Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro on Tuesday accused Washington of ordering a coup against his government and called for a "total revision" of ties with the US.

The latest claims by Caracas of a US coup plot came the day before a mass street protest announced by the opposition, and one day after a mutiny by some soldiers.

Maduro was specifically reacting to comments by US Vice President Mike Pence, who posted a video on Twitter branding Maduro "<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/hola-im-mike-pence-us-vp-delivers-message-of-support-to-venezuelans-192101">a dictator with no legitimate claim to power</a>."

Referring to Wednesday's planned opposition rally, Pence added: "As the good people of Venezuela make your voices heard tomorrow, on behalf of the American people, we say: estamos con ustedes. We are with you."

Maduro responded during a radio and TV broadcast that "what the government of the United States did through Vice President Mike Pence, was to give orders to carry out a coup from the fascist state... which is unparalleled in the history of relations between the United States and Venezuela in 200 years."

He ordered Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza to begin "a total revision of relations" with Washington, which has already sanctioned top Venezuelan regime figures.

'Reconsider the plan' 
With Maduro's government ominously predicting there would be violence against opposition protesters, US Senator Marco Rubio warned Venezuela's intelligence service to "reconsider the plan they have for tomorrow before it's too late."

"You are about to cross a line &amp; trigger a response that believe me you are not prepared to face," the Florida Republican said on Twitter.

Rubio urged prayers for "the thousands of Venezuelans who will face danger &amp; difficulty in the hours ahead. May God give them strength. And may he change the hearts of military leaders so that they protect not repress their fellow countrymen."

The Venezuelan government's rhetoric intensified the day after a group of soldiers rose up against Maduro at a command post in the north of Caracas. They published a video on social media calling for the public to come out and support them.

But they surrendered after police and military units surrounded the post, and the 27 soldiers were arrested.

Their voices were heard, though, according to the non-governmental Social Conflict Observatory, which said on Tuesday that anti-Maduro protests were recorded in at least 30 different locations around the capital.

The Organization of American States, which has declared Maduro's new term illegitimate, plans to hold an extraordinary session on Thursday to discuss "recent events in Venezuela."

"Yankee go home! We won't let them interfere in the affairs of the homeland," Maduro's Vice President Delcy Rodriguez said in televised remarks, while Communications Minister Jorge Rodriguez accused Pence of having ordered "terrorists" to carry out acts of violence during Wednesday's protest.

'It was awful' 
Demonstrators are set to mobilize behind the National Assembly's new president Juan Guaido, who has branded Maduro a "usurper" and wants to establish a transitional government leading to elections.

Maduro's administration stripped the Assembly of its power but Guaido has risen to the challenge of taking him on. The movement has gained traction since Maduro was sworn in for a second term as president on January 10 after he won controversial elections.

Unrest triggered by Monday's troop uprising lasted in some places until Tuesday morning.

"Maduro out! That's what the people were shouting. It was awful," 60-year-old Dinora de Longa told AFP.

"The police were shooting and there was tear gas everywhere. I had to put my grandchildren in the bathroom. This won't solve anything."

One protest, in which people pelted cars with stones, took place on the motorway linking Caracas to the neighboring port of La Guaira, where the capital's airport is located.

The opposition accuses Maduro of running an authoritarian regime and acting unconstitutionally.

Counter demonstration 
Wednesday's protest date of January 23 is significant because it marks 61 years since the fall of Marcos Perez Jimenez's dictatorship.

The regime has responded by announcing its own demonstration in support of Maduro.

It will be the first major street movement since 125 people were killed during civil unrest between April and July 2017.

Venezuela is suffering the worst economic crisis in its modern history. Food and medicine have been in short supply, while spiraling inflation -- predicted to reach a mind-boggling 10 million percent this year -- has crippled the currency.

The crisis was sparked by a fall in global oil prices in 2014, a commodity Venezuela is almost entirely reliant upon. Its crude production has dropped to barely a third of the level of a decade ago.

Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro on Tuesday accused Washington of ordering a coup against his government and called for a "total revision" of ties with the US.

Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro on Tuesday accused Washington of ordering a coup against his government and called for a "total revision" of ties with the US. The latest claims by Caracas of a US coup plot came the day before a mass street protest announced by the opposition, and one day after a mutiny by some soldiers. Maduro was specifically reacting to comments by US Vice President Mike Pence, who posted a video on Twitter branding Maduro "a dictator with no legitimate claim to power." Referring to Wednesday's planned opposition rally, Pence added: "As the good people of Venezuela make your voices heard tomorrow, on behalf of the American people, we say: estamos con ustedes. We are with you." Maduro responded during a radio and TV broadcast that "what the government of the United States did through Vice President Mike Pence, was to give orders to carry out a coup from the fascist state... which is unparalleled in the history of relations between the United States and Venezuela in 200 years." He ordered Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza to begin "a total revision of relations" with Washington, which has already sanctioned top Venezuelan regime figures. 'Reconsider the plan' With Maduro's government ominously predicting there would be violence against opposition protesters, US Senator Marco Rubio warned Venezuela's intelligence service to "reconsider the plan they have for tomorrow before it's too late." "You are about to cross a line & trigger a response that believe me you are not prepared to face," the Florida Republican said on Twitter. Rubio urged prayers for "the thousands of Venezuelans who will face danger & difficulty in the hours ahead. May God give them strength. And may he change the hearts of military leaders so that they protect not repress their fellow countrymen." The Venezuelan government's rhetoric intensified the day after a group of soldiers rose up against Maduro at a command post in the north of Caracas. They published a video on social media calling for the public to come out and support them. But they surrendered after police and military units surrounded the post, and the 27 soldiers were arrested. Their voices were heard, though, according to the non-governmental Social Conflict Observatory, which said on Tuesday that anti-Maduro protests were recorded in at least 30 different locations around the capital. The Organization of American States, which has declared Maduro's new term illegitimate, plans to hold an extraordinary session on Thursday to discuss "recent events in Venezuela." "Yankee go home! We won't let them interfere in the affairs of the homeland," Maduro's Vice President Delcy Rodriguez said in televised remarks, while Communications Minister Jorge Rodriguez accused Pence of having ordered "terrorists" to carry out acts of violence during Wednesday's protest. 'It was awful' Demonstrators are set to mobilize behind the National Assembly's new president Juan Guaido, who has branded Maduro a "usurper" and wants to establish a transitional government leading to elections. Maduro's administration stripped the Assembly of its power but Guaido has risen to the challenge of taking him on. The movement has gained traction since Maduro was sworn in for a second term as president on January 10 after he won controversial elections. Unrest triggered by Monday's troop uprising lasted in some places until Tuesday morning. "Maduro out! That's what the people were shouting. It was awful," 60-year-old Dinora de Longa told AFP. "The police were shooting and there was tear gas everywhere. I had to put my grandchildren in the bathroom. This won't solve anything." One protest, in which people pelted cars with stones, took place on the motorway linking Caracas to the neighboring port of La Guaira, where the capital's airport is located. The opposition accuses Maduro of running an authoritarian regime and acting unconstitutionally. Counter demonstration Wednesday's protest date of January 23 is significant because it marks 61 years since the fall of Marcos Perez Jimenez's dictatorship. The regime has responded by announcing its own demonstration in support of Maduro. It will be the first major street movement since 125 people were killed during civil unrest between April and July 2017. Venezuela is suffering the worst economic crisis in its modern history. Food and medicine have been in short supply, while spiraling inflation -- predicted to reach a mind-boggling 10 million percent this year -- has crippled the currency. The crisis was sparked by a fall in global oil prices in 2014, a commodity Venezuela is almost entirely reliant upon. Its crude production has dropped to barely a third of the level of a decade ago.

Venezuela accuses US of ordering coup, calls for 'total revision' of ties

Reports of drones disrupt flights at Newark Airport

As much as <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-rejects-advance-trade-meeting-with-china-reports-192094">US&nbsp;President Donald Trump</a> wants to boost markets through a trade pact with China, he will not soften his position that Beijing must make real structural reforms, including how it handles intellectual property, to reach a deal, advisers say.

Offering to buy more American goods is unlikely by itself to overcome an issue that has bedeviled talks between the two countries. Those talks are set to continue when Chinese Vice Premier Liu He visits Washington at the end of January.

The United States accuses China of stealing intellectual property and forcing American companies to share technology when they do business in China. Beijing denies the accusations.

With a March 1 deadline approaching to reach an agreement or risk an escalation of tariffs on another $200 billion worth of Chinese goods, the two sides are still far apart on key, structural elements critical for a deal, according to sources familiar with the talks.

"We're not yet in a position where our concerns have been addressed sufficiently," one US&nbsp;official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. The official said the Trump team, led by hardline US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, was focussed on such structural issues as well as trade imbalances.

White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow told Reuters that forced technology transfers, IP theft and ownership restrictions remained a top priority for Trump.

"The president's said many times how crucial that is, and he's not going to back down," Kudlow said.

Lack of progress led the Trump administration to decline an in-person meeting with a lower-level Chinese delegation for preparatory talks ahead of Liu He's visit, a source familiar with the situation told Reuters.

The Financial Times also reported that an offer for preparatory meeting was rejected, but White House officials pushed back on the suggestion that any meeting was cancelled.

"With respect, the story is not true," Kudlow told CNBC, referring to the FT report.

"The teams remain in touch in preparation for high-level talks with Vice Premier Liu He at the end of this month," said White House spokeswoman Lindsay Walters.

Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed on a ceasefire in their trade war at the G20 meeting in Buenos Aires last year, setting a 90-day period to discuss differences and agree a deal.

Those talks have yet to produce anything on paper.

"There's progress in that the two sides are talking. But I look at it like this: there's still nothing agreed on in writing," said one source familiar with the discussions.

Trump has painted developments in the US-China trade talks as largely positive, aware of the effect that the tensions have had on stock markets.

The S&amp;P 500 registered its biggest four-week percentage gain since 2011 on Friday after dropping nearly 20 per cent from its record September close on Christmas Eve. The benchmark index lost ground on Tuesday after a national holiday on Monday.

"We've really had a very extraordinary number of meetings, and a deal could very well happen with China. It's going very well," Trump told reporters at the White House on Saturday.

China has offered more than $1.2 trillion in additional commitments on trade, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin said last month.

That is not sufficient for Trump or his team.

"To think that this is going to end with simple 'commitments,' I think, is overlooking the historical experience that we've had," the US&nbsp;official said.

Chinese officials pledged to buy enough US&nbsp;products to wipe out the US-China trade deficit at talks in Beijing earlier this month but also hedged its position, saying it depended on the demands of Chinese companies, said Scott Kennedy, director of the Project on Chinese Business and Political Economy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The Chinese have indicated they feel they already addressed US&nbsp;concerns about intellectual property rights through a new law and other actions, Kennedy said.

"These weren't sufficient to satisfy the US negotiation team. So we'll see if the Chinese give any more on those or if they still try to focus on sweetening the purchases side, and hoping that Trump bites on the potential big numbers," he said.

Barring progress at the end of the 90-day period, the Trump administration is scheduled to increase tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods from the current 10 per cent to 25 per cent.

"All I'll say is the meetings coming up at the end of the month with Liu He are very important," Kudlow said.

As much as US President Donald Trump wants to boost markets through a trade pact with China, he will not soften his position that Beijing must make real structural reforms, including how it handles intellectual property, to reach a deal, advisers say.

As much as US President Donald Trump wants to boost markets through a trade pact with China, he will not soften his position that Beijing must make real structural reforms, including how it handles intellectual property, to reach a deal, advisers say. Offering to buy more American goods is unlikely by itself to overcome an issue that has bedeviled talks between the two countries. Those talks are set to continue when Chinese Vice Premier Liu He visits Washington at the end of January. The United States accuses China of stealing intellectual property and forcing American companies to share technology when they do business in China. Beijing denies the accusations. With a March 1 deadline approaching to reach an agreement or risk an escalation of tariffs on another $200 billion worth of Chinese goods, the two sides are still far apart on key, structural elements critical for a deal, according to sources familiar with the talks. "We're not yet in a position where our concerns have been addressed sufficiently," one US official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. The official said the Trump team, led by hardline US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, was focussed on such structural issues as well as trade imbalances. White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow told Reuters that forced technology transfers, IP theft and ownership restrictions remained a top priority for Trump. "The president's said many times how crucial that is, and he's not going to back down," Kudlow said. Lack of progress led the Trump administration to decline an in-person meeting with a lower-level Chinese delegation for preparatory talks ahead of Liu He's visit, a source familiar with the situation told Reuters. The Financial Times also reported that an offer for preparatory meeting was rejected, but White House officials pushed back on the suggestion that any meeting was cancelled. "With respect, the story is not true," Kudlow told CNBC, referring to the FT report. "The teams remain in touch in preparation for high-level talks with Vice Premier Liu He at the end of this month," said White House spokeswoman Lindsay Walters. Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed on a ceasefire in their trade war at the G20 meeting in Buenos Aires last year, setting a 90-day period to discuss differences and agree a deal. Those talks have yet to produce anything on paper. "There's progress in that the two sides are talking. But I look at it like this: there's still nothing agreed on in writing," said one source familiar with the discussions. Trump has painted developments in the US-China trade talks as largely positive, aware of the effect that the tensions have had on stock markets. The S&P 500 registered its biggest four-week percentage gain since 2011 on Friday after dropping nearly 20 per cent from its record September close on Christmas Eve. The benchmark index lost ground on Tuesday after a national holiday on Monday. "We've really had a very extraordinary number of meetings, and a deal could very well happen with China. It's going very well," Trump told reporters at the White House on Saturday. China has offered more than $1.2 trillion in additional commitments on trade, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin said last month. That is not sufficient for Trump or his team. "To think that this is going to end with simple 'commitments,' I think, is overlooking the historical experience that we've had," the US official said. Chinese officials pledged to buy enough US products to wipe out the US-China trade deficit at talks in Beijing earlier this month but also hedged its position, saying it depended on the demands of Chinese companies, said Scott Kennedy, director of the Project on Chinese Business and Political Economy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The Chinese have indicated they feel they already addressed US concerns about intellectual property rights through a new law and other actions, Kennedy said. "These weren't sufficient to satisfy the US negotiation team. So we'll see if the Chinese give any more on those or if they still try to focus on sweetening the purchases side, and hoping that Trump bites on the potential big numbers," he said. Barring progress at the end of the 90-day period, the Trump administration is scheduled to increase tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods from the current 10 per cent to 25 per cent. "All I'll say is the meetings coming up at the end of the month with Liu He are very important," Kudlow said.

Trump will not soften hard line on China to make deal: Advisers

Russia should not unleash an oil price war against the United States but rather stick with output cuts even at the cost of losing market share in the medium term, one of the main Russian architects of a production pact with OPEC said.

Since 2017, Russia and OPEC have cut oil production jointly for the first time in an effort to boost the price of crude. Following their supply pact, oil has traded between roughly $60 and $85 per barrel, from below $30 before the deal took effect.

"For US shale production to go down, you need oil prices at $40 per barrel and below. That is not healthy for the Russian economy," Kirill Dmitriev, head of the state-backed Russian Direct Investment Fund, said on Wednesday.

"We should not take competitive action to destroy US shale production," said Dmitriev, speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

Three years ago in Davos, Dmitriev became the first Russian official to mention publicly the possibility of a supply pact with the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. At that time, oil prices had collapsed after OPEC kingpin Saudi Arabia raised output to hurt higher-cost U.S. producers.

The rise in prices thanks to output cuts has brought roughly an additional $110 billion in revenues to Russia, Dmitriev said.

However, higher oil prices have also helped the United States, which is not participating in output cuts. The country's production has rocketed, overtaking that of Russia and Saudi Arabia and making it the world’s largest oil liquids producer.

US production is expected to reach new highs this year. Russian President Vladimir Putin will visit Saudi Arabia later in 2019 to strengthen cooperation further, Dmitriev said.

Azerbaijan, one of the largest former Soviet oil producers and a participant in the production deal with OPEC, believes the pact should be extended to the end of this year, President Ilham Aliyev said this week.

Such a move should keep oil prices in the $60 to $70 range, Aliyev said.

Russia should not unleash an oil price war against the United States but rather stick with output cuts even at the cost of losing market share in the medium term, one of the main Russian architects of a production pact with OPEC said.

Russia should not unleash an oil price war against the United States but rather stick with output cuts even at the cost of losing market share in the medium term, one of the main Russian architects of a production pact with OPEC said. Since 2017, Russia and OPEC have cut oil production jointly for the first time in an effort to boost the price of crude. Following their supply pact, oil has traded between roughly $60 and $85 per barrel, from below $30 before the deal took effect. "For US shale production to go down, you need oil prices at $40 per barrel and below. That is not healthy for the Russian economy," Kirill Dmitriev, head of the state-backed Russian Direct Investment Fund, said on Wednesday. "We should not take competitive action to destroy US shale production," said Dmitriev, speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Three years ago in Davos, Dmitriev became the first Russian official to mention publicly the possibility of a supply pact with the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. At that time, oil prices had collapsed after OPEC kingpin Saudi Arabia raised output to hurt higher-cost U.S. producers. The rise in prices thanks to output cuts has brought roughly an additional $110 billion in revenues to Russia, Dmitriev said. However, higher oil prices have also helped the United States, which is not participating in output cuts. The country's production has rocketed, overtaking that of Russia and Saudi Arabia and making it the world’s largest oil liquids producer. US production is expected to reach new highs this year. Russian President Vladimir Putin will visit Saudi Arabia later in 2019 to strengthen cooperation further, Dmitriev said. Azerbaijan, one of the largest former Soviet oil producers and a participant in the production deal with OPEC, believes the pact should be extended to the end of this year, President Ilham Aliyev said this week. Such a move should keep oil prices in the $60 to $70 range, Aliyev said.

Russia says oil price war with US would be too costly

As the United States endures the longest shutdown in its history, Americans are getting a taste of life without government.

The absence of some services is clearly visible, such as a buildup of trash at national parks or longer lines at airport security checkpoints.&nbsp;

Others, like those felt primarily by businesses, are less noticeable but arguably more important, such as an inability to get a small business loan or limited service from the IRS, Securities and Exchange Commission and other key agencies.

Collectively they show that government matters. But once the shutdown ends and the memories of the pain and discomfort it caused to begin to fade, the visceral reminder Americans got of this message may fade with it.

As scholars of business and policy, we believe it’s essential that Americans not forget. In fact, the shutdown provides a good opportunity to reflect on the government’s vital role in the free market and find a better balance between regulation and business.

How the shutdown is affecting business

The partial shutdown, in its fifth week, has left about 800,000 government employees either furloughed or working without pay, affecting more than 10 agencies.

This has resulted in the slowing or halting of a great deal of activity, including food safety inspections, initial public offerings on the stock market and the approval of new craft beers.

And these costs are felt by citizens as the risks grow to their food, the environment and other things. Economists warn that long-term impacts could also undermine confidence as businesses, consumers and investors lose faith in political leaders’ ability to make constructive policies.

The White House’s own economists estimate that every week of shutdown reduces growth by 0.13 percentage point, meaning the economy has already taken a hit of half a per cent. If it goes for another week, total costs could exceed $6 billion, which is more than what the president is demanding for his border wall.

And yet Americans won’t even know the actual impact because many of the government workers whose job it is to collect and measure economic activity have been sent home.

Hamilton and public goods

While the shutdown crystallises what the absence of government feels like, the debate over its proper role in business is as old as the American Republic.

For example, Alexander Hamilton, the nation’s first Treasury secretary, wrote eloquently about the need for the government to get involved in markets, specifically through the establishment of a national bank. He called it a key public institution that “facilitates and extends the operations of commerce among individuals. The industry is increased, commodities are multiplied, agriculture and manufacturers flourish: and herein consists the true wealth and prosperity of a state.”

Beyond a central bank, “public goods” often require the protection of a set of laws. Examples include the environment, national defence, national parks, consumer protection and advanced research that helps seed inventions and create the industries of our future.

Author Michael Lewis, in his book “The Fifth Risk,” details many of the important yet little-noticed functions that government agencies handle better than private industry, such as the protection of food safety or the oversight of spent nuclear resources. Further, he shows how a functioning economy depends on civil servants using the best data and science available to provide vital services to all Americans.

To offer just one example of the federal government’s positive role in fostering innovation, its creation of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency in 1957 gave us the internet, GPS, stealth aircraft and countless other technologies used in non-defence sectors today.

On the flip side, the absence of proper regulation can lead to serious economic and personal damage, as we saw during the global financial crisis a decade ago. And only government – through regulatory agencies and smartly designed laws – is in a position to prevent another crisis. Indeed, fears are growing that another one may be on the horizon as a result of Wall Street excesses or financial bubbles in housing or debt.

The point is that in all these cases, the question is not about “no government” but about how much, what kind and which level (state or federal).

Americans’ evolving views

It’s good news in our opinion that Americans seem to be increasingly abandoning the view that government should stay out of business and the market. And more are embracing an expanded role.

In 2011, half of Americans polled by Gallup said there’s “too much” regulation. The latest survey, taken in late 2018, found that just 39 per cent felt that way – the lowest in a decade – with a growing share saying that the balance is “just right.”

This comes at a time when the Trump administration is boasting about the number of regulations it has eliminated. Yet these surveys suggest Americans don’t simply want fewer regulations, they want better ones.

Even more encouraging in our view is a Cato survey from 2017 that found that large majorities of Americans “believe regulations, at least in the past, have produced positive benefits” and that “regulations can help make businesses more responsive to people’s needs.”

One area where people see a value in government regulation is the financial sector, which is seen as rapacious and in need of more monitoring.

And 1 in 4 Americans surveyed by Gallup said there’s “too little” regulation, a figure that hasn’t changed much in recent years. This suggests that a notable number of Americans don’t trust the private sector and think that government is necessary to curb market excess and other problems.

Toward a better balance

But instead of a debate over the right balance for the government, American politicians and others have denigrated government as “the problem” or, more recently, “the swamp.” The terms are meant to say that government is alternatively inept, obstructive or corrupt.

They do this to take advantage of the still too widespread view that government has no role in markets and that regulation represents an unwarranted intrusion on business. This is a misperception that dismays both of us, motivating the very article you are reading.

While there certainly are problems with special interest influence in government and bureaucratic inefficiency, the enterprise as a whole remains central to the operation of capitalism and the markets. After all, capitalism is a set of institutions designed by the government in concert with business and civil society.

As National Affairs editor Yuval Levin points out, even Adam Smith, the Scottish economist who wrote the foundational texts on capitalism, argued that “the rules of the market are not self-legislating or naturally obvious.” Rather, Smith said, the market is a public institution that requires rules imposed on it.

So we believe it is time to return to the basics and launch a new effort at reinventing government to improve how the various branches and levels interact with each other and the market.

At the same time, it’s important to provide more public education on what the government does, and why, and solicit feedback from citizens on how to do it better – including at the ballot box.

(Andrew J Hoffman is Holcim (US) Professor, University of Michigan; Ellen Hughes-Cromwick is Senior Economist and Associate Director of Social Science and Policy, University of Michigan Energy Institute)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/shutdowns-economic-impact-is-a-forceful-reminder-of-why-government-matters-105940">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 United States endures the longest shutdown in its history, Americans are getting a taste of life without government. The absence of some services is clearly visible, such as a buildup of trash at national parks or longer lines at airport security checkpoints.

As the United States endures the longest shutdown in its history, Americans are getting a taste of life without government. The absence of some services is clearly visible, such as a buildup of trash at national parks or longer lines at airport security checkpoints. Others, like those felt primarily by businesses, are less noticeable but arguably more important, such as an inability to get a small business loan or limited service from the IRS, Securities and Exchange Commission and other key agencies. Collectively they show that government matters. But once the shutdown ends and the memories of the pain and discomfort it caused to begin to fade, the visceral reminder Americans got of this message may fade with it. As scholars of business and policy, we believe it’s essential that Americans not forget. In fact, the shutdown provides a good opportunity to reflect on the government’s vital role in the free market and find a better balance between regulation and business. How the shutdown is affecting business The partial shutdown, in its fifth week, has left about 800,000 government employees either furloughed or working without pay, affecting more than 10 agencies. This has resulted in the slowing or halting of a great deal of activity, including food safety inspections, initial public offerings on the stock market and the approval of new craft beers. And these costs are felt by citizens as the risks grow to their food, the environment and other things. Economists warn that long-term impacts could also undermine confidence as businesses, consumers and investors lose faith in political leaders’ ability to make constructive policies. The White House’s own economists estimate that every week of shutdown reduces growth by 0.13 percentage point, meaning the economy has already taken a hit of half a per cent. If it goes for another week, total costs could exceed $6 billion, which is more than what the president is demanding for his border wall. And yet Americans won’t even know the actual impact because many of the government workers whose job it is to collect and measure economic activity have been sent home. Hamilton and public goods While the shutdown crystallises what the absence of government feels like, the debate over its proper role in business is as old as the American Republic. For example, Alexander Hamilton, the nation’s first Treasury secretary, wrote eloquently about the need for the government to get involved in markets, specifically through the establishment of a national bank. He called it a key public institution that “facilitates and extends the operations of commerce among individuals. The industry is increased, commodities are multiplied, agriculture and manufacturers flourish: and herein consists the true wealth and prosperity of a state.” Beyond a central bank, “public goods” often require the protection of a set of laws. Examples include the environment, national defence, national parks, consumer protection and advanced research that helps seed inventions and create the industries of our future. Author Michael Lewis, in his book “The Fifth Risk,” details many of the important yet little-noticed functions that government agencies handle better than private industry, such as the protection of food safety or the oversight of spent nuclear resources. Further, he shows how a functioning economy depends on civil servants using the best data and science available to provide vital services to all Americans. To offer just one example of the federal government’s positive role in fostering innovation, its creation of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency in 1957 gave us the internet, GPS, stealth aircraft and countless other technologies used in non-defence sectors today. On the flip side, the absence of proper regulation can lead to serious economic and personal damage, as we saw during the global financial crisis a decade ago. And only government – through regulatory agencies and smartly designed laws – is in a position to prevent another crisis. Indeed, fears are growing that another one may be on the horizon as a result of Wall Street excesses or financial bubbles in housing or debt. The point is that in all these cases, the question is not about “no government” but about how much, what kind and which level (state or federal). Americans’ evolving views It’s good news in our opinion that Americans seem to be increasingly abandoning the view that government should stay out of business and the market. And more are embracing an expanded role. In 2011, half of Americans polled by Gallup said there’s “too much” regulation. The latest survey, taken in late 2018, found that just 39 per cent felt that way – the lowest in a decade – with a growing share saying that the balance is “just right.” This comes at a time when the Trump administration is boasting about the number of regulations it has eliminated. Yet these surveys suggest Americans don’t simply want fewer regulations, they want better ones. Even more encouraging in our view is a Cato survey from 2017 that found that large majorities of Americans “believe regulations, at least in the past, have produced positive benefits” and that “regulations can help make businesses more responsive to people’s needs.” One area where people see a value in government regulation is the financial sector, which is seen as rapacious and in need of more monitoring. And 1 in 4 Americans surveyed by Gallup said there’s “too little” regulation, a figure that hasn’t changed much in recent years. This suggests that a notable number of Americans don’t trust the private sector and think that government is necessary to curb market excess and other problems. Toward a better balance But instead of a debate over the right balance for the government, American politicians and others have denigrated government as “the problem” or, more recently, “the swamp.” The terms are meant to say that government is alternatively inept, obstructive or corrupt. They do this to take advantage of the still too widespread view that government has no role in markets and that regulation represents an unwarranted intrusion on business. This is a misperception that dismays both of us, motivating the very article you are reading. While there certainly are problems with special interest influence in government and bureaucratic inefficiency, the enterprise as a whole remains central to the operation of capitalism and the markets. After all, capitalism is a set of institutions designed by the government in concert with business and civil society. As National Affairs editor Yuval Levin points out, even Adam Smith, the Scottish economist who wrote the foundational texts on capitalism, argued that “the rules of the market are not self-legislating or naturally obvious.” Rather, Smith said, the market is a public institution that requires rules imposed on it. So we believe it is time to return to the basics and launch a new effort at reinventing government to improve how the various branches and levels interact with each other and the market. At the same time, it’s important to provide more public education on what the government does, and why, and solicit feedback from citizens on how to do it better – including at the ballot box. (Andrew J Hoffman is Holcim (US) Professor, University of Michigan; Ellen Hughes-Cromwick is Senior Economist and Associate Director of Social Science and Policy, University of Michigan Energy Institute) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Shutdown’s economic impact is a forceful reminder of why government matter

The United States will proceed with the formal extradition from <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.wionews.com/world/executive-of-chinas-huawei-asks-for-bail-in-us-extradition-case-183236&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwjZk9Kv44DgAhWFinAKHVwWCLoQFggFMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw3x8RB4GE_gLQaP4sLXygkt">Canada of Huawei </a>executive Meng Wanzhou, Canada's ambassador to the United States told the Globe and Mail, in a move certain to ratchet up tensions with China.

David MacNaughton, in an interview with the <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.wionews.com/world/canadian-government-banning-huawei-5g-network-will-have-repercussions-china-191217&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwjZk9Kv44DgAhWFinAKHVwWCLoQFggOMAM&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw297XTNIV9-qKZKM1nxk7kQ">Canadian </a>newspaper published on Monday, said the US has told Canada it will request Meng's extradition, but he did not say when the request will be made. The deadline for filing is January 30, or 60 days after Meng was arrested on December 1 in Vancouver.

Meng, the daughter of Huawei Technologies Co Ltd founder Ren Zhengfei, was arrested at the request of the United States over alleged violations of US sanctions on Iran. She was released on bail last month and is due in court in Vancouver on February 6.

Relations between China and Canada turned frosty after the arrest, with China detaining two Canadian citizens and sentencing to death a Canadian man previously found guilty of drug smuggling.

The Chinese firm, the world's biggest maker of telecommunications equipment, said it had no comment on ongoing legal proceedings when contacted by Reuters on Tuesday. A US Justice Department spokesman said, "We will comment through our filings."

The Canadian Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment outside regular business hours.

Canada is one of over 100 countries with which the United States has extradition treaties. Once a formal request is received, a Canadian court must determine within 30 days if there is sufficient evidence to support extradition, and Canada's Minister of Justice must give a formal order.

In an article published on Monday, a former Canadian spy chief said Canada should ban Huawei from supplying equipment for next-generation telecoms networks, while Canada's government is studying any security implications.

Some of Canada's allies such as the United States and Australia have already imposed restrictions on using Huawei equipment, citing the risk of it being used for espionage.

Huawei has repeatedly said such concerns are unfounded, while China's ambassador to Canada last week said there would be repercussions if Ottawa blocked Huawei.

In Monday's interview, MacNaughton said he had complained to the United States that Canada was suffering from Chinese revenge for an arrest made at the US's request.

"We don't like that it is our citizens who are being punished," the Globe and Mail cited MacNaughton as saying. "(The Americans) are the ones seeking to have the full force of American law brought against (Ms&nbsp;Meng) and yet we are the ones who are paying the price. Our citizens are."

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau previously said China was arbitrarily using the death penalty and called on world leaders to raise concerns about the detained Canadians.

The United States will proceed with the formal extradition from Canada of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou, Canada's ambassador to the United States told the Globe and Mail, in a move certain to ratchet up tensions with China.

The United States will proceed with the formal extradition from Canada of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou, Canada's ambassador to the United States told the Globe and Mail, in a move certain to ratchet up tensions with China. David MacNaughton, in an interview with the Canadian newspaper published on Monday, said the US has told Canada it will request Meng's extradition, but he did not say when the request will be made. The deadline for filing is January 30, or 60 days after Meng was arrested on December 1 in Vancouver. Meng, the daughter of Huawei Technologies Co Ltd founder Ren Zhengfei, was arrested at the request of the United States over alleged violations of US sanctions on Iran. She was released on bail last month and is due in court in Vancouver on February 6. Relations between China and Canada turned frosty after the arrest, with China detaining two Canadian citizens and sentencing to death a Canadian man previously found guilty of drug smuggling. The Chinese firm, the world's biggest maker of telecommunications equipment, said it had no comment on ongoing legal proceedings when contacted by Reuters on Tuesday. A US Justice Department spokesman said, "We will comment through our filings." The Canadian Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment outside regular business hours. Canada is one of over 100 countries with which the United States has extradition treaties. Once a formal request is received, a Canadian court must determine within 30 days if there is sufficient evidence to support extradition, and Canada's Minister of Justice must give a formal order. In an article published on Monday, a former Canadian spy chief said Canada should ban Huawei from supplying equipment for next-generation telecoms networks, while Canada's government is studying any security implications. Some of Canada's allies such as the United States and Australia have already imposed restrictions on using Huawei equipment, citing the risk of it being used for espionage. Huawei has repeatedly said such concerns are unfounded, while China's ambassador to Canada last week said there would be repercussions if Ottawa blocked Huawei. In Monday's interview, MacNaughton said he had complained to the United States that Canada was suffering from Chinese revenge for an arrest made at the US's request. "We don't like that it is our citizens who are being punished," the Globe and Mail cited MacNaughton as saying. "(The Americans) are the ones seeking to have the full force of American law brought against (Ms Meng) and yet we are the ones who are paying the price. Our citizens are." Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau previously said China was arbitrarily using the death penalty and called on world leaders to raise concerns about the detained Canadians.

US to formally seek extradition of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou: Report

Germany has revoked the licence of an Iranian airline because it has been transporting military equipment and personnel to Syria and other Middle East war zones, the foreign ministry said on Monday, after heavy US pressure on Berlin to act.

The United States imposed sanctions on Mahan Air in 2011, saying it provided financial and other support to Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) and has been pressing its European allies to follow suit.

The German ban on the airline takes immediate effect, a foreign ministry spokesman said.

US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin said on Monday that the "US Treasury appreciates the important decision by Germany to deny Mahan Air's landing rights. Mahan routinely flies IRGC-QF and weapons to Syria, is subject to our terrorism secondary sanctions, and should be denied access around the world."

Contacted by Reuters, Mahan Air in Tehran said it could not comment immediately on the ban.

The measure does not signal plans for the reimposition of broader sanctions against Iran, a German government source told Reuters.

Mahan Air, established in 1992 as Iran's first private airline, has the country's largest fleet of aircraft and has flights to a number of European countries, including France, Italy, Spain and Greece.

The US ambassador in Berlin, Richard Grenell, who has long objected to Mahan Air's links to Germany, welcomed the ban.

"Mahan Air has flown terrorists, weapons, equipment, and funds to international locations to support Iranian terrorist proxy groups," he said in a statement.

"Iran's use of Mahan Air to support the Assad regime in Syria, for example, has contributed to incredible human suffering, violence, and political instability felt across the world," he said, referring to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

''SECURITY NEEDS"

German government spokesman Steffen Seibert denied that the decision to ban Mahan air was the result of US pressure.

"The German decision is based on considerations of our security needs," he told a regular news conference.

"It cannot be ruled out that this airline could also transport cargo to Germany that threatens our security. This is based on knowledge of past terrorist activities by Iran in Europe," he added.

European countries have been under sustained US pressure to reimpose sanctions on Iran since President Donald Trump last year pulled Washington out of an international nuclear non-proliferation treaty reached with Tehran under his predecessor Barack Obama.

Along with Iran, the other signatories to the deal - Germany, France, Britain, Russia and China - are still trying to keep it alive.

The European countries, with more extensive economic ties to Iran and mindful of the threat that would be posed by another nuclear state in their immediate neighbourhood, have sought to shield themselves from the impact of Washington's extra-territorial sanctions, with limited success.

Germany has revoked the licence of an Iranian airline because it has been transporting military equipment and personnel to Syria and other Middle East war zones, the foreign ministry said on Monday, after heavy US pressure on Berlin to act.

Germany has revoked the licence of an Iranian airline because it has been transporting military equipment and personnel to Syria and other Middle East war zones, the foreign ministry said on Monday, after heavy US pressure on Berlin to act. The United States imposed sanctions on Mahan Air in 2011, saying it provided financial and other support to Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) and has been pressing its European allies to follow suit. The German ban on the airline takes immediate effect, a foreign ministry spokesman said. US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin said on Monday that the "US Treasury appreciates the important decision by Germany to deny Mahan Air's landing rights. Mahan routinely flies IRGC-QF and weapons to Syria, is subject to our terrorism secondary sanctions, and should be denied access around the world." Contacted by Reuters, Mahan Air in Tehran said it could not comment immediately on the ban. The measure does not signal plans for the reimposition of broader sanctions against Iran, a German government source told Reuters. Mahan Air, established in 1992 as Iran's first private airline, has the country's largest fleet of aircraft and has flights to a number of European countries, including France, Italy, Spain and Greece. The US ambassador in Berlin, Richard Grenell, who has long objected to Mahan Air's links to Germany, welcomed the ban. "Mahan Air has flown terrorists, weapons, equipment, and funds to international locations to support Iranian terrorist proxy groups," he said in a statement. "Iran's use of Mahan Air to support the Assad regime in Syria, for example, has contributed to incredible human suffering, violence, and political instability felt across the world," he said, referring to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. ''SECURITY NEEDS" German government spokesman Steffen Seibert denied that the decision to ban Mahan air was the result of US pressure. "The German decision is based on considerations of our security needs," he told a regular news conference. "It cannot be ruled out that this airline could also transport cargo to Germany that threatens our security. This is based on knowledge of past terrorist activities by Iran in Europe," he added. European countries have been under sustained US pressure to reimpose sanctions on Iran since President Donald Trump last year pulled Washington out of an international nuclear non-proliferation treaty reached with Tehran under his predecessor Barack Obama. Along with Iran, the other signatories to the deal - Germany, France, Britain, Russia and China - are still trying to keep it alive. The European countries, with more extensive economic ties to Iran and mindful of the threat that would be posed by another nuclear state in their immediate neighbourhood, have sought to shield themselves from the impact of Washington's extra-territorial sanctions, with limited success.

Germany bans Iranian airline from its airspace after US pressure

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/ghosn-vows-to-stay-in-japan-if-granted-bail-191701">Carlos Ghosn</a> is likely to remain in Japanese custody for the foreseeable future after a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/ghosn-appeals-against-japan-bail-rejection-190912">Tokyo court denied</a> him bail Tuesday despite a last-ditch personal appeal by the former Nissan boss.

The decision was expected as the court had previously judged him to be a flight risk who could potentially tamper with evidence. Even Ghosn's own lawyer has said his client will likely remain in jail until his trial.

But ever since his arrest out of the blue on November 19 on allegations of financial misconduct, Ghosn's case has been a rollercoaster ride that has kept Japan and the business world gripped.

A public pledge by the auto tycoon to stay in Japan and wear an electronic tag if necessary appears to have left the Tokyo District Court unmoved. In a public statement on Monday, Ghosn had set out a series of steps he hoped would convince the court he was not about to flee Japan.

He vowed to hand over his three passports, wear an electronic tagging device and increased the amount of bail money offered.

Ghosn also promised to hire security guards approved by prosecutors to monitor him and said he would not contact anyone connected with the case.

"As the court considers my bail application, I want to emphasise that I will reside in Japan and respect any and all bail conditions the court concludes are warranted," Ghosn said in a statement released by his US-based representatives.

He vowed to attend any subsequent trial "not only because I am legally obligated to do so, but because I am eager to finally have the opportunity to defend myself".

"I am not guilty of the charges against me and I look forward to defending my reputation in the courtroom," concluded the statement.

However, an official at the Japanese justice ministry told AFP: "There is no system in Japan in which a person accused in a criminal case can be released with such a tracking bracelet." "The court sets the bail sum and can also add appropriate conditions such as limitations on where the accused should stay," added the official.

Ghosn was technically in pre-trial detention after being slapped with three separate charges - all of which he denies.

Prosecutors believe he under-declared his income in official statements to shareholders between 2010 and 2015 to the tune of some five billion yen ($46 million) in an apparent attempt to avoid accusations he was overpaid. 
A second separate but very similar charge is that he continued to do this between 2015 and 2018, under-reporting his income by a further four billion yen.

He also faces a complex charge of seeking to shift personal investment losses onto Nissan's books and transferring company funds to a Saudi contact who allegedly stumped up collateral for him.

Since his arrest, he has been seen in public only once, in a dramatic court appearance where the much thinner executive pleaded his innocence in a packed courtroom.

His wife Carole has appealed to Human Rights Watch, claiming he is being held in "harsh" conditions and subjected to round-the-clock interrogations intended to extract a confession.

Ghosn's arrest has thrown into question the future of the auto alliance he forged, which has come under pressure in his absence. Nissan immediately ousted him as chairman after the arrest, as did Mitsubishi Motors, the other Japanese firm in the three-way alliance with Renault.

The French firm is expected to meet later this week to discuss removing Ghosn as chairman and CEO. French government officials have already urged the company's board to pick a "new lasting leadership".

Late Sunday, Nissan held an inaugural meeting of a special committee designed to improve governance in the wake of the scandal.

The head of the committee, Seiichiro Nishioka, said the problem was "an excessive concentration of authority in the hands of a single person".

The committee is expected to meet three or four additional times before issuing a final report at the end of March.

French Economy Minister Bruno Le Maire on Sunday denied talk of a potential merger between Renault and Nissan, despite reports in the Japanese media that Paris was pushing for that outcome.&nbsp;

Carlos Ghosn is likely to remain in Japanese custody for the foreseeable future after a Tokyo court denied him bail Tuesday despite a last-ditch personal appeal by the former Nissan boss.

Carlos Ghosn is likely to remain in Japanese custody for the foreseeable future after a Tokyo court denied him bail Tuesday despite a last-ditch personal appeal by the former Nissan boss. The decision was expected as the court had previously judged him to be a flight risk who could potentially tamper with evidence. Even Ghosn's own lawyer has said his client will likely remain in jail until his trial. But ever since his arrest out of the blue on November 19 on allegations of financial misconduct, Ghosn's case has been a rollercoaster ride that has kept Japan and the business world gripped. A public pledge by the auto tycoon to stay in Japan and wear an electronic tag if necessary appears to have left the Tokyo District Court unmoved. In a public statement on Monday, Ghosn had set out a series of steps he hoped would convince the court he was not about to flee Japan. He vowed to hand over his three passports, wear an electronic tagging device and increased the amount of bail money offered. Ghosn also promised to hire security guards approved by prosecutors to monitor him and said he would not contact anyone connected with the case. "As the court considers my bail application, I want to emphasise that I will reside in Japan and respect any and all bail conditions the court concludes are warranted," Ghosn said in a statement released by his US-based representatives. He vowed to attend any subsequent trial "not only because I am legally obligated to do so, but because I am eager to finally have the opportunity to defend myself". "I am not guilty of the charges against me and I look forward to defending my reputation in the courtroom," concluded the statement. However, an official at the Japanese justice ministry told AFP: "There is no system in Japan in which a person accused in a criminal case can be released with such a tracking bracelet." "The court sets the bail sum and can also add appropriate conditions such as limitations on where the accused should stay," added the official. Ghosn was technically in pre-trial detention after being slapped with three separate charges - all of which he denies. Prosecutors believe he under-declared his income in official statements to shareholders between 2010 and 2015 to the tune of some five billion yen ($46 million) in an apparent attempt to avoid accusations he was overpaid. A second separate but very similar charge is that he continued to do this between 2015 and 2018, under-reporting his income by a further four billion yen. He also faces a complex charge of seeking to shift personal investment losses onto Nissan's books and transferring company funds to a Saudi contact who allegedly stumped up collateral for him. Since his arrest, he has been seen in public only once, in a dramatic court appearance where the much thinner executive pleaded his innocence in a packed courtroom. His wife Carole has appealed to Human Rights Watch, claiming he is being held in "harsh" conditions and subjected to round-the-clock interrogations intended to extract a confession. Ghosn's arrest has thrown into question the future of the auto alliance he forged, which has come under pressure in his absence. Nissan immediately ousted him as chairman after the arrest, as did Mitsubishi Motors, the other Japanese firm in the three-way alliance with Renault. The French firm is expected to meet later this week to discuss removing Ghosn as chairman and CEO. French government officials have already urged the company's board to pick a "new lasting leadership". Late Sunday, Nissan held an inaugural meeting of a special committee designed to improve governance in the wake of the scandal. The head of the committee, Seiichiro Nishioka, said the problem was "an excessive concentration of authority in the hands of a single person". The committee is expected to meet three or four additional times before issuing a final report at the end of March. French Economy Minister Bruno Le Maire on Sunday denied talk of a potential merger between Renault and Nissan, despite reports in the Japanese media that Paris was pushing for that outcome.

Tokyo court denies ex-Nissan chief Ghosn's bail request

Kamala Harris: First Indian-origin black woman to contest US presidential election

After Japan, India overtakes UK as most attractive investment market:  PwC survey

One of 20 undeclared ballistic missile operating bases in&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/china-asks-north-korea-to-stop-missile-tests-tells-us-and-south-to-seek-talks-13161?amp">North Korea</a> serves as a missile headquarters, according to a report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) published on Monday.

"The Sino-ri missile operating base and the Nodong missiles deployed at this location fit into North Korea's presumed nuclear military strategy by providing an operational-level nuclear or conventional first strike capability," the report said.

The discovery of an undeclared missile headquarters comes three days after US President Donald Trump announced on Friday that he "looks forward" to another summit to discuss denuclearization with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in late February.

CSIS, which last reported on the 20 undeclared bases in November, said the Sino-ri base has never been declared by North Korea and as a result "does not appear to be the subject of denuclearization negotiations."

The report noted that missile operating bases would presumably be subject to declaration, verification, and dismantlement in any denuclearization deal.

"The North Koreans are not going to negotiate over things they don't disclose," said Victor Cha, one of the authors of the report. "It looks like they're playing a game. They're still going to have all this operational capability," even if they destroy their disclosed nuclear facilities.

Located 132 miles (212 kilometers) north of the demilitarized zone, the Sino-ri complex is a seven-square-mile (18-square-km) base that plays a key role in developing ballistic missiles capable of reaching South Korea, Japan, and even the US territory of Guam in the Western Pacific, the report said.

It houses a regiment-sized unit equipped with Nodong-1 medium-range ballistic missiles, the report added.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Satellite images of the base from December 27, 2018 show an entrance to an underground bunker, reinforced shelters and a headquarters, the report said.

One of 20 undeclared ballistic missile operating bases in North Korea serves as a missile headquarters, according to a report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) published on Monday.

One of 20 undeclared ballistic missile operating bases in North Korea serves as a missile headquarters, according to a report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) published on Monday. "The Sino-ri missile operating base and the Nodong missiles deployed at this location fit into North Korea's presumed nuclear military strategy by providing an operational-level nuclear or conventional first strike capability," the report said. The discovery of an undeclared missile headquarters comes three days after US President Donald Trump announced on Friday that he "looks forward" to another summit to discuss denuclearization with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in late February. CSIS, which last reported on the 20 undeclared bases in November, said the Sino-ri base has never been declared by North Korea and as a result "does not appear to be the subject of denuclearization negotiations." The report noted that missile operating bases would presumably be subject to declaration, verification, and dismantlement in any denuclearization deal. "The North Koreans are not going to negotiate over things they don't disclose," said Victor Cha, one of the authors of the report. "It looks like they're playing a game. They're still going to have all this operational capability," even if they destroy their disclosed nuclear facilities. Located 132 miles (212 kilometers) north of the demilitarized zone, the Sino-ri complex is a seven-square-mile (18-square-km) base that plays a key role in developing ballistic missiles capable of reaching South Korea, Japan, and even the US territory of Guam in the Western Pacific, the report said. It houses a regiment-sized unit equipped with Nodong-1 medium-range ballistic missiles, the report added. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Satellite images of the base from December 27, 2018 show an entrance to an underground bunker, reinforced shelters and a headquarters, the report said.

Report reveals undeclared North Korean missile base headquarters

An Israeli soldier fatally shot a Palestinian man who tried to stab a fellow soldier in the occupied West Bank on Monday, the Israeli military said.

The Palestinian health ministry confirmed the man was killed. There was no further comment from Palestinian officials.

"The assailant arrived by vehicle from the city of Nablus, exited the vehicle and attempted to stab an IDF (Israel Defence Forces) soldier who was at a nearby check post. Another soldier responded by firing towards the terrorist and neutralized him," the military said, adding that none of the troops were hurt.

Peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians broke down in 2014. A bid by the administration of US President Donald Trump to restart negotiations has so far shown little progress.

The Palestinians seek statehood in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, territories that Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East war. The Palestinians have limited self-rule in the West Bank, most of which is controlled by Israel.

An Israeli soldier fatally shot a Palestinian man who tried to stab a fellow soldier in the occupied West Bank on Monday, the Israeli military said. The Palestinian health ministry confirmed the man was killed.

An Israeli soldier fatally shot a Palestinian man who tried to stab a fellow soldier in the occupied West Bank on Monday, the Israeli military said. The Palestinian health ministry confirmed the man was killed. There was no further comment from Palestinian officials. "The assailant arrived by vehicle from the city of Nablus, exited the vehicle and attempted to stab an IDF (Israel Defence Forces) soldier who was at a nearby check post. Another soldier responded by firing towards the terrorist and neutralized him," the military said, adding that none of the troops were hurt. Peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians broke down in 2014. A bid by the administration of US President Donald Trump to restart negotiations has so far shown little progress. The Palestinians seek statehood in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, territories that Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East war. The Palestinians have limited self-rule in the West Bank, most of which is controlled by Israel.

Palestinian shot dead while trying to stab Israeli soldier: Army

Eighteen years ago, at the height of the Taliban's power in Afghanistan, Roshan Mashal secretly taught her daughters to read and write alongside a dozen local girls who smuggled school books to her house in potato sacks.

Mashal's daughters have since gained university degrees in economics and medicine. But she now fears the looming prospect that the hardline Islamist group, whose rule barred women from education, could once again become part of the government.

"They say they have changed, but I have concerns," she said in an interview in her office in Kabul. "There is no trust ... we don't want peace to come with women losing all the achievements of the last 17 years."

As talks to end Afghanistan's long war pick up momentum, women such as Mashal fear the freedoms eked out since US-backed Afghan forces overthrew the Taliban in 2001 are about to slide backwards and complain their voices are being sidelined.

An aide to Rula Ghani, the wife of Afghanistan's president, said the first lady had launched a survey of women in 34 provinces in a bid to amplify their voices in the peace process, with a report summarizing their views slated for February.

"The war was started by men, the war will be ended by men," said the aide. "But it's the women and children who suffer the most and they have a right to define peace."

Almost two decades of war have implicated both sides in the suffering of women. The United Nations last year expressed alarm at the increased use of air strikes by US and Afghan forces, which caused a rising death toll among women and children.

CHANGED TIMES

Afghanistan is still not an easy place to be a woman, with forced marriages, domestic violence and high maternal mortality rates prevalent nationwide, and particularly in rural areas, according to gender equality advocates.

But access to public life has improved, especially in cities such as the capital Kabul, where many women work outside the home and more than a quarter of the parliament is female.

But women lawmakers and some foreign diplomats fear enshrining gender equality may take a backseat in any peace deal to the intense international focus on ending the fighting and eliminating the country's potential as a haven for militants to launch attacks overseas.

"That is the threshold. The question is how much they will accept the position of women deteriorating in the process," said a senior Western diplomat in Kabul whose country funds projects to empower women. "There may be some backsliding, but hopefully not all the way back."

Between 1996 and 2001, under the Taliban government that called itself the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, women were banned from work, required to wear the full-length burqa that covered their faces, and not allowed to leave the house without a male relative.

The Taliban say they have changed, and that they would allow women to be educated, though they say schools should be segregated by gender and women required to wear loose clothing.

"We want Afghanistan to move forward with its present achievements and developments. But there are some reforms and changes the Emirate will struggle for," spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid told Reuters last month.

That is not enough to assuage the fears of women such as Karima Rahimyaar. She is the main provider for her family after her first husband was shot and killed by the Taliban in Kunduz province in 1996 and her second was injured and left unable to work after being imprisoned by them around three years ago.

She regularly comforts her university-aged daughters, who feel sick when they hear gunshots or mention of the Taliban.

"It is very difficult for me," she said.

Like many Afghans, she is desperate for peace and wants an end to the near-daily attacks across the country, which claimed the life of her 32-year-old son, a police officer, in 2016.

But not, she says, at the expense of women's rights.

"If there are no agreements and commitments, women will be inside the home and they will be deprived of everything," she said.

FIGHTING FOR A VOICE

Wazhma Frogh, a member of Afghanistan's High Peace Council, tasked with negotiating with the Taliban, said that she and the 11 other female members of the group had to fight to have their perspective heard.

"To get access is difficult," she said, saying that at times women had to raise their voices in meetings to avoid being ignored and that gatherings were sometimes held late at night in venues women did not feel comfortable travelling to.

Though the Taliban is refusing to include the Afghan government in formal talks, Frogh and other members have informally met with the insurgent group and with US special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad.

Meanwhile, young women such as Zuhal Babakarkhil, one of the fast-growing segment of the population who has reached adulthood since the fall of the Taliban, say Afghan society has changed.

"In Afghanistan, the women are no more the women from 20 years back," said the 28-year-old, who was in her first year of school when the Taliban took power and whose family fled overseas.

She now lives in Kabul, plays cricket and promotes higher education among girls. She says that social media such as Whatsapp and Facebook gives women access to organising networks at home and abroad that would be tough to curtail.

She said she has no intention to leave Afghanistan, despite her worries about the Taliban returning.

"We did it before ... but certainly this is not the way, to escape anymore," she said. "We are not leaving our home country. We will definitely stand up for our rights."

Eighteen years ago, at the height of the Taliban's power in Afghanistan, Roshan Mashal secretly taught her daughters to read and write alongside a dozen local girls who smuggled school books to her house in potato sacks.

Eighteen years ago, at the height of the Taliban's power in Afghanistan, Roshan Mashal secretly taught her daughters to read and write alongside a dozen local girls who smuggled school books to her house in potato sacks. Mashal's daughters have since gained university degrees in economics and medicine. But she now fears the looming prospect that the hardline Islamist group, whose rule barred women from education, could once again become part of the government. "They say they have changed, but I have concerns," she said in an interview in her office in Kabul. "There is no trust ... we don't want peace to come with women losing all the achievements of the last 17 years." As talks to end Afghanistan's long war pick up momentum, women such as Mashal fear the freedoms eked out since US-backed Afghan forces overthrew the Taliban in 2001 are about to slide backwards and complain their voices are being sidelined. An aide to Rula Ghani, the wife of Afghanistan's president, said the first lady had launched a survey of women in 34 provinces in a bid to amplify their voices in the peace process, with a report summarizing their views slated for February. "The war was started by men, the war will be ended by men," said the aide. "But it's the women and children who suffer the most and they have a right to define peace." Almost two decades of war have implicated both sides in the suffering of women. The United Nations last year expressed alarm at the increased use of air strikes by US and Afghan forces, which caused a rising death toll among women and children. CHANGED TIMES Afghanistan is still not an easy place to be a woman, with forced marriages, domestic violence and high maternal mortality rates prevalent nationwide, and particularly in rural areas, according to gender equality advocates. But access to public life has improved, especially in cities such as the capital Kabul, where many women work outside the home and more than a quarter of the parliament is female. But women lawmakers and some foreign diplomats fear enshrining gender equality may take a backseat in any peace deal to the intense international focus on ending the fighting and eliminating the country's potential as a haven for militants to launch attacks overseas. "That is the threshold. The question is how much they will accept the position of women deteriorating in the process," said a senior Western diplomat in Kabul whose country funds projects to empower women. "There may be some backsliding, but hopefully not all the way back." Between 1996 and 2001, under the Taliban government that called itself the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, women were banned from work, required to wear the full-length burqa that covered their faces, and not allowed to leave the house without a male relative. The Taliban say they have changed, and that they would allow women to be educated, though they say schools should be segregated by gender and women required to wear loose clothing. "We want Afghanistan to move forward with its present achievements and developments. But there are some reforms and changes the Emirate will struggle for," spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid told Reuters last month. That is not enough to assuage the fears of women such as Karima Rahimyaar. She is the main provider for her family after her first husband was shot and killed by the Taliban in Kunduz province in 1996 and her second was injured and left unable to work after being imprisoned by them around three years ago. She regularly comforts her university-aged daughters, who feel sick when they hear gunshots or mention of the Taliban. "It is very difficult for me," she said. Like many Afghans, she is desperate for peace and wants an end to the near-daily attacks across the country, which claimed the life of her 32-year-old son, a police officer, in 2016. But not, she says, at the expense of women's rights. "If there are no agreements and commitments, women will be inside the home and they will be deprived of everything," she said. FIGHTING FOR A VOICE Wazhma Frogh, a member of Afghanistan's High Peace Council, tasked with negotiating with the Taliban, said that she and the 11 other female members of the group had to fight to have their perspective heard. "To get access is difficult," she said, saying that at times women had to raise their voices in meetings to avoid being ignored and that gatherings were sometimes held late at night in venues women did not feel comfortable travelling to. Though the Taliban is refusing to include the Afghan government in formal talks, Frogh and other members have informally met with the insurgent group and with US special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad. Meanwhile, young women such as Zuhal Babakarkhil, one of the fast-growing segment of the population who has reached adulthood since the fall of the Taliban, say Afghan society has changed. "In Afghanistan, the women are no more the women from 20 years back," said the 28-year-old, who was in her first year of school when the Taliban took power and whose family fled overseas. She now lives in Kabul, plays cricket and promotes higher education among girls. She says that social media such as Whatsapp and Facebook gives women access to organising networks at home and abroad that would be tough to curtail. She said she has no intention to leave Afghanistan, despite her worries about the Taliban returning. "We did it before ... but certainly this is not the way, to escape anymore," she said. "We are not leaving our home country. We will definitely stand up for our rights."

As Taliban talks gather pace, Afghan women fear clock turning back

After remarkable growth and change for decades, most economists believe <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/china-to-introduce-policies-to-strengthen-domestic-consumption-report-189109">China's economy</a> is entering a period of slower, steadier growth.

The world's second-largest economy grew 6.6 per cent last year, government figures showed on Monday, the slowest rate since 1990.

Here is a brief look at China's economic roller-coaster since 1949:

The Mao Years

When Mao Zedong's communists seized control in 1949 after decades of strife, China was a basket case, agricultural output had cratered, the industry was hopelessly backward and hyper-inflation raged.

Adopting Soviet-style central planning, Mao's regime brought stability by nationalising industries, regulating the monetary system, and redistributing land to boost agriculture.

But leaders courted crisis with ideologically-driven campaigns like the "Great Leap Forward"— an ill-advised bid to super-charge industry and agriculture that caused widespread famine.

Stability was eventually restored but Mao brought China to its knees again through his radical leftist "Cultural Revolution" from 1966-76, which severely weakened the economy.

Deng takes charge

After Mao's death in 1976, Deng Xiaoping — purged twice by Mao over his reform tendencies—rose again, taking power in 1978.

He turned away from ideology and isolationism toward a more pragmatic, results-oriented approach, and slowly re-connected China with the world.

Reforms began to modernise the economy and introduce market-based mechanisms, best exemplified by a handful of new coastal "special economic zones" like Shenzhen, where foreign investment in export-oriented industries was welcomed.&nbsp;

Such zones posted rapid growth, encouraging more reforms that would eventually give China the reputation as the "factory of the world".

The Boom

By the early 1980s, Deng's reforms had re-energised China, which became the fastest-growing major economy for most of the next four decades.

This was briefly threatened in 1989, however, when Deng and other party elders sent tanks to crush Tiananmen Square demonstrations demanding commensurate political reform.

Growth sputtered in the aftermath and hard-liners pushed back against further reform.

But the wily Deng visited coastal export zones in 1992 in his famous "southern tour" that cemented "reform and opening" once and for all as China's guiding philosophy.

Incomes and living standards soared, Shanghai's stock exchange re-opened in 1990 after a four-decade hiatus, and China symbolically rejoined the global economy with WTO membership in 2001.

But growth brought other ills like inflation, corruption, and environmental degradation, and reform of inefficient state enterprises in the 1990s deprived millions of the "iron rice bowl" of cradle-to-grave employment.

Slowing Down

By 2010, China had become the world's second-biggest economy after the United States, a commercial, technological and military juggernaut which used that growing clout to extend its global influence.

But the era of double-digit expansion also ended around that time, due to an ageing workforce, a gradual shift of foreign investment to lower-cost developing countries, and other factors.

China also began deliberately downshifting to curb environmental damage, wealth inequities, and other growth side-effects, while launching a re-balancing of the economy to rely more on domestic consumption, and less on volatile foreign export demand.

New challenges

Slower, but more stable, expansion is forecast in the years ahead, but economists say that may limit China's ability to grow its way out of two major new challenges: huge domestic debt and US trade hawkishness.

A $586-billion stimulus package helped China weather the 2008-09 world financial crisis better than other major economies, but it contributed to a mountain of debt that the IMF has called "dangerous".

Beijing launched a debt crackdown a year ago, but it faced a new challenge as US President Donald Trump launched a trade war with China that has prompted both sides to slap tariffs on more than $350 billion in two-way commerce. 
&nbsp;

After remarkable growth and change for decades, most economists believe China's economy is entering a period of slower, steadier growth. The world's second-largest economy grew 6.

After remarkable growth and change for decades, most economists believe China's economy is entering a period of slower, steadier growth. The world's second-largest economy grew 6.6 per cent last year, government figures showed on Monday, the slowest rate since 1990. Here is a brief look at China's economic roller-coaster since 1949: The Mao Years When Mao Zedong's communists seized control in 1949 after decades of strife, China was a basket case, agricultural output had cratered, the industry was hopelessly backward and hyper-inflation raged. Adopting Soviet-style central planning, Mao's regime brought stability by nationalising industries, regulating the monetary system, and redistributing land to boost agriculture. But leaders courted crisis with ideologically-driven campaigns like the "Great Leap Forward"— an ill-advised bid to super-charge industry and agriculture that caused widespread famine. Stability was eventually restored but Mao brought China to its knees again through his radical leftist "Cultural Revolution" from 1966-76, which severely weakened the economy. Deng takes charge After Mao's death in 1976, Deng Xiaoping — purged twice by Mao over his reform tendencies—rose again, taking power in 1978. He turned away from ideology and isolationism toward a more pragmatic, results-oriented approach, and slowly re-connected China with the world. Reforms began to modernise the economy and introduce market-based mechanisms, best exemplified by a handful of new coastal "special economic zones" like Shenzhen, where foreign investment in export-oriented industries was welcomed. Such zones posted rapid growth, encouraging more reforms that would eventually give China the reputation as the "factory of the world". The Boom By the early 1980s, Deng's reforms had re-energised China, which became the fastest-growing major economy for most of the next four decades. This was briefly threatened in 1989, however, when Deng and other party elders sent tanks to crush Tiananmen Square demonstrations demanding commensurate political reform. Growth sputtered in the aftermath and hard-liners pushed back against further reform. But the wily Deng visited coastal export zones in 1992 in his famous "southern tour" that cemented "reform and opening" once and for all as China's guiding philosophy. Incomes and living standards soared, Shanghai's stock exchange re-opened in 1990 after a four-decade hiatus, and China symbolically rejoined the global economy with WTO membership in 2001. But growth brought other ills like inflation, corruption, and environmental degradation, and reform of inefficient state enterprises in the 1990s deprived millions of the "iron rice bowl" of cradle-to-grave employment. Slowing Down By 2010, China had become the world's second-biggest economy after the United States, a commercial, technological and military juggernaut which used that growing clout to extend its global influence. But the era of double-digit expansion also ended around that time, due to an ageing workforce, a gradual shift of foreign investment to lower-cost developing countries, and other factors. China also began deliberately downshifting to curb environmental damage, wealth inequities, and other growth side-effects, while launching a re-balancing of the economy to rely more on domestic consumption, and less on volatile foreign export demand. New challenges Slower, but more stable, expansion is forecast in the years ahead, but economists say that may limit China's ability to grow its way out of two major new challenges: huge domestic debt and US trade hawkishness. A $586-billion stimulus package helped China weather the 2008-09 world financial crisis better than other major economies, but it contributed to a mountain of debt that the IMF has called "dangerous". Beijing launched a debt crackdown a year ago, but it faced a new challenge as US President Donald Trump launched a trade war with China that has prompted both sides to slap tariffs on more than $350 billion in two-way commerce.

From Mao to Trump: China's economic roller-coaster since 1949

The United States has <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/syria-is-sand-and-death-trump-says-187966">no plan for Syria</a> as it proceeds with President Donald Trump's order to pull American troops out of the country, a top official who quit in protest at the policy said on Sunday.

Brett McGurk, who was America's envoy to the US-led global coalition against the Islamic State group, said "there's no plan for what's coming next" and this is increasing the risk to US forces.

He spoke in an interview with CBS's "Face the Nation," after a suicide bomber on Wednesday killed four Americans and 15 others in the northern Syrian town of Manbij. It was the deadliest attack to hit US troops since they deployed to Syria in 2014 to assist local forces against the Islamic State group.&nbsp;

The bombing came after Trump's announcement last month that he was ordering a full withdrawal of the 2,000 US troops from Syria, shocking allies and leading to the resignations of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis as well as McGurk.

Senior US officials have since given contradictory statements about US intentions, but the Pentagon said it had begun the withdrawal, although how long it would take remained uncertain.

"The president has made that clear -- we are leaving. And that means our force should be really with one mission: to get out and get out safely," McGurk told "Face the Nation."

But he added: "Right now we do not have a plan. It increases a vulnerability of our force... It is increasing the risk to our people on the ground in Syria and will open up space for ISIS," another acronym for IS.

Most importantly, said McGurk, the US cannot expect "a partner" such as NATO-ally Turkey to take the place of the United States.

"That is not realistic. And if our forces are under order to withdraw, as at the same time they are trying to find some formula for another coalition partner to come in, that is not workable. That is not a viable plan."

Trump announced the US withdrawal because, he said, IS had been defeated -- something McGurk and other experts dispute.

McGurk has previously warned that the US pullout would shore up Syria's President Bashar al-Assad and lessen America's leverage with Russia and Iran.

The United States has no plan for Syria as it proceeds with President Donald Trump's order to pull American troops out of the country, a top official who quit in protest at the policy said on Sunday.

The United States has no plan for Syria as it proceeds with President Donald Trump's order to pull American troops out of the country, a top official who quit in protest at the policy said on Sunday. Brett McGurk, who was America's envoy to the US-led global coalition against the Islamic State group, said "there's no plan for what's coming next" and this is increasing the risk to US forces. He spoke in an interview with CBS's "Face the Nation," after a suicide bomber on Wednesday killed four Americans and 15 others in the northern Syrian town of Manbij. It was the deadliest attack to hit US troops since they deployed to Syria in 2014 to assist local forces against the Islamic State group. The bombing came after Trump's announcement last month that he was ordering a full withdrawal of the 2,000 US troops from Syria, shocking allies and leading to the resignations of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis as well as McGurk. Senior US officials have since given contradictory statements about US intentions, but the Pentagon said it had begun the withdrawal, although how long it would take remained uncertain. "The president has made that clear -- we are leaving. And that means our force should be really with one mission: to get out and get out safely," McGurk told "Face the Nation." But he added: "Right now we do not have a plan. It increases a vulnerability of our force... It is increasing the risk to our people on the ground in Syria and will open up space for ISIS," another acronym for IS. Most importantly, said McGurk, the US cannot expect "a partner" such as NATO-ally Turkey to take the place of the United States. "That is not realistic. And if our forces are under order to withdraw, as at the same time they are trying to find some formula for another coalition partner to come in, that is not workable. That is not a viable plan." Trump announced the US withdrawal because, he said, IS had been defeated -- something McGurk and other experts dispute. McGurk has previously warned that the US pullout would shore up Syria's President Bashar al-Assad and lessen America's leverage with Russia and Iran.

America has 'no plan' as it pulls out of Syria: Ex-US envoy

A Sikh man has been brutally assaulted in an alleged hate crime by a white man who pulled his beard, kicked and punched him in the face at a store in the US, the latest such incident in the country.

Harwinder Singh Dodd, who was working at a convenience store in the US State of Oregon, was racially targeted on Monday by a 24-year-old Andrew Ramsey.

Ramsey targeted Dodd because of his perception of the employee's religion, FOX 12 TV news reported, citing a court document.&nbsp;

Ramsey wanted rolling papers for cigarettes but did not have an ID and the clerk would not sell them to him, Justin Brecht, a legislative policy adviser in the Oregon State Capitol and a former combat Marine, was quoted as saying by the report.

When Dodd asked Ramsey to leave, he attacked him by pulling his beard, punching him in the face, pulling him to the ground and kicking him, Brecht said, adding that they held Ramsey down until officers got there, the report said.

"He was bleeding, he had gotten punched quite a bit in the face, and kicked on the ground and thrown to the ground very brutally. It was very serious." 
Ramsey has been charged with a hate crime, assault, police said, adding that he threw his shoe at Dodd and tried to steal his head covering.&nbsp;

He was also charged with assault in the fourth degree, disorderly conduct, and criminal trespass.

Hate crimes increased by 40 per cent in Oregon from 2016 to 2017, according to the FBI.

In August 2018, in about a week, two Sikh men were brutally assaulted in the US State of California that raised concerns over increasing incidents of hate crimes in the country.

Last year, the South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT) published a report documenting a 45 per cent increase in hate violence and rhetoric against Indians, Sikhs, and South Asian Americans from the year prior.

Harwinder Singh Dodd, who was working at a convenience store in the US State of Oregon, was racially targeted on Monday by a 24-year-old Andrew Ramsey.

A Sikh man has been brutally assaulted in an alleged hate crime by a white man who pulled his beard, kicked and punched him in the face at a store in the US, the latest such incident in the country. Harwinder Singh Dodd, who was working at a convenience store in the US State of Oregon, was racially targeted on Monday by a 24-year-old Andrew Ramsey. Ramsey targeted Dodd because of his perception of the employee's religion, FOX 12 TV news reported, citing a court document. Ramsey wanted rolling papers for cigarettes but did not have an ID and the clerk would not sell them to him, Justin Brecht, a legislative policy adviser in the Oregon State Capitol and a former combat Marine, was quoted as saying by the report. When Dodd asked Ramsey to leave, he attacked him by pulling his beard, punching him in the face, pulling him to the ground and kicking him, Brecht said, adding that they held Ramsey down until officers got there, the report said. "He was bleeding, he had gotten punched quite a bit in the face, and kicked on the ground and thrown to the ground very brutally. It was very serious." Ramsey has been charged with a hate crime, assault, police said, adding that he threw his shoe at Dodd and tried to steal his head covering. He was also charged with assault in the fourth degree, disorderly conduct, and criminal trespass. Hate crimes increased by 40 per cent in Oregon from 2016 to 2017, according to the FBI. In August 2018, in about a week, two Sikh men were brutally assaulted in the US State of California that raised concerns over increasing incidents of hate crimes in the country. Last year, the South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT) published a report documenting a 45 per cent increase in hate violence and rhetoric against Indians, Sikhs, and South Asian Americans from the year prior.

Sikh man attacked in hate crime in US

Dozens of families displaced from their homes in the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/opinions/us-pakistan-talks-great-game-redux-in-afghanistan-191186">northern province of Sar-e Pul by Taliban pressure</a> have arrived in the provincial capital, as the insurgents have tightened their grip around the city, residents and officials said.

Taliban fighters have been threatening oil fields around the city of Sar-e Pul as they have stepped up operations with the apparent aim of strengthening their position during <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghan-taliban-reject-talks-with-us-in-pakistan-191358">peace talks with US&nbsp;officials</a>.

"In general, the security situation in Sar-e Pul province has been in critical condition and the Taliban are trying to carry out their attacks on the districts close to the city," said Zabiullah Amani, spokesman for the governor of Sar-e Pul.

The fighting comes as peace talks between US&nbsp;special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad and Taliban representatives have stalled over the insurgents' demand to focus the agenda for peace talks on the withdrawal of US&nbsp;troops from Afghanistan.

The increasingly confident Taliban now control broad swathes of the countryside outside the main cities of Afghanistan and have set their stamp ever more clearly on areas under their control as government forces struggle to push them back.

In Sar-e Pul, officials said around 40 families had arrived in the provincial capital from Kohistan, an isolated district firmly under Taliban control, and have mostly been seeking shelter from the freezing winter temperatures in city mosques.

With punishing winter temperatures making life a misery for displaced people, little help has come from the government.

"These families are now in the centre of the city of Sar-e Pul and are in a very bad state because they do not have any kind of living materials," Amani said.

Accounts from the displaced families suggest the Taliban singled out families believed to have sympathies with the government or family members in the police and expelled them.

Haji Azizullah, an elder who oversaw the transfer of displaced families from Kohistan district, said those driven from their homes were all suspected of being close to the military or the security forces.

"The Taliban told us to either take your children and work together with the Taliban under our authority or move you out of this area," he said.

With the Taliban still refusing to talk directly with the Afghan government, the pressure on families on the opposing side points to some of the likely problems in any post-settlement Afghanistan after more than 17 years of war.

Saber, a resident of Kohistan who left the district with her six children last week, said Taliban had approached her a week ago and told her to bring her son, a member of the Afghan Local Police, into them.

"When I refused, four people from the Taliban came yesterday and told me I had to get out of the area," she said.

The Taliban spokesman was not immediately for comment.

&nbsp;

Taliban fighters have been threatening oil fields around the city of Sar-e Pul as they have stepped up operations with the apparent aim of strengthening their position during peace talks with US officials.

Dozens of families displaced from their homes in the northern province of Sar-e Pul by Taliban pressure have arrived in the provincial capital, as the insurgents have tightened their grip around the city, residents and officials said. Taliban fighters have been threatening oil fields around the city of Sar-e Pul as they have stepped up operations with the apparent aim of strengthening their position during peace talks with US officials. "In general, the security situation in Sar-e Pul province has been in critical condition and the Taliban are trying to carry out their attacks on the districts close to the city," said Zabiullah Amani, spokesman for the governor of Sar-e Pul. The fighting comes as peace talks between US special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad and Taliban representatives have stalled over the insurgents' demand to focus the agenda for peace talks on the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan. The increasingly confident Taliban now control broad swathes of the countryside outside the main cities of Afghanistan and have set their stamp ever more clearly on areas under their control as government forces struggle to push them back. In Sar-e Pul, officials said around 40 families had arrived in the provincial capital from Kohistan, an isolated district firmly under Taliban control, and have mostly been seeking shelter from the freezing winter temperatures in city mosques. With punishing winter temperatures making life a misery for displaced people, little help has come from the government. "These families are now in the centre of the city of Sar-e Pul and are in a very bad state because they do not have any kind of living materials," Amani said. Accounts from the displaced families suggest the Taliban singled out families believed to have sympathies with the government or family members in the police and expelled them. Haji Azizullah, an elder who oversaw the transfer of displaced families from Kohistan district, said those driven from their homes were all suspected of being close to the military or the security forces. "The Taliban told us to either take your children and work together with the Taliban under our authority or move you out of this area," he said. With the Taliban still refusing to talk directly with the Afghan government, the pressure on families on the opposing side points to some of the likely problems in any post-settlement Afghanistan after more than 17 years of war. Saber, a resident of Kohistan who left the district with her six children last week, said Taliban had approached her a week ago and told her to bring her son, a member of the Afghan Local Police, into them. "When I refused, four people from the Taliban came yesterday and told me I had to get out of the area," she said. The Taliban spokesman was not immediately for comment.

Families in Afghanistan's north seek shelter as Taliban ups pressure

The United States is pushing for regular reviews of China's progress on pledged<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-officials-consider-lifting-china-tariffs-report-191160"> trade reforms</a> as a condition for a trade deal - and could again resort to tariffs if it deems Beijing has violated the agreement, according to sources briefed on negotiations to end the trade war between the two nations.

A continuing threat of tariffs hanging over commerce between the world's two largest economies would mean a deal would not end the risk of investing in businesses or assets that have been impacted by the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/explaining-the-us-china-trade-war-which-grabbed-spotlight-in-2018-185043">trade war</a>.

"The threat of tariffs is not going away, even if there is a deal," said one of three sources briefed on the talks who spoke with Reuters on condition of anonymity.

Chinese negotiators were not keen on the idea of regular compliance checks, the source said, but the US proposal "didn't derail negotiations."

A Chinese source said the United States wants “periodic assessments” but it's not yet clear how often.

“It looks like humiliation," the source said. "But perhaps the two sides could find a way to save face for the Chinese government."

The administration of US President Donald Trump has imposed import tariffs on Chinese goods to put pressure on Beijing to meet a long list of demands that would rewrite the terms of trade between the two countries.

The demands include changes to China's policies on intellectual property protection, technology transfers, industrial subsidies and other trade barriers.

An enforcement and verification process is unusual for trade deals and is akin to the process around punitive economic sanctions such as those imposed on North Korea and Iran.

Disputes over trade are more typically dealt with through courts, the World Trade Organization (WTO) or through arbitration panels and other dispute settlement mechanisms built into trade agreements.

Trump's team has criticized the WTO for failing to hold China accountable for not executing on promised market reforms. The U.S. has also criticized the WTO's dispute settlement process and is seeking reforms at the organisation.

(For an explainer on how the US-China talks differ from any other trade negotiation, see: )

Regular reviews would be one potential solution to address a demand from US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer for ongoing verification of any trade pact between the two countries, three sources familiar with the talks told Reuters. The threat of tariffs would be used to keep reform on track, the sources said.

Lighthizer is leading negotiations with China. A USTR spokesman declined to comment on the possibility of regular assessments.

The idea of quarterly reviews of quarterly reviews was part of a US negotiating document leaked after talks in May 2018, before the United States had slapped its first round of duties on $50 billion worth of Chinese goods.

The renewed focus on regular reviews in current negotiations - this time carrying the threat of tariffs - underscores the growing distrust between the two countries.

The extra scrutiny is needed and should be based on clear benchmarks - with consequence for failing to meet them, said Erin Ennis, Senior Vice President of the US-China Business Council, a trade group representing American companies doing business in China.

“It needs to be tied to removing or reducing the tariffs," Ennis said. "If China can show compliance through a process like this, it would also be a trust-building measure for both sides.”

Broken promises

Trump's administration has accused China of repeatedly failing to follow through on previous pledges to implement reforms sought by the United States.

Washington often cites as an example the difficulties still faced by foreign payment card operators in entering China's market despite a 2012 WTO ruling that Beijing was discriminating against them.

A separate industry source said it is likely that different agreement on separate issues - forced technology transfer, intellectual property, changes to China's legal system - would require separate verification processes, all of which will need to be hammered out by negotiators.

"The challenge of verification and enforcement stems from the fact that China has made promises it hasn't kept," the source said.

Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed to a 90-day truce in the trade war in December to give their teams time to negotiate a deal. Nearly 50 days later, there is little sign that China will make the concessions the US is seeking.

Lighthizer saw no progress on structural issues at three days of mid-level talks in Beijing last week, Republican Senator Chuck Grassley said on Tuesday.

China's Vice Premier and lead negotiator Liu He is due to visit Washington for the next round of talks with Lighthizer and US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin at the end of the month.

The United States is pushing for regular reviews of China's progress on pledged trade reforms as a condition for a trade deal - and could again resort to tariffs if it deems Beijing has violated the agreement, according to sources briefed on negotiations to end the trade war between the two nations.

The United States is pushing for regular reviews of China's progress on pledged trade reforms as a condition for a trade deal - and could again resort to tariffs if it deems Beijing has violated the agreement, according to sources briefed on negotiations to end the trade war between the two nations. A continuing threat of tariffs hanging over commerce between the world's two largest economies would mean a deal would not end the risk of investing in businesses or assets that have been impacted by the trade war. "The threat of tariffs is not going away, even if there is a deal," said one of three sources briefed on the talks who spoke with Reuters on condition of anonymity. Chinese negotiators were not keen on the idea of regular compliance checks, the source said, but the US proposal "didn't derail negotiations." A Chinese source said the United States wants “periodic assessments” but it's not yet clear how often. “It looks like humiliation," the source said. "But perhaps the two sides could find a way to save face for the Chinese government." The administration of US President Donald Trump has imposed import tariffs on Chinese goods to put pressure on Beijing to meet a long list of demands that would rewrite the terms of trade between the two countries. The demands include changes to China's policies on intellectual property protection, technology transfers, industrial subsidies and other trade barriers. An enforcement and verification process is unusual for trade deals and is akin to the process around punitive economic sanctions such as those imposed on North Korea and Iran. Disputes over trade are more typically dealt with through courts, the World Trade Organization (WTO) or through arbitration panels and other dispute settlement mechanisms built into trade agreements. Trump's team has criticized the WTO for failing to hold China accountable for not executing on promised market reforms. The U.S. has also criticized the WTO's dispute settlement process and is seeking reforms at the organisation. (For an explainer on how the US-China talks differ from any other trade negotiation, see: ) Regular reviews would be one potential solution to address a demand from US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer for ongoing verification of any trade pact between the two countries, three sources familiar with the talks told Reuters. The threat of tariffs would be used to keep reform on track, the sources said. Lighthizer is leading negotiations with China. A USTR spokesman declined to comment on the possibility of regular assessments. The idea of quarterly reviews of quarterly reviews was part of a US negotiating document leaked after talks in May 2018, before the United States had slapped its first round of duties on $50 billion worth of Chinese goods. The renewed focus on regular reviews in current negotiations - this time carrying the threat of tariffs - underscores the growing distrust between the two countries. The extra scrutiny is needed and should be based on clear benchmarks - with consequence for failing to meet them, said Erin Ennis, Senior Vice President of the US-China Business Council, a trade group representing American companies doing business in China. “It needs to be tied to removing or reducing the tariffs," Ennis said. "If China can show compliance through a process like this, it would also be a trust-building measure for both sides.” Broken promises Trump's administration has accused China of repeatedly failing to follow through on previous pledges to implement reforms sought by the United States. Washington often cites as an example the difficulties still faced by foreign payment card operators in entering China's market despite a 2012 WTO ruling that Beijing was discriminating against them. A separate industry source said it is likely that different agreement on separate issues - forced technology transfer, intellectual property, changes to China's legal system - would require separate verification processes, all of which will need to be hammered out by negotiators. "The challenge of verification and enforcement stems from the fact that China has made promises it hasn't kept," the source said. Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping agreed to a 90-day truce in the trade war in December to give their teams time to negotiate a deal. Nearly 50 days later, there is little sign that China will make the concessions the US is seeking. Lighthizer saw no progress on structural issues at three days of mid-level talks in Beijing last week, Republican Senator Chuck Grassley said on Tuesday. China's Vice Premier and lead negotiator Liu He is due to visit Washington for the next round of talks with Lighthizer and US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin at the end of the month.

US demands regular review of China trade reform

Iran's foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif on Friday targetted US National Security Advisor John Bolton in a tweet and called him a "bully."

In a tweet, Zarif posted screenshots of two media reports, a decade apart, on Bolton calling for an air strike on Iran.&nbsp;

"Same bull. Same bully. Same delusion", Zarif tweeted with two different articles from 2009 and 2019.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Same bull. Same bully. Same delusion.<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/10YearChallenge?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#10YearChallenge</a> <a href="https://t.co/KgUAejJcar">pic.twitter.com/KgUAejJcar</a>
— Javad Zarif (@JZarif) <a href="https://twitter.com/JZarif/status/1086242142488530944?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 18, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The articles quoted Bolton's demand for launching an air strike on Iran.

Earlier this week, reports stated that Bolton has&nbsp;asked the Pentagon in September to prepare military options for attacking Iran following the&nbsp;attacks on US Diplomatic sites in Iraq.

Tensions between Iran and the US have been heightened after President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the nuclear deal and re-imposed sanctions on Iran. 
&nbsp;

Iran's foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif on Friday targetted US National Security Advisor John Bolton in a tweet and called him a "bully." In a tweet, Zarif posted screenshots of two media reports, a decade apart, on Bolton calling for an air strike on Iran.

Iran's foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif on Friday targetted US National Security Advisor John Bolton in a tweet and called him a "bully." In a tweet, Zarif posted screenshots of two media reports, a decade apart, on Bolton calling for an air strike on Iran. "Same bull. Same bully. Same delusion", Zarif tweeted with two different articles from 2009 and 2019. Same bull. Same bully. Same delusion.#10YearChallenge pic.twitter.com/KgUAejJcar — Javad Zarif (@JZarif) January 18, 2019 × The articles quoted Bolton's demand for launching an air strike on Iran. Earlier this week, reports stated that Bolton has asked the Pentagon in September to prepare military options for attacking Iran following the attacks on US Diplomatic sites in Iraq. Tensions between Iran and the US have been heightened after President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the nuclear deal and re-imposed sanctions on Iran.

Iran's foreign minister calls Bolton 'bully', targets him with '10-year challenge'

US officials have considered lifting tariffs on Chinese imports to calm volatile stock markets and encourage Beijing to make concessions in current trade talks, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.

American and Chinese trade officials have until March 1 to resolve their <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/explaining-the-us-china-trade-war-which-grabbed-spotlight-in-2018-185043">trade war</a>, to prevent a sharp increase in punitive US duties on $200 billion in Chinese goods.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin raised the idea of revoking tariffs on some or all of the $250 billion in Chinese goods impacted, during discussions on the strategy for the current talks but the question has not yet reached the White House, according to The Journal.

The US stock market reacted favorably to the report, with equities prices closing higher after being flat for most of the day.

The talks with Beijing are being led by US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, who has taken a more hard line position on trade than Mnuchin.

The Treasury Department told AFP on that the trade talks with China were "nowhere near completion."

"Neither Secretary Mnuchin nor Ambassador Lighthizer have made any recommendations to anyone with respect to tariffs or other parts of the negotiation with China," a spokesperson working with the trade team said by email.

CNBC quoted a senior White House official involved in the trade talks saying that Trump had no incentive to offer concessions, and officials instead were focused on preparations for talks with Chinese Vice Premier Liu He set for January 30-31 in Washington.

US President Donald Trump tweeted January 8 that the talks with Beijing were "going very well!"

But the trade war has rattled stock markets in the months since, putting pressure on the White House to reach a resolution.

Trump launched the trade war last year and the two sides have since exchanged tit-for-tat tariffs on more than $360 billion in two-way trade.

US officials have considered lifting tariffs on Chinese imports to calm volatile stock markets and encourage Beijing to make concessions in current trade talks, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.

US officials have considered lifting tariffs on Chinese imports to calm volatile stock markets and encourage Beijing to make concessions in current trade talks, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday. American and Chinese trade officials have until March 1 to resolve their trade war, to prevent a sharp increase in punitive US duties on $200 billion in Chinese goods. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin raised the idea of revoking tariffs on some or all of the $250 billion in Chinese goods impacted, during discussions on the strategy for the current talks but the question has not yet reached the White House, according to The Journal. The US stock market reacted favorably to the report, with equities prices closing higher after being flat for most of the day. The talks with Beijing are being led by US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, who has taken a more hard line position on trade than Mnuchin. The Treasury Department told AFP on that the trade talks with China were "nowhere near completion." "Neither Secretary Mnuchin nor Ambassador Lighthizer have made any recommendations to anyone with respect to tariffs or other parts of the negotiation with China," a spokesperson working with the trade team said by email. CNBC quoted a senior White House official involved in the trade talks saying that Trump had no incentive to offer concessions, and officials instead were focused on preparations for talks with Chinese Vice Premier Liu He set for January 30-31 in Washington. US President Donald Trump tweeted January 8 that the talks with Beijing were "going very well!" But the trade war has rattled stock markets in the months since, putting pressure on the White House to reach a resolution. Trump launched the trade war last year and the two sides have since exchanged tit-for-tat tariffs on more than $360 billion in two-way trade.

US officials consider lifting China tariffs: Report

A North Korean envoy arrived in Washington on Thursday for expected talks with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and a possible encounter with President Donald Trump aimed at laying the groundwork for a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/us-and-north-korea-negotiating-location-for-second-summit-donald-trump-188710">second US-North Korea summit</a>.

The envoy arrived on the same day <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/in-revamped-missile-defence-strategy-trump-deems-north-korea-an-extraordinary-threat-191082">Trump unveiled a revamped US missile defence strategy </a>that singled out North Korea as an ongoing and "extraordinary threat," seven months after he declared after his first summit with leader Kim Jong Un that the North Korean threat had been eliminated.

Kim Yong Chol, Pyongyang's lead negotiator in denuclearisation talks with the United States, was due to meet Pompeo and could also go to the White House on Friday, a person familiar with the plan said, a sign of potential movement in a diplomatic effort that has appeared stalled for months.

The North Korean visit could yield an announcement of plans for another summit between Trump and Kim Jong Un, the source said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

There has been no indication, however, of any narrowing of differences over US demands that North Korea abandon a nuclear weapons programme that threatens the United States or Pyongyang`s demand for a lifting of punishing sanctions.

Kim Yong Chol, a hardline former spy chief, arrived in Washington on a commercial flight from Beijing, South Korea`s Yonhap news agency reported.

Pompeo had planned to meet his North Korean counterpart to discuss a second summit last November, but the meeting was postponed at the last moment.

Diplomatic contact was resumed after Kim Jong Un delivered a New Year speech in which he said he was willing to meet Trump "at any time," South Korea`s ambassador to the United States, Cho Yoon-je, told reporters last week.

Kim Yong Chol was last in Washington in June, when he delivered a letter from Kim Jong Un to Trump that opened the way for the June 12 summit in Singapore.&nbsp;

That meeting yielded a pledge from the latter to work towards denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula and Trump declared the next day that there was "no longer a nuclear threat from North Korea."&nbsp;

There has been little obvious progress since, however, which was underlined by the Missile Defense Review unveiled on Thursday.

Introducing the report, acting US Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan noted that North Korean missiles remained a "significant concern." Trump himself only mentioned North Korea in passing at the same event, saying negotiations he had conducted should have been done years ago.

"Concrete steps"

US Vice President Mike Pence acknowledged on Wednesday that efforts to persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear arsenal had not made headway.

"While the president is promising dialogue with Chairman Kim, we still await concrete steps by North Korea to dismantle the nuclear weapons that threaten our people and our allies in the region," Pence said in an address to US ambassadors and other senior American diplomats at the State Department.

Trump said on January 2 that he had received a "great" letter from Kim Jong Un and would probably meet him again in the not-too-distant future, but there was no rush.

Pyongyang had stopped missile and bomb testing and if it had not been for his administration "you`d be having a nice big fat war in Asia," he said.

CNN quoted a source familiar with the US-North Korea talks as saying that Kim Yong Chol would be carrying a new letter from Kim Jong Un to Trump.

Kim Yong Chol will be the first top North Korean official to stay overnight in Washington since the late Vice Marshal Jo Myong Rok did so ahead of talks with then-President Bill Clinton and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright in 2000.

Communist-ruled Vietnam, which has good relations with both the United States and North Korea, has been widely touted as the most likely venue for a second meeting between Trump and Kim Jong Un.&nbsp;

The Washington Post quoted people familiar with recent diplomatic activity as saying that if announced soon, the summit would probably take place in March or April, with the coastal city of Danang the most likely venue.

A North Korean envoy arrived in Washington on Thursday for expected talks with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and a possible encounter with President Donald Trump aimed at laying the groundwork for a second US-North Korea summit.

A North Korean envoy arrived in Washington on Thursday for expected talks with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and a possible encounter with President Donald Trump aimed at laying the groundwork for a second US-North Korea summit. The envoy arrived on the same day Trump unveiled a revamped US missile defence strategy that singled out North Korea as an ongoing and "extraordinary threat," seven months after he declared after his first summit with leader Kim Jong Un that the North Korean threat had been eliminated. Kim Yong Chol, Pyongyang's lead negotiator in denuclearisation talks with the United States, was due to meet Pompeo and could also go to the White House on Friday, a person familiar with the plan said, a sign of potential movement in a diplomatic effort that has appeared stalled for months. The North Korean visit could yield an announcement of plans for another summit between Trump and Kim Jong Un, the source said, speaking on condition of anonymity. There has been no indication, however, of any narrowing of differences over US demands that North Korea abandon a nuclear weapons programme that threatens the United States or Pyongyang`s demand for a lifting of punishing sanctions. Kim Yong Chol, a hardline former spy chief, arrived in Washington on a commercial flight from Beijing, South Korea`s Yonhap news agency reported. Pompeo had planned to meet his North Korean counterpart to discuss a second summit last November, but the meeting was postponed at the last moment. Diplomatic contact was resumed after Kim Jong Un delivered a New Year speech in which he said he was willing to meet Trump "at any time," South Korea`s ambassador to the United States, Cho Yoon-je, told reporters last week. Kim Yong Chol was last in Washington in June, when he delivered a letter from Kim Jong Un to Trump that opened the way for the June 12 summit in Singapore. That meeting yielded a pledge from the latter to work towards denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula and Trump declared the next day that there was "no longer a nuclear threat from North Korea." There has been little obvious progress since, however, which was underlined by the Missile Defense Review unveiled on Thursday. Introducing the report, acting US Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan noted that North Korean missiles remained a "significant concern." Trump himself only mentioned North Korea in passing at the same event, saying negotiations he had conducted should have been done years ago. "Concrete steps" US Vice President Mike Pence acknowledged on Wednesday that efforts to persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear arsenal had not made headway. "While the president is promising dialogue with Chairman Kim, we still await concrete steps by North Korea to dismantle the nuclear weapons that threaten our people and our allies in the region," Pence said in an address to US ambassadors and other senior American diplomats at the State Department. Trump said on January 2 that he had received a "great" letter from Kim Jong Un and would probably meet him again in the not-too-distant future, but there was no rush. Pyongyang had stopped missile and bomb testing and if it had not been for his administration "you`d be having a nice big fat war in Asia," he said. CNN quoted a source familiar with the US-North Korea talks as saying that Kim Yong Chol would be carrying a new letter from Kim Jong Un to Trump. Kim Yong Chol will be the first top North Korean official to stay overnight in Washington since the late Vice Marshal Jo Myong Rok did so ahead of talks with then-President Bill Clinton and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright in 2000. Communist-ruled Vietnam, which has good relations with both the United States and North Korea, has been widely touted as the most likely venue for a second meeting between Trump and Kim Jong Un. The Washington Post quoted people familiar with recent diplomatic activity as saying that if announced soon, the summit would probably take place in March or April, with the coastal city of Danang the most likely venue.

North Korea envoy in US for talks with Pompeo, possibly Trump

Stock markets rebounded more than one per cent Friday, buoyed by hopes of a breakthrough in the <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.wionews.com/opinions/why-there-will-be-no-winners-from-the-us-china-trade-war-191220&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwjh79XyqfffAhUK448KHd3VBv8QFggFMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw0J249ya864ZWnj0ZufEEXj">US-China trade war</a>.

European and Asian indices bounced back after the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported that the US was considering lifting tariffs on China as officials look to hammer out a trade deal.

US stocks gained Thursday on the report, recovering from a wobble triggered by news that the US was carrying out a criminal probe into Chinese tech giant Huawei.&nbsp;

"Global markets are enjoying an overwhelmingly bullish end to the week, with hopes of a potential breakthrough in US-China trade talks helping drive optimism throughout both Asia and now Europe," said Joshua Mahony, senior market analyst at traders IG.

The WSJ reported that US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin had raised the idea with US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer of removing some or all levies on Beijing in return for structural reforms.

It said the move was part of a bid to reassure markets and bolster the odds of a bigger trade deal, ending a months-long saga that is beginning to impact economies around the world, particularly China.

However, the Treasury Department told AFP that no formal recommendation had been made by either Mnuchin or Lighthizer in the talks, which were "nowhere near completion".

"The US government has said that there have been no formal talks to scale back tariffs, but the market saw the half glass full as the reports signal that concessions are in the works," said Alfonso Esparza, senior market analyst at OANDA.

However, there was scepticism among some analysts, with the two sides still far apart on a number of issues, particularly regarding intellectual property.

On currency markets, the pound edged up and was sitting around two-month highs against the dollar as dealers bet that Britain would not leave the European Union without a deal.

After her grand <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.wionews.com/world/britains-may-to-miss-davos-to-focus-on-brexit-downing-street-191092&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwizlJClqvffAhVLpY8KHbAIC24QFggFMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw2eX0qY6dSj_XORRz7exnwj">Brexit </a>plan was soundly rebuffed by MPs this week, British Prime Minister Theresa May has called cross-party talks to put together a "Plan B" by Monday.

If that does not work, there is a growing expectation that the March 29 exit deadline will be pushed back to give May more time to reach another deal or possibly call another referendum.

Oil prices meanwhile rose on the China-US tariffs report and after OPEC said it had cut output in December before a new agreement to limit supply took effect.

Both main contracts are up around a fifth since the end of December, thanks to an agreement to cut output by OPEC and other key producers including Russia.&nbsp;

That followed almost three months of losses that wiped around 40 per cent off prices amid concerns supply was running ahead of demand.

Stock markets rebounded more than one per cent Friday, buoyed by hopes of a breakthrough in the US-China trade war. European and Asian indices bounced back after the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported that the US was considering lifting tariffs on China as officials look to hammer out a trade deal.

Stock markets rebounded more than one per cent Friday, buoyed by hopes of a breakthrough in the US-China trade war. European and Asian indices bounced back after the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported that the US was considering lifting tariffs on China as officials look to hammer out a trade deal. US stocks gained Thursday on the report, recovering from a wobble triggered by news that the US was carrying out a criminal probe into Chinese tech giant Huawei. "Global markets are enjoying an overwhelmingly bullish end to the week, with hopes of a potential breakthrough in US-China trade talks helping drive optimism throughout both Asia and now Europe," said Joshua Mahony, senior market analyst at traders IG. The WSJ reported that US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin had raised the idea with US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer of removing some or all levies on Beijing in return for structural reforms. It said the move was part of a bid to reassure markets and bolster the odds of a bigger trade deal, ending a months-long saga that is beginning to impact economies around the world, particularly China. However, the Treasury Department told AFP that no formal recommendation had been made by either Mnuchin or Lighthizer in the talks, which were "nowhere near completion". "The US government has said that there have been no formal talks to scale back tariffs, but the market saw the half glass full as the reports signal that concessions are in the works," said Alfonso Esparza, senior market analyst at OANDA. However, there was scepticism among some analysts, with the two sides still far apart on a number of issues, particularly regarding intellectual property. On currency markets, the pound edged up and was sitting around two-month highs against the dollar as dealers bet that Britain would not leave the European Union without a deal. After her grand Brexit plan was soundly rebuffed by MPs this week, British Prime Minister Theresa May has called cross-party talks to put together a "Plan B" by Monday. If that does not work, there is a growing expectation that the March 29 exit deadline will be pushed back to give May more time to reach another deal or possibly call another referendum. Oil prices meanwhile rose on the China-US tariffs report and after OPEC said it had cut output in December before a new agreement to limit supply took effect. Both main contracts are up around a fifth since the end of December, thanks to an agreement to cut output by OPEC and other key producers including Russia. That followed almost three months of losses that wiped around 40 per cent off prices amid concerns supply was running ahead of demand.

Stock markets rebound on China-US trade breakthrough hopes Wrap Markets

Vietnam's premier has said his country is willing to host a much-anticipated second summit between <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/if-trump-and-kim-can-meet-why-not-other-countries-nepal-on-stalled-saarc-summit-189572&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwiO7uCmmPffAhXLK48KHa7fAwYQFggFMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw1b50NO0aT8xriJ5tGTMLsX">US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.</a>

One of North Korea's top generals Kim Yong Chol is expected to meet with Trump at the White House on Friday to hash out details of a second meeting with Kim, including a potential venue.

The second round of talks follow a historic summit in Singapore last year and are aimed at denuclearisation and ending decades of enmity between the two nations.

Vietnam has cropped up in the swirl of rumours and conjecture over a possible site for the meeting, with the capital Hanoi or the coastal city of Danang seemingly the most likely bases for the summit.

On Thursday Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc said he would be open to hosting it.

"We don't know the final decision. However, if it happens here we will do our best to facilitate the meeting," he said in an interview with Bloomberg TV.&nbsp;

"Vietnam has cooperated well with the US in developing economic and trade relations, as well as in other areas."

A Vietnamese government source who wished to remain anonymous told AFP "logistical preparations" were underway for a Trump-Kim summit although "no official decision" had been made.

"There is lots of work to be done, not only for Danang but some other locations for the event. The Vietnamese side is ready to host... but it is not up to us to decide."

Like several other Southeast Asian countries, Vietnam maintains diplomatic ties with both communist-run Pyongyang and Washington and is keen to host major global events as it tries to project a more confident global profile.

Communist Vietnam hosted a major Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting in the central city of Danang in 2017 attended by global leaders, including Trump.

Hanoi also welcomed North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho in November for a visit reportedly aimed at sharing lessons from its economic success story.

Hosting a meeting of this calibre that will draw attention — and scrutiny — from around the world will be "very significant", said Nguyen Vinh Quang, an analyst at Vietnam's Center for Strategic Studies and International Development.

"It will show Vietnam's contribution to global peace. Secondly, Vietnam can affirm its role as a reliable partner for countries around the world," he told AFP.

Trump has said he is eager to meet with Kim again after their historic summit in June, the first-ever meeting between two sitting leaders from two countries that never formally ended the 1950-53 Korean War.

The leaders agreed on a vaguely-worded statement in which Kim pledged to work toward "the denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula".

But progress has since stalled with the two sides sparring over what that means.&nbsp;

Kim is hoping for an easing of international sanctions but the United States insists on maintaining maximum pressure until Pyongyang moves forward on giving up its nuclear weapons.

Vietnam's premier has said his country is willing to host a much-anticipated second summit between US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

Vietnam's premier has said his country is willing to host a much-anticipated second summit between US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. One of North Korea's top generals Kim Yong Chol is expected to meet with Trump at the White House on Friday to hash out details of a second meeting with Kim, including a potential venue. The second round of talks follow a historic summit in Singapore last year and are aimed at denuclearisation and ending decades of enmity between the two nations. Vietnam has cropped up in the swirl of rumours and conjecture over a possible site for the meeting, with the capital Hanoi or the coastal city of Danang seemingly the most likely bases for the summit. On Thursday Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc said he would be open to hosting it. "We don't know the final decision. However, if it happens here we will do our best to facilitate the meeting," he said in an interview with Bloomberg TV. "Vietnam has cooperated well with the US in developing economic and trade relations, as well as in other areas." A Vietnamese government source who wished to remain anonymous told AFP "logistical preparations" were underway for a Trump-Kim summit although "no official decision" had been made. "There is lots of work to be done, not only for Danang but some other locations for the event. The Vietnamese side is ready to host... but it is not up to us to decide." Like several other Southeast Asian countries, Vietnam maintains diplomatic ties with both communist-run Pyongyang and Washington and is keen to host major global events as it tries to project a more confident global profile. Communist Vietnam hosted a major Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting in the central city of Danang in 2017 attended by global leaders, including Trump. Hanoi also welcomed North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho in November for a visit reportedly aimed at sharing lessons from its economic success story. Hosting a meeting of this calibre that will draw attention — and scrutiny — from around the world will be "very significant", said Nguyen Vinh Quang, an analyst at Vietnam's Center for Strategic Studies and International Development. "It will show Vietnam's contribution to global peace. Secondly, Vietnam can affirm its role as a reliable partner for countries around the world," he told AFP. Trump has said he is eager to meet with Kim again after their historic summit in June, the first-ever meeting between two sitting leaders from two countries that never formally ended the 1950-53 Korean War. The leaders agreed on a vaguely-worded statement in which Kim pledged to work toward "the denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula". But progress has since stalled with the two sides sparring over what that means. Kim is hoping for an easing of international sanctions but the United States insists on maintaining maximum pressure until Pyongyang moves forward on giving up its nuclear weapons.

Vietnam 'willing' to host Trump-Kim summit: Report

The<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-special-peace-envoy-to-afghanistan-meets-pakistan-army-chief-general-bajwa-185372"> US envoy in Afghanistan </a>said Wednesday that a peaceful end to the 17-year conflict requires the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/taliban-urge-us-to-exit-afghanistan-or-face-soviet-style-defeat-186871">Taliban to engage in direct talks with the Afghan government</a>, which they have consistently refused.

Zalmay Khalilzad spoke to reporters in Kabul on his latest visit to the war-torn country, where he is at the centre of a flurry of diplomatic efforts to bring an end to the conflict which began with the US invasion of 2001.

"The road to peace will require Taliban to sit with other Afghans, including the government," Khalilzad said.&nbsp;

"There is a consensus among all regional partners on this point," he added, according to quotes sent to AFP by the US embassy in Kabul.&nbsp;

The insurgents have long refused to hold direct talks with the Kabul government, which they dismiss as a puppet of Washington.&nbsp;

Taliban representatives have met several times with US officials in recent months, but earlier this week threatened to suspend the fledgling peace efforts, accusing the US of changing the agenda of the talks and "unilaterally" adding new subjects.&nbsp;

"If the Talibs want to talk, we can talk, if they want to fight we can fight. We hope that the Talibs want to make peace," Khalilzad said in response to the threat.

The envoy arrived in Kabul late Tuesday, where he met with the country's political leaders. On his third tour of the region since his appointment in September, he had previously travelled to India, the United Arab Emirates and China. He is expected next in Pakistan.

His tour comes shortly after US officials said in December that President Donald Trump intends to withdraw as many as half of the 14,000 US troops deployed in Afghanistan.

Khalilzad Wednesday said that if the Taliban choose to continue fighting, "the United States will stand with the Afghan government and the Afghan people and support them".

He dismissed reports the US wanted to maintain military bases in the country.

"We have never said we want permanent military bases in Afghanistan," he said.&nbsp;

"What we want is to see this conflict end through negotiation, and to continue our partnership with Afghanistan, and to ensure no terrorist threatens either of us." &nbsp;

In the long run, US is seeking a military, diplomatic and economic relationship with Afghanistan, he added. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Khalilzad, a former US ambassador to Afghanistan, said he hopes for fresh talks with the Taliban "very soon".&nbsp;

The US is not the only country dancing around talks with the militants. Russia and Iran have held meetings with the Taliban in recent months, while China has also made overtures. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Pakistan are all participating in the US efforts.

The US envoy in Afghanistan said Wednesday that a peaceful end to the 17-year conflict requires the Taliban to engage in direct talks with the Afghan government, which they have consistently refused.

The US envoy in Afghanistan said Wednesday that a peaceful end to the 17-year conflict requires the Taliban to engage in direct talks with the Afghan government, which they have consistently refused. Zalmay Khalilzad spoke to reporters in Kabul on his latest visit to the war-torn country, where he is at the centre of a flurry of diplomatic efforts to bring an end to the conflict which began with the US invasion of 2001. "The road to peace will require Taliban to sit with other Afghans, including the government," Khalilzad said. "There is a consensus among all regional partners on this point," he added, according to quotes sent to AFP by the US embassy in Kabul. The insurgents have long refused to hold direct talks with the Kabul government, which they dismiss as a puppet of Washington. Taliban representatives have met several times with US officials in recent months, but earlier this week threatened to suspend the fledgling peace efforts, accusing the US of changing the agenda of the talks and "unilaterally" adding new subjects. "If the Talibs want to talk, we can talk, if they want to fight we can fight. We hope that the Talibs want to make peace," Khalilzad said in response to the threat. The envoy arrived in Kabul late Tuesday, where he met with the country's political leaders. On his third tour of the region since his appointment in September, he had previously travelled to India, the United Arab Emirates and China. He is expected next in Pakistan. His tour comes shortly after US officials said in December that President Donald Trump intends to withdraw as many as half of the 14,000 US troops deployed in Afghanistan. Khalilzad Wednesday said that if the Taliban choose to continue fighting, "the United States will stand with the Afghan government and the Afghan people and support them". He dismissed reports the US wanted to maintain military bases in the country. "We have never said we want permanent military bases in Afghanistan," he said. "What we want is to see this conflict end through negotiation, and to continue our partnership with Afghanistan, and to ensure no terrorist threatens either of us." In the long run, US is seeking a military, diplomatic and economic relationship with Afghanistan, he added. Khalilzad, a former US ambassador to Afghanistan, said he hopes for fresh talks with the Taliban "very soon". The US is not the only country dancing around talks with the militants. Russia and Iran have held meetings with the Taliban in recent months, while China has also made overtures. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Pakistan are all participating in the US efforts.

US tells Taliban it must talk to Afghan government

us-1

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

us 1