Nearly three out of every four H-1B visa holders as of October 5 are Indian citizens, an official US report has said. 
According to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), there were as many as 419,637 foreign nationals working in the US on H-1B visas as on October 5.

Of these, 309,986 are Indians, the USCIS said in its report 'H-1B petitions by gender and country of birth fiscal year 2018'.

The report reveals a massive gender disparity ? only one out of every four H-1B visa holders is female. Of the 419,637 H-1B visa holders, 106,096 (or 25.3 per cent) are females as against 311,997 (or 74.3 per cent males), it said.

Gender disparity is wider among Indians.

Of the 309,986 Indians on H-1B visas in the US this October, only 63,220 or 20.4 per cent are females while nearly 245,517 Indians on H-1B visas or 80 per cent (79.2 per cent to be precise) are males.

As many as 1,249 Indians on H-1B visas have been characterised in the category of missing/others.

Indians, who account for 73.9 per cent of the total H-1B visa holders in the US, are followed by a distant Chinese with 47,172 on H-1B visas, accounting for 11.2 per cent of the total foreign nationals on this work visas.

But there is not much gender disparity among the Chinese on H-1B visas. According to the report, 21,342 or 45.2 per cent are females and 25,718 or 54.5 per cent are males.

After India and China, Canada and South Korea are the only two countries which account for a little over one per cent (1.1 per cent to be precise) each on H-1B visas.

After that all other countries constitute less than one per cent of the H-1B visas as of October 5.

The Philippines is the only country in top 10 H-1B visa holders wherein there are more females (1712 or 52.7 per cent) on H-1B visas than males (1519 or 46.7 per cent) on H-1B visas. As of October 5, as many as 3,250 professionals from the Philippines were on H-1B visas.

The H-1B gender report was released days after the Trump administration came out with its unified fall agenda, in which it said that it plans to make changes in the definition of specialty occupation for the definition of H-1B visas and re-redefining the relationship between employees and employers.

The proposed regulations, it said, is aimed at attracting the best and the brightest from across the world, prevent the abuse of H-1B visas which is consistent with the hire American agenda of the Trump administration.

The USCIS is also proposing to introduce a pre-registration system for foreign students in the US. Technically it is possible that if 85,000 such students succeed in getting H-1B visas, no overseas applicants could apply.&nbsp;

Nearly three out of every four H-1B visa holders as of October 5 are Indian citizens, an official US report has said. According to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), there were as many as 419,637 foreign nationals working in the US on H-1B visas as on October 5.

Nearly three out of every four H-1B visa holders as of October 5 are Indian citizens, an official US report has said. According to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), there were as many as 419,637 foreign nationals working in the US on H-1B visas as on October 5. Of these, 309,986 are Indians, the USCIS said in its report 'H-1B petitions by gender and country of birth fiscal year 2018'. The report reveals a massive gender disparity ? only one out of every four H-1B visa holders is female. Of the 419,637 H-1B visa holders, 106,096 (or 25.3 per cent) are females as against 311,997 (or 74.3 per cent males), it said. Gender disparity is wider among Indians. Of the 309,986 Indians on H-1B visas in the US this October, only 63,220 or 20.4 per cent are females while nearly 245,517 Indians on H-1B visas or 80 per cent (79.2 per cent to be precise) are males. As many as 1,249 Indians on H-1B visas have been characterised in the category of missing/others. Indians, who account for 73.9 per cent of the total H-1B visa holders in the US, are followed by a distant Chinese with 47,172 on H-1B visas, accounting for 11.2 per cent of the total foreign nationals on this work visas. But there is not much gender disparity among the Chinese on H-1B visas. According to the report, 21,342 or 45.2 per cent are females and 25,718 or 54.5 per cent are males. After India and China, Canada and South Korea are the only two countries which account for a little over one per cent (1.1 per cent to be precise) each on H-1B visas. After that all other countries constitute less than one per cent of the H-1B visas as of October 5. The Philippines is the only country in top 10 H-1B visa holders wherein there are more females (1712 or 52.7 per cent) on H-1B visas than males (1519 or 46.7 per cent) on H-1B visas. As of October 5, as many as 3,250 professionals from the Philippines were on H-1B visas. The H-1B gender report was released days after the Trump administration came out with its unified fall agenda, in which it said that it plans to make changes in the definition of specialty occupation for the definition of H-1B visas and re-redefining the relationship between employees and employers. The proposed regulations, it said, is aimed at attracting the best and the brightest from across the world, prevent the abuse of H-1B visas which is consistent with the hire American agenda of the Trump administration. The USCIS is also proposing to introduce a pre-registration system for foreign students in the US. Technically it is possible that if 85,000 such students succeed in getting H-1B visas, no overseas applicants could apply.

Three-fourths of H-1B visa holders in 2018 are Indians: US report

By Marco Aponte-Moreno

President Donald Trump has spoken forcefully about the humanitarian crisis in Venezuela, calling it a “human tragedy” at the United Nations General Assembly in September.

Venezuela’s humanitarian crisis – which began in late 2014, when a drop in oil prices deprived the government of its primary income source – has worsened to previously unimaginable levels. People are now dying from shortages of food and medicine.

Noting that 2 million Venezuelan refugees have escaped “the anguish inflicted by the socialist Maduro regime,” Trump asked world leaders to join forces and “seek the restoration of democracy in Venezuela.”

Vice President Mike Pence, who visited Latin America in June, described the situation in Venezuela as “heart breaking.”

This sounds like strong support for my ailing native country. My academic research on political rhetoric, however, has taught me that politicians’ words often deceive.

Close analysis of Trump’s Venezuela policy shows that his administration is doing much less than it could to ease Venezuelans’ suffering. But that hasn’t stopped the president from using the country’s crisis for Republicans’ political gain ahead of November’s midterm elections.

Sanctions that don’t work

Venezuela was once Latin America’s richest nation. Now inflation may reach 1 million per cent and a recent poll found that 30 per cent of Venezuelans eat only once a day.

To pressure Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro to “restore democratic order,” the US in September imposed sanctions on his wife, the country’s defence minister and the head of its Constituent Assembly, an all-powerful body created in 2017 to supersede the opposition-led legislature.

This is the fourth round of sanctions on Venezuelan leadership since Trump took office in 2017.

President Barack Obama also targeted Maduro’s regime, passing sanctions in 2015 and declaring Venezuela a threat to US national security.

Latin America’s crisis

Despite repeated sanctions, the authoritarian Maduro regime remains firmly in power.

As conditions in Venezuela worsen, a massive and growing number of people are fleeing to neighbouring nations. The UN High Commission on Refugees estimates that 5,000 people leave every day.

The Venezuelan exodus “is on the scale of Syria,” said Matthew Raynolds, of the United Nations refugee agency.

The influx of migrants is straining resources in Brazil and Colombia, where border cities have seen flare-ups of xenophobia and violent attacks on refugees.

The US says it will allocate an additional $48 million in humanitarian aid to fund US agencies that are providing disaster and food relief to Venezuelan migrants in Latin America.

Combined with the $46.8 million already earmarked as humanitarian aid for Venezuelan refugees this fiscal year, US foreign aid for the South American nation totals $94.8 million – up from $14 million in 2017.

But even with that big boost, foreign assistance for Venezuela is just a fraction of the $475 million given last year to Colombia and only slightly higher than the Latin American regional average of $62 million in annual aid.

Closed borders 
 
Despite Trump’s statements of sympathy for Venezuelan refugees, they are not exempt from his administration’s immigration crackdown.

Nearly 260 Venezuelans were deported from the US in the first half of 2018 alone, up from 248 deportations in all 2017 and 182 in 2016.

And though Vice President Pence’s recognized that “violence and tyranny” rule the country, Venezuelans are routinely denied political asylum. Over the past five years, immigration judges have denied nearly 50 per cent of all Venezuelan asylum applications.

Venezuelans now represent the biggest group of asylum-seekers in the US, surpassing Central Americans in 2016. Last year Venezuelan refugees filed 27,629 asylum claims, more than 10 times the 2,181 petitions made in 2014.

Immigration attorneys in Miami say the U.S. Consulate there has also been revoking tourist visas from Venezuelans, and the federal government has drastically reduced the number of non-immigrant visas issued to Venezuelans, from 239,772 in 2015 to 47,942 last year.

In Florida, home to the United States’ largest Venezuelan community, politicians from both parties – including Sens. Bill Nelson and Marco Rubio – say they would support giving Temporary Protective Status to Venezuelans. That policy would allow migrants to remain legally in the U.S. until Venezuela stabilizes.

Previous administrations have granted TPS to Nicaraguans, Hondurans and Sudanese during similar times of crisis.

But the Trump administration, which is in a court fight over its termination of TPS for most immigrant groups, says Venezuelans do not qualify for protected status.

The military option

Trump seems more interested in military action in Venezuela.

Administration officials met secretly with dissidents from Venezuela’s armed forces over the last year to discuss plans to overthrow Maduro, according to a New York Times story.

Ultimately, the US declined to participate in a coup. But Maduro’s regime “could be toppled very quickly by the military,” Trump has said, evidently referring to the Venezuelan armed forces.

Navy Vice Adm. Craig Faller, nominated to lead the US military’s Southern Command, recently told a Senate panel that he was unaware of any plan for military action in Venezuela.

“We are not doing anything other than normal prudent planning … to prepare for a range of contingencies,” he said.

The lack of serious American efforts to address Venezuela’s migration crisis has left Latin American governments alone in dealing with this historic migration crisis.

Eleven nations in the region, including refugee-saturated Brazil and Colombia, recently agreed to accept more Venezuelans, including those whose documents have expired. Many Venezuelans cannot obtain a passport or renew their national identity cards because of the Maduro regime’s slow, dysfunctional and corrupt bureaucracy.

‘They want to turn American into Venezuela!’

The White House’s failure to act on Venezuela has not stopped Trump from using its crisis for electoral gain in November’s midterm elections.

“The new Democrats are radical socialists who want to model America’s economy after Venezuela,” Trump wrote in an October 10 USA Today op-ed.

And at an event to in Tennessee earlier this month, Trump insisted that Democrats “want to shut down American energy and replace freedom with socialism.”

They “want to turn America into Venezuela!” he yelled.

Bellicose rhetoric against Maduro’s regime coupled with expressions of compassion for its victims may play well with Trump’s base.

But it will not help those living through the worst humanitarian crisis the Americas have ever seen.

 
(Marco Aponte-Moreno is Assistant Professor of Global Business, St Mary's College of California)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/trump-sees-opportunity-in-venezuelas-humanitarian-crisis-as-midterms-approach-104047">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 Marco Aponte-Moreno President Donald Trump has spoken forcefully about the humanitarian crisis in Venezuela, calling it a “human tragedy” at the United Nations General Assembly in September.

By Marco Aponte-Moreno President Donald Trump has spoken forcefully about the humanitarian crisis in Venezuela, calling it a “human tragedy” at the United Nations General Assembly in September. Venezuela’s humanitarian crisis – which began in late 2014, when a drop in oil prices deprived the government of its primary income source – has worsened to previously unimaginable levels. People are now dying from shortages of food and medicine. Noting that 2 million Venezuelan refugees have escaped “the anguish inflicted by the socialist Maduro regime,” Trump asked world leaders to join forces and “seek the restoration of democracy in Venezuela.” Vice President Mike Pence, who visited Latin America in June, described the situation in Venezuela as “heart breaking.” This sounds like strong support for my ailing native country. My academic research on political rhetoric, however, has taught me that politicians’ words often deceive. Close analysis of Trump’s Venezuela policy shows that his administration is doing much less than it could to ease Venezuelans’ suffering. But that hasn’t stopped the president from using the country’s crisis for Republicans’ political gain ahead of November’s midterm elections. Sanctions that don’t work Venezuela was once Latin America’s richest nation. Now inflation may reach 1 million per cent and a recent poll found that 30 per cent of Venezuelans eat only once a day. To pressure Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro to “restore democratic order,” the US in September imposed sanctions on his wife, the country’s defence minister and the head of its Constituent Assembly, an all-powerful body created in 2017 to supersede the opposition-led legislature. This is the fourth round of sanctions on Venezuelan leadership since Trump took office in 2017. President Barack Obama also targeted Maduro’s regime, passing sanctions in 2015 and declaring Venezuela a threat to US national security. Latin America’s crisis Despite repeated sanctions, the authoritarian Maduro regime remains firmly in power. As conditions in Venezuela worsen, a massive and growing number of people are fleeing to neighbouring nations. The UN High Commission on Refugees estimates that 5,000 people leave every day. The Venezuelan exodus “is on the scale of Syria,” said Matthew Raynolds, of the United Nations refugee agency. The influx of migrants is straining resources in Brazil and Colombia, where border cities have seen flare-ups of xenophobia and violent attacks on refugees. The US says it will allocate an additional $48 million in humanitarian aid to fund US agencies that are providing disaster and food relief to Venezuelan migrants in Latin America. Combined with the $46.8 million already earmarked as humanitarian aid for Venezuelan refugees this fiscal year, US foreign aid for the South American nation totals $94.8 million – up from $14 million in 2017. But even with that big boost, foreign assistance for Venezuela is just a fraction of the $475 million given last year to Colombia and only slightly higher than the Latin American regional average of $62 million in annual aid. Closed borders Despite Trump’s statements of sympathy for Venezuelan refugees, they are not exempt from his administration’s immigration crackdown. Nearly 260 Venezuelans were deported from the US in the first half of 2018 alone, up from 248 deportations in all 2017 and 182 in 2016. And though Vice President Pence’s recognized that “violence and tyranny” rule the country, Venezuelans are routinely denied political asylum. Over the past five years, immigration judges have denied nearly 50 per cent of all Venezuelan asylum applications. Venezuelans now represent the biggest group of asylum-seekers in the US, surpassing Central Americans in 2016. Last year Venezuelan refugees filed 27,629 asylum claims, more than 10 times the 2,181 petitions made in 2014. Immigration attorneys in Miami say the U.S. Consulate there has also been revoking tourist visas from Venezuelans, and the federal government has drastically reduced the number of non-immigrant visas issued to Venezuelans, from 239,772 in 2015 to 47,942 last year. In Florida, home to the United States’ largest Venezuelan community, politicians from both parties – including Sens. Bill Nelson and Marco Rubio – say they would support giving Temporary Protective Status to Venezuelans. That policy would allow migrants to remain legally in the U.S. until Venezuela stabilizes. Previous administrations have granted TPS to Nicaraguans, Hondurans and Sudanese during similar times of crisis. But the Trump administration, which is in a court fight over its termination of TPS for most immigrant groups, says Venezuelans do not qualify for protected status. The military option Trump seems more interested in military action in Venezuela. Administration officials met secretly with dissidents from Venezuela’s armed forces over the last year to discuss plans to overthrow Maduro, according to a New York Times story. Ultimately, the US declined to participate in a coup. But Maduro’s regime “could be toppled very quickly by the military,” Trump has said, evidently referring to the Venezuelan armed forces. Navy Vice Adm. Craig Faller, nominated to lead the US military’s Southern Command, recently told a Senate panel that he was unaware of any plan for military action in Venezuela. “We are not doing anything other than normal prudent planning … to prepare for a range of contingencies,” he said. The lack of serious American efforts to address Venezuela’s migration crisis has left Latin American governments alone in dealing with this historic migration crisis. Eleven nations in the region, including refugee-saturated Brazil and Colombia, recently agreed to accept more Venezuelans, including those whose documents have expired. Many Venezuelans cannot obtain a passport or renew their national identity cards because of the Maduro regime’s slow, dysfunctional and corrupt bureaucracy. ‘They want to turn American into Venezuela!’ The White House’s failure to act on Venezuela has not stopped Trump from using its crisis for electoral gain in November’s midterm elections. “The new Democrats are radical socialists who want to model America’s economy after Venezuela,” Trump wrote in an October 10 USA Today op-ed. And at an event to in Tennessee earlier this month, Trump insisted that Democrats “want to shut down American energy and replace freedom with socialism.” They “want to turn America into Venezuela!” he yelled. Bellicose rhetoric against Maduro’s regime coupled with expressions of compassion for its victims may play well with Trump’s base. But it will not help those living through the worst humanitarian crisis the Americas have ever seen. (Marco Aponte-Moreno is Assistant Professor of Global Business, St Mary's College of California) (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)

Trump sees opportunity in Venezuela’s humanitarian crisis as midterms approach

Growing Western political and corporate reluctance to be associated with Saudi Arabia in the wake of the suspected killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi spotlights fundamentally different investment strategies and environments in the bulk of Asia and the oil-rich Gulf states, the continent’s most western flank.

The Khashoggi crisis highlighted the fact that much of investment in the Gulf, irrespective of whether it is domestic, Western or Chinese, comes from financial, technology and other service industries, the arms industry or Gulf governments. It is focused on services, infrastructure or enhancing the state’s capacities rather than on manufacturing, industrial development, and the nurturing of an independent private sector.

The crisis has put on display the risks Gulf governments run by adopting policies that significantly tarnish their international reputations. Technology, media, financial and other services industries, as well as various European ministers and the US Treasury Secretary, have cancelled, in the wake of Khashoggi’s disappearance and likely killing while visiting the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, their participation in Davos in the Desert, a high-profile investors’ conference in Riyadh later this month.

By contrast, the military industry, with US President Donald J. Trump’s encouragement, has proven so far less worried about reputational damage.

Sponsored by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is suspected of being responsible for Khashoggi’s likely murder, the conference was intended to attract investment in his Vision 2030 plan to reform and diversify the Saudi economy.

In highlighting differences in investment strategies in the Middle East and the rest of Asia, the fallout of Khashoggi’s disappearance goes beyond the parameters of a single incident. It suggests that foreign investment must be embedded in broader social and economic policies as well as an environment that promises stability to ensure that it is productive, contributes to sustainable growth, and benefits broad segments of the population.

In contrast to the Gulf where, with the exception of state-run airlines and DP World, Dubai’s global port operator, the bulk of investment in portfolios managed by sovereign wealth funds, trophies or investment designed to enhance a country’s international prestige and soft power, major Asian nations like China and India have used investment to lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, foster a substantial middle class, and create an industrial base.

To be sure, with small populations, Gulf states are more likely to ensure sustainability in services and oil and gas derivatives rather than in manufacturing and industry. Nonetheless, that too requires enabling policies and an education system that encourages critical thinking and the freedom to question, allow one’s mind to roam without fear of repercussion, and grants free, unfettered access to information – categories that are becoming increasingly rare in a part of the world in which freedoms are severely curtailed.

China’s $1 trillion, infrastructure-driven Belt and Road initiative may be the Asian exception that would come closest to some of the Gulf’s soft power investments. Yet, even so, the Belt and Road initiative, designed to alleviate domestic over capacity by state-owned companies that are not beholden to shareholders’ short-term demands and/or geopolitical gain, contributes to productive economic growth in the People’s Republic itself.

Asian nations, moreover, have been able to manage investors’ expectations in an environment of relative political stability. By contrast, Saudi Arabia damaged confidence in its ability to reform and diversify its oil-based economy when after repeated delays it suspended indefinitely plans to list five per cent of its national oil company, Saudi Arabian Oil Company or Aramco, in what would have been the world’s largest-ever initial public offering.

The Khashoggi crisis and the Aramco delay followed a series of political initiatives for which there was little equivalent in the rest of Asia. These included the Saudi-United Arab Emirates military campaign in Yemen causing the world’s worst post-World War Two humanitarian crisis; the 16-month-old diplomatic and economic embargo of Qatar by Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt; the detention and failed effort to force Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri to resign; and the diplomatic Saudi spat with Canada in response to a tweet criticizing the kingdom’s human rights record. As a result, foreign direct investment in Saudi Arabia last year plunged to a 14-year low.

All of this is not to say that the rest of Asia does not have its own questionable policies such as Chinese claims in the South China Sea or the Pakistani-Indian feud, and questionable business practices such as China’s alleged industrial espionage. However, with the exception of China’s massive repression of Turkic Muslims in its north-western province of Xinjiang, none of these is likely to fundamentally undermine investor confidence, derail existing social and economic policies that have produced results or produce situations in which avoidance of reputational damage becomes a priority.

At the bottom line, China is no less autocratic than the Gulf states, while Hindu nationalism in India fits a global trend towards populism and illiberal democracy. Nevertheless, what differentiates much of Asia from the Gulf and accounts for its economic success are policies that ensure a relatively stable environment and are focused on social and economic enhancement rather than primarily on regime survival. That may be the lesson for Gulf rulers. 
&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

Growing Western political and corporate reluctance to be associated with Saudi Arabia in the wake of the suspected killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi spotlights fundamentally different investment strategies and environments in the bulk of Asia and the oil-rich Gulf states, the continent’s most western flank.

Growing Western political and corporate reluctance to be associated with Saudi Arabia in the wake of the suspected killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi spotlights fundamentally different investment strategies and environments in the bulk of Asia and the oil-rich Gulf states, the continent’s most western flank. The Khashoggi crisis highlighted the fact that much of investment in the Gulf, irrespective of whether it is domestic, Western or Chinese, comes from financial, technology and other service industries, the arms industry or Gulf governments. It is focused on services, infrastructure or enhancing the state’s capacities rather than on manufacturing, industrial development, and the nurturing of an independent private sector. The crisis has put on display the risks Gulf governments run by adopting policies that significantly tarnish their international reputations. Technology, media, financial and other services industries, as well as various European ministers and the US Treasury Secretary, have cancelled, in the wake of Khashoggi’s disappearance and likely killing while visiting the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, their participation in Davos in the Desert, a high-profile investors’ conference in Riyadh later this month. By contrast, the military industry, with US President Donald J. Trump’s encouragement, has proven so far less worried about reputational damage. Sponsored by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is suspected of being responsible for Khashoggi’s likely murder, the conference was intended to attract investment in his Vision 2030 plan to reform and diversify the Saudi economy. In highlighting differences in investment strategies in the Middle East and the rest of Asia, the fallout of Khashoggi’s disappearance goes beyond the parameters of a single incident. It suggests that foreign investment must be embedded in broader social and economic policies as well as an environment that promises stability to ensure that it is productive, contributes to sustainable growth, and benefits broad segments of the population. In contrast to the Gulf where, with the exception of state-run airlines and DP World, Dubai’s global port operator, the bulk of investment in portfolios managed by sovereign wealth funds, trophies or investment designed to enhance a country’s international prestige and soft power, major Asian nations like China and India have used investment to lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, foster a substantial middle class, and create an industrial base. To be sure, with small populations, Gulf states are more likely to ensure sustainability in services and oil and gas derivatives rather than in manufacturing and industry. Nonetheless, that too requires enabling policies and an education system that encourages critical thinking and the freedom to question, allow one’s mind to roam without fear of repercussion, and grants free, unfettered access to information – categories that are becoming increasingly rare in a part of the world in which freedoms are severely curtailed. China’s $1 trillion, infrastructure-driven Belt and Road initiative may be the Asian exception that would come closest to some of the Gulf’s soft power investments. Yet, even so, the Belt and Road initiative, designed to alleviate domestic over capacity by state-owned companies that are not beholden to shareholders’ short-term demands and/or geopolitical gain, contributes to productive economic growth in the People’s Republic itself. Asian nations, moreover, have been able to manage investors’ expectations in an environment of relative political stability. By contrast, Saudi Arabia damaged confidence in its ability to reform and diversify its oil-based economy when after repeated delays it suspended indefinitely plans to list five per cent of its national oil company, Saudi Arabian Oil Company or Aramco, in what would have been the world’s largest-ever initial public offering. The Khashoggi crisis and the Aramco delay followed a series of political initiatives for which there was little equivalent in the rest of Asia. These included the Saudi-United Arab Emirates military campaign in Yemen causing the world’s worst post-World War Two humanitarian crisis; the 16-month-old diplomatic and economic embargo of Qatar by Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt; the detention and failed effort to force Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri to resign; and the diplomatic Saudi spat with Canada in response to a tweet criticizing the kingdom’s human rights record. As a result, foreign direct investment in Saudi Arabia last year plunged to a 14-year low. All of this is not to say that the rest of Asia does not have its own questionable policies such as Chinese claims in the South China Sea or the Pakistani-Indian feud, and questionable business practices such as China’s alleged industrial espionage. However, with the exception of China’s massive repression of Turkic Muslims in its north-western province of Xinjiang, none of these is likely to fundamentally undermine investor confidence, derail existing social and economic policies that have produced results or produce situations in which avoidance of reputational damage becomes a priority. At the bottom line, China is no less autocratic than the Gulf states, while Hindu nationalism in India fits a global trend towards populism and illiberal democracy. Nevertheless, what differentiates much of Asia from the Gulf and accounts for its economic success are policies that ensure a relatively stable environment and are focused on social and economic enhancement rather than primarily on regime survival. That may be the lesson for Gulf rulers. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Jamal Khashoggi crisis highlights why investment in Asia is more productive

The US Department of State's Rewards for Justice Program has increased the reward from US $5 million to up to US $10 million for information leading to the identification, location, arrest, and/or conviction of Qasim al-Rimi who is the terrorist of Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).

The department is further offering a reward of up to US $5 million for information leading to the identification or location of Khalid Saeed al-Batarfi, a senior regional leader of the AQAP.

Qasim al-Rimi was named the leader of the AQAP in 2015 and has called for renewed attacks against the USA.

The US Department of State designated al-Rimi as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) under Executive Order (EO) 13224 in May 2010, while he had already been listed by Saudi Arabia as a most wanted terrorist suspect on February 3, 2009. He has also been added to the United Nations (UN) 1267 Sanctions Committee's Consolidated List of individuals associated with Al Qaeda/ISIL in May 2010.

Al-Rimi has been charged in numerous terror incidents, including being convicted in Yemen of plotting to assassinate the US Ambassador to Yemen in 2005. He escaped from a Yemeni prison in 2006, after which Al-Rimi has been linked to the September 2008 attack on the US Embassy in Sana'a that left 20 dead, and the December 2009 attempted suicide bombing by "underwear bomber" Umar Farouq Abdulmutallab aboard a US-bound airliner.

The "emir" of AQAP has also praised Omar Mateen, who killed 49 people in the June 2016 mass shooting at a nightclub in Orlando, Florida. He has also instigated 'supporters' living in Western countries to conduct "easy and simple" attacks in a video that was released in May 2017.

Khalid al-Batarfi, on the other hand, is a senior member of AQAP in Yemen's Hadramaut Governorate and a former member of AQAP's shura council.

Born in Saudi Arabia, he fought alongside the Taliban against US forces and the Northern Alliance in 2001. In 2010, al-Batarfi joined AQAP in Yemen, led AQAP fighters in taking over Yemen's Abyan Province, and was named AQAP's emir of Abyan.

He issued a statement warning that the al-Qaeda would destroy the US economy and attack other US interests after a US attack killed a senior leader of AQAP. After the US announced that it would recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, al-Batarfi appeared in an AQAP video in January 2018 threatening the US and Jews.

On January 23, 2018, the US Department of State designated al-Batarfi as an SDGT under E.O. 13224.

The US Department of State's Rewards for Justice Program has increased the reward from US $5 million to up to US $10 million for information leading to the identification, location, arrest, and/or conviction of Qasim al-Rimi who is the terrorist of Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).

The US Department of State's Rewards for Justice Program has increased the reward from US $5 million to up to US $10 million for information leading to the identification, location, arrest, and/or conviction of Qasim al-Rimi who is the terrorist of Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). The department is further offering a reward of up to US $5 million for information leading to the identification or location of Khalid Saeed al-Batarfi, a senior regional leader of the AQAP. Qasim al-Rimi was named the leader of the AQAP in 2015 and has called for renewed attacks against the USA. The US Department of State designated al-Rimi as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) under Executive Order (EO) 13224 in May 2010, while he had already been listed by Saudi Arabia as a most wanted terrorist suspect on February 3, 2009. He has also been added to the United Nations (UN) 1267 Sanctions Committee's Consolidated List of individuals associated with Al Qaeda/ISIL in May 2010. Al-Rimi has been charged in numerous terror incidents, including being convicted in Yemen of plotting to assassinate the US Ambassador to Yemen in 2005. He escaped from a Yemeni prison in 2006, after which Al-Rimi has been linked to the September 2008 attack on the US Embassy in Sana'a that left 20 dead, and the December 2009 attempted suicide bombing by "underwear bomber" Umar Farouq Abdulmutallab aboard a US-bound airliner. The "emir" of AQAP has also praised Omar Mateen, who killed 49 people in the June 2016 mass shooting at a nightclub in Orlando, Florida. He has also instigated 'supporters' living in Western countries to conduct "easy and simple" attacks in a video that was released in May 2017. Khalid al-Batarfi, on the other hand, is a senior member of AQAP in Yemen's Hadramaut Governorate and a former member of AQAP's shura council. Born in Saudi Arabia, he fought alongside the Taliban against US forces and the Northern Alliance in 2001. In 2010, al-Batarfi joined AQAP in Yemen, led AQAP fighters in taking over Yemen's Abyan Province, and was named AQAP's emir of Abyan. He issued a statement warning that the al-Qaeda would destroy the US economy and attack other US interests after a US attack killed a senior leader of AQAP. After the US announced that it would recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, al-Batarfi appeared in an AQAP video in January 2018 threatening the US and Jews. On January 23, 2018, the US Department of State designated al-Batarfi as an SDGT under E.O. 13224.

US increases bounty to $10 million for information on Al-Qaeda terrorist Qasim al-Rimi

It is too soon to say if a major attack in Afghanistan that killed a top security commander will hurt voter turnout in Saturday's elections, US&nbsp;Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said, but added that the US&nbsp;military's mission was unaltered.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-general-who-escaped-unhurt-condemns-loss-of-afghan-general-taliban-claims-responsibility-of-attack-172213">Thursday's attack</a> underlined how precarious the situation remains in Afghanistan after more than 17 years of war and even after Taliban and US&nbsp;officials have opened preliminary contacts aimed at establishing the basis for future peace talks.

Mattis, who had known General Abdul Razeq, the police commander in southern Kandahar, on Friday described his death as "the loss of a patriot."

But he predicted that the brazen attack would not have a long-term impact on security in Kandahar, one of Afghanistan's most strategically important and contested provinces in America's longest war.

"We need to find who's done this," Mattis told reporters traveling with him in the southeast Asian city-state of Singapore. "But right now, we are going toward the election and we will continue to defend the Afghan people."

General Scott Miller, the top US&nbsp;commander in Afghanistan, had been at a meeting with Razeq only moments before the attack but was not injured, although it wounded two Americans and a coalition contractor.

US&nbsp;officials in Afghanistan say Miller was not the target but have offered no evidence. The Taliban say they were targeting Miller.

Mattis said he had yet spoken to Miller and could not confirm the Taliban's claim of responsibility. Still, Mattis said he believed the attack would not affect Miller's security arrangements or the movement of the US&nbsp;military in Afghanistan.

Security officials in Afghanistan had warned of attacks ahead of the election but Razeq's death triggered deep shock that officials fear may keep voters away, particularly after Taliban warnings not to participate in what the militants consider a foreign-imposed ballot.

Asked how the attack would affect voter turnout in Saturday's parliamentary elections, Mattis was cautious.

"Terrorism can have a short-term effect. I think it's too early to say if it will have any real effect on the election," Mattis said.

"I'm not willing to say that right now. And obviously (insurgents) are not good at ballots. They are good at bombs."

Mattis renewed U.S. hopes of finding a negotiated, Afghan-led political solution to the conflict.

"We remain absolutely committed to an Afghan-led Afghan reconciliation," he said.

It is too soon to say if a major attack in Afghanistan that killed a top security commander will hurt voter turnout in Saturday's elections, US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said, but added that the US military's mission was unaltered.

It is too soon to say if a major attack in Afghanistan that killed a top security commander will hurt voter turnout in Saturday's elections, US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said, but added that the US military's mission was unaltered. Thursday's attack underlined how precarious the situation remains in Afghanistan after more than 17 years of war and even after Taliban and US officials have opened preliminary contacts aimed at establishing the basis for future peace talks. Mattis, who had known General Abdul Razeq, the police commander in southern Kandahar, on Friday described his death as "the loss of a patriot." But he predicted that the brazen attack would not have a long-term impact on security in Kandahar, one of Afghanistan's most strategically important and contested provinces in America's longest war. "We need to find who's done this," Mattis told reporters traveling with him in the southeast Asian city-state of Singapore. "But right now, we are going toward the election and we will continue to defend the Afghan people." General Scott Miller, the top US commander in Afghanistan, had been at a meeting with Razeq only moments before the attack but was not injured, although it wounded two Americans and a coalition contractor. US officials in Afghanistan say Miller was not the target but have offered no evidence. The Taliban say they were targeting Miller. Mattis said he had yet spoken to Miller and could not confirm the Taliban's claim of responsibility. Still, Mattis said he believed the attack would not affect Miller's security arrangements or the movement of the US military in Afghanistan. Security officials in Afghanistan had warned of attacks ahead of the election but Razeq's death triggered deep shock that officials fear may keep voters away, particularly after Taliban warnings not to participate in what the militants consider a foreign-imposed ballot. Asked how the attack would affect voter turnout in Saturday's parliamentary elections, Mattis was cautious. "Terrorism can have a short-term effect. I think it's too early to say if it will have any real effect on the election," Mattis said. "I'm not willing to say that right now. And obviously (insurgents) are not good at ballots. They are good at bombs." Mattis renewed U.S. hopes of finding a negotiated, Afghan-led political solution to the conflict. "We remain absolutely committed to an Afghan-led Afghan reconciliation," he said.

Mattis says too soon to say if Afghan attack will affect ballot

President Donald Trump on Thursday (October 18) said the upcoming midterm election would be about "Kavanaugh, the caravan, law and order and common sense," during a campaign rally in Montana.

"I have created so many jobs. I've made this country so great that everybody wants to come in," Trump said in a speech where he blamed Democrats for obstructing his efforts to build a wall along the US&nbsp;border with Mexico.

Trump also shared a surprising benefit of becoming president and the constant scrutiny from the media.

"They used to say 'he wears a hairpiece. He wears a hairpiece.' They don't say that anymore," Trump said.

Referencing to his recent visits to hurricane impacted areas, Trump added, "These people have seen me under every condition known to man. You walk around in those conditions. You can't fake it...It might be one of the best things that's happened to me in a long time."

Trump is on a three-state tour in the western part of the United States advocating for Republican candidates who are running for election in November with the hope of keeping control of the US&nbsp;Senate and House of Representatives in Republican hands.

President Donald Trump on Thursday (October 18) said the upcoming midterm election would be about "Kavanaugh, the caravan, law and order and common sense," during a campaign rally in Montana.

President Donald Trump on Thursday (October 18) said the upcoming midterm election would be about "Kavanaugh, the caravan, law and order and common sense," during a campaign rally in Montana. "I have created so many jobs. I've made this country so great that everybody wants to come in," Trump said in a speech where he blamed Democrats for obstructing his efforts to build a wall along the US border with Mexico. Trump also shared a surprising benefit of becoming president and the constant scrutiny from the media. "They used to say 'he wears a hairpiece. He wears a hairpiece.' They don't say that anymore," Trump said. Referencing to his recent visits to hurricane impacted areas, Trump added, "These people have seen me under every condition known to man. You walk around in those conditions. You can't fake it...It might be one of the best things that's happened to me in a long time." Trump is on a three-state tour in the western part of the United States advocating for Republican candidates who are running for election in November with the hope of keeping control of the US Senate and House of Representatives in Republican hands.

Trump shares surprising perk of being president, says election will be about 'Kavanaugh, caravan, common sense'

An American student who was barred from entering Israel under a law against foreign activists who support boycotts of the state over its Palestinian policies was given permission to stay in the country by the Supreme Court on Thursday.

In its ruling, the court criticised Israeli authorities for denying entry to Lara Alqasem, 22, saying their decision gave "the unavoidable impression" that she was barred for her political opinions.

If so, the justices said, it represented "a radical and dangerous step that could lead to the crumbling of the foundations upon which Israel's democracy is built".

Alqasem was refused entry when she flew to Israel on a study visa on Oct. 2. Security officials cited her role as president of a small local chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida.

Her case touched off a debate in Israel over whether democratic values had been compromised by a 2017 law that bars the entry of foreigners who publicly support boycotts over Israel's policies towards the Palestinians.

Thursday's ruling, seen by Reuters, overturned a lower court decision that had backed the decision by Israeli authorities.

Alqasem said she was releived by the court's decision and would speak more later. Her lawyers called the ruling "a victory for free speech, academic freedom, and the rule of law".

Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan, who had denied Alqasem entry, said the government would look into the implications of the ruling.

"We will examine the legal criteria in order to ensure that the original intent of the law is maintained," he said. "The principle that whoever acts to harm the State of Israel and its citizens should be refused entry must be preserved."

Members of Israel's right-wing government have long criticized the court for being, in their eyes, too liberal in its interventions regarding policy towards Palestinians.

The Supreme Court accepted Alqasem's lawyers’ argument that she had ceased her pro-boycott activity in April 2017, and noted that since then she had engaged in Holocaust studies and had been accepted to a post graduate programme at Jerusalem’s Hebrew University, which supported her petition.

"Since the petitioner's actions do not sufficiently warrant banning her entry to Israel, the unavoidable impression is that her political opinions were the reason behind the cancellation of the visa that was granted to her," the ruling said.

"If that is indeed the case, we are talking about a radical and dangerous step."

The court cited in its decision the Hebrew University's contention that barring the entry, at the airport, of a foreign student accepted into an international programme damaged the university's international ties.

However one justice wrote that if Alqasem "returns to her old ways" and promoted a boycott while she is in Israel, her stay could be cancelled and she could be expelled.

It was not immediately clear whether the Israeli authorities would appeal the ruling.

An American student who was barred from entering Israel under a law against foreign activists who support boycotts of the state over its Palestinian policies was given permission to stay in the country by the Supreme Court on Thursday.

An American student who was barred from entering Israel under a law against foreign activists who support boycotts of the state over its Palestinian policies was given permission to stay in the country by the Supreme Court on Thursday. In its ruling, the court criticised Israeli authorities for denying entry to Lara Alqasem, 22, saying their decision gave "the unavoidable impression" that she was barred for her political opinions. If so, the justices said, it represented "a radical and dangerous step that could lead to the crumbling of the foundations upon which Israel's democracy is built". Alqasem was refused entry when she flew to Israel on a study visa on Oct. 2. Security officials cited her role as president of a small local chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida. Her case touched off a debate in Israel over whether democratic values had been compromised by a 2017 law that bars the entry of foreigners who publicly support boycotts over Israel's policies towards the Palestinians. Thursday's ruling, seen by Reuters, overturned a lower court decision that had backed the decision by Israeli authorities. Alqasem said she was releived by the court's decision and would speak more later. Her lawyers called the ruling "a victory for free speech, academic freedom, and the rule of law". Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan, who had denied Alqasem entry, said the government would look into the implications of the ruling. "We will examine the legal criteria in order to ensure that the original intent of the law is maintained," he said. "The principle that whoever acts to harm the State of Israel and its citizens should be refused entry must be preserved." Members of Israel's right-wing government have long criticized the court for being, in their eyes, too liberal in its interventions regarding policy towards Palestinians. The Supreme Court accepted Alqasem's lawyers’ argument that she had ceased her pro-boycott activity in April 2017, and noted that since then she had engaged in Holocaust studies and had been accepted to a post graduate programme at Jerusalem’s Hebrew University, which supported her petition. "Since the petitioner's actions do not sufficiently warrant banning her entry to Israel, the unavoidable impression is that her political opinions were the reason behind the cancellation of the visa that was granted to her," the ruling said. "If that is indeed the case, we are talking about a radical and dangerous step." The court cited in its decision the Hebrew University's contention that barring the entry, at the airport, of a foreign student accepted into an international programme damaged the university's international ties. However one justice wrote that if Alqasem "returns to her old ways" and promoted a boycott while she is in Israel, her stay could be cancelled and she could be expelled. It was not immediately clear whether the Israeli authorities would appeal the ruling.

US student in boycott case allowed to stay in Israel

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-saudi-journalist-likely-dead-warns-of-severe-response-172200">Trump says Saudi journalist likely dead, warns of 'severe' response</a>

President Donald Trump said Thursday he now believes journalist Jamal Khashoggi is dead and warned of "very severe" consequences should Saudi Arabia be proven responsible.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/ahead-of-pm-modis-visit-sri-lanka-drops-chinese-housing-deal-to-favour-indian-company-172218">As PM Wickremesinghe visits India, Sri Lanka drops Chinese housing deal to </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/ahead-of-pm-modis-visit-sri-lanka-drops-chinese-housing-deal-to-favour-indian-company-172218">favour</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/ahead-of-pm-modis-visit-sri-lanka-drops-chinese-housing-deal-to-favour-indian-company-172218"> Indian joint venture</a>

Ahead of Lankan PM Wickremesinghe's visit to India, the Lankan government dropped a $300-million housing deal with China for a joint venture with an Indian company.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-treasury-secretary-mnuchin-withdraws-from-saudi-conference-172206">US Treasury Secretary Mnuchin withdraws from Saudi conference</a>

US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Thursday said he would no longer attend next week’s investment conference in Saudi Arabia, as the Trump administration awaited the outcome of investigations into missing Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-should-stay-in-afghanistan-until-peace-achieved-pakistan-172201">US</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-should-stay-in-afghanistan-until-peace-achieved-pakistan-172201"> should stay in Afghanistan until peace achieved: Pakistan</a>

Pakistan on Thursday said that the US should stay in Afghanistan until peace was achieved in the war-torn country.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/sanctity-of-sabarimala-temple-should-be-preserved-devotees-172199">Sanctity of Sabarimala temple should be preserved: Devotees</a>

A day after protests and violence against the entry of women of menstruating age at the Sabarimala temple was witnessed, devotees visiting the shrine reiterated that the sanctity of the temple and Lord Ayyappa "must be preserved at any cost".

Trump says Saudi journalist likely dead, warns of 'severe' response President Donald Trump said Thursday he now believes journalist Jamal Khashoggi is dead and warned of "very severe" consequences should Saudi Arabia be proven responsible.

Trump says Saudi journalist likely dead, warns of 'severe' response President Donald Trump said Thursday he now believes journalist Jamal Khashoggi is dead and warned of "very severe" consequences should Saudi Arabia be proven responsible. As PM Wickremesinghe visits India, Sri Lanka drops Chinese housing deal to favour Indian joint venture Ahead of Lankan PM Wickremesinghe's visit to India, the Lankan government dropped a $300-million housing deal with China for a joint venture with an Indian company. US Treasury Secretary Mnuchin withdraws from Saudi conference US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Thursday said he would no longer attend next week’s investment conference in Saudi Arabia, as the Trump administration awaited the outcome of investigations into missing Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. US should stay in Afghanistan until peace achieved: Pakistan Pakistan on Thursday said that the US should stay in Afghanistan until peace was achieved in the war-torn country. Sanctity of Sabarimala temple should be preserved: Devotees A day after protests and violence against the entry of women of menstruating age at the Sabarimala temple was witnessed, devotees visiting the shrine reiterated that the sanctity of the temple and Lord Ayyappa "must be preserved at any cost".

News brief: Big stories of the day

A Republican congressman in central Arkansas and his challenger on Thursday condemned a political action committee's radio ad that suggests white Democrats will lynch black Americans if they win the midterm election next month.

GOP Representative&nbsp;French Hill criticized the ad from Black Americans for the President's Agenda, which invokes the accusation that Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted a woman when he was a teenager.

A woman in the ad says that "white Democrats will be lynching black folk again."I'm voting to keep Congressman French Hill and the Republicans because we have to protect our men and boys," the woman in the ad says.

"We can't afford to let white Democrats take us back to bad old days of race verdicts, life sentences and lynchings when a white girl screams rape." Hill, who represents the 2nd District covering Little Rock and seven central Arkansas counties, blasted the ad.

"I condemn this outrageous ad in the strongest terms," he said in a statement. "There's no place in Arkansas for this nonsense." Vernon Robinson, the PAC's co-founder and treasurer, said the ad has been running in Little Rock.

He said the ad is part of a US $50,000 buy that includes a similar spot running on stations in Missouri, where Republican Josh Hawley is trying to unseat Democratic Senator&nbsp;Claire McCaskill. The group had not coordinated the ad with Hill or spoken to his campaign about it, Robinson said.

Robinson did not immediately respond to an email Thursday night from The Associated Press asking if the group planned to pull the ad. Clarke Tucker, the Democratic state legislator trying to unseat Hill, also condemned the ad.

"Congressman Hill and his allies will have to live with the kind of campaign they're running. This radio ad is disgraceful and has no place in our society,"

Tucker said in a statement. "We won't let these shameful tactics distract us from why we're running, to stand up for the people in Central Arkansas on the critical issues in our lives, not just health care and good-paying jobs but also having some basic decency in our political process."

The North Carolina-based PAC was formed earlier this year and this week reported having about US $52,507 cash on hand and US $62,769 in debt.

Arkansas hasn't sent a Democrat to the US&nbsp;House since 2010, but Tucker is mounting a surprisingly competitive bid to unseat the two-term Hill.

Democrats are relying on a heavy turnout in Little Rock and its surrounding county, which is about 37 per cent black and 6 per cent Hispanic.&nbsp;

A Republican congressman in central Arkansas and his challenger on Thursday condemned a political action committee's radio ad that suggests white Democrats will lynch black Americans if they win the midterm election next month.

A Republican congressman in central Arkansas and his challenger on Thursday condemned a political action committee's radio ad that suggests white Democrats will lynch black Americans if they win the midterm election next month. GOP Representative French Hill criticized the ad from Black Americans for the President's Agenda, which invokes the accusation that Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted a woman when he was a teenager. A woman in the ad says that "white Democrats will be lynching black folk again."I'm voting to keep Congressman French Hill and the Republicans because we have to protect our men and boys," the woman in the ad says. "We can't afford to let white Democrats take us back to bad old days of race verdicts, life sentences and lynchings when a white girl screams rape." Hill, who represents the 2nd District covering Little Rock and seven central Arkansas counties, blasted the ad. "I condemn this outrageous ad in the strongest terms," he said in a statement. "There's no place in Arkansas for this nonsense." Vernon Robinson, the PAC's co-founder and treasurer, said the ad has been running in Little Rock. He said the ad is part of a US $50,000 buy that includes a similar spot running on stations in Missouri, where Republican Josh Hawley is trying to unseat Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill. The group had not coordinated the ad with Hill or spoken to his campaign about it, Robinson said. Robinson did not immediately respond to an email Thursday night from The Associated Press asking if the group planned to pull the ad. Clarke Tucker, the Democratic state legislator trying to unseat Hill, also condemned the ad. "Congressman Hill and his allies will have to live with the kind of campaign they're running. This radio ad is disgraceful and has no place in our society," Tucker said in a statement. "We won't let these shameful tactics distract us from why we're running, to stand up for the people in Central Arkansas on the critical issues in our lives, not just health care and good-paying jobs but also having some basic decency in our political process." The North Carolina-based PAC was formed earlier this year and this week reported having about US $52,507 cash on hand and US $62,769 in debt. Arkansas hasn't sent a Democrat to the US House since 2010, but Tucker is mounting a surprisingly competitive bid to unseat the two-term Hill. Democrats are relying on a heavy turnout in Little Rock and its surrounding county, which is about 37 per cent black and 6 per cent Hispanic.

Radio ad in Arkansas suggests 'lynching' if Democrats win

US&nbsp;trade policy towards China over the next few years will become more confrontational, according to a majority of economists in a Reuters poll who remain convinced US&nbsp;growth has peaked and will slow substantially next year.

The same survey showed the Federal Reserve will raise rates three times next year compared with just two in a poll taken only a month ago. That brings the consensus among Fed watchers in line with the central bank`s "dot plot" forecasts.

The economy is currently expanding at a brisk pace, in part from aggressive tax cuts passed into law late last year, and so economists have revised up some of their near-term growth forecasts.

But the latest October 10-18 survey of over 100 economists suggests tightening financial conditions and the trade war with China will soon start to slow growth.

After surging to an annualized 4.2 per cent in the second quarter, growth is forecast to have lost momentum to 3.3 per cent in the quarter just gone by and then to 2.7 per cent in the current period ending in December.

Those are slightly higher than the September poll. But by end-2019, growth will have slowed to 2.1 per cent.

"The fiscal support for the US&nbsp;economy will start to fade through 2019," noted James Knightley, chief international economist at ING. "Moreover, the strong US&nbsp;dollar and gradual increases in interest rates will act as a brake on growth while trade uncertainty and emerging market fragility could also contribute to a gradual slowdown."

That said, the median probability of a recession in the next two years also slipped from the previous poll, to 30 per cent from 35 per cent.

More than half of over 50 economists who answered an additional question said US&nbsp;economic policy towards China in the next few years will become more punitive and confrontational, countering a lingering view that US&nbsp;President Donald Trump`s administration will soften its tone.

"US&nbsp;and China trade disputes are spilling over into other areas of the bilateral relationship between the two countries. The policy differences that are coming to a head today will not be easily or quickly resolved," said Scott Anderson, chief economist at Bank of the West in San Francisco.

Last month, the administration threatened duties on another US $267 billion of Chinese goods, on top of tariffs already levied on US $200 billion and US $50 billion previously. Beijing retaliated.

The trade war "will continue to escalate," said Andrew Hunter, economist at Capital Economics.

"There are potential talks between President Trump and (Chinese President) Xi (Jinping) planned for the G20 summit next month, but at the moment we wouldn`t hold much hope" for a deal, he added.

Just seven respondents in the poll predicted an improvement in US-China trade relations.

Economists polled by Reuters have consistently said putting up trade barriers will do more harm than good.&nbsp;

Economists said they believed that a deteriorating US&nbsp;fiscal position will give Washington fewer policy options to cushion the next downturn. They noted that tax cuts have widened the federal budget deficit to the highest in six years, expected to touch US $1 trillion in the current fiscal year.&nbsp;

Without robust growth, "the deficit could rise sharply," said ING`s Knightley. "Given the polarization of views on Capitol Hill this runs the real threat of government shutdowns, which could add to political, economic and market uncertainty."&nbsp;

Economists also expect the Fed to hike rates once more this year, probably at the December meeting, taking the fed funds rate to 2.25-2.50 per cent.&nbsp;

Despite a tame US&nbsp;inflation outlook, Reuters poll medians show three Fed rate hikes next year, one more than the two predicted in the September poll and in every survey since the complete 2019 Fed outlook was first polled in March.

US trade policy towards China over the next few years will become more confrontational, according to a majority of economists in a Reuters poll who remain convinced US growth has peaked and will slow substantially next year.

US trade policy towards China over the next few years will become more confrontational, according to a majority of economists in a Reuters poll who remain convinced US growth has peaked and will slow substantially next year. The same survey showed the Federal Reserve will raise rates three times next year compared with just two in a poll taken only a month ago. That brings the consensus among Fed watchers in line with the central bank`s "dot plot" forecasts. The economy is currently expanding at a brisk pace, in part from aggressive tax cuts passed into law late last year, and so economists have revised up some of their near-term growth forecasts. But the latest October 10-18 survey of over 100 economists suggests tightening financial conditions and the trade war with China will soon start to slow growth. After surging to an annualized 4.2 per cent in the second quarter, growth is forecast to have lost momentum to 3.3 per cent in the quarter just gone by and then to 2.7 per cent in the current period ending in December. Those are slightly higher than the September poll. But by end-2019, growth will have slowed to 2.1 per cent. "The fiscal support for the US economy will start to fade through 2019," noted James Knightley, chief international economist at ING. "Moreover, the strong US dollar and gradual increases in interest rates will act as a brake on growth while trade uncertainty and emerging market fragility could also contribute to a gradual slowdown." That said, the median probability of a recession in the next two years also slipped from the previous poll, to 30 per cent from 35 per cent. More than half of over 50 economists who answered an additional question said US economic policy towards China in the next few years will become more punitive and confrontational, countering a lingering view that US President Donald Trump`s administration will soften its tone. "US and China trade disputes are spilling over into other areas of the bilateral relationship between the two countries. The policy differences that are coming to a head today will not be easily or quickly resolved," said Scott Anderson, chief economist at Bank of the West in San Francisco. Last month, the administration threatened duties on another US $267 billion of Chinese goods, on top of tariffs already levied on US $200 billion and US $50 billion previously. Beijing retaliated. The trade war "will continue to escalate," said Andrew Hunter, economist at Capital Economics. "There are potential talks between President Trump and (Chinese President) Xi (Jinping) planned for the G20 summit next month, but at the moment we wouldn`t hold much hope" for a deal, he added. Just seven respondents in the poll predicted an improvement in US-China trade relations. Economists polled by Reuters have consistently said putting up trade barriers will do more harm than good. Economists said they believed that a deteriorating US fiscal position will give Washington fewer policy options to cushion the next downturn. They noted that tax cuts have widened the federal budget deficit to the highest in six years, expected to touch US $1 trillion in the current fiscal year. Without robust growth, "the deficit could rise sharply," said ING`s Knightley. "Given the polarization of views on Capitol Hill this runs the real threat of government shutdowns, which could add to political, economic and market uncertainty." Economists also expect the Fed to hike rates once more this year, probably at the December meeting, taking the fed funds rate to 2.25-2.50 per cent. Despite a tame US inflation outlook, Reuters poll medians show three Fed rate hikes next year, one more than the two predicted in the September poll and in every survey since the complete 2019 Fed outlook was first polled in March.

US economic policy toward China to get tougher, say economists: Reuters poll

US&nbsp;Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Thursday said he would no longer attend next week’s investment conference in Saudi Arabia, as the Trump administration awaited the outcome of investigations into missing Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

Mnuchin announced the decision in a post on Twitter following a meeting with President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who recently returned from meetings with top leaders in Riyadh and Ankara.

“Just met with @realDonaldTrump and @SecPompeo and we have decided, I will not be participating in the Future Investment Initiative summit in Saudi Arabia,” Mnuchin wrote on Twitter.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Just met with <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDonaldTrump</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/SecPompeo?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SecPompeo</a> and we have decided, I will not be participating in the Future Investment Initiative summit in Saudi Arabia.
— Steven Mnuchin (@stevenmnuchin1) <a href="https://twitter.com/stevenmnuchin1/status/1052944784355205120?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 18, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The Saudis have said they plan to move forward with the conference, scheduled for October&nbsp;23-25, despite a wave of cancellations by high-profile business, government and media leaders.

Mnuchin’s withdrawal comes after top financial, trade and foreign officials from Britain, France, Germany and the Netherlands also dropped out.

Trump has urged patience in the wake of US-based Khashoggi’s disappearance earlier this month during a visit to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, and said he took the matter seriously.

Turkish officials have said they believe Khashoggi - a Washington Post columnist who was a strong critic of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman - was murdered at the consulate and his body chopped up and removed.

US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Thursday said he would no longer attend next week’s investment conference in Saudi Arabia, as the Trump administration awaited the outcome of investigations into missing Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Thursday said he would no longer attend next week’s investment conference in Saudi Arabia, as the Trump administration awaited the outcome of investigations into missing Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Mnuchin announced the decision in a post on Twitter following a meeting with President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who recently returned from meetings with top leaders in Riyadh and Ankara. “Just met with @realDonaldTrump and @SecPompeo and we have decided, I will not be participating in the Future Investment Initiative summit in Saudi Arabia,” Mnuchin wrote on Twitter. Just met with @realDonaldTrump and @SecPompeo and we have decided, I will not be participating in the Future Investment Initiative summit in Saudi Arabia. — Steven Mnuchin (@stevenmnuchin1) October 18, 2018 × The Saudis have said they plan to move forward with the conference, scheduled for October 23-25, despite a wave of cancellations by high-profile business, government and media leaders. Mnuchin’s withdrawal comes after top financial, trade and foreign officials from Britain, France, Germany and the Netherlands also dropped out. Trump has urged patience in the wake of US-based Khashoggi’s disappearance earlier this month during a visit to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, and said he took the matter seriously. Turkish officials have said they believe Khashoggi - a Washington Post columnist who was a strong critic of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman - was murdered at the consulate and his body chopped up and removed.

US Treasury Secretary Mnuchin withdraws from Saudi conference

Over 50,000 Indians were granted the American citizenship in 2017, four thousand more than the previous year, according to the latest official report.

The Department of Homeland Security in its latest annual immigration report said that in 2017, as many as 50,802 Indians took citizenship of the United States.

This is four thousand more than 2016's figure of 46,188 Indian naturalization and eight thousand more than 42,213 Indian citizenship in 2015.

In all, 707,265 foreign nationals took the oath of American citizenship in 2017, as against 753,060 in 2016 and 730,259 in 2015.

Mexico with 118,559 citizenships topped the list among all foreign nationals.

India was a distant second, followed by China (37,674); the Philippines (36,828); Dominican Republic (29,734); Cuba (25,961).

Figures indicated that more females (396,234) took American citizenship than male (310,987).

The report indicates that as many as 12,000 newly naturalized American citizens from India settled in California, followed by New Jersey (5,900), and Texas about 3,700.

More than 7,100 naturalized Americans lived in the regions of New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.&nbsp;

Over 50,000 Indians were granted the American citizenship in 2017, four thousand more than the previous year, according to the latest official report. The Department of Homeland Security in its latest annual immigration report said that in 2017, as many as 50,802 Indians took citizenship of the United States.

Over 50,000 Indians were granted the American citizenship in 2017, four thousand more than the previous year, according to the latest official report. The Department of Homeland Security in its latest annual immigration report said that in 2017, as many as 50,802 Indians took citizenship of the United States. This is four thousand more than 2016's figure of 46,188 Indian naturalization and eight thousand more than 42,213 Indian citizenship in 2015. In all, 707,265 foreign nationals took the oath of American citizenship in 2017, as against 753,060 in 2016 and 730,259 in 2015. Mexico with 118,559 citizenships topped the list among all foreign nationals. India was a distant second, followed by China (37,674); the Philippines (36,828); Dominican Republic (29,734); Cuba (25,961). Figures indicated that more females (396,234) took American citizenship than male (310,987). The report indicates that as many as 12,000 newly naturalized American citizens from India settled in California, followed by New Jersey (5,900), and Texas about 3,700. More than 7,100 naturalized Americans lived in the regions of New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

50,000 Indians took US citizenship in 2017: Official report

Pakistan on Thursday said that the US should stay in Afghanistan until peace was achieved in the war-torn country.

Pakistan Foreign Office spokesman Mohammad Faisal said that withdrawal of US troops could result in chaos seen after Soviet troops' pullout in the late 1980s.

"Pakistan has been reiterating that the US forces should stay in Afghanistan till the achievement of complete peace and stability. I would like to draw your attention to the chaos in the aftermath of the withdrawal of USSR in the late 1980s. The region cannot afford anything similar, at this time," he said.

To a question about the reported meeting of US officials with Taliban leaders in Qatar, the spokesman said it showed that there was no military solution to the conflict in Afghanistan.

"We are pleased that other important actors are also arriving at the same conclusion (that there is no military solution) and are exploring possibilities of initiating a peace and reconciliation process," he said.

He said Pakistan is building border management infrastructure along the Afghan border with a view to stop the cross-border movement of terrorists, smugglers and other undesired elements while facilitating legitimate trade and travel between the two countries.&nbsp;

Pakistan on Thursday said that the US should stay in Afghanistan until peace was achieved in the war-torn country. Pakistan Foreign Office spokesman Mohammad Faisal said that withdrawal of US troops could result in chaos seen after Soviet troops' pullout in the late 1980s.

Pakistan on Thursday said that the US should stay in Afghanistan until peace was achieved in the war-torn country. Pakistan Foreign Office spokesman Mohammad Faisal said that withdrawal of US troops could result in chaos seen after Soviet troops' pullout in the late 1980s. "Pakistan has been reiterating that the US forces should stay in Afghanistan till the achievement of complete peace and stability. I would like to draw your attention to the chaos in the aftermath of the withdrawal of USSR in the late 1980s. The region cannot afford anything similar, at this time," he said. To a question about the reported meeting of US officials with Taliban leaders in Qatar, the spokesman said it showed that there was no military solution to the conflict in Afghanistan. "We are pleased that other important actors are also arriving at the same conclusion (that there is no military solution) and are exploring possibilities of initiating a peace and reconciliation process," he said. He said Pakistan is building border management infrastructure along the Afghan border with a view to stop the cross-border movement of terrorists, smugglers and other undesired elements while facilitating legitimate trade and travel between the two countries.

US should stay in Afghanistan until peace achieved: Pakistan

The United States on Thursday gave Saudi Arabia more time to investigate the disappearance of journalist Jamal Khashoggi as Turkish investigators searched Riyadh's consulate in Istanbul for a second time in a hunt for clues.

U.S. President Donald Trump met for less than an hour with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who gave the president an update on his talks this week with Saudi and Turkish officials about the Khashoggi case amid concern that the journalist was killed in the consulate after entering it on Oct. 2.

Pompeo told reporters after his talks with Trump that he made clear to the Saudis in his visit to Riyadh that "we take this matter with respect to Mr. Khashoggi very seriously."

"They made clear to me that they too understand the serious nature of the disappearance of Mr. Khashoggi. They also assured me that they will conduct a complete, thorough investigation of all of the facts surrounding Mr. Khashoggi and that they will do so in a timely fashion," Pompeo added.

Pompeo said he told Trump that "we ought to give them a few more days to complete" their investigation in order to get a full understanding of what happened "at which point we can make decisions about how - or if - the United States should respond to the incident surrounding Mr. Khashoggi."

"I think it's important for us all to remember to, we have a long - since 1932 - a long strategic relationship with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia," Pompeo added.

Turkish officials have said they believe Khashoggi - a U.S. resident and Washington Post columnist who was a strong critic of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman - was murdered at the consulate and his body chopped up and removed.

Turkish investigators left the Saudi consulate in Istanbul early on Thursday after searching the building and consular vehicles, a Reuters witness said. They used bright lights to illuminate the garden. Earlier, they spent nearly nine hours in the Saudi consul's residence along with Saudi investigators.

The Turkish search, which used a drone, included the roof and garage.

Khashoggi had gone to the consulate seeking documents for his planned upcoming marriage and has not been seen since. Saudi Arabia has denied involvement in the disappearance.

The incident has caused a global outcry but also poses a dilemma for the United States and other Western nations, which have lucrative business dealings with the authoritarian kingdom and count on it as a leading Middle East ally and opponent of their common enemy Iran.

The United States on Thursday gave Saudi Arabia more time to investigate the disappearance of journalist Jamal Khashoggi as Turkish investigators searched Riyadh's consulate in Istanbul for a second time in a hunt for clues.

The United States on Thursday gave Saudi Arabia more time to investigate the disappearance of journalist Jamal Khashoggi as Turkish investigators searched Riyadh's consulate in Istanbul for a second time in a hunt for clues. U.S. President Donald Trump met for less than an hour with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who gave the president an update on his talks this week with Saudi and Turkish officials about the Khashoggi case amid concern that the journalist was killed in the consulate after entering it on Oct. 2. Pompeo told reporters after his talks with Trump that he made clear to the Saudis in his visit to Riyadh that "we take this matter with respect to Mr. Khashoggi very seriously." "They made clear to me that they too understand the serious nature of the disappearance of Mr. Khashoggi. They also assured me that they will conduct a complete, thorough investigation of all of the facts surrounding Mr. Khashoggi and that they will do so in a timely fashion," Pompeo added. Pompeo said he told Trump that "we ought to give them a few more days to complete" their investigation in order to get a full understanding of what happened "at which point we can make decisions about how - or if - the United States should respond to the incident surrounding Mr. Khashoggi." "I think it's important for us all to remember to, we have a long - since 1932 - a long strategic relationship with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia," Pompeo added. Turkish officials have said they believe Khashoggi - a U.S. resident and Washington Post columnist who was a strong critic of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman - was murdered at the consulate and his body chopped up and removed. Turkish investigators left the Saudi consulate in Istanbul early on Thursday after searching the building and consular vehicles, a Reuters witness said. They used bright lights to illuminate the garden. Earlier, they spent nearly nine hours in the Saudi consul's residence along with Saudi investigators. The Turkish search, which used a drone, included the roof and garage. Khashoggi had gone to the consulate seeking documents for his planned upcoming marriage and has not been seen since. Saudi Arabia has denied involvement in the disappearance. The incident has caused a global outcry but also poses a dilemma for the United States and other Western nations, which have lucrative business dealings with the authoritarian kingdom and count on it as a leading Middle East ally and opponent of their common enemy Iran.

US gives Saudi Arabia a 'few more days' on Khashoggi probe

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump heaped more criticism on the Federal Reserve in an interview with Fox Business Network on Tuesday, extending his discontent beyond its chairman, Jerome Powell, whom he has frequently critiqued in public.

"My biggest threat is the Fed," he said, according to excerpts released before the interview with "Trish Regan Primetime" airs. "I put a couple of other people there I’m not so happy with too but for the most part I’m very happy with people."

Last week, Trump criticized the US&nbsp;central bank twice, saying it was raising interest rates so swiftly that it threatened the country's economic health.

Nonetheless, in the face of a hot labour market and signs of inflation, the Fed has settled into a gradual policy tightening and is expected to raise interest rates again in December.

Past US&nbsp;presidents have been reticent to criticize the central bank because its independence is seen as important for economic stability. But Trump in the past week has called the Fed "crazy," "loco," "ridiculous," and "too cute."

Trump has said he is not trying to oust Powell, whom he appointed to replace former Chair Janet Yellen. The president also appointed two of the three other policymakers on the Fed's powerful Board of Governors, Randal Quarles and Richard Clarida.

"Can I be honest? I’m not blaming anybody," Trump said in the interview. "I put (Powell) there. And maybe it’s right, maybe it’s wrong, but I put him there."

The Fed independently makes policy decisions but regularly reports to Congress. Data since the Fed's last meeting in September has been in line with its portrait of a strong economy, and policymakers have said they expect to continue a rate-hike cycle that began in late 2015.

Republican US&nbsp;Representative Jeb Hensarling, who is set to retire as chairman of the House of Representatives Financial Services Committee that oversees the central bank, said Trump "clearly has his own style." But "I don't think the fact that he has publicly criticized the Fed, in any way shape or form, is going to impinge upon (its) independence," he told Reuters.

US President Donald Trump heaped more criticism on the Federal Reserve in an interview with Fox Business Network on Tuesday, extending his discontent beyond its chairman, Jerome Powell, whom he has frequently critiqued in public.

US President Donald Trump heaped more criticism on the Federal Reserve in an interview with Fox Business Network on Tuesday, extending his discontent beyond its chairman, Jerome Powell, whom he has frequently critiqued in public. "My biggest threat is the Fed," he said, according to excerpts released before the interview with "Trish Regan Primetime" airs. "I put a couple of other people there I’m not so happy with too but for the most part I’m very happy with people." Last week, Trump criticized the US central bank twice, saying it was raising interest rates so swiftly that it threatened the country's economic health. Nonetheless, in the face of a hot labour market and signs of inflation, the Fed has settled into a gradual policy tightening and is expected to raise interest rates again in December. Past US presidents have been reticent to criticize the central bank because its independence is seen as important for economic stability. But Trump in the past week has called the Fed "crazy," "loco," "ridiculous," and "too cute." Trump has said he is not trying to oust Powell, whom he appointed to replace former Chair Janet Yellen. The president also appointed two of the three other policymakers on the Fed's powerful Board of Governors, Randal Quarles and Richard Clarida. "Can I be honest? I’m not blaming anybody," Trump said in the interview. "I put (Powell) there. And maybe it’s right, maybe it’s wrong, but I put him there." The Fed independently makes policy decisions but regularly reports to Congress. Data since the Fed's last meeting in September has been in line with its portrait of a strong economy, and policymakers have said they expect to continue a rate-hike cycle that began in late 2015. Republican US Representative Jeb Hensarling, who is set to retire as chairman of the House of Representatives Financial Services Committee that oversees the central bank, said Trump "clearly has his own style." But "I don't think the fact that he has publicly criticized the Fed, in any way shape or form, is going to impinge upon (its) independence," he told Reuters.

Trump widens Fed critique, calls it 'my biggest threat'

President Donald Trump said Wednesday he did not want to walk away from Saudi Arabia over the disappearance and alleged killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, arguing the US relies on the kingdom in the fight against terrorism.

Asked during an interview on Fox Business what action he had in mind for Riyadh if he learned it was responsible, Trump said: "Well, I hope we're going to be on the better side of the equation."

"You know we need Saudi Arabia in terms of our fight against all of the terrorism, everything that's happening in Iran and other places."

Asked if the US would not then walk away from Saudi Arabia, he said: "I do not want to do that and frankly they have a tremendous order, $110 billion." The reference was to promised US arms sales to the kingdom.&nbsp;

President Donald Trump said Wednesday he did not want to walk away from Saudi Arabia over the disappearance and alleged killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, arguing the US relies on the kingdom in the fight against terrorism.

President Donald Trump said Wednesday he did not want to walk away from Saudi Arabia over the disappearance and alleged killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, arguing the US relies on the kingdom in the fight against terrorism. Asked during an interview on Fox Business what action he had in mind for Riyadh if he learned it was responsible, Trump said: "Well, I hope we're going to be on the better side of the equation." "You know we need Saudi Arabia in terms of our fight against all of the terrorism, everything that's happening in Iran and other places." Asked if the US would not then walk away from Saudi Arabia, he said: "I do not want to do that and frankly they have a tremendous order, $110 billion." The reference was to promised US arms sales to the kingdom.

Trump says US needs Saudi Arabia in fight against terrorism

US&nbsp;Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will travel to Panama and Mexico this week to meet with top leaders and discuss "defending democracy in Venezuela and Nicaragua," aong other regional issues, the US&nbsp;Department of State said in a statement on Wednesday.

Pompeo will meet with Panamanian President Juan Carlos Varela in Panama City on Thursday and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto on Friday, among other top officials, the department said, adding that immigration, narcotic drugs and terrorism will also be discussed.

Pompeo&nbsp;met Turkey's President and Foreign Minister on Wednesday to discuss the disappearance of a Saudi journalist as pressure mounted on the kingdom to provide answers following Turkish allegations he was killed.

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump gave Saudi Arabia the benefit of the doubt on Tuesday even as US&nbsp;lawmakers pointed the finger at the Saudi leadership and&nbsp;Pompeo, sent by Trump to address the crisis, discussed the affair with Saudi King Salman and his Crown Prince on a visit to Riyadh.

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu has said&nbsp;Pompeo&nbsp;would provide information about the case after Khashoggi, a US&nbsp;resident, vanished during a visit to the consulate on Oct. 2 to collect marriage documents.

Turkish police on Wednesday began a search at the residence of the Saudi consul to Istanbul, in the investigation into the disappearance of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the kingdom's consulate in the city, according to an AFP correspondent.

A team of a dozen police and prosecutors, including forensics experts in white overalls, entered the residence of Mohammed al-Otaibi, a day after he flew out of Istanbul for Riyadh.

Earlier in the day, a Saudi delegation had also arrived at the building to take part in what is presented as a joint search with their Turkish counterparts.

Turkish police had on Monday searched the consulate building itself for over eight hours, taking away soil and DNA samples for further examination.

Khashoggi, a former regime insider who became critical of Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, wrote articles for titles including the Washington Post. He has not been seen since he stepped inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2.

Turkish officials have said they believe he was killed there although this has not been confirmed by Saudi Arabia.&nbsp;

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will travel to Panama and Mexico this week to meet with top leaders and discuss "defending democracy in Venezuela and Nicaragua," aong other regional issues, the US Department of State said in a statement on Wednesday.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will travel to Panama and Mexico this week to meet with top leaders and discuss "defending democracy in Venezuela and Nicaragua," aong other regional issues, the US Department of State said in a statement on Wednesday. Pompeo will meet with Panamanian President Juan Carlos Varela in Panama City on Thursday and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto on Friday, among other top officials, the department said, adding that immigration, narcotic drugs and terrorism will also be discussed. Pompeo met Turkey's President and Foreign Minister on Wednesday to discuss the disappearance of a Saudi journalist as pressure mounted on the kingdom to provide answers following Turkish allegations he was killed. US President Donald Trump gave Saudi Arabia the benefit of the doubt on Tuesday even as US lawmakers pointed the finger at the Saudi leadership and Pompeo, sent by Trump to address the crisis, discussed the affair with Saudi King Salman and his Crown Prince on a visit to Riyadh. Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu has said Pompeo would provide information about the case after Khashoggi, a US resident, vanished during a visit to the consulate on Oct. 2 to collect marriage documents. Turkish police on Wednesday began a search at the residence of the Saudi consul to Istanbul, in the investigation into the disappearance of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the kingdom's consulate in the city, according to an AFP correspondent. A team of a dozen police and prosecutors, including forensics experts in white overalls, entered the residence of Mohammed al-Otaibi, a day after he flew out of Istanbul for Riyadh. Earlier in the day, a Saudi delegation had also arrived at the building to take part in what is presented as a joint search with their Turkish counterparts. Turkish police had on Monday searched the consulate building itself for over eight hours, taking away soil and DNA samples for further examination. Khashoggi, a former regime insider who became critical of Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, wrote articles for titles including the Washington Post. He has not been seen since he stepped inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2. Turkish officials have said they believe he was killed there although this has not been confirmed by Saudi Arabia.

US's Pompeo to visit Panama, Mexico to discuss Venezuela, other issues

By Giorgio Cafiero 
 
On October 1, Iran carried out six missile strikes against Islamic State (IS) targets in Abu Kamal, situated in eastern Syria near the Iraqi border. Iran’s state-owned television showed one missile carrying slogans “Death to America,” “Death to Israel” and “Death to al Saud.” The bold move was officially a retaliation for the deadly attack in Ahvaz, in the Iranian Province of Khuzestan, nine days earlier, which the Iranian leadership blames on IS.&nbsp;

In addition to killing “many terrorists” in Abu Kamal, as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed, the missiles also eviscerated stockpiles of the Islamic State’s ammunition and infrastructure. By firing missiles over Iraq into Syria, the Iranians delivered a powerful message to Washington at a time when the Trump administration ratchets up its aggression against the Islamic Republic.

Put simply, the message is that five months after the US withdrew from the Joint Plan of Comprehensive Action (JCPOA), better known as the Iran nuclear deal, Tehran will not change its regional conduct or cave in to pressure from the United States, Israel and certain Arab Gulf states. When it comes to Syria, Iran is set to remain in the country despite the White House’s stated goal to cause a retreat of Iranian forces and proxies. As Tehran begins conducting a more muscular and “offensive” approach in the region following America’s JCPOA decision, hardline elements within the Iranian regime — chiefly within the IRGC, which carried out the October 1 missile strikes — are being empowered.

Also, the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) October 3 ruling ordered Washington to ensure that its anti-Iran sanctions do not harm humanitarian assistance or civil aviation security. This left officials in Tehran more determined to stay their rigid course even if the ICJ lacks the teeth to enforce the ruling against the United States, which was rejected by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Other recent instances of Tehran acting confidently against perceived security menaces and asserting a stronger regional clout came on September 8 when Iran killed at least 11 people in long-range missile attacks on the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan’s headquarters in Koya, Iraq, which belongs to the Kurdistan Regional Government. During the previous month, Iranian officials stated that over the previous several months, Iran’s military had transferred several dozen short-range ballistic missiles to Tehran-sponsored Shia militias in Iraq to deter attacks against Iran’s homeland. Depending on from where in Iraq they are placed, these missiles (Zelzal, Fateh-110 and Zolfaqar) can reach both the Saudi and Israeli capitals.

Pressures within Iran

Such acts, along with the Iranian intelligence ministry’s alleged role in the foiled plot to attack a gathering by the militant Iranian opposition group Mujahedeen-e Khalq in France in June, illustrate how hardliners within the Islamic Republic are demonstrating more will to operate with greater autonomy from the central government, without obtaining permission before acting in the region. As the Iranian economy continues to suffer many ills, from rising unemployment and inflation to excess liquidity, as Washington’s sanctions continue to hurt the country, President Hassan Rouhani appears to find himself in a difficult political situation. That the parliament has summoned Rouhani to provide answers to questions about the country’s economic crises, and with a number of voices calling for his impeachment, the extent to which his centrist government has failed to meet the average Iranian citizen’s expectations about the economic rewards that JCPOA was to bring is clearly highlighted.

As such pressures within Iran intensify, moderate elements within the government struggle to maintain relevance in the country’s political arena. With nationalist sentiments on the rise, moderates have been prompted to align, at least to some degree, with hardliners in support of Tehran’s assertive conduct across the region. For the Iranian leadership, given the Trump administration’s rhetoric and conduct that leave many Iranians fearing a US-orchestrated regime change plot, engaging the White House at this point would be humiliating, particularly given how anti-Iranian Trump’s foreign policy has been since he entered the Oval Office.

Now with the Trump administration calling on Iran to leave Syria, and with a number of Sunni Arab states appearing set on welcoming the regime of Bashar al-Assad back from the cold, the White House, along with its Arab Gulf allies, seems optimistic about plans to accept Assad staying in power for the long term, but only with his regime putting space between itself and Iran. IRGC leaders, however, have declared that Iranian forces will remain in Syria as long as the Damascus regime demands their presence. Given how much Assad owes Iran for his survival, it is difficult to imagine the Syrian regime being in any position to push out the Iranians, who currently wield unprecedented influence over the Baathist order in Damascus.

Further Away from Diplomacy 
 
That Iran’s missiles landed within three miles of US troops in Syria on October 1 shows how grave the risks are of intense friction originating in Washington and Tehran spiralling out of control in the Middle East. With US National Security Adviser John Bolton declaring on September 24 that the US military would remain in Syria “as long as Iranian troops are outside Iranian borders and that includes Iranian proxies and militias,” the 2,000 US troops currently in the country face a likelier possibility of a direct confrontation with Iran’s roughly 10,000 IRGC forces in Syria.

Doubtless, Syria will remain a major point of contention between the US and Iran. Even when bilateral relations were at their warmest after the signing of the Iran nuclear deal in 2015 while Barack Obama was in the White House, Washington and Tehran had serious conflicts of interest in Syria notwithstanding their mutual interest in defeating IS. The JCPOA resolved neither both sides’ opposing stakes in the Syrian crisis nor any other non-nuclear issue. Yet the nuclear deal afforded both the US and Iran the means to build on some degree of trust to work toward finding common ground on such regional issues such as Syria, along with Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan.

Without the JCPOA as a foundation, Washington and Tehran are set to address their conflicting interests in Syria on terms that move farther away from diplomatic strategies, raising serious risks of an American-Iranian war that could bring far more devastation and instability to the Middle East than the US-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. 
 
(Giorgio Cafiero is the founder and CEO of Gulf State Analytics, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Washington, DC)

(This article was originally published on Fair Observer. Read the <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/region/middle_east_north_africa/syria-iran-nuclear-deal-us-middle-east-politics-news-10891/">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 Giorgio Cafiero On October 1, Iran carried out six missile strikes against Islamic State (IS) targets in Abu Kamal, situated in eastern Syria near the Iraqi border.

By Giorgio Cafiero On October 1, Iran carried out six missile strikes against Islamic State (IS) targets in Abu Kamal, situated in eastern Syria near the Iraqi border. Iran’s state-owned television showed one missile carrying slogans “Death to America,” “Death to Israel” and “Death to al Saud.” The bold move was officially a retaliation for the deadly attack in Ahvaz, in the Iranian Province of Khuzestan, nine days earlier, which the Iranian leadership blames on IS. In addition to killing “many terrorists” in Abu Kamal, as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed, the missiles also eviscerated stockpiles of the Islamic State’s ammunition and infrastructure. By firing missiles over Iraq into Syria, the Iranians delivered a powerful message to Washington at a time when the Trump administration ratchets up its aggression against the Islamic Republic. Put simply, the message is that five months after the US withdrew from the Joint Plan of Comprehensive Action (JCPOA), better known as the Iran nuclear deal, Tehran will not change its regional conduct or cave in to pressure from the United States, Israel and certain Arab Gulf states. When it comes to Syria, Iran is set to remain in the country despite the White House’s stated goal to cause a retreat of Iranian forces and proxies. As Tehran begins conducting a more muscular and “offensive” approach in the region following America’s JCPOA decision, hardline elements within the Iranian regime — chiefly within the IRGC, which carried out the October 1 missile strikes — are being empowered. Also, the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) October 3 ruling ordered Washington to ensure that its anti-Iran sanctions do not harm humanitarian assistance or civil aviation security. This left officials in Tehran more determined to stay their rigid course even if the ICJ lacks the teeth to enforce the ruling against the United States, which was rejected by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Other recent instances of Tehran acting confidently against perceived security menaces and asserting a stronger regional clout came on September 8 when Iran killed at least 11 people in long-range missile attacks on the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan’s headquarters in Koya, Iraq, which belongs to the Kurdistan Regional Government. During the previous month, Iranian officials stated that over the previous several months, Iran’s military had transferred several dozen short-range ballistic missiles to Tehran-sponsored Shia militias in Iraq to deter attacks against Iran’s homeland. Depending on from where in Iraq they are placed, these missiles (Zelzal, Fateh-110 and Zolfaqar) can reach both the Saudi and Israeli capitals. Pressures within Iran Such acts, along with the Iranian intelligence ministry’s alleged role in the foiled plot to attack a gathering by the militant Iranian opposition group Mujahedeen-e Khalq in France in June, illustrate how hardliners within the Islamic Republic are demonstrating more will to operate with greater autonomy from the central government, without obtaining permission before acting in the region. As the Iranian economy continues to suffer many ills, from rising unemployment and inflation to excess liquidity, as Washington’s sanctions continue to hurt the country, President Hassan Rouhani appears to find himself in a difficult political situation. That the parliament has summoned Rouhani to provide answers to questions about the country’s economic crises, and with a number of voices calling for his impeachment, the extent to which his centrist government has failed to meet the average Iranian citizen’s expectations about the economic rewards that JCPOA was to bring is clearly highlighted. As such pressures within Iran intensify, moderate elements within the government struggle to maintain relevance in the country’s political arena. With nationalist sentiments on the rise, moderates have been prompted to align, at least to some degree, with hardliners in support of Tehran’s assertive conduct across the region. For the Iranian leadership, given the Trump administration’s rhetoric and conduct that leave many Iranians fearing a US-orchestrated regime change plot, engaging the White House at this point would be humiliating, particularly given how anti-Iranian Trump’s foreign policy has been since he entered the Oval Office. Now with the Trump administration calling on Iran to leave Syria, and with a number of Sunni Arab states appearing set on welcoming the regime of Bashar al-Assad back from the cold, the White House, along with its Arab Gulf allies, seems optimistic about plans to accept Assad staying in power for the long term, but only with his regime putting space between itself and Iran. IRGC leaders, however, have declared that Iranian forces will remain in Syria as long as the Damascus regime demands their presence. Given how much Assad owes Iran for his survival, it is difficult to imagine the Syrian regime being in any position to push out the Iranians, who currently wield unprecedented influence over the Baathist order in Damascus. Further Away from Diplomacy That Iran’s missiles landed within three miles of US troops in Syria on October 1 shows how grave the risks are of intense friction originating in Washington and Tehran spiralling out of control in the Middle East. With US National Security Adviser John Bolton declaring on September 24 that the US military would remain in Syria “as long as Iranian troops are outside Iranian borders and that includes Iranian proxies and militias,” the 2,000 US troops currently in the country face a likelier possibility of a direct confrontation with Iran’s roughly 10,000 IRGC forces in Syria. Doubtless, Syria will remain a major point of contention between the US and Iran. Even when bilateral relations were at their warmest after the signing of the Iran nuclear deal in 2015 while Barack Obama was in the White House, Washington and Tehran had serious conflicts of interest in Syria notwithstanding their mutual interest in defeating IS. The JCPOA resolved neither both sides’ opposing stakes in the Syrian crisis nor any other non-nuclear issue. Yet the nuclear deal afforded both the US and Iran the means to build on some degree of trust to work toward finding common ground on such regional issues such as Syria, along with Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan. Without the JCPOA as a foundation, Washington and Tehran are set to address their conflicting interests in Syria on terms that move farther away from diplomatic strategies, raising serious risks of an American-Iranian war that could bring far more devastation and instability to the Middle East than the US-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. (Giorgio Cafiero is the founder and CEO of Gulf State Analytics, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Washington, DC) (This article was originally published on Fair Observer. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Iran delivers powerful message to US on Syria

Iran called new US sanctions against its paramilitary Basij group an act of "blind vindictiveness" on Wednesday.

"America's new sanctions are a clear insult to international and legal mechanisms and a result of the American government's blind vindictiveness against the Iranian nation," said foreign ministry spokesman Bahram Ghasemi.

He called Washington's "lack of adherence to international legal mechanisms" a threat not only "to the Iranian people's interests but also the world's stability and security."

On Tuesday, the US Treasury Department slapped sanctions on the Basij paramilitary group along with a network of more than 20 businesses that were providing it financing.

The US pulled out of a landmark 2015 nuclear accord between Iran and six world powers in May and is reimposing punishing sanctions on the Middle Eastern country, hoping to pressure Tehran into what President Donald Trump calls a "better deal".

"Contrary to the American government's hypocritical claims in support of the Iranian people, such acts obstruct the people's ability to benefit from economic relations with the international community," Ghasemi added.

Iran called new US sanctions against its paramilitary Basij group an act of "blind vindictiveness" on Wednesday. "America's new sanctions are a clear insult to international and legal mechanisms and a result of the American government's blind vindictiveness against the Iranian nation," said foreign ministry spokesman Bahram Ghasemi.

Iran called new US sanctions against its paramilitary Basij group an act of "blind vindictiveness" on Wednesday. "America's new sanctions are a clear insult to international and legal mechanisms and a result of the American government's blind vindictiveness against the Iranian nation," said foreign ministry spokesman Bahram Ghasemi. He called Washington's "lack of adherence to international legal mechanisms" a threat not only "to the Iranian people's interests but also the world's stability and security." On Tuesday, the US Treasury Department slapped sanctions on the Basij paramilitary group along with a network of more than 20 businesses that were providing it financing. The US pulled out of a landmark 2015 nuclear accord between Iran and six world powers in May and is reimposing punishing sanctions on the Middle Eastern country, hoping to pressure Tehran into what President Donald Trump calls a "better deal". "Contrary to the American government's hypocritical claims in support of the Iranian people, such acts obstruct the people's ability to benefit from economic relations with the international community," Ghasemi added.

Iran calls US sanctions on paramilitary force 'blind vindictiveness'

Anyone entering the US illegally would be arrested, detained and then deported back, President Donald Trump has warned as he threatened three Central American nations to halt a migrant caravan from heading to America or lose millions of dollars in foreign aid.

Trump's warning comes amidst reports that a new migrant caravan from Honduras comprising about 1600 people is moving towards the US via Guatemala.

The caravan, formed in the Honduran city of San Pedro Sula on Saturday, crossed into Guatemala on Monday. Guatemala detained one of its coordinators on Tuesday, but other members of the caravan are advancing through Guatemala with hopes of reaching the US border.

"Anybody entering the United States illegally will be arrested and detained, prior to being sent back to their country!" Trump said in a late-night tweet.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Anybody entering the United States illegally will be arrested and detained, prior to being sent back to their country!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1052369731959820292?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 17, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

He said his administration has informed the three countries - Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador - that America will stop all payments to them if they allow their citizens to enter the US.

"We have today informed the countries of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador that if they allow their citizens, or others, to journey through their borders and up to the United States, with the intention of entering our country illegally, all payments made to them will STOP (END)!" Trump said in another tweet.

In 2017, the US gave US $248 million to Guatemala, US $175 million to Honduras and US $115 million to El Salvador in foreign aid.

Vice President Mike Pence also tweeted earlier, saying that he had spoken with Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez and Guatemalan President Jimmy Morales.

He said Trump's message to Honduras also applied to Guatemala, "no more aid if it's not stopped!"

"Spoke with Guatemalan President Jimmy Morales about caravan heading for the US and made clear our borders and sovereignty must be maintained. We expect our partners to do all they can to assist and appreciate their support. Reiterated POTUS' message: no more aid if it's not stopped!" Pence tweeted.

This caravan's emergence comes nearly six months after another caravan consisting largely of Honduran immigrants reached the US-Mexico border.

Its formation also comes just weeks before high-stakes midterm elections in the United States, in which many Republican candidates have been echoing President Trump's message of boosting border security and cracking down on illegal immigration.

Trump has been a fierce advocate of building a border wall with Mexico to tighten the US' immigration controls.

He believes border security is a serious national issue and the lack of it poses a substantial threat to the "sovereignty and safety" of America and its citizens.

During his campaign, Trump tapped into the immigration concerns of many Americans who worry about loss of economic opportunities and the threat of criminals and terrorists entering the country.

His call for the construction of a border wall was one of his most popular proposals and helped the billionaire tycoon to galvanise masses.&nbsp;

Anyone entering the US illegally would be arrested, detained and then deported back, President Donald Trump has warned as he threatened three Central American nations to halt a migrant caravan from heading to America or lose millions of dollars in foreign aid.

Anyone entering the US illegally would be arrested, detained and then deported back, President Donald Trump has warned as he threatened three Central American nations to halt a migrant caravan from heading to America or lose millions of dollars in foreign aid. Trump's warning comes amidst reports that a new migrant caravan from Honduras comprising about 1600 people is moving towards the US via Guatemala. The caravan, formed in the Honduran city of San Pedro Sula on Saturday, crossed into Guatemala on Monday. Guatemala detained one of its coordinators on Tuesday, but other members of the caravan are advancing through Guatemala with hopes of reaching the US border. "Anybody entering the United States illegally will be arrested and detained, prior to being sent back to their country!" Trump said in a late-night tweet. Anybody entering the United States illegally will be arrested and detained, prior to being sent back to their country! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 17, 2018 × He said his administration has informed the three countries - Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador - that America will stop all payments to them if they allow their citizens to enter the US. "We have today informed the countries of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador that if they allow their citizens, or others, to journey through their borders and up to the United States, with the intention of entering our country illegally, all payments made to them will STOP (END)!" Trump said in another tweet. In 2017, the US gave US $248 million to Guatemala, US $175 million to Honduras and US $115 million to El Salvador in foreign aid. Vice President Mike Pence also tweeted earlier, saying that he had spoken with Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez and Guatemalan President Jimmy Morales. He said Trump's message to Honduras also applied to Guatemala, "no more aid if it's not stopped!" "Spoke with Guatemalan President Jimmy Morales about caravan heading for the US and made clear our borders and sovereignty must be maintained. We expect our partners to do all they can to assist and appreciate their support. Reiterated POTUS' message: no more aid if it's not stopped!" Pence tweeted. This caravan's emergence comes nearly six months after another caravan consisting largely of Honduran immigrants reached the US-Mexico border. Its formation also comes just weeks before high-stakes midterm elections in the United States, in which many Republican candidates have been echoing President Trump's message of boosting border security and cracking down on illegal immigration. Trump has been a fierce advocate of building a border wall with Mexico to tighten the US' immigration controls. He believes border security is a serious national issue and the lack of it poses a substantial threat to the "sovereignty and safety" of America and its citizens. During his campaign, Trump tapped into the immigration concerns of many Americans who worry about loss of economic opportunities and the threat of criminals and terrorists entering the country. His call for the construction of a border wall was one of his most popular proposals and helped the billionaire tycoon to galvanise masses.

'Arrest, detain and deport': Donald Trump on people entering US illegally

Facebook said Wednesday it was reviving the pioneering MTV reality show "The Real World" as its secret weapon to lure viewers away from YouTube.

The social media giant said it was also trying to harness the formidable online power of the "cute kitten" factor with a new show called "World's Most Amazing Dog" on its new Facebook Watch platform.

Users who think their pooch is cute enough to be a contender can enter audition videos from their phones, it told TV executives at MIPCOM in Cannes, the world's top entertainment showcase.

The company's head of video Paresh Rajwat said Facebook Watch -- which began to be rolled out in the US last year -- was now available across the world, with "the time people spend on it increasing by 14 times since".

"The Real World" was one of the first "social experiment" TV reality shows when it aired in 1992, spawning others like "Big Brother".

It turns on the moment when "seven strangers put together stop being polite and start being real," said Facebook's content and strategy chief Matthew Henick.

Three versions of the new Facebook variant of the show will be launched simultaneously in the US, Mexico and Thailand.&nbsp;

Users will be able to "co-watch with their friends and interact with the contestants", stealing a march on its internet rivals, Henick told the gathering in the French Riviera resort.

Rajwat said Facebook Watch was "completely open" and was already being used by broadcasters, with new contestants on Germany's "X Factor" recently being introduced to fans on the platform before they made their TV debuts.

He said its interactivity means "watching videos doesn't have to be a passive experience... with friends able to co-watch together in real time".

A new service called "Watch Party" allowing "people to watch and comment all at the same time" has already been used on celebrity chef Jamie Oliver's "Veggie Challenge", he added.

A Facebook Watch show called "Sorry For Your Loss" about a "young widow struggling to put her life back together has led to long meaningful conversations about dealing with grief", Rajwat said, with many users "offering help to people who lost their beloveds. This is where Facebook is different," he said.

MTV boss Chris McCarthy predicted that Facebook Watch was going to "create a whole a new genre of shared reality TV", and help shows lift off when it was "harder and harder to break through with more and more content" out there.

Facebook said Wednesday it was reviving the pioneering MTV reality show "The Real World" as its secret weapon to lure viewers away from YouTube. The social media giant said it was also trying to harness the formidable online power of the "cute kitten" factor with a new show called "World's Most Amazing Dog" on its new Facebook Watch platform.

Facebook said Wednesday it was reviving the pioneering MTV reality show "The Real World" as its secret weapon to lure viewers away from YouTube. The social media giant said it was also trying to harness the formidable online power of the "cute kitten" factor with a new show called "World's Most Amazing Dog" on its new Facebook Watch platform. Users who think their pooch is cute enough to be a contender can enter audition videos from their phones, it told TV executives at MIPCOM in Cannes, the world's top entertainment showcase. The company's head of video Paresh Rajwat said Facebook Watch -- which began to be rolled out in the US last year -- was now available across the world, with "the time people spend on it increasing by 14 times since". "The Real World" was one of the first "social experiment" TV reality shows when it aired in 1992, spawning others like "Big Brother". It turns on the moment when "seven strangers put together stop being polite and start being real," said Facebook's content and strategy chief Matthew Henick. Three versions of the new Facebook variant of the show will be launched simultaneously in the US, Mexico and Thailand. Users will be able to "co-watch with their friends and interact with the contestants", stealing a march on its internet rivals, Henick told the gathering in the French Riviera resort. Rajwat said Facebook Watch was "completely open" and was already being used by broadcasters, with new contestants on Germany's "X Factor" recently being introduced to fans on the platform before they made their TV debuts. He said its interactivity means "watching videos doesn't have to be a passive experience... with friends able to co-watch together in real time". A new service called "Watch Party" allowing "people to watch and comment all at the same time" has already been used on celebrity chef Jamie Oliver's "Veggie Challenge", he added. A Facebook Watch show called "Sorry For Your Loss" about a "young widow struggling to put her life back together has led to long meaningful conversations about dealing with grief", Rajwat said, with many users "offering help to people who lost their beloveds. This is where Facebook is different," he said. MTV boss Chris McCarthy predicted that Facebook Watch was going to "create a whole a new genre of shared reality TV", and help shows lift off when it was "harder and harder to break through with more and more content" out there.

Facebook has a plan to take on YouTube: Reality TV

With the RBI data localisation mandate becoming effective as of October 15, the debate on its legality and viability is revived. Reports indicate that whilst most entities subject to regulation by RBI have complied, the larger multinationals, who probably account for the larger quantum of transactions, are still resisting compliance.

RBI’s circular of April 2018 pertains only to banks and payment systems that it regulates. Its mandate for data localisation also was restricted to all aspects of payments data. The multitude of commercial establishments, which have and utilise financial data, will be covered only under the provisions of the proposed Personal Data Protection (PDP) Bill, 2018. The deadline for public comments is now closed and the presentation of the final draft Bill is expected soon.

Presently, the draft PDP Bill also clearly provides for localisation of critical personal (CP) data but leaves definition thereof to the Central government. Global trends that are elicited and the recommendations accompanying the draft PDP Bill clearly indicate that a wide spectrum of CP, including data of critical infrastructure, finance and health would probably form part of CP.

RBI may have jumped the gun with its circular pre-dating the draft PDP Bill and Report, but it is not off the mark in its call for localisation. Many of us were sceptical about the call for localisation keeping in mind business needs and practicalities, but there cannot be any quandary about protecting critical data from rampant dissemination.

The objections to data localisation range from economic to absurd – additional costs and teething problems that any change in processes entail, do not appear to be the real reasons for the objections though they are projected, as such. The other objections touted at most discussions across India are (a) possibility of surveillance by Indian law enforcement agencies, (b) breaches and vulnerabilities of systems and (c) purported availability of better infrastructure outside India. The other and more recent objections including from USA is for “free flow of data” to enable businesses and to “benefit users”.

Each of the above objections to data-sharing appears specious. Surveillance was and continues to be a matter of grave concern, but to claim that it is a malaise restricted to India is untenable. Indians would, in fact, benefit from localisation to the extent that there would be immediate access to remedies against violation of due process. This would not be the case if their rights are violated outside India.

System vulnerability too is not confined to India. As with the vulnerability of systems in USA or Europe, so would it be in India. Similarly, the need to create local infrastructure and systems only spells business opportunities for India. The cost is an on-time investment and the returns and benefits are likely to be sustained over long periods of time.

Finally, free flow of data is and continues to be the bedrock of the Internet, but the very jurisdiction seeking this is the one which moved away from a Net Neutrality regime. That does not justify India opting for protectionist or exclusionary processes. Again, this would be so only if the data localization sought is intended or will result in the same.

Data localisation mandated under the RBI circular and that which is envisaged under the draft PDP Bill are not completely protectionist. It is limited to financial data under the RBI circular and CP under the draft PDP Bill.

Scratch the surface and the real reason for opposition comes to the fore. The need for one of the largest caches of data, as India is, stems not just from commercial interests or profits, but from the larger issue of “Control”. USA’s attempt to flex its muscles to coerce RBI to reverse its position or to extend an extremely elongated compliance window indicates its intent.

Data sharing and control over data has become the new battleground for control. Many an instance of not just data collation or analysis, but of manipulation using data analytics demonstrates the power of data. USA’s ‘‘Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act’’ or the ‘‘CLOUD Act’’ and its overreaching provisions for interception and procuring of data of any online user is another illustration of the vulnerabilities that Indians’ data may be subjected to with unfettered data transfers.

The Justice Srikrishna Committee Report indicates that the decision to allow free flow of data and to limit restrictions only to CP indicates a well thought out process.

Apart from the loss of control, the next large concern appears to be jurisdiction. There has been consistent resistance from multinationals to subject themselves to India’s jurisdiction. Instances abound of government authorities’ orders and in many instances, even court orders not being complied with on grounds of jurisdiction. Localization would necessarily ensure not just ease of obtaining data for investigative, tax and other government purposes, but also for victims and litigants to enforce their rights more expeditiously.

The final fear-factor appears to be the nemesis of “taxation”. The Income Tax Act, 1961 already defines the principal place of business-wide enough to encompass the place where a business, profession or vocation is situated. Localization by itself would mean implementation of local infrastructure, which may give the taxman his much-needed jurisdiction.

Data localisation is here to stay. RBI’s circular and its implementation by a substantial number of entities governed by it has already proven feasibility. National interests, the exercise of sovereignty, need for easy access to data and possibly preventing foreign surveillance and dissemination are all bound to prevail over external pressure, for the Indian government to pass the provisions for data localisation. 
&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-us-flexes-cyber-muscles-2676092">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

With the RBI data localisation mandate becoming effective as of October 15, the debate on its legality and viability is revived. Reports indicate that whilst most entities subject to regulation by RBI have complied, the larger multinationals, who probably account for the larger quantum of transactions, are still resisting compliance.

With the RBI data localisation mandate becoming effective as of October 15, the debate on its legality and viability is revived. Reports indicate that whilst most entities subject to regulation by RBI have complied, the larger multinationals, who probably account for the larger quantum of transactions, are still resisting compliance. RBI’s circular of April 2018 pertains only to banks and payment systems that it regulates. Its mandate for data localisation also was restricted to all aspects of payments data. The multitude of commercial establishments, which have and utilise financial data, will be covered only under the provisions of the proposed Personal Data Protection (PDP) Bill, 2018. The deadline for public comments is now closed and the presentation of the final draft Bill is expected soon. Presently, the draft PDP Bill also clearly provides for localisation of critical personal (CP) data but leaves definition thereof to the Central government. Global trends that are elicited and the recommendations accompanying the draft PDP Bill clearly indicate that a wide spectrum of CP, including data of critical infrastructure, finance and health would probably form part of CP. RBI may have jumped the gun with its circular pre-dating the draft PDP Bill and Report, but it is not off the mark in its call for localisation. Many of us were sceptical about the call for localisation keeping in mind business needs and practicalities, but there cannot be any quandary about protecting critical data from rampant dissemination. The objections to data localisation range from economic to absurd – additional costs and teething problems that any change in processes entail, do not appear to be the real reasons for the objections though they are projected, as such. The other objections touted at most discussions across India are (a) possibility of surveillance by Indian law enforcement agencies, (b) breaches and vulnerabilities of systems and (c) purported availability of better infrastructure outside India. The other and more recent objections including from USA is for “free flow of data” to enable businesses and to “benefit users”. Each of the above objections to data-sharing appears specious. Surveillance was and continues to be a matter of grave concern, but to claim that it is a malaise restricted to India is untenable. Indians would, in fact, benefit from localisation to the extent that there would be immediate access to remedies against violation of due process. This would not be the case if their rights are violated outside India. System vulnerability too is not confined to India. As with the vulnerability of systems in USA or Europe, so would it be in India. Similarly, the need to create local infrastructure and systems only spells business opportunities for India. The cost is an on-time investment and the returns and benefits are likely to be sustained over long periods of time. Finally, free flow of data is and continues to be the bedrock of the Internet, but the very jurisdiction seeking this is the one which moved away from a Net Neutrality regime. That does not justify India opting for protectionist or exclusionary processes. Again, this would be so only if the data localization sought is intended or will result in the same. Data localisation mandated under the RBI circular and that which is envisaged under the draft PDP Bill are not completely protectionist. It is limited to financial data under the RBI circular and CP under the draft PDP Bill. Scratch the surface and the real reason for opposition comes to the fore. The need for one of the largest caches of data, as India is, stems not just from commercial interests or profits, but from the larger issue of “Control”. USA’s attempt to flex its muscles to coerce RBI to reverse its position or to extend an extremely elongated compliance window indicates its intent. Data sharing and control over data has become the new battleground for control. Many an instance of not just data collation or analysis, but of manipulation using data analytics demonstrates the power of data. USA’s ‘‘Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act’’ or the ‘‘CLOUD Act’’ and its overreaching provisions for interception and procuring of data of any online user is another illustration of the vulnerabilities that Indians’ data may be subjected to with unfettered data transfers. The Justice Srikrishna Committee Report indicates that the decision to allow free flow of data and to limit restrictions only to CP indicates a well thought out process. Apart from the loss of control, the next large concern appears to be jurisdiction. There has been consistent resistance from multinationals to subject themselves to India’s jurisdiction. Instances abound of government authorities’ orders and in many instances, even court orders not being complied with on grounds of jurisdiction. Localization would necessarily ensure not just ease of obtaining data for investigative, tax and other government purposes, but also for victims and litigants to enforce their rights more expeditiously. The final fear-factor appears to be the nemesis of “taxation”. The Income Tax Act, 1961 already defines the principal place of business-wide enough to encompass the place where a business, profession or vocation is situated. Localization by itself would mean implementation of local infrastructure, which may give the taxman his much-needed jurisdiction. Data localisation is here to stay. RBI’s circular and its implementation by a substantial number of entities governed by it has already proven feasibility. National interests, the exercise of sovereignty, need for easy access to data and possibly preventing foreign surveillance and dissemination are all bound to prevail over external pressure, for the Indian government to pass the provisions for data localisation. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

RBI data localisation: US flexes cyber muscles

US President Donald Trump said on Saturday the United States would be "punishing" itself by halting military sales to Saudi Arabia even if it is proven that Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was killed inside the country's consulate in Istanbul.

Khashoggi, a prominent critic of Riyadh and a US resident, disappeared on October 2 after visiting the Saudi consulate. Turkey's government believes he was deliberately killed inside the building and his body removed.

Trump has forged closer ties with Saudi Arabia and is under international and domestic pressure to help determine what happened to Khashoggi and punish Saudi Arabia if investigations show its government had him killed.

Republican and Democratic lawmakers alike have demanded firm action. There was already mounting concern over civilian deaths caused by a Saudi-led military coalition in Yemen's civil war and some lawmakers have said Washington should block military sales to Riyadh if the allegations over Khashoggi are proven.

But Trump is firmly opposed.

"I actually think we’d be punishing ourselves if we did that," Trump told reporters at the White House.

"There are other things we can do that are very, very powerful, very strong and we’ll do them," he added, without saying what those measures might be.

Under US law, major foreign military sales can be blocked by Congress. An informal review process lets key lawmakers use a practice known as a "hold" to stall deals if they have concerns such as whether the weapons being supplied would be used to kill civilians.

Major US defence contractors, including Lockheed Martin Corp and Raytheon Co, are among the beneficiaries of Washington's close ties to Riyadh and would be hurt by the halting of major arms deals.

Trump said on Saturday his administration won a $110 billion military order from Saudi Arabia and that the deal, combined with Saudi commitments to invest heavily in the United States, was worth hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs.

"If they don’t buy it from us, they’re going to buy it from Russia or they’re going to buy it from China," he said. "Think of that, $110 billion. All they’re going to do is give it to other countries, and I think that would be very foolish.”

It was unclear what specific measures, if any, Trump is considering against Saudi Arabia, which is the world's largest oil exporter, and one of his top allies.

The Trump administration plans to reimpose sanctions on oil exports from Iran on Nov. 5 and Trump has urged Saudi Arabia to boost oil output to help make up for the loss.

Trump said he would probably speak to Saudi Arabia's King Salman over the weekend "because I think it’s appropriate for me to ask him what’s going on."

US President Donald Trump said on Saturday the United States would be "punishing" itself by halting military sales to Saudi Arabia even if it is proven that Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was killed inside the country's consulate in Istanbul.

US President Donald Trump said on Saturday the United States would be "punishing" itself by halting military sales to Saudi Arabia even if it is proven that Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was killed inside the country's consulate in Istanbul. Khashoggi, a prominent critic of Riyadh and a US resident, disappeared on October 2 after visiting the Saudi consulate. Turkey's government believes he was deliberately killed inside the building and his body removed. Trump has forged closer ties with Saudi Arabia and is under international and domestic pressure to help determine what happened to Khashoggi and punish Saudi Arabia if investigations show its government had him killed. Republican and Democratic lawmakers alike have demanded firm action. There was already mounting concern over civilian deaths caused by a Saudi-led military coalition in Yemen's civil war and some lawmakers have said Washington should block military sales to Riyadh if the allegations over Khashoggi are proven. But Trump is firmly opposed. "I actually think we’d be punishing ourselves if we did that," Trump told reporters at the White House. "There are other things we can do that are very, very powerful, very strong and we’ll do them," he added, without saying what those measures might be. Under US law, major foreign military sales can be blocked by Congress. An informal review process lets key lawmakers use a practice known as a "hold" to stall deals if they have concerns such as whether the weapons being supplied would be used to kill civilians. Major US defence contractors, including Lockheed Martin Corp and Raytheon Co, are among the beneficiaries of Washington's close ties to Riyadh and would be hurt by the halting of major arms deals. Trump said on Saturday his administration won a $110 billion military order from Saudi Arabia and that the deal, combined with Saudi commitments to invest heavily in the United States, was worth hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs. "If they don’t buy it from us, they’re going to buy it from Russia or they’re going to buy it from China," he said. "Think of that, $110 billion. All they’re going to do is give it to other countries, and I think that would be very foolish.” It was unclear what specific measures, if any, Trump is considering against Saudi Arabia, which is the world's largest oil exporter, and one of his top allies. The Trump administration plans to reimpose sanctions on oil exports from Iran on Nov. 5 and Trump has urged Saudi Arabia to boost oil output to help make up for the loss. Trump said he would probably speak to Saudi Arabia's King Salman over the weekend "because I think it’s appropriate for me to ask him what’s going on."

Trump says US would be 'punishing' itself if it halts Saudi arms sales

US President Donald Trump has said that he wants people with merit, who can help, to enter the country and not sneak inside the border illegally.

"I'm very tough at the borders. We've been very tough at the borders. People have to come into our country legally, not illegally. Legally. And I want them to come in on merit," Trump told reporters at the White House on Saturday.

Responding to a series of question on illegal immigration, the president reiterated that he wants people based on merit, a move that can help technology professionals from countries such as India.

"What I want is merit. I want a lot of people to come in. We have great car companies entering our country again. This hasn't happened for 35 years. We have companies like Foxconn going to Wisconsin with a massive, massive plant," he said.

"We need people coming in, but we want them to come in on merit. We want people that are going to help us. It's very important," Trump said.

Observing that immigration is not tricky to him, he insisted that the administration and the Congress have to do the right thing whether there's an election or not.

He opposed the chain migration policy and said, "If that's a bad policy, then guess what, a lot of bad things are going to happen. But a lot of people agree with me. I would say a vast majority of our country agrees. They don't want criminals coming into our country.They don't want people that they don't want in the country that aren't going to help us as a country. They don't want these people coming in. So we have a very strong policy."&nbsp;

"The one thing that really has changed over the last couple of years since I've been President -- our country is doing so well, even with real interest -- not with false interest rates. Zero interest. Anybody can do well with zero interest. We're the hottest country in the world, economically, by far. You take a look at us compared to China, compared to everybody else, we're the hottest country in the world. A lot of people are trying to come in. Our border security, our ICE, our law enforcement is doing an incredible job," he said.&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump has said that he wants people with merit, who can help, to enter the country and not sneak inside the border illegally. "I'm very tough at the borders.

US President Donald Trump has said that he wants people with merit, who can help, to enter the country and not sneak inside the border illegally. "I'm very tough at the borders. We've been very tough at the borders. People have to come into our country legally, not illegally. Legally. And I want them to come in on merit," Trump told reporters at the White House on Saturday. Responding to a series of question on illegal immigration, the president reiterated that he wants people based on merit, a move that can help technology professionals from countries such as India. "What I want is merit. I want a lot of people to come in. We have great car companies entering our country again. This hasn't happened for 35 years. We have companies like Foxconn going to Wisconsin with a massive, massive plant," he said. "We need people coming in, but we want them to come in on merit. We want people that are going to help us. It's very important," Trump said. Observing that immigration is not tricky to him, he insisted that the administration and the Congress have to do the right thing whether there's an election or not. He opposed the chain migration policy and said, "If that's a bad policy, then guess what, a lot of bad things are going to happen. But a lot of people agree with me. I would say a vast majority of our country agrees. They don't want criminals coming into our country.They don't want people that they don't want in the country that aren't going to help us as a country. They don't want these people coming in. So we have a very strong policy." "The one thing that really has changed over the last couple of years since I've been President -- our country is doing so well, even with real interest -- not with false interest rates. Zero interest. Anybody can do well with zero interest. We're the hottest country in the world, economically, by far. You take a look at us compared to China, compared to everybody else, we're the hottest country in the world. A lot of people are trying to come in. Our border security, our ICE, our law enforcement is doing an incredible job," he said.

Want people to come to US legally, on merit: Trump

us-1

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

us 1