Asserting that India should adopt a "clear-cut roadmap" to tackle the Kashmir issue, former DGP of <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/bjp-slams-farooq-abdullah-over-promising-regional-autonomy-in-jammu-kashmir-if-his-party-comes-to-power-185789">Jammu &amp; Kashmir</a> K Rajendra Kumar has said the US pulling out troops from Afghanistan will have implications in the Valley and terrorist outfits may feel emboldened.

Kumar was delivering the Lalitaditya Memorial Lecture in Pune, organised by Sarhad organisation. During his speech, he also said that there is a need to send a stern <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/pakistan-pm-imran-khan-raised-kashmir-issue-with-un-chief-says-un-spokesman-185764">message to Pakistan </a>for its support to militancy.

"A stern message needs to be sent to Pakistan in terms of retaliation. We need to make it more costly for Pakistan because today Pakistan is not feeling the pinch it should feel," said Kumar.

He said India should deal strongly with Pakistan as far as training camps and terrorist launchpads are concerned.

"Now USA is existing Afghanistan. It has its implications in Kashmir. It is a matter of time that we will be feeling its implications in the Valley. After the US withdrawal, the terrorists organisations would feel pumped up, emboldened," he said.

Seeing America's withdrawal as a "sign of victory", terrorist outfits can feel that New Delhi can also be defeated, so there is an urgent need for India to adopt a "clear-cut roadmap" to deal with terrorism in Kashmir, he asserted.

The US is planning to withdraw 7,000 troops from Afghanistan. The American troops contribute to training and advising local forces fighting the Taliban and the Islamic State group.

Underlying Pakistan's active role in spreading terrorism in the Valley, the former IPS officer said Pakistan is not only sponsoring terrorism but also sending its nationals to Kashmir in the garb of fighting jihad.

"No matter which government is in power, Pakistan continues to sponsor terrorism in the Valley," he said.

He said militancy in Kashmir started with local terrorist organisations but now it is tilting towards Islamic extremism.

"The Valley has a rich history of Sufism but over the years it has moved towards Wahabism," he said, adding that efforts should be made to take Kashmir back to Sufism.

Suggesting measures, he said the state needs stringent laws to deal with anti-national forces, a concrete policy to encourage youths to give up militancy.

The surrender policy must ensure that youth who give up militancy are gainfully employed and discouraged from returning to the menace, he said.&nbsp;

He also called for political outreach and empowerment of the civil society.

He said social media has played a destructive role in inciting sentiments of the youth.

Asserting that India should adopt a "clear-cut roadmap" to tackle the Kashmir issue, former DGP of Jammu & Kashmir K Rajendra Kumar has said the US pulling out troops from Afghanistan will have implications in the Valley and terrorist outfits may feel emboldened.

Asserting that India should adopt a "clear-cut roadmap" to tackle the Kashmir issue, former DGP of Jammu & Kashmir K Rajendra Kumar has said the US pulling out troops from Afghanistan will have implications in the Valley and terrorist outfits may feel emboldened. Kumar was delivering the Lalitaditya Memorial Lecture in Pune, organised by Sarhad organisation. During his speech, he also said that there is a need to send a stern message to Pakistan for its support to militancy. "A stern message needs to be sent to Pakistan in terms of retaliation. We need to make it more costly for Pakistan because today Pakistan is not feeling the pinch it should feel," said Kumar. He said India should deal strongly with Pakistan as far as training camps and terrorist launchpads are concerned. "Now USA is existing Afghanistan. It has its implications in Kashmir. It is a matter of time that we will be feeling its implications in the Valley. After the US withdrawal, the terrorists organisations would feel pumped up, emboldened," he said. Seeing America's withdrawal as a "sign of victory", terrorist outfits can feel that New Delhi can also be defeated, so there is an urgent need for India to adopt a "clear-cut roadmap" to deal with terrorism in Kashmir, he asserted. The US is planning to withdraw 7,000 troops from Afghanistan. The American troops contribute to training and advising local forces fighting the Taliban and the Islamic State group. Underlying Pakistan's active role in spreading terrorism in the Valley, the former IPS officer said Pakistan is not only sponsoring terrorism but also sending its nationals to Kashmir in the garb of fighting jihad. "No matter which government is in power, Pakistan continues to sponsor terrorism in the Valley," he said. He said militancy in Kashmir started with local terrorist organisations but now it is tilting towards Islamic extremism. "The Valley has a rich history of Sufism but over the years it has moved towards Wahabism," he said, adding that efforts should be made to take Kashmir back to Sufism. Suggesting measures, he said the state needs stringent laws to deal with anti-national forces, a concrete policy to encourage youths to give up militancy. The surrender policy must ensure that youth who give up militancy are gainfully employed and discouraged from returning to the menace, he said. He also called for political outreach and empowerment of the civil society. He said social media has played a destructive role in inciting sentiments of the youth.

US withdrawal from Afghanistan will have implications in Kashmir: Former J&K DGP K Rajendra Kumar

Disasters that devastated US in 2018

At least two people were killed and 11 wounded on Tuesday by a car bomb in the northern <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/turkey-will-keep-attacking-pkk-in-iraq-foreign-ministry-184255">Iraqi city</a> of Tal Afar, a former Islamic State stronghold, the military said.

Tal Afar, about 80 kilometres (50 miles) west of Mosul, experienced cycles of sectarian violence between Sunnis and Shi'ites after the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and produced some of Islamic State's most senior commanders.

The city, which had about 200,000 residents, came under the militants' control when Islamic State overran swathes of Iraq's north in 2014.

It fell to Iraqi Security Forces, backed by the US-led coalition, in August 2017, the last area to be retaken in the north before fighting moved to the Syrian border. A heavy security presence has remained since then and the city has been mostly quiet.

At least two people were killed and 11 wounded on Tuesday by a car bomb in the northern Iraqi city of Tal Afar, a former Islamic State stronghold, the military said.

At least two people were killed and 11 wounded on Tuesday by a car bomb in the northern Iraqi city of Tal Afar, a former Islamic State stronghold, the military said. Tal Afar, about 80 kilometres (50 miles) west of Mosul, experienced cycles of sectarian violence between Sunnis and Shi'ites after the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and produced some of Islamic State's most senior commanders. The city, which had about 200,000 residents, came under the militants' control when Islamic State overran swathes of Iraq's north in 2014. It fell to Iraqi Security Forces, backed by the US-led coalition, in August 2017, the last area to be retaken in the north before fighting moved to the Syrian border. A heavy security presence has remained since then and the city has been mostly quiet.

Two dead, 11 injured in car bomb in northern Iraqi city Tal Afar

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-sanctions-are-economic-terrorism-says-iran-president-rouhani-182402">President Hassan Rouhani </a>presented an annual state budget of 4,700 trillion rials ($47 billion at the free market rate) to parliament on Tuesday, saying <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/iran-seeks-regional-front-against-us-economic-terrorism-182445">US sanctions would affect Iranians`</a> lives and growth but not bring the government to its knees.

"America`s goal is to bring Iran`s Islamic system to its knees... and it will fail in this, but sanctions will no doubt affect people`s lives, and the country`s development and economic growth," Rouhani told parliament in a speech carried live on state television.

He gave the value of the draft budget at about 4,700 trillion rials for the next Iranian year which starts on March 21, 2019.

President Hassan Rouhani presented an annual state budget of 4,700 trillion rials ($47 billion at the free market rate) to parliament on Tuesday, saying US sanctions would affect Iranians` lives and growth but not bring the government to its knees.

President Hassan Rouhani presented an annual state budget of 4,700 trillion rials ($47 billion at the free market rate) to parliament on Tuesday, saying US sanctions would affect Iranians` lives and growth but not bring the government to its knees. "America`s goal is to bring Iran`s Islamic system to its knees... and it will fail in this, but sanctions will no doubt affect people`s lives, and the country`s development and economic growth," Rouhani told parliament in a speech carried live on state television. He gave the value of the draft budget at about 4,700 trillion rials for the next Iranian year which starts on March 21, 2019.

President Rouhani presents Iran budget, says US sanctions to hit lives, growth

A US judge on Monday ordered North Korea to pay $501 million over the death of American Otto Warmbier, concluding that the university student likely suffered torture.

The penalties, which North Korea is highly unlikely to pay willingly, come in the midst of a diplomatic drive by President Donald Trump, who is eager to reach a potential landmark deal with leader Kim Jong Un.

The parents of Warmbier sued North Korea in a US court after the 22-year-old was flown back to the United States last year in a coma, unrecognizable to his family and died within days of his return.

Beryl Howell, the chief judge of the US District Court for Washington, DC, awarded $501,134,683.80 to the family, most of it in punitive damages.

"An American family, the Warmbiers, experienced North Korea's brutality first-hand when North Korea seized their son to use as a pawn in that totalitarian state's global shenanigans and face-off with the United States," she wrote.

"North Korea is liable for the torture, hostage-taking, and extrajudicial killing of Otto Warmbier, and the injuries to his mother and father, Fred and Cindy Warmbier," she added.

Chances of paying slim&nbsp;

Howell said North Korea did not submit any response to the lawsuit, which the family filed under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, a US law that allows lawsuits against foreign governments over offences not considered to be covered by diplomatic immunity.

As one of the world's most isolated countries, North Korea is believed to have few assets in the United States that could be seized to meet the judgment.

But North Korea is seeking to end economic sanctions imposed over its nuclear program. An accord with Trump raises the possibility of future US assistance, which could become entangled by the court-ordered damages.

Trump, who held a historic summit in June with North Korea, posted on Twitter that he had a briefing Monday on diplomatic efforts and is "looking forward to my next summit with Chairman Kim!"

Senator Robert Portman of Ohio, who had secretly met North Korean officials as he pushed for Warmbier's release, hailed the court verdict.

"While nothing will bring back Otto Warmbier, who was such a promising young man, I'm glad that North Korea has been rightly held accountable for his death," he tweeted.

&nbsp;Unrecognizable after release&nbsp;

Warmbier, an Ohio native who studied at the University of Virginia, travelled to North Korea on a tour but did not return home. He was pulled away at the Pyongyang airport and charged with crimes against the state for allegedly taking down a poster in support of Kim.

The ruling said the family was continually advised by the State Department to stay quiet, believing North Korea would make a demand in return for Warmbier's safe release.

When he finally returned home after 17 months, Warmbier&nbsp;a high school prom king who was studying business and economics was attached to a feeding tube and was howling incomprehensible noises, the ruling said.&nbsp;

The head-shaven Warmbier had gone blind and deaf, his once straight teeth misaligned and his eyes bulging out, it said.&nbsp;

The judge quoted his neurologist in Ohio, Daniel Kanter, as concluding that Warmbier probably suffered brain damage of the sort caused by a loss of blood flow to the brain of five to 20 minutes.

Based on previously known cases in which North Korea extracted confessions, Warmbier's injuries could have been caused by water-boarding, electric shock, suffocation or pulling his teeth with pliers, Howell said.

North Korea has denied ill-treatment of Warmbier, saying he contracted botulism, a nerve disorder caused by toxin poisoning, while in detention.

But the judge quoted medical tests that found no evidence of botulism. And even if the diagnosis were true, the judge questioned why North Korea did not earlier send him back for medical care, a delay which she said: "compounds the deliberate nature of the totalitarian state's brutal treatment of Otto."

A US judge on Monday ordered North Korea to pay $501 million over the death of American Otto Warmbier, concluding that the university student likely suffered torture.

A US judge on Monday ordered North Korea to pay $501 million over the death of American Otto Warmbier, concluding that the university student likely suffered torture. The penalties, which North Korea is highly unlikely to pay willingly, come in the midst of a diplomatic drive by President Donald Trump, who is eager to reach a potential landmark deal with leader Kim Jong Un. The parents of Warmbier sued North Korea in a US court after the 22-year-old was flown back to the United States last year in a coma, unrecognizable to his family and died within days of his return. Beryl Howell, the chief judge of the US District Court for Washington, DC, awarded $501,134,683.80 to the family, most of it in punitive damages. "An American family, the Warmbiers, experienced North Korea's brutality first-hand when North Korea seized their son to use as a pawn in that totalitarian state's global shenanigans and face-off with the United States," she wrote. "North Korea is liable for the torture, hostage-taking, and extrajudicial killing of Otto Warmbier, and the injuries to his mother and father, Fred and Cindy Warmbier," she added. Chances of paying slim Howell said North Korea did not submit any response to the lawsuit, which the family filed under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, a US law that allows lawsuits against foreign governments over offences not considered to be covered by diplomatic immunity. As one of the world's most isolated countries, North Korea is believed to have few assets in the United States that could be seized to meet the judgment. But North Korea is seeking to end economic sanctions imposed over its nuclear program. An accord with Trump raises the possibility of future US assistance, which could become entangled by the court-ordered damages. Trump, who held a historic summit in June with North Korea, posted on Twitter that he had a briefing Monday on diplomatic efforts and is "looking forward to my next summit with Chairman Kim!" Senator Robert Portman of Ohio, who had secretly met North Korean officials as he pushed for Warmbier's release, hailed the court verdict. "While nothing will bring back Otto Warmbier, who was such a promising young man, I'm glad that North Korea has been rightly held accountable for his death," he tweeted. Unrecognizable after release Warmbier, an Ohio native who studied at the University of Virginia, travelled to North Korea on a tour but did not return home. He was pulled away at the Pyongyang airport and charged with crimes against the state for allegedly taking down a poster in support of Kim. The ruling said the family was continually advised by the State Department to stay quiet, believing North Korea would make a demand in return for Warmbier's safe release. When he finally returned home after 17 months, Warmbier a high school prom king who was studying business and economics was attached to a feeding tube and was howling incomprehensible noises, the ruling said. The head-shaven Warmbier had gone blind and deaf, his once straight teeth misaligned and his eyes bulging out, it said. The judge quoted his neurologist in Ohio, Daniel Kanter, as concluding that Warmbier probably suffered brain damage of the sort caused by a loss of blood flow to the brain of five to 20 minutes. Based on previously known cases in which North Korea extracted confessions, Warmbier's injuries could have been caused by water-boarding, electric shock, suffocation or pulling his teeth with pliers, Howell said. North Korea has denied ill-treatment of Warmbier, saying he contracted botulism, a nerve disorder caused by toxin poisoning, while in detention. But the judge quoted medical tests that found no evidence of botulism. And even if the diagnosis were true, the judge questioned why North Korea did not earlier send him back for medical care, a delay which she said: "compounds the deliberate nature of the totalitarian state's brutal treatment of Otto."

US judge orders North Korea to pay $501 million over dead American

Iran&nbsp;said on Monday it was ready to respond to any hostile US&nbsp;action, but it did not consider the arrival of a US aircraft carrier in the Gulf last week as a significant threat.

The USS John C. Stennis entered the Gulf on Friday, ending a long absence of US&nbsp;aircraft carriers in the region as tensions rise between Tehran and Washington.

"The presence of this warship is insignificant to us,"&nbsp;Iran's Navy commander Habibollah Sayyari was quoted as saying by the semi-official ISNA news agency.

"We will not allow this warship to come near our territorial waters in the Persian Gulf," he added.

Sayyari said the US&nbsp;Navy was allowed to sail in international waters near&nbsp;Iran, just as the&nbsp;Iranian navy could sail in the Atlantic Ocean near U.S. waters.

He said, however, that&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;was on alert for possible threats. "They do not have the courage or ability to take any measures against us. We have enough capabilities to stand against their actions and we have fully rehearsed for that."

A US-Iranian war of words has escalated since US&nbsp;President Donald Trump withdrew Washington in May from a world powers’ nuclear deal with&nbsp;Iran, and reimposed sanctions on its banking and energy sectors.

Iran&nbsp;has warned that if it cannot sell its oil due to US&nbsp;pressures, then no other regional country will be allowed to do so either, threatening to block the Strait of Hormuz in the Gulf.

A fifth of global oil consumption passes through the Strait from the Middle East crude producers to major markets.

In recent years, there have been periodic confrontations between&nbsp;Iran's Revolutionary Guards and US&nbsp;military in the Gulf, but the number of incidents has dropped in recent months.

Iran said on Monday it was ready to respond to any hostile US action, but it did not consider the arrival of a US aircraft carrier in the Gulf last week as a significant threat.

Iran said on Monday it was ready to respond to any hostile US action, but it did not consider the arrival of a US aircraft carrier in the Gulf last week as a significant threat. The USS John C. Stennis entered the Gulf on Friday, ending a long absence of US aircraft carriers in the region as tensions rise between Tehran and Washington. "The presence of this warship is insignificant to us," Iran's Navy commander Habibollah Sayyari was quoted as saying by the semi-official ISNA news agency. "We will not allow this warship to come near our territorial waters in the Persian Gulf," he added. Sayyari said the US Navy was allowed to sail in international waters near Iran, just as the Iranian navy could sail in the Atlantic Ocean near U.S. waters. He said, however, that Iran was on alert for possible threats. "They do not have the courage or ability to take any measures against us. We have enough capabilities to stand against their actions and we have fully rehearsed for that." A US-Iranian war of words has escalated since US President Donald Trump withdrew Washington in May from a world powers’ nuclear deal with Iran, and reimposed sanctions on its banking and energy sectors. Iran has warned that if it cannot sell its oil due to US pressures, then no other regional country will be allowed to do so either, threatening to block the Strait of Hormuz in the Gulf. A fifth of global oil consumption passes through the Strait from the Middle East crude producers to major markets. In recent years, there have been periodic confrontations between Iran's Revolutionary Guards and US military in the Gulf, but the number of incidents has dropped in recent months.

Presence of US warship insignificant to us, won't allow it to enter Persian Gulf: Iran

By Gary Grappo

Rational observers, US allies and even America’s adversaries are left to wonder where President Donald Trump’s erratic foreign policies and unpredictable decision-making will now lead after the departure of Defence Secretary James Mattis, the one reliable constant on whom they could depend in a presidency defined by inconsistency, disorder and disarray.

Before considering Trump’s surprising and abrupt decision to withdraw US forces from Syria and Afghanistan and Mattis’ subsequent resignation, it is important to remind ourselves of the president’s notorious — one shudders at the use of such a term — “leadership” style.

Throughout his business career, when confronted with situations casting him in an unfavourable light or threatening him with loss of face, Trump’s almost instinctive response was to distract and create chaos. In those circumstances, he could then thrive as others veered to address the decoy issue while the underlying issue was forgotten, set aside or ignored.

Fast forward to this week’s Syria decision and the resulting Mattis resignation. Consider the array of dauntingly adverse news confronting Trump, all painting a particularly unpleasing portrait of the Trump presidency: a plunging Wall Street set to record the worst December since 1931; closure of 25 per cent of the federal government due to his refusal to compromise on his demand to fund an unnecessary and wasteful $5 billion wall on the border with Mexico; a special counsel investigation that is closing in on the centers of the fetid Trump campaign, administration and even family; an unresolved trade dispute with China, the world’s second largest economy; and loss of his coveted Republican majority in Congress in less than two weeks, rendering most of his campaign promises mere fiction.

Amid such overwhelming bad news, where else is a president to turn to exercise his authorities and coincidentally distract voters from his spiralling presidency? Of all his powers, the president of the United States enjoys near autonomy in foreign policy. The drafters of the Constitution, understanding the national security implications of the matter, purposely intended things that way. The Senate exercises confirmation authority over presidentially-appointed positions and the House maintains control of the purse in its power to approve or reject funding for virtually any government action.

Bad news in the Middle East

But that still leaves President Trump with considerable powers to address issues and crises, whether real or perceived. This brings us to Syria and Secretary Mattis. The nation will certainly survive the Syria conflict. What the decision does to US policy in the Middle East, however, is another question. Given that the US has little discernable overarching policy for the region other than countering Iran, bolstering Israel and defeating the Islamic State (IS), it would seem that everything else has been ceded to the much-discredited Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

The only effective US action in Syria since the start of the civil war in 2011 has been its successful arming and training of a credible fighting force, the Syrian Democratic Forces, comprised largely of Kurds but also Arabs, to confront the Islamic State and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. By withdrawing US forces from Syria, Trump will have returned US policy in Syria to the status quo of before he entered the office. America again will have no leverage whatsoever for reaching anything approaching a balanced, humane and fair conclusion of the civil war and any form of representative government.

Barack Obama’s secretary of state, John Kerry, had pleaded with Obama for US military engagement in Syria, if only token, to give him negotiating leverage in the Geneva process with Russia. It did not happen until Donald Trump took office. It worked and is one reason why the Astana process, an alternative peace process that includes Russia, Iran, Turkey and the Assad regime but not the US or the European Union, has made no genuine progress. And it won’t until all interested parties return to Geneva and can have their concerns genuinely addressed.

With the loss of US leverage in any talks, Syria will now be left to the devices of Russia, Iran and Assad’s autocratic and self-interested machinations and exploitation. Syrians may see an end to their civil war but little prospect for prosperity or a change in the Assad dictatorship. Moreover, the Kurds and Arabs of northeastern Syria will be abandoned and exposed to the deprivations of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who has set his sights on neutralizing the “Kurdish threat” in Syria.

The move also jeopardises the security of Syria’s surrounding states, including Israel, Jordan and Lebanon. Given Iran’s aggressive intentions in Syria against Israel and Tel Aviv’s firm determination to resist the Islamic Republic — recently reaffirmed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — we should expect more uncertainty and instability.

Finally, Trump’s claim of the defeat of IS can fairly be described as fake news. Experts estimate some 25,000 to 30,000 Islamic State fighters in Iraq and Syria, with an IS resurgence already planned in Syria. The Islamic State also remains a credible threat of instability and violence throughout Egypt and North Africa. So, while IS has certainly suffered major setbacks in Syria as well as Iraq, it is far from beaten. Once US forces depart, we should count on its return to eastern Syria and increased threats against Iraq. And we shouldn’t discount the likelihood that the other terrorist organization prominently engaged in Syria, Hezbollah, and its Iranian backers will also turn their attention to eastern Syria.

The political weather out there is frightening

For Americans, now wrapped up in preparations for the upcoming Christmas and New Year’s holidays, little concerning Syria will register. What should concern them and the entire world, however, is the departure of James Mattis. Given Trump’s fatal attraction to only those who agree with him in senior administration positions, there will be no more gatekeepers after Mattis.

All of those whom he once termed “my generals” will have left or been indicted (see former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn). Trump sometimes referred to his now departing defence secretary as “mad dog,” an apparent appellation acquired during the secretary’s days as a combat commander in the Marines. It was never appreciated by the cerebral and thoughtful former four-star general, universally respected for his breath of knowledge of world history and international affairs and his depth of experience. Mattis had found ways to talk the president out of unsound policies and decisions but clearly could not prevail in the Syria decision. His resignation was tantamount to a rebuke of Trump.

National Security Adviser John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo are practically Trump clones when it comes to rigid, blinkered, hard-edged and aggressive foreign and national security policies. We can expect Mattis’ successor to be of the same ilk.

That’s a chilling thought, given the extraordinary power of American forces around the world and their ability to wreak havoc on the order, or whim, of one very unpredictable, erratic and impulsive man. That power includes one of the world’s two largest nuclear weapons arsenals.

The effort to circumscribe America’s irresponsible and congenitally mercurial president must now reside with Congress. The US Senate, with its authority to block an unsuitable nominee to the soon-to-be-vacant post, and the House, with its power to initiate funding bills, must now exercise their constitutional powers to constrain Donald Trump. This will be especially challenging for the still Republican-controlled Senate, given its heretofore almost reflexive and uncritical support of its standard bearer in the White House.

The US system of democracy, under strain since Trump’s inauguration in 2017, must now confront yet another challenge. The American system, always an experiment in constitutional, multi-racial, multi-confessional democracy, may be facing its most serious crisis since the Civil War more than 150 years ago. Then, it was a strong president and properly-led armed forces that ultimately saved the republic. Today, America has anything but a strong president, though its armed forces are inarguably more capably led.

Can America’s other acclaimed democratic institutions — Congress, courts, media, state-level institutions — ensure the survival and continued prosperity of the world’s oldest democracy?

(Gary Grappo is a former US ambassador and a distinguished fellow at the Center for Middle East Studies at the Korbel School for International Studies)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/region/north_america/james-mattis-resignation-donald-trump-administration-jim-mattis-us-politics-world-news-29012/">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

By Gary Grappo Rational observers, US allies and even America’s adversaries are left to wonder where President Donald Trump’s erratic foreign policies and unpredictable decision-making will now lead after the departure of Defence Secretary James Mattis, the one reliable constant on whom they could depend in a presidency defined by inconsistency, disorder and disarray.

By Gary Grappo Rational observers, US allies and even America’s adversaries are left to wonder where President Donald Trump’s erratic foreign policies and unpredictable decision-making will now lead after the departure of Defence Secretary James Mattis, the one reliable constant on whom they could depend in a presidency defined by inconsistency, disorder and disarray. Before considering Trump’s surprising and abrupt decision to withdraw US forces from Syria and Afghanistan and Mattis’ subsequent resignation, it is important to remind ourselves of the president’s notorious — one shudders at the use of such a term — “leadership” style. Throughout his business career, when confronted with situations casting him in an unfavourable light or threatening him with loss of face, Trump’s almost instinctive response was to distract and create chaos. In those circumstances, he could then thrive as others veered to address the decoy issue while the underlying issue was forgotten, set aside or ignored. Fast forward to this week’s Syria decision and the resulting Mattis resignation. Consider the array of dauntingly adverse news confronting Trump, all painting a particularly unpleasing portrait of the Trump presidency: a plunging Wall Street set to record the worst December since 1931; closure of 25 per cent of the federal government due to his refusal to compromise on his demand to fund an unnecessary and wasteful $5 billion wall on the border with Mexico; a special counsel investigation that is closing in on the centers of the fetid Trump campaign, administration and even family; an unresolved trade dispute with China, the world’s second largest economy; and loss of his coveted Republican majority in Congress in less than two weeks, rendering most of his campaign promises mere fiction. Amid such overwhelming bad news, where else is a president to turn to exercise his authorities and coincidentally distract voters from his spiralling presidency? Of all his powers, the president of the United States enjoys near autonomy in foreign policy. The drafters of the Constitution, understanding the national security implications of the matter, purposely intended things that way. The Senate exercises confirmation authority over presidentially-appointed positions and the House maintains control of the purse in its power to approve or reject funding for virtually any government action. Bad news in the Middle East But that still leaves President Trump with considerable powers to address issues and crises, whether real or perceived. This brings us to Syria and Secretary Mattis. The nation will certainly survive the Syria conflict. What the decision does to US policy in the Middle East, however, is another question. Given that the US has little discernable overarching policy for the region other than countering Iran, bolstering Israel and defeating the Islamic State (IS), it would seem that everything else has been ceded to the much-discredited Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The only effective US action in Syria since the start of the civil war in 2011 has been its successful arming and training of a credible fighting force, the Syrian Democratic Forces, comprised largely of Kurds but also Arabs, to confront the Islamic State and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. By withdrawing US forces from Syria, Trump will have returned US policy in Syria to the status quo of before he entered the office. America again will have no leverage whatsoever for reaching anything approaching a balanced, humane and fair conclusion of the civil war and any form of representative government. Barack Obama’s secretary of state, John Kerry, had pleaded with Obama for US military engagement in Syria, if only token, to give him negotiating leverage in the Geneva process with Russia. It did not happen until Donald Trump took office. It worked and is one reason why the Astana process, an alternative peace process that includes Russia, Iran, Turkey and the Assad regime but not the US or the European Union, has made no genuine progress. And it won’t until all interested parties return to Geneva and can have their concerns genuinely addressed. With the loss of US leverage in any talks, Syria will now be left to the devices of Russia, Iran and Assad’s autocratic and self-interested machinations and exploitation. Syrians may see an end to their civil war but little prospect for prosperity or a change in the Assad dictatorship. Moreover, the Kurds and Arabs of northeastern Syria will be abandoned and exposed to the deprivations of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who has set his sights on neutralizing the “Kurdish threat” in Syria. The move also jeopardises the security of Syria’s surrounding states, including Israel, Jordan and Lebanon. Given Iran’s aggressive intentions in Syria against Israel and Tel Aviv’s firm determination to resist the Islamic Republic — recently reaffirmed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — we should expect more uncertainty and instability. Finally, Trump’s claim of the defeat of IS can fairly be described as fake news. Experts estimate some 25,000 to 30,000 Islamic State fighters in Iraq and Syria, with an IS resurgence already planned in Syria. The Islamic State also remains a credible threat of instability and violence throughout Egypt and North Africa. So, while IS has certainly suffered major setbacks in Syria as well as Iraq, it is far from beaten. Once US forces depart, we should count on its return to eastern Syria and increased threats against Iraq. And we shouldn’t discount the likelihood that the other terrorist organization prominently engaged in Syria, Hezbollah, and its Iranian backers will also turn their attention to eastern Syria. The political weather out there is frightening For Americans, now wrapped up in preparations for the upcoming Christmas and New Year’s holidays, little concerning Syria will register. What should concern them and the entire world, however, is the departure of James Mattis. Given Trump’s fatal attraction to only those who agree with him in senior administration positions, there will be no more gatekeepers after Mattis. All of those whom he once termed “my generals” will have left or been indicted (see former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn). Trump sometimes referred to his now departing defence secretary as “mad dog,” an apparent appellation acquired during the secretary’s days as a combat commander in the Marines. It was never appreciated by the cerebral and thoughtful former four-star general, universally respected for his breath of knowledge of world history and international affairs and his depth of experience. Mattis had found ways to talk the president out of unsound policies and decisions but clearly could not prevail in the Syria decision. His resignation was tantamount to a rebuke of Trump. National Security Adviser John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo are practically Trump clones when it comes to rigid, blinkered, hard-edged and aggressive foreign and national security policies. We can expect Mattis’ successor to be of the same ilk. That’s a chilling thought, given the extraordinary power of American forces around the world and their ability to wreak havoc on the order, or whim, of one very unpredictable, erratic and impulsive man. That power includes one of the world’s two largest nuclear weapons arsenals. The effort to circumscribe America’s irresponsible and congenitally mercurial president must now reside with Congress. The US Senate, with its authority to block an unsuitable nominee to the soon-to-be-vacant post, and the House, with its power to initiate funding bills, must now exercise their constitutional powers to constrain Donald Trump. This will be especially challenging for the still Republican-controlled Senate, given its heretofore almost reflexive and uncritical support of its standard bearer in the White House. The US system of democracy, under strain since Trump’s inauguration in 2017, must now confront yet another challenge. The American system, always an experiment in constitutional, multi-racial, multi-confessional democracy, may be facing its most serious crisis since the Civil War more than 150 years ago. Then, it was a strong president and properly-led armed forces that ultimately saved the republic. Today, America has anything but a strong president, though its armed forces are inarguably more capably led. Can America’s other acclaimed democratic institutions — Congress, courts, media, state-level institutions — ensure the survival and continued prosperity of the world’s oldest democracy? (Gary Grappo is a former US ambassador and a distinguished fellow at the Center for Middle East Studies at the Korbel School for International Studies) (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)

James Mattis: Who will keep Donald Trump in check now?

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/putin-says-west-trying-to-hold-back-powerful-russia-185542">Russian President Vladimir Putin</a> remains a formidable force in world politics. He started as a low-level KGB spy and rose to the upper echelon of power winning the top office of his country a record four times.

Putin, a black belt in judo, relishes his macho image. His swift military interventions in Ukraine, annexing Crimea in 2014, the bombing of rebels in Syria, and allegations of interference in the US elections have stunned many observers. 
 
At 65, Putin has made no secret of his determination to reassert Russian power against US and Nato allies. 
 
Despite the long rule, Putin's approval ratings have remained high his brand of patriotism dominates Russian media, skews coverage in favour of him and puts opposition leaders in jail, and silences dissenters. 
 
In his first two terms as President, Putin was buoyed by oil and gas profits but that has changed the world is now looking at an uncertain future for the oil market. 
 
His third term was marked by more controversies - allegations of absolutism, religious orthodoxy under the powerful church, protesters marginalised including the most prominent opposition leader Alexei Navalny who was jailed under corruptions charges. 
 
The Church under Putin has supported a ban on groups spreading gay "propaganda" among teenagers.

The Church is back in focus over the Ukraine war and the breaking away of a faction of the Orthodox Church in favour of Ukraine as the seat of religious conservatives.

International concern about human rights in Russia has grown with the jailing of oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, once one of the world's richest billionaires, and of anti-Putin activists from the punk group Pussy Riot. 
 
World leaders are conscious of&nbsp;Putin's rising clout, but&nbsp;US President Donald Trump admires the Russian President for his style. However, he&nbsp;has been wary of the headlines around his ties with Russian businesses and Russian interference in US elections in favour of Trump himself. 
 
US prosecutors accuse a longstanding Putin ally oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin of orchestrating Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. 
 
The alleged meddling&nbsp;has prompted the US to impose more sanctions on officials close to Putin, a controversy that has surrounded Trump's presidency.

There are also worries of a growing arms race between the US and Russia after Washington publicly discussed quitting a landmark nuclear arms control pact with Russia that has been in place since 1987.

Putin has warned Washington it will be forced to respond in kind to restore the military balance if Trump carries through with his threat to quit the INF treaty. 
 
Russia is no longer a strategic partner of the European Union as well. The West accuses Putin of helping the pro-Russian rebels in Eastern Ukraine with heavy weapons and troops. The West also accuses him of meddling in Syria in favour of Bashar al-Assad. 
 
Putin's relations with the UK have soured too&nbsp;over the 2006 radioactive poisoning of anti-Putin campaigner Alexander Litvinenko in London. Agents of the Russian state were accused of murdering him and more recently the nerve agent attack on a former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter. 
 
Controversially, he has also backed Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman a man now being accused of ordering the brutal murder of dissident Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.&nbsp; 
 
But Putin is also playing peacemaker. He has been part of talks with the Taliban and the Afghan government to initiate a peace process and to bring the Taliban to the talking table. 
 
Significantly, India, China and Russia are also advancing the cause of liberalisation and promotion of free trade as the&nbsp;three countries held a trilateral meeting recently to take on the US administrations to move towards protectionism and unilateralism. 
 
Putin's rise has been spectacular - from being a spy to four-time President.

Born in 1952 in Leningrad, he studied law and then joined the Russian spy agency, the KGB, after university.

Putin served as a spy in Communist East Germany and in the&nbsp;1990s, became a top aide to Saint Petersburg Mayor Anatoly Sobchak. Later, he entered Boris Yeltsin's Kremlin in 1997, was first made chief of federal security service, and&nbsp;then the&nbsp;prime minister. 
 
Putin’s moment came in 1999 when Yeltsin quit and named him acting President. Since then, he has won four times.

Russian President Vladimir Putin remains a formidable force in world politics. He started as a low-level KGB spy and rose to the upper echelon of power winning the top office of his country a record four times.

Russian President Vladimir Putin remains a formidable force in world politics. He started as a low-level KGB spy and rose to the upper echelon of power winning the top office of his country a record four times. Putin, a black belt in judo, relishes his macho image. His swift military interventions in Ukraine, annexing Crimea in 2014, the bombing of rebels in Syria, and allegations of interference in the US elections have stunned many observers. At 65, Putin has made no secret of his determination to reassert Russian power against US and Nato allies. Despite the long rule, Putin's approval ratings have remained high his brand of patriotism dominates Russian media, skews coverage in favour of him and puts opposition leaders in jail, and silences dissenters. In his first two terms as President, Putin was buoyed by oil and gas profits but that has changed the world is now looking at an uncertain future for the oil market. His third term was marked by more controversies - allegations of absolutism, religious orthodoxy under the powerful church, protesters marginalised including the most prominent opposition leader Alexei Navalny who was jailed under corruptions charges. The Church under Putin has supported a ban on groups spreading gay "propaganda" among teenagers. The Church is back in focus over the Ukraine war and the breaking away of a faction of the Orthodox Church in favour of Ukraine as the seat of religious conservatives. International concern about human rights in Russia has grown with the jailing of oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, once one of the world's richest billionaires, and of anti-Putin activists from the punk group Pussy Riot. World leaders are conscious of Putin's rising clout, but US President Donald Trump admires the Russian President for his style. However, he has been wary of the headlines around his ties with Russian businesses and Russian interference in US elections in favour of Trump himself. US prosecutors accuse a longstanding Putin ally oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin of orchestrating Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The alleged meddling has prompted the US to impose more sanctions on officials close to Putin, a controversy that has surrounded Trump's presidency. There are also worries of a growing arms race between the US and Russia after Washington publicly discussed quitting a landmark nuclear arms control pact with Russia that has been in place since 1987. Putin has warned Washington it will be forced to respond in kind to restore the military balance if Trump carries through with his threat to quit the INF treaty. Russia is no longer a strategic partner of the European Union as well. The West accuses Putin of helping the pro-Russian rebels in Eastern Ukraine with heavy weapons and troops. The West also accuses him of meddling in Syria in favour of Bashar al-Assad. Putin's relations with the UK have soured too over the 2006 radioactive poisoning of anti-Putin campaigner Alexander Litvinenko in London. Agents of the Russian state were accused of murdering him and more recently the nerve agent attack on a former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter. Controversially, he has also backed Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman a man now being accused of ordering the brutal murder of dissident Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. But Putin is also playing peacemaker. He has been part of talks with the Taliban and the Afghan government to initiate a peace process and to bring the Taliban to the talking table. Significantly, India, China and Russia are also advancing the cause of liberalisation and promotion of free trade as the three countries held a trilateral meeting recently to take on the US administrations to move towards protectionism and unilateralism. Putin's rise has been spectacular - from being a spy to four-time President. Born in 1952 in Leningrad, he studied law and then joined the Russian spy agency, the KGB, after university. Putin served as a spy in Communist East Germany and in the 1990s, became a top aide to Saint Petersburg Mayor Anatoly Sobchak. Later, he entered Boris Yeltsin's Kremlin in 1997, was first made chief of federal security service, and then the prime minister. Putin’s moment came in 1999 when Yeltsin quit and named him acting President. Since then, he has won four times.

Vladimir Putin: Four-time President and global influencer

By Scott Lucas

The last adult in the Trump White House playground has gone – and the president is throwing his toys around.

James Mattis, as defence secretary, was one of three retired generals in the Trump administration whose hope was to contain an ill-informed, temperamental, and unpredictable president. Now they’re all gone: national security adviser HR McMaster, pushed out early this year; White House chief of staff John Kelly, giving up at the end of December; and now Mattis, who resigned after losing hope that Trump can be restrained from impulsive actions, defying his advisers, threatening US allies and even embracing American foes.

The catalyst for Mattis’s departure was Trump’s abrupt decision to withdraw all 2,000 US troops from Syria. But the list of his concerns about Trump is far longer. They include the president’s views on the American presence in Afghanistan and his hostility towards NATO allies, as well as Trump’s affinity for Vladimir Putin, even as Russia pursues an aggressive foreign policy and intervenes in US domestic affairs.

As Mattis put it in his resignation letter, a message of rebuke to Trump: "My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues."

With Trump willing to toss aside alliances and shred international arrangements, this could be the most serious challenge to US foreign policy and American partners since 1945. But what does it mean in specific areas?

Syria 
 
American policy has never been clear or decisive over Syria’s 93-month conflict. But Trump’s impulsive order for withdrawal threatens a new cycle of violence.

Since the autumn of 2015, Washington has worked with Kurdish groups to push back the Islamic State in northern and eastern Syria. Those groups, through the Syrian Democratic Forces, have reduced Islamic State to a pocket of territory near the Iraqi border. But Trump’s tweet that the battle against the group is “won” is simply wrong. IS could be resurgent if the opportunity presents itself.

Trump is also abandoning Syria’s Kurds to the predatory ambitions of others in the region. The Assad regime, propped up by Russia, has vowed to regain the one-third of the country controlled by Kurdish factions. Turkey has pledged offensives both west and east of the Euphrates River. Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has said “terrorists” – Kurdish fighters – will be erased.

US support for the Kurds was never a benevolent mission. Beyond the anti-IS campaign, the American presence was a buffer against the influence of Iran – a key ally of the Assad regime. Now that buffer disappears, and American policy against IS has been thrown into disarray.

Afghanistan 
 
The Pentagon was already planning to pull out half of&nbsp;the 14,000 US troops currently in Afghanistan, but Trump’s shift on Syria may have an even more unsettling effect.

Even with the full complement of American forces and international partners, defeat of the Taliban has been a mirage. The insurgents have rebuilt their influence to control almost half the fragmented country. The focus has shifted from military victory to negotiation for political resolution.

But Trump has complicated the tactics with his impulsive interventions – leading to his being called an “idiot” by both McMaster and Kelly, and a “moron” by the then-secretary of state Rex Tillerson. He has angered Pakistan, an essential part of the negotiating process, by slashing US military aid, and his declarations about a full withdrawal have emboldened the Taliban rather than brought them to the table.

Russia 
 
The loss of Mattis will likely deepen the split personality of the Trump administration towards Russia. Most of Trump’s advisers view Moscow with concern and favour a firm line that includes sanctions and opposition to Russian ventures in areas such as Ukraine and the Baltic States.

But Trump’s admiration for Putin has led to his foot-dragging over Russia and even undermining of the American position. He has held out against enforcing sanctions until a combination of Congress and US agencies forced his compliance. With Putin standing next to him at a press conference in July, Trump failed to make a statement on Russia’s annexation of Crimea and sided with the Russian leader over the American officials who concluded that Moscow interfered in the 2016 election.

Putin is already revelling in the chaos within the administration. Asked about Trump’s announcement on withdrawal from Syria, he said: “On this, Donald is right. I agree with him.”

NATO 
 
The US deployment in Afghanistan is part of a NATO-led mission to train, advise and assist Afghan security forces. But Trump’s threat to NATO is far more than an Afghan draw down.

The president has repeatedly bashed the alliance with his false insistence – the outcome of his lack of knowledge – that NATO “owes” money to the US. During his campaign, he labelled the organisation “obsolete” and at last July’s summit he was still threatening to withdraw the US from the bloc after 69 years. Meanwhile, Trump was casting insults at individual members, notably Germany.

Mattis was an assurance that the US institutional relationships with NATO and its members, the linchpin of the alliance, would continue despite the president. But the general’s departure, and the prospect that Trump will want a “yes man” to replace him, could renew uncertainties.

Into the void 
 
The replacement for Mattis is not yet apparent. But it is a marker of the decay of US policy that the question could be close to irrelevant, be the candidate former general and Fox TV pundit Jack Keane or Trump loyalist and defence hawk Senator Tom Cotton. For Trump is now beyond advice and guidance. US foreign policy rests on the whim of this man: angry and frustrated by investigations closing in on him, but bunkered in the self-confidence that he is smarter than anyone else in the room.

(Scott Lucas is Professor of International Politics, University of Birmingham)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/james-mattis-what-defence-secretarys-resignation-means-for-syria-afghanistan-and-nato-as-trump-leans-in-to-putin-109204">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

By Scott Lucas The last adult in the Trump White House playground has gone – and the president is throwing his toys around. James Mattis, as defence secretary, was one of three retired generals in the Trump administration whose hope was to contain an ill-informed, temperamental, and unpredictable president.

By Scott Lucas The last adult in the Trump White House playground has gone – and the president is throwing his toys around. James Mattis, as defence secretary, was one of three retired generals in the Trump administration whose hope was to contain an ill-informed, temperamental, and unpredictable president. Now they’re all gone: national security adviser HR McMaster, pushed out early this year; White House chief of staff John Kelly, giving up at the end of December; and now Mattis, who resigned after losing hope that Trump can be restrained from impulsive actions, defying his advisers, threatening US allies and even embracing American foes. The catalyst for Mattis’s departure was Trump’s abrupt decision to withdraw all 2,000 US troops from Syria. But the list of his concerns about Trump is far longer. They include the president’s views on the American presence in Afghanistan and his hostility towards NATO allies, as well as Trump’s affinity for Vladimir Putin, even as Russia pursues an aggressive foreign policy and intervenes in US domestic affairs. As Mattis put it in his resignation letter, a message of rebuke to Trump: "My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues." With Trump willing to toss aside alliances and shred international arrangements, this could be the most serious challenge to US foreign policy and American partners since 1945. But what does it mean in specific areas? Syria American policy has never been clear or decisive over Syria’s 93-month conflict. But Trump’s impulsive order for withdrawal threatens a new cycle of violence. Since the autumn of 2015, Washington has worked with Kurdish groups to push back the Islamic State in northern and eastern Syria. Those groups, through the Syrian Democratic Forces, have reduced Islamic State to a pocket of territory near the Iraqi border. But Trump’s tweet that the battle against the group is “won” is simply wrong. IS could be resurgent if the opportunity presents itself. Trump is also abandoning Syria’s Kurds to the predatory ambitions of others in the region. The Assad regime, propped up by Russia, has vowed to regain the one-third of the country controlled by Kurdish factions. Turkey has pledged offensives both west and east of the Euphrates River. Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has said “terrorists” – Kurdish fighters – will be erased. US support for the Kurds was never a benevolent mission. Beyond the anti-IS campaign, the American presence was a buffer against the influence of Iran – a key ally of the Assad regime. Now that buffer disappears, and American policy against IS has been thrown into disarray. Afghanistan The Pentagon was already planning to pull out half of the 14,000 US troops currently in Afghanistan, but Trump’s shift on Syria may have an even more unsettling effect. Even with the full complement of American forces and international partners, defeat of the Taliban has been a mirage. The insurgents have rebuilt their influence to control almost half the fragmented country. The focus has shifted from military victory to negotiation for political resolution. But Trump has complicated the tactics with his impulsive interventions – leading to his being called an “idiot” by both McMaster and Kelly, and a “moron” by the then-secretary of state Rex Tillerson. He has angered Pakistan, an essential part of the negotiating process, by slashing US military aid, and his declarations about a full withdrawal have emboldened the Taliban rather than brought them to the table. Russia The loss of Mattis will likely deepen the split personality of the Trump administration towards Russia. Most of Trump’s advisers view Moscow with concern and favour a firm line that includes sanctions and opposition to Russian ventures in areas such as Ukraine and the Baltic States. But Trump’s admiration for Putin has led to his foot-dragging over Russia and even undermining of the American position. He has held out against enforcing sanctions until a combination of Congress and US agencies forced his compliance. With Putin standing next to him at a press conference in July, Trump failed to make a statement on Russia’s annexation of Crimea and sided with the Russian leader over the American officials who concluded that Moscow interfered in the 2016 election. Putin is already revelling in the chaos within the administration. Asked about Trump’s announcement on withdrawal from Syria, he said: “On this, Donald is right. I agree with him.” NATO The US deployment in Afghanistan is part of a NATO-led mission to train, advise and assist Afghan security forces. But Trump’s threat to NATO is far more than an Afghan draw down. The president has repeatedly bashed the alliance with his false insistence – the outcome of his lack of knowledge – that NATO “owes” money to the US. During his campaign, he labelled the organisation “obsolete” and at last July’s summit he was still threatening to withdraw the US from the bloc after 69 years. Meanwhile, Trump was casting insults at individual members, notably Germany. Mattis was an assurance that the US institutional relationships with NATO and its members, the linchpin of the alliance, would continue despite the president. But the general’s departure, and the prospect that Trump will want a “yes man” to replace him, could renew uncertainties. Into the void The replacement for Mattis is not yet apparent. But it is a marker of the decay of US policy that the question could be close to irrelevant, be the candidate former general and Fox TV pundit Jack Keane or Trump loyalist and defence hawk Senator Tom Cotton. For Trump is now beyond advice and guidance. US foreign policy rests on the whim of this man: angry and frustrated by investigations closing in on him, but bunkered in the self-confidence that he is smarter than anyone else in the room. (Scott Lucas is Professor of International Politics, University of Birmingham) (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)

What James Mattis's resignation means for Syria, Afghanistan and NATO

Turkey on Saturday sent military reinforcements to northern Syria near an area controlled by Kurdish forces as Ankara threatens to carry out a fresh offensive to wipe them out, a war monitor said.

The move comes after <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-special-envoy-brett-mcgurk-quits-over-trump-syria-pullout-185899">US President Donald Trump's surprise announcement on Wednesday of the withdrawal of American troops</a> stationed in northeastern Syria alongside Kurdish fighters, a long-time enemy of Turkey.

Washington has for years supported the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in the fight against the Islamic State group in Syria, as part of an international anti-jihadist coalition dominated by the People's Protection Units (YPG).

But on Wednesday Trump said he was ordering a withdrawal of the estimated 2,000 US troops in Syria because IS had been defeated, an assessment rubbished by many.

"Around 35 tanks and other heavy weapons, carried aboard tank carriers, crossed the Jarablos border crossing in the early evening," Rami Abdel Rahman, the head of the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, told AFP.

"They headed for an area near the Sajour River, between Jarablos and Minbej, not far from the front lines where Kurdish fighters of the Minbej Military Council are stationed," he added.

Turkey accuses the YPG of being a "terrorist offshoot" of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) which has been waging an insurgency against the Turkish state since 1984.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Friday vowed to drive both the YPG and IS from Syria.

Ankara fears a Kurdish state could be established on its borders, which it believes could reinforce separatist ambitions of the Kurdish minority in Turkey.

The Kurdish community accounts for 15 percent of Syria's population and controls around 30 percent of the country, as a federal region declared in 2016.

In the past two years Turkey has conducted two offensives into northern Syria. In 2016 it launched an operation against IS, which also aimed to block the YPG from joining up the territory it held in northern Syria.

And in January 2018 Turkey staged an offensive against the militia in its northwestern enclave of Afrin.

Turkey on Saturday sent military reinforcements to northern Syria near an area controlled by Kurdish forces as Ankara threatens to carry out a fresh offensive to wipe them out, a war monitor said.

Turkey on Saturday sent military reinforcements to northern Syria near an area controlled by Kurdish forces as Ankara threatens to carry out a fresh offensive to wipe them out, a war monitor said. The move comes after US President Donald Trump's surprise announcement on Wednesday of the withdrawal of American troops stationed in northeastern Syria alongside Kurdish fighters, a long-time enemy of Turkey. Washington has for years supported the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in the fight against the Islamic State group in Syria, as part of an international anti-jihadist coalition dominated by the People's Protection Units (YPG). But on Wednesday Trump said he was ordering a withdrawal of the estimated 2,000 US troops in Syria because IS had been defeated, an assessment rubbished by many. "Around 35 tanks and other heavy weapons, carried aboard tank carriers, crossed the Jarablos border crossing in the early evening," Rami Abdel Rahman, the head of the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, told AFP. "They headed for an area near the Sajour River, between Jarablos and Minbej, not far from the front lines where Kurdish fighters of the Minbej Military Council are stationed," he added. Turkey accuses the YPG of being a "terrorist offshoot" of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) which has been waging an insurgency against the Turkish state since 1984. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Friday vowed to drive both the YPG and IS from Syria. Ankara fears a Kurdish state could be established on its borders, which it believes could reinforce separatist ambitions of the Kurdish minority in Turkey. The Kurdish community accounts for 15 percent of Syria's population and controls around 30 percent of the country, as a federal region declared in 2016. In the past two years Turkey has conducted two offensives into northern Syria. In 2016 it launched an operation against IS, which also aimed to block the YPG from joining up the territory it held in northern Syria. And in January 2018 Turkey staged an offensive against the militia in its northwestern enclave of Afrin.

After Trump says US pulling out, Turkey sends troops into northern Syria: War monitor

China&nbsp;and the United States held a vice ministerial-level call on Friday, the second such contact in a week, achieving a "deep exchange of views" on trade imbalances and the protection of intellectual property, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce said.

A statement posted on the ministry's website on Sunday said the two countries "made new progress" on those issues, without specifying further.

It also said&nbsp;China&nbsp;and the United States discussed arrangements for the next call and mutual visits.

On Wednesday, the ministry said Beijing and Washington had held a vice ministerial-level telephone call about trade and economic issues, without providing other details.

The calls took place amid signs of a thaw in a trade dispute between the United States and&nbsp;China, the world's two largest economies.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-us-president-marks-another-year-of-controversies-185674">US President Donald Trump</a> and <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/sino-india-ties-actively-moving-forward-president-xi-18570">Chinese President Xi Jinping</a> this month agreed to a truce that delayed the planned January 1 US&nbsp;increase of tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods while they negotiate a trade deal.

Chinese Commerce Ministry officials indicated earlier the two countries were in close contact over trade, and any US&nbsp;trade delegation would be welcome to visit.

China and the United States held a vice ministerial-level call on Friday, the second such contact in a week, achieving a "deep exchange of views" on trade imbalances and the protection of intellectual property, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce said.

China and the United States held a vice ministerial-level call on Friday, the second such contact in a week, achieving a "deep exchange of views" on trade imbalances and the protection of intellectual property, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce said. A statement posted on the ministry's website on Sunday said the two countries "made new progress" on those issues, without specifying further. It also said China and the United States discussed arrangements for the next call and mutual visits. On Wednesday, the ministry said Beijing and Washington had held a vice ministerial-level telephone call about trade and economic issues, without providing other details. The calls took place amid signs of a thaw in a trade dispute between the United States and China, the world's two largest economies. US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping this month agreed to a truce that delayed the planned January 1 US increase of tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods while they negotiate a trade deal. Chinese Commerce Ministry officials indicated earlier the two countries were in close contact over trade, and any US trade delegation would be welcome to visit.

China says it held second vice ministerial call with US on trade

Billionaire <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/elon-musks-boring-company-to-unveil-its-first-underground-tunnel-185202">Elon Musk</a>'s <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/elon-musk-unveils-his-first-los-angeles-area-tunnel-185381">SpaceX</a> is scheduled on Saturday to launch a long-delayed US military navigation satellite, which if successful would mark the rocket company's first national security space mission for the United States.

A Falcon 9 rocket carrying a roughly $500 million GPS satellite built by Lockheed Martin Corp was due to blast off from Florida's Cape Canaveral around 9 am (1400 GMT), privately held SpaceX said.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/spacex-launches-64-satellites-at-once-181346">A successful launch</a> - SpaceX's fourth attempt in a week after technical and weather delays - would be a significant victory for Musk's rocket company, which has spent years trying to break into the lucrative market for military space launches long-dominated by Lockheed and Boeing Co.

SpaceX sued the US Air Force in 2014 in protest over the military's award of a multibillion-dollar, non-compete contract for 36 rocket launches to United Launch Alliance, a partnership of Boeing and Lockheed. It dropped the lawsuit in 2015 after the Air Force agreed to open up the competition.

The next year, SpaceX won an $83 million Air Force contract to launch the GPS III satellite, which will have a lifespan of 15 years.

The launch would be the first of 32 satellites in production by Lockheed under contracts worth a combined $12.6 billion for the Air Force GPS III program, Lockheed spokesman Chip Eschenfelder said.

Air Force spokesman William Russell said: "Once fully operational, this latest generation of GPS satellites will bring new capabilities to users, including three times greater accuracy and up to eight times the anti-jamming capabilities."

The launch was originally scheduled for 2014 but has been hobbled by production delays, the Air Force said.

It would mark SpaceX's first so-called National Security Space mission, as defined by the US military, SpaceX said.

The next GPS III satellite is due to launch in mid-2019, Eschenfelder said, while subsequent satellites undergo testing in the company's Colorado processing facility.

Billionaire Elon Musk's SpaceX is scheduled on Saturday to launch a long-delayed US military navigation satellite, which if successful would mark the rocket company's first national security space mission for the United States.

Billionaire Elon Musk's SpaceX is scheduled on Saturday to launch a long-delayed US military navigation satellite, which if successful would mark the rocket company's first national security space mission for the United States. A Falcon 9 rocket carrying a roughly $500 million GPS satellite built by Lockheed Martin Corp was due to blast off from Florida's Cape Canaveral around 9 am (1400 GMT), privately held SpaceX said. A successful launch - SpaceX's fourth attempt in a week after technical and weather delays - would be a significant victory for Musk's rocket company, which has spent years trying to break into the lucrative market for military space launches long-dominated by Lockheed and Boeing Co. SpaceX sued the US Air Force in 2014 in protest over the military's award of a multibillion-dollar, non-compete contract for 36 rocket launches to United Launch Alliance, a partnership of Boeing and Lockheed. It dropped the lawsuit in 2015 after the Air Force agreed to open up the competition. The next year, SpaceX won an $83 million Air Force contract to launch the GPS III satellite, which will have a lifespan of 15 years. The launch would be the first of 32 satellites in production by Lockheed under contracts worth a combined $12.6 billion for the Air Force GPS III program, Lockheed spokesman Chip Eschenfelder said. Air Force spokesman William Russell said: "Once fully operational, this latest generation of GPS satellites will bring new capabilities to users, including three times greater accuracy and up to eight times the anti-jamming capabilities." The launch was originally scheduled for 2014 but has been hobbled by production delays, the Air Force said. It would mark SpaceX's first so-called National Security Space mission, as defined by the US military, SpaceX said. The next GPS III satellite is due to launch in mid-2019, Eschenfelder said, while subsequent satellites undergo testing in the company's Colorado processing facility.

SpaceX to retry launch in first US national security space mission

The Trump administration on Friday gave "national interest waiver" to four countries, including <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-plans-to-relax-visa-policy-in-bid-to-revive-tourism-185822">Pakistan</a>, which was designated as "countries of particular concern" for having engaged in or tolerated severe violations of religious freedom.

The four countries <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-issues-export-control-list-of-goods-technologies-related-to-nuclear-biological-weapons-185560">Pakistan</a>, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan along with Burma, China, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea and Sudan were last month named as "countries of particular concern" (CPC) by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for their gross violation of religious freedom.&nbsp;

Such a designation under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, would have automatically attracted sanctions and other punitive measures from the United States.

Prominent among these include designations or sanctions against individuals and organisations responsible for the suppression of freedom in these countries.

However, these sanctions and designations can be done away with a waiver as required in the "important national interest of the United States" as per section 407 of International Religious Freedom Act.

In a federal notification, Pompeo gave national interest waiver to the four countries.

For other countries, including Burma and China, the existing restrictions like export control would continue, a federal notification said.

The Secretary of State also designated Comoros, Russia and Uzbekistan as "special watch list" countries for engaging in or tolerating severe violations of religious freedom, it said.&nbsp;

The Trump administration on Friday gave "national interest waiver" to four countries, including Pakistan, which was designated as "countries of particular concern" for having engaged in or tolerated severe violations of religious freedom.

The Trump administration on Friday gave "national interest waiver" to four countries, including Pakistan, which was designated as "countries of particular concern" for having engaged in or tolerated severe violations of religious freedom. The four countries Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan along with Burma, China, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea and Sudan were last month named as "countries of particular concern" (CPC) by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for their gross violation of religious freedom. Such a designation under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, would have automatically attracted sanctions and other punitive measures from the United States. Prominent among these include designations or sanctions against individuals and organisations responsible for the suppression of freedom in these countries. However, these sanctions and designations can be done away with a waiver as required in the "important national interest of the United States" as per section 407 of International Religious Freedom Act. In a federal notification, Pompeo gave national interest waiver to the four countries. For other countries, including Burma and China, the existing restrictions like export control would continue, a federal notification said. The Secretary of State also designated Comoros, Russia and Uzbekistan as "special watch list" countries for engaging in or tolerating severe violations of religious freedom, it said.

US gives national interest waiver to Pakistan on CPC designation

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistans-court-to-announce-verdict-on-former-pm-nawaz-sharif-in-corruption-cases-185667">Pakistan</a> is planning to ease visa restrictions for visitors from 55 countries, including most European nations, in a bid to revive tourism that was devastated by Islamist violence in the fallout from the 9/11 attacks in the United States.

"We are reviewing our visa policies. We are trying to bring 55 countries into a visa-free region, which includes most of the European countries," Pakistan's information minister, Fawad Chaudhry, told Reuters.

That comes after Portugal this month declared <a href="http://13.232.42.114/india-news/jammu-kashmir-two-army-officers-killed-in-pakistan-ceasefire-violation-in-kupwara-185745">Pakistan</a> safe for travel, while France has also relaxed its advisory on travel to the South Asian nation

"I'm happy our (travel) advisories are changing," said Chaudhry.

Potentially restarting tourism has been one of the most talked about parts of new Prime Minister Imran Khan's push to create an Islamic welfare state in Pakistan, but visitors to the country often complain of an arduous visa process.

Former Real Madrid soccer stars Kaka of Brazil and Portuguese playmaker Luis Figo were recently denied visas to the country for a promotional visit, Chaudhry said, highlighting the nation's laborious visa process.

"We refused a visa to Kaka and Figo. Can you believe that? I called the section officer and he never heard of ... Kaka," Chaudhry said, laughing.

"I spoke to the interior secretary yesterday and gave him a piece of my mind."

Pakistan was last a prominent tourist destination in the 1970s when the "hippie trail" brought Western travellers through the apricot and walnut orchards of the Swat Valley and Kashmir on their way to India and Nepal.

Since then, a deteriorating security situation and the imposition of a harsh interpretation of Islamic laws have chipped away at the number of visitors.

Following Pakistan's participation in the US-led war in Afghanistan after the September 11, 2001 attacks in New York and Washington, the country was rocked by a decade of regular large-scale militant attacks.

Security has since improved dramatically, with militant attacks down sharply in the mainly Muslim country of 208 million people.

British Airways on Tuesday announced it would resume flights to Pakistan next year after a 10-year absence that followed a major hotel bombing, becoming the first Western airline to restart such flights.

Pakistan is planning to ease visa restrictions for visitors from 55 countries, including most European nations, in a bid to revive tourism that was devastated by Islamist violence in the fallout from the 9/11 attacks in the United States.

Pakistan is planning to ease visa restrictions for visitors from 55 countries, including most European nations, in a bid to revive tourism that was devastated by Islamist violence in the fallout from the 9/11 attacks in the United States. "We are reviewing our visa policies. We are trying to bring 55 countries into a visa-free region, which includes most of the European countries," Pakistan's information minister, Fawad Chaudhry, told Reuters. That comes after Portugal this month declared Pakistan safe for travel, while France has also relaxed its advisory on travel to the South Asian nation "I'm happy our (travel) advisories are changing," said Chaudhry. Potentially restarting tourism has been one of the most talked about parts of new Prime Minister Imran Khan's push to create an Islamic welfare state in Pakistan, but visitors to the country often complain of an arduous visa process. Former Real Madrid soccer stars Kaka of Brazil and Portuguese playmaker Luis Figo were recently denied visas to the country for a promotional visit, Chaudhry said, highlighting the nation's laborious visa process. "We refused a visa to Kaka and Figo. Can you believe that? I called the section officer and he never heard of ... Kaka," Chaudhry said, laughing. "I spoke to the interior secretary yesterday and gave him a piece of my mind." Pakistan was last a prominent tourist destination in the 1970s when the "hippie trail" brought Western travellers through the apricot and walnut orchards of the Swat Valley and Kashmir on their way to India and Nepal. Since then, a deteriorating security situation and the imposition of a harsh interpretation of Islamic laws have chipped away at the number of visitors. Following Pakistan's participation in the US-led war in Afghanistan after the September 11, 2001 attacks in New York and Washington, the country was rocked by a decade of regular large-scale militant attacks. Security has since improved dramatically, with militant attacks down sharply in the mainly Muslim country of 208 million people. British Airways on Tuesday announced it would resume flights to Pakistan next year after a 10-year absence that followed a major hotel bombing, becoming the first Western airline to restart such flights.

Pakistan plans to relax visa policy in bid to revive tourism

The US central bank sent a strong signal on Friday that it would be willing to reconsider expected <a href="http://www.wionews.com/business-economy/us-federal-reserve-hikes-interest-rates-wall-street-stocks-tumble-185385">interest rate hikes </a>amid new data showing President Donald Trump's multi-front trade wars are dragging on the economy and shaking up investors.

The message, from the senior Federal Reserve official with the closest links to US financial markets, sent the Dow Jones Industrial Average surging 300 points. But the index later turned negative once again, and closed with yet another steep decline, its worst week in 10 years.

"I think we are hearing something important for markets and that is a concern around risks to the economy and potential slowdown," New York Federal Reserve Bank President John Williams said Friday on CNBC.

He stressed that the Fed is listening to the fears about the risks and will "be ready to reassess and re-evaluate our views and our policy stance."

It was a remarkable comment coming just two days after the Fed raised the key borrowing rate on Wednesday and signalled it will continue to hike next year, albeit at a slower pace, with only two increases projected.

Economist Chris Low lambasted the Fed's "epic post-meeting communications bungle," and cited the "glaring omission" of the Fed failing to recognize a global manufacturing slowdown, and continuing to believe the labour market is the main factor behind inflation.

The Fed has continued to forecast strong growth, which would support their case for tightening monetary policy, but the expected inflation spurt and rise in wages have not materialized.&nbsp;

New data Friday showed the Fed's preferred inflation index slowed to 1.8 per cent in November, below the central bank's target.

"It's hard to imagine anyone would think it's acceptable to signal three rate hikes when inflation is below target," Low said, noting the Fed forecast see two hikes in 2019 and one in 2020.

Trump effect?&nbsp;

Williams tried to correct the market impression that two interest rate increases are set in stone for next year, highlighting a slight change of language in the policy statement issued Wednesday.&nbsp;

The Fed's November statement said rate increases were expected, while now it "judges that some further gradual" hikes are in store, which Williams said, "is not a commitment or promise in any way."

"Clearly the Fed is changing its tone and it's getting a little more dovish following the market reaction this week," said Adam Sarhan of 50 Park Investments.

"The Fed is blinking"

Of course, there were many who criticized the Fed for not raising interest rates fast enough in the past two years.

While the Fed continues to forecast solid growth, new government data released Friday revealed that falling exports and slower consumer spending and business investment are putting the brakes on economic growth in the second half of the year, while inflation is again falling.

US growth in the July-September quarter was slightly slower than previously reported, at 3.4 per cent, dragged down by the large drop in exports, the Commerce Department reported.

With hundreds of billions of dollars in goods hit by retaliatory tariffs, US exports fell by the largest amount since early 2009 at the height of the global financial crisis, according to the report, the third and final reading on third-quarter GDP.

Trump's aggressive trade policies, and especially the tariff retaliation from China, has impeded exports, with soybean sales nearly grinding to a halt.&nbsp;

The strong US dollar also has made American goods more expensive.

The dispute with China, even with a ceasefire declared until March 1 for negotiations, has created fears of slowing US and global growth, and caused stock markets to retreat, with Wall Street wiping out all of the 2018 gains.

Sluggish Q4&nbsp;

White House trade advisor Peter Navarro helped fuel the Wall Street downturn Friday with more hardline comments about China in an interview with Nikkei, saying Beijing is "trying to steal the future."

He also said two rate hikes by the Fed would be "two too many." &nbsp;

"We don't understand why the Fed is acting so contractionary, at a time when there's no inflation to worry about."

Gregory Daco of Oxford Economics said the data added to "evidence that business investment momentum continues to gradually cool."

Other data show fourth-quarter growth is shaping up to be even more sluggish.

Purchases of durable goods — big-ticket items like appliances, vehicles and machinery — rose in November compared to October, but much less than expected. That follows a big drop in October and will drag on GDP in the final quarter of 2018.

The US central bank sent a strong signal on Friday that it would be willing to reconsider expected interest rate hikes amid new data showing President Donald Trump's multi-front trade wars are dragging on the economy and shaking up investors.

The US central bank sent a strong signal on Friday that it would be willing to reconsider expected interest rate hikes amid new data showing President Donald Trump's multi-front trade wars are dragging on the economy and shaking up investors. The message, from the senior Federal Reserve official with the closest links to US financial markets, sent the Dow Jones Industrial Average surging 300 points. But the index later turned negative once again, and closed with yet another steep decline, its worst week in 10 years. "I think we are hearing something important for markets and that is a concern around risks to the economy and potential slowdown," New York Federal Reserve Bank President John Williams said Friday on CNBC. He stressed that the Fed is listening to the fears about the risks and will "be ready to reassess and re-evaluate our views and our policy stance." It was a remarkable comment coming just two days after the Fed raised the key borrowing rate on Wednesday and signalled it will continue to hike next year, albeit at a slower pace, with only two increases projected. Economist Chris Low lambasted the Fed's "epic post-meeting communications bungle," and cited the "glaring omission" of the Fed failing to recognize a global manufacturing slowdown, and continuing to believe the labour market is the main factor behind inflation. The Fed has continued to forecast strong growth, which would support their case for tightening monetary policy, but the expected inflation spurt and rise in wages have not materialized. New data Friday showed the Fed's preferred inflation index slowed to 1.8 per cent in November, below the central bank's target. "It's hard to imagine anyone would think it's acceptable to signal three rate hikes when inflation is below target," Low said, noting the Fed forecast see two hikes in 2019 and one in 2020. Trump effect? Williams tried to correct the market impression that two interest rate increases are set in stone for next year, highlighting a slight change of language in the policy statement issued Wednesday. The Fed's November statement said rate increases were expected, while now it "judges that some further gradual" hikes are in store, which Williams said, "is not a commitment or promise in any way." "Clearly the Fed is changing its tone and it's getting a little more dovish following the market reaction this week," said Adam Sarhan of 50 Park Investments. "The Fed is blinking" Of course, there were many who criticized the Fed for not raising interest rates fast enough in the past two years. While the Fed continues to forecast solid growth, new government data released Friday revealed that falling exports and slower consumer spending and business investment are putting the brakes on economic growth in the second half of the year, while inflation is again falling. US growth in the July-September quarter was slightly slower than previously reported, at 3.4 per cent, dragged down by the large drop in exports, the Commerce Department reported. With hundreds of billions of dollars in goods hit by retaliatory tariffs, US exports fell by the largest amount since early 2009 at the height of the global financial crisis, according to the report, the third and final reading on third-quarter GDP. Trump's aggressive trade policies, and especially the tariff retaliation from China, has impeded exports, with soybean sales nearly grinding to a halt. The strong US dollar also has made American goods more expensive. The dispute with China, even with a ceasefire declared until March 1 for negotiations, has created fears of slowing US and global growth, and caused stock markets to retreat, with Wall Street wiping out all of the 2018 gains. Sluggish Q4 White House trade advisor Peter Navarro helped fuel the Wall Street downturn Friday with more hardline comments about China in an interview with Nikkei, saying Beijing is "trying to steal the future." He also said two rate hikes by the Fed would be "two too many." "We don't understand why the Fed is acting so contractionary, at a time when there's no inflation to worry about." Gregory Daco of Oxford Economics said the data added to "evidence that business investment momentum continues to gradually cool." Other data show fourth-quarter growth is shaping up to be even more sluggish. Purchases of durable goods — big-ticket items like appliances, vehicles and machinery — rose in November compared to October, but much less than expected. That follows a big drop in October and will drag on GDP in the final quarter of 2018.

US Federal could rethink rate hikes as Trump trade wars drag on economy

There is no signed agreement allowing third-country migrants to stay in Mexico while their <a href="http://13.232.42.114/world/us-judge-rules-in-favour-of-asylum-seekers-185388">asylum applications</a> are processed in the United States, Mexico's new foreign minister said Friday.

Marcelo Ebrard spoke one day after US Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-government-shuts-down-at-midnight-as-house-adjourns-with-no-deal-185738">Donald Trump</a> administration will send migrants who cross the southern US border back to Mexico while their cases are being heard.

"We have signed no treaty, nor will we do it," Ebrard said during the daily press conference of President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who took office on December 1.

Mexico's Washington charge d'affairs Jose Antonio Zabalgoitia told reporters Thursday his country would "guarantee that foreign people who have received their appointment (in the United States) fully enjoy the rights and freedoms recognized by the constitution."&nbsp;

But he also urged Washington "not to turn migrants into ping-pong balls."

"The measure applies only to people seeking asylum" in the United States, Zabalgoitia said. "We will not accept people deported from the United States."

In Mexico, some critics thought that meant their new government had signed an agreement with Washington formalizing the procedure.

Not so, said Ebrard.

"Mexico would not accept such a treaty, we have told them many times," he said.

Ebrard said officials were asking Washington for more details on what they are doing so they can give a "more accurate position" regarding the policy on Monday.

The US announcement came after US courts rebuffed Trump administration orders to deny asylum to tens of thousands of Central Americans, mostly from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras, who have headed northward fleeing poverty and violence in their countries.

Since Mexico will not accept non-Mexican migrants returned by the United States, US officials are forced to register those people, either charging them with illegal entry or recording their asylum requests.

Then they are released within the United States to await future hearings. Nielsen says few ever show up for their asylum hearings.

On Tuesday the United States said it was ready to support $4.5 billion in investment in Central America and southern Mexico in hopes of stemming migration.

There is no signed agreement allowing third-country migrants to stay in Mexico while their asylum applications are processed in the United States, Mexico's new foreign minister said Friday.

There is no signed agreement allowing third-country migrants to stay in Mexico while their asylum applications are processed in the United States, Mexico's new foreign minister said Friday. Marcelo Ebrard spoke one day after US Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said the Donald Trump administration will send migrants who cross the southern US border back to Mexico while their cases are being heard. "We have signed no treaty, nor will we do it," Ebrard said during the daily press conference of President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who took office on December 1. Mexico's Washington charge d'affairs Jose Antonio Zabalgoitia told reporters Thursday his country would "guarantee that foreign people who have received their appointment (in the United States) fully enjoy the rights and freedoms recognized by the constitution." But he also urged Washington "not to turn migrants into ping-pong balls." "The measure applies only to people seeking asylum" in the United States, Zabalgoitia said. "We will not accept people deported from the United States." In Mexico, some critics thought that meant their new government had signed an agreement with Washington formalizing the procedure. Not so, said Ebrard. "Mexico would not accept such a treaty, we have told them many times," he said. Ebrard said officials were asking Washington for more details on what they are doing so they can give a "more accurate position" regarding the policy on Monday. The US announcement came after US courts rebuffed Trump administration orders to deny asylum to tens of thousands of Central Americans, mostly from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras, who have headed northward fleeing poverty and violence in their countries. Since Mexico will not accept non-Mexican migrants returned by the United States, US officials are forced to register those people, either charging them with illegal entry or recording their asylum requests. Then they are released within the United States to await future hearings. Nielsen says few ever show up for their asylum hearings. On Tuesday the United States said it was ready to support $4.5 billion in investment in Central America and southern Mexico in hopes of stemming migration.

No signed agreement with US on asylum seekers: Mexico

The Supreme Court dealt President <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-government-shuts-down-at-midnight-as-house-adjourns-with-no-deal-185738">Donald Trump</a>'s attempt to crack down on illegal immigration a blow Friday when it rejected a White House bid to implement his asylum ban on Central Americans.

The high court declined to overturn a block placed by the San Francisco federal appeals court on <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/hours-ahead-of-midnight-deadline-trump-meets-republican-senators-to-thrash-out-wall-funding-dilemma-185729">Trump</a>'s executive order to automatically reject asylum requests from migrants crossing the US border from Mexico.

The court made no comment in its ruling but noted that four of the nine justices were in favour of lifting the lower court's stay and letting Trump enforce the ban, while lawsuits over it go ahead.

The four backing the president were Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Trump appointees Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.

On November 9 Trump signed the order, which aimed at halting the flow of migrants mainly from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador crossing into the United States without authorization.

Many of them request asylum due to pervasive violence and poverty in their home countries.

Trump's order was immediately challenged by rights groups who said it violated international standards and US law on asylum. A lower court placed a stay on enactment, which was then supported by the appeals court.

The loss Friday in the Supreme Court might not make much difference to migrants.&nbsp;

While they can still turn themselves in and request asylum after crossing the border, on Thursday the Trump administration announced that all illegal immigrants will be pushed back into Mexico while their requests are being processed.

The administration hopes the long waiting time for a ruling on asylum applications, and being forced to stay in Mexico, will deter others from making the long trip to the border from their home countries.

The Supreme Court dealt President Donald Trump's attempt to crack down on illegal immigration a blow Friday when it rejected a White House bid to implement his asylum ban on Central Americans.

The Supreme Court dealt President Donald Trump's attempt to crack down on illegal immigration a blow Friday when it rejected a White House bid to implement his asylum ban on Central Americans. The high court declined to overturn a block placed by the San Francisco federal appeals court on Trump's executive order to automatically reject asylum requests from migrants crossing the US border from Mexico. The court made no comment in its ruling but noted that four of the nine justices were in favour of lifting the lower court's stay and letting Trump enforce the ban, while lawsuits over it go ahead. The four backing the president were Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Trump appointees Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. On November 9 Trump signed the order, which aimed at halting the flow of migrants mainly from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador crossing into the United States without authorization. Many of them request asylum due to pervasive violence and poverty in their home countries. Trump's order was immediately challenged by rights groups who said it violated international standards and US law on asylum. A lower court placed a stay on enactment, which was then supported by the appeals court. The loss Friday in the Supreme Court might not make much difference to migrants. While they can still turn themselves in and request asylum after crossing the border, on Thursday the Trump administration announced that all illegal immigrants will be pushed back into Mexico while their requests are being processed. The administration hopes the long waiting time for a ruling on asylum applications, and being forced to stay in Mexico, will deter others from making the long trip to the border from their home countries.

Supreme Court upholds block on Trump's asylum ban

US politicians and international allies scrambled Friday to make sense of President Donald Trump's momentous foreign<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-backed-forces-expel-is-from-east-syria-hub-184123"> policy decisions for Syria </a>and Afghanistan — epic reversals that prompted Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to quit.

Trump's historic moves to pull out of<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/syria-calls-us-french-turkish-forces-withdraw-immediately-168468"> Syria </a>and slash troop numbers in <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-troops-withdrawal-will-not-have-security-impact-on-afghanistan-presidential-spokesman-185677">Afghanistan </a>run counter to years of US doctrine in the region and set the stage for a cascading series of events that could well result in more bloodshed across a scarred region.

While many Americans —and not just his supporters — lauded Trump's decision, fed up after years of costly and spiralling conflicts, politicians of every stripe were tripping over each other to voice their condemnation.

"Reducing the American presence in Afghanistan and removing our presence in Syria will reverse... progress, encourage our adversaries, and make America less safe," said Republican Congressman Mac Thornberry, a Trump ally who heads the House Armed Services Committee.

In the Pentagon, no one seemed to know what comes next.&nbsp;

"We are referring all questions to the White House," one spokeswoman said when asked about the momentous Afghanistan withdrawal.

Mattis, who was seen as a voice of moderation and widely trusted by allies, resigned Thursday after telling Trump he could not abide the Syria decision.

It leaves vulnerable to Turkish attack thousands of Kurdish fighters the Pentagon has spent years training and arming to fight the Islamic State group.

'No surprise'&nbsp;

In Afghanistan, the Taliban welcomed Trump's partial pull out, with a spokesman saying the group was "more than happy."

Bill Roggio, an Afghanistan expert and senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told AFP the Trump administration's Middle East policy is in disarray.&nbsp;

"I do not know what its policy is, specifically with respect to what was known as the War on Terror," he said.&nbsp;

"Until Trump articulates a policy, it appears isolationism has won the day."

Trump campaigned on a pledge of "America First" and vowed to limit US engagement overseas, so his action on Afghanistan and Syria aren't bolted from the blue, and many observers were pleased with his actions.&nbsp;

Just weeks before Mattis announced a surge of troops in Afghanistan in August 2017, polls showed Americans were weary of war and lacked confidence that Washington had any winning strategy.

A Morning Consult-Politico poll at the time showed only 23 per cent of people thought the US was "winning" in Afghanistan; 38 per cent thought it was "losing."

"Trump ran on a platform of non-intervention, 'no more stupid wars,' and promised to get out of the nation-building business," Daniel Davis, a retired army lieutenant colonel and senior fellow at the Defense Priorities military think tank, told AFP.

"That, in general terms, is his policy, which is fundamentally sound."

In March, Trump said he wanted to bring troops home "soon" from Syria and last year, when he agreed to boost the US troop presence in Afghanistan, he said he was doing so against his own instincts.

"Getting out of Syria was no surprise," Trump tweeted on Thursday.&nbsp;

"I've been campaigning on it for years, and six months ago, when I very publicly wanted to do it, I agreed to stay longer," he added, noting that it was "time to come home" and "time for others to finally fight."

'Strategic mistake'&nbsp;

Trump claims IS has been defeated territorially in Syria, even though thousands of fighters remain and still hold small pockets of land.

His withdrawal from Syria abruptly ends American influence in the war-ravaged country and gives the Turks an opening to attack US-backed Kurds.&nbsp;

Trump reportedly made the decision during a phone call last week with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

By ceding Syria, Trump is also yanking a keystone of his own administration's foreign policy: to push back against Iran, which supports President Bashar al-Assad and is seeking to expand regional influence.

"This is a huge strategic mistake that I hope the president will reconsider," Jack Keane, a retired general, told Fox News.

"If he does not, I believe with some degree of confidence that he will come to regret this decision."

Keane has been one of the names in the Washington rumour mill to replace Mattis.&nbsp;

He went on to warn that Trump was repeating the "mistakes" of President Barack Obama, who for years drew withering criticism from Republicans for pulling US troops out of Iraq, only to see the emergence of IS.

Trump's withdrawal orders, meanwhile, rattled Europe.&nbsp;

French Defense Minister Florence Parly said there was still "has a job to finish" in Syria and called on the US to discuss its withdrawal with other members of a coalition fighting IS.&nbsp;

Britain's junior defence minister Tobias Ellwood had contradicted Trump on Wednesday, retweeting his message that the jihadists had been defeated in Syria with the words: "I strongly disagree.

"It has morphed into other forms of extremism and the threat is very much alive," he wrote.

US politicians and international allies scrambled Friday to make sense of President Donald Trump's momentous foreign policy decisions for Syria and Afghanistan — epic reversals that prompted Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to quit.

US politicians and international allies scrambled Friday to make sense of President Donald Trump's momentous foreign policy decisions for Syria and Afghanistan — epic reversals that prompted Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to quit. Trump's historic moves to pull out of Syria and slash troop numbers in Afghanistan run counter to years of US doctrine in the region and set the stage for a cascading series of events that could well result in more bloodshed across a scarred region. While many Americans —and not just his supporters — lauded Trump's decision, fed up after years of costly and spiralling conflicts, politicians of every stripe were tripping over each other to voice their condemnation. "Reducing the American presence in Afghanistan and removing our presence in Syria will reverse... progress, encourage our adversaries, and make America less safe," said Republican Congressman Mac Thornberry, a Trump ally who heads the House Armed Services Committee. In the Pentagon, no one seemed to know what comes next. "We are referring all questions to the White House," one spokeswoman said when asked about the momentous Afghanistan withdrawal. Mattis, who was seen as a voice of moderation and widely trusted by allies, resigned Thursday after telling Trump he could not abide the Syria decision. It leaves vulnerable to Turkish attack thousands of Kurdish fighters the Pentagon has spent years training and arming to fight the Islamic State group. 'No surprise' In Afghanistan, the Taliban welcomed Trump's partial pull out, with a spokesman saying the group was "more than happy." Bill Roggio, an Afghanistan expert and senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told AFP the Trump administration's Middle East policy is in disarray. "I do not know what its policy is, specifically with respect to what was known as the War on Terror," he said. "Until Trump articulates a policy, it appears isolationism has won the day." Trump campaigned on a pledge of "America First" and vowed to limit US engagement overseas, so his action on Afghanistan and Syria aren't bolted from the blue, and many observers were pleased with his actions. Just weeks before Mattis announced a surge of troops in Afghanistan in August 2017, polls showed Americans were weary of war and lacked confidence that Washington had any winning strategy. A Morning Consult-Politico poll at the time showed only 23 per cent of people thought the US was "winning" in Afghanistan; 38 per cent thought it was "losing." "Trump ran on a platform of non-intervention, 'no more stupid wars,' and promised to get out of the nation-building business," Daniel Davis, a retired army lieutenant colonel and senior fellow at the Defense Priorities military think tank, told AFP. "That, in general terms, is his policy, which is fundamentally sound." In March, Trump said he wanted to bring troops home "soon" from Syria and last year, when he agreed to boost the US troop presence in Afghanistan, he said he was doing so against his own instincts. "Getting out of Syria was no surprise," Trump tweeted on Thursday. "I've been campaigning on it for years, and six months ago, when I very publicly wanted to do it, I agreed to stay longer," he added, noting that it was "time to come home" and "time for others to finally fight." 'Strategic mistake' Trump claims IS has been defeated territorially in Syria, even though thousands of fighters remain and still hold small pockets of land. His withdrawal from Syria abruptly ends American influence in the war-ravaged country and gives the Turks an opening to attack US-backed Kurds. Trump reportedly made the decision during a phone call last week with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. By ceding Syria, Trump is also yanking a keystone of his own administration's foreign policy: to push back against Iran, which supports President Bashar al-Assad and is seeking to expand regional influence. "This is a huge strategic mistake that I hope the president will reconsider," Jack Keane, a retired general, told Fox News. "If he does not, I believe with some degree of confidence that he will come to regret this decision." Keane has been one of the names in the Washington rumour mill to replace Mattis. He went on to warn that Trump was repeating the "mistakes" of President Barack Obama, who for years drew withering criticism from Republicans for pulling US troops out of Iraq, only to see the emergence of IS. Trump's withdrawal orders, meanwhile, rattled Europe. French Defense Minister Florence Parly said there was still "has a job to finish" in Syria and called on the US to discuss its withdrawal with other members of a coalition fighting IS. Britain's junior defence minister Tobias Ellwood had contradicted Trump on Wednesday, retweeting his message that the jihadists had been defeated in Syria with the words: "I strongly disagree. "It has morphed into other forms of extremism and the threat is very much alive," he wrote.

Trump's foreign policy in spotlight after military withdrawals

UN rights experts called on British authorities on Friday to allow WikiLeaks founder <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/path-cleared-for-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-to-leave-ecuador-embassy-president-moreno-182030">Julian Assange</a> to leave the Ecuador embassy in London without fear of arrest or extradition.

The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention reiterated its finding published in February 2016 that Assange had been de facto unlawfully held without charge in the embassy, where he has now been holed up for more than six years.

He initially took asylum to avoid being extradited to Sweden, where authorities wanted to question him as part of a sexual assault investigation. That investigation was dropped.

Assange, whose website published thousands of classified US government documents, denied the Sweden allegations, saying the charge was a ploy that would eventually take him to the United States where prosecutors are preparing to pursue a criminal case against him.

Britain says Assange will be arrested for skipping bail if he leaves the embassy, but that any sentence would not exceed six months if convicted. It had no immediate comment on the experts' call, but in June, foreign office minister Alan Duncan said Assange would be treated humanely and properly.

"The only ground remaining for Mr Assange’s continued deprivation of liberty is a bail violation in the UK, which is, objectively, a minor offence that cannot post facto justify the more than six years confinement that he has been subjected to since he sought asylum in the Embassy of Ecuador," the UN experts said in a statement.

"It is time that Mr Assange, who has already paid a high price for peacefully exercising his rights to freedom of opinion, expression and information, and to promote the right to truth in the public interest, recovers his freedom,” they said.

Lawyers for Assange and others have said his work with WikiLeaks was critical to a free press and was protected speech.

The experts voiced concern that his "deprivation of liberty" was undermining his health and could "endanger his life" given the disproportionate amount of anxiety that has entailed.

Ecuador in October imposed new rules requiring him to receive routine medical exams, following concern he was not getting the medical attention he needed. The rules also ordered him to pay medical and phone bills and clean up after his cat.

Assange has sued Ecuador, arguing the rules violate his rights. An Ecuadorean court on Friday upheld a prior ruling dismissing Assange's suit.

"We have lost again," said Carlos Povedo, Assange's attorney in Ecuador, adding that the legal team would consider bringing a case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

UN rights experts called on British authorities on Friday to allow WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to leave the Ecuador embassy in London without fear of arrest or extradition.

UN rights experts called on British authorities on Friday to allow WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to leave the Ecuador embassy in London without fear of arrest or extradition. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention reiterated its finding published in February 2016 that Assange had been de facto unlawfully held without charge in the embassy, where he has now been holed up for more than six years. He initially took asylum to avoid being extradited to Sweden, where authorities wanted to question him as part of a sexual assault investigation. That investigation was dropped. Assange, whose website published thousands of classified US government documents, denied the Sweden allegations, saying the charge was a ploy that would eventually take him to the United States where prosecutors are preparing to pursue a criminal case against him. Britain says Assange will be arrested for skipping bail if he leaves the embassy, but that any sentence would not exceed six months if convicted. It had no immediate comment on the experts' call, but in June, foreign office minister Alan Duncan said Assange would be treated humanely and properly. "The only ground remaining for Mr Assange’s continued deprivation of liberty is a bail violation in the UK, which is, objectively, a minor offence that cannot post facto justify the more than six years confinement that he has been subjected to since he sought asylum in the Embassy of Ecuador," the UN experts said in a statement. "It is time that Mr Assange, who has already paid a high price for peacefully exercising his rights to freedom of opinion, expression and information, and to promote the right to truth in the public interest, recovers his freedom,” they said. Lawyers for Assange and others have said his work with WikiLeaks was critical to a free press and was protected speech. The experts voiced concern that his "deprivation of liberty" was undermining his health and could "endanger his life" given the disproportionate amount of anxiety that has entailed. Ecuador in October imposed new rules requiring him to receive routine medical exams, following concern he was not getting the medical attention he needed. The rules also ordered him to pay medical and phone bills and clean up after his cat. Assange has sued Ecuador, arguing the rules violate his rights. An Ecuadorean court on Friday upheld a prior ruling dismissing Assange's suit. "We have lost again," said Carlos Povedo, Assange's attorney in Ecuador, adding that the legal team would consider bringing a case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

UN calls on UK to allow Julian Assange to leave Ecuador embassy freely

The US government began a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-government-shuts-down-at-midnight-as-house-adjourns-with-no-deal-185738">Christmas shutdown </a>early Saturday after Congress adjourned without passing a federal spending bill or addressing President Donald Trump's demand for money to build a border wall.

Operations for several key <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/standoff-over-trump-wall-leaves-us-govt-5-days-away-from-shutdown-184833">agencies ceased at </a>12:01 am Saturday (5:01 GMT), despite last-ditch talks that continued on Capitol Hill between White House officials and congressional leaders in both parties.

Trump has dug in on his demand for $5 billion for construction of a wall on the US border with Mexico. Democrats are staunchly opposed, and the absence of an elusive deal means federal funds for dozens of agencies lapsed when the clock struck midnight on Friday.

The shutdown is the third this year and it remained unclear how long it would last. Trump expressed hope late Friday night that it "will not last long," after earlier saying he was ready for just that.

The optics are bad, as 800,000 federal employees will be either furloughed or forced to work without pay in the run-up to the Christmas holiday.

But the prospect of a large portion of government workers going without paychecks was not enough to spur lawmakers or the president to action.

The House of Representatives adjourned just before 7:00 pm &nbsp;Friday, with no moves taken to avert a shutdown, and the Senate closed up shop an hour later.&nbsp;

Both are due back in session at noon Saturday.

About three-quarters of the government, including the military and the Department of Health and Human Services, is fully funded until the end of September 2019, leaving 25 per cent unfunded as of Saturday.&nbsp;

Most NASA employees will be sent home, as will Commerce Department workers and many at the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, Agriculture and State.

National parks will remain open, but most park staff will stay at home.&nbsp;

While most critical security functions will be operational, the effects of the budget wrangling and uncertainty have cast an air of chaos over the capital, which is also reeling from the resignation announcement Thursday by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis.

Wall Street ended its worst week in a decade with more bruising losses Friday.

And the inability of Washington to accomplish one of its most basic tasks — keeping the government up and running— has caused deep embarrassment and anxiety.

'Prepared' for shutdown&nbsp;

"It's up to the Democrats whether or not we have a shutdown tonight," Trump said earlier Friday, blaming political opponents for the crisis.

"I hope we don't," the president added, but "we're totally prepared for a very long shutdown."

Senators told reporters that congressional leaders from both parties were negotiating behind the scenes with White House officials including Vice President Mike Pence, Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, and incoming chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.

The power trio shuttled from one side of the Capitol to the other, seeking a breakthrough with Republicans and Democrats.&nbsp;

It did not come on Friday.

Should they eventually strike a deal, it could swiftly clear Congress and reach the president's desk, said Senate Republican Bob Corker.&nbsp;

"Now Republicans and Democrats both own the success or failure to fund government."

One focus of discussion was the $1.6 billion in border security funding that was a part of pending Senate legislation, number two Senate Republican John Cornyn told AFP.

But conservatives in the House would likely baulk at that figure.

"There's no agreement," Congressman Mark Meadows, chairman of the House Freedom Caucus of ultra-conservatives, told reporters as he left a closed-door meeting on the Capitol's Senate side.

"There's a whole lot of numbers being thrown around," but a maximum $1.6 billion for border security "is not acceptable."

Cornyn suggested the art of the deal was less about grandstanding and more about a logical compromise to break the impasse.

"The House is at five (billion dollars for border security), the Democrats are at zero," he said. "It doesn't sound like that's rocket science to come up with a figure."

'Hostage'

Trump reversed course Thursday and rejected a measure that had unanimously passed the Senate and was under House consideration.

It would have extended government funding until February 8, but contained no money for a border wall, a pet project Trump has fought for since his presidential campaign.

Democrats painted Trump as the Grinch who stole the year-end deal.

"This #shutdown is brought to you by @POTUS &amp; @HouseGOP," Congresswoman Kathleen Rice tweeted. "Instead of passing the Senate's funding bill, they decided to hold this country hostage."

With lawmakers like Meadows and prominent conservative commentators demanding that the president sticks to his campaign promises, Trump doubled down on his wall.

The House swiftly passed a bill that fulfilled the president's demands. It included $5.7 billion in wall funding and $7.8 billion in disaster relief.

But it stalled at the first hurdle in the Senate.

Trump was scheduled to fly to Florida Friday for his Christmas break, but he postponed the trip to help salvage a deal.

The US government began a Christmas shutdown early Saturday after Congress adjourned without passing a federal spending bill or addressing President Donald Trump's demand for money to build a border wall.

The US government began a Christmas shutdown early Saturday after Congress adjourned without passing a federal spending bill or addressing President Donald Trump's demand for money to build a border wall. Operations for several key agencies ceased at 12:01 am Saturday (5:01 GMT), despite last-ditch talks that continued on Capitol Hill between White House officials and congressional leaders in both parties. Trump has dug in on his demand for $5 billion for construction of a wall on the US border with Mexico. Democrats are staunchly opposed, and the absence of an elusive deal means federal funds for dozens of agencies lapsed when the clock struck midnight on Friday. The shutdown is the third this year and it remained unclear how long it would last. Trump expressed hope late Friday night that it "will not last long," after earlier saying he was ready for just that. The optics are bad, as 800,000 federal employees will be either furloughed or forced to work without pay in the run-up to the Christmas holiday. But the prospect of a large portion of government workers going without paychecks was not enough to spur lawmakers or the president to action. The House of Representatives adjourned just before 7:00 pm Friday, with no moves taken to avert a shutdown, and the Senate closed up shop an hour later. Both are due back in session at noon Saturday. About three-quarters of the government, including the military and the Department of Health and Human Services, is fully funded until the end of September 2019, leaving 25 per cent unfunded as of Saturday. Most NASA employees will be sent home, as will Commerce Department workers and many at the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, Agriculture and State. National parks will remain open, but most park staff will stay at home. While most critical security functions will be operational, the effects of the budget wrangling and uncertainty have cast an air of chaos over the capital, which is also reeling from the resignation announcement Thursday by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. Wall Street ended its worst week in a decade with more bruising losses Friday. And the inability of Washington to accomplish one of its most basic tasks — keeping the government up and running— has caused deep embarrassment and anxiety. 'Prepared' for shutdown "It's up to the Democrats whether or not we have a shutdown tonight," Trump said earlier Friday, blaming political opponents for the crisis. "I hope we don't," the president added, but "we're totally prepared for a very long shutdown." Senators told reporters that congressional leaders from both parties were negotiating behind the scenes with White House officials including Vice President Mike Pence, Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, and incoming chief of staff Mick Mulvaney. The power trio shuttled from one side of the Capitol to the other, seeking a breakthrough with Republicans and Democrats. It did not come on Friday. Should they eventually strike a deal, it could swiftly clear Congress and reach the president's desk, said Senate Republican Bob Corker. "Now Republicans and Democrats both own the success or failure to fund government." One focus of discussion was the $1.6 billion in border security funding that was a part of pending Senate legislation, number two Senate Republican John Cornyn told AFP. But conservatives in the House would likely baulk at that figure. "There's no agreement," Congressman Mark Meadows, chairman of the House Freedom Caucus of ultra-conservatives, told reporters as he left a closed-door meeting on the Capitol's Senate side. "There's a whole lot of numbers being thrown around," but a maximum $1.6 billion for border security "is not acceptable." Cornyn suggested the art of the deal was less about grandstanding and more about a logical compromise to break the impasse. "The House is at five (billion dollars for border security), the Democrats are at zero," he said. "It doesn't sound like that's rocket science to come up with a figure." 'Hostage' Trump reversed course Thursday and rejected a measure that had unanimously passed the Senate and was under House consideration. It would have extended government funding until February 8, but contained no money for a border wall, a pet project Trump has fought for since his presidential campaign. Democrats painted Trump as the Grinch who stole the year-end deal. "This #shutdown is brought to you by @POTUS & @HouseGOP," Congresswoman Kathleen Rice tweeted. "Instead of passing the Senate's funding bill, they decided to hold this country hostage." With lawmakers like Meadows and prominent conservative commentators demanding that the president sticks to his campaign promises, Trump doubled down on his wall. The House swiftly passed a bill that fulfilled the president's demands. It included $5.7 billion in wall funding and $7.8 billion in disaster relief. But it stalled at the first hurdle in the Senate. Trump was scheduled to fly to Florida Friday for his Christmas break, but he postponed the trip to help salvage a deal.

US government partially shuts as Congress, Trump fail to reach deal

A threatened <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-refuses-to-sign-us-government-shutdown-legislation-over-mexico-wall-funding-185571">shutdown </a>of the US government would see hundreds of thousands of federal employees furloughed and many more working without pay.

President <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-pressures-democrats-warns-government-may-close-for-very-long-time-185701">Donald Trump </a>warned Friday that a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-government-shuts-down-at-midnight-as-house-adjourns-with-no-deal-185738">shutdown</a> could last a "very long time" unless Democrats in the Senate join Republicans and approve funding for the border wall with Mexico.

Unless a last-minute deal is reached the <a href="http://13.232.42.114/business-economy/wall-street-stocks-slump-over-us-government-shutdown-fears-185583">government will shut down</a> at midnight (0500 GMT Saturday).

According to Democrats in the House and Senate, a shutdown would impact about 800,000 of the 2.1 million federal employees in the United States.

Some 380,000 federal workers would be furloughed — put on unpaid leave — including 52,000 employees of the Internal Revenue Service.

Some 80 per cent of the employees of the National Park Service would also be sent home, along with 96 per cent of NASA workers and 86 per cent of the Commerce Department.

Another 420,000 workers considered essential personnel would work without pay including 41,000 federal law enforcement and correctional officers and others such as aviation and postal workers.

The departments impacted would include homeland security, transport, commerce, state, agriculture, interior, treasury and housing and urban development.

Others such as the Defense Department, Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Health and Human Services have already received funding and would be spared.

No visitor services would be provided at tourist attractions such as the nation's national parks, which are frequently visited over the Christmas holidays.

During the last shutdown, the Statue of Liberty was closed for two days before the state of New York decided to pony up the money necessary to keep it open.

The Smithsonian in Washington said that in the event of a shutdown, it had enough in reserve to keep its museums open through January 1.

There have been a number of government shutdowns in recent years including one which lasted three days under Trump in January.

An October 2013 shutdown lasted 16 days while one in 1995-96 lasted a record 21 days.

One person who would not be the victim of the shutdown is Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the target of Trump's frequent ire.

Mueller's team, which is investigating whether Trump's campaign colluded with Russia to get him elected, will continue working.

A threatened shutdown of the US government would see hundreds of thousands of federal employees furloughed and many more working without pay. President Donald Trump warned Friday that a shutdown could last a "very long time" unless Democrats in the Senate join Republicans and approve funding for the border wall with Mexico.

A threatened shutdown of the US government would see hundreds of thousands of federal employees furloughed and many more working without pay. President Donald Trump warned Friday that a shutdown could last a "very long time" unless Democrats in the Senate join Republicans and approve funding for the border wall with Mexico. Unless a last-minute deal is reached the government will shut down at midnight (0500 GMT Saturday). According to Democrats in the House and Senate, a shutdown would impact about 800,000 of the 2.1 million federal employees in the United States. Some 380,000 federal workers would be furloughed — put on unpaid leave — including 52,000 employees of the Internal Revenue Service. Some 80 per cent of the employees of the National Park Service would also be sent home, along with 96 per cent of NASA workers and 86 per cent of the Commerce Department. Another 420,000 workers considered essential personnel would work without pay including 41,000 federal law enforcement and correctional officers and others such as aviation and postal workers. The departments impacted would include homeland security, transport, commerce, state, agriculture, interior, treasury and housing and urban development. Others such as the Defense Department, Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Health and Human Services have already received funding and would be spared. No visitor services would be provided at tourist attractions such as the nation's national parks, which are frequently visited over the Christmas holidays. During the last shutdown, the Statue of Liberty was closed for two days before the state of New York decided to pony up the money necessary to keep it open. The Smithsonian in Washington said that in the event of a shutdown, it had enough in reserve to keep its museums open through January 1. There have been a number of government shutdowns in recent years including one which lasted three days under Trump in January. An October 2013 shutdown lasted 16 days while one in 1995-96 lasted a record 21 days. One person who would not be the victim of the shutdown is Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the target of Trump's frequent ire. Mueller's team, which is investigating whether Trump's campaign colluded with Russia to get him elected, will continue working.

US government shutdown would affect 800,000 federal employees

US slams China for corporate cyber espionage, indicts two spies

China denounced the United States on <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/chinas-premier-says-tibet-inseparable-part-of-countrys-sacred-territory-155400">Thursday for passing a new law </a>on restive Tibet, saying it was "resolutely opposed" to the US legislation on what China considers an internal affair, and it risked causing "serious harm" to their relations.

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed into law the Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act.

The law seeks to promote access to Tibet for US diplomats and other officials, journalists and other citizens by denying US entry for Chinese officials deemed responsible for restricting access to Tibet.

Beijing sent troops into remote, mountainous Tibet in 1950 in what it officially terms a peaceful liberation and has ruled there with an iron fist ever since.

Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying told a daily briefing that the law "sent seriously wrong signals to Tibetan separatist elements", as well as threatening to worsen bilateral ties strained by trade tension and other issues.

"If the United States implements this law, it will cause serious harm to China-US relations and to the cooperation in important areas between the two countries," Hua said.

The United States should be fully aware of the high sensitivity of the Tibet issue and should stop its interference, otherwise the United States would have to accept responsibility for the consequences, she added, without elaborating.

Rights groups say the situation for ethnic Tibetans inside what China calls the Tibet Autonomous Region remains extremely difficult. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights said in June conditions were "fast deteriorating" in Tibet.

All foreigners need special permission to enter Tibet, which is generally granted to tourists, who are allowed to go on often tightly monitored tours, but very infrequently to foreign diplomats and journalists.

Hua said Tibet was open to foreign visitors, as shown by the 40,000 American visitors to the region since 2015.

At the same time, she said it was "absolutely necessary and understandable" that the government-administered controls on the entry of foreigners given "local geographic and climate reasons".

Tibetan rights groups have welcomed the US legislation.

The International Campaign for Tibet said the "impactful and innovative" law marked a "new era of American support" and was a challenge to China's policies in Tibet.

"The US let Beijing know that its officials will face real consequences for discriminating against Americans and Tibetans and has blazed a path for other countries to follow," the group's president, Matteo Mecacci, said in a statement.

Next year marks the sensitive 60th anniversary of the flight into exile in India of the Dalai Lama, the highest figure in Tibetan Buddhism, after a failed uprising against Chinese rule.

China routinely denounces him as a dangerous separatist, although the Dalai Lama says he merely wants genuine autonomy for his homeland.

China denounced the United States on Thursday for passing a new law on restive Tibet, saying it was "resolutely opposed" to the US legislation on what China considers an internal affair, and it risked causing "serious harm" to their relations.

China denounced the United States on Thursday for passing a new law on restive Tibet, saying it was "resolutely opposed" to the US legislation on what China considers an internal affair, and it risked causing "serious harm" to their relations. US President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed into law the Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act. The law seeks to promote access to Tibet for US diplomats and other officials, journalists and other citizens by denying US entry for Chinese officials deemed responsible for restricting access to Tibet. Beijing sent troops into remote, mountainous Tibet in 1950 in what it officially terms a peaceful liberation and has ruled there with an iron fist ever since. Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying told a daily briefing that the law "sent seriously wrong signals to Tibetan separatist elements", as well as threatening to worsen bilateral ties strained by trade tension and other issues. "If the United States implements this law, it will cause serious harm to China-US relations and to the cooperation in important areas between the two countries," Hua said. The United States should be fully aware of the high sensitivity of the Tibet issue and should stop its interference, otherwise the United States would have to accept responsibility for the consequences, she added, without elaborating. Rights groups say the situation for ethnic Tibetans inside what China calls the Tibet Autonomous Region remains extremely difficult. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights said in June conditions were "fast deteriorating" in Tibet. All foreigners need special permission to enter Tibet, which is generally granted to tourists, who are allowed to go on often tightly monitored tours, but very infrequently to foreign diplomats and journalists. Hua said Tibet was open to foreign visitors, as shown by the 40,000 American visitors to the region since 2015. At the same time, she said it was "absolutely necessary and understandable" that the government-administered controls on the entry of foreigners given "local geographic and climate reasons". Tibetan rights groups have welcomed the US legislation. The International Campaign for Tibet said the "impactful and innovative" law marked a "new era of American support" and was a challenge to China's policies in Tibet. "The US let Beijing know that its officials will face real consequences for discriminating against Americans and Tibetans and has blazed a path for other countries to follow," the group's president, Matteo Mecacci, said in a statement. Next year marks the sensitive 60th anniversary of the flight into exile in India of the Dalai Lama, the highest figure in Tibetan Buddhism, after a failed uprising against Chinese rule. China routinely denounces him as a dangerous separatist, although the Dalai Lama says he merely wants genuine autonomy for his homeland.

Resolutely oppose US legislation on Tibet: China

Yemeni mother arrives in US to visit her dying son

us-1

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

us 1