Taylor Swift, Cardi B, Camila Cabello & others at the American Music Awards

The Chinese embassy in New Delhi has issued a statement calling for both countries to "deepen their cooperation to fight trade protectionism".&nbsp;

The statement says practicing unilateral trade protectionism in the name of “national security” and “fair trade” will not only affect China’s economic development, but also undermine the external environment of India and hinder India’s booming economy".&nbsp;

The statement comes at a time when <a href="http://www.wionews.com/americas/imf-cuts-chinas-growth-rate-on-negative-effect-of-tariff-actions-170439">China and US are engaged in a full-blown trade </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/americas/imf-cuts-chinas-growth-rate-on-negative-effect-of-tariff-actions-170439">war</a>&nbsp;with both the economic giants imposing tariffs on each others products.&nbsp;

It is interesting to note that the statement was issued two days after US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited China and met Jang Jiechi, member of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC), and Foreign Minister Wang Yi.

The statement from the Chinese embassy futher said that "facing unilateralism and bullying activities", China and India have greater reason to join "efforts to build a more just and reasonable international order". &nbsp;

India and China have been trying to engage with each other in a more positive manner of late and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jingping have met three times in the last few months — at the famous Wuhan informal summit, at the SCO meet, and finally the BRICS summit in Johannesburg.&nbsp;

They are likely to meet again on the sidelines of G20 summit in Argentina.&nbsp;

The two sides jointly published the “Qingdao Declaration” and the 10th BRICS Summit Johannesburg declaration, sending out a clear message against protectionism.&nbsp;

The Chinese embassy statement lashed out at the US.&nbsp;

Calling US Vice-President Mike Pence’s statements "groundless accusations", the statement said "US should view and understand China's development in a right way and immediately stop its misguided comments and actions which harm China’s core interest. China is unswervingly pressing ahead with comprehensively deepening reform and opening wider to the outside world."

"China has initiated an unprecedented effort to influence American public opinion, the 2018 elections, and the environment leading into the 2020 presidential elections," Pence had said. US President Donald Trump had said the same thing at the United Nations Security Council in September.&nbsp;

The Chinese embassy in New Delhi has issued a statement calling for both countries to "deepen their cooperation to fight trade protectionism". The statement says practicing unilateral trade protectionism in the name of “national security” and “fair trade” will not only affect China’s economic development, but also undermine the external environment of India and hinder India’s booming economy".

The Chinese embassy in New Delhi has issued a statement calling for both countries to "deepen their cooperation to fight trade protectionism". The statement says practicing unilateral trade protectionism in the name of “national security” and “fair trade” will not only affect China’s economic development, but also undermine the external environment of India and hinder India’s booming economy". The statement comes at a time when China and US are engaged in a full-blown trade war with both the economic giants imposing tariffs on each others products. It is interesting to note that the statement was issued two days after US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited China and met Jang Jiechi, member of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC), and Foreign Minister Wang Yi. The statement from the Chinese embassy futher said that "facing unilateralism and bullying activities", China and India have greater reason to join "efforts to build a more just and reasonable international order". India and China have been trying to engage with each other in a more positive manner of late and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jingping have met three times in the last few months — at the famous Wuhan informal summit, at the SCO meet, and finally the BRICS summit in Johannesburg. They are likely to meet again on the sidelines of G20 summit in Argentina. The two sides jointly published the “Qingdao Declaration” and the 10th BRICS Summit Johannesburg declaration, sending out a clear message against protectionism. The Chinese embassy statement lashed out at the US. Calling US Vice-President Mike Pence’s statements "groundless accusations", the statement said "US should view and understand China's development in a right way and immediately stop its misguided comments and actions which harm China’s core interest. China is unswervingly pressing ahead with comprehensively deepening reform and opening wider to the outside world." "China has initiated an unprecedented effort to influence American public opinion, the 2018 elections, and the environment leading into the 2020 presidential elections," Pence had said. US President Donald Trump had said the same thing at the United Nations Security Council in September.

India, China should build more 'reasonable international order': Chinese Embassy

As the world celebrated the UN-designated International Day for Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons on September 26, there were still some 16,000 nuclear weapons in the world, largely in the hands of the US and the Russian Federation, some on ready alert”.

There are plans to “modernise” nuclear weapons, and there are at least seven other States with nuclear weapons: North Korea, Pakistan, India and China in Asia, Israel in the Middle East and France and the United Kingdom in Europe.

The instability and tensions of current world politics merit that we look at ways in which governments and NGOs have tried to deal with the existence of nuclear weapons, their control and their possible abolition.

There have been four avenues proposed since 1945: Presented, dropped, represented, combined with other proposals for political settlements, linked to proposals for general disarmament or focused on nuclear issues alone.

The first avenue proposed was the Baruch Plan, named after Bernard Baruch, a financier, often adviser to US presidents going back to Woodrow Wilson and the First World War. He had been named a US delegate to the United Nations in charge of atomic issues.

The Baruch Plan proposed the creation of IAEA, which would have a monopoly of all activities connected with atomic research and development such as mining, ownership and management of refineries, and the construction of atomic reactors. The agency staff would be internationally recruited and would be free from interference from national governments.

However, the Baruch Plan was proposed as the Cold War (1945-1990) was starting to heat up and become more structured. In 1949, the US nuclear monopoly was broken by the explosion of the first Soviet bomb, and then in 1950, the war started in Korea. The Korean War led to the next stage, the second and third avenues in nuclear arms policy, someone contradictory but proposed at the same time, and in the light of the Korean War experience.

Avenue two proposed that limited war could be carried out but with nuclear weapons that were smaller than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima and that would not necessarily lead to an all-out war between the United States and the Soviet Union. This avenue is most closely associated with Henry Kissinger and his book Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy.

The 1950-1953 Korean War showed that war was a real possibility, perhaps due to political miscalculations, erroneous intelligence and failure to see how a local situation could have a much broader impact.

At the same time that Henry Kissinger was writing his book, reflecting largely in similar ways, Robert Osgood of the University of Chicago was teaching a seminar on limited war in which I was one of his students. The seminar led to the widely-read book: Limited War: The Challenge to American Strategy.

It was in Europe where the opposing NATO-Warsaw Pact forces faced each other most closely that the third avenue was proposed: Nuclear-weapon-free zones.

In October 1957, Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs Adam Rapacki put forward a plan for creating a nuclear-weapon-free and neutral zone in central Europe, usually known as the Rapacki Plan. The first stage would be the “freezing” of nuclear armaments in Poland, Czechoslovakia and the two German States. The second stage would consist of a reduction of conventional armaments and complete de-nuclearisation of the four states.

Nuclear-weapon-free zones took shape after the 1962 Cuban missiles crisis. Even today, it is difficult to know how close to a war the 1962 nuclear missiles in Cuba brought the United States and the Soviet Union.

It was close enough that it worried leaders in Latin America. Led by the ambassador of Mexico to the United Nations and later Nobel Laureate Alfonso Garcia Robles, negotiations for a Latin American nuclear-weapon-free zone were started, and in 1967, 21 Latin American States signed the Treaty of Tlatelolco. In Latin America, Argentina and Brazil, have nuclear power industries and a potential capacity to develop nuclear weapons. Thus the treaty provides a confidence-building framework between these two regional powers, although the two have none of the tensions between them that coloured Warsaw Pact-NATO relations.

The fourth avenue and the one most discussed at the United Nations these days is a convention to ban the possession and use of nuclear weapons on the lines of the conventions to ban chemical weapons, anti-personnel landmines and cluster munitions.

My own view is that effective nuclear-weapon control will come from a combined regional conflict resolution and nuclear-weapon-free zone approach that was first set out in the Rapacki proposals. I believe that the Korean Peninsula holds the most potential for a settlement within a nuclear-weapon-free zone. 
 
(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-us-and-russian-nuclear-weapons-continue-to-roam-free-2673170">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

As the world celebrated the UN-designated International Day for Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons on September 26, there were still some 16,000 nuclear weapons in the world, largely in the hands of the US and the Russian Federation, some on ready alert”.

As the world celebrated the UN-designated International Day for Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons on September 26, there were still some 16,000 nuclear weapons in the world, largely in the hands of the US and the Russian Federation, some on ready alert”. There are plans to “modernise” nuclear weapons, and there are at least seven other States with nuclear weapons: North Korea, Pakistan, India and China in Asia, Israel in the Middle East and France and the United Kingdom in Europe. The instability and tensions of current world politics merit that we look at ways in which governments and NGOs have tried to deal with the existence of nuclear weapons, their control and their possible abolition. There have been four avenues proposed since 1945: Presented, dropped, represented, combined with other proposals for political settlements, linked to proposals for general disarmament or focused on nuclear issues alone. The first avenue proposed was the Baruch Plan, named after Bernard Baruch, a financier, often adviser to US presidents going back to Woodrow Wilson and the First World War. He had been named a US delegate to the United Nations in charge of atomic issues. The Baruch Plan proposed the creation of IAEA, which would have a monopoly of all activities connected with atomic research and development such as mining, ownership and management of refineries, and the construction of atomic reactors. The agency staff would be internationally recruited and would be free from interference from national governments. However, the Baruch Plan was proposed as the Cold War (1945-1990) was starting to heat up and become more structured. In 1949, the US nuclear monopoly was broken by the explosion of the first Soviet bomb, and then in 1950, the war started in Korea. The Korean War led to the next stage, the second and third avenues in nuclear arms policy, someone contradictory but proposed at the same time, and in the light of the Korean War experience. Avenue two proposed that limited war could be carried out but with nuclear weapons that were smaller than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima and that would not necessarily lead to an all-out war between the United States and the Soviet Union. This avenue is most closely associated with Henry Kissinger and his book Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy. The 1950-1953 Korean War showed that war was a real possibility, perhaps due to political miscalculations, erroneous intelligence and failure to see how a local situation could have a much broader impact. At the same time that Henry Kissinger was writing his book, reflecting largely in similar ways, Robert Osgood of the University of Chicago was teaching a seminar on limited war in which I was one of his students. The seminar led to the widely-read book: Limited War: The Challenge to American Strategy. It was in Europe where the opposing NATO-Warsaw Pact forces faced each other most closely that the third avenue was proposed: Nuclear-weapon-free zones. In October 1957, Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs Adam Rapacki put forward a plan for creating a nuclear-weapon-free and neutral zone in central Europe, usually known as the Rapacki Plan. The first stage would be the “freezing” of nuclear armaments in Poland, Czechoslovakia and the two German States. The second stage would consist of a reduction of conventional armaments and complete de-nuclearisation of the four states. Nuclear-weapon-free zones took shape after the 1962 Cuban missiles crisis. Even today, it is difficult to know how close to a war the 1962 nuclear missiles in Cuba brought the United States and the Soviet Union. It was close enough that it worried leaders in Latin America. Led by the ambassador of Mexico to the United Nations and later Nobel Laureate Alfonso Garcia Robles, negotiations for a Latin American nuclear-weapon-free zone were started, and in 1967, 21 Latin American States signed the Treaty of Tlatelolco. In Latin America, Argentina and Brazil, have nuclear power industries and a potential capacity to develop nuclear weapons. Thus the treaty provides a confidence-building framework between these two regional powers, although the two have none of the tensions between them that coloured Warsaw Pact-NATO relations. The fourth avenue and the one most discussed at the United Nations these days is a convention to ban the possession and use of nuclear weapons on the lines of the conventions to ban chemical weapons, anti-personnel landmines and cluster munitions. My own view is that effective nuclear-weapon control will come from a combined regional conflict resolution and nuclear-weapon-free zone approach that was first set out in the Rapacki proposals. I believe that the Korean Peninsula holds the most potential for a settlement within a nuclear-weapon-free zone. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US and Russian nuclear weapons continue to roam free

US&nbsp;adviser on Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad arrived in Kabul to hold the first round of talks with Afghan leaders since being appointed an envoy to lead peace efforts with the Taliban and end the 17-year war, Afghan officials said on Sunday.

Last month Khalilzad, 67, an Afghan-born former US&nbsp;ambassador to Kabul and Iraq, joined the US&nbsp;State Department team to lead the reconciliation effort and peace talks with the Taliban.

A spokesman for Afghan President Ashraf Ghani said Khalilzad met with Ghani on Sunday and he is expected to meet senior ministers and top diplomats in Kabul on Monday.

A senior government official said Khalilzad will be travelling to Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Qatar as part of a 10-day trip in an attempt to bring the Taliban to the negotiating table.

Khalilzad’s appointment last month highlighted the US administration's fresh efforts to convince the Taliban leadership to participate in the Afghan peace process, despite a surge in attacks by the militant group.

Khalilzad's knowledge of Afghanistan’s main languages, culture and politics could help him engage with all the stakeholders in the peace process in addition to his experience advising or working for four US&nbsp;administrations.

But his visit comes as the Taliban and the Islamic State group ramp up attacks across the country two weeks before the country is set to hold long-delayed parliamentary polls.

In the latest incident, Taliban fighters killed at least 10 policemen in a district in central Afghanistan and blocked arterial highways.

US adviser on Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad arrived in Kabul to hold the first round of talks with Afghan leaders since being appointed an envoy to lead peace efforts with the Taliban and end the 17-year war, Afghan officials said on Sunday.

US adviser on Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad arrived in Kabul to hold the first round of talks with Afghan leaders since being appointed an envoy to lead peace efforts with the Taliban and end the 17-year war, Afghan officials said on Sunday. Last month Khalilzad, 67, an Afghan-born former US ambassador to Kabul and Iraq, joined the US State Department team to lead the reconciliation effort and peace talks with the Taliban. A spokesman for Afghan President Ashraf Ghani said Khalilzad met with Ghani on Sunday and he is expected to meet senior ministers and top diplomats in Kabul on Monday. A senior government official said Khalilzad will be travelling to Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Qatar as part of a 10-day trip in an attempt to bring the Taliban to the negotiating table. Khalilzad’s appointment last month highlighted the US administration's fresh efforts to convince the Taliban leadership to participate in the Afghan peace process, despite a surge in attacks by the militant group. Khalilzad's knowledge of Afghanistan’s main languages, culture and politics could help him engage with all the stakeholders in the peace process in addition to his experience advising or working for four US administrations. But his visit comes as the Taliban and the Islamic State group ramp up attacks across the country two weeks before the country is set to hold long-delayed parliamentary polls. In the latest incident, Taliban fighters killed at least 10 policemen in a district in central Afghanistan and blocked arterial highways.

US special envoy to Afghanistan arrives in Kabul as Taliban launch fresh attacks

Singer Taylor Swift has now come out after breaking her age old refusal to talk about politics by endorsing Tennessee Democrats Phil Bredesen and Jim Cooper, who are running for Senate and House of Representatives, respectively.

Swift paired social media and social activism in a lengthy Instagram post on Sunday evening. One month before the midterm elections, she endorsed the two Democrats and entreated her followers to register and show up to the polls.&nbsp;

"I always have and always will cast my vote based on which candidate will protect and fight for the human rights I believe we all deserve in this country," she wrote in a lengthy post.

"I believe in the fight for LGBTQ rights, and that any form of discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender is WRONG. I believe that the systemic racism we still see in this country towards people of color is terrifying, sickening and prevalent."

"In the past I've been reluctant to publicly voice my political opinions, but due to several events in my life and in the world in the past two years, I feel very differently about that now," Swift wrote in an Instagram post.

The pop star - who spent later years growing up in Tennessee - also slammed Republican candidate and US Rep. Marsha Blackburn in her lengthy post on Sunday.&nbsp;

"As much as I have in the past and would like to continue voting for women in office, I cannot support Marsha Blackburn. Her voting record in Congress appalls and terrifies me. She voted against equal pay for women. She voted against the Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, which attempts to protect women from domestic violence, stalking, and date rape. She believes businesses have a right to refuse service to gay couples. She also believes they should not have the right to marry."&nbsp;

"These are not MY Tennessee values."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="instagram-media" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/BopoXpYnCes/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_medium=loading" data-instgrm-version="12" style=" background:#FFF; border:0; border-radius:3px; box-shadow:0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width:540px; min-width:326px; padding:0; width:99.375%; width:-webkit-calc(100% - 2px); width:calc(100% - 2px);">
<div style="padding:16px;">
<div style=" display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;">
<div style="background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;">
<div style=" background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;">&nbsp;</div>

<div style=" background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;">&nbsp;</div>
</div>
</div>

<div style="padding: 19% 0;">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="display:block; height:50px; margin:0 auto 12px; width:50px;"><a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/BopoXpYnCes/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_medium=loading" style=" background:#FFFFFF; line-height:0; padding:0 0; text-align:center; text-decoration:none; width:100%;" target="_blank"><svg height="50px" version="1.1" viewbox="0 0 60 60" width="50px" xmlns="https://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="https://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g fill="none" fill-rule="evenodd" stroke="none" stroke-width="1"><g fill="#000000" transform="translate(-511.000000, -20.000000)"><g><path d="M556.869,30.41 C554.814,30.41 553.148,32.076 553.148,34.131 C553.148,36.186 554.814,37.852 556.869,37.852 C558.924,37.852 560.59,36.186 560.59,34.131 C560.59,32.076 558.924,30.41 556.869,30.41 M541,60.657 C535.114,60.657 530.342,55.887 530.342,50 C530.342,44.114 535.114,39.342 541,39.342 C546.887,39.342 551.658,44.114 551.658,50 C551.658,55.887 546.887,60.657 541,60.657 M541,33.886 C532.1,33.886 524.886,41.1 524.886,50 C524.886,58.899 532.1,66.113 541,66.113 C549.9,66.113 557.115,58.899 557.115,50 C557.115,41.1 549.9,33.886 541,33.886 M565.378,62.101 C565.244,65.022 564.756,66.606 564.346,67.663 C563.803,69.06 563.154,70.057 562.106,71.106 C561.058,72.155 560.06,72.803 558.662,73.347 C557.607,73.757 556.021,74.244 553.102,74.378 C549.944,74.521 548.997,74.552 541,74.552 C533.003,74.552 532.056,74.521 528.898,74.378 C525.979,74.244 524.393,73.757 523.338,73.347 C521.94,72.803 520.942,72.155 519.894,71.106 C518.846,70.057 518.197,69.06 517.654,67.663 C517.244,66.606 516.755,65.022 516.623,62.101 C516.479,58.943 516.448,57.996 516.448,50 C516.448,42.003 516.479,41.056 516.623,37.899 C516.755,34.978 517.244,33.391 517.654,32.338 C518.197,30.938 518.846,29.942 519.894,28.894 C520.942,27.846 521.94,27.196 523.338,26.654 C524.393,26.244 525.979,25.756 528.898,25.623 C532.057,25.479 533.004,25.448 541,25.448 C548.997,25.448 549.943,25.479 553.102,25.623 C556.021,25.756 557.607,26.244 558.662,26.654 C560.06,27.196 561.058,27.846 562.106,28.894 C563.154,29.942 563.803,30.938 564.346,32.338 C564.756,33.391 565.244,34.978 565.378,37.899 C565.522,41.056 565.552,42.003 565.552,50 C565.552,57.996 565.522,58.943 565.378,62.101 M570.82,37.631 C570.674,34.438 570.167,32.258 569.425,30.349 C568.659,28.377 567.633,26.702 565.965,25.035 C564.297,23.368 562.623,22.342 560.652,21.575 C558.743,20.834 556.562,20.326 553.369,20.18 C550.169,20.033 549.148,20 541,20 C532.853,20 531.831,20.033 528.631,20.18 C525.438,20.326 523.257,20.834 521.349,21.575 C519.376,22.342 517.703,23.368 516.035,25.035 C514.368,26.702 513.342,28.377 512.574,30.349 C511.834,32.258 511.326,34.438 511.181,37.631 C511.035,40.831 511,41.851 511,50 C511,58.147 511.035,59.17 511.181,62.369 C511.326,65.562 511.834,67.743 512.574,69.651 C513.342,71.625 514.368,73.296 516.035,74.965 C517.703,76.634 519.376,77.658 521.349,78.425 C523.257,79.167 525.438,79.673 528.631,79.82 C531.831,79.965 532.853,80.001 541,80.001 C549.148,80.001 550.169,79.965 553.369,79.82 C556.562,79.673 558.743,79.167 560.652,78.425 C562.623,77.658 564.297,76.634 565.965,74.965 C567.633,73.296 568.659,71.625 569.425,69.651 C570.167,67.743 570.674,65.562 570.82,62.369 C570.966,59.17 571,58.147 571,50 C571,41.851 570.966,40.831 570.82,37.631"></path></g></g></g></svg></a></div>

<div style="padding-top: 8px;">
<div style=" color:#3897f0; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; font-style:normal; font-weight:550; line-height:18px;"><a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/BopoXpYnCes/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_medium=loading" style=" background:#FFFFFF; line-height:0; padding:0 0; text-align:center; text-decoration:none; width:100%;" target="_blank">View this post on Instagram</a></div>
</div>

<div style="padding: 12.5% 0;">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;">
<div>
<div style="background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="background-color: #F4F4F4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);">&nbsp;</div>
</div>

<div style="margin-left: 8px;">
<div style=" background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;">&nbsp;</div>

<div style=" width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg)">&nbsp;</div>
</div>

<div style="margin-left: auto;">
<div style=" width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);">&nbsp;</div>

<div style=" background-color: #F4F4F4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);">&nbsp;</div>

<div style=" width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);">&nbsp;</div>
</div>
</div>

<a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/BopoXpYnCes/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_medium=loading" style=" color:#000; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; font-style:normal; font-weight:normal; line-height:17px; text-decoration:none; word-wrap:break-word;" target="_blank">I’m writing this post about the upcoming midterm elections on November 6th, in which I’ll be voting in the state of Tennessee. In the past I’ve been reluctant to publicly voice my political opinions, but due to several events in my life and in the world in the past two years, I feel very differently about that now. I always have and always will cast my vote based on which candidate will protect and fight for the human rights I believe we all deserve in this country. I believe in the fight for LGBTQ rights, and that any form of discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender is WRONG. I believe that the systemic racism we still see in this country towards people of color is terrifying, sickening and prevalent. I cannot vote for someone who will not be willing to fight for dignity for ALL Americans, no matter their skin color, gender or who they love. Running for Senate in the state of Tennessee is a woman named Marsha Blackburn. As much as I have in the past and would like to continue voting for women in office, I cannot support Marsha Blackburn. Her voting record in Congress appalls and terrifies me. She voted against equal pay for women. She voted against the Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, which attempts to protect women from domestic violence, stalking, and date rape. She believes businesses have a right to refuse service to gay couples. She also believes they should not have the right to marry. These are not MY Tennessee values. I will be voting for Phil Bredesen for Senate and Jim Cooper for House of Representatives. Please, please educate yourself on the candidates running in your state and vote based on who most closely represents your values. For a lot of us, we may never find a candidate or party with whom we agree 100% on every issue, but we have to vote anyway. So many intelligent, thoughtful, self-possessed people have turned 18 in the past two years and now have the right and privilege to make their vote count. But first you need to register, which is quick and easy to do. October 9th is the LAST DAY to register to vote in the state of TN. Go to vote.org and you can find all the info. Happy Voting! 🗳😃🌈</a>

<p style=" color:#c9c8cd; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; line-height:17px; margin-bottom:0; margin-top:8px; overflow:hidden; padding:8px 0 7px; text-align:center; text-overflow:ellipsis; white-space:nowrap;">A post shared by <a href="https://www.instagram.com/taylorswift/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_medium=loading" style=" color:#c9c8cd; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; font-style:normal; font-weight:normal; line-height:17px;" target="_blank"> Taylor Swift</a> (@taylorswift) on <time datetime="2018-10-07T23:33:38+00:00" style=" font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; line-height:17px;">Oct 7, 2018 at 4:33pm PDT</time>
</div>
</blockquote>
<script async defer src="//www.instagram.com/embed.js"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

By early Monday, more than a million Instagram users had registered their approval.&nbsp;

She plans to vote for Representative Jim Cooper (D-TN) and Senator Phil Bredesen (D-TN), who sparked controversy for voicing support for Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings. &nbsp;

Bredesen was quick to trumpet Swift’s endorsement. "Thank you for the kind words @taylorswift13. I’m honored to have your support and that of so many Tennesseans who are ready to put aside the partisan shouting and get things done. We’re ready for it. Last day to register to vote is October 9," he wrote on Twitter.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Thank you for the kind words <a href="https://twitter.com/taylorswift13?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@taylorswift13</a>. I’m honored to have your support and that of so many Tennesseans who are ready to put aside the partisan shouting and get things done. We’re ready for it. Last day to register to vote is October 9. <a href="https://t.co/6Xd6YyaJCG">https://t.co/6Xd6YyaJCG</a> <a href="https://t.co/CatUBkXPKe">pic.twitter.com/CatUBkXPKe</a>
— Phil Bredesen (@PhilBredesen) <a href="https://twitter.com/PhilBredesen/status/1049092137944530944?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 8, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Swift, who spent much of her teenage life in Tennessee, previously endorsed the March For Our Lives movement, though has faced criticism in the past for largely remaining silent on her political views.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

Singer Taylor Swift has now come out after breaking her age old refusal to talk about politics by endorsing Tennessee Democrats Phil Bredesen and Jim Cooper, who are running for Senate and House of Representatives, respectively.

Singer Taylor Swift has now come out after breaking her age old refusal to talk about politics by endorsing Tennessee Democrats Phil Bredesen and Jim Cooper, who are running for Senate and House of Representatives, respectively. Swift paired social media and social activism in a lengthy Instagram post on Sunday evening. One month before the midterm elections, she endorsed the two Democrats and entreated her followers to register and show up to the polls. "I always have and always will cast my vote based on which candidate will protect and fight for the human rights I believe we all deserve in this country," she wrote in a lengthy post. "I believe in the fight for LGBTQ rights, and that any form of discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender is WRONG. I believe that the systemic racism we still see in this country towards people of color is terrifying, sickening and prevalent." "In the past I've been reluctant to publicly voice my political opinions, but due to several events in my life and in the world in the past two years, I feel very differently about that now," Swift wrote in an Instagram post. The pop star - who spent later years growing up in Tennessee - also slammed Republican candidate and US Rep. Marsha Blackburn in her lengthy post on Sunday. "As much as I have in the past and would like to continue voting for women in office, I cannot support Marsha Blackburn. Her voting record in Congress appalls and terrifies me. She voted against equal pay for women. She voted against the Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, which attempts to protect women from domestic violence, stalking, and date rape. She believes businesses have a right to refuse service to gay couples. She also believes they should not have the right to marry." "These are not MY Tennessee values." View this post on Instagram I’m writing this post about the upcoming midterm elections on November 6th, in which I’ll be voting in the state of Tennessee. In the past I’ve been reluctant to publicly voice my political opinions, but due to several events in my life and in the world in the past two years, I feel very differently about that now. I always have and always will cast my vote based on which candidate will protect and fight for the human rights I believe we all deserve in this country. I believe in the fight for LGBTQ rights, and that any form of discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender is WRONG. I believe that the systemic racism we still see in this country towards people of color is terrifying, sickening and prevalent. I cannot vote for someone who will not be willing to fight for dignity for ALL Americans, no matter their skin color, gender or who they love. Running for Senate in the state of Tennessee is a woman named Marsha Blackburn. As much as I have in the past and would like to continue voting for women in office, I cannot support Marsha Blackburn. Her voting record in Congress appalls and terrifies me. She voted against equal pay for women. She voted against the Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, which attempts to protect women from domestic violence, stalking, and date rape. She believes businesses have a right to refuse service to gay couples. She also believes they should not have the right to marry. These are not MY Tennessee values. I will be voting for Phil Bredesen for Senate and Jim Cooper for House of Representatives. Please, please educate yourself on the candidates running in your state and vote based on who most closely represents your values. For a lot of us, we may never find a candidate or party with whom we agree 100% on every issue, but we have to vote anyway. So many intelligent, thoughtful, self-possessed people have turned 18 in the past two years and now have the right and privilege to make their vote count. But first you need to register, which is quick and easy to do. October 9th is the LAST DAY to register to vote in the state of TN. Go to vote.org and you can find all the info. Happy Voting! 🗳😃🌈 A post shared by Taylor Swift (@taylorswift) on Oct 7, 2018 at 4:33pm PDT × By early Monday, more than a million Instagram users had registered their approval. She plans to vote for Representative Jim Cooper (D-TN) and Senator Phil Bredesen (D-TN), who sparked controversy for voicing support for Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings. Bredesen was quick to trumpet Swift’s endorsement. "Thank you for the kind words @taylorswift13. I’m honored to have your support and that of so many Tennesseans who are ready to put aside the partisan shouting and get things done. We’re ready for it. Last day to register to vote is October 9," he wrote on Twitter. Thank you for the kind words @taylorswift13. I’m honored to have your support and that of so many Tennesseans who are ready to put aside the partisan shouting and get things done. We’re ready for it. Last day to register to vote is October 9. https://t.co/6Xd6YyaJCG pic.twitter.com/CatUBkXPKe — Phil Bredesen (@PhilBredesen) October 8, 2018 × Swift, who spent much of her teenage life in Tennessee, previously endorsed the March For Our Lives movement, though has faced criticism in the past for largely remaining silent on her political views.

Taylor Swift breaks silence on politics, endorses two Tennessee Democrats for midterms

India need not take an aggressive position in public on the issue of US sanctions on nations defying its directive to bring their oil imports from Iran to zero by November 4, says a former Indian diplomat.

India has to play a cautious role, in that priority should be the country's national interests, former Ambassador of India to Saudi Arabia Oman and the UAE Talmiz Ahmad said.

"India's national interests lie in maintaining relations with Iran while at the same time not totally alienating the United States", he told PTI.

"And what India will do and I think that's the correct policy that there will be some reduction in oil imports for a short period and at the same time discussions with the United States will continue in order to ensure that the US policy becomes more accomodative", Mr Ahmad said.

He was of the view that over a period of time or as early as six months, the entire sanctions regime would "collapse".

"My own view is that we don't need to take an aggressive position in public but constantly subserve our own interests and wait for that time when the United States' absurd policy is revised by the international community or the US itself," he said.

Ahmad said this had to be done quietly without going public and ensuring the country's interests was safeguarded.

According to him, there would be some reduction in oil purchases from Iran in the short term but it's not likely to continue for a longer period.

India need not take an aggressive position in public on the issue of US sanctions on nations defying its directive to bring their oil imports from Iran to zero by November 4, says a former Indian diplomat.

India need not take an aggressive position in public on the issue of US sanctions on nations defying its directive to bring their oil imports from Iran to zero by November 4, says a former Indian diplomat. India has to play a cautious role, in that priority should be the country's national interests, former Ambassador of India to Saudi Arabia Oman and the UAE Talmiz Ahmad said. "India's national interests lie in maintaining relations with Iran while at the same time not totally alienating the United States", he told PTI. "And what India will do and I think that's the correct policy that there will be some reduction in oil imports for a short period and at the same time discussions with the United States will continue in order to ensure that the US policy becomes more accomodative", Mr Ahmad said. He was of the view that over a period of time or as early as six months, the entire sanctions regime would "collapse". "My own view is that we don't need to take an aggressive position in public but constantly subserve our own interests and wait for that time when the United States' absurd policy is revised by the international community or the US itself," he said. Ahmad said this had to be done quietly without going public and ensuring the country's interests was safeguarded. According to him, there would be some reduction in oil purchases from Iran in the short term but it's not likely to continue for a longer period.

Wait and watch US sanctions implode: Ex-envoy's advice to India on Iran

The rupee slumped by 30 paise to finish at a fresh lifetime low of 74.06 against the US dollar Monday amid strengthening of the greenback and steady capital outflows.

The rupee had opened lower by 14 paisa against Friday's close of 73.76 in early trade as the US dollar strength against major global currencies weighed on the rupee sentiment.

At the Interbank Foreign Exchange (Forex) market, the local currency opened lower at 73.89 a dollar against its previous closing of 73.76.

It recovered to a high of 73.76, but failed to sustain the momentum and plunged to 74.10 and finally closed at 74.06, down by 30 paise, marking its fifth straight session of decline.

On Friday, the domestic unit plummeted by 18 paise to end at 73.76.

The rupee slumped by 30 paise to finish at a fresh lifetime low of 74.06 against the US dollar Monday amid strengthening of the greenback and steady capital outflows.

The rupee slumped by 30 paise to finish at a fresh lifetime low of 74.06 against the US dollar Monday amid strengthening of the greenback and steady capital outflows. The rupee had opened lower by 14 paisa against Friday's close of 73.76 in early trade as the US dollar strength against major global currencies weighed on the rupee sentiment. At the Interbank Foreign Exchange (Forex) market, the local currency opened lower at 73.89 a dollar against its previous closing of 73.76. It recovered to a high of 73.76, but failed to sustain the momentum and plunged to 74.10 and finally closed at 74.06, down by 30 paise, marking its fifth straight session of decline. On Friday, the domestic unit plummeted by 18 paise to end at 73.76.

Rupee slumps 30 paise to close at record low of 74.06

The US jobless rate tumbled in September to its lowest level since December 1969, even as job creation slowed, likely due in part to Hurricane Florence, the government reported Friday.

A month ahead of hard-fought congressional elections, the result was sure to delight US President Donald Trump, who has eagerly taken credit for America's extended run of economic expansion even as his Republican party faces a possible rebuke from disenchanted voters.

Unemployment fell to a 48-year-low of 3.7 per cent last month from 3.9 per cent, an unusually large drop, according to the Labor Department's closely-watched monthly jobs report.

But despite the lower jobless rate, non-farm employers added just 134,000 net new positions, far weaker than analysts expected.

Hurricane Florence, the storm that made landfall along the mid-Atlantic US coast on September 14, caused widespread disruption for homes and employers but it was not possible to determine the extent to which this might have depressed the September jobs numbers, officials said.

Economists had expected job creation to slow but only to 184,000, even with the hurricane effect, from the 270,000 net new positions created in August. Job gains in July and August were revised up a combined 87,000 from the original reports.

Employees temporarily left unable to work during natural disasters can be left off the government's monthly jobs survey, especially part time workers who receive no pay during the week of the survey, meaning figures can rebound in the month after a storm.

"We're humming, we're just humming," White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow told reporters. "The economy's running full speed ahead."

And he said he expects the economy can maintain the "very good pace" of job creation.

The modest job gains came after private payrolls firm ADP said hiring surged 230,000 in the month, but the two reports often diverge since they calculate employment differently.

S&amp;P Global economist Satyam Panday noted that the three-month average for job gains was 190,000, slightly below the rate of 201,000 over the last year.

But this is "still impressive given the mature stage of the current expansion," he said in an analytical note.

Echoes of the Nixon era

Meanwhile, the labor force participation rate held steady at 62.7 per cent, while the number of unemployed people fell by 270,000 to six million, with the largest drop among adult women.&nbsp;

Hourly pay edged up 0.3 per cent for the month, and is 2.8 per cent higher than the same month last year, a notch above inflation.

Job gains were noted in healthcare, up 26,000, transportation and warehousing, up 24,000, and construction, up 23,000.

But the banner result from August's jobs numbers was surely the record low jobless rate, which was driven lower by job gains among adult women.

But with unemployment at levels not seen since Richard Nixon was in the White House, the September report also sure strengthened the case for the Federal Reserve to continue raising interest rates.

Markets widely expect the central bank to raise rates again in December but some analysts say markets may not have taken the Fed's expectations for next year -- another three increases -- into account, potentially leaving them in for a rude shock.

Wall Street closed down sharply following the news, extending losses from Thursday's selloff due to a sudden jump in bond yields.

The last time the US jobless rate was so low preceded more than a decade of economic pain tied to rising price pressures and efforts to rein them in. But wage increases so far have been modest, something that puzzles economists but allows the Fed to move gradually.

And many analysts see the unemployment rate continuing to decline this year, ramping up pressure on wages and prices.

"No-one at the Fed thinks unemployment near three per cent is sustainable," Ian Shepherdson of Pantheon Macroeconomics said in a client note.

As a result, the Fed is all but guaranteed to stick to its plan of raising rates four times before the end of next year, he added.

The US jobless rate tumbled in September to its lowest level since December 1969, even as job creation slowed, likely due in part to Hurricane Florence, the government reported Friday.

The US jobless rate tumbled in September to its lowest level since December 1969, even as job creation slowed, likely due in part to Hurricane Florence, the government reported Friday. A month ahead of hard-fought congressional elections, the result was sure to delight US President Donald Trump, who has eagerly taken credit for America's extended run of economic expansion even as his Republican party faces a possible rebuke from disenchanted voters. Unemployment fell to a 48-year-low of 3.7 per cent last month from 3.9 per cent, an unusually large drop, according to the Labor Department's closely-watched monthly jobs report. But despite the lower jobless rate, non-farm employers added just 134,000 net new positions, far weaker than analysts expected. Hurricane Florence, the storm that made landfall along the mid-Atlantic US coast on September 14, caused widespread disruption for homes and employers but it was not possible to determine the extent to which this might have depressed the September jobs numbers, officials said. Economists had expected job creation to slow but only to 184,000, even with the hurricane effect, from the 270,000 net new positions created in August. Job gains in July and August were revised up a combined 87,000 from the original reports. Employees temporarily left unable to work during natural disasters can be left off the government's monthly jobs survey, especially part time workers who receive no pay during the week of the survey, meaning figures can rebound in the month after a storm. "We're humming, we're just humming," White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow told reporters. "The economy's running full speed ahead." And he said he expects the economy can maintain the "very good pace" of job creation. The modest job gains came after private payrolls firm ADP said hiring surged 230,000 in the month, but the two reports often diverge since they calculate employment differently. S&P Global economist Satyam Panday noted that the three-month average for job gains was 190,000, slightly below the rate of 201,000 over the last year. But this is "still impressive given the mature stage of the current expansion," he said in an analytical note. Echoes of the Nixon era Meanwhile, the labor force participation rate held steady at 62.7 per cent, while the number of unemployed people fell by 270,000 to six million, with the largest drop among adult women. Hourly pay edged up 0.3 per cent for the month, and is 2.8 per cent higher than the same month last year, a notch above inflation. Job gains were noted in healthcare, up 26,000, transportation and warehousing, up 24,000, and construction, up 23,000. But the banner result from August's jobs numbers was surely the record low jobless rate, which was driven lower by job gains among adult women. But with unemployment at levels not seen since Richard Nixon was in the White House, the September report also sure strengthened the case for the Federal Reserve to continue raising interest rates. Markets widely expect the central bank to raise rates again in December but some analysts say markets may not have taken the Fed's expectations for next year -- another three increases -- into account, potentially leaving them in for a rude shock. Wall Street closed down sharply following the news, extending losses from Thursday's selloff due to a sudden jump in bond yields. The last time the US jobless rate was so low preceded more than a decade of economic pain tied to rising price pressures and efforts to rein them in. But wage increases so far have been modest, something that puzzles economists but allows the Fed to move gradually. And many analysts see the unemployment rate continuing to decline this year, ramping up pressure on wages and prices. "No-one at the Fed thinks unemployment near three per cent is sustainable," Ian Shepherdson of Pantheon Macroeconomics said in a client note. As a result, the Fed is all but guaranteed to stick to its plan of raising rates four times before the end of next year, he added.

US unemployment falls to 48-year low in September

Criticised by the White House for <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/china-actively-trying-to-impact-and-change-our-election-us-president-donald-trump-166467">alleged interference in US politics</a>, China has quietly blazed a path at the United Nations where it is, little by little, becoming one of the most influential members.

At the Security Council, where China holds one of five permanent seats, its statements remain bland, often recalling fundamentals of the United Nations Charter such as national sovereignty and principles of non-interference.

"In their interpretation, democracy is optional, as are human rights," a European diplomat said.

Yet in peacekeeping missions or when jobs are available at the New York secretariat, Beijing increasingly makes its presence felt.

More than 2,500 Chinese military personnel wear UN blue helmets on peacekeeping mission in Libya, Mali, the Democratic Republic of Congo and South Sudan.

China has also "enormously increased" its voluntary financial contributions to the UN while the US administration of President Donald Trump cuts back its own financing.

"To fund reports and missions allows the buying of influence" and pushing its candidates into positions, the diplomat said, adding that to have Chinese in multiple roles "is a source of information and influence."

Another diplomat, also speaking anonymously, said: "China is taking power at the United Nations."

In 2017 and 2018, the country, which is economically expanding in Africa and elsewhere, became a key player in two major international issues: North Korea and Myanmar.

Under American pressure, Beijing imposed unprecedented economic sanctions against Pyongyang, but with the hope that an accord on denuclearization of the Korean peninsula will lead to the departure of about 30,000 US troops based in South Korea -- China's behind-the-scenes strategy in the region.

China meanwhile considers the crisis of Myanmar's Muslim minority Rohingya, 700,000 of whom fled a military crackdown to Bangladesh, as a bilateral issue between those two countries, and succeeded in preventing any firm Security Council action.

Power and erosion 
"The increase in power of China at the UN is taking place in parallel with a slow erosion of automatic reciprocal support" practiced until now with Russia, European capitals have noted.&nbsp;

While Moscow has recourse to its veto power, China sometimes relies on abstention.

At less high-profile levels of the UN, such as negotiation over texts between experts from the 15-member Security Council, China is "present on all subjects," a diplomat said, speaking anonymously.

Beijing, for example, is now seeking to become chief author on texts about Afghanistan, replacing the Netherlands, which on January 1 will leave its seat as a non-permanent Security Council member, several diplomats said.

The vast majority of UN resolutions still are written by the United States, Britain or France, a reflection of an older world order.

China, like Russia, is rarely the author, although it was in charge of the Somalia file long ago.

"For China, multipolarity is a subway stop. There will be a future station G2 -- China/US, and then one day it will be a G1 -- in their mind!" a diplomat said.

"They are long-term players. They don't want to create a commotion," another diplomatic source said.

The United States has imposed $250 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods and Trump has gone so far as alleging that China is interfering in the November midterm US elections in hopes of defeating his Republican Party due to his tough trade stance.

Speaking to a US think tank last week, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi dismissed fears that his country was seeking to overtake the US as the pre-eminent world power.

Concluding that China is about to seek hegemony, he said, is "a serious strategic misjudgment." 
&nbsp;

Criticised by the White House for alleged interference in US politics, China has quietly blazed a path at the United Nations where it is, little by little, becoming one of the most influential members.

Criticised by the White House for alleged interference in US politics, China has quietly blazed a path at the United Nations where it is, little by little, becoming one of the most influential members. At the Security Council, where China holds one of five permanent seats, its statements remain bland, often recalling fundamentals of the United Nations Charter such as national sovereignty and principles of non-interference. "In their interpretation, democracy is optional, as are human rights," a European diplomat said. Yet in peacekeeping missions or when jobs are available at the New York secretariat, Beijing increasingly makes its presence felt. More than 2,500 Chinese military personnel wear UN blue helmets on peacekeeping mission in Libya, Mali, the Democratic Republic of Congo and South Sudan. China has also "enormously increased" its voluntary financial contributions to the UN while the US administration of President Donald Trump cuts back its own financing. "To fund reports and missions allows the buying of influence" and pushing its candidates into positions, the diplomat said, adding that to have Chinese in multiple roles "is a source of information and influence." Another diplomat, also speaking anonymously, said: "China is taking power at the United Nations." In 2017 and 2018, the country, which is economically expanding in Africa and elsewhere, became a key player in two major international issues: North Korea and Myanmar. Under American pressure, Beijing imposed unprecedented economic sanctions against Pyongyang, but with the hope that an accord on denuclearization of the Korean peninsula will lead to the departure of about 30,000 US troops based in South Korea -- China's behind-the-scenes strategy in the region. China meanwhile considers the crisis of Myanmar's Muslim minority Rohingya, 700,000 of whom fled a military crackdown to Bangladesh, as a bilateral issue between those two countries, and succeeded in preventing any firm Security Council action. Power and erosion "The increase in power of China at the UN is taking place in parallel with a slow erosion of automatic reciprocal support" practiced until now with Russia, European capitals have noted. While Moscow has recourse to its veto power, China sometimes relies on abstention. At less high-profile levels of the UN, such as negotiation over texts between experts from the 15-member Security Council, China is "present on all subjects," a diplomat said, speaking anonymously. Beijing, for example, is now seeking to become chief author on texts about Afghanistan, replacing the Netherlands, which on January 1 will leave its seat as a non-permanent Security Council member, several diplomats said. The vast majority of UN resolutions still are written by the United States, Britain or France, a reflection of an older world order. China, like Russia, is rarely the author, although it was in charge of the Somalia file long ago. "For China, multipolarity is a subway stop. There will be a future station G2 -- China/US, and then one day it will be a G1 -- in their mind!" a diplomat said. "They are long-term players. They don't want to create a commotion," another diplomatic source said. The United States has imposed $250 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods and Trump has gone so far as alleging that China is interfering in the November midterm US elections in hopes of defeating his Republican Party due to his tough trade stance. Speaking to a US think tank last week, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi dismissed fears that his country was seeking to overtake the US as the pre-eminent world power. Concluding that China is about to seek hegemony, he said, is "a serious strategic misjudgment."

In divided UN, China quietly blazes path to power

Control of the US Congress hangs in the balance in hard-fought midterm elections next month. And, even with a booming economy, the party in power does not have the wind at its back.

The lowest unemployment level in nearly 50 years has also not substantially lifted President Donald Trump's standing in opinion polls, and he remains among the least popular US leaders of the last 70 years.&nbsp;

Forecasts point to solid chances that Democrats could wrest control of the House of Representatives away from Republicans, drastically shifting the political landscape in Washington.

Below are some facts on the recent run of the world's largest economy.

How good is the economy?

Quite. By most measures, it is unusually strong. US Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said last week the outlook was "remarkably positive." &nbsp;&nbsp;

GDP grew at a 4.2 per cent clip in the second quarter, the strongest in nearly four years and the fastest among advanced economies -- though it was helped by a few one-off factors that are unlikely to be replicated later in the year.

The last time the unemployment rate was this low -- 3.7 per cent -- president Richard Nixon was enacting tax reform and The Beatles were breaking up.&nbsp; 
Inflation is rising only slowly, but enough to eat into wages, which also are growing sluggishly.

Job creation through September has averaged 218,000 net new positions a month so far this year, the fastest rate since 2015.

Consumer and business confidence, as well as measures of services and manufacturing activity, are all at historically high levels.&nbsp;

But the housing sector, which can be a leading indicator in the economic cycle, appears in decline, with building and sales steadily weakening.

Wall Street also has been very happy for much of the past 20 months, repeatedly smashing records.

But economist Jared Bernstein, adviser to former Vice President Joe Biden, notes that prosperity has not been evenly shared.

Corporate after-tax profits rose 14.9 percent in the first six quarters of the Trump era, but mid-level hourly wages gained only 0.5 percent in the same period.

Credit to Trump or Obama ?

Economists caution against attributing economic performance, good or bad, solely to presidents.

Trump has forcefully claimed ownership for the current economy but it was former President Barack Obama who presided over most of the recovery.

"There's no question that there's a mixture of credit involved. President Obama took office during the worst downturn since the Great Depression," Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a Republican former director of the Congressional Budget Office, told AFP.

But Trump has slashed taxes and regulations to energize businesses, Holtz-Eakin said.

Following December's tax cuts and a big spending package enacted in February, the US economy does appear to be growing faster than it did in the prior two years -- for now -- and business investment picked up.

The International Monetary Fund in July forecast US growth of 2.9 per cent for 2018, which would match the expansion in 2015 under Obama.

But as unemployment has fallen and available workers have become scarce, job growth has actually slowed under Trump.

Since January 2017, the economy had added 3.9 million jobs. But in the final 21 months of Obama's presidency, there were 4.5 million net new positions created.

And, since peaking at 10 per cent in October 2009, the US unemployment rate has fallen 6.3 percentage points: 5.3 points of that was under Obama and just one under Trump.

What are the risks?

Predicting recessions is a notoriously difficult task. But economists say dangers to the US economy, and the odds of a downturn, are growing.

The trade war with China, America's largest trading partner, already is causing "chaos" for US electronics manufacturers, according to the Institute for Supply Management, with the hit to US supply chains likely to show up in economic data in the near future.

And there are no negotiations between Washington and Beijing currently scheduled.

As the Fed raises lending rates, there is a growing risk of popping an asset bubble created by years of easy money from the Fed -- and thus wiping out household wealth and tipping the economy into recession.

Economic contagion could also spread from emerging markets as they suffer capital flight, falling currency values and rising debt costs.

Record high global debt is a key risk flagged by the IMF, as it reached an all-time high of $182 trillion -- almost 60 per cent higher than in 2007.

Control of the US Congress hangs in the balance in hard-fought midterm elections next month. And, even with a booming economy, the party in power does not have the wind at its back.

Control of the US Congress hangs in the balance in hard-fought midterm elections next month. And, even with a booming economy, the party in power does not have the wind at its back. The lowest unemployment level in nearly 50 years has also not substantially lifted President Donald Trump's standing in opinion polls, and he remains among the least popular US leaders of the last 70 years. Forecasts point to solid chances that Democrats could wrest control of the House of Representatives away from Republicans, drastically shifting the political landscape in Washington. Below are some facts on the recent run of the world's largest economy. How good is the economy? Quite. By most measures, it is unusually strong. US Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said last week the outlook was "remarkably positive." GDP grew at a 4.2 per cent clip in the second quarter, the strongest in nearly four years and the fastest among advanced economies -- though it was helped by a few one-off factors that are unlikely to be replicated later in the year. The last time the unemployment rate was this low -- 3.7 per cent -- president Richard Nixon was enacting tax reform and The Beatles were breaking up. Inflation is rising only slowly, but enough to eat into wages, which also are growing sluggishly. Job creation through September has averaged 218,000 net new positions a month so far this year, the fastest rate since 2015. Consumer and business confidence, as well as measures of services and manufacturing activity, are all at historically high levels. But the housing sector, which can be a leading indicator in the economic cycle, appears in decline, with building and sales steadily weakening. Wall Street also has been very happy for much of the past 20 months, repeatedly smashing records. But economist Jared Bernstein, adviser to former Vice President Joe Biden, notes that prosperity has not been evenly shared. Corporate after-tax profits rose 14.9 percent in the first six quarters of the Trump era, but mid-level hourly wages gained only 0.5 percent in the same period. Credit to Trump or Obama ? Economists caution against attributing economic performance, good or bad, solely to presidents. Trump has forcefully claimed ownership for the current economy but it was former President Barack Obama who presided over most of the recovery. "There's no question that there's a mixture of credit involved. President Obama took office during the worst downturn since the Great Depression," Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a Republican former director of the Congressional Budget Office, told AFP. But Trump has slashed taxes and regulations to energize businesses, Holtz-Eakin said. Following December's tax cuts and a big spending package enacted in February, the US economy does appear to be growing faster than it did in the prior two years -- for now -- and business investment picked up. The International Monetary Fund in July forecast US growth of 2.9 per cent for 2018, which would match the expansion in 2015 under Obama. But as unemployment has fallen and available workers have become scarce, job growth has actually slowed under Trump. Since January 2017, the economy had added 3.9 million jobs. But in the final 21 months of Obama's presidency, there were 4.5 million net new positions created. And, since peaking at 10 per cent in October 2009, the US unemployment rate has fallen 6.3 percentage points: 5.3 points of that was under Obama and just one under Trump. What are the risks? Predicting recessions is a notoriously difficult task. But economists say dangers to the US economy, and the odds of a downturn, are growing. The trade war with China, America's largest trading partner, already is causing "chaos" for US electronics manufacturers, according to the Institute for Supply Management, with the hit to US supply chains likely to show up in economic data in the near future. And there are no negotiations between Washington and Beijing currently scheduled. As the Fed raises lending rates, there is a growing risk of popping an asset bubble created by years of easy money from the Fed -- and thus wiping out household wealth and tipping the economy into recession. Economic contagion could also spread from emerging markets as they suffer capital flight, falling currency values and rising debt costs. Record high global debt is a key risk flagged by the IMF, as it reached an all-time high of $182 trillion -- almost 60 per cent higher than in 2007.

US economy booms as elections near, but who gets credit?

The United States’ time is up. The country is wading into the pits of absolute decline. But, there is a bit of an irony involved here, the country contra international relations theory and practice is not declining because of peer competitor(s), or hard balancing; it is in decline because of its own follies and an inexorable drift into torpor and turpitude.&nbsp;

These assertions might sound counterintuitive or even in the nature of a pious wish given that the country holds the balance in almost all domains of power and politics.&nbsp;

For instance, its defence spending is unmatched, &nbsp;its hard power peerless, power projection capabilities unmatched and the system of alliances that it presides over rather relatively unscathed. &nbsp;The question then arises is that is the United States is still at the apogee of its power, how can it be in decline? If it is in decline, should it be a cause of celebration? And, more importantly perhaps, who or what should replace the country?

First things first.

Power, a slippery and contested concept, is intimately linked with legitimacy. It is not the “number of tanks or battalions (to briefly paraphrase Joseph Stalin) that a country has that determines its “actual” power (or influence) but a combination of power and the fund of legitimacy it enjoys. The United States, despite its grave crimes like the Vietnam war, its egregious and bloody meddling in Latin America, its blatant and fraudulent use of power in the Second Gulf War and so on did enjoy legitimacy especially in the aftermath of the Second world war.

This legitimacy accrued from the country’s leadership in creating and instituting the liberal world order. Consequently, many countries not only acquiesced in its leadership but also accepted the country. But, with the concentration of power in the United States( also known as unipolarity), hubris became the predominant impulse of the United States. The country not only squandered its fund of power and legitimacy by opting for “wars of choice” in Afghanistan and Iraq but also became contemptuous of rules, regimes and norms that it had helped institute. The United States also lost the plot domestically as the country’s elite became so self-centred and self-absorbed that there was a massive disconnect between the masses and the governing classes of the country. This, in turn, corrupted the United States’ democracy and its institutions, in the process.

The chicken finally came to roost, so to speak, in the form of Donald Trump to the highest office of the country. Trump is not only disdainful of ( and in the process reconfiguring) United States institutional fabric in an insalubrious and deleterious way but also swaggering internationally in a cavalier way that he is destroying the fabric of world order, norms, laws and regimes thereof. His gratuitous assault on Iran, the contempt demonstrated by his administration toward the United Nations and the International Criminal Court, and the aggressive and bellicose approach adopted toward China illustrate the point. But, this is not all, the United States is being hollowed out from within by the corruption of its institutions, the ungainly and cruel treatment of refugees and immigrants, the arrogant and disdain demonstrated toward the rule of law and so on. Cumulatively, the gravamen of these omissions and commissions can only mean decline.

Now, if the United States is in decline, who or what can replace it? The obvious contender is China given its power, heft and clout. But, there are obvious issues with China’s total dominance of the international system. The country’s world view and its sense of self, along with issues of humanitarian concern would render China an inadequate globally preponderant power, among other things. &nbsp;The European Union is too mired in structural issues to actually even countenance global leadership. By elimination then, what the world is left with is international law and institutions of global governance like the United Nations.

In the absence of hegemony, only international law and institutions can actually fill the void in anarchic international relations. But, here too, issues arise, the major one being that states invariably act in and out of self-interest. However, given that there will be no more a hegemon to enforce peace, or hold the balance in a way that approximates global public goods, all the states of and in the international system must redefine their interests and conceive these in a way where , internationally and globally, international law, regimes and laws reign supreme. 
 
This might even constitute raison d’etat given that if , in the past, the United States was looked toward as the provider of security and public goods, and that it is in decline and there would be no entity to do this in the future, states’ self-interest would lie in bandwagoning together and agglomerating their interests in and to some well-defined goals and peace. The most important of these goals would be the world order, global peace and stability, themes and ideas that would redound to the benefit of all. Moreover, this potential combination would also check and hem the worst instincts and impulses of states, especially powerful ones.

This potential state of affairs and the desired condition can only be reified if international institutions and laws are strengthened by a robust backing of states. &nbsp;Broken down, it means reviving the United Nations and making it more robust, not merely as a declamatory body or one whose USP lies only in “low politics” but making it an arbiter of high politics. It can happen when states delegate their power, not just rhetorically but substantively to the “Parliament of Man” and, among other things imbue the august body with hard power capabilities.

The United States is declining. There is no other state which can actually replace it, as of now. And, in and during its decline, the country can do something silly and odious, like going to war or rejigging the economic order in place drastically, so much so that the rest of the world suffers. Before the country, during the throes of decline, lashes out and before the world drifts into a more intense disorder, it is time to introspect and accord primacy to law and institutions which promote peace, stability and prosperity. The time to make haste slowly is now!

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The United States’ time is up. The country is wading into the pits of absolute decline. But, there is a bit of an irony involved here, the country contra international relations theory and practice is not declining because of peer competitor(s), or hard balancing; it is in decline because of its own follies and an inexorable drift into torpor and turpitude.

The United States’ time is up. The country is wading into the pits of absolute decline. But, there is a bit of an irony involved here, the country contra international relations theory and practice is not declining because of peer competitor(s), or hard balancing; it is in decline because of its own follies and an inexorable drift into torpor and turpitude. These assertions might sound counterintuitive or even in the nature of a pious wish given that the country holds the balance in almost all domains of power and politics. For instance, its defence spending is unmatched, its hard power peerless, power projection capabilities unmatched and the system of alliances that it presides over rather relatively unscathed. The question then arises is that is the United States is still at the apogee of its power, how can it be in decline? If it is in decline, should it be a cause of celebration? And, more importantly perhaps, who or what should replace the country? First things first. Power, a slippery and contested concept, is intimately linked with legitimacy. It is not the “number of tanks or battalions (to briefly paraphrase Joseph Stalin) that a country has that determines its “actual” power (or influence) but a combination of power and the fund of legitimacy it enjoys. The United States, despite its grave crimes like the Vietnam war, its egregious and bloody meddling in Latin America, its blatant and fraudulent use of power in the Second Gulf War and so on did enjoy legitimacy especially in the aftermath of the Second world war. This legitimacy accrued from the country’s leadership in creating and instituting the liberal world order. Consequently, many countries not only acquiesced in its leadership but also accepted the country. But, with the concentration of power in the United States( also known as unipolarity), hubris became the predominant impulse of the United States. The country not only squandered its fund of power and legitimacy by opting for “wars of choice” in Afghanistan and Iraq but also became contemptuous of rules, regimes and norms that it had helped institute. The United States also lost the plot domestically as the country’s elite became so self-centred and self-absorbed that there was a massive disconnect between the masses and the governing classes of the country. This, in turn, corrupted the United States’ democracy and its institutions, in the process. The chicken finally came to roost, so to speak, in the form of Donald Trump to the highest office of the country. Trump is not only disdainful of ( and in the process reconfiguring) United States institutional fabric in an insalubrious and deleterious way but also swaggering internationally in a cavalier way that he is destroying the fabric of world order, norms, laws and regimes thereof. His gratuitous assault on Iran, the contempt demonstrated by his administration toward the United Nations and the International Criminal Court, and the aggressive and bellicose approach adopted toward China illustrate the point. But, this is not all, the United States is being hollowed out from within by the corruption of its institutions, the ungainly and cruel treatment of refugees and immigrants, the arrogant and disdain demonstrated toward the rule of law and so on. Cumulatively, the gravamen of these omissions and commissions can only mean decline. Now, if the United States is in decline, who or what can replace it? The obvious contender is China given its power, heft and clout. But, there are obvious issues with China’s total dominance of the international system. The country’s world view and its sense of self, along with issues of humanitarian concern would render China an inadequate globally preponderant power, among other things. The European Union is too mired in structural issues to actually even countenance global leadership. By elimination then, what the world is left with is international law and institutions of global governance like the United Nations. In the absence of hegemony, only international law and institutions can actually fill the void in anarchic international relations. But, here too, issues arise, the major one being that states invariably act in and out of self-interest. However, given that there will be no more a hegemon to enforce peace, or hold the balance in a way that approximates global public goods, all the states of and in the international system must redefine their interests and conceive these in a way where , internationally and globally, international law, regimes and laws reign supreme. This might even constitute raison d’etat given that if , in the past, the United States was looked toward as the provider of security and public goods, and that it is in decline and there would be no entity to do this in the future, states’ self-interest would lie in bandwagoning together and agglomerating their interests in and to some well-defined goals and peace. The most important of these goals would be the world order, global peace and stability, themes and ideas that would redound to the benefit of all. Moreover, this potential combination would also check and hem the worst instincts and impulses of states, especially powerful ones. This potential state of affairs and the desired condition can only be reified if international institutions and laws are strengthened by a robust backing of states. Broken down, it means reviving the United Nations and making it more robust, not merely as a declamatory body or one whose USP lies only in “low politics” but making it an arbiter of high politics. It can happen when states delegate their power, not just rhetorically but substantively to the “Parliament of Man” and, among other things imbue the august body with hard power capabilities. The United States is declining. There is no other state which can actually replace it, as of now. And, in and during its decline, the country can do something silly and odious, like going to war or rejigging the economic order in place drastically, so much so that the rest of the world suffers. Before the country, during the throes of decline, lashes out and before the world drifts into a more intense disorder, it is time to introspect and accord primacy to law and institutions which promote peace, stability and prosperity. The time to make haste slowly is now! (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

As the US declines, International Law and Institutions must be strengthened

US voters will soon render their verdict on Donald Trump and his ruling Republican Party after two tumultuous years that have deeply shaken the world's oldest existing democracy.

Have Americans had enough? The answer comes at polling stations one month from Saturday, with Republicans battling to keep control of the US Congress and Democrats hoping a "blue wave" will wash them out.&nbsp;

Trump -- among the most polarizing US leaders ever -- is not on the ballot, but his presence looms large over the midterms, which he has declared "the most important congressional elections of our lifetime."

He has hit the campaign trail for political allies and to rally his base, attacking "obstructionist" Democrats and touting his success in improving the US economy.

"I'm not on the ticket," he told supporters at a Mississippi rally Tuesday. "But I am on the ticket, because this is also a referendum about me."

Some Republicans, especially those who prevailed in 2016 in districts won by Hillary Clinton, are running at arm's length from Trump, whose poll ratings remain under water.

But many candidates have wholeheartedly embraced the president and acknowledged their election fortunes will rise or fall with him.

'Defining moment'

Democrats are energized, with well-funded campaigns aiming to snatch seats in Tennessee and other red states like Georgia, Kansas and Texas as they aim to reclaim the 435-member House of Representatives and the 100-member Senate.

"Folks are sensing a sea change coming here," Tariq Thowfeek of the Texas Democratic Party told AFP in Austin.

He pointed to the compelling grassroots candidacy of Beto O'Rourke, whose bid to oust Republican Senator Ted Cruz would send shockwaves through the nation if it succeeds on November 6.

O'Rourke often speaks of this being "a defining moment for our country," and embraces the opportunity to engage with Texans of all stripes.

He drills down on kitchen table issues including health care -- a top priority for Democratic voters -- jobs and education, while demanding criminal justice reform, more rational immigration policies and gun safety legislation.

But the man in the White House is still expected to have the predominant impact on the midterms.

"For Democrats the top issue by a mile is Donald Trump," said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics.

"He is the reason they're turning out to vote, and almost unanimously they're voting against him."

In the first midterms of the anti-harassment #MeToo era, the power of the female vote is certain to be tested -- even more so with the dramatic debate currently roiling the US Senate.&nbsp;

The election season is occurring in the shadow of a bitter Supreme Court battle, in which Democrats are aiming to spoil the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, a federal judge who stands accused of sexual assault.

'Rallying cry'

It remains unclear just how that partisan fight might impact the midterms. But Trump is confident his nominee, whose confirmation would shift the nine-justice high court rightward, will energize his base -- a necessity if the party wants to hold ground in November.

Kavanaugh "is like a rallying cry for the Republicans," Trump told reporters Tuesday.

If Kavanaugh gets confirmed, it would mean Republicans control the White House, both chambers of Congress, and a conservative-leaning Supreme Court, potentially diminishing the sense of urgency among Republican voters.

Depressed turnout could spell disaster for Republicans, who face a hostile election climate.&nbsp;

Democrats must gain 23 seats to retake the House. Dave Wasserman of the non-partisan Cook Political Report predicts Democrats will flip 25 to 40 seats, while the Center for Politics says that number could near 50.

In a sign of 2018's Democratic tilt, a hefty 29 Republican-held House seats are rated a "toss up" by Cook, compared to just two Democratic seats.&nbsp;

"It's getting ugly" for Republicans, tweeted Wasserman, as he pointed to the GOP closing the funding spigot for some embattled candidates in districts won by Trump in 2016.

Trump has employed fear-mongering to counter the Democrats' enthusiasm edge.

"If Democrats get control, they will raise your taxes, flood your streets with criminal aliens, weaken our military, outlaw private health insurance and replace freedom with socialism," Trump said in Mississippi.

Meanwhile, Democrats are promoting a diverse collection of candidates. Native Americans, Muslims, and Latinas are seeking to make history in many races, while Florida, Georgia and Maryland could elect their first black governors.&nbsp;

A new Quinnipiac Poll gives conservatives some hope, as it showed Republicans cutting the general Democratic lead in House races from 14 points to seven.

In the Senate, Democrats have a steeper climb, even though Republicans have a slim 51-49 majority.&nbsp;

Of the 35 Senate seats in contention in November, Democrats are defending 26 of them -- including 10 in states Trump won. Republicans are defending just nine seats.&nbsp;

US voters will soon render their verdict on Donald Trump and his ruling Republican Party after two tumultuous years that have deeply shaken the world's oldest existing democracy.

US voters will soon render their verdict on Donald Trump and his ruling Republican Party after two tumultuous years that have deeply shaken the world's oldest existing democracy. Have Americans had enough? The answer comes at polling stations one month from Saturday, with Republicans battling to keep control of the US Congress and Democrats hoping a "blue wave" will wash them out. Trump -- among the most polarizing US leaders ever -- is not on the ballot, but his presence looms large over the midterms, which he has declared "the most important congressional elections of our lifetime." He has hit the campaign trail for political allies and to rally his base, attacking "obstructionist" Democrats and touting his success in improving the US economy. "I'm not on the ticket," he told supporters at a Mississippi rally Tuesday. "But I am on the ticket, because this is also a referendum about me." Some Republicans, especially those who prevailed in 2016 in districts won by Hillary Clinton, are running at arm's length from Trump, whose poll ratings remain under water. But many candidates have wholeheartedly embraced the president and acknowledged their election fortunes will rise or fall with him. 'Defining moment' Democrats are energized, with well-funded campaigns aiming to snatch seats in Tennessee and other red states like Georgia, Kansas and Texas as they aim to reclaim the 435-member House of Representatives and the 100-member Senate. "Folks are sensing a sea change coming here," Tariq Thowfeek of the Texas Democratic Party told AFP in Austin. He pointed to the compelling grassroots candidacy of Beto O'Rourke, whose bid to oust Republican Senator Ted Cruz would send shockwaves through the nation if it succeeds on November 6. O'Rourke often speaks of this being "a defining moment for our country," and embraces the opportunity to engage with Texans of all stripes. He drills down on kitchen table issues including health care -- a top priority for Democratic voters -- jobs and education, while demanding criminal justice reform, more rational immigration policies and gun safety legislation. But the man in the White House is still expected to have the predominant impact on the midterms. "For Democrats the top issue by a mile is Donald Trump," said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics. "He is the reason they're turning out to vote, and almost unanimously they're voting against him." In the first midterms of the anti-harassment #MeToo era, the power of the female vote is certain to be tested -- even more so with the dramatic debate currently roiling the US Senate. The election season is occurring in the shadow of a bitter Supreme Court battle, in which Democrats are aiming to spoil the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, a federal judge who stands accused of sexual assault. 'Rallying cry' It remains unclear just how that partisan fight might impact the midterms. But Trump is confident his nominee, whose confirmation would shift the nine-justice high court rightward, will energize his base -- a necessity if the party wants to hold ground in November. Kavanaugh "is like a rallying cry for the Republicans," Trump told reporters Tuesday. If Kavanaugh gets confirmed, it would mean Republicans control the White House, both chambers of Congress, and a conservative-leaning Supreme Court, potentially diminishing the sense of urgency among Republican voters. Depressed turnout could spell disaster for Republicans, who face a hostile election climate. Democrats must gain 23 seats to retake the House. Dave Wasserman of the non-partisan Cook Political Report predicts Democrats will flip 25 to 40 seats, while the Center for Politics says that number could near 50. In a sign of 2018's Democratic tilt, a hefty 29 Republican-held House seats are rated a "toss up" by Cook, compared to just two Democratic seats. "It's getting ugly" for Republicans, tweeted Wasserman, as he pointed to the GOP closing the funding spigot for some embattled candidates in districts won by Trump in 2016. Trump has employed fear-mongering to counter the Democrats' enthusiasm edge. "If Democrats get control, they will raise your taxes, flood your streets with criminal aliens, weaken our military, outlaw private health insurance and replace freedom with socialism," Trump said in Mississippi. Meanwhile, Democrats are promoting a diverse collection of candidates. Native Americans, Muslims, and Latinas are seeking to make history in many races, while Florida, Georgia and Maryland could elect their first black governors. A new Quinnipiac Poll gives conservatives some hope, as it showed Republicans cutting the general Democratic lead in House races from 14 points to seven. In the Senate, Democrats have a steeper climb, even though Republicans have a slim 51-49 majority. Of the 35 Senate seats in contention in November, Democrats are defending 26 of them -- including 10 in states Trump won. Republicans are defending just nine seats.

With US midterms a month away, verdict on Trump looms

China on Friday rejected <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/pence-accuses-china-of-seeking-to-change-us-president-169494">US Vice President Mike Pence's charge that Beijing was meddling in American elections</a> as "unwarranted" and "ridiculous".

In a blistering speech, Pence on Thursday accused China of military aggression, commercial theft and rising human rights violations as he cast the Asian power as a villain bent on interfering in upcoming US polls.

"The relevant speech made unwarranted accusations against China's domestic and foreign policies and slandered China by claiming that China meddles in US internal affairs and election," Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said in a statement.

"This is nothing but speaking on hearsay evidence, confusing right and wrong and creating something out of thin air. The Chinese side is firmly opposed to it," she said.

Expanding on complaints aired by President Donald Trump at the United Nations last week, Pence accused China of waging an "unprecedented effort to influence American public opinion" ahead of critical congressional elections on November 6, and wanting "a different American president."

Relations between the world's two largest economies have plummeted in recent weeks with Trump placing $250 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods, in part over charges that Beijing forces US companies to hand over technological know-how.&nbsp;

"It is very ridiculous for the US side to stigmatise its normal exchanges and cooperation with China as China interfering in its internal affairs and elections," Hua said.

"China always follows the principle of non-interference in others' internal affairs and we have no interest in meddling in US internal affairs and elections," she said.

"We urge the US to correct its wrongdoing, stop groundlessly accusing and slandering China and harming China's interests and China-US ties."

China on Friday rejected US Vice President Mike Pence's charge that Beijing was meddling in American elections as "unwarranted" and "ridiculous". In a blistering speech, Pence on Thursday accused China of military aggression, commercial theft and rising human rights violations as he cast the Asian power as a villain bent on interfering in upcoming US polls.

China on Friday rejected US Vice President Mike Pence's charge that Beijing was meddling in American elections as "unwarranted" and "ridiculous". In a blistering speech, Pence on Thursday accused China of military aggression, commercial theft and rising human rights violations as he cast the Asian power as a villain bent on interfering in upcoming US polls. "The relevant speech made unwarranted accusations against China's domestic and foreign policies and slandered China by claiming that China meddles in US internal affairs and election," Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said in a statement. "This is nothing but speaking on hearsay evidence, confusing right and wrong and creating something out of thin air. The Chinese side is firmly opposed to it," she said. Expanding on complaints aired by President Donald Trump at the United Nations last week, Pence accused China of waging an "unprecedented effort to influence American public opinion" ahead of critical congressional elections on November 6, and wanting "a different American president." Relations between the world's two largest economies have plummeted in recent weeks with Trump placing $250 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods, in part over charges that Beijing forces US companies to hand over technological know-how. "It is very ridiculous for the US side to stigmatise its normal exchanges and cooperation with China as China interfering in its internal affairs and elections," Hua said. "China always follows the principle of non-interference in others' internal affairs and we have no interest in meddling in US internal affairs and elections," she said. "We urge the US to correct its wrongdoing, stop groundlessly accusing and slandering China and harming China's interests and China-US ties."

China slams 'ridiculous' US election meddling charges

US President Donald Trump unveiled a new counter-terrorism strategy which issues a tough warning to terrorist groups and their supporters that the United States will defeat its enemies with the full force of American might.

The strategy for counterterrorism focuses efforts on pursuing terrorists to their source and isolating terrorists from their support, the US administration said.

"Guided by the National Strategy for Counterterrorism, we will use all instruments of American power to protect our great nation, and we will defeat our enemies with the full force of American might," Trump said after basic contours of National Strategy for Counterterrorism were made public.

The strategy, Trump said, outlines the approach of the US to counter the increasingly complex and evolving terrorist threats and represents the nation's first fully articulated counterterrorism strategy since 2011.

"It provides the strategic guidance needed to protect the United States against all terrorist threats, while simultaneously fostering the agility to anticipate, prevent, and respond to new threats," he said.

Describing the strategy as a significant departure from the previous Obama Administration, his National Security Advisor John Bolton told reporters that the strategy focuses efforts on pursuing terrorists to their source and isolating terrorists from their support.

It also involves modernising and integrating US's counterterrorism tools, protecting infrastructure and enhancing preparedness, countering terrorist radicalisation and recruitment and strengthening the counterterrorism abilities of its international partners, he said.&nbsp;

"The strategy articulates a counterterrorism approach that is sustainable, more efficient, prioritized and less reliant on only United States' capabilities," Bolton said.&nbsp;

"Because the global threat posed by terrorist groups is more complex and diffuse than ever, this strategy provides the framework to protect the United States against all terrorists who threaten our country," he said.

As part of the strategy, the top Trump advisor said the US will not focus on a single organisation, but will counter all terrorists with the ability and intent to harm the United States, citizens, and its interests.&nbsp;

"We will place greater emphasis on targeting terrorist networks that threaten the US and our allies, and focus our efforts on disrupting and denying the ways and means terrorists use to radicalize, recruit, mobilize, finance, travel, communicate, and inspire new followers," he said.

"We will deny terrorists the freedom to travel and communicate across international borders, and take action to limit their ability to recruit and radicalize online. We will counter the violent, extreme, and twisted ideologies that purport to justify and excuse the murder of innocents," Bolton said.

Bolton asserted this strategy stresses better integration of national power, both, military and non-military, to combat terrorism and terrorist ideologies, with an increased emphasis on non-kinetic means.&nbsp;

The strategy also places greater emphasis on protecting the homeland, preventing attacks, and mitigating the impact of an attack, should one occur, he said.

This includes building strong borders, securing ports of entry, protecting critical U.S. Infrastructure, and promoting a culture of preparedness.&nbsp; 
Welcoming the new strategy, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the strategy recognises the need for all nations to equitably share the burden of confronting terrorism.

"As such, the State Department, in close coordination with other federal agencies, will continue to work with our allies and partners to implement the policies and tools necessary to eliminate our terrorist enemies and their networks of support,&nbsp;he said.

The Pentagon said, "By standing with traditional and non-traditional partners, the DoD (Department of Defense) advances shared counterterrorism efforts by employing military and non-military capabilities to disrupt and deny terrorist mobility, financing, communication and recruitment."

According to Director of National Intelligence, Daniel Coats, the strategy addresses the complex and evolving terrorism landscape in its emphasis on denying terrorists the resources and recruits to fuel their nefarious aims, and outlines the need to leverage the strong partnerships that the US has to built at home and abroad to solve this global problem.

"The strategy places America first, emphasizing strong borders, strengthening security at points of entry, protecting critical infrastructure, and facilitating preparedness. However, America First does not mean America alone.&nbsp;The new strategy commits us to expand our partnerships at home and abroad to encourage partners' assistance in counterterrorism activities,&nbsp;the White House said, adding that this includes working with North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Allies and partners.&nbsp;

Trump said under his leadership, the United States has accelerated efforts to defeat terrorists. Working with coalition partners, we have decimated ISIS in Syria and Iraq, he said.

"Likewise, I ended United States participation in the horrible Iran deal, which had provided a windfall for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its proxies, funding Iran's malign activities throughout the world.&nbsp;Importantly, I have also secured historic increases in defense funding to rebuild our Nation's military," said the US President.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="720" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/nTTb6VUuT-Y" width="1280"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump unveiled a new counter-terrorism strategy which issues a tough warning to terrorist groups and their supporters that the United States will defeat its enemies with the full force of American might.

US President Donald Trump unveiled a new counter-terrorism strategy which issues a tough warning to terrorist groups and their supporters that the United States will defeat its enemies with the full force of American might. The strategy for counterterrorism focuses efforts on pursuing terrorists to their source and isolating terrorists from their support, the US administration said. "Guided by the National Strategy for Counterterrorism, we will use all instruments of American power to protect our great nation, and we will defeat our enemies with the full force of American might," Trump said after basic contours of National Strategy for Counterterrorism were made public. The strategy, Trump said, outlines the approach of the US to counter the increasingly complex and evolving terrorist threats and represents the nation's first fully articulated counterterrorism strategy since 2011. "It provides the strategic guidance needed to protect the United States against all terrorist threats, while simultaneously fostering the agility to anticipate, prevent, and respond to new threats," he said. Describing the strategy as a significant departure from the previous Obama Administration, his National Security Advisor John Bolton told reporters that the strategy focuses efforts on pursuing terrorists to their source and isolating terrorists from their support. It also involves modernising and integrating US's counterterrorism tools, protecting infrastructure and enhancing preparedness, countering terrorist radicalisation and recruitment and strengthening the counterterrorism abilities of its international partners, he said. "The strategy articulates a counterterrorism approach that is sustainable, more efficient, prioritized and less reliant on only United States' capabilities," Bolton said. "Because the global threat posed by terrorist groups is more complex and diffuse than ever, this strategy provides the framework to protect the United States against all terrorists who threaten our country," he said. As part of the strategy, the top Trump advisor said the US will not focus on a single organisation, but will counter all terrorists with the ability and intent to harm the United States, citizens, and its interests. "We will place greater emphasis on targeting terrorist networks that threaten the US and our allies, and focus our efforts on disrupting and denying the ways and means terrorists use to radicalize, recruit, mobilize, finance, travel, communicate, and inspire new followers," he said. "We will deny terrorists the freedom to travel and communicate across international borders, and take action to limit their ability to recruit and radicalize online. We will counter the violent, extreme, and twisted ideologies that purport to justify and excuse the murder of innocents," Bolton said. Bolton asserted this strategy stresses better integration of national power, both, military and non-military, to combat terrorism and terrorist ideologies, with an increased emphasis on non-kinetic means. The strategy also places greater emphasis on protecting the homeland, preventing attacks, and mitigating the impact of an attack, should one occur, he said. This includes building strong borders, securing ports of entry, protecting critical U.S. Infrastructure, and promoting a culture of preparedness. Welcoming the new strategy, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the strategy recognises the need for all nations to equitably share the burden of confronting terrorism. "As such, the State Department, in close coordination with other federal agencies, will continue to work with our allies and partners to implement the policies and tools necessary to eliminate our terrorist enemies and their networks of support, he said. The Pentagon said, "By standing with traditional and non-traditional partners, the DoD (Department of Defense) advances shared counterterrorism efforts by employing military and non-military capabilities to disrupt and deny terrorist mobility, financing, communication and recruitment." According to Director of National Intelligence, Daniel Coats, the strategy addresses the complex and evolving terrorism landscape in its emphasis on denying terrorists the resources and recruits to fuel their nefarious aims, and outlines the need to leverage the strong partnerships that the US has to built at home and abroad to solve this global problem. "The strategy places America first, emphasizing strong borders, strengthening security at points of entry, protecting critical infrastructure, and facilitating preparedness. However, America First does not mean America alone. The new strategy commits us to expand our partnerships at home and abroad to encourage partners' assistance in counterterrorism activities, the White House said, adding that this includes working with North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Allies and partners. Trump said under his leadership, the United States has accelerated efforts to defeat terrorists. Working with coalition partners, we have decimated ISIS in Syria and Iraq, he said. "Likewise, I ended United States participation in the horrible Iran deal, which had provided a windfall for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its proxies, funding Iran's malign activities throughout the world. Importantly, I have also secured historic increases in defense funding to rebuild our Nation's military," said the US President. ×

Trump announces new National Strategy for Counterterrorism 

A video showing US President Donald Trump walking with a paper stuck onto his left shoe went viral on social media today.

The incident which shows President Trump walking up the stairs of the plane with a white paper stuck onto his left foot&nbsp;happened on Thursday at the Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport.

The incident happened when President Trump was departing for the Mayo Civic Center in Rochester, Minnesota.

The paper got detached from his foot when he reached the top and turned to wave back at his people.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allowfullscreen="true" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="373" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FKSTPTV%2Fvideos%2F983529125153588%2F&amp;show_text=0&amp;width=560" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" width="560"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Social media exploded over the incident with several users speculating that the paper which got stuck to Trump's foot was a toilet tissue.

&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

A video showing US President Donald Trump walking with a paper stuck onto his left shoe went viral on social media today. The incident which shows President Trump walking up the stairs of the plane with a white paper stuck onto his left foot happened on Thursday at the Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport.

A video showing US President Donald Trump walking with a paper stuck onto his left shoe went viral on social media today. The incident which shows President Trump walking up the stairs of the plane with a white paper stuck onto his left foot happened on Thursday at the Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport. The incident happened when President Trump was departing for the Mayo Civic Center in Rochester, Minnesota. The paper got detached from his foot when he reached the top and turned to wave back at his people. × Social media exploded over the incident with several users speculating that the paper which got stuck to Trump's foot was a toilet tissue.

Watch: 'Toilet paper' stuck to Trump's foot as he boards plane

Afghan officials have reacted angrily to speculation that foreign military contractors could take over training and advising the Afghan armed forces, following a renewed push by the founder of private military contractor Blackwater.

Erik Prince, whose company came to prominence during the war in Iraq, has been lobbying officials about his proposal to privatise parts of US military operations in Afghanistan for more than a year.

On a recent visit to Kabul, he lobbied several Afghan political figures and gave interviews to media outlets including Tolo News, Afghanistan`s largest television station, as well as the New York Times, to discuss the plan.

President Ashraf Ghani, approaching presidential elections in April, has repeatedly rejected the proposal and on Thursday his national security adviser issued a statement condemning what he called a "destructive and divisive debate".

"Under no circumstances will the Afghan government and people allow the counterterrorism fight to become a private, for-profit business," the statement said.

In August, US Defense Secretary James Mattis also rebuffed the idea, saying: "When Americans put their nation`s credibility on the line, privatizing it is probably not a wise idea."

Afghan officials say that any move to replace US military advisers with private contractors would further undermine government legitimacy and fuel Taliban accusations that the war was being conducted for the benefit of foreign interests.

Speaking half seriously, one senior security official said recently: "If they did that, even I would join the Taliban".&nbsp;

Prince, a former US Navy SEAL whose sister Betsy De Vos serves as Education Secretary in President Donald Trump`s administration, would have retired Special Forces troops from the United States and allied nations embed with Afghan forces, replacing US and NATO military advisers.

The plan was originally broached last year as Trump was considering a new strategy for Afghanistan but it was not adopted and instead, Washington ordered thousands more US troops to be sent to boost existing forces.

The United States currently has some 14,000 troops in Afghanistan, serving in the NATO-led Resolute Support training and advisory mission as well as in separate counter-terrorism operations against militant groups like Islamic State.

Under the strategy announced just over a year ago, the extra troops and greatly increased air strikes against the Taliban are intended to force the insurgents to the negotiating table.

A brief ceasefire in June raised hopes of a possible breakthrough with the Taliban but progress towards any kind of peace deal has since been slow and fighting has continued with increasing Afghan military casualties, raising questions about the success of the strategy.

Trump has since been reported to be unhappy about the lack of progress, prompting fears among some diplomats that he could reverse course and order US troops out of Afghanistan, a move that would risk a collapse of the Western-backed government.

Afghan officials have reacted angrily to speculation that foreign military contractors could take over training and advising the Afghan armed forces, following a renewed push by the founder of private military contractor Blackwater.

Afghan officials have reacted angrily to speculation that foreign military contractors could take over training and advising the Afghan armed forces, following a renewed push by the founder of private military contractor Blackwater. Erik Prince, whose company came to prominence during the war in Iraq, has been lobbying officials about his proposal to privatise parts of US military operations in Afghanistan for more than a year. On a recent visit to Kabul, he lobbied several Afghan political figures and gave interviews to media outlets including Tolo News, Afghanistan`s largest television station, as well as the New York Times, to discuss the plan. President Ashraf Ghani, approaching presidential elections in April, has repeatedly rejected the proposal and on Thursday his national security adviser issued a statement condemning what he called a "destructive and divisive debate". "Under no circumstances will the Afghan government and people allow the counterterrorism fight to become a private, for-profit business," the statement said. In August, US Defense Secretary James Mattis also rebuffed the idea, saying: "When Americans put their nation`s credibility on the line, privatizing it is probably not a wise idea." Afghan officials say that any move to replace US military advisers with private contractors would further undermine government legitimacy and fuel Taliban accusations that the war was being conducted for the benefit of foreign interests. Speaking half seriously, one senior security official said recently: "If they did that, even I would join the Taliban". Prince, a former US Navy SEAL whose sister Betsy De Vos serves as Education Secretary in President Donald Trump`s administration, would have retired Special Forces troops from the United States and allied nations embed with Afghan forces, replacing US and NATO military advisers. The plan was originally broached last year as Trump was considering a new strategy for Afghanistan but it was not adopted and instead, Washington ordered thousands more US troops to be sent to boost existing forces. The United States currently has some 14,000 troops in Afghanistan, serving in the NATO-led Resolute Support training and advisory mission as well as in separate counter-terrorism operations against militant groups like Islamic State. Under the strategy announced just over a year ago, the extra troops and greatly increased air strikes against the Taliban are intended to force the insurgents to the negotiating table. A brief ceasefire in June raised hopes of a possible breakthrough with the Taliban but progress towards any kind of peace deal has since been slow and fighting has continued with increasing Afghan military casualties, raising questions about the success of the strategy. Trump has since been reported to be unhappy about the lack of progress, prompting fears among some diplomats that he could reverse course and order US troops out of Afghanistan, a move that would risk a collapse of the Western-backed government.

Afghan government rejects proposals to privatise war

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/bolton-calls-united-nation-world-court-politicized-us-limit-exposure-169280">US</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/bolton-calls-united-nation-world-court-politicized-us-limit-exposure-169280"> says </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/bolton-calls-united-nation-world-court-politicized-us-limit-exposure-169280">International</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/bolton-calls-united-nation-world-court-politicized-us-limit-exposure-169280"> Court of Justice is 'politicised and ineffective'</a>

The United States is taking steps to avoid exposure to binding decisions by the International Court of Justice, the US national security adviser John Bolton said on Wednesday as he accused the UN court of being "politicised and ineffective."

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/putin-arrive-india-today-all-eyes-s-400-defence-system-deal-169293">Putin to arrive in India today, all eyes on S-400 defence system deal</a>

Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Putin will hold the 19th India-Russia annual bilateral summit on Friday, but all eyes will be on the S-400 Triumf defence system deal the two countries are expected to sign during Putin's visit.&nbsp;

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/petrol-price-rises-rs-9134litre-mumbai-rs-84litre-delhi-169288">Petrol prices up again, selling at Rs 91.34 a litre in Mumbai</a>

Fuel prices continued to rise across the country on October 4. The price of petrol in Mumbai increased by 0.14 paise to Rs 91.34 per litre, while that of diesel rose by 0.21 paise to Rs 80.10 per litre.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/uk-accuses-russia-global-cyber-attacks-campaign-169286">UK</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/uk-accuses-russia-global-cyber-attacks-campaign-169286"> accuses Russia of global cyber attacks campaign</a>

British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt on Thursday accused Russian military intelligence of conducting a campaign of "indiscriminate and reckless" online attacks targeting political institutions, businesses, media and sport bodies around the world.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-urges-us-resume-aid-backs-taliban-outreach-169290">Pakistan urges </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-urges-us-resume-aid-backs-taliban-outreach-169290">US</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-urges-us-resume-aid-backs-taliban-outreach-169290"> to resume military aid</a>

Pakistan pledged Wednesday to support negotiations with the Taliban to end Afghanistan's 17-year war as it asked the United States to restore military aid and stop blaming Islamabad for the extremists' strengths.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

US says International Court of Justice is 'politicised and ineffective' The United States is taking steps to avoid exposure to binding decisions by the International Court of Justice, the US national security adviser John Bolton said on Wednesday as he accused the UN court of being "politicised and ineffective.

US says International Court of Justice is 'politicised and ineffective' The United States is taking steps to avoid exposure to binding decisions by the International Court of Justice, the US national security adviser John Bolton said on Wednesday as he accused the UN court of being "politicised and ineffective." Putin to arrive in India today, all eyes on S-400 defence system deal Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Putin will hold the 19th India-Russia annual bilateral summit on Friday, but all eyes will be on the S-400 Triumf defence system deal the two countries are expected to sign during Putin's visit. Petrol prices up again, selling at Rs 91.34 a litre in Mumbai Fuel prices continued to rise across the country on October 4. The price of petrol in Mumbai increased by 0.14 paise to Rs 91.34 per litre, while that of diesel rose by 0.21 paise to Rs 80.10 per litre. UK accuses Russia of global cyber attacks campaign British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt on Thursday accused Russian military intelligence of conducting a campaign of "indiscriminate and reckless" online attacks targeting political institutions, businesses, media and sport bodies around the world. Pakistan urges US to resume military aid Pakistan pledged Wednesday to support negotiations with the Taliban to end Afghanistan's 17-year war as it asked the United States to restore military aid and stop blaming Islamabad for the extremists' strengths.

News brief: Big stories of the day

Russia and Saudi Arabia struck a private deal in September to raise oil output to cool rising prices and informed the United States before a meeting in Algiers with other producers, four sources familiar with the plan said.

US President Donald Trump has blamed the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) for high crude prices and called on it to boost output to bring down fuel costs before the US congressional elections on November 6.

The deal underlines how Russia and Saudi Arabia are increasingly deciding oil output policies bilaterally, before consulting with the rest of OPEC.

The sources said Saudi Energy Minister Khalid al-Falih and his Russian counterpart Alexander Novak agreed during a series of meetings to lift output from September through December as crude headed towards $80 a barrel. It is now over $85.

"The Russians and the Saudis agreed to add barrels to the market quietly with a view not to look like they are acting on Trump's order to pump more," one source said.

"The Saudi minister told (US Energy Secretary Rick) Perry that Saudi Arabia will raise output if its customers asked for more oil," another source said.

Originally, the two countries had hoped to announce an overall increase of 500,000 barrels per day (bpd) from Saudi-led OPEC and non-OPEC Russia at a gathering of oil ministers in Algiers at the end of September.

But with opposition from some in OPEC, including Iran which is subject to US&nbsp;sanctions, they decided to defer any formal decision until a full OPEC meeting in December.

"Saudi is trying to thread a needle with a rope by satisfying customer concerns about higher oil prices, but also wanting to keep prices from falling and sending the wrong price signal to industry which absolutely needs to continue to invest to prevent a supply crunch," Yasser Elguindi, energy market strategist at consultancy Energy Aspects https://www.energyaspects.com said.

Executives at the world's biggest oil and gas companies are under growing pressure to loosen the purse strings to replenish reserves and halt declines in crude production after years of austerity.

Perry looped in&nbsp;

Since the meeting in Algiers, Reuters has reported that Riyadh planned to lift output by some 200,000 bpd to 300,000 bpd from September to help fill the gap left by lower Iranian output due to the sanctions.

Russian output rose 150,000 bpd in September.

Iran accused Saudi Arabia and Russia on Wednesday of breaking OPEC's agreement on output cuts by producing more crude, adding that the two countries would not be able to produce enough oil to make up for a reduction in Iranian exports.

A source at a major Russian oil company told Reuters: "I would expect Russia's oil production will hover at around 11.4 to 11.6 million bpd until the end of 2018 and may increase further to 11.8 million bpd later on in 2019."

Russian produced 11.36 million bpd in September, up from 11.21 million bpd in August, Energy Ministry data showed.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday it could raise production by 200,000 to 300,000 bpd to tackle possible fuel shortages while Falih said Saudi Arabia will increase output further in November from 10.7 million bpd.

Perry was made aware of the Saudi-Russia plan to lift output before the Algiers gathering, meeting with Falih three times in September and Novak once. The three did not meet together.

Perry's spokeswoman Shaylyn Hynes did not comment on details of the talks but said the energy secretary, "continues to be engaged with leaders from other major oil producing nations and remains confident in their ability to boost output if needed".

She said Perry had in recent meetings "impressed upon his counterparts that keeping supply up is important for the global economy".

Oil prices rose to $85 a barrel this week as buyers of Iranian crude wound down their purchases to meet the terms of US sanctions on Tehran.

Sources said Riyadh would help fill that shortfall because buyers needed replacement supplies. Saudi Arabia has spare capacity to produce oil at a higher rate and holds a large volume of crude in storage.

At the same time, Saudi Arabia is keen to maintain unity among the so-called OPEC+ alliance, a group comprising OPEC states, Russia and several other producers that has agreed on output curbs. That's because it may need to change course and seek the collaboration of OPEC+ for any future production cuts.

"Iranian crude exports are considerably lower and market participants are concerned of a wide market deficit this quarter," said Giovanni Staunovo, analyst at Swiss bank UBS.

"To cover those losses, Saudi Arabia, Russia and the other Gulf countries are increasing production, but this will bring down the global spare capacity to a 10-year low."

Football diplomacy

In the run up to the private deal with Russia, Falih flew to the United States during the second week of September where he and fellow Texas A&amp;M University alumnus Perry attended a football game in College Station, Texas.

Falih then held official talks with Perry in Washington on September 10, the US Energy Department has said.

Perry flew to Moscow two days later to meet Novak, while Falih also met Novak in Moscow a day later.

Perry told Reuters during his Moscow visit that Saudi Arabia, the United States and Russia had enough capacity between them to compensate for the loss of Iranian supply over the next 18 months.

After Moscow, Falih and Perry met again in Vienna where they attended an event in the Austrian capital, sources said.

"Perry was aware that Russia is going to ramp up oil output," a third source familiar with talks said.

It was at this point that Falih and Novak discussed announcing a 500,000-bpd increase at the Sept. 23 Algiers meeting of OPEC and non-OPEC countries. The plan did not materialise, with any formal decision deferred until a regular OPEC meeting in Vienna on December 6.

"Saudi Arabia is not going to flood the market and risk a price crash. Saudi Arabia has to work with other producers and see what are they doing, who is raising exports and to which market," another source said.

Russia and Saudi Arabia struck a private deal in September to raise oil output to cool rising prices and informed the United States before a meeting in Algiers with other producers, four sources familiar with the plan said.

Russia and Saudi Arabia struck a private deal in September to raise oil output to cool rising prices and informed the United States before a meeting in Algiers with other producers, four sources familiar with the plan said. US President Donald Trump has blamed the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) for high crude prices and called on it to boost output to bring down fuel costs before the US congressional elections on November 6. The deal underlines how Russia and Saudi Arabia are increasingly deciding oil output policies bilaterally, before consulting with the rest of OPEC. The sources said Saudi Energy Minister Khalid al-Falih and his Russian counterpart Alexander Novak agreed during a series of meetings to lift output from September through December as crude headed towards $80 a barrel. It is now over $85. "The Russians and the Saudis agreed to add barrels to the market quietly with a view not to look like they are acting on Trump's order to pump more," one source said. "The Saudi minister told (US Energy Secretary Rick) Perry that Saudi Arabia will raise output if its customers asked for more oil," another source said. Originally, the two countries had hoped to announce an overall increase of 500,000 barrels per day (bpd) from Saudi-led OPEC and non-OPEC Russia at a gathering of oil ministers in Algiers at the end of September. But with opposition from some in OPEC, including Iran which is subject to US sanctions, they decided to defer any formal decision until a full OPEC meeting in December. "Saudi is trying to thread a needle with a rope by satisfying customer concerns about higher oil prices, but also wanting to keep prices from falling and sending the wrong price signal to industry which absolutely needs to continue to invest to prevent a supply crunch," Yasser Elguindi, energy market strategist at consultancy Energy Aspects https://www.energyaspects.com said. Executives at the world's biggest oil and gas companies are under growing pressure to loosen the purse strings to replenish reserves and halt declines in crude production after years of austerity. Perry looped in Since the meeting in Algiers, Reuters has reported that Riyadh planned to lift output by some 200,000 bpd to 300,000 bpd from September to help fill the gap left by lower Iranian output due to the sanctions. Russian output rose 150,000 bpd in September. Iran accused Saudi Arabia and Russia on Wednesday of breaking OPEC's agreement on output cuts by producing more crude, adding that the two countries would not be able to produce enough oil to make up for a reduction in Iranian exports. A source at a major Russian oil company told Reuters: "I would expect Russia's oil production will hover at around 11.4 to 11.6 million bpd until the end of 2018 and may increase further to 11.8 million bpd later on in 2019." Russian produced 11.36 million bpd in September, up from 11.21 million bpd in August, Energy Ministry data showed. Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday it could raise production by 200,000 to 300,000 bpd to tackle possible fuel shortages while Falih said Saudi Arabia will increase output further in November from 10.7 million bpd. Perry was made aware of the Saudi-Russia plan to lift output before the Algiers gathering, meeting with Falih three times in September and Novak once. The three did not meet together. Perry's spokeswoman Shaylyn Hynes did not comment on details of the talks but said the energy secretary, "continues to be engaged with leaders from other major oil producing nations and remains confident in their ability to boost output if needed". She said Perry had in recent meetings "impressed upon his counterparts that keeping supply up is important for the global economy". Oil prices rose to $85 a barrel this week as buyers of Iranian crude wound down their purchases to meet the terms of US sanctions on Tehran. Sources said Riyadh would help fill that shortfall because buyers needed replacement supplies. Saudi Arabia has spare capacity to produce oil at a higher rate and holds a large volume of crude in storage. At the same time, Saudi Arabia is keen to maintain unity among the so-called OPEC+ alliance, a group comprising OPEC states, Russia and several other producers that has agreed on output curbs. That's because it may need to change course and seek the collaboration of OPEC+ for any future production cuts. "Iranian crude exports are considerably lower and market participants are concerned of a wide market deficit this quarter," said Giovanni Staunovo, analyst at Swiss bank UBS. "To cover those losses, Saudi Arabia, Russia and the other Gulf countries are increasing production, but this will bring down the global spare capacity to a 10-year low." Football diplomacy In the run up to the private deal with Russia, Falih flew to the United States during the second week of September where he and fellow Texas A&M University alumnus Perry attended a football game in College Station, Texas. Falih then held official talks with Perry in Washington on September 10, the US Energy Department has said. Perry flew to Moscow two days later to meet Novak, while Falih also met Novak in Moscow a day later. Perry told Reuters during his Moscow visit that Saudi Arabia, the United States and Russia had enough capacity between them to compensate for the loss of Iranian supply over the next 18 months. After Moscow, Falih and Perry met again in Vienna where they attended an event in the Austrian capital, sources said. "Perry was aware that Russia is going to ramp up oil output," a third source familiar with talks said. It was at this point that Falih and Novak discussed announcing a 500,000-bpd increase at the Sept. 23 Algiers meeting of OPEC and non-OPEC countries. The plan did not materialise, with any formal decision deferred until a regular OPEC meeting in Vienna on December 6. "Saudi Arabia is not going to flood the market and risk a price crash. Saudi Arabia has to work with other producers and see what are they doing, who is raising exports and to which market," another source said.

Saudi Arabia, Russia agreed in September to lift oil output: US

Pakistan pledged Wednesday to support negotiations with the Taliban to end Afghanistan's 17-year war as it asked the United States to restore military aid and stop blaming Islamabad for the extremists' strengths.

Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi visited Washington to explain the Afghanistan strategy of new Prime Minister Imran Khan, who has long advocated talks over military action with the Taliban and other Islamist insurgents.

A month after Washington cut $300 million in military aid, Qureshi said he found Secretary of State Mike Pompeo "ready to listen" to Pakistan and said he was returning to Islamabad "slightly more hopeful" than before.

Pakistan had been the main supporter of the Taliban regime which imposed an austere brand of Islam on much of Afghanistan until a US military campaign launched after the September 11, 2001 attacks.

The United States has pressed for years for Pakistan to crack down on militant groups involved in Afghanistan as well as virulently anti-Indian groups that operate virtually openly.

It says the insurgents have safe havens in Pakistan's border areas and links to its shadowy military establishment, accusations which Islamabad has repeatedly denied.

Trump has accused Pakistan, where US commandos killed Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, of duplicity.

Qureshi said Pakistan would act "in good faith" to jumpstart diplomacy with the Taliban, whose representatives held a breakthrough meeting in July in Qatar with US representatives in a tentative bid to try to end the longest-running US war.

"Pakistan is willing and Pakistan will use all its influence to do that. We feel that Afghanistan's stability and peace are linked to ours," Qureshi said at the US Institute of Peace a day after meeting Pompeo.

But he added: "Contrary to the largely held view here, our influence on the Taliban is diminished."

He said he believed that the Taliban's shift to negotiations, as well as an unprecedented if temporary ceasefire, was based on the militants' own calculations.

"Even the Taliban recognize that things have changed in Afghanistan. They can at best maintain a stalemate but those days are gone when they will just go in and take over Kabul."

Defending Pakistan role

Qureshi said Pakistan "cannot and should not be held responsible for the failures in Afghanistan" as he pointed to disunity in the Kabul government as well as corruption.

"I have seen or read a lot of criticism and think it's unfair not to recognize the contributions Pakistan has made to the successes that you've had in Afghanistan -- and you've had successes despite the challenges," he said.

Calling for renewed cooperation with the United States, Qureshi said: "Cutting off training, not giving precision equipment that could have been used against terrorism -- I don't know to what extent that will help."

'Momentum' for negotiations

Trump had called for years for a withdrawal from Afghanistan, questioning what more can be achieved from a war that has claimed about 2,400 US lives, but the real estate mogul turned politician decided to stay the course after advice from security officials.

Pompeo, who met Khan in Islamabad last month, told Qureshi that Pakistan has an "important role" to play in Afghanistan negotiations, State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said.

Pompeo "agreed that there was momentum to advance the Afghan peace process, and that the Afghan Taliban should seize the opportunity for dialogue," Nauert said.

The State Department notably did not say whether Pompeo addressed Pakistan's position on extremism.

In August, Pompeo congratulated Khan in a telephone call when he took office as prime minister. The State Department said he asked Islamabad to "take decisive action against all terrorists operating in Pakistan."

Pakistan insisted that the issue never came up.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="720" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/M86MC0brs9g" width="1280"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

Pakistan pledged Wednesday to support negotiations with the Taliban to end Afghanistan's 17-year war as it asked the United States to restore military aid and stop blaming Islamabad for the extremists' strengths.

Pakistan pledged Wednesday to support negotiations with the Taliban to end Afghanistan's 17-year war as it asked the United States to restore military aid and stop blaming Islamabad for the extremists' strengths. Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi visited Washington to explain the Afghanistan strategy of new Prime Minister Imran Khan, who has long advocated talks over military action with the Taliban and other Islamist insurgents. A month after Washington cut $300 million in military aid, Qureshi said he found Secretary of State Mike Pompeo "ready to listen" to Pakistan and said he was returning to Islamabad "slightly more hopeful" than before. Pakistan had been the main supporter of the Taliban regime which imposed an austere brand of Islam on much of Afghanistan until a US military campaign launched after the September 11, 2001 attacks. The United States has pressed for years for Pakistan to crack down on militant groups involved in Afghanistan as well as virulently anti-Indian groups that operate virtually openly. It says the insurgents have safe havens in Pakistan's border areas and links to its shadowy military establishment, accusations which Islamabad has repeatedly denied. Trump has accused Pakistan, where US commandos killed Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, of duplicity. Qureshi said Pakistan would act "in good faith" to jumpstart diplomacy with the Taliban, whose representatives held a breakthrough meeting in July in Qatar with US representatives in a tentative bid to try to end the longest-running US war. "Pakistan is willing and Pakistan will use all its influence to do that. We feel that Afghanistan's stability and peace are linked to ours," Qureshi said at the US Institute of Peace a day after meeting Pompeo. But he added: "Contrary to the largely held view here, our influence on the Taliban is diminished." He said he believed that the Taliban's shift to negotiations, as well as an unprecedented if temporary ceasefire, was based on the militants' own calculations. "Even the Taliban recognize that things have changed in Afghanistan. They can at best maintain a stalemate but those days are gone when they will just go in and take over Kabul." Defending Pakistan role Qureshi said Pakistan "cannot and should not be held responsible for the failures in Afghanistan" as he pointed to disunity in the Kabul government as well as corruption. "I have seen or read a lot of criticism and think it's unfair not to recognize the contributions Pakistan has made to the successes that you've had in Afghanistan -- and you've had successes despite the challenges," he said. Calling for renewed cooperation with the United States, Qureshi said: "Cutting off training, not giving precision equipment that could have been used against terrorism -- I don't know to what extent that will help." 'Momentum' for negotiations Trump had called for years for a withdrawal from Afghanistan, questioning what more can be achieved from a war that has claimed about 2,400 US lives, but the real estate mogul turned politician decided to stay the course after advice from security officials. Pompeo, who met Khan in Islamabad last month, told Qureshi that Pakistan has an "important role" to play in Afghanistan negotiations, State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said. Pompeo "agreed that there was momentum to advance the Afghan peace process, and that the Afghan Taliban should seize the opportunity for dialogue," Nauert said. The State Department notably did not say whether Pompeo addressed Pakistan's position on extremism. In August, Pompeo congratulated Khan in a telephone call when he took office as prime minister. The State Department said he asked Islamabad to "take decisive action against all terrorists operating in Pakistan." Pakistan insisted that the issue never came up. ×

Pakistan urges US to resume military aid

Another blow to US: UN orders to lift sanctions on Iran partially 

The US has decided to withdraw from the optional protocol on disputes of the Vienna Convention, National Security Adviser John Bolton said Wednesday, citing a Palestinian lawsuit challenging America's move to shift its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem as the reason.

The announcement by the White House came soon after Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/after-icj-verdict-us-terminate-1955-treaty-amity-iran-169266">termination of the 1955 Treaty of Amity</a> with Iran.

Iran made a mockery of the treaty with its support for terrorism, provocative ballistic missile proliferation and malign behaviour throughout the Middle East, Bolton told reporters at a White House news conference.

"In addition to the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/iran-origin-threat-us-missions-iraq-pompeo-169265">Treaty of Amity</a>, I am announcing that the president has decided that the United States will withdraw from the Optional Protocol and Dispute Resolution to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations," Bolton said.

"This is in connection with a case brought by the so-called state of Palestine naming the United States as a defendant, challenging our move of our embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem," he said.

Bolton, simultaneously underscored that the US remained a party to the underlying Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, and it expects all other parties to abide by their international obligations under the convention.

The top Trump administration official insisted that the two actions were consistent with the decisions former US President Ronald Reagan made in the 1980s in the wake of the politicised suits against the US by Nicaragua to terminate its acceptance of the Optional Compulsory Jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice under Article 36-2 of the ICJ statute, and his decision to withdraw from a bilateral treaty with Nicaragua.

"It is also consistent with the decision President Bush made in 2005 to withdraw from the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations following the ICJ's interference in our domestic criminal justice system," he said.

Bolton also said the administration was reviewing all international agreements that could expose it to binding decisions by the International Court of Justice saying it was politicised and ineffective.

The US in May opened its embassy in Jerusalem under a controversial move by President Donald Trump, amid a bloodbath right on the border with Gaza where Israeli soldiers shot dead at least 52 Palestinians in clashes, in the deadliest escalation of violence since 2014.

President Donald Trump announced the decision to move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in December, when he formally recognised the holy city as the capital of Israel, breaking away from decades of US neutrality on the sensitive issue.

The US has decided to withdraw from the optional protocol on disputes of the Vienna Convention, National Security Adviser John Bolton said Wednesday, citing a Palestinian lawsuit challenging America's move to shift its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem as the reason.

The US has decided to withdraw from the optional protocol on disputes of the Vienna Convention, National Security Adviser John Bolton said Wednesday, citing a Palestinian lawsuit challenging America's move to shift its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem as the reason. The announcement by the White House came soon after Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced the termination of the 1955 Treaty of Amity with Iran. Iran made a mockery of the treaty with its support for terrorism, provocative ballistic missile proliferation and malign behaviour throughout the Middle East, Bolton told reporters at a White House news conference. "In addition to the Treaty of Amity, I am announcing that the president has decided that the United States will withdraw from the Optional Protocol and Dispute Resolution to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations," Bolton said. "This is in connection with a case brought by the so-called state of Palestine naming the United States as a defendant, challenging our move of our embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem," he said. Bolton, simultaneously underscored that the US remained a party to the underlying Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, and it expects all other parties to abide by their international obligations under the convention. The top Trump administration official insisted that the two actions were consistent with the decisions former US President Ronald Reagan made in the 1980s in the wake of the politicised suits against the US by Nicaragua to terminate its acceptance of the Optional Compulsory Jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice under Article 36-2 of the ICJ statute, and his decision to withdraw from a bilateral treaty with Nicaragua. "It is also consistent with the decision President Bush made in 2005 to withdraw from the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations following the ICJ's interference in our domestic criminal justice system," he said. Bolton also said the administration was reviewing all international agreements that could expose it to binding decisions by the International Court of Justice saying it was politicised and ineffective. The US in May opened its embassy in Jerusalem under a controversial move by President Donald Trump, amid a bloodbath right on the border with Gaza where Israeli soldiers shot dead at least 52 Palestinians in clashes, in the deadliest escalation of violence since 2014. President Donald Trump announced the decision to move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in December, when he formally recognised the holy city as the capital of Israel, breaking away from decades of US neutrality on the sensitive issue.

US pulls out of optional protocol on Vienna Convention

100 Indian American candidates for US mid term poll

WION Wallet: Tesla facing low sales in China amid Trade War

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will pay a fresh visit to North Korea on Sunday and meet leader Kim Jong Un as the administration's hopes rise of a denuclearisation deal, the State Department said.

The rare advance announcement of a meeting with the young strongman came hours after North Korea raised the stakes in negotiations, saying it would not give up its nuclear weapons in exchange for a peace treaty.

Pompeo, who is trying to arrange a second summit between Kim and US President Donald Trump, will also head to US allies Japan and South Korea, as well as North Korea's chief ally China with which the United States is engaged in escalating trade and diplomatic disputes.

It will be the fourth trip by Pompeo to longtime US pariah North Korea as the Trump administration looks to end its nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

"I think it shows forward progress and momentum that the secretary is making his fourth trip in less than a year," State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert told reporters.

"Everyone recognises that we have a ways to go and a lot of work that is left to be done," she said.

"But obviously these conversations are going in the right direction and we feel confident enough to hop on a plane to head there to continue the conversations."

Pompeo has already met twice with Kim, including once when he headed the CIA. But Pompeo did not meet Kim on his last visit in July, when the North Korean leader instead was photographed touring a potato farm.

Another visit by Pompeo was announced in August but was abruptly cancelled by Trump.

Trump 'in love' with Kim 
Kim, who as leader has rarely travelled outside of North Korea, met in June in Singapore with Trump in the first-ever summit between the two countries that have never signed a formal treaty to end the 1950-53 Korean War.

On Saturday, Trump lavished praise on Kim -- considered by human rights groups to be one of the world's most repressive leaders -- and said they had fallen "in love" after an exchange of letters.

If the love is reciprocated, Kim is more reticent in his words.&nbsp;

His foreign minister, Ri Yong Ho, on Saturday told the United Nations General Assembly that there was a "deadlock" in the denuclearization talks as the United States "relies on coercive measure that are lethal to trust-building."

The official Korean Central News Agency on Tuesday said that a peace treaty "can never be a bargaining chip," calling an end to war "not just a gift from one man to another."

Nauert played down the remarks, saying: "Other countries sometimes will say things that are more colourful than the United States will, and that's just fine, too."

Trump paints rapprochement with North Korea as a signature foreign policy achievement, although critics question whether Kim would really give up nuclear weapons which his dynasty has defiantly pursued for decades.

Consulting allies and China 
The United States has insisted on maintaining tight UN sanctions against North Korea during the diplomatic drive, while Beijing has said it is time to start easing sanctions.

The top US diplomat announced last week that he was ready to return to North Korea after meeting Ri, his counterpart, at the United Nations.

Pompeo will open his trip on Saturday in Tokyo, where he will meet Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who has long championed a hard line on North Korea but recently said he was willing to meet Kim.

After the talks in Pyongyang, Pompeo will head later Sunday to Seoul, where he will meet President Moon Jae-in, a dove who has helped spearhead the reconciliation efforts with North Korea.

Nauert said Pompeo would head afterward to Beijing for meetings with unspecified officials.

Trump last week slapped $200 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods and has accused Beijing of interfering in the upcoming US election because of his hard line on trade.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will pay a fresh visit to North Korea on Sunday and meet leader Kim Jong Un as the administration's hopes rise of a denuclearisation deal, the State Department said.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will pay a fresh visit to North Korea on Sunday and meet leader Kim Jong Un as the administration's hopes rise of a denuclearisation deal, the State Department said. The rare advance announcement of a meeting with the young strongman came hours after North Korea raised the stakes in negotiations, saying it would not give up its nuclear weapons in exchange for a peace treaty. Pompeo, who is trying to arrange a second summit between Kim and US President Donald Trump, will also head to US allies Japan and South Korea, as well as North Korea's chief ally China with which the United States is engaged in escalating trade and diplomatic disputes. It will be the fourth trip by Pompeo to longtime US pariah North Korea as the Trump administration looks to end its nuclear and ballistic missile programs. "I think it shows forward progress and momentum that the secretary is making his fourth trip in less than a year," State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert told reporters. "Everyone recognises that we have a ways to go and a lot of work that is left to be done," she said. "But obviously these conversations are going in the right direction and we feel confident enough to hop on a plane to head there to continue the conversations." Pompeo has already met twice with Kim, including once when he headed the CIA. But Pompeo did not meet Kim on his last visit in July, when the North Korean leader instead was photographed touring a potato farm. Another visit by Pompeo was announced in August but was abruptly cancelled by Trump. Trump 'in love' with Kim Kim, who as leader has rarely travelled outside of North Korea, met in June in Singapore with Trump in the first-ever summit between the two countries that have never signed a formal treaty to end the 1950-53 Korean War. On Saturday, Trump lavished praise on Kim -- considered by human rights groups to be one of the world's most repressive leaders -- and said they had fallen "in love" after an exchange of letters. If the love is reciprocated, Kim is more reticent in his words. His foreign minister, Ri Yong Ho, on Saturday told the United Nations General Assembly that there was a "deadlock" in the denuclearization talks as the United States "relies on coercive measure that are lethal to trust-building." The official Korean Central News Agency on Tuesday said that a peace treaty "can never be a bargaining chip," calling an end to war "not just a gift from one man to another." Nauert played down the remarks, saying: "Other countries sometimes will say things that are more colourful than the United States will, and that's just fine, too." Trump paints rapprochement with North Korea as a signature foreign policy achievement, although critics question whether Kim would really give up nuclear weapons which his dynasty has defiantly pursued for decades. Consulting allies and China The United States has insisted on maintaining tight UN sanctions against North Korea during the diplomatic drive, while Beijing has said it is time to start easing sanctions. The top US diplomat announced last week that he was ready to return to North Korea after meeting Ri, his counterpart, at the United Nations. Pompeo will open his trip on Saturday in Tokyo, where he will meet Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who has long championed a hard line on North Korea but recently said he was willing to meet Kim. After the talks in Pyongyang, Pompeo will head later Sunday to Seoul, where he will meet President Moon Jae-in, a dove who has helped spearhead the reconciliation efforts with North Korea. Nauert said Pompeo would head afterward to Beijing for meetings with unspecified officials. Trump last week slapped $200 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods and has accused Beijing of interfering in the upcoming US election because of his hard line on trade.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to meet Kim Jong-Un on Sunday

United States captain Jim Furyk proverbially fell on his own sword on Sunday, accepting blame for his team's heavy loss to Europe at the Ryder Cup.

US hopes were high after their victory on home soil two years ago, but it turned into the same old story for the visitors as they succumbed amid a series of errant drives and missed putts.

In the process, Furyk became the sixth consecutive American leader to preside over a losing team in Europe.

"Thomas (Bjorn) was a better captain, and their team out-played us," Furyk said, surrounded by the 12 players on his team at a glum news conference.

"He did a good job. When a team is successful, as they were and as well as they played, that shows to me they had great leadership.

"I know everyone on this table wishes they had played better, and I wish I probably would have done some things differently, as well, but at the end of the day we did the best we could and we all worked hard."

Tough questions about what Furyk, and his players, could have done differently will be asked, including whether it was negligent that half his team arrived at quirky Le Golf National without having stepped foot on the course.

Furyk cited logistics as a reason, though it is worth noting that Justin Thomas, the only American team member who played the French Open on the course this year, was the star of the losing team, winning four of his five matches.

Furyk will also be second-guessed for playing the notoriously inaccurate Phil Mickelson in the unforgiving alternate-shot foursomes, rather than fourball (best ball).

The latter format, in which both players hit their own ball and take the best score on each hole, generally rewards attacking golf and birdies, which is more Mickelson's style of play.

Mickelson lost his Friday foursomes and was benched until the singles.

"You know we're going to get second-guessed and we're going to get questioned," Furyk said.

"I realise as a leader of this team and as a captain, the brunt of it is going to be on my plate and I accepted that when I took this role.

"I'll work with the PGA of America and I'll work with our Ryder Cup committee and I think we'll keep improving."

Furyk was also asked whether losing was traumatic.

"It's just golf. Golf isn't traumatic," he said.

"Obviously, there's a sour taste in our mouth to come over here now for 27 years and not be able to win on foreign soil.

"We want to grow and we want to get better, but we want to do it here in Europe. That will be the goal four years from now."

United States captain Jim Furyk proverbially fell on his own sword on Sunday, accepting blame for his team's heavy loss to Europe at the Ryder Cup. US hopes were high after their victory on home soil two years ago, but it turned into the same old story for the visitors as they succumbed amid a series of errant drives and missed putts.

United States captain Jim Furyk proverbially fell on his own sword on Sunday, accepting blame for his team's heavy loss to Europe at the Ryder Cup. US hopes were high after their victory on home soil two years ago, but it turned into the same old story for the visitors as they succumbed amid a series of errant drives and missed putts. In the process, Furyk became the sixth consecutive American leader to preside over a losing team in Europe. "Thomas (Bjorn) was a better captain, and their team out-played us," Furyk said, surrounded by the 12 players on his team at a glum news conference. "He did a good job. When a team is successful, as they were and as well as they played, that shows to me they had great leadership. "I know everyone on this table wishes they had played better, and I wish I probably would have done some things differently, as well, but at the end of the day we did the best we could and we all worked hard." Tough questions about what Furyk, and his players, could have done differently will be asked, including whether it was negligent that half his team arrived at quirky Le Golf National without having stepped foot on the course. Furyk cited logistics as a reason, though it is worth noting that Justin Thomas, the only American team member who played the French Open on the course this year, was the star of the losing team, winning four of his five matches. Furyk will also be second-guessed for playing the notoriously inaccurate Phil Mickelson in the unforgiving alternate-shot foursomes, rather than fourball (best ball). The latter format, in which both players hit their own ball and take the best score on each hole, generally rewards attacking golf and birdies, which is more Mickelson's style of play. Mickelson lost his Friday foursomes and was benched until the singles. "You know we're going to get second-guessed and we're going to get questioned," Furyk said. "I realise as a leader of this team and as a captain, the brunt of it is going to be on my plate and I accepted that when I took this role. "I'll work with the PGA of America and I'll work with our Ryder Cup committee and I think we'll keep improving." Furyk was also asked whether losing was traumatic. "It's just golf. Golf isn't traumatic," he said. "Obviously, there's a sour taste in our mouth to come over here now for 27 years and not be able to win on foreign soil. "We want to grow and we want to get better, but we want to do it here in Europe. That will be the goal four years from now."

Golf: Captain Furyk takes blame for American Ryder Cup loss

Pakistan foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi is expected to meet US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and US National Security Advisor John Bolton at the White House on Tuesday, reports said.

Qureshi arrived in the US on Sunday for bilateral talks with the officials after his trip to New York for the United Nation's General Assembly session. &nbsp;

His first stop is expected to be the White House where he will meet Bolton for talks on untangling Pakistan's ruffled relations with the US.&nbsp;

He will then proceed to the US State Department for his second meeting with the Secretary of State.

On Monday, Qureshi will meet Pakistani diplomats and experts to prepare for the crucial talks that are to be held on Tuesday.

Pompeo and Qureshi first met in Islamabad in September when the US approached the new Pakistani government to discuss key issues that have strained decades-old ties between the two countries.

It was during his Islamabad visit that Pompeo invited the Pakistani foreign minister to visit Washington for further talks.

Pakistan foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi is expected to meet US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and US National Security Advisor John Bolton at the White House on Tuesday, reports said.

Pakistan foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi is expected to meet US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and US National Security Advisor John Bolton at the White House on Tuesday, reports said. Qureshi arrived in the US on Sunday for bilateral talks with the officials after his trip to New York for the United Nation's General Assembly session. His first stop is expected to be the White House where he will meet Bolton for talks on untangling Pakistan's ruffled relations with the US. He will then proceed to the US State Department for his second meeting with the Secretary of State. On Monday, Qureshi will meet Pakistani diplomats and experts to prepare for the crucial talks that are to be held on Tuesday. Pompeo and Qureshi first met in Islamabad in September when the US approached the new Pakistani government to discuss key issues that have strained decades-old ties between the two countries. It was during his Islamabad visit that Pompeo invited the Pakistani foreign minister to visit Washington for further talks.

Shah Mahmood Qureshi expected to meet Pompeo, NSA over US-Pak relations 

The tension between China and the US has intensified, following the Trump administration’s decision to impose sanctions on China for purchasing Russian jets and surface to farce missiles.

Under Section 231 of the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) of 2017, the US Department of State recently announced sanctions on the Chinese Defence Ministry’s Equipment Development Department (EDD) and its director, Li Shangfu, for buying Russian jets and missile equipment.&nbsp;

According to the statement of the US Department of State, the transactions involved the purchase of Russian Su-35 combat aircraft and S-400 surface-to-air missile system-related equipment. Consequently, the EDD will be denied US foreign export licenses, banned from making foreign exchange transactions within US jurisdictions and prohibited from using the US financial system.

Any of the EDD’s property and interests within the US will be blocked. Li will also be subjected to similar restrictions, including the fact that will also not be able to get a US visa.

On the other hand, China and Russia have strongly criticised the US action. Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that the US was “thoughtlessly undermining” global stability, and warned it against “playing with fire”. Chinese Foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said on Friday, “The US has seriously violated the basic norms of international relations and disturbed the relationship between China and the US. We strongly call on the US to remedy the mistake and cancel the sanctions. Otherwise, the US has to bear the consequences.”

One of the reasons the US imposed sanctions on China under CAATSA was to effectively respond to Russia’s meddling in the US elections, its competition with the US, its allies and its partners. Thus, while the US had already imposed several sanctions on Russia, this time the Trump administration added 33 additional persons to the CAATSA section 231 List of “Specified Persons” for being a part of or operating for or on behalf of, the defence or intelligence sectors of the Government of the Russian Federation.

Certainly, India is also closely watching this development since the sanction against China is also a signal to other countries that are in the process of buying Russian military hardware. This is evident from the fact that the US State Department has made it clear that Turkey would also be subjected to similar sanctions if it purchased S-400 missiles which are due to be delivered next year. Consequently, the CAATSA has also alarmed India because the Trump administration has not yet indicated whether it would exempt India from the US’ punitive action under this Act. 
 
Thus, in this situation, India’s increasing dependence on US arms can be used by Washington to force New Delhi to toe its line on many issues, which in turn, endangers India’s strategic autonomy. At the same time, Russia is already disturbed by expanding ties between India and the US since the two sides signed the civil nuclear agreement in 2008. In fact, the Putin government has expressed guarded disappointment about India’s efforts towards improving deference military ties with the US. This is clearly evident from a marked shift in Russia’s South policy. In 2014 Russia lifted a ban on arms supplies to Pakistan. Moscow also signed a defence agreement and technical cooperation agreement with Pakistan in 2015 for arms supplies and sold it four helicopters in August 2017.

Today, talks for purchasing Russian SU-35 fighter jets are going on along with Pakistan’s reported desire to buy T-90 tanks from Russia. On September 29, Russia has also signed a memorandum of understanding on implementing a project to build an underwater gas pipeline from Iran to Pakistan and India. At the same time, India is also worried about deepening defence ties between Russia and China, given the fact that even today, the Indian military uses Russian arms, and in fact, Russia accounted for 68 per cent of India’s arms import from 2012 to 2016. Rising tension between the US and Russia has placed India in a very volatile security situation. 
 
To effectively defuse this situation, it can be hoped that during the upcoming visit of President Vladimir Putin, the two sides will infuse a momentum into their time-tested friendship. New Delhi must ensure that Russia does not foster defence ties with other South Asian countries at the cost of India’s security.

(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-us-sanctions-on-russia-china-add-to-india-s-security-woes-2669987">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 tension between China and the US has intensified, following the Trump administration’s decision to impose sanctions on China for purchasing Russian jets and surface to farce missiles.

The tension between China and the US has intensified, following the Trump administration’s decision to impose sanctions on China for purchasing Russian jets and surface to farce missiles. Under Section 231 of the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) of 2017, the US Department of State recently announced sanctions on the Chinese Defence Ministry’s Equipment Development Department (EDD) and its director, Li Shangfu, for buying Russian jets and missile equipment. According to the statement of the US Department of State, the transactions involved the purchase of Russian Su-35 combat aircraft and S-400 surface-to-air missile system-related equipment. Consequently, the EDD will be denied US foreign export licenses, banned from making foreign exchange transactions within US jurisdictions and prohibited from using the US financial system. Any of the EDD’s property and interests within the US will be blocked. Li will also be subjected to similar restrictions, including the fact that will also not be able to get a US visa. On the other hand, China and Russia have strongly criticised the US action. Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that the US was “thoughtlessly undermining” global stability, and warned it against “playing with fire”. Chinese Foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said on Friday, “The US has seriously violated the basic norms of international relations and disturbed the relationship between China and the US. We strongly call on the US to remedy the mistake and cancel the sanctions. Otherwise, the US has to bear the consequences.” One of the reasons the US imposed sanctions on China under CAATSA was to effectively respond to Russia’s meddling in the US elections, its competition with the US, its allies and its partners. Thus, while the US had already imposed several sanctions on Russia, this time the Trump administration added 33 additional persons to the CAATSA section 231 List of “Specified Persons” for being a part of or operating for or on behalf of, the defence or intelligence sectors of the Government of the Russian Federation. Certainly, India is also closely watching this development since the sanction against China is also a signal to other countries that are in the process of buying Russian military hardware. This is evident from the fact that the US State Department has made it clear that Turkey would also be subjected to similar sanctions if it purchased S-400 missiles which are due to be delivered next year. Consequently, the CAATSA has also alarmed India because the Trump administration has not yet indicated whether it would exempt India from the US’ punitive action under this Act. Thus, in this situation, India’s increasing dependence on US arms can be used by Washington to force New Delhi to toe its line on many issues, which in turn, endangers India’s strategic autonomy. At the same time, Russia is already disturbed by expanding ties between India and the US since the two sides signed the civil nuclear agreement in 2008. In fact, the Putin government has expressed guarded disappointment about India’s efforts towards improving deference military ties with the US. This is clearly evident from a marked shift in Russia’s South policy. In 2014 Russia lifted a ban on arms supplies to Pakistan. Moscow also signed a defence agreement and technical cooperation agreement with Pakistan in 2015 for arms supplies and sold it four helicopters in August 2017. Today, talks for purchasing Russian SU-35 fighter jets are going on along with Pakistan’s reported desire to buy T-90 tanks from Russia. On September 29, Russia has also signed a memorandum of understanding on implementing a project to build an underwater gas pipeline from Iran to Pakistan and India. At the same time, India is also worried about deepening defence ties between Russia and China, given the fact that even today, the Indian military uses Russian arms, and in fact, Russia accounted for 68 per cent of India’s arms import from 2012 to 2016. Rising tension between the US and Russia has placed India in a very volatile security situation. To effectively defuse this situation, it can be hoped that during the upcoming visit of President Vladimir Putin, the two sides will infuse a momentum into their time-tested friendship. New Delhi must ensure that Russia does not foster defence ties with other South Asian countries at the cost of India’s security. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US sanctions on Russia, China add to India’s security woes

“Human identity is no longer defined by what one does but what one owns,” this harrowing truth about our existence was pronounced by former US President Jimmy Carter in one of his public addresses almost four decades ago.

Humans are wired to get dissatisfied -- especially in a world fraught with distractions and things that offer speedier, quicker, faster results -- one tends to get bored easily. With so many options available, our hunger to own more expands exponentially. Unfortunately, at the core of this saddening reality, an ugly truth stares right back – more of us are intrinsically unhappy even while working in fancy multinationals, clad in couture and commuting by fanciest of cars.

This ever-growing sense of dissatisfaction seems to have an answer in a growing school of thought which, according to me, makes total sense. Now is the time to adopt ‘minimalism’ like never before.

Look around and all that the eye can meet is clutter. Our mind, on an average, produces as many as 70,000 thoughts in a day – most of it just fans unnecessary anxiety and stress. We have enough food but we want more, we have a comfortable house but we want a bigger one, another car and of course, the latest iPhone.

Matt D’Avella’s documentary on minimalism&nbsp;becomes a must watch for all of us as it introduces to the virtue of having less and why having less is more. The short film features a young duo, Joshua Fields Millburn and Ryan Nicodemus, who quit their six-figure, fancy jobs in the United States and packed their lives in just about two suitcases to live with as little as possible. The duo calls itself 'The Minimalists' and goes around the country talking about their book and the importance of embracing the movement that emphasises de-cluttering lives and embracing simplicity.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>When our standard of living is improving by the day, why is that we still want more? Why are we so restless and why do we feel like not getting enough?</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=When our standard of living is improving by the day, why is that we still want more? Why are we so restless and why do we feel like not getting enough? " target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">×</a></div>
</div>
</div>

The documentary, 'Minimalism: A documentary about the important things,' raises a valid point – when our standard of living is improving by the day, why is that we still want more? Why are we so restless and why do we feel like not getting enough? All the flashy things that are out there, we don’t really need those things for survival; they have been marketed to us for years, to trick us into believing that we need those things.

What is the true meaning of being successful? Experts suggest that over decades the idea of the ‘Big American Dream’ has come around to have completely different connotations. America was once seen as a land of enormous opportunities for one and all. A nation where one starts at rock-bottom, work hard and do well. With time, the idea became more materialistic in nature – increasingly about getting a six-figure job, that is how success is measured today across the globe, sadly.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>The concept of 'minimalism'&nbsp;rests in the fact that one should be able to justify the existence of things in life.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The concept of 'minimalism' rests in the fact that one should be able to justify the existence of things in life." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">×</a></div>
</div>
</div>

The concept of minimalism&nbsp;rests in the fact that one should be able to justify the existence of things in life. Ask yourself, does this item, commodity or even a relationship add any value to life? If the answer is in negative then, “I should be willing enough to part with it, to let it go,” Joshua notes in the documentary.

It is interesting to see how an art movement, essentially an American visual arts movement of the mid-twentieth century, gained prominence to actually inspire a movement with a potential to make our lives better and instil meaning and substance.

Minimalism&nbsp;can be applied to every aspect of life, think out loud to yourself – is your closet too cluttered, do you really need all those pairs of shoes or the latest version of that pricey smartphone? Do you have quality and meaningful relationships with anyone in the crowd that you call ‘friends’? Is your daily routine meaningful and adds value to your existence?

Always remember, we cannot be happy with having too little, having too much is never going to bring contentment, you and I seek that fine balance of having just about enough and maintaining that equilibrium for life -- that is minimalism, your key to happiness.&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

“Human identity is no longer defined by what one does but what one owns,” this harrowing truth about our existence was pronounced by former US President Jimmy Carter in one of his public addresses almost four decades ago.

“Human identity is no longer defined by what one does but what one owns,” this harrowing truth about our existence was pronounced by former US President Jimmy Carter in one of his public addresses almost four decades ago. Humans are wired to get dissatisfied -- especially in a world fraught with distractions and things that offer speedier, quicker, faster results -- one tends to get bored easily. With so many options available, our hunger to own more expands exponentially. Unfortunately, at the core of this saddening reality, an ugly truth stares right back – more of us are intrinsically unhappy even while working in fancy multinationals, clad in couture and commuting by fanciest of cars. This ever-growing sense of dissatisfaction seems to have an answer in a growing school of thought which, according to me, makes total sense. Now is the time to adopt ‘minimalism’ like never before. Look around and all that the eye can meet is clutter. Our mind, on an average, produces as many as 70,000 thoughts in a day – most of it just fans unnecessary anxiety and stress. We have enough food but we want more, we have a comfortable house but we want a bigger one, another car and of course, the latest iPhone. Matt D’Avella’s documentary on minimalism becomes a must watch for all of us as it introduces to the virtue of having less and why having less is more. The short film features a young duo, Joshua Fields Millburn and Ryan Nicodemus, who quit their six-figure, fancy jobs in the United States and packed their lives in just about two suitcases to live with as little as possible. The duo calls itself 'The Minimalists' and goes around the country talking about their book and the importance of embracing the movement that emphasises de-cluttering lives and embracing simplicity. When our standard of living is improving by the day, why is that we still want more? Why are we so restless and why do we feel like not getting enough? × The documentary, 'Minimalism: A documentary about the important things,' raises a valid point – when our standard of living is improving by the day, why is that we still want more? Why are we so restless and why do we feel like not getting enough? All the flashy things that are out there, we don’t really need those things for survival; they have been marketed to us for years, to trick us into believing that we need those things. What is the true meaning of being successful? Experts suggest that over decades the idea of the ‘Big American Dream’ has come around to have completely different connotations. America was once seen as a land of enormous opportunities for one and all. A nation where one starts at rock-bottom, work hard and do well. With time, the idea became more materialistic in nature – increasingly about getting a six-figure job, that is how success is measured today across the globe, sadly. The concept of 'minimalism' rests in the fact that one should be able to justify the existence of things in life. × The concept of minimalism rests in the fact that one should be able to justify the existence of things in life. Ask yourself, does this item, commodity or even a relationship add any value to life? If the answer is in negative then, “I should be willing enough to part with it, to let it go,” Joshua notes in the documentary. It is interesting to see how an art movement, essentially an American visual arts movement of the mid-twentieth century, gained prominence to actually inspire a movement with a potential to make our lives better and instil meaning and substance. Minimalism can be applied to every aspect of life, think out loud to yourself – is your closet too cluttered, do you really need all those pairs of shoes or the latest version of that pricey smartphone? Do you have quality and meaningful relationships with anyone in the crowd that you call ‘friends’? Is your daily routine meaningful and adds value to your existence? Always remember, we cannot be happy with having too little, having too much is never going to bring contentment, you and I seek that fine balance of having just about enough and maintaining that equilibrium for life -- that is minimalism, your key to happiness. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Now is the time to embrace 'minimalism'; why having less is actually more

North Korea's foreign minister on Saturday told the United Nations there was "no way" that his country would disarm first as long as the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/north-korea-sanctions-must-be-vigorously-enforced-pompeo-tells-un-168040">United States continued to push for tough enforcement</a> of <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/north-korea-says-continued-sanctions-deepening-mistrust-us-168461">sanctions against Pyongyang</a>.

Addressing the United Nations General Assembly, Ri Yong Ho accused Washington of creating a deadlock in talks on denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.&nbsp;

"The recent deadlock is because the US relies on coercive measures which are lethal to trust-building," Ri told the assembly.

"Without any trust in the US, there will be no confidence in our national security and under such circumstances, there is no way we will unilaterally disarm ourselves first."

The United States is insisting on a "denuclearization-first" policy that "increases the level of pressure by sanctions to achieve their purpose in a coercive manner," said the foreign minister.

"The perception that sanctions can bring us on our knees is a pipe dream of the people who are ignorant about us."

Led by the United States, the UN Security Council adopted three sanctions resolutions last year aimed at depriving North Korea of revenue for its nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

A landmark summit between US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in June led to a warming of ties and a halt in Pyongyang's missile launches, but there has been little concrete progress since.

While in New York, Ri met with US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who agreed to return to Pyongyang next month to discuss US demands that the North scrap its weapons programs.

Pompeo will also try to arrange a second summit between Trump and Kim, whose June meeting in Singapore was the first ever between sitting leaders of the long-time enemy states.

Russia, China want sanctions relief

The North Korean foreign minister told the UN assembly that his government had stopped nuclear and missile tests, dismantled a nuclear test site and continued to make efforts to build trust.

"However we do not see any corresponding response from the US," he said.

North Korea's complaints have gotten a sympathetic ear from Russia and China, which this week called for an easing of sanctions to encourage Pyongyang to make concessions.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the "positive developments" in relations between North and South Korea -- combined with warmer US-North Korean ties -- should lead to sanctions relief.

The United States however has pushed for full enforcement of the tough measures that include a cap on oil and fuel deliveries, a ban on exports of North Korea's raw commodities and an end to contracts for its workers abroad.

China is Pyongyang's top trading partner, while Russia has welcomed tens of thousands of North Korean laborers that provide a vital source of hard currency. Human rights groups say the laborers often work in slave-like conditions.&nbsp;

The United States is also hearing calls for step-by-step sanctions relief from ally South Korea, whose left-leaning President Moon Jae-in helped arrange Trump's diplomatic drive.

That view is not shared by Japan, which wants complete and verified disarming of North Korea as a condition for lifting any sanctions.

North Korea's foreign minister on Saturday told the United Nations there was "no way" that his country would disarm first as long as the United States continued to push for tough enforcement of sanctions against Pyongyang.

North Korea's foreign minister on Saturday told the United Nations there was "no way" that his country would disarm first as long as the United States continued to push for tough enforcement of sanctions against Pyongyang. Addressing the United Nations General Assembly, Ri Yong Ho accused Washington of creating a deadlock in talks on denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. "The recent deadlock is because the US relies on coercive measures which are lethal to trust-building," Ri told the assembly. "Without any trust in the US, there will be no confidence in our national security and under such circumstances, there is no way we will unilaterally disarm ourselves first." The United States is insisting on a "denuclearization-first" policy that "increases the level of pressure by sanctions to achieve their purpose in a coercive manner," said the foreign minister. "The perception that sanctions can bring us on our knees is a pipe dream of the people who are ignorant about us." Led by the United States, the UN Security Council adopted three sanctions resolutions last year aimed at depriving North Korea of revenue for its nuclear and ballistic missile programs. A landmark summit between US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in June led to a warming of ties and a halt in Pyongyang's missile launches, but there has been little concrete progress since. While in New York, Ri met with US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who agreed to return to Pyongyang next month to discuss US demands that the North scrap its weapons programs. Pompeo will also try to arrange a second summit between Trump and Kim, whose June meeting in Singapore was the first ever between sitting leaders of the long-time enemy states. Russia, China want sanctions relief The North Korean foreign minister told the UN assembly that his government had stopped nuclear and missile tests, dismantled a nuclear test site and continued to make efforts to build trust. "However we do not see any corresponding response from the US," he said. North Korea's complaints have gotten a sympathetic ear from Russia and China, which this week called for an easing of sanctions to encourage Pyongyang to make concessions. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the "positive developments" in relations between North and South Korea -- combined with warmer US-North Korean ties -- should lead to sanctions relief. The United States however has pushed for full enforcement of the tough measures that include a cap on oil and fuel deliveries, a ban on exports of North Korea's raw commodities and an end to contracts for its workers abroad. China is Pyongyang's top trading partner, while Russia has welcomed tens of thousands of North Korean laborers that provide a vital source of hard currency. Human rights groups say the laborers often work in slave-like conditions. The United States is also hearing calls for step-by-step sanctions relief from ally South Korea, whose left-leaning President Moon Jae-in helped arrange Trump's diplomatic drive. That view is not shared by Japan, which wants complete and verified disarming of North Korea as a condition for lifting any sanctions.

North Korea says 'no way' it will disarm without trust in US

President Donald Trump on Saturday complained that the US is "subsidizing" the military of Middle East ally Saudi Arabia, as well as Japan and South Korea.

The comment, at a West Virginia rally for local candidates of his Republican Party, follows similar jibes at European members of the NATO alliance.

"When you have wealthy countries like Saudi Arabia, like Japan, like South Korea, why are we subsidizing their military?" asked Trump, who pushes an aggressive "America First" policy on trade.

"They'll pay us. The problem is nobody ever asks."

He added that he had spoken to Saudi Arabia's King Salman on Saturday to make the same point.

Saudi Arabia and Japan are major buyers of US-made weaponry, and the US provides intelligence and aerial refueling support to a Saudi-led coalition fighting rebels in Yemen.

Japan and South Korea host tens of thousands of American troops.

Trump said the United States pays "about 60 per cent" of South Korea's military.

Last year he suggested Seoul should pay for the $1.0-billion THAAD anti-missile system that the US has deployed on South Korean territory.

Trump has long complained that European members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization do not pay enough for their own defense, singling out Germany for particular criticism.

President Donald Trump on Saturday complained that the US is "subsidizing" the military of Middle East ally Saudi Arabia, as well as Japan and South Korea. The comment, at a West Virginia rally for local candidates of his Republican Party, follows similar jibes at European members of the NATO alliance.

President Donald Trump on Saturday complained that the US is "subsidizing" the military of Middle East ally Saudi Arabia, as well as Japan and South Korea. The comment, at a West Virginia rally for local candidates of his Republican Party, follows similar jibes at European members of the NATO alliance. "When you have wealthy countries like Saudi Arabia, like Japan, like South Korea, why are we subsidizing their military?" asked Trump, who pushes an aggressive "America First" policy on trade. "They'll pay us. The problem is nobody ever asks." He added that he had spoken to Saudi Arabia's King Salman on Saturday to make the same point. Saudi Arabia and Japan are major buyers of US-made weaponry, and the US provides intelligence and aerial refueling support to a Saudi-led coalition fighting rebels in Yemen. Japan and South Korea host tens of thousands of American troops. Trump said the United States pays "about 60 per cent" of South Korea's military. Last year he suggested Seoul should pay for the $1.0-billion THAAD anti-missile system that the US has deployed on South Korean territory. Trump has long complained that European members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization do not pay enough for their own defense, singling out Germany for particular criticism.

US 'subsidizing' Saudi Arabia, Asia militaries: President Donald Trump

Syria's foreign minister on Saturday denounced US, French and Turkish forces operating in his country as "occupying forces" and demanded that they leave immediately.

Addressing the UN General Assembly, Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem also called on Syrian refugees to come home, even though the country's war is now in its eighth year.

Moualem, who also serves as deputy prime minister, said the foreign forces were on Syrian soil illegally, under the pretext of fighting terrorism, and "will be dealt with accordingly."

"They must withdraw immediately and without any conditions," he told the assembly.

Moualem insisted that the "war on terror is almost over" in Syria, where more than 360,000 people have died since 2011, with millions more uprooted from their homes.

He said Damascus would continue "fighting this sacred battle until we purge all Syrian territories" of both terror groups and "any illegal foreign presence."

The United States has some 2,000 troops in Syria, mainly training and advising both Kurdish forces and Syrian Arabs opposed to President Bashar al-Assad.

France has more than 1,000 troops on the ground in the war-wracked country.

On the issue of refugees, Moualem said the conditions were fine for them to return, and he blamed "some western countries" for "spreading irrational fears" that prompted refugees to stay away.

"We have called upon the international community and humanitarian organizations to facilitate these returns," he said. "They are politicizing what should be a purely humanitarian issue."

The United States and the European Union have warned that there will be no reconstruction aid for Syria until there is a political agreement between Assad and the opposition to end the war.

UN diplomats say a recent agreement between Russia and Turkey to set up a buffer zone in the last major rebel stronghold of Idlib has created an opportunity to press ahead with political talks.

The Russian-Turkish deal averted a large-scale assault by Russian-backed Syrian forces on the province, where three million people live.

Moualem however stressed that the agreement had "clear deadlines" and expressed hope that military action will target jihadists including fighters from the Al-Qaeda-linked Nusra Front, who "will be eradicated."

UN envoy Staffan de Mistura is hoping to soon convene the first meetings of a new committee comprised of government and opposition members to draft a post-war constitution for Syria and pave the way to elections.

Moualem laid out conditions for the Syrian government's participation in the committee, saying the panel's work should be restricted "to reviewing the articles of the current constitution," and warned against interference.

Syria's foreign minister on Saturday denounced US, French and Turkish forces operating in his country as "occupying forces" and demanded that they leave immediately.

Syria's foreign minister on Saturday denounced US, French and Turkish forces operating in his country as "occupying forces" and demanded that they leave immediately. Addressing the UN General Assembly, Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem also called on Syrian refugees to come home, even though the country's war is now in its eighth year. Moualem, who also serves as deputy prime minister, said the foreign forces were on Syrian soil illegally, under the pretext of fighting terrorism, and "will be dealt with accordingly." "They must withdraw immediately and without any conditions," he told the assembly. Moualem insisted that the "war on terror is almost over" in Syria, where more than 360,000 people have died since 2011, with millions more uprooted from their homes. He said Damascus would continue "fighting this sacred battle until we purge all Syrian territories" of both terror groups and "any illegal foreign presence." The United States has some 2,000 troops in Syria, mainly training and advising both Kurdish forces and Syrian Arabs opposed to President Bashar al-Assad. France has more than 1,000 troops on the ground in the war-wracked country. On the issue of refugees, Moualem said the conditions were fine for them to return, and he blamed "some western countries" for "spreading irrational fears" that prompted refugees to stay away. "We have called upon the international community and humanitarian organizations to facilitate these returns," he said. "They are politicizing what should be a purely humanitarian issue." The United States and the European Union have warned that there will be no reconstruction aid for Syria until there is a political agreement between Assad and the opposition to end the war. UN diplomats say a recent agreement between Russia and Turkey to set up a buffer zone in the last major rebel stronghold of Idlib has created an opportunity to press ahead with political talks. The Russian-Turkish deal averted a large-scale assault by Russian-backed Syrian forces on the province, where three million people live. Moualem however stressed that the agreement had "clear deadlines" and expressed hope that military action will target jihadists including fighters from the Al-Qaeda-linked Nusra Front, who "will be eradicated." UN envoy Staffan de Mistura is hoping to soon convene the first meetings of a new committee comprised of government and opposition members to draft a post-war constitution for Syria and pave the way to elections. Moualem laid out conditions for the Syrian government's participation in the committee, saying the panel's work should be restricted "to reviewing the articles of the current constitution," and warned against interference.

Syria calls on US, French, Turkish forces to withdraw immediately

us-1

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

us 1