it in which he told his followers to "fight like hell."

Four people died in the violence. A Capitol Police officer who had been attacked by protesters died the day after the riot and four police officers who took part in the defense of the Capitol later took their own lives. About 140 police officers were injured.

Most of the guilty pleas in Jan. 6 prosecutions so far have been in cases involving non-violent misdemeanors, but government lawyers are seeking prison sentences for some defendants facing more serious felony charges.

A federal judge on Wednesday sentenced the U.S. Capitol rioter known as the "QAnon Shaman" for his horned headdress to 41 months in prison for his role in the deadly Jan.

A federal judge on Wednesday sentenced the U.S. Capitol rioter known as the "QAnon Shaman" for his horned headdress to 41 months in prison for his role in the deadly Jan. 6 attack by followers of then-President Donald Trump. Prosecutors had asked U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth to impose a longer 51-month sentence on Jacob Chansley, who pleaded guilty in September to obstructing an official proceeding when he and thousands of others stormed the building to try to stop Congress from certifying President Joe Biden's election. The sentence matches one Lamberth imposed on a former mixed martial artist filmed punching a police officer during violence, who was sentenced last week to 41 months in prison. The two are the stiffest sentences handed down in any of the roughly 675 riot prosecutions. Lamberth said he believed Chansley, 34, had done a lot to convince the court he is "on the right track." Chansley's attorney asked the judge for a sentence of time served for his client, who has been detained since his January arrest. Chansley appeared in court in a dark green prison jumpsuit, with a beard and shaved head. "The hardest part of this is that I know I am to blame," Chansley said in a lengthy statement before he was sentenced, describing a difficult childhood and saying he had taken responsibility for his behavior. "I thought I was going to get 20 years solitary confinement," he said, adding: "This trauma has done something to me ... I have the white hairs to prove it ... on my chest ... on my arms... I should not have white hairs your honor." While in detention, Chansley was diagnosed by prison officials with transient schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and anxiety. When he entered his guilty plea, Chansley said he was disappointed Trump had not pardoned him. Trump was impeached by the House of Representatives and acquitted by the Senate on a charge of inciting the Jan. 6 riot for a fiery speech that preceded it in which he told his followers to "fight like hell." Four people died in the violence. A Capitol Police officer who had been attacked by protesters died the day after the riot and four police officers who took part in the defense of the Capitol later took their own lives. About 140 police officers were injured. Most of the guilty pleas in Jan. 6 prosecutions so far have been in cases involving non-violent misdemeanors, but government lawyers are seeking prison sentences for some defendants facing more serious felony charges.

Judge sentences US Capitol rioter 'QAnon Shaman' to over three years in prison

The drug crisis in the United States continues to escalate. This year, more than 100,000 Americans died due to drug overdose. Its overuse exceeds the deaths caused by car crashes, guns and even flu. It is now one of the top 10 reasons for death in America. Officials say this grim situation is tied in with the onset of COVID-19.

Drug crisis in the United States continues to escalate

The second most senior US general, John Hyten, has said the hypersonic missile tested by China this summer "went around the world", and warned that China might one day be capable of launching a surprise nuclear attack on the US.&nbsp;

He said, "They launched a long-range missile. It went around the world, dropped off a hypersonic glide vehicle that glided all the way back to China, that impacted a target in China."

When asked about the missile hitting the target, Hyten told CBS News: "Close enough."

Hyten said, "Why are they building all of this capability?&nbsp;They look like a first-use weapon. That's what those weapons look like to me."

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/days-after-promising-to-fight-climate-change-us-auctions-off-oil-and-gas-drilling-lease-in-gulf-of-mexico-430125">Also read |&nbsp;Days after promising to fight climate change, US auctions off oil and gas drilling lease in Gulf of Mexico</a>

China has denied that it has tested hypersonic weapons. The pace with which the Chinese have developed their system has surprised US national security officials.

Hyten, outgoing vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,&nbsp;had previously deemed China's developing pace as "stunning."

Earlier this week, US President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping opened a virtual summit. This was done with the aim of more communication between the superpowers and "guardrails" to prevent a conflict.

Biden said they must create "guardrails" so that the competition between the two countries does not veer into conflict, whether intended or unintended. They would have a "candid" discussion, he added.

Referring to Biden as his "old friend," Beijing's Xi said the rivals must work more closely. "China and the United States need to increase communication and cooperation," he said.

The second most senior US general, John Hyten, has said the hypersonic missile tested by China this summer "went around the world", and warned that China might one day be capable of launching a surprise nuclear attack on the US.

The second most senior US general, John Hyten, has said the hypersonic missile tested by China this summer "went around the world", and warned that China might one day be capable of launching a surprise nuclear attack on the US. He said, "They launched a long-range missile. It went around the world, dropped off a hypersonic glide vehicle that glided all the way back to China, that impacted a target in China." When asked about the missile hitting the target, Hyten told CBS News: "Close enough." Hyten said, "Why are they building all of this capability? They look like a first-use weapon. That's what those weapons look like to me." Also read | Days after promising to fight climate change, US auctions off oil and gas drilling lease in Gulf of Mexico China has denied that it has tested hypersonic weapons. The pace with which the Chinese have developed their system has surprised US national security officials. Hyten, outgoing vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, had previously deemed China's developing pace as "stunning." Earlier this week, US President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping opened a virtual summit. This was done with the aim of more communication between the superpowers and "guardrails" to prevent a conflict. Biden said they must create "guardrails" so that the competition between the two countries does not veer into conflict, whether intended or unintended. They would have a "candid" discussion, he added. Referring to Biden as his "old friend," Beijing's Xi said the rivals must work more closely. "China and the United States need to increase communication and cooperation," he said.

China will soon be capable of launching a surprise nuke attack on US, warns top military official

US President Joe Biden held a virtual meeting with Xi Jinping. In this meeting, both the countries discussed common issues, strategic issues including mutual relations. Taiwan and human rights violations were Biden's top focus. During this meeting, Chinese President Xi said that America and China should respect each other.

Joe Biden, Xi Jinping trade warnings over Taiwan

U.S. retail sales surged in October as Americans eagerly started their holiday shopping early to avoid empty shelves amid shortages of some goods because of the ongoing pandemic, giving the economy a lift at the start of the fourth quarter.

US retail sales surge in October

A planned pan-European payments network backed by 22 banks is to compete with U.S. Mastercard and Visa appealed for public money, saying its private backers were not prepared to stump up all the cash needed.

Planned pan-European payments network  to compete with U.S. Mastercard and Visa

Snap or food stamp is a U.S. Department of agriculture initiative. The programme aims at ending hunger and move U.S. Citizens towards self sufficiency. But with conditions applied. Take a look at this report.

Families face impact of snap rules in United States

Over the last two decades, global wealth tripled, with China leading the way and overtaking the US for the top spot globally.

In a new report, the research arm of consulting firm McKinsey &amp; Co. examines the national balance sheets of ten countries which together account for more than 60 per cent of world income.

The world is now wealthier than it has ever been, says Jan Mischke, a partner at the McKinsey Global Institute in Zurich.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-rakes-up-taiwan-issue-during-virtual-meet-xi-warns-dont-play-with-fire-429694" hreflang="en">Biden rakes up Taiwan issue during virtual meet, Xi warns don’t 'play with fire'</a>

The study says global wealth rose from $156 trillion in 2000 to $514 trillion in 2020. A third of the increase was accounted for by China. Its wealth increased from $7 trillion in 2000, when it joined the World Trade Organization, to $120 trillion in 2015, speeding its economic ascent.

In contrast, the US saw its net worth more than double over the period, to $90 trillion, despite more muted increases in property prices.

It is estimated that the wealthiest 10 per cent of households control more than two-thirds of each country's wealth, and according to the report their share has been increasing.

Real estate accounts for 68 per cent of global net worth, in 2020 it accounted for two-thirds of net worth. The remainder is made up of things like infrastructure, machinery, and equipment, and to a lesser extent, things like intellectual property and patents.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/russia-blasts-own-satellite-us-slams-it-as-missile-test-threatens-international-space-station-429666" hreflang="en">Russia blasts own satellite, US slams it as missile test threatens International Space Station</a>

Since financial assets are effectively offset by liabilities, they are not included in the global wealth calculation.&nbsp;

In the past two decades, net worth has outstripped growth in global GDP, fuelled by skyrocketing property prices and declining interest rates. According to McKinsey, asset prices are almost 50 per cent higher than their long-term average.

However, there are questions about whether the wealth boom can last.

Real-estate values rising too fast can make home ownership unaffordable for many people and increase the risk of a financial crisis, like the one the United States experienced in 2008. There is a possibility that China might also run into trouble due to the debts of property developers such as the China Evergrande Group.

Watch |&nbsp;Gravitas: China is now the richest country in the world. Can it stay rich?

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-china-is-now-the-richest-country-in-the-world-can-it-stay-rich-429864/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The report recommends that the world's wealth be invested in more productive investments that expand global GDP.&nbsp;

"There are different ways to interpret the expansion of balance sheets and net worth relative to GDP. It could mark an economic paradigm shift, or it could precede a reversion to the historical mean, softly or abruptly. Aiming at a soft rebalancing via faster GDP growth might well be the safest and most desirable option. To achieve that, redirecting capital to more productive and sustainable uses seems to be the economic imperative of our time, not only to support growth and the environment but also to protect our wealth and financial systems."

The ten countries that account for about 60 per cent of global GDP are Australia, Canada, China, France, Germany, Japan, Mexico, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Over the last two decades, global wealth tripled, with China leading the way and overtaking the US for the top spot globally. In a new report, the research arm of consulting firm McKinsey & Co.

Over the last two decades, global wealth tripled, with China leading the way and overtaking the US for the top spot globally. In a new report, the research arm of consulting firm McKinsey & Co. examines the national balance sheets of ten countries which together account for more than 60 per cent of world income. The world is now wealthier than it has ever been, says Jan Mischke, a partner at the McKinsey Global Institute in Zurich. Also read | Biden rakes up Taiwan issue during virtual meet, Xi warns don’t 'play with fire' The study says global wealth rose from $156 trillion in 2000 to $514 trillion in 2020. A third of the increase was accounted for by China. Its wealth increased from $7 trillion in 2000, when it joined the World Trade Organization, to $120 trillion in 2015, speeding its economic ascent. In contrast, the US saw its net worth more than double over the period, to $90 trillion, despite more muted increases in property prices. It is estimated that the wealthiest 10 per cent of households control more than two-thirds of each country's wealth, and according to the report their share has been increasing. Real estate accounts for 68 per cent of global net worth, in 2020 it accounted for two-thirds of net worth. The remainder is made up of things like infrastructure, machinery, and equipment, and to a lesser extent, things like intellectual property and patents. Also read | Russia blasts own satellite, US slams it as missile test threatens International Space Station Since financial assets are effectively offset by liabilities, they are not included in the global wealth calculation. In the past two decades, net worth has outstripped growth in global GDP, fuelled by skyrocketing property prices and declining interest rates. According to McKinsey, asset prices are almost 50 per cent higher than their long-term average. However, there are questions about whether the wealth boom can last. Real-estate values rising too fast can make home ownership unaffordable for many people and increase the risk of a financial crisis, like the one the United States experienced in 2008. There is a possibility that China might also run into trouble due to the debts of property developers such as the China Evergrande Group. Watch | Gravitas: China is now the richest country in the world. Can it stay rich? The report recommends that the world's wealth be invested in more productive investments that expand global GDP. "There are different ways to interpret the expansion of balance sheets and net worth relative to GDP. It could mark an economic paradigm shift, or it could precede a reversion to the historical mean, softly or abruptly. Aiming at a soft rebalancing via faster GDP growth might well be the safest and most desirable option. To achieve that, redirecting capital to more productive and sustainable uses seems to be the economic imperative of our time, not only to support growth and the environment but also to protect our wealth and financial systems." The ten countries that account for about 60 per cent of global GDP are Australia, Canada, China, France, Germany, Japan, Mexico, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

At $514 trillion, China overtakes US in terms of amassing the biggest net worth

The US has condemned Russia for conducting a "dangerous and irresponsible" missile test that it says endangered the crew aboard the International Space Station (ISS). The test blew up one of Russia's own satellites, creating debris that forced the ISS crew to shelter in capsules

US condemns Russian missile test which put ISS crew at risk

It's been over 3 months since the Taliban took over and deliberations between countries on the Afghanistan crisis continues. In the latest Indian foreign secretary Harsh Vardhan Shringla met U.S. Special representative for Afghanistan Thomas West to discuss the ongoing developments.

Indian Foreign Secy Shringla meets US special representative for Afghanistan

Alarm bells are ringing in the halls of the Pentagon led by General Mark Milley, senior Pentagon officials are becoming increasingly worried about China's rapid expansion of its nuclear arsenal.

US worried about China's nuclear arsenal, 'We have to act now,' says General Milley

The virtual meeting between President Joe Biden and China’s leader, Xi Jinping, produced no breakthroughs in a relationship that has spiraled dangerously downward. That was not the intent.

Instead, the two leaders sought to keep the many disputes between the two countries from escalating into a broader conflict. If they can translate their words into a kind of détente, it would count as a diplomatic success.

“It seems clear to me we need to establish some common-sense guardrails,” Biden told Xi in opening remarks, speaking over what amounted to the equivalent of a Zoom call from the Roosevelt Room at the White House and the East Hall in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing.

Xi, for his part, called Biden “my old friend” and used a nautical metaphor, comparing the two countries to ships that must together navigate the ocean’s wind and waves without colliding.

Bubbling under the surface, though, was acrimony that could prove difficult to resolve.

At the end of 3 1/2 hours of talks, the two did not even cobble together the sort of joint statement that has typically punctuated summits between the United States and China over the decades. Xi’s last meeting with a U.S. president, Donald Trump in 2019, also ended with no joint statement, marking the deterioration in ties.

Nor did the meeting end with any agreement to have groups of officials from both sides hold further talks on strategic nuclear issues and conflicts in cyberspace — the way Biden did in his summit in June with another quarrelsome geopolitical rival, President Vladimir Putin of Russia.

“We were not expecting a breakthrough,” a senior administration official told reporters shortly after the talks with Xi ended. “There were none.”

Instead, the two sides issued their own statements, each emphasizing the points of long-standing contention. They amounted to catalogs of mutual grievances that offered little room for compromise.

Biden raised concerns about human rights abuses in Xinjiang, Tibet and Hong Kong, and about China’s “unfair trade and economic policies” harming American workers, the White House statement said. Xi, according to China’s own readout, said that U.S. support for Taiwan was “playing with fire,” and explicitly warned that the world risked slipping back into the superpower confrontations of a half-century ago.

“Engaging in ideological demarcation, camp division, group confrontation, will inevitably bring disaster to the world,” Xi said, a clear reference to a pillar of the new administration’s strategy for challenging China by teaming up with like-minded nations that fear China or oppose its authoritarian model. “The consequence of the Cold War are not far away.”

With that reference, Xi plunged directly into the debate now underway in Washington about whether the two powers are descending into something akin to the Cold War, or whether the deep economic, trade and technological links between China and the U.S. make any comparison to the old U.S.-Soviet Union relationship impossible.

The tone of the meeting was a reminder that China, perhaps inevitably, remains what Biden and his top advisers have cast as the greatest geopolitical challenge to the United States in its history. They have rejected the Cold War comparisons as overly simplistic, and as Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, put it, “We have the choice not to do that.”

“China is going to be a factor in the international system for the foreseeable future — it’s not going anywhere,” Sullivan said last week during a speech to the Lowy Institute in Australia. “And the United States is not going anywhere, and we’re not going anywhere in the Indo-Pacific either. And so we’re going to have to learn how to deal with that reality.”

Although the two leaders have spoken by telephone twice this year, the conference was intended to replicate the more thorough discussion of issues in previous summits between the United States and China — something that has not been possible because pandemic and political preoccupations have kept Xi from traveling since January 2020.

The White House had hoped to hold the meeting in person, possibly at the Group of 20 meeting in Rome last month, but concluded that it was better to meet remotely than to let tensions fester into next year. Xi is sure to be preoccupied then with the Winter Olympics in Beijing in February and a Communist Party congress in November that is expected to extend his rule.

Biden has repeatedly suggested that it should be possible for the United States to engage in vigorous competition with China and to confront it over certain issues, without risking clashes — whether in the disputed waters off China’s coast or in the murky shadows of cyberspace.

He also wanted to hold the meeting after he had begun to shore up American competitiveness at home. Just hours before meeting Xi, he signed the bipartisan infrastructure bill, which his aides cited as an example of refocusing on international competitiveness. He also recently signed other legislation that bans some key Chinese technology players, like telecommunications giant Huawei, from operating inside the United States.

What is perceived as a move to strengthen the economy in one capital can seem aggressive in the other.

“Both leaders are dissatisfied with the state of the relationship and the behavior of the other country,” said Danny Russel, a former assistant secretary of state who participated in talks with Xi during the Obama administration. “Both are also mindful of the risk of an incident between our militaries that could quickly spin out of control.”

No one meeting could have resolved the enormous divisions that have grown between the two countries.

The trade war that Trump started remains unresolved, with China still more than $180 billion short of a pledge to purchase $380 billion in American products before a deadline of Dec. 31. Problems have also emerged or gotten worse, including a Pentagon assessment that China is rapidly expanding its strategic nuclear arsenal, and may be abandoning its decadeslong strategy of maintaining a “minimum deterrent.”

Administration officials declined to discuss what was said about the nuclear buildup, beyond a vague statement that Biden “underscored the importance of managing strategic risks.”

Other topics that analysts thought would come up did not, according to the senior administration official. They included disputes over granting visas for diplomats, journalists and others, as well as a possible invitation to attend the Winter Olympics in Beijing in February.

Many also expected an effort to create a forum for discussing disputes.

The two sides did agree to talks among lower-level officials. That, and the leaders’ tone in their published statements, raised hopes that tensions could ease at least a bit.

“All the right things were said by both sides to stabilize a relationship marked by mutual mistrust,” said Rorry Daniels, a security specialist with the National Committee on American Foreign Policy in New York. “The question moving forward is how each side will adjust policy to meet this change of direction.”

On Tuesday, Biden suggested that officials from both sides would meet in working groups, though he did not specify on which issues. “We got a lot to follow up on,” he said.

After Biden’s last telephone call with the Chinese leader in September, the tone of the relationship, at least, improved considerably.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and his counterpart, Wang Yi, met on the sidelines of the G-20 gathering and spoke by phone again last weekend. Biden’s envoy on climate change, John Kerry, and Xi’s, Xie Zhenhua, reached a surprise agreement on the issue at the talks this month in Glasgow, Scotland.

Xi, according to the Chinese description of the talks, suggested that cooperation on issues like climate change was conditional on stability across the spectrum of the relationship — a stance at odds with Biden’s view.

“China and the United States are entering a period of détente, but we don’t know how long it will be and to what extent,” said Cheng Xiaohe, an associate professor of international studies at Renmin University in Beijing. “We have a lot of uncertainties now.”

Even as the two leaders met virtually, another meeting was taking place in Beijing, commemorating the American pilots known as the Flying Tigers who aided China during its war against Japan in 1941 and 1942.

“The story of the Flying Tigers undergirds the profound friendship forged by the lives and blood of the Chinese and American people,” Qin Gang, China’s ambassador to the United States, said during the event. Acknowledging the tensions in the relationship, he added that the two countries “should inherit the friendly friendship tempered by war.”

The virtual meeting between President Joe Biden and China’s leader, Xi Jinping, produced no breakthroughs in a relationship that has spiraled dangerously downward.

The virtual meeting between President Joe Biden and China’s leader, Xi Jinping, produced no breakthroughs in a relationship that has spiraled dangerously downward. That was not the intent. Instead, the two leaders sought to keep the many disputes between the two countries from escalating into a broader conflict. If they can translate their words into a kind of détente, it would count as a diplomatic success. “It seems clear to me we need to establish some common-sense guardrails,” Biden told Xi in opening remarks, speaking over what amounted to the equivalent of a Zoom call from the Roosevelt Room at the White House and the East Hall in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing. Xi, for his part, called Biden “my old friend” and used a nautical metaphor, comparing the two countries to ships that must together navigate the ocean’s wind and waves without colliding. Bubbling under the surface, though, was acrimony that could prove difficult to resolve. At the end of 3 1/2 hours of talks, the two did not even cobble together the sort of joint statement that has typically punctuated summits between the United States and China over the decades. Xi’s last meeting with a U.S. president, Donald Trump in 2019, also ended with no joint statement, marking the deterioration in ties. Nor did the meeting end with any agreement to have groups of officials from both sides hold further talks on strategic nuclear issues and conflicts in cyberspace — the way Biden did in his summit in June with another quarrelsome geopolitical rival, President Vladimir Putin of Russia. “We were not expecting a breakthrough,” a senior administration official told reporters shortly after the talks with Xi ended. “There were none.” Instead, the two sides issued their own statements, each emphasizing the points of long-standing contention. They amounted to catalogs of mutual grievances that offered little room for compromise. Biden raised concerns about human rights abuses in Xinjiang, Tibet and Hong Kong, and about China’s “unfair trade and economic policies” harming American workers, the White House statement said. Xi, according to China’s own readout, said that U.S. support for Taiwan was “playing with fire,” and explicitly warned that the world risked slipping back into the superpower confrontations of a half-century ago. “Engaging in ideological demarcation, camp division, group confrontation, will inevitably bring disaster to the world,” Xi said, a clear reference to a pillar of the new administration’s strategy for challenging China by teaming up with like-minded nations that fear China or oppose its authoritarian model. “The consequence of the Cold War are not far away.” With that reference, Xi plunged directly into the debate now underway in Washington about whether the two powers are descending into something akin to the Cold War, or whether the deep economic, trade and technological links between China and the U.S. make any comparison to the old U.S.-Soviet Union relationship impossible. The tone of the meeting was a reminder that China, perhaps inevitably, remains what Biden and his top advisers have cast as the greatest geopolitical challenge to the United States in its history. They have rejected the Cold War comparisons as overly simplistic, and as Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, put it, “We have the choice not to do that.” “China is going to be a factor in the international system for the foreseeable future — it’s not going anywhere,” Sullivan said last week during a speech to the Lowy Institute in Australia. “And the United States is not going anywhere, and we’re not going anywhere in the Indo-Pacific either. And so we’re going to have to learn how to deal with that reality.” Although the two leaders have spoken by telephone twice this year, the conference was intended to replicate the more thorough discussion of issues in previous summits between the United States and China — something that has not been possible because pandemic and political preoccupations have kept Xi from traveling since January 2020. The White House had hoped to hold the meeting in person, possibly at the Group of 20 meeting in Rome last month, but concluded that it was better to meet remotely than to let tensions fester into next year. Xi is sure to be preoccupied then with the Winter Olympics in Beijing in February and a Communist Party congress in November that is expected to extend his rule. Biden has repeatedly suggested that it should be possible for the United States to engage in vigorous competition with China and to confront it over certain issues, without risking clashes — whether in the disputed waters off China’s coast or in the murky shadows of cyberspace. He also wanted to hold the meeting after he had begun to shore up American competitiveness at home. Just hours before meeting Xi, he signed the bipartisan infrastructure bill, which his aides cited as an example of refocusing on international competitiveness. He also recently signed other legislation that bans some key Chinese technology players, like telecommunications giant Huawei, from operating inside the United States. What is perceived as a move to strengthen the economy in one capital can seem aggressive in the other. “Both leaders are dissatisfied with the state of the relationship and the behavior of the other country,” said Danny Russel, a former assistant secretary of state who participated in talks with Xi during the Obama administration. “Both are also mindful of the risk of an incident between our militaries that could quickly spin out of control.” No one meeting could have resolved the enormous divisions that have grown between the two countries. The trade war that Trump started remains unresolved, with China still more than $180 billion short of a pledge to purchase $380 billion in American products before a deadline of Dec. 31. Problems have also emerged or gotten worse, including a Pentagon assessment that China is rapidly expanding its strategic nuclear arsenal, and may be abandoning its decadeslong strategy of maintaining a “minimum deterrent.” Administration officials declined to discuss what was said about the nuclear buildup, beyond a vague statement that Biden “underscored the importance of managing strategic risks.” Other topics that analysts thought would come up did not, according to the senior administration official. They included disputes over granting visas for diplomats, journalists and others, as well as a possible invitation to attend the Winter Olympics in Beijing in February. Many also expected an effort to create a forum for discussing disputes. The two sides did agree to talks among lower-level officials. That, and the leaders’ tone in their published statements, raised hopes that tensions could ease at least a bit. “All the right things were said by both sides to stabilize a relationship marked by mutual mistrust,” said Rorry Daniels, a security specialist with the National Committee on American Foreign Policy in New York. “The question moving forward is how each side will adjust policy to meet this change of direction.” On Tuesday, Biden suggested that officials from both sides would meet in working groups, though he did not specify on which issues. “We got a lot to follow up on,” he said. After Biden’s last telephone call with the Chinese leader in September, the tone of the relationship, at least, improved considerably. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and his counterpart, Wang Yi, met on the sidelines of the G-20 gathering and spoke by phone again last weekend. Biden’s envoy on climate change, John Kerry, and Xi’s, Xie Zhenhua, reached a surprise agreement on the issue at the talks this month in Glasgow, Scotland. Xi, according to the Chinese description of the talks, suggested that cooperation on issues like climate change was conditional on stability across the spectrum of the relationship — a stance at odds with Biden’s view. “China and the United States are entering a period of détente, but we don’t know how long it will be and to what extent,” said Cheng Xiaohe, an associate professor of international studies at Renmin University in Beijing. “We have a lot of uncertainties now.” Even as the two leaders met virtually, another meeting was taking place in Beijing, commemorating the American pilots known as the Flying Tigers who aided China during its war against Japan in 1941 and 1942. “The story of the Flying Tigers undergirds the profound friendship forged by the lives and blood of the Chinese and American people,” Qin Gang, China’s ambassador to the United States, said during the event. Acknowledging the tensions in the relationship, he added that the two countries “should inherit the friendly friendship tempered by war.”

US-China summit produces little more than polite words, but they help

Food crisis is deepening in America. The outbreak of Covid pandemic has only worsened the situation, so much so that even American military forces are finding it hard to secure food for their families.

According to a report by news agency AP, as many as 160,000 active-duty military members are having trouble feeding their families.

The report has quoted data from a United States-based nonprofit organisation, Feeding America, which runs over 200 food banks and feeds more than 46 million people across the country.

The revelation came when the NGO was compiling data to examine how long-term food insecurity has extended into every aspect of American life, including the military.

According to Department of Agriculture, US, over 89 per cent of US households were food secure throughout the year in 2020.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/bidens-effort-to-combat-hunger-marks-a-profound-change-375471">Biden's effort to combat hunger marks ‘a profound change’</a>

The remaining 10.5 per cent of households were food insecure at least some time during the year, including 3.9 percent (5.1 million households) that had very low food security.

While the government has no data of food insecurity among the military members, the NGO’s report is the first one to openly acknowledge the glaring crisis among the armed forces.

Activists say that food crisis had existed for years in the military ranks, primarily among junior-level enlisted service members with children.

The group estimates that 29 per cent of troops in the most junior enlisted ranks faced food insecurity during the previous year.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/124-mln-people-food-insecure-in-war-torn-syria-wfp-363463">12.4 mln people food insecure in war-torn Syria: WFP</a>

“It’s a shocking truth that’s known to many food banks across the United States. This should be the cause of deep embarrassment,” Vince Hall, Feeding America’s government relations officer, told AP.

A Naval officer acknowledged that he was relying on food assistance to ensure that his two daughters are fed.

“It is what it is," said James Bohannon, 34, a low-ranking Naval in San Diego.

"You know what you’re signing up for in the military,” he said, after emerging from a drive-thru food distribution organized by the local Armed Services YMCA branch. “But I’m not going to lie. It’s really tough.”

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/around-20-million-yemenis-food-insecure-due-to-ongoing-conflict-un-182515">Around 20 million Yemenis food insecure due to ongoing conflict: UN</a>

Meredith Knopp, CEO of a food bank in St. Louis and an Army veteran, said the problem cuts across all branches of the military. She recalls being a young officer in Texas when she was approached by a new private with a baby.

“They were getting ready to turn off his electricity because he couldn't pay his bills,” she said. “It was shocking to me.”

According to experts there are several reasons why the military members are finding hard to afford food.

Modest pay, for instance, of junior enlisted ranks is the primary source of food crisis, the experts say. Apart from that, internal military culture of self-sufficiency leaves many reluctant to speak about their difficulties, for fear they will be regarded as irresponsible.

(With inputs from agencies)

Food crisis is deepening in America. The outbreak of Covid pandemic has only worsened the situation, so much so that even American military forces are finding it hard to secure food for their families.

Food crisis is deepening in America. The outbreak of Covid pandemic has only worsened the situation, so much so that even American military forces are finding it hard to secure food for their families. According to a report by news agency AP, as many as 160,000 active-duty military members are having trouble feeding their families. The report has quoted data from a United States-based nonprofit organisation, Feeding America, which runs over 200 food banks and feeds more than 46 million people across the country. The revelation came when the NGO was compiling data to examine how long-term food insecurity has extended into every aspect of American life, including the military. According to Department of Agriculture, US, over 89 per cent of US households were food secure throughout the year in 2020. Also read | Biden's effort to combat hunger marks ‘a profound change’ The remaining 10.5 per cent of households were food insecure at least some time during the year, including 3.9 percent (5.1 million households) that had very low food security. While the government has no data of food insecurity among the military members, the NGO’s report is the first one to openly acknowledge the glaring crisis among the armed forces. Activists say that food crisis had existed for years in the military ranks, primarily among junior-level enlisted service members with children. The group estimates that 29 per cent of troops in the most junior enlisted ranks faced food insecurity during the previous year. Also read | 12.4 mln people food insecure in war-torn Syria: WFP “It’s a shocking truth that’s known to many food banks across the United States. This should be the cause of deep embarrassment,” Vince Hall, Feeding America’s government relations officer, told AP. A Naval officer acknowledged that he was relying on food assistance to ensure that his two daughters are fed. “It is what it is," said James Bohannon, 34, a low-ranking Naval in San Diego. "You know what you’re signing up for in the military,” he said, after emerging from a drive-thru food distribution organized by the local Armed Services YMCA branch. “But I’m not going to lie. It’s really tough.” Also read | Around 20 million Yemenis food insecure due to ongoing conflict: UN Meredith Knopp, CEO of a food bank in St. Louis and an Army veteran, said the problem cuts across all branches of the military. She recalls being a young officer in Texas when she was approached by a new private with a baby. “They were getting ready to turn off his electricity because he couldn't pay his bills,” she said. “It was shocking to me.” According to experts there are several reasons why the military members are finding hard to afford food. Modest pay, for instance, of junior enlisted ranks is the primary source of food crisis, the experts say. Apart from that, internal military culture of self-sufficiency leaves many reluctant to speak about their difficulties, for fear they will be regarded as irresponsible. (With inputs from agencies)

Thousands of low-ranking military officers in US facing food insecurity: Report

The United States has imposed an entry ban on Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega, his vice-president wife and his government.

United States imposes entry ban on Nicaraguan Prez

A year after President Biden’s election, we’re beginning to see the contours of his foreign policy: He has something for everyone. For balance-of-power realists, he has countered China by working much more closely with “the Quad” — India, Australia, Japan and the United States — and creating a new British, Australian, U.S. nexus with the AUKUS submarine deal, no matter how clumsily handled.

For liberal internationalists, he has re-engaged with global institutions: rejoining the World Health Organization and the U.N.-sponsored Paris Agreement to limit climate change and recommitting to NATO. For those advocating “restraint” in America’s military might, he has ended at least the visible “forever wars.”

And for democracy and human rights activists committed to a values-based foreign policy, Mr. Biden will be hosting a Summit for Democracy next month. The administration has also ratcheted up both its rhetoric and its actions on human rights issues, accusing China of both genocide and crimes against humanity for its treatment of its Uyghur population and authorizing sanctions against several officials responsible for the war and humanitarian crisis in Ethiopia.

Yet when everyone gets something, no one gets everything, which is why the core principles of Mr. Biden’s worldview have been hard to pin down.

Not for lack of trying, however. Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, argues that Mr. Biden is continuing many of Donald Trump’s “America First” policies in a different guise. Joshua Shifrinson, a Boston University professor, and Stephen Wertheim, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, claim that the Biden Doctrine is “pragmatic realism,” pursuing U.S. interests “in a competitive world” and changing course as necessary to achieve them.

On the values-based side of the foreign policy ledger, a growing number of observers insist that the real Biden Doctrine is to preserve and prove “the supremacy of democracy” worldwide. As Jonathan Tepperman, former editor in chief of Foreign Policy, argues, the “global contest between democracies and autocracies” provides an “organizing principle” to link investing in infrastructure and industrial policy at home, pursuing a foreign policy for the middle class and working to build coalitions of democracies abroad.

Perhaps Mr. Biden is perfectly comfortable with multiple “Biden Doctrines.” He might say that reconciling conflicting impulses and brokering compromises is his trademark as a politician who knows how to get things done.

The problem is that swinging from one framework and set of goals to another without a set of clear principles and priorities risks falling radically short of the progress that the world needs on existential issues. What difference does it make whether the United States “beats China” if our cities are underwater, the Gulf Stream stops warming northern Europe and the United States, and hundreds of millions of climate refugees are on the move? If we destroy the biodiversity on the planet? If millions more people die from serial pandemics? If people the world over do not have the means to flourish and care for one another?

It is time to break free of 20th-century thinking. Two decades of Mr. Biden’s 50-odd years in public life were spent during the Cold War and a third during the 1990s with the United States as a hyperpower. For most of this period great-power competition and making the world safe for democracy were fused. “People” issues were relegated to human rights advocates and development experts. Diplomacy and defense were the provinces of nations and the field of international relations.

The frameworks, paradigms and doctrines of that era, of any kind, are simply insufficient to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Bolder thinking is required, thinking that shifts away from states, whether great powers or lesser powers, democracies or autocracies. It is time to put people first, to see the world first as a planet of eight billion people rather than as an artificially constructed system of 195 countries and to measure all state actions in terms of their impact on people. Instead of competing with China today on one issue and cooperating tomorrow on another, Mr. Biden must prioritize cooperation on global issues and challenge other nations, regardless of whether they are democracies, autocracies or something in between, to join in.

This approach is known as globalism, which has a bad name because of its association with globalization. But globalism is actually closer to localism, to beginning with people, where they live and what they need, regardless of what colored square on the map they happen to be born in. It is a people-centered rather than a state-centered approach to problem-solving on a global scale. It does not pretend that governments don’t exist or don’t matter, but rejects the idea that interstate rivalry matters as an end in itself — the essence of geopolitics.

Globalism also sees government officials as a set of actors who can contribute to either global problems or global solutions. To succeed as problem solvers, however, they must work side by side with global corporations and networks of cities, civic groups, faith groups, universities, scientists and others. These actors are not just “helpers” or catalysts or constituents. They are players in global politics.

Mr. Biden sometimes seems to be moving in this direction. His speech to the U.N. General Assembly in September laid out a long list of global problems, from health and climate change to inequality and corruption. In my view, his greatest foreign policy achievement to date was to secure a minimum global corporate tax rate of 15 percent, ensuring that corporations worldwide pay at least a portion of their fair share for the public goods — from roads to intellectual property laws — that they rely on and that benefit all citizens. The Biden administration also embraces an “all of society” approach to fighting climate change.

Time and again, however, Mr. Biden’s other goal — of beating China, or more broadly of lining up the democracies to beat the autocracies — gets in the way. This week, thanks to the work of John Kerry, the climate envoy, the United States and China reached an important agreement to cooperate on deeper cuts to both carbon dioxide and methane emissions. It’s not enough, however, and misses a larger opportunity to mobilize the United States, China, the European Union and India as co-leaders on a global climate challenge.

The lure of competition — often on the edge of conflict — with a rival superpower is just too strong, both for Mr. Biden and for the tight-knit band of brothers who form the core of his foreign policy team. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, are veterans of the Obama administration’s “pivot to Asia,” a concept designed and advanced in large part by Kurt Campbell, now the White House Asia czar.

From the perspective of 20th-century geopolitics, it makes sense for the Biden administration to approach its relationship with China as one in which the United States has many different goals: economic, military and diplomatic. On some issues, like climate or health, we seek China’s cooperation. On many more, like military primacy, freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, fair trade, intellectual property rights, cybersecurity and human rights, our relationship requires competition and coercion. Hence we have the frequent trade-off debate, in which China hawks have demanded that Mr. Kerry not give an inch to get concessions on Chinese emissions or to encourage other actions that are necessary to stop the globe from warming another degree.

From a people-first perspective, saving the planet for humanity must be a goal that takes precedence over all others. The United States should openly challenge China to a competition to see which country can deliver the cleanest and safest environment for its people while at the same time increasing their well-being. Which country can build and deploy clean technologies the fastest? Which country can help the most developing countries upgrade their infrastructure and wean themselves off carbon?

It should be possible to develop common measures to assess the climate impact of China’s Belt and Road investments versus the Build Back Better World initiative — a project of the Group of 7 wealthiest economies — and the E.U.’s Global Gateway investments and to agree on a set of nongovernmental organizations charged with applying and publicizing these metrics. Global youth movements, from the Sunrise Movement in the United States to the China Youth Climate Action Network and Greta Thunberg’s followers everywhere, would be ideal candidates.

When it comes to the Covid-19 pandemic, if our collective goal really is to vaccinate and treat as many people as possible worldwide, then it’s time to ignore geopolitics. Back in September, the Biden administration’s global vaccine summit brought together over 100 governments and an additional 100 global actors to commit to vaccinating 70 percent of the world’s people by 2022. China has said that it is now working with 19 nations to produce vaccines and cooperating with another 30 countries on vaccine distribution through the Belt and Road Initiative. Indeed, President Xi Jinping of China proposed a Global Vaccine Cooperation Action Initiative at the Group of 20 summit last month, without an apparent response from the United States. Aboard Air Force One, on his way to Rome, Mr. Sullivan told reporters that “the main thrust of the effort on Covid-19 is not actually traveling through the G20.” My translation: The Chinese and their partners have one effort and the United States and its partners have another.

Mr. Biden believes in the inherent value and ultimate superiority of democracy. He sees it as the form of government that best recognizes human dignity and agency, and that can deliver well-being and prosperity for the greatest number of people. So do I. But this conviction, which was as reflexive as breathing for most Americans during the 20th century, must now be put to an empirical test, starting at home.

Mr. Biden gets this, in part. He has made clear that the United States must demonstrate that our democracy can in fact represent and deliver results for our own people. Bolder thinking would insist that the United States face all the ways in which our democracy has fallen short for millions of our people and accept at least the possibility that other forms of government could be better. Beyond U.S. borders, the contest between democracy and autocracy should be an open competition to see which governments can deliver more — materially, intellectually, spiritual and all the other ways we measure human flourishing — for their people. One measure might be which country does the most to achieve the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals, as assessed by a global coalition of civic organizations.

Globalism is not mushy government idealism — far from it. It does not deny the existence or importance of government — at the local, state, national and international levels — or of intergovernmental diplomacy. But it insists that the great-power games, as deadly as they have been and could still be, must give way to planetary politics, in which human beings matter more than nationalities. Competition itself is fine and natural, but it needs to be competition to achieve a goal that benefits us all.

Under normal circumstances, administrations set goals and navigate the conflicting interests that are the essence of politics. They muddle through one crisis, one summit, one speech at a time. But we are not living in normal times. As Mr. Biden understands and is striving to achieve on the domestic front, it’s time for bold, transformative change. To vaccinate fewer people globally in the hope of demonstrating American or even democratic superiority is a moral calamity that will hurt us all.

To some, adopting people-centered policies at the national and global levels might seem so fanciful as to be delusional. But history shows that it is possible to change course, even drastically. Just over a hundred years ago, the United States Senate refused to ratify the Treaty of Versailles and turned its back on the League of Nations. At the time, no one would have predicted that a quarter century later, President Franklin Roosevelt would be a principal architect of the United Nations and that the United States would embrace a set of global institutions designed to maintain peace, prosperity and security. Gen Z and many millennials are already thinking in planetary terms, putting people ahead of states. It is time for the rest of us to catch up.

A year after President Biden’s election, we’re beginning to see the contours of his foreign policy: He has something for everyone. For balance-of-power realists, he has countered China by working much more closely with “the Quad” — India, Australia, Japan and the United States — and creating a new British, Australian, U.

A year after President Biden’s election, we’re beginning to see the contours of his foreign policy: He has something for everyone. For balance-of-power realists, he has countered China by working much more closely with “the Quad” — India, Australia, Japan and the United States — and creating a new British, Australian, U.S. nexus with the AUKUS submarine deal, no matter how clumsily handled. For liberal internationalists, he has re-engaged with global institutions: rejoining the World Health Organization and the U.N.-sponsored Paris Agreement to limit climate change and recommitting to NATO. For those advocating “restraint” in America’s military might, he has ended at least the visible “forever wars.” And for democracy and human rights activists committed to a values-based foreign policy, Mr. Biden will be hosting a Summit for Democracy next month. The administration has also ratcheted up both its rhetoric and its actions on human rights issues, accusing China of both genocide and crimes against humanity for its treatment of its Uyghur population and authorizing sanctions against several officials responsible for the war and humanitarian crisis in Ethiopia. Yet when everyone gets something, no one gets everything, which is why the core principles of Mr. Biden’s worldview have been hard to pin down. Not for lack of trying, however. Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, argues that Mr. Biden is continuing many of Donald Trump’s “America First” policies in a different guise. Joshua Shifrinson, a Boston University professor, and Stephen Wertheim, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, claim that the Biden Doctrine is “pragmatic realism,” pursuing U.S. interests “in a competitive world” and changing course as necessary to achieve them. On the values-based side of the foreign policy ledger, a growing number of observers insist that the real Biden Doctrine is to preserve and prove “the supremacy of democracy” worldwide. As Jonathan Tepperman, former editor in chief of Foreign Policy, argues, the “global contest between democracies and autocracies” provides an “organizing principle” to link investing in infrastructure and industrial policy at home, pursuing a foreign policy for the middle class and working to build coalitions of democracies abroad. Perhaps Mr. Biden is perfectly comfortable with multiple “Biden Doctrines.” He might say that reconciling conflicting impulses and brokering compromises is his trademark as a politician who knows how to get things done. The problem is that swinging from one framework and set of goals to another without a set of clear principles and priorities risks falling radically short of the progress that the world needs on existential issues. What difference does it make whether the United States “beats China” if our cities are underwater, the Gulf Stream stops warming northern Europe and the United States, and hundreds of millions of climate refugees are on the move? If we destroy the biodiversity on the planet? If millions more people die from serial pandemics? If people the world over do not have the means to flourish and care for one another? It is time to break free of 20th-century thinking. Two decades of Mr. Biden’s 50-odd years in public life were spent during the Cold War and a third during the 1990s with the United States as a hyperpower. For most of this period great-power competition and making the world safe for democracy were fused. “People” issues were relegated to human rights advocates and development experts. Diplomacy and defense were the provinces of nations and the field of international relations. The frameworks, paradigms and doctrines of that era, of any kind, are simply insufficient to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Bolder thinking is required, thinking that shifts away from states, whether great powers or lesser powers, democracies or autocracies. It is time to put people first, to see the world first as a planet of eight billion people rather than as an artificially constructed system of 195 countries and to measure all state actions in terms of their impact on people. Instead of competing with China today on one issue and cooperating tomorrow on another, Mr. Biden must prioritize cooperation on global issues and challenge other nations, regardless of whether they are democracies, autocracies or something in between, to join in. This approach is known as globalism, which has a bad name because of its association with globalization. But globalism is actually closer to localism, to beginning with people, where they live and what they need, regardless of what colored square on the map they happen to be born in. It is a people-centered rather than a state-centered approach to problem-solving on a global scale. It does not pretend that governments don’t exist or don’t matter, but rejects the idea that interstate rivalry matters as an end in itself — the essence of geopolitics. Globalism also sees government officials as a set of actors who can contribute to either global problems or global solutions. To succeed as problem solvers, however, they must work side by side with global corporations and networks of cities, civic groups, faith groups, universities, scientists and others. These actors are not just “helpers” or catalysts or constituents. They are players in global politics. Mr. Biden sometimes seems to be moving in this direction. His speech to the U.N. General Assembly in September laid out a long list of global problems, from health and climate change to inequality and corruption. In my view, his greatest foreign policy achievement to date was to secure a minimum global corporate tax rate of 15 percent, ensuring that corporations worldwide pay at least a portion of their fair share for the public goods — from roads to intellectual property laws — that they rely on and that benefit all citizens. The Biden administration also embraces an “all of society” approach to fighting climate change. Time and again, however, Mr. Biden’s other goal — of beating China, or more broadly of lining up the democracies to beat the autocracies — gets in the way. This week, thanks to the work of John Kerry, the climate envoy, the United States and China reached an important agreement to cooperate on deeper cuts to both carbon dioxide and methane emissions. It’s not enough, however, and misses a larger opportunity to mobilize the United States, China, the European Union and India as co-leaders on a global climate challenge. The lure of competition — often on the edge of conflict — with a rival superpower is just too strong, both for Mr. Biden and for the tight-knit band of brothers who form the core of his foreign policy team. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, are veterans of the Obama administration’s “pivot to Asia,” a concept designed and advanced in large part by Kurt Campbell, now the White House Asia czar. From the perspective of 20th-century geopolitics, it makes sense for the Biden administration to approach its relationship with China as one in which the United States has many different goals: economic, military and diplomatic. On some issues, like climate or health, we seek China’s cooperation. On many more, like military primacy, freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, fair trade, intellectual property rights, cybersecurity and human rights, our relationship requires competition and coercion. Hence we have the frequent trade-off debate, in which China hawks have demanded that Mr. Kerry not give an inch to get concessions on Chinese emissions or to encourage other actions that are necessary to stop the globe from warming another degree. From a people-first perspective, saving the planet for humanity must be a goal that takes precedence over all others. The United States should openly challenge China to a competition to see which country can deliver the cleanest and safest environment for its people while at the same time increasing their well-being. Which country can build and deploy clean technologies the fastest? Which country can help the most developing countries upgrade their infrastructure and wean themselves off carbon? It should be possible to develop common measures to assess the climate impact of China’s Belt and Road investments versus the Build Back Better World initiative — a project of the Group of 7 wealthiest economies — and the E.U.’s Global Gateway investments and to agree on a set of nongovernmental organizations charged with applying and publicizing these metrics. Global youth movements, from the Sunrise Movement in the United States to the China Youth Climate Action Network and Greta Thunberg’s followers everywhere, would be ideal candidates. When it comes to the Covid-19 pandemic, if our collective goal really is to vaccinate and treat as many people as possible worldwide, then it’s time to ignore geopolitics. Back in September, the Biden administration’s global vaccine summit brought together over 100 governments and an additional 100 global actors to commit to vaccinating 70 percent of the world’s people by 2022. China has said that it is now working with 19 nations to produce vaccines and cooperating with another 30 countries on vaccine distribution through the Belt and Road Initiative. Indeed, President Xi Jinping of China proposed a Global Vaccine Cooperation Action Initiative at the Group of 20 summit last month, without an apparent response from the United States. Aboard Air Force One, on his way to Rome, Mr. Sullivan told reporters that “the main thrust of the effort on Covid-19 is not actually traveling through the G20.” My translation: The Chinese and their partners have one effort and the United States and its partners have another. Mr. Biden believes in the inherent value and ultimate superiority of democracy. He sees it as the form of government that best recognizes human dignity and agency, and that can deliver well-being and prosperity for the greatest number of people. So do I. But this conviction, which was as reflexive as breathing for most Americans during the 20th century, must now be put to an empirical test, starting at home. Mr. Biden gets this, in part. He has made clear that the United States must demonstrate that our democracy can in fact represent and deliver results for our own people. Bolder thinking would insist that the United States face all the ways in which our democracy has fallen short for millions of our people and accept at least the possibility that other forms of government could be better. Beyond U.S. borders, the contest between democracy and autocracy should be an open competition to see which governments can deliver more — materially, intellectually, spiritual and all the other ways we measure human flourishing — for their people. One measure might be which country does the most to achieve the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals, as assessed by a global coalition of civic organizations. Globalism is not mushy government idealism — far from it. It does not deny the existence or importance of government — at the local, state, national and international levels — or of intergovernmental diplomacy. But it insists that the great-power games, as deadly as they have been and could still be, must give way to planetary politics, in which human beings matter more than nationalities. Competition itself is fine and natural, but it needs to be competition to achieve a goal that benefits us all. Under normal circumstances, administrations set goals and navigate the conflicting interests that are the essence of politics. They muddle through one crisis, one summit, one speech at a time. But we are not living in normal times. As Mr. Biden understands and is striving to achieve on the domestic front, it’s time for bold, transformative change. To vaccinate fewer people globally in the hope of demonstrating American or even democratic superiority is a moral calamity that will hurt us all. To some, adopting people-centered policies at the national and global levels might seem so fanciful as to be delusional. But history shows that it is possible to change course, even drastically. Just over a hundred years ago, the United States Senate refused to ratify the Treaty of Versailles and turned its back on the League of Nations. At the time, no one would have predicted that a quarter century later, President Franklin Roosevelt would be a principal architect of the United Nations and that the United States would embrace a set of global institutions designed to maintain peace, prosperity and security. Gen Z and many millennials are already thinking in planetary terms, putting people ahead of states. It is time for the rest of us to catch up.

It’s time to get honest about the Biden doctrine

Taiwan took centre stage as Joe Biden and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping met for a virtual meet. The talks were held in a cordial manner but the tensions remained palpable. Xi Jinping warned on Taiwan, saying that the US was playing with fire.

Biden-Xi meet: China warns United States about 'playing with fire' on Taiwan

In a bizarre move, a high school in the United States has removed washroom doors citing safety concerns. But the development has in turn led to privacy issues. &nbsp;

The high school is located in Austin, Texas. The principal of the educational institution decided to remove restroom doors to check drug use and other "significant behavioural events" that occurred this year, said a report. &nbsp;

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/majority-of-americans-are-cutting-ties-with-anti-vaxxer-family-members-survey-429470" hreflang="en">Majority of Americans are cutting ties with anti-vaxxer family members: Survey</a>

In a letter to parents explaining her decision, Christina Steele Hantgin, principal, Austin ISD’s Travis Early College High School, admitted that she could have done a better job by communicating about her plans, said a CBS Austin report. &nbsp;&nbsp;

In the letter, Hantgin said that there have been behavioural events and "conduct violations" inside restrooms, which include around 90% of drug offenses. &nbsp;&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
In Austin, Texas there have been doors in the bathroom removed. This happened due to drug offenses. The incidents have decreased, but is this the right way to go? Where does the privacy go? How do we stop drug offenses in schools? <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SWO332?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SWO332</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/2021SWO332?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#2021SWO332</a>
— SWO332 (@swo332sophomore) <a href="https://twitter.com/swo332sophomore/status/1460277646709997575?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 15, 2021</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>

Since the removal of the doors, there have been no incidents, added Hantgin.&nbsp;Another report said that no stall in the washroom can be viewed from the hallway outside. &nbsp;

The move has not gone down well with several netizens, who raised privacy issues.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/huge-catch-44-million-worth-cocaine-found-in-onion-ring-cargo-at-uk-border-429524" hreflang="en">Huge catch: $44 million worth cocaine found in onion ring cargo at UK border</a>

As per KXAN.com, the school seems to have exhausted other methods in dealing with the safety issues. &nbsp;

Another strategy could have been locking bathroom doors, which could not be monitored. But as per the report, the process was taking up a lot of time. &nbsp;

"My number one priority is safety. Removing the doors is one of many strategies we are planning or implementing to keep our campus a safe learning environment," added Hantgin, in the letter, as per the report. &nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

In a bizarre move, a high school in the United States has removed washroom doors citing safety concerns. But the development has in turn led to privacy issues. The high school is located in Austin, Texas.

In a bizarre move, a high school in the United States has removed washroom doors citing safety concerns. But the development has in turn led to privacy issues. The high school is located in Austin, Texas. The principal of the educational institution decided to remove restroom doors to check drug use and other "significant behavioural events" that occurred this year, said a report. Also Read | Majority of Americans are cutting ties with anti-vaxxer family members: Survey In a letter to parents explaining her decision, Christina Steele Hantgin, principal, Austin ISD’s Travis Early College High School, admitted that she could have done a better job by communicating about her plans, said a CBS Austin report. In the letter, Hantgin said that there have been behavioural events and "conduct violations" inside restrooms, which include around 90% of drug offenses. In Austin, Texas there have been doors in the bathroom removed. This happened due to drug offenses. The incidents have decreased, but is this the right way to go? Where does the privacy go? How do we stop drug offenses in schools? #SWO332 #2021SWO332 — SWO332 (@swo332sophomore) November 15, 2021 × Since the removal of the doors, there have been no incidents, added Hantgin. Another report said that no stall in the washroom can be viewed from the hallway outside. The move has not gone down well with several netizens, who raised privacy issues. Also Read | Huge catch: $44 million worth cocaine found in onion ring cargo at UK border As per KXAN.com, the school seems to have exhausted other methods in dealing with the safety issues. Another strategy could have been locking bathroom doors, which could not be monitored. But as per the report, the process was taking up a lot of time. "My number one priority is safety. Removing the doors is one of many strategies we are planning or implementing to keep our campus a safe learning environment," added Hantgin, in the letter, as per the report. (With inputs from agencies)

For ‘safety concerns’, high school in US removes washroom doors: Report

us-1

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

us 1