Turkey expects the delivery of the controversial <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/would-like-to-keep-f-35-fighter-jet-programme-with-us-erdogan-226686">Russian S-400 missile defence</a> system to begin in July, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was quoted as saying in Turkish media on Sunday.

"I believe (S-400s) will begin to arrive in the first half of July. Colleagues in charge of the schedule are following the issue," Erdogan said according to CNN Turk broadcaster.

Ankara's deal with Moscow has been a major source of tension between <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/we-have-made-an-agreement-with-russia-no-backtracking-on-s400-missile-system-erdogan-224109">Turkey and the United States</a>, with Washington threatening consequences including sanctions against its fellow NATO member.

Acting US Defence Secretary Patrick Shanahan sent a letter earlier this month warning Turkey it must renounce the S-400 system by July 31 or Turkish pilots currently training on the F-35 fighter jet programme would be expelled from the US.

Turkey plans to buy 100 US F-35s while a number of Turkish manufacturers are making parts and equipment for the warplane.

Ankara has yet formally to respond to Shanahan's letter but Erdogan said that "within a short time, perhaps sometime this week, a letter in response will be sent".

He was adamant the deal with Moscow was not one which Turkey would walk away from.

"The issue of the S-400 is completed. There are no difficulties," Erdogan said, speaking to Turkish journalists on his plane to Turkey after a visit to Tajikistan for a summit.

"If we now swallow our words, this would not comply with the manners of our state, and it would also not suit my statesmanship," Erdogan added.

There had been expectations that the first deliveries could begin this month but Russia's state-owned defence conglomerate Rostec said earlier in June that there were plans to start deliveries in two months.

Washington has urged Ankara to buy US Patriot missiles instead and warned Turkey faces penalties under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA).

The act bars business with Russia's state and private defence and intelligence sectors.

But Ankara has insisted the country is preparing for any possible US sanctions.

Turkey expects the delivery of the controversial Russian S-400 missile defence system to begin in July, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was quoted as saying in Turkish media on Sunday.

Turkey expects the delivery of the controversial Russian S-400 missile defence system to begin in July, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was quoted as saying in Turkish media on Sunday. "I believe (S-400s) will begin to arrive in the first half of July. Colleagues in charge of the schedule are following the issue," Erdogan said according to CNN Turk broadcaster. Ankara's deal with Moscow has been a major source of tension between Turkey and the United States, with Washington threatening consequences including sanctions against its fellow NATO member. Acting US Defence Secretary Patrick Shanahan sent a letter earlier this month warning Turkey it must renounce the S-400 system by July 31 or Turkish pilots currently training on the F-35 fighter jet programme would be expelled from the US. Turkey plans to buy 100 US F-35s while a number of Turkish manufacturers are making parts and equipment for the warplane. Ankara has yet formally to respond to Shanahan's letter but Erdogan said that "within a short time, perhaps sometime this week, a letter in response will be sent". He was adamant the deal with Moscow was not one which Turkey would walk away from. "The issue of the S-400 is completed. There are no difficulties," Erdogan said, speaking to Turkish journalists on his plane to Turkey after a visit to Tajikistan for a summit. "If we now swallow our words, this would not comply with the manners of our state, and it would also not suit my statesmanship," Erdogan added. There had been expectations that the first deliveries could begin this month but Russia's state-owned defence conglomerate Rostec said earlier in June that there were plans to start deliveries in two months. Washington has urged Ankara to buy US Patriot missiles instead and warned Turkey faces penalties under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA). The act bars business with Russia's state and private defence and intelligence sectors. But Ankara has insisted the country is preparing for any possible US sanctions.

Russia's S-400 missile defence system to be delivered next month: Erdogan

India may impose retaliatory tariffs on the US. Deadline ends on 16 June of this. India may impose higher tariffs on 29 goods. It could be because US removed preference to India under GSP. Basically GSP is Generalised System Of Preference. Watch this video to know more.

India Watch: Tariff Wars: What's India's Stance?

West Asia Is On The Edge. US-Iran Tensions Soar After The Explosion Of 2 Oil Tankers In The Gulf Of Oman. Explosion In 2 More Oil Tankers In The Gulf Of Oman. US Blames Iran As Tensions Soar. Iran Hits Back At The US, Says Iran Is Being Blamed Without A Shred Of Factual Evidence.

Gravitas: US Blames Iran For Thursday's Attacks

Hormuz Strait Is Crucial For Oil Trade. And Two More Tankers Have Been Attacked.The Ongoing Tensions Between The US And Iran Have Been Brewing For A While. Here's A Report

Gravitas: US-Iran Crisis Brewing For A While

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

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning - June 15th, 2019

Indonesia has returned five containers of rubbish to the United States and will not become a "dumping ground", officials said Saturday, the latest Southeast Asian country to return imported waste.&nbsp;

The containers were supposed to contain only paper scrap, according to the customs documents. Instead, they were loaded with other waste including bottles, plastic waste, and diapers, said senior environment ministry official Sayid Muhadhar.

"This is not appropriate and we don't want to be a dumping ground," Muhadhar told AFP.&nbsp;

The five containers -- owned by a Canadian company -- were shipped from Seattle in the United States to Indonesia's second biggest city Surabaya in late March, Muhadhar said.&nbsp;

It was not immediately clear where the rubbish originated from.

Indonesia is currently examining several other containers in Jakarta's port and the city of Batam on the island of Sumatra.&nbsp;

It is the latest country to return imported rubbish after neighbouring Malaysia vowed to ship back hundreds of tonnes of plastic waste last month.&nbsp;

The Philippines has ordered tonnes of garbage dumped in the country to be shipped back to Canada, sparking a diplomatic row between the two countries.

For years China received the bulk of scrap plastic from around the world but closed its doors to foreign refuse last year in an effort to clean up its environment.

Huge quantities of waste have since been redirected to Southeast Asia, including Malaysia, Indonesia and to a lesser degree the Philippines.

Around 300 million tonnes of plastic are produced every year. Much of that ends up in landfill or in the seas, according to the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF).

Indonesia has returned five containers of rubbish to the United States and will not become a "dumping ground", officials said Saturday, the latest Southeast Asian country to return imported waste.

Indonesia has returned five containers of rubbish to the United States and will not become a "dumping ground", officials said Saturday, the latest Southeast Asian country to return imported waste. The containers were supposed to contain only paper scrap, according to the customs documents. Instead, they were loaded with other waste including bottles, plastic waste, and diapers, said senior environment ministry official Sayid Muhadhar. "This is not appropriate and we don't want to be a dumping ground," Muhadhar told AFP. The five containers -- owned by a Canadian company -- were shipped from Seattle in the United States to Indonesia's second biggest city Surabaya in late March, Muhadhar said. It was not immediately clear where the rubbish originated from. Indonesia is currently examining several other containers in Jakarta's port and the city of Batam on the island of Sumatra. It is the latest country to return imported rubbish after neighbouring Malaysia vowed to ship back hundreds of tonnes of plastic waste last month. The Philippines has ordered tonnes of garbage dumped in the country to be shipped back to Canada, sparking a diplomatic row between the two countries. For years China received the bulk of scrap plastic from around the world but closed its doors to foreign refuse last year in an effort to clean up its environment. Huge quantities of waste have since been redirected to Southeast Asia, including Malaysia, Indonesia and to a lesser degree the Philippines. Around 300 million tonnes of plastic are produced every year. Much of that ends up in landfill or in the seas, according to the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF).

Indonesia returns five containers of waste to the US

The United States has doubled the number of asylum seekers it sends back each day to Mexico from El Paso, Texas, a Mexican immigration official said on Friday, in the first sign of action following a deal struck to avert US&nbsp;tariffs last week.&nbsp;

Luis Carlos Cano, a spokesman for Mexico`s national immigration agency in Ciudad Juarez, across the border from El Paso, said starting Thursday some 200 asylum seekers per day were being sent back, up from 100 previously.&nbsp;

Under pressure from US President Donald Trump, Mexico agreed on June 7 to expand the program, known as the Migrant Protection Protocols, or `Remain in Mexico,` which forces mostly Central American asylum seekers arriving at the US southern border to await the outcome of their US&nbsp;asylum claims in Mexico.

Remain in Mexico currently operates in Tijuana, Mexicali and Ciudad Juarez. Close to 12,000 people have been returned to Mexico since it began in January.&nbsp;

However, Mexico has not accepted that the United States send it an unlimited number of asylum seekers, Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard said, ahead of planned meetings with US&nbsp;officials on Friday to determine details of the expansion.

"Today there is a meeting with US&nbsp;authorities, to learn, to discuss the ports of entry and how the number will be measured, because Mexico has not accepted that it be undetermined," Ebrard said at a news conference.&nbsp;

The agreement has put Mexican officials under mounting pressure to deliver results. The head of Mexico`s National Migration Institute, Tonatiuh Guillen, resigned on Friday for "personal reasons," an interior ministry official said.&nbsp;

'Safe third country'

If enforcement measures are not successful after 45 days, Mexico has also agreed to consider making itself a "safe third country." Asylum seekers who first set foot on Mexican soil would have to apply for refugee status in Mexico instead of in the United States.&nbsp;

Mexico`s government on Friday published the section of the joint accord which said Mexico would examine any changes to its legislation necessary to permit a safe third country arrangement to come into force 90 days after June 7.

The document also stated that such an agreement was intended to be "part of a regional approach to burden-sharing" in processing migrants` asylum claims.

Ebrard said this week that if Mexico could not stem the flow of people, a regional system should be established to bind in other countries crossed by migrants en route to the United States, including Guatemala, Panama and Brazil.&nbsp;

A rights group in Guatemala on Friday lashed out at the proposal to make asylum seekers from Honduras and El Salvador seek refuge in Guatemala, when its own citizens were fleeing poverty and violence.&nbsp;

Trump confirmed the deal included the safe third country plan if Mexico did not do enough to cut migration.

Asked in a Fox News interview if that possibility was part of the accord, Trump said, "It`s exactly right, and that`s what`s going to happen." 
Trump also named Tom Homan as "Border Czar."

Homan is a veteran of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement and served as the agency`s acting head during the first year of Trump`s presidency. He retired last year, after increasing arrests of non-criminal immigrants.

The United States has doubled the number of asylum seekers it sends back each day to Mexico from El Paso, Texas, a Mexican immigration official said on Friday, in the first sign of action following a deal struck to avert US tariffs last week.

The United States has doubled the number of asylum seekers it sends back each day to Mexico from El Paso, Texas, a Mexican immigration official said on Friday, in the first sign of action following a deal struck to avert US tariffs last week. Luis Carlos Cano, a spokesman for Mexico`s national immigration agency in Ciudad Juarez, across the border from El Paso, said starting Thursday some 200 asylum seekers per day were being sent back, up from 100 previously. Under pressure from US President Donald Trump, Mexico agreed on June 7 to expand the program, known as the Migrant Protection Protocols, or `Remain in Mexico,` which forces mostly Central American asylum seekers arriving at the US southern border to await the outcome of their US asylum claims in Mexico. Remain in Mexico currently operates in Tijuana, Mexicali and Ciudad Juarez. Close to 12,000 people have been returned to Mexico since it began in January. However, Mexico has not accepted that the United States send it an unlimited number of asylum seekers, Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard said, ahead of planned meetings with US officials on Friday to determine details of the expansion. "Today there is a meeting with US authorities, to learn, to discuss the ports of entry and how the number will be measured, because Mexico has not accepted that it be undetermined," Ebrard said at a news conference. The agreement has put Mexican officials under mounting pressure to deliver results. The head of Mexico`s National Migration Institute, Tonatiuh Guillen, resigned on Friday for "personal reasons," an interior ministry official said. 'Safe third country' If enforcement measures are not successful after 45 days, Mexico has also agreed to consider making itself a "safe third country." Asylum seekers who first set foot on Mexican soil would have to apply for refugee status in Mexico instead of in the United States. Mexico`s government on Friday published the section of the joint accord which said Mexico would examine any changes to its legislation necessary to permit a safe third country arrangement to come into force 90 days after June 7. The document also stated that such an agreement was intended to be "part of a regional approach to burden-sharing" in processing migrants` asylum claims. Ebrard said this week that if Mexico could not stem the flow of people, a regional system should be established to bind in other countries crossed by migrants en route to the United States, including Guatemala, Panama and Brazil. A rights group in Guatemala on Friday lashed out at the proposal to make asylum seekers from Honduras and El Salvador seek refuge in Guatemala, when its own citizens were fleeing poverty and violence. Trump confirmed the deal included the safe third country plan if Mexico did not do enough to cut migration. Asked in a Fox News interview if that possibility was part of the accord, Trump said, "It`s exactly right, and that`s what`s going to happen." Trump also named Tom Homan as "Border Czar." Homan is a veteran of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement and served as the agency`s acting head during the first year of Trump`s presidency. He retired last year, after increasing arrests of non-criminal immigrants.

US ramps up Mexico asylum returns, Trump confirms 'safe third country' plan

Democratic lawmakers accused President Donald Trump on Thursday of giving Russia the green light to interfere in the 2020 US presidential race, while a top Republican ally said Trump was wrong to say he would <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/nothing-wrong-with-accepting-dirt-from-foreign-governments-on-opponents-trump-226696">accept political dirt from foreign sources</a>.

The uproar followed televised comments in which the US president told ABC News he would be willing to listen to such damaging information about political opponents as he seeks re-election.

"I think you might want to listen, there isn`t anything wrong with listening,” Trump said in an interview aired on Wednesday.&nbsp;

"It`s not an interference. They have information, I think I`d take it. If I thought there was something wrong, I`d go maybe to the FBI - if I thought there was something wrong."

Trump`s comments came less than three months after Special Counsel Robert Mueller submitted a report that found Russia waged a hacking and influence campaign to help Trump defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election.

Democratic lawmakers roundly condemned the remarks.&nbsp;

"What the president said last night shows clearly, once again, over and over again, that he does not know the difference between right and wrong," said US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the top Democrat in Congress.

While some 2020 Democratic presidential candidates renewed their call to impeach the president, Trump`s comments did not seem to move House Democrats who have been on the fence closer to initiating impeachment proceedings.

Trump`s statement drew a rebuke, however, from one of his closest allies in Congress, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham.

"I think it`s a mistake," said Graham, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.&nbsp;

He accused Democrats of having accepted damaging information from foreign nationals on political opponents and said any public official contacted by a foreign government with an offer of help to their campaign should reject it and inform the FBI.

House of Representatives Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said he was confident Trump was speaking hypothetically. Others prominent Republicans were outspoken in their discomfort, without naming Trump.

"It is never appropriate to allow a foreign government or its agents to interfere in our election process. Period," said Republican Senator Mike Rounds.&nbsp;

Mitt Romney, a senator and former Republican presidential candidate, said it was "unthinkable" to accept adverse information on a political opponent from a foreign source. "It would strike at the very heart of our democracy," he said.

Senate Democrats failed on Thursday to ram through legislation requiring US presidential campaigns to report to the FBI offers of help from an agent of a foreign government. The move was blocked by Republicans who control the chamber.

Senator Mark Warner, who pushed the legislation, recalled Trump`s "Russia, if you are listening" call for Moscow to dig up Clinton`s missing emails during the 2016 campaign.

"The President has given Russia the green light to interfere in the 2020 election," Warner wrote on Twitter earlier.&nbsp;

'Thing of value'

Any foreign contribution of "money or other thing of value" violates US campaign finance law. Legal experts say knowingly soliciting information from a foreign entity would also be illegal.

In a statement on Twitter prefaced with the comment: "I would not have thought that I needed to say this," Federal Election Commission Chair Ellen Weintraub warned political campaigns not to accept foreign help, saying it risked putting them "on the wrong of a federal investigation."

An FBI counterintelligence investigation of Russian election activities in the 2016 presidential election sparked Mueller`s probe, which confirmed US intelligence agencies` findings that Russia worked to help Trump win.

Mueller, whose investigation examined a 2016 meeting at Trump Tower that Trump`s campaign had with Russians promising dirt on Clinton, did not charge Trump campaign staff who attended the meeting.&nbsp;

Trump defended his remarks in a flurry of tweets on Thursday morning in which he said it would be "ridiculous" to report his contacts with foreign leaders to the FBI.

The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee expressed alarm at Trump`s comments.

"The president has either learned nothing in the last two years or picked up exactly the wrong lesson - that he can accept gleefully foreign assistance again and escape the punishment of the law," Representative Adam Schiff said.

Democratic presidential candidates who renewed calls for Trump`s impeachment included US Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kirsten Gillibrand and US Representative Eric Swalwell.

"A foreign government attacked our 2016 elections to support Trump, Trump welcomed that help, and Trump obstructed the investigation. Now, he said he`d do it all over again. It`s time to impeach Donald Trump,” Warren said.

Democratic lawmakers accused President Donald Trump on Thursday of giving Russia the green light to interfere in the 2020 US presidential race, while a top Republican ally said Trump was wrong to say he would accept political dirt from foreign sources.

Democratic lawmakers accused President Donald Trump on Thursday of giving Russia the green light to interfere in the 2020 US presidential race, while a top Republican ally said Trump was wrong to say he would accept political dirt from foreign sources. The uproar followed televised comments in which the US president told ABC News he would be willing to listen to such damaging information about political opponents as he seeks re-election. "I think you might want to listen, there isn`t anything wrong with listening,” Trump said in an interview aired on Wednesday. "It`s not an interference. They have information, I think I`d take it. If I thought there was something wrong, I`d go maybe to the FBI - if I thought there was something wrong." Trump`s comments came less than three months after Special Counsel Robert Mueller submitted a report that found Russia waged a hacking and influence campaign to help Trump defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election. Democratic lawmakers roundly condemned the remarks. "What the president said last night shows clearly, once again, over and over again, that he does not know the difference between right and wrong," said US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the top Democrat in Congress. While some 2020 Democratic presidential candidates renewed their call to impeach the president, Trump`s comments did not seem to move House Democrats who have been on the fence closer to initiating impeachment proceedings. Trump`s statement drew a rebuke, however, from one of his closest allies in Congress, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham. "I think it`s a mistake," said Graham, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He accused Democrats of having accepted damaging information from foreign nationals on political opponents and said any public official contacted by a foreign government with an offer of help to their campaign should reject it and inform the FBI. House of Representatives Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said he was confident Trump was speaking hypothetically. Others prominent Republicans were outspoken in their discomfort, without naming Trump. "It is never appropriate to allow a foreign government or its agents to interfere in our election process. Period," said Republican Senator Mike Rounds. Mitt Romney, a senator and former Republican presidential candidate, said it was "unthinkable" to accept adverse information on a political opponent from a foreign source. "It would strike at the very heart of our democracy," he said. Senate Democrats failed on Thursday to ram through legislation requiring US presidential campaigns to report to the FBI offers of help from an agent of a foreign government. The move was blocked by Republicans who control the chamber. Senator Mark Warner, who pushed the legislation, recalled Trump`s "Russia, if you are listening" call for Moscow to dig up Clinton`s missing emails during the 2016 campaign. "The President has given Russia the green light to interfere in the 2020 election," Warner wrote on Twitter earlier. 'Thing of value' Any foreign contribution of "money or other thing of value" violates US campaign finance law. Legal experts say knowingly soliciting information from a foreign entity would also be illegal. In a statement on Twitter prefaced with the comment: "I would not have thought that I needed to say this," Federal Election Commission Chair Ellen Weintraub warned political campaigns not to accept foreign help, saying it risked putting them "on the wrong of a federal investigation." An FBI counterintelligence investigation of Russian election activities in the 2016 presidential election sparked Mueller`s probe, which confirmed US intelligence agencies` findings that Russia worked to help Trump win. Mueller, whose investigation examined a 2016 meeting at Trump Tower that Trump`s campaign had with Russians promising dirt on Clinton, did not charge Trump campaign staff who attended the meeting. Trump defended his remarks in a flurry of tweets on Thursday morning in which he said it would be "ridiculous" to report his contacts with foreign leaders to the FBI. The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee expressed alarm at Trump`s comments. "The president has either learned nothing in the last two years or picked up exactly the wrong lesson - that he can accept gleefully foreign assistance again and escape the punishment of the law," Representative Adam Schiff said. Democratic presidential candidates who renewed calls for Trump`s impeachment included US Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kirsten Gillibrand and US Representative Eric Swalwell. "A foreign government attacked our 2016 elections to support Trump, Trump welcomed that help, and Trump obstructed the investigation. Now, he said he`d do it all over again. It`s time to impeach Donald Trump,” Warren said.

Trump comments give green light to foreign election meddling: Democrats

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning - June 14th, 2019

India to hike tariffs on US goods by next week. India to impose tariffs on American Almonds, Walnuts. In 2018 India was one of the largest buyers of US Almonds. Tariffs will be on US goods worth over $220 Mn.

Report : India to hike tariffs on US Goods

As the blame game continued over <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/sophisticated-tanker-attacks-likely-the-work-of-a-state-actor-uae-225109">tanker explosions in the Gulf of Oman</a>, Iran President Rouhani slammed the US during his speech at the SCO summit in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan.

"The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-behind-tanker-attack-in-gulf-of-oman-us-acting-ambassador-jonathan-cohen-226968">US government</a> over the last two years, violating all the international structures and rules and using its economic, financial and military resources, has taken an aggressive approach and presents a serious risk to stability in the region and the world," Rouhani said, in translated comments, at a meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation.

The two tankers, one Norwegian- and one <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/flying-objects-damaged-japanese-tanker-during-attack-in-gulf-of-oman-kokuka-sangyo-co-president-227084">Japanese-owned</a>, were set ablaze in the Gulf of Oman off the coast of Iran on Thursday, escalating tensions across the region and sending world oil prices soaring.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had said earlier&nbsp;that <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/received-distress-calls-from-two-tankers-under-attack-in-gulf-of-oman-us-fifth-fleet-226781">Iran </a>was responsible for the attack that occurred in the Gulf of Oman.

"This assessment is based on intelligence, the weapons used, the level of expertise needed to execute the operation, recent similar Iranian attacks on shipping," Pompeo said.

US military tried to back up Pompeo's claim asserting&nbsp;that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corp Gashti Class patrol boat approached the Kokuka Courageous "and was observed and recorded removing (an) unexploded limpet mine from the M/T Kokuka Courageous."&nbsp;

The US also released a video of the incident.

The United Arab Emirates said Friday that twin attacks on tankers in the Sea of Oman just weeks after four ships were damaged off the UAE coast marked a dangerous escalation".

"The attack against the tankers in the Gulf of Oman is a worrying development and a dangerous escalation," the UAE minister of state for foreign affairs, Anwar Gargash, said.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif charged that the US administration had "immediately jumped to make allegations against Iran without a shred of factual or circumstantial evidence".

He accused it of seeking to "sabotage diplomacy" as Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited Tehran in a bid to ease Iran-US tensions.

(With inputs from agencies)

As the blame game continued over tanker explosions in the Gulf of Oman, Iran President Rouhani slammed the US during his speech at the SCO summit in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan.

As the blame game continued over tanker explosions in the Gulf of Oman, Iran President Rouhani slammed the US during his speech at the SCO summit in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan. "The US government over the last two years, violating all the international structures and rules and using its economic, financial and military resources, has taken an aggressive approach and presents a serious risk to stability in the region and the world," Rouhani said, in translated comments, at a meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. The two tankers, one Norwegian- and one Japanese-owned, were set ablaze in the Gulf of Oman off the coast of Iran on Thursday, escalating tensions across the region and sending world oil prices soaring. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had said earlier that Iran was responsible for the attack that occurred in the Gulf of Oman. "This assessment is based on intelligence, the weapons used, the level of expertise needed to execute the operation, recent similar Iranian attacks on shipping," Pompeo said. US military tried to back up Pompeo's claim asserting that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corp Gashti Class patrol boat approached the Kokuka Courageous "and was observed and recorded removing (an) unexploded limpet mine from the M/T Kokuka Courageous." The US also released a video of the incident. The United Arab Emirates said Friday that twin attacks on tankers in the Sea of Oman just weeks after four ships were damaged off the UAE coast marked a dangerous escalation". "The attack against the tankers in the Gulf of Oman is a worrying development and a dangerous escalation," the UAE minister of state for foreign affairs, Anwar Gargash, said. Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif charged that the US administration had "immediately jumped to make allegations against Iran without a shred of factual or circumstantial evidence". He accused it of seeking to "sabotage diplomacy" as Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited Tehran in a bid to ease Iran-US tensions. (With inputs from agencies)

US 'serious threat to global stability': Iran President Hassan Rouhani at SCO summit

By Amitrajeet A Batabyal&nbsp;

President Donald Trump’s trade war with China is based on two basic and complementary assumptions: The US economy is strong and, perhaps more importantly, stronger than the Chinese economy.

Last summer when the war began heating up, both assumptions were certainly true. The American economy was booming, while China’s was slowing. Hence, the US was in a better position to withstand any pain in a tariff war of attrition.

But the first of those assumptions, at least, is beginning to falter as signs grow of economic weakness in the US.

As an economist who conducts research in international trade, I believe that a weaker US economy would likely affect Trump’s ability to engage in a prolonged trade war with China – no matter how much he might want to.

Signs of Weakness

The US economy has been expanding for a decade now, and no economy can continue to grow indefinitely. The May jobs report was the latest indicator that the party may be coming to an end.

The report showed that the US economy added only 75,000 jobs that month, a significantly lower number than the 224,000 jobs added in April. Even though the unemployment rate stayed at the extremely low figure of 3.6 per cent, worryingly, there was virtually no wage growth. In addition, another key metric, the so-called ISM Manufacturing Index, fell to its lowest level in Trump’s presidency in May.

And while GDP growth has remained fairly robust, there have been other harbingers of underlying weakness in recent months, including a bond market signal that a recession may be on the horizon and a broad measure of the health of the US economy that recorded its slowest increase in more than two years.

Putting this all together, it suggests a key premise behind Trump’s trade war with China may not hold up for much longer.

Trade War’s Role

One of the reasons to blame for economic sluggishness is the trade war itself and specifically Trump’s use of tariffs to prosecute it.

Contrary to what he has said in the past, elementary trade theory shows that tariffs not only hurt the intended target but the tariff-imposing nation as well. This fundamental theoretical prediction is now being borne out in practice.

For instance, a recent and ongoing study by a group of economists shows that the higher prices resulting from Trump’s tariffs on China have been paid largely by US retailers, and some of them may soon be passed on to consumers. A separate study focused on washing machines found that tariffs resulted in an average 12 per cent increase in the price of the appliance, whether it was imported or made domestically.

Then there’s the impact of the retaliatory tariffs. Studies show that the US coal, crude oil and agricultural sectors have all been detrimentally affected by Chinese tariffs imposed in response. In addition, there is a reason to believe that the slowdown in American job growth is being felt most acutely in the sectors that are most susceptible to trade tensions such as manufacturing, construction, mining and logging.

In other words, if the deleterious impacts of Trump’s trade war with China continue to be felt in an economy that is weakening, it is certainly likely that there will be much greater opposition to these tariffs from industry groups and lawmakers.

These possibilities cast serious doubt on Trump’s ability to continue – let alone achieve the concessions he might need to win – a protracted trade war with China.

Fed to the Rescue?

Trump may end up having an unexpected ally in the Federal Reserve, however.

Evidence of weakness has already ended the US central bank’s policy of monetary tightening by raising interest rates. The latest data will no doubt put considerable pressure on the Fed to actually cut rates to avoid a more sustained slowdown.

If it does, then the Fed-driven stimulation will mitigate some of the pain felt by Americans as a result of Trump’s trade war with China and allow him to continue to prosecute his trade war.

High Stakes

That being said, it is still too early to say definitively that the US economy is cooling.

And, given Trump’s unpredictability, it’s impossible to forecast what may happen no matter what. At least for now, the president appears to have no intention of backing down.

But for me, a weakening economy adds to the reasons why this trade war is not only futile but harmful. For one thing, I believe tariffs alone cannot address the underlying structural problems that afflict US-China trade.

And let’s not forget that the trade war has global repercussions. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development recently warned that an escalation of this trade war – as Trump has repeatedly threatened – will damage the rest of the world, trimming 0.7 per cent off global growth by 2021. That may not sound like much, but this trimming amounts to a whopping $600 billion in lost economic activity.

It’s a reminder that the stakes of this war are enormous.

(Arthur J. Gosnell Professor of Economics, Rochester Institute of Technology)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the<a href="https://theconversation.com/could-a-weakening-us-economy-imperil-trumps-trade-war-against-china-118576"> original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

By Amitrajeet A Batabyal President Donald Trump’s trade war with China is based on two basic and complementary assumptions: The US economy is strong and, perhaps more importantly, stronger than the Chinese economy.

By Amitrajeet A Batabyal President Donald Trump’s trade war with China is based on two basic and complementary assumptions: The US economy is strong and, perhaps more importantly, stronger than the Chinese economy. Last summer when the war began heating up, both assumptions were certainly true. The American economy was booming, while China’s was slowing. Hence, the US was in a better position to withstand any pain in a tariff war of attrition. But the first of those assumptions, at least, is beginning to falter as signs grow of economic weakness in the US. As an economist who conducts research in international trade, I believe that a weaker US economy would likely affect Trump’s ability to engage in a prolonged trade war with China – no matter how much he might want to. Signs of Weakness The US economy has been expanding for a decade now, and no economy can continue to grow indefinitely. The May jobs report was the latest indicator that the party may be coming to an end. The report showed that the US economy added only 75,000 jobs that month, a significantly lower number than the 224,000 jobs added in April. Even though the unemployment rate stayed at the extremely low figure of 3.6 per cent, worryingly, there was virtually no wage growth. In addition, another key metric, the so-called ISM Manufacturing Index, fell to its lowest level in Trump’s presidency in May. And while GDP growth has remained fairly robust, there have been other harbingers of underlying weakness in recent months, including a bond market signal that a recession may be on the horizon and a broad measure of the health of the US economy that recorded its slowest increase in more than two years. Putting this all together, it suggests a key premise behind Trump’s trade war with China may not hold up for much longer. Trade War’s Role One of the reasons to blame for economic sluggishness is the trade war itself and specifically Trump’s use of tariffs to prosecute it. Contrary to what he has said in the past, elementary trade theory shows that tariffs not only hurt the intended target but the tariff-imposing nation as well. This fundamental theoretical prediction is now being borne out in practice. For instance, a recent and ongoing study by a group of economists shows that the higher prices resulting from Trump’s tariffs on China have been paid largely by US retailers, and some of them may soon be passed on to consumers. A separate study focused on washing machines found that tariffs resulted in an average 12 per cent increase in the price of the appliance, whether it was imported or made domestically. Then there’s the impact of the retaliatory tariffs. Studies show that the US coal, crude oil and agricultural sectors have all been detrimentally affected by Chinese tariffs imposed in response. In addition, there is a reason to believe that the slowdown in American job growth is being felt most acutely in the sectors that are most susceptible to trade tensions such as manufacturing, construction, mining and logging. In other words, if the deleterious impacts of Trump’s trade war with China continue to be felt in an economy that is weakening, it is certainly likely that there will be much greater opposition to these tariffs from industry groups and lawmakers. These possibilities cast serious doubt on Trump’s ability to continue – let alone achieve the concessions he might need to win – a protracted trade war with China. Fed to the Rescue? Trump may end up having an unexpected ally in the Federal Reserve, however. Evidence of weakness has already ended the US central bank’s policy of monetary tightening by raising interest rates. The latest data will no doubt put considerable pressure on the Fed to actually cut rates to avoid a more sustained slowdown. If it does, then the Fed-driven stimulation will mitigate some of the pain felt by Americans as a result of Trump’s trade war with China and allow him to continue to prosecute his trade war. High Stakes That being said, it is still too early to say definitively that the US economy is cooling. And, given Trump’s unpredictability, it’s impossible to forecast what may happen no matter what. At least for now, the president appears to have no intention of backing down. But for me, a weakening economy adds to the reasons why this trade war is not only futile but harmful. For one thing, I believe tariffs alone cannot address the underlying structural problems that afflict US-China trade. And let’s not forget that the trade war has global repercussions. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development recently warned that an escalation of this trade war – as Trump has repeatedly threatened – will damage the rest of the world, trimming 0.7 per cent off global growth by 2021. That may not sound like much, but this trimming amounts to a whopping $600 billion in lost economic activity. It’s a reminder that the stakes of this war are enormous. (Arthur J. Gosnell Professor of Economics, Rochester Institute of Technology) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Could a weakening US economy imperil Trump’s trade war against China?

A senior US general has called the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/islamic-state-defeated-caliphate-eliminated-says-us-ally-in-syria-205079">Islamic State</a>(IS) in Afghanistan as a serious threat, adding that the IS terrorist organisation&nbsp;aspires to attack the United States.

"<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/the-next-islamic-state-battlefield-will-be-in-south-asia-216301">ISIS</a> in Afghanistan certainly has aspirations to attack the United States. It is our clear judgment that as long as we maintain pressure on them it will be hard for them to do that, " Marine General&nbsp;Frank McKenzie said.

Further calling the IS "very worrisome in eastern Afghanistan", McKenzie added, "combat operations have failed to reduce the group's fighting ranks. Others have said they are thought to number in the thousands".

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/islamic-state-is-focusing-on-subcontinent-and-india-in-particular-219555">Islamic State is focusing on subcontinent and India in particular</a>

Associated Press had earlier reported that the Islamic State was expanding its footprints across Afghanistan. Citing US and Afghan security officials, the report claimed&nbsp;that the terror group was recruiting new fighters and plotting attacks on the United States and other western countries.

General McKenzie is the head of US Central Command and manages the country's military operations across the greater Middle East.

Watch: Wounded and alone, children emerge from last Islamic State enclave in Baghouz

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/wounded-and-alone-children-emerge-from-last-islamic-state-enclave-in-baghouz-200827/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The Islamic State grew in Afghanistan with the emergence of the jihadist militant group in Syria and Iraq in&nbsp;early 2014.

The IS in Afghanistan calls itself as the Khorasan Province, a name applied to parts of Afghanistan, Iran and central Asia in the Middle Ages.

Besides assisting the Afghan defence forces against the Taliban, the US forces in Afghanistan are combatting the Islamic State group separately.&nbsp;

A senior US general has called the Islamic State(IS) in Afghanistan as a serious threat, adding that the IS terrorist organisation aspires to attack the United States.

A senior US general has called the Islamic State(IS) in Afghanistan as a serious threat, adding that the IS terrorist organisation aspires to attack the United States. "ISIS in Afghanistan certainly has aspirations to attack the United States. It is our clear judgment that as long as we maintain pressure on them it will be hard for them to do that, " Marine General Frank McKenzie said. Further calling the IS "very worrisome in eastern Afghanistan", McKenzie added, "combat operations have failed to reduce the group's fighting ranks. Others have said they are thought to number in the thousands". Also read: Islamic State is focusing on subcontinent and India in particular Associated Press had earlier reported that the Islamic State was expanding its footprints across Afghanistan. Citing US and Afghan security officials, the report claimed that the terror group was recruiting new fighters and plotting attacks on the United States and other western countries. General McKenzie is the head of US Central Command and manages the country's military operations across the greater Middle East. Watch: Wounded and alone, children emerge from last Islamic State enclave in Baghouz × The Islamic State grew in Afghanistan with the emergence of the jihadist militant group in Syria and Iraq in early 2014. The IS in Afghanistan calls itself as the Khorasan Province, a name applied to parts of Afghanistan, Iran and central Asia in the Middle Ages. Besides assisting the Afghan defence forces against the Taliban, the US forces in Afghanistan are combatting the Islamic State group separately.

Islamic State in Afghanistan aspires to attack US: Marine General Frank McKenzie

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning - June 13th, 2019

Japan's PM Shinzo Abe Is In Iran To Broken Peace Between Washington & Tehran. Can Japan's PM Shinzo Abe Pull Off A Truce Between The US & Iran? Abe Is In Tehran For This Very Specific Purpose. Here's A Report

Gravitas: Can Abe Pull Off US-Iran Truce?

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/eye-on-china-us-government-seeks-more-funding-from-congress-to-bolster-bay-of-bengal-military-security-226703">Eye on China: US government seeks more funding from Congress to bolster Bay of Bengal military security</a>

With an eye on countering increasing Chinese influence in key&nbsp;South Asian countries, the Trump administration has sought $30 million for what it has described as "Bay of Bengal" security initiative to provide foreign military financing to Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the Maldives.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistans-defence-budget-unchanged-says-minister-documents-show-45-increase-226697">Pakistan's defence budget 'unchanged', says minister; documents show 4.5% increase</a>

The Pakistan government claimed that its defence budget was kept unchanged at Rs 1,152,535 million&nbsp;for next fiscal (2019-20), but the official documents showed that there was nominal increase of 4.5 per cent in the defence expenditure as compared to the last year.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/sports/we-need-to-overcome-mistakes-to-beat-india-says-sarfaraz-after-australia-defeat-226683">We need to overcome mistakes to beat India, says Sarfaraz after Australia defeat</a>

Pakistan captain Sarfaraz Ahmed said his side's needs to raise their fielding standards ahead of a crucial World Cup match against arch-rivals India at Old Trafford on Sunday.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-state-media-blames-hong-kong-protests-on-lawlessness-226680">China state media blames Hong Kong protests on 'lawlessness'</a>

Protests in Hong Kong&nbsp;over planned new extradition laws with China are "hammering" the city`s reputation, with outbreaks of "lawlessness" undermining rule of law, Chinese state media said in editorials published on Thursday.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/modi-hai-to-mumkin-hai-says-pompeo-ahead-of-india-visit-226682">Modi 'hai to mumkin hai', says Pompeo ahead of India visit</a>

Citing the popular election slogan "Modi hai to mumkin hai", US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has sought to take the bilateral relationship with India to the next level and said the Trump and Modi administrations have a "unique opportunity" to make it happen.

Eye on China: US government seeks more funding from Congress to bolster Bay of Bengal military security With an eye on countering increasing Chinese influence in key South Asian countries, the Trump administration has sought $30 million for what it has described as "Bay of Bengal" security initiative to provide foreign military financing to Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the Maldives.

Eye on China: US government seeks more funding from Congress to bolster Bay of Bengal military security With an eye on countering increasing Chinese influence in key South Asian countries, the Trump administration has sought $30 million for what it has described as "Bay of Bengal" security initiative to provide foreign military financing to Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the Maldives. Pakistan's defence budget 'unchanged', says minister; documents show 4.5% increase The Pakistan government claimed that its defence budget was kept unchanged at Rs 1,152,535 million for next fiscal (2019-20), but the official documents showed that there was nominal increase of 4.5 per cent in the defence expenditure as compared to the last year. We need to overcome mistakes to beat India, says Sarfaraz after Australia defeat Pakistan captain Sarfaraz Ahmed said his side's needs to raise their fielding standards ahead of a crucial World Cup match against arch-rivals India at Old Trafford on Sunday. China state media blames Hong Kong protests on 'lawlessness' Protests in Hong Kong over planned new extradition laws with China are "hammering" the city`s reputation, with outbreaks of "lawlessness" undermining rule of law, Chinese state media said in editorials published on Thursday. Modi 'hai to mumkin hai', says Pompeo ahead of India visit Citing the popular election slogan "Modi hai to mumkin hai", US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has sought to take the bilateral relationship with India to the next level and said the Trump and Modi administrations have a "unique opportunity" to make it happen.

News brief: Big stories of the day

A US congressional committee on Wednesday unanimously approved legislation to extend the fund compensating first responders to the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Centre for the next 70 years, a move that would avoid steep benefit reductions over a lack of money.

The House Judiciary Committee acted one day after television personality and comedian Jon Stewart castigated lawmakers at a hearing for their slow response to helping New York City firefighters, police officers and other emergency personnel who rushed to the scene of the attacks that left two of Manhattan`s most well-known skyscrapers in rubble.

The fund also helps construction workers and victims of the attack.

"Your indifference costs these men and women their most valuable commodity - time," Stewart said to a hearing room packed with lawmakers and first-responders, including those now suffering from cancer, respiratory problems and other serious health issues as a result of inhaling contaminated air nearly 18 years ago.

Before Wednesday`s vote, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, whose constituents live in New York City, said that despite federal officials` statements that the air was safe in the aftermath of the attack, "more than 95,000 responders and survivors are sick."&nbsp;

The bill, which next goes to the full House for debate, would extend the victims` compensation fund to 2090, putting it on the same terms as a health program for World Trade Centre victims. It also would reverse any benefit cuts due to insufficient funds.&nbsp;

Also on Wednesday, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York pleaded for fast passage in that chamber.

On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was asked by a reporter whether he would advance the legislation.

"I hadn`t looked at that lately. I`ll have to. We`ve always dealt with that in a compassionate way and I assume we will again," McConnell said. 
In the past, some lawmakers have complained about the cost of helping 9-11 victims at a time of severe U.S. budget deficits.&nbsp;

"It`s shameful. There’s no other word for it. Shameful, that our brave first responders have had to suffer the indignity of delay after delay after delay," Schumer said in a speech to the Senate.

A US congressional committee on Wednesday unanimously approved legislation to extend the fund compensating first responders to the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Centre for the next 70 years, a move that would avoid steep benefit reductions over a lack of money.

A US congressional committee on Wednesday unanimously approved legislation to extend the fund compensating first responders to the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Centre for the next 70 years, a move that would avoid steep benefit reductions over a lack of money. The House Judiciary Committee acted one day after television personality and comedian Jon Stewart castigated lawmakers at a hearing for their slow response to helping New York City firefighters, police officers and other emergency personnel who rushed to the scene of the attacks that left two of Manhattan`s most well-known skyscrapers in rubble. The fund also helps construction workers and victims of the attack. "Your indifference costs these men and women their most valuable commodity - time," Stewart said to a hearing room packed with lawmakers and first-responders, including those now suffering from cancer, respiratory problems and other serious health issues as a result of inhaling contaminated air nearly 18 years ago. Before Wednesday`s vote, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, whose constituents live in New York City, said that despite federal officials` statements that the air was safe in the aftermath of the attack, "more than 95,000 responders and survivors are sick." The bill, which next goes to the full House for debate, would extend the victims` compensation fund to 2090, putting it on the same terms as a health program for World Trade Centre victims. It also would reverse any benefit cuts due to insufficient funds. Also on Wednesday, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York pleaded for fast passage in that chamber. On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was asked by a reporter whether he would advance the legislation. "I hadn`t looked at that lately. I`ll have to. We`ve always dealt with that in a compassionate way and I assume we will again," McConnell said. In the past, some lawmakers have complained about the cost of helping 9-11 victims at a time of severe U.S. budget deficits. "It`s shameful. There’s no other word for it. Shameful, that our brave first responders have had to suffer the indignity of delay after delay after delay," Schumer said in a speech to the Senate.

US House panel approves permanent September 11 victims' compensation

It was a symbolic gift from Emmanuel Macron to Donald Trump at the height of their “bromance” last year: an oak tree ceremoniously planted in the manicured lawns of the White House by both leaders.

Trump and Macron’s symbolic friendship tree dies

The US House Oversight Committee voted on Wednesday to approve contempt of Congress citations against <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-attorney-general-william-barr-refuses-to-testify-before-house-judiciary-committee-on-mueller-report-215205">Attorney General William Barr</a> and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross for defying congressional subpoenas related to the US Census.

By a 24-15 vote, the panel recommended that the full House of Representatives find Barr and Ross in contempt for refusing to cooperate with an investigation of the Trump administration's decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 US Census.

The US House Oversight Committee voted on Wednesday to approve contempt of Congress citations against Attorney General William Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross for defying congressional subpoenas related to the US Census.

The US House Oversight Committee voted on Wednesday to approve contempt of Congress citations against Attorney General William Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross for defying congressional subpoenas related to the US Census. By a 24-15 vote, the panel recommended that the full House of Representatives find Barr and Ross in contempt for refusing to cooperate with an investigation of the Trump administration's decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 US Census.

United States House panel approves contempt citations against Barr, Ross

&nbsp;The US President Donald Trump pledged to Polish President Andrzej Duda on Wednesday that he will<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/poland-offering-2-billion-to-host-us-military-base-donald-trump-166570"> deploy 1,000 US troops to Poland</a>, a step sought by Warsaw to deter potential aggression from Russia.

Despite their strong show of unity, Trump disagreed with Duda's attempt to force the retirement of some Polish Supreme Court judges, a decision last year that prompted protests. "No," Trump said when asked if he supported the move.

Trump announced the troop deployment at a joint news conference with Duda in the White House Rose Garden shortly after the two leaders signed a joint declaration affirming defence cooperation and watched a US made F-35 fighter jet fly overhead.

Duda, who is considering naming the US installation "Fort Trump," said the new influx of troops was needed because of Moscow's past aggression against Poland and to help solidify his country's ties to the West.

"Russia again is showing its unkind, unfriendly imperial face," he said. "Russia is always looking out to take our territory."

Trump said earlier the troop contingent could come from the US force in Germany, which he has accused of paying too little for NATO's common defence.

The decision by Trump represents an effort to cater to the interests of Poland, a key NATO ally, while not overly antagonizing Russian President Vladimir Putin, with whom Trump would like to have friendly relations. He and Putin are to meet in Japan in two weeks.

"I hope that Poland is going to have a great relationship with Russia. I hope that we're going to have a great relationship with Russia," said Trump.

The United States already has troops in Poland as part of a 2016 agreement with the NATO military alliance in response to Moscow's annexation of Crimea from Poland's eastern neighbour Ukraine in 2014.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg issued a statement welcoming the deployment.

"Today’s announcement is part of NATO’s measured, defensive and proportionate efforts to strengthen our deterrence and defence," he said.

Duda denied backsliding on democracy when asked about his attempt to remove the judges. He said some of them dated back to Poland's communist past and that he wanted to remove them as part of judicial reforms.

"This is a very complex issue," he said. "Everything that we were doing was aimed at retiring those people .. Let me assure you, freedom of speech is absolutely respected in Poland. Poland absolutely respects all constitutional standards."

With Trump to turn 73 on Friday, Duda wished Trump a happy birthday at an evening White House reception whose audience included Polish-Americans. Some in the crowd launched into a happy birthday song in Polish.

"This first term of your presidency will be the introduction to your second term," Duda told Trump.

The US President Donald Trump pledged to Polish President Andrzej Duda on Wednesday that he will deploy 1,000 US troops to Poland, a step sought by Warsaw to deter potential aggression from Russia.

The US President Donald Trump pledged to Polish President Andrzej Duda on Wednesday that he will deploy 1,000 US troops to Poland, a step sought by Warsaw to deter potential aggression from Russia. Despite their strong show of unity, Trump disagreed with Duda's attempt to force the retirement of some Polish Supreme Court judges, a decision last year that prompted protests. "No," Trump said when asked if he supported the move. Trump announced the troop deployment at a joint news conference with Duda in the White House Rose Garden shortly after the two leaders signed a joint declaration affirming defence cooperation and watched a US made F-35 fighter jet fly overhead. Duda, who is considering naming the US installation "Fort Trump," said the new influx of troops was needed because of Moscow's past aggression against Poland and to help solidify his country's ties to the West. "Russia again is showing its unkind, unfriendly imperial face," he said. "Russia is always looking out to take our territory." Trump said earlier the troop contingent could come from the US force in Germany, which he has accused of paying too little for NATO's common defence. The decision by Trump represents an effort to cater to the interests of Poland, a key NATO ally, while not overly antagonizing Russian President Vladimir Putin, with whom Trump would like to have friendly relations. He and Putin are to meet in Japan in two weeks. "I hope that Poland is going to have a great relationship with Russia. I hope that we're going to have a great relationship with Russia," said Trump. The United States already has troops in Poland as part of a 2016 agreement with the NATO military alliance in response to Moscow's annexation of Crimea from Poland's eastern neighbour Ukraine in 2014. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg issued a statement welcoming the deployment. "Today’s announcement is part of NATO’s measured, defensive and proportionate efforts to strengthen our deterrence and defence," he said. Duda denied backsliding on democracy when asked about his attempt to remove the judges. He said some of them dated back to Poland's communist past and that he wanted to remove them as part of judicial reforms. "This is a very complex issue," he said. "Everything that we were doing was aimed at retiring those people .. Let me assure you, freedom of speech is absolutely respected in Poland. Poland absolutely respects all constitutional standards." With Trump to turn 73 on Friday, Duda wished Trump a happy birthday at an evening White House reception whose audience included Polish-Americans. Some in the crowd launched into a happy birthday song in Polish. "This first term of your presidency will be the introduction to your second term," Duda told Trump.

US will deploy 1,000 troops to Poland; Warsaw may call them 'Fort Trump'

Amidst peace talks and reconciliation efforts with the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Trump administration on Wednesday told a Congressional subcommittee that its assistance to the war-ravaged country should not be treated as a "blank check".

"Our assistance is not a blank check," Alice G Wells Senior State Department Official for South and Central Asian Affairs has told House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee for Asia, the Pacific and Nonproliferation in a prepared statement on Wednesday.

The sub-committee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee is scheduled to hold a hearing "US Interests in South Asia and the FY 2020 Budget" on Thursday.&nbsp;

"We expect the Afghan government will continue on a path of reform, and we will use the Afghanistan Compact as a means to monitor progress and discuss new reform objectives to tackle Afghanistan's biggest challenges," she said.&nbsp;

Afghanistan, Wells said, has made some progress on benchmarks in the Compact, including the conviction of high-level officials for corruption, independent management of security for the parliamentary elections, and improved government revenue collection. "Continued progress is needed," the US diplomat said.

President Donald Trump and the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have made clear that their top priority in the region is to end the war in Afghanistan through a sustainable political settlement that ensures that Afghanistan never again serves as a haven for terrorist attacks against the US or its interests.&nbsp;

"As we seek an end to the war, we are working with the Afghan government to define the parameters of a sustainable, long-term partnership with Afghanistan; civilian assistance will continue to play an important role," she said.

In recent discussions in Kabul, the Department of State and the Afghan government have agreed to focus US assistance on our highest priorities: furthering the peace process, ensuring Afghanistan does not serve as a terrorist safe haven, promoting Afghan self-reliance, and maintaining Afghan stability.&nbsp;

The US, she said, has smaller budgetary request for FY 2020 for Afghanistan and anticipates this having more focused portfolio.&nbsp;

However, significant prior year resources in the pipeline will allow US to avoid programme disruptions as they transition to a smaller portfolio and have flexibility to respond to a political settlement.&nbsp;

"We also stand ready to provide humanitarian support as needed, so that a natural disaster or a significant return of refugees won't undermine Afghanistan's push for peace and stability," Wells said.

"At the same time, the US is intensifying its engagement with partners," she said.&nbsp;

"At last year's Geneva Conference on Afghanistan, the United States called on donors to begin planning for post-settlement Afghanistan, and several countries have responded," she added.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

Amidst peace talks and reconciliation efforts with the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Trump administration on Wednesday told a Congressional subcommittee that its assistance to the war-ravaged country should not be treated as a "blank check".

Amidst peace talks and reconciliation efforts with the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Trump administration on Wednesday told a Congressional subcommittee that its assistance to the war-ravaged country should not be treated as a "blank check". "Our assistance is not a blank check," Alice G Wells Senior State Department Official for South and Central Asian Affairs has told House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee for Asia, the Pacific and Nonproliferation in a prepared statement on Wednesday. The sub-committee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee is scheduled to hold a hearing "US Interests in South Asia and the FY 2020 Budget" on Thursday. "We expect the Afghan government will continue on a path of reform, and we will use the Afghanistan Compact as a means to monitor progress and discuss new reform objectives to tackle Afghanistan's biggest challenges," she said. Afghanistan, Wells said, has made some progress on benchmarks in the Compact, including the conviction of high-level officials for corruption, independent management of security for the parliamentary elections, and improved government revenue collection. "Continued progress is needed," the US diplomat said. President Donald Trump and the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have made clear that their top priority in the region is to end the war in Afghanistan through a sustainable political settlement that ensures that Afghanistan never again serves as a haven for terrorist attacks against the US or its interests. "As we seek an end to the war, we are working with the Afghan government to define the parameters of a sustainable, long-term partnership with Afghanistan; civilian assistance will continue to play an important role," she said. In recent discussions in Kabul, the Department of State and the Afghan government have agreed to focus US assistance on our highest priorities: furthering the peace process, ensuring Afghanistan does not serve as a terrorist safe haven, promoting Afghan self-reliance, and maintaining Afghan stability. The US, she said, has smaller budgetary request for FY 2020 for Afghanistan and anticipates this having more focused portfolio. However, significant prior year resources in the pipeline will allow US to avoid programme disruptions as they transition to a smaller portfolio and have flexibility to respond to a political settlement. "We also stand ready to provide humanitarian support as needed, so that a natural disaster or a significant return of refugees won't undermine Afghanistan's push for peace and stability," Wells said. "At the same time, the US is intensifying its engagement with partners," she said. "At last year's Geneva Conference on Afghanistan, the United States called on donors to begin planning for post-settlement Afghanistan, and several countries have responded," she added.

Assistance to Afghanistan not blank check says US

With under three weeks to go before proposed&nbsp;talks&nbsp;between the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/americas/donald-trump-xi-jinping-and-trade-a-high-stakes-game-of-chicken-216697">Chinese and US leaders</a>,&nbsp;expectations&nbsp;for progress toward ending the trade war are&nbsp;low&nbsp;and sources say there has been little preparation for a meeting even as the health of the world economy is at stake.

President Donald&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;says he wants to meet with President&nbsp;Xi&nbsp;Jinping at the June 28-29 G20 summit in Osaka, Japan and will decide on whether to extend tariffs to almost all Chinese imports after that.

Though neither side has confirmed that a meeting will take place, investors worldwide who have seen over a trillion dollars wiped from global markets in the past month by the trade fight will be closely watching any interaction between the two men.

Relations have deteriorated since May when negotiations to end the US-Chinese trade disputes broke down, all but killing off the possibility of an agreement in Japan.

"The atmosphere is poisonous," one senior Beijing-based Western diplomat told Reuters, referring to China-US ties.

Sources familiar with the matter, including officials and diplomats in Washington and Beijing, say there has been a lack of preparatory work for the meeting, due largely to the increasing acrimony. The trade negotiating teams have not met since&nbsp;talks&nbsp;ended in stalemate on May 10.

The White House declined to comment on plans for a&nbsp;Trump-Xi&nbsp;meeting.

"Preparations&nbsp;for the G20 summit in Japan are ongoing. We have nothing to announce at this time regarding specific bilateral meetings," White House National Security Council spokesman Garrett Marquis.

White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow&nbsp;told CNBC on Tuesday that&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;is hoping to "pick up where we left off" in the&nbsp;talks&nbsp;with&nbsp;Xi.

Trump&nbsp;said again on Monday that he expected the meeting to happen, and threatened more tariffs on Chinese imports if there is not enough progress or if&nbsp;Xi&nbsp;does not attend.

China is open to more trade&nbsp;talks&nbsp;but has nothing to announce about a possible meeting between the two leaders, Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said on Monday. He said on Tuesday that China would "fight to the end" if Washington escalates trade fictions.

Sources said the two leaders are likely to have some kind of meeting but whatever happens in Osaka, it will be a downgrade from the possibility both sides feted just two months ago - when they hoped the&nbsp;talks&nbsp;would be the scene for the two presidents to sign a historic trade deal.

A senior Chinese official told US business representatives last week that&nbsp;preparations&nbsp;had yet to begin for either a&nbsp;Trump-Xi&nbsp;meeting or to resume trade negotiations, a source with direct knowledge of the briefing said.

On the US side in recent years, the lack of preparation for a big meeting is not that unusual.&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;often attends important&nbsp;talks&nbsp;with little advance work and makes policy on the fly.

Xi&nbsp;may not even want to go into such a high profile meeting with an unpredictable outcome and facing the threat of more US tariffs on Chinese goods.

"For China, it's all about the protocol for&nbsp;Xi&nbsp;and making sure he is respected," said an Asian diplomat. "China will not want&nbsp;Xi to go into a meeting where he may be embarrassed."

Low Expectations

Eswar Prasad, a trade professor at Cornell University and a former head of the China department at the International Monetary Fund, said&nbsp;expectations&nbsp;from any&nbsp;talks&nbsp;were&nbsp;low.

"The best-case outcome from a&nbsp;Trump-Xi&nbsp;meeting, which seems a dubious proposition at this stage, would be an agreement for the two sides to resume&nbsp;talks," said Prasad, who is in touch with Chinese officials. "The prospects for even a temporary and&nbsp;limited&nbsp;ceasefire have dissipated and a prolonged period of trade and broader economic tensions between the two countries seems on the cards."

If&nbsp;talks&nbsp;go badly, both sides could raise tariffs on each other,&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;could withdraw licenses for firms trading with Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei, and China might ban exports of rare earth supplies vital for high-tech products as well as take measures against US companies in China.

Trade negotiations broke down in May and the two sides raised tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of each other's imports.

Trump&nbsp;accused Beijing of reneging on promises to meet US demands to extend the protection of intellectual property, end state-sponsored cyber theft, open more markets to US firms, and reduce industrial subsidies.

China has said US demands are so extensive that they violate its sovereignty.

A source with ties to China's leadership said there was deep anger in the government and party about&nbsp;Trump's accusations of China backsliding, especially as Beijing thought it was on the verge of a deal.

The source likened the US response to the feeling of being jilted at the altar.

"You don't promise to marry someone and then back out at the last minute," the source, who meets regularly with senior officials, told Reuters.

Xi&nbsp;and&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;met last year in Buenos Aires and broke a prior impasse in trade&nbsp;talks.

The US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin drew parallels between the planned Osaka meeting and that encounter, telling Reuters that the pace of&nbsp;preparations&nbsp;for both meetings was similar.

But, unlike the current uncertainty over plans for the meeting in Japan, the White House confirmed the Argentina&nbsp;talks&nbsp;were taking place as early as six weeks in advance.

The US-China tension has gone beyond tariffs. The United States has sanctioned Huawei, sent its navy into the disputed South China Sea and Taiwan Strait, and made other public shows of support for self-ruled Taiwan.

The strains between Washington and Beijing are expected to make it difficult for diplomats to agree on the language of the G20 statement issued at the end of the summit.

Host country Japan and European Union countries are working with the United States on new World Trade Organization rules aimed at reining in "non market-oriented policies" including industrial subsidies, rules clearly aimed at China.

Beijing is expected to resist language in the statement that the United States may subsequently use against China in trade&nbsp;talks.

With under three weeks to go before proposed talks between the Chinese and US leaders, expectations for progress toward ending the trade war are low and sources say there has been little preparation for a meeting even as the health of the world economy is at stake.

With under three weeks to go before proposed talks between the Chinese and US leaders, expectations for progress toward ending the trade war are low and sources say there has been little preparation for a meeting even as the health of the world economy is at stake. President Donald Trump says he wants to meet with President Xi Jinping at the June 28-29 G20 summit in Osaka, Japan and will decide on whether to extend tariffs to almost all Chinese imports after that. Though neither side has confirmed that a meeting will take place, investors worldwide who have seen over a trillion dollars wiped from global markets in the past month by the trade fight will be closely watching any interaction between the two men. Relations have deteriorated since May when negotiations to end the US-Chinese trade disputes broke down, all but killing off the possibility of an agreement in Japan. "The atmosphere is poisonous," one senior Beijing-based Western diplomat told Reuters, referring to China-US ties. Sources familiar with the matter, including officials and diplomats in Washington and Beijing, say there has been a lack of preparatory work for the meeting, due largely to the increasing acrimony. The trade negotiating teams have not met since talks ended in stalemate on May 10. The White House declined to comment on plans for a Trump-Xi meeting. "Preparations for the G20 summit in Japan are ongoing. We have nothing to announce at this time regarding specific bilateral meetings," White House National Security Council spokesman Garrett Marquis. White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow told CNBC on Tuesday that Trump is hoping to "pick up where we left off" in the talks with Xi. Trump said again on Monday that he expected the meeting to happen, and threatened more tariffs on Chinese imports if there is not enough progress or if Xi does not attend. China is open to more trade talks but has nothing to announce about a possible meeting between the two leaders, Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said on Monday. He said on Tuesday that China would "fight to the end" if Washington escalates trade fictions. Sources said the two leaders are likely to have some kind of meeting but whatever happens in Osaka, it will be a downgrade from the possibility both sides feted just two months ago - when they hoped the talks would be the scene for the two presidents to sign a historic trade deal. A senior Chinese official told US business representatives last week that preparations had yet to begin for either a Trump-Xi meeting or to resume trade negotiations, a source with direct knowledge of the briefing said. On the US side in recent years, the lack of preparation for a big meeting is not that unusual. Trump often attends important talks with little advance work and makes policy on the fly. Xi may not even want to go into such a high profile meeting with an unpredictable outcome and facing the threat of more US tariffs on Chinese goods. "For China, it's all about the protocol for Xi and making sure he is respected," said an Asian diplomat. "China will not want Xi to go into a meeting where he may be embarrassed." Low Expectations Eswar Prasad, a trade professor at Cornell University and a former head of the China department at the International Monetary Fund, said expectations from any talks were low. "The best-case outcome from a Trump-Xi meeting, which seems a dubious proposition at this stage, would be an agreement for the two sides to resume talks," said Prasad, who is in touch with Chinese officials. "The prospects for even a temporary and limited ceasefire have dissipated and a prolonged period of trade and broader economic tensions between the two countries seems on the cards." If talks go badly, both sides could raise tariffs on each other, Trump could withdraw licenses for firms trading with Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei, and China might ban exports of rare earth supplies vital for high-tech products as well as take measures against US companies in China. Trade negotiations broke down in May and the two sides raised tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of each other's imports. Trump accused Beijing of reneging on promises to meet US demands to extend the protection of intellectual property, end state-sponsored cyber theft, open more markets to US firms, and reduce industrial subsidies. China has said US demands are so extensive that they violate its sovereignty. A source with ties to China's leadership said there was deep anger in the government and party about Trump's accusations of China backsliding, especially as Beijing thought it was on the verge of a deal. The source likened the US response to the feeling of being jilted at the altar. "You don't promise to marry someone and then back out at the last minute," the source, who meets regularly with senior officials, told Reuters. Xi and Trump met last year in Buenos Aires and broke a prior impasse in trade talks. The US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin drew parallels between the planned Osaka meeting and that encounter, telling Reuters that the pace of preparations for both meetings was similar. But, unlike the current uncertainty over plans for the meeting in Japan, the White House confirmed the Argentina talks were taking place as early as six weeks in advance. The US-China tension has gone beyond tariffs. The United States has sanctioned Huawei, sent its navy into the disputed South China Sea and Taiwan Strait, and made other public shows of support for self-ruled Taiwan. The strains between Washington and Beijing are expected to make it difficult for diplomats to agree on the language of the G20 statement issued at the end of the summit. Host country Japan and European Union countries are working with the United States on new World Trade Organization rules aimed at reining in "non market-oriented policies" including industrial subsidies, rules clearly aimed at China. Beijing is expected to resist language in the statement that the United States may subsequently use against China in trade talks.

Expectations low for Trump-Xi talks, preparations limited

The rupee appreciated by 8 paise to 69.38 against the US dollar in opening trade Wednesday, driven by easing crude oil prices and foreign fund inflows.

Forex traders said the weakening of the greenback vis-a-vis some major currencies overseas aided the local unit. However, a weak opening in domestic equities weighed on the domestic currency.

The rupee opened strong at 69.38 at the interbank forex market, then gained further ground and touched 69.36, displaying gains of 8 paise over its last close.

The local unit, however, pared some gains and was trading at 69.38, up 6 paise from its previous close at 1005 hrs.

The rupee had settled at 69.44 against the US dollar Tuesday.

Foreign institutional investors (FIIs) remained net buyers in the capital markets, putting in Rs 95.79 crore Tuesday, according to provisional exchange data.

Brent crude futures, the global oil benchmark, eased 1.43 per cent to US $61.40 per barrel.

Domestic bourses opened on a bearish note Wednesday with benchmark indices Sensex trading 202.24 points down at 39,748.22 and Nifty down 57.65 points at 11,907.95.

The rupee appreciated by 8 paise to 69.38 against the US dollar in opening trade Wednesday, driven by easing crude oil prices and foreign fund inflows. Forex traders said the weakening of the greenback vis-a-vis some major currencies overseas aided the local unit.

The rupee appreciated by 8 paise to 69.38 against the US dollar in opening trade Wednesday, driven by easing crude oil prices and foreign fund inflows. Forex traders said the weakening of the greenback vis-a-vis some major currencies overseas aided the local unit. However, a weak opening in domestic equities weighed on the domestic currency. The rupee opened strong at 69.38 at the interbank forex market, then gained further ground and touched 69.36, displaying gains of 8 paise over its last close. The local unit, however, pared some gains and was trading at 69.38, up 6 paise from its previous close at 1005 hrs. The rupee had settled at 69.44 against the US dollar Tuesday. Foreign institutional investors (FIIs) remained net buyers in the capital markets, putting in Rs 95.79 crore Tuesday, according to provisional exchange data. Brent crude futures, the global oil benchmark, eased 1.43 per cent to US $61.40 per barrel. Domestic bourses opened on a bearish note Wednesday with benchmark indices Sensex trading 202.24 points down at 39,748.22 and Nifty down 57.65 points at 11,907.95.

Rupee rises 8 paise to 69.38 vs US dollar in early trade

Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador is celebrating an agreement avoiding US tariffs as a major political and diplomatic triumph for his government.

“We didn’t win everything, but we were able to claim a victory with there being no tariffs,” said chief negotiator Marcelo Ebrard, Mexico’s foreign affairs secretary, on June 9.

The two neighbours have been at odds since United States President Donald Trump on May 30 threatened to hit all Mexican imports with steadily rising tariffs unless Mexico successfully halted the northward flow of Central American migrants fleeing extreme poverty and violence through Mexico toward the United States.

Approximately 80 per cent of Mexican exports are destined for the United States. Tariffs would have devastated Mexico’s economy.

To keep its goods untaxed, Mexico had to convince President Trump that it was serious about stopping migration. After a week of frantic negotiations, Mexico said it would deploy up to 6,000 National Guard troops to its southern border with Guatemala to stop migrants from entering Mexico.

As part of the agreement, a Trump administration program known as “Remain in Mexico,” which forces some migrants to wait in Mexico while their asylum claims are processed in the US, will also be expanded.

At a June 8 rally “for the dignity of Mexico and friendship with the US” held in the border city of Tijuana, López Obrador pledged that Mexico will reinforce its southern border while still “applying the law and respecting the human rights” of migrants.

Ebrard added at the rally that Mexico had emerged from a near trade war with its “dignity intact.”

Doing the dirty work 
 
As a law professor who teaches human rights, I believe that dignity will come at great cost to both Mexico and to the migrants fleeing extreme poverty and violence in Central America.

Many Mexican lawmakers, including allies of the president, have expressed outrage that their immigration policy is now bound by an “immoral and unacceptable” deal that effectively turns Mexico itself into Trump’s border wall.

The agreement violates the campaign promises of López Obrador, who took office in December promising to protect migrants’ rights and pledging not to do the U.S.‘s “dirty work” on border enforcement.

It also violates the Mexican Constitution and international law.

According to international refugee law asylum-seekers with demonstrable fear of persecution in their home countries are entitled to seek protection in the place of their choosing. Mexican law goes further. As of 2011, legitimate asylum-seekers are entitled not just to seek but to be granted asylum in Mexico.

Trump’s economic threats against Mexico may not even have been legal. Both the current North American Free Trade Agreement and the newly signed – but not yet ratified – United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement require most trade between North American countries to be tariff-free.

Even before the recent negotiations, López Obrador was already quietly complying with US demands to do more to prevent migrants from reaching the US.

Between January and May of this year, Mexico detained 74,031 migrants – a 36 per cent increase compared to the same period last year under former Mexican president Enrique Peña Nieto. The number of migrants deported from Mexico tripled from 5,717 in December 2018 to 15,654 in April 2019, government statistics show.

Sending troops out to target migrants, as Mexico has now promised to do, will almost certainly result in the excessive use of force against these migrants.

The Mexican National Guard is an untested new military police force with immigration enforcement powers. Its creation in early 2019 was highly controversial in Mexico given the Mexican military’s extraordinarily violent law enforcement record.

Between 2007 and 2017, when troops were helping police fight Mexican drug cartels, the National Human Rights Commission received over 13,700 complaints of human rights violations committed by soldiers against civilians. These included accusations of arbitrary arrests, torture and extrajudicial killings.

Mexico is not a safe country 
 
Beyond avoiding tariffs, Mexico’s main victory in its negotiations with the United States appears to be having resisted pressure to sign a “safe third country” agreement.

Under such an agreement, refugees are required to apply for asylum in the country where they first land and not the country where they ultimately want to settle. This means that one country can reject a person’s asylum application if they have already been granted asylum by another country.

Canada and the US&nbsp;signed such an agreement in 2002, and Trump has been pushing Mexico to do the same since spring 2018. Under this proposal, thousands of migrants in Mexico who have already applied for asylum in the United States and are now waiting for an answer would see their applications invalidated.

Foreign Secretary Ebrard consistently rejected that proposal. He insisted that a safe third country arrangement would violate the Mexican Constitution and Mexico’s international human rights agreements.

But it is not actually clear how the newly expanded “Remain in Mexico” program – the details of which have not yet been released – will differ in practice from a safe third country agreement.

Migrants may end up staying in Mexico for years while they await their asylum hearing in the United States. During that period, Mexico will be responsible for housing, feeding and protecting refugees.

Jorge Castañeda, Mexico’s secretary of foreign affairs from 2000 to 2003, has derided Mexico’s commitment as a “light” safe third country agreement.

The mere idea that Mexico is safe is “a particularly cynical bout of wishful thinking,” as Mexican journalist León Krauze put it in a recent Washington Post op-ed.

Mexico is one of the world’s most dangerous places. An estimated 33,000 people were murdered there last year – twice the average annual homicides in the United States in a country with less than half the population.

Dozens of Central Americans have disappeared from migrant caravans journeying northward in Mexico. Over 90 per cent of migrants say they do not feel safe in Mexico, according to a survey of 500 Central American asylum-seekers conducted in February 2018.

Mexico must do more with less

The “Remain in Mexico” policy is likely to result in a significant increase in claims filed for asylum in Mexico, where the immigration system is already under enormous strain.

Around 29,000 people applied for asylum in Mexico in 2018, according to United Nations data. This year, between January and March, Mexico received 12,716 asylum applications – 43 per cent of last year’s total in just three months.

The Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance, which processes asylum claims, currently has a two-year backlog.

It will now have to do more with less.

Under López Obrador’s austerity policies, the commission’s 2019 budget was cut 20 per cent, to about $1 million – its lowest budget since 2011.

More migrants, less money, extreme violence and a recalcitrant, unpredictable northern neighbour – these are the ingredients of a refugee crisis, not a diplomatic victory. 
&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/migrants-will-pay-the-price-of-mexicos-tariff-deal-with-trump-118269">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp;

Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador is celebrating an agreement avoiding US tariffs as a major political and diplomatic triumph for his government. “We didn’t win everything, but we were able to claim a victory with there being no tariffs,” said chief negotiator Marcelo Ebrard, Mexico’s foreign affairs secretary, on June 9.

Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador is celebrating an agreement avoiding US tariffs as a major political and diplomatic triumph for his government. “We didn’t win everything, but we were able to claim a victory with there being no tariffs,” said chief negotiator Marcelo Ebrard, Mexico’s foreign affairs secretary, on June 9. The two neighbours have been at odds since United States President Donald Trump on May 30 threatened to hit all Mexican imports with steadily rising tariffs unless Mexico successfully halted the northward flow of Central American migrants fleeing extreme poverty and violence through Mexico toward the United States. Approximately 80 per cent of Mexican exports are destined for the United States. Tariffs would have devastated Mexico’s economy. To keep its goods untaxed, Mexico had to convince President Trump that it was serious about stopping migration. After a week of frantic negotiations, Mexico said it would deploy up to 6,000 National Guard troops to its southern border with Guatemala to stop migrants from entering Mexico. As part of the agreement, a Trump administration program known as “Remain in Mexico,” which forces some migrants to wait in Mexico while their asylum claims are processed in the US, will also be expanded. At a June 8 rally “for the dignity of Mexico and friendship with the US” held in the border city of Tijuana, López Obrador pledged that Mexico will reinforce its southern border while still “applying the law and respecting the human rights” of migrants. Ebrard added at the rally that Mexico had emerged from a near trade war with its “dignity intact.” Doing the dirty work As a law professor who teaches human rights, I believe that dignity will come at great cost to both Mexico and to the migrants fleeing extreme poverty and violence in Central America. Many Mexican lawmakers, including allies of the president, have expressed outrage that their immigration policy is now bound by an “immoral and unacceptable” deal that effectively turns Mexico itself into Trump’s border wall. The agreement violates the campaign promises of López Obrador, who took office in December promising to protect migrants’ rights and pledging not to do the U.S.‘s “dirty work” on border enforcement. It also violates the Mexican Constitution and international law. According to international refugee law asylum-seekers with demonstrable fear of persecution in their home countries are entitled to seek protection in the place of their choosing. Mexican law goes further. As of 2011, legitimate asylum-seekers are entitled not just to seek but to be granted asylum in Mexico. Trump’s economic threats against Mexico may not even have been legal. Both the current North American Free Trade Agreement and the newly signed – but not yet ratified – United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement require most trade between North American countries to be tariff-free. Even before the recent negotiations, López Obrador was already quietly complying with US demands to do more to prevent migrants from reaching the US. Between January and May of this year, Mexico detained 74,031 migrants – a 36 per cent increase compared to the same period last year under former Mexican president Enrique Peña Nieto. The number of migrants deported from Mexico tripled from 5,717 in December 2018 to 15,654 in April 2019, government statistics show. Sending troops out to target migrants, as Mexico has now promised to do, will almost certainly result in the excessive use of force against these migrants. The Mexican National Guard is an untested new military police force with immigration enforcement powers. Its creation in early 2019 was highly controversial in Mexico given the Mexican military’s extraordinarily violent law enforcement record. Between 2007 and 2017, when troops were helping police fight Mexican drug cartels, the National Human Rights Commission received over 13,700 complaints of human rights violations committed by soldiers against civilians. These included accusations of arbitrary arrests, torture and extrajudicial killings. Mexico is not a safe country Beyond avoiding tariffs, Mexico’s main victory in its negotiations with the United States appears to be having resisted pressure to sign a “safe third country” agreement. Under such an agreement, refugees are required to apply for asylum in the country where they first land and not the country where they ultimately want to settle. This means that one country can reject a person’s asylum application if they have already been granted asylum by another country. Canada and the US signed such an agreement in 2002, and Trump has been pushing Mexico to do the same since spring 2018. Under this proposal, thousands of migrants in Mexico who have already applied for asylum in the United States and are now waiting for an answer would see their applications invalidated. Foreign Secretary Ebrard consistently rejected that proposal. He insisted that a safe third country arrangement would violate the Mexican Constitution and Mexico’s international human rights agreements. But it is not actually clear how the newly expanded “Remain in Mexico” program – the details of which have not yet been released – will differ in practice from a safe third country agreement. Migrants may end up staying in Mexico for years while they await their asylum hearing in the United States. During that period, Mexico will be responsible for housing, feeding and protecting refugees. Jorge Castañeda, Mexico’s secretary of foreign affairs from 2000 to 2003, has derided Mexico’s commitment as a “light” safe third country agreement. The mere idea that Mexico is safe is “a particularly cynical bout of wishful thinking,” as Mexican journalist León Krauze put it in a recent Washington Post op-ed. Mexico is one of the world’s most dangerous places. An estimated 33,000 people were murdered there last year – twice the average annual homicides in the United States in a country with less than half the population. Dozens of Central Americans have disappeared from migrant caravans journeying northward in Mexico. Over 90 per cent of migrants say they do not feel safe in Mexico, according to a survey of 500 Central American asylum-seekers conducted in February 2018. Mexico must do more with less The “Remain in Mexico” policy is likely to result in a significant increase in claims filed for asylum in Mexico, where the immigration system is already under enormous strain. Around 29,000 people applied for asylum in Mexico in 2018, according to United Nations data. This year, between January and March, Mexico received 12,716 asylum applications – 43 per cent of last year’s total in just three months. The Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance, which processes asylum claims, currently has a two-year backlog. It will now have to do more with less. Under López Obrador’s austerity policies, the commission’s 2019 budget was cut 20 per cent, to about $1 million – its lowest budget since 2011. More migrants, less money, extreme violence and a recalcitrant, unpredictable northern neighbour – these are the ingredients of a refugee crisis, not a diplomatic victory. (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Migrants will pay the price of Mexico’s tariff deal with Trump

<div class="content" itemprop="articleBody">
Defending the immigration deal the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-he-is-confident-mexico-will-try-very-hard-to-enforce-new-immigration-deal-225578/amp">United States</a> reached with <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/its-business-as-usual-at-mexicos-southern-border-despite-trump-deal-225581">Mexico</a>, Secretary of State Michael Pompeo on Monday termed the agreement as a "significant win" for Washington and reflects "diplomacy at its finest."

"Frankly, it reflects diplomacy at its finest. It shows the enduring strength, too, of the relationship between our two countries. It's a significant win for the American people," Pompeo told reporters at a press briefing.

Reiterating US' stand on tough immigration, Pompeo said that migrants who crossed the southern border would be "rapidly returned" to Mexico and Washington will now have the "full-throttle" capacity to send asylum seekers back to Mexico.

"Those crossing the US southern border to seek asylum will be rapidly returned to Mexico where they may await the adjudication of their asylum claims. We've seen this before. We were able to do this to the tune of a couple of hundred people per day," he said.

"We now have the capacity to do this full throttle and engage this in a way that will make a fundamental difference in the calculus for those deciding to transit Mexico to try to get into the United States," Pompeo added. 
Talking about the immigration deal, the Secretary of State asserted that it underlined US' commitment to tackle illegal immigration at the southern border.

"The deal continues the Trump administration's commitment - the strongest by any administration in history - to confront the tide of illegal immigration and many other problems along our southern border, including the drug trafficking issues that transit there. The President is doing precisely what he said he would do," he said.

Pompeo said, "We agreed to a number of things, including the placement of 6,000 Mexican National Guard along the Mexican southern border. It's the biggest effort to date that the Mexicans have committed. It's something that we pressed for with them throughout the time of the negotiations." 
He said that both the US and Mexico will work closely to make the deal successful.

On June 7, President Donald Trump had announced that his administration reached an agreement with Mexico over immigration, owing to which tariffs on the Central American country were "indefinitely suspended," after days of gruelling negotiations between the two sides.

According to the deal, Mexico has agreed to strengthen its security presence at the southern border to stop the flow of Central American migrants from entering the US and boost intelligence sharing with Washington.

Mexico has also said that it would take stringent action against human and drug trafficking rings.

Trump had threatened to impose a five per cent tariff on all Mexican goods from June 10, which would increase by another five per cent every month and ultimately reach 25 per cent by October.
</div>

Defending the immigration deal the United States reached with Mexico, Secretary of State Michael Pompeo on Monday termed the agreement as a "significant win" for Washington and reflects "diplomacy at its finest.

Defending the immigration deal the United States reached with Mexico, Secretary of State Michael Pompeo on Monday termed the agreement as a "significant win" for Washington and reflects "diplomacy at its finest." "Frankly, it reflects diplomacy at its finest. It shows the enduring strength, too, of the relationship between our two countries. It's a significant win for the American people," Pompeo told reporters at a press briefing. Reiterating US' stand on tough immigration, Pompeo said that migrants who crossed the southern border would be "rapidly returned" to Mexico and Washington will now have the "full-throttle" capacity to send asylum seekers back to Mexico. "Those crossing the US southern border to seek asylum will be rapidly returned to Mexico where they may await the adjudication of their asylum claims. We've seen this before. We were able to do this to the tune of a couple of hundred people per day," he said. "We now have the capacity to do this full throttle and engage this in a way that will make a fundamental difference in the calculus for those deciding to transit Mexico to try to get into the United States," Pompeo added. Talking about the immigration deal, the Secretary of State asserted that it underlined US' commitment to tackle illegal immigration at the southern border. "The deal continues the Trump administration's commitment - the strongest by any administration in history - to confront the tide of illegal immigration and many other problems along our southern border, including the drug trafficking issues that transit there. The President is doing precisely what he said he would do," he said. Pompeo said, "We agreed to a number of things, including the placement of 6,000 Mexican National Guard along the Mexican southern border. It's the biggest effort to date that the Mexicans have committed. It's something that we pressed for with them throughout the time of the negotiations." He said that both the US and Mexico will work closely to make the deal successful. On June 7, President Donald Trump had announced that his administration reached an agreement with Mexico over immigration, owing to which tariffs on the Central American country were "indefinitely suspended," after days of gruelling negotiations between the two sides. According to the deal, Mexico has agreed to strengthen its security presence at the southern border to stop the flow of Central American migrants from entering the US and boost intelligence sharing with Washington. Mexico has also said that it would take stringent action against human and drug trafficking rings. Trump had threatened to impose a five per cent tariff on all Mexican goods from June 10, which would increase by another five per cent every month and ultimately reach 25 per cent by October.

Mexico immigration deal 'significant win' for US: Pompeo

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning - June 11th, 2019

The United States (US), on June 5, withdrew duty-free market access to over 3,600 products that it was providing to India under the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP). &nbsp;

The GSP was put in place in 1971, under which 13 developed countries provide duty-free access to designated products for beneficiary developing countries. &nbsp;

While most developed countries introduced the GSP in 1971, the US accepted this system of preferences in 1976, after the Trade Act of 1974 authorised the US president “to extend duty-free treatment to certain eligible products imported into the United States from beneficiary developing countries”. &nbsp;

The US extended GSP benefits to 104 countries before it removed India from the list of “beneficiary developing countries”.

The Trade Act of 1974 also outlined a set of conditions for determining whether any country should be designated as a beneficiary developing country.

These are: (i) a request by the country to be so designated, (ii) the level of economic development of such a country, (iii) whether or not the other major developed countries extend their GSP scheme to the country, and (iv) the extent to which the country has assured the US of equitable and reasonable access to its market and basic commodity resources. &nbsp;

These conditions gave the US trade administration discretionary powers. Alongside, the Act also introduced a mechanism that was to be used to review if specific products originating in the beneficiary developing countries could continue to enjoy the GSP benefits. &nbsp;

One of the key mechanisms is Competitive Need Limitations (CNL). This states that a beneficiary developing country could lose its GSP eligibility with respect to any product if the CNLs are exceeded. &nbsp;

There are two measures for CNLs: (i) when, during any calendar year, import of a particular product into the US from a beneficiary developing country accounts for 50 per cent or more of the value of total imports of that product into the US, or (ii) exceeds a certain dollar value. As per the GSP rules, the dollar-value limit is increased by $5 million annually. The limit set in 2017 was $180 million.&nbsp;

There were indications since last year that the Trump Administration was taking steps towards eventually denying India the benefits under GSP. &nbsp;

The US president, on October 30, 2018, announced the decision to exclude 94 products from the list of GSP-eligible products, for 16 countries beginning November 1, 2018. &nbsp;

There were 50 products in the exclusion list in which India was the principal beneficiary. The targeted list of products for India was the largest among the 16 countries, whose products lost the GSP beneficiary status.

In March 2019, the United States Trade Representative (USTR) announced the Trump administration’s intent to terminate India’s designation as a beneficiary developing country under its GSP programme since it was not complying with the “statutory eligibility criteria”. &nbsp;

India was targeted, according to the USTR, for its failure to provide the US with “assurances that it will provide equitable and reasonable access to its markets in numerous sectors”. &nbsp;

This was the beginning of a mandatory 60-day period, which is required to be given before a final decision was taken whether to retain the country in the list of beneficiaries. &nbsp;

Finally, on May 31, Trump announced his decision to remove India as a beneficiary country under the US GSP programme, effective from June 5.

The decision of the US president was based on an eligibility review conducted by the USTR in April 2018. This review was conducted on “concerns” related to India’s compliance with the GSP market access criterion, but more importantly, on two petitions related to the same criterion. &nbsp;

The petitions were filed by the US dairy industry and the US medical device industry (Advanced Medical Technology Association) requesting the USTR to withdraw India as a beneficiary country, given Indian trade barriers affecting US exports in those sectors. &nbsp;

The latter petition was regarding the price controls that the government of India had introduced for coronary stents and knee implants aimed at making such devices affordable in the country.

These expressed reasons for removing India from the list of GSP beneficiaries hardly sound convincing. It is clearly part of a strategy adopted by the Trump administration to target the Indian market. &nbsp;

Trump has frequently spoken of the “disadvantage” the US faces due to India being a “very high-tariff nation”. There should be no doubt that there will be further measures taken against India, including implementing “a measure in the form of a safeguard to address increased imports of articles that are a substantial cause of serious injury to a domestic industry producing competitive products”; this was mentioned by Trump in his May 31 proclamation.

What are the implications of India’s removal from the list of US GSP beneficiary countries? According to research conducted for the US Congress, in 2018, India was the largest beneficiary developing country, accounting for over 25 per cent of US imports under GSP. &nbsp;

India’s exports of GSP beneficiary products were $15 billion during April-February 2018-19, which was just less than a third of the total exports to the US. &nbsp;

Six sectors – gems and jewellery, electrical and non-electrical machinery, chemicals, auto components and iron and steel products were the main beneficiaries – with each sector exporting more than a billion dollars. These products would now have to pay tariffs to enter the US market.

It may be mentioned that the tariffs on these products is below 3 per cent for nearly a fourth of the total, which are usually called “nuisance tariffs” because they effectively provide no protection to the domestic industry. &nbsp;

But, these tariffs could cause considerable “nuisance” to the exporters in the form of procedural formalities that would have to be thoroughly reviewed. This would increase the cost of the transaction with regard to exporting to the US. &nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-decoding-the-gsp-puzzle-2759399">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp;

The United States (US), on June 5, withdrew duty-free market access to over 3,600 products that it was providing to India under the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP).

The United States (US), on June 5, withdrew duty-free market access to over 3,600 products that it was providing to India under the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP). The GSP was put in place in 1971, under which 13 developed countries provide duty-free access to designated products for beneficiary developing countries. While most developed countries introduced the GSP in 1971, the US accepted this system of preferences in 1976, after the Trade Act of 1974 authorised the US president “to extend duty-free treatment to certain eligible products imported into the United States from beneficiary developing countries”. The US extended GSP benefits to 104 countries before it removed India from the list of “beneficiary developing countries”. The Trade Act of 1974 also outlined a set of conditions for determining whether any country should be designated as a beneficiary developing country. These are: (i) a request by the country to be so designated, (ii) the level of economic development of such a country, (iii) whether or not the other major developed countries extend their GSP scheme to the country, and (iv) the extent to which the country has assured the US of equitable and reasonable access to its market and basic commodity resources. These conditions gave the US trade administration discretionary powers. Alongside, the Act also introduced a mechanism that was to be used to review if specific products originating in the beneficiary developing countries could continue to enjoy the GSP benefits. One of the key mechanisms is Competitive Need Limitations (CNL). This states that a beneficiary developing country could lose its GSP eligibility with respect to any product if the CNLs are exceeded. There are two measures for CNLs: (i) when, during any calendar year, import of a particular product into the US from a beneficiary developing country accounts for 50 per cent or more of the value of total imports of that product into the US, or (ii) exceeds a certain dollar value. As per the GSP rules, the dollar-value limit is increased by $5 million annually. The limit set in 2017 was $180 million. There were indications since last year that the Trump Administration was taking steps towards eventually denying India the benefits under GSP. The US president, on October 30, 2018, announced the decision to exclude 94 products from the list of GSP-eligible products, for 16 countries beginning November 1, 2018. There were 50 products in the exclusion list in which India was the principal beneficiary. The targeted list of products for India was the largest among the 16 countries, whose products lost the GSP beneficiary status. In March 2019, the United States Trade Representative (USTR) announced the Trump administration’s intent to terminate India’s designation as a beneficiary developing country under its GSP programme since it was not complying with the “statutory eligibility criteria”. India was targeted, according to the USTR, for its failure to provide the US with “assurances that it will provide equitable and reasonable access to its markets in numerous sectors”. This was the beginning of a mandatory 60-day period, which is required to be given before a final decision was taken whether to retain the country in the list of beneficiaries. Finally, on May 31, Trump announced his decision to remove India as a beneficiary country under the US GSP programme, effective from June 5. The decision of the US president was based on an eligibility review conducted by the USTR in April 2018. This review was conducted on “concerns” related to India’s compliance with the GSP market access criterion, but more importantly, on two petitions related to the same criterion. The petitions were filed by the US dairy industry and the US medical device industry (Advanced Medical Technology Association) requesting the USTR to withdraw India as a beneficiary country, given Indian trade barriers affecting US exports in those sectors. The latter petition was regarding the price controls that the government of India had introduced for coronary stents and knee implants aimed at making such devices affordable in the country. These expressed reasons for removing India from the list of GSP beneficiaries hardly sound convincing. It is clearly part of a strategy adopted by the Trump administration to target the Indian market. Trump has frequently spoken of the “disadvantage” the US faces due to India being a “very high-tariff nation”. There should be no doubt that there will be further measures taken against India, including implementing “a measure in the form of a safeguard to address increased imports of articles that are a substantial cause of serious injury to a domestic industry producing competitive products”; this was mentioned by Trump in his May 31 proclamation. What are the implications of India’s removal from the list of US GSP beneficiary countries? According to research conducted for the US Congress, in 2018, India was the largest beneficiary developing country, accounting for over 25 per cent of US imports under GSP. India’s exports of GSP beneficiary products were $15 billion during April-February 2018-19, which was just less than a third of the total exports to the US. Six sectors – gems and jewellery, electrical and non-electrical machinery, chemicals, auto components and iron and steel products were the main beneficiaries – with each sector exporting more than a billion dollars. These products would now have to pay tariffs to enter the US market. It may be mentioned that the tariffs on these products is below 3 per cent for nearly a fourth of the total, which are usually called “nuisance tariffs” because they effectively provide no protection to the domestic industry. But, these tariffs could cause considerable “nuisance” to the exporters in the form of procedural formalities that would have to be thoroughly reviewed. This would increase the cost of the transaction with regard to exporting to the US. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Decoding the GSP puzzle

US President Donald Trump on Monday lashed out at France for unfair tariffs on "great" American wine

Trump could target French wine with tariffs

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning - June 10th, 2019

The Chinese government convened top tech companies this week and warned them of consequences if they cut off technology sales to the country, US media reported on Saturday.

The meeting followed US President Donald Trump's move last month to blacklist Chinese tech giant Huawei over national security concerns, threatening the firm's global ambitions and ramping up the months-long trade battle between the two countries.

Earlier this week, the Chinese government summoned executives from American firms Dell and Microsoft and South Korea's Samsung, among others, to warn them that any moves to ramp down their businesses in China may lead to retaliation, The New York Times reported.

American companies were told "that the Trump administration's move to cut off Chinese companies from American technology had disrupted the global supply chain, adding that companies that followed the policy could face permanent consequences," the newspaper reported.&nbsp;

Companies based outside the United States were told that as long as they maintained business as usual, they wouldn't be punished, the newspaper reported.

Last Friday, Facebook announced it would cut Huwaei off from its popular social networking app to comply with the US sanctions, further isolating the company that has become the world's second-largest smartphone vendor.

Google made a similar announcement in May.

Washington and Beijing resumed their trade battle last month when negotiations in the US ended without a deal and US President Donald Trump raised tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese goods.

Beijing retaliated with its own tariff hike on billions of dollars worth of US goods.&nbsp;

The US move to cut Huawei off from American hardware came next, but was delayed by 90 days to prevent economic disruptions.

The Chinese government convened top tech companies this week and warned them of consequences if they cut off technology sales to the country, US media reported on Saturday.

The Chinese government convened top tech companies this week and warned them of consequences if they cut off technology sales to the country, US media reported on Saturday. The meeting followed US President Donald Trump's move last month to blacklist Chinese tech giant Huawei over national security concerns, threatening the firm's global ambitions and ramping up the months-long trade battle between the two countries. Earlier this week, the Chinese government summoned executives from American firms Dell and Microsoft and South Korea's Samsung, among others, to warn them that any moves to ramp down their businesses in China may lead to retaliation, The New York Times reported. American companies were told "that the Trump administration's move to cut off Chinese companies from American technology had disrupted the global supply chain, adding that companies that followed the policy could face permanent consequences," the newspaper reported. Companies based outside the United States were told that as long as they maintained business as usual, they wouldn't be punished, the newspaper reported. Last Friday, Facebook announced it would cut Huwaei off from its popular social networking app to comply with the US sanctions, further isolating the company that has become the world's second-largest smartphone vendor. Google made a similar announcement in May. Washington and Beijing resumed their trade battle last month when negotiations in the US ended without a deal and US President Donald Trump raised tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese goods. Beijing retaliated with its own tariff hike on billions of dollars worth of US goods. The US move to cut Huawei off from American hardware came next, but was delayed by 90 days to prevent economic disruptions.

China warns tech giants after US Huawei ban: Report

Sharpening its attack, Iran on Saturday slammed the United States for its decision to impose fresh <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-hits-iran-petrochemical-group-pgpic-with-sanctions-225322">sanctions on the country`s largest petrochemical group</a>, calling it a violation of "principles of international law."

"Only week-long patience proved the US president`s void assertion that he was willing to hold talks with Iran," Anadolu News Agency quoted Foreign Ministry spokesperson Abbas Mousavi citing state-run IRNA.

"These measures are in contrast with principles of international law and the international commitments of the US administration," he said.

On Friday, the US slapped sanctions on Persian Gulf Petrochemical Industries Company (PGPIC) for allegedly indirectly supporting Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), as part of Washington`s "maximum pressure" campaign against Tehran.

"By targeting this network we intend to deny funding to key elements of Iran`s petrochemical sector that provide support to the IRGC. This action is a warning that we will continue to target holding groups and companies in the petrochemical sector and elsewhere that provide financial lifelines to the IRGC," Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin had said in a statement.

Responding to the US` move, Mousavi urged the countries to protest against Washington`s "violation of principles of international law and not to let destroy the achievements of the international community and the principle of multilateralism be ignored due to US` bullying and unilateral acts".

Ties between the US and Iran soured after Washington pulled out of the 2015 nuclear deal or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) last year.

Following this, the US slapped a multitude of sanctions on Iran, citing the latter`s support to state-sponsored terrorism and conflicts.

The historic 2015 deal between Iran and world powers including the European Union and the US, offered sanctions relief to Iran for scaling back its nuclear programme.

The US has remained rooted to its stand, saying it would continue to "impose maximum pressure" against Iran till the regime gives up its "destabilising ambitions" of expanding its nuclear programme.

Washington also recently announced that no fresh sanction waivers will be issued for Iranian oil imports to eight countries, including India.

Sharpening its attack, Iran on Saturday slammed the United States for its decision to impose fresh sanctions on the country`s largest petrochemical group, calling it a violation of "principles of international law.

Sharpening its attack, Iran on Saturday slammed the United States for its decision to impose fresh sanctions on the country`s largest petrochemical group, calling it a violation of "principles of international law." "Only week-long patience proved the US president`s void assertion that he was willing to hold talks with Iran," Anadolu News Agency quoted Foreign Ministry spokesperson Abbas Mousavi citing state-run IRNA. "These measures are in contrast with principles of international law and the international commitments of the US administration," he said. On Friday, the US slapped sanctions on Persian Gulf Petrochemical Industries Company (PGPIC) for allegedly indirectly supporting Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), as part of Washington`s "maximum pressure" campaign against Tehran. "By targeting this network we intend to deny funding to key elements of Iran`s petrochemical sector that provide support to the IRGC. This action is a warning that we will continue to target holding groups and companies in the petrochemical sector and elsewhere that provide financial lifelines to the IRGC," Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin had said in a statement. Responding to the US` move, Mousavi urged the countries to protest against Washington`s "violation of principles of international law and not to let destroy the achievements of the international community and the principle of multilateralism be ignored due to US` bullying and unilateral acts". Ties between the US and Iran soured after Washington pulled out of the 2015 nuclear deal or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) last year. Following this, the US slapped a multitude of sanctions on Iran, citing the latter`s support to state-sponsored terrorism and conflicts. The historic 2015 deal between Iran and world powers including the European Union and the US, offered sanctions relief to Iran for scaling back its nuclear programme. The US has remained rooted to its stand, saying it would continue to "impose maximum pressure" against Iran till the regime gives up its "destabilising ambitions" of expanding its nuclear programme. Washington also recently announced that no fresh sanction waivers will be issued for Iranian oil imports to eight countries, including India.

Iran denounces latest US sanctions targetting petrochemical sector

us-1

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

us 1