United States Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo condemned terrorists and violent extremists who target religious minorities, especially mentioning Pakistan's statement of Hindu minorities among other countries.

Mike Pompeo: People can't practice faith freely

Today in History: Articles of Confederation, Apollo 14 and more!

Violent attacks in Afghanistan's war jumped to record levels in the last quarter of 2019, a US government watchdog said Friday, underscoring the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-plane-crashes-in-afghanistan-top-us-intel-officers-dead-277184">conflict's continued toll</a> despite relative calm in Kabul. The nation's capital and other urban areas have enjoyed a rare stretch of more than <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-recovers-two-bodies-from-bombardier-aircraft-crash-site-in-afghanistan-277343">two </a>months without the sorts of large-scale bomb attack that frequently rock the city and cause mass causalities.

Despite the lull, which has come as the<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/despite-defeats-the-islamic-state-remains-unbroken-and-defiant-around-the-world-277491"> US and the Taliban continue talks</a> over a possible deal for American forces to leave Afghanistan, fighting in rural provinces has continued unabated, with reports of skirmishes appearing daily. According to the US Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), "enemy-initiated attacks" rose sharply last year, with the fourth quarter seeing a total of 8,204 attacks -- up from 6,974 in the same period in 2018.&nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/united-states-bombing-of-afghanistan-hits-10-year-high-us-air-force-277324">United States bombing of Afghanistan hits 10-year high: US Air Force</a>

September, when the first round of presidential voting was held, saw the highest number of casualty-causing attacks since recording began in 2010. SIGAR noted that attacks appeared to mirror progress in US-Taliban talks, with incidents dropping earlier in the year, then picking up again after US President Donald Trump temporarily halted negotiations in September.

"A turbulent last six months resulted in increases in overall enemy attacks (6 per cent) and effective attacks (4 per cent) in 2019 compared to the already high levels reported in 2018," SIGAR said in its quarterly report to the US Congress. The Pentagon has also continued to up the tempo of operations, with American warplanes dropping more bombs on Afghanistan in 2019 than at any other time in at least a decade, according to the US Air Force.

Washington and the Taliban are continuing to wrangle over a possible agreement that would see US troops begin to leave Afghanistan in return for security guarantees.&nbsp; The US has for months been calling on the militants to reduce violence, but both sides have said little in recent days about the status of talks and the Kabul government wants the US to push for a full ceasefire.

SIGAR's report also found that Afghanistan's security forces struggled to take the fight to the Taliban, relying on US support for more than half their ground operations. SIGAR also highlighted a slight increase in the number of casualties among Afghan military members, who have sustained massive losses over the past five years.

Violent attacks in Afghanistan's war jumped to record levels in the last quarter of 2019, a US government watchdog said Friday, underscoring the conflict's continued toll despite relative calm in Kabul.

Violent attacks in Afghanistan's war jumped to record levels in the last quarter of 2019, a US government watchdog said Friday, underscoring the conflict's continued toll despite relative calm in Kabul. The nation's capital and other urban areas have enjoyed a rare stretch of more than two months without the sorts of large-scale bomb attack that frequently rock the city and cause mass causalities. Despite the lull, which has come as the US and the Taliban continue talks over a possible deal for American forces to leave Afghanistan, fighting in rural provinces has continued unabated, with reports of skirmishes appearing daily. According to the US Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), "enemy-initiated attacks" rose sharply last year, with the fourth quarter seeing a total of 8,204 attacks -- up from 6,974 in the same period in 2018. Also Read: United States bombing of Afghanistan hits 10-year high: US Air Force September, when the first round of presidential voting was held, saw the highest number of casualty-causing attacks since recording began in 2010. SIGAR noted that attacks appeared to mirror progress in US-Taliban talks, with incidents dropping earlier in the year, then picking up again after US President Donald Trump temporarily halted negotiations in September. "A turbulent last six months resulted in increases in overall enemy attacks (6 per cent) and effective attacks (4 per cent) in 2019 compared to the already high levels reported in 2018," SIGAR said in its quarterly report to the US Congress. The Pentagon has also continued to up the tempo of operations, with American warplanes dropping more bombs on Afghanistan in 2019 than at any other time in at least a decade, according to the US Air Force. Washington and the Taliban are continuing to wrangle over a possible agreement that would see US troops begin to leave Afghanistan in return for security guarantees. The US has for months been calling on the militants to reduce violence, but both sides have said little in recent days about the status of talks and the Kabul government wants the US to push for a full ceasefire. SIGAR's report also found that Afghanistan's security forces struggled to take the fight to the Taliban, relying on US support for more than half their ground operations. SIGAR also highlighted a slight increase in the number of casualties among Afghan military members, who have sustained massive losses over the past five years.

Amid US-Taliban peace talks, violence in Afghanistan rises: Watchdog

With Iowa caucus, people from the United States and across the world will get a sense of who are losing their chances to be a possible final contender to challenge US President Donald Trump for the Presidency. There will be important wins, and also, heartbreaks from what this time is known as a very 'crowded' race of Democratic challengers. On February 3, Iowa caucus will be held and even though, the state might not be a good predictor of the overall trends because of being less diverse, candidates will certainly gain and lose momentum for the primaries and caucuses ahead. For Democrats, Iowa is definitely significant as its last four nominees have all won caucuses from this part. At this juncture, let's look at which democratic candidate is leading the race of nomination and the ones who can catch up.

1. Joe Biden

Joe Biden, who was the Vice President during the Obama administration, started the Democratic Presidential race as the frontrunner. He still leads in most of the polls. In the last democratic debate, Biden also avoided sharp attacks from his Democratic rivals and was able to successfully elaborate his plans on foreign policy and health care, which worked in his favour. Biden is still voters’ first choice among other Democratic contenders, with support ranging from 20 to 35 per cent as per various polls. He is also popular among black voters, who remain crucial supporters of Democrats.

2. &nbsp;Bernie Sanders

Despite being the oldest candidate, Bernie Sanders' persuasive and energetic campaign has shed away the health-related concerns in the minds of voters, at least for now. Sanders and the other liberal candidate's, Elizabeth Warren, spar was the talking point during the January debate wherein Sanders flatly denied that he told Warren that a woman could not beat Trump in 2016 elections. This controversy didn't manage to cause any harm to Sanders and he took on Biden for supporting the war in Iraq in 2002-03. Sanders also reiterated his 'Medicare-for-all' policy. He became the first-choice Democratic candidate for the US elections after the debate as he garnered 20 per cent support as compared to Biden's 19 per cent, as per Ipsos poll released on January 16. According to most polls, Sanders has improved his position from last few months and is now in No 2 spot in the Democratic race after Biden. The gap between Biden and Sanders is also narrowing.

3. Elizabeth Warren

Elizabeth Warren was undoubtedly the best performer in the January debate. In the debate, Warren was once again articulate in her arguments and convincing on the healthcare policy. Warren also reiterated that Sanders doubted women’s electability in the 2016 polls and pointed out that women on the stage (she and Amy Klobuchar) never lost any election. Despite her consistent performance, Warren is still behind her leftist rival Sanders in terms of public support. The good thing with Warren is that she has plans for most of the things, ranging from anti-corruption law, foreign policy to child-care and education.

Warren is currently Americans third choice and her popularity has taken a hit since October, when she came very close to Biden, as per surveys by IPSOS, ABC News and Fox News show. However, a poll by YouGov suggests Warren is ahead of Sanders by a whisker and the trends also predict a close fight between Democrats liberal flag-bearers.

4. Michael Bloomberg

The latest and one of the oldest entrants in the Democratic race is in the list of top five candidates despite not participating in any debate yet. Interestingly, when the other candidates were debating in Iowa, Bloomberg’s campaign was busy tweeting live to grab the spotlight. One of the major reasons for the billionaire and three-time New York mayor’s rise in support is advertisements in TV, radio and digital platforms, for which he already spent $248 million. Bloomberg currently holds number 4 spot ahead of Pete Buttigieg, with voters backing ranging from 7 to 10 per cent, as per polls by ABC News, YouGov and Ipsos. &nbsp;

5. Pete Buttigieg

Buttigieg’s profile speaks for itself: a Harvard graduate, military veteran, very young and a charismatic speaker. The 38-year-old openly gay contender has done most things right, but still is way behind the top three candidates. Buttigieg’s performance in the last debate was neither disappointing nor exemplary, but he failed to grab the spotlight. After the debate, Buttigieg’s support remains stagnant or declining, oscillating from 4 to 9 per cent, which is a blow to his nomination’s chances.

6. Amy Klobuchar

Amy Klobuchar’s campaign has found some momentum from the strong performance in the last debate. She took on Sanders and Warren on healthcare and emphasised that her experience in Senate is more suitable for the Presidency than Buttigieg who was a naval intelligence officer in Afghanistan. Klobuchar’s campaign focussed on tackling climate change, some of which include big investments in green infrastructure, and cutting down emissions. So far, most of the polls show Klobuchar trailing behind the top tier candidates and her campaign needs the push in order to garner the 15 per cent required support from Iowa. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp;

With Iowa caucus, people from the United States and across the world will get a sense of who are losing their chances to be a possible final contender to challenge US President Donald Trump for the Presidency.

With Iowa caucus, people from the United States and across the world will get a sense of who are losing their chances to be a possible final contender to challenge US President Donald Trump for the Presidency. There will be important wins, and also, heartbreaks from what this time is known as a very 'crowded' race of Democratic challengers. On February 3, Iowa caucus will be held and even though, the state might not be a good predictor of the overall trends because of being less diverse, candidates will certainly gain and lose momentum for the primaries and caucuses ahead. For Democrats, Iowa is definitely significant as its last four nominees have all won caucuses from this part. At this juncture, let's look at which democratic candidate is leading the race of nomination and the ones who can catch up. 1. Joe Biden Joe Biden, who was the Vice President during the Obama administration, started the Democratic Presidential race as the frontrunner. He still leads in most of the polls. In the last democratic debate, Biden also avoided sharp attacks from his Democratic rivals and was able to successfully elaborate his plans on foreign policy and health care, which worked in his favour. Biden is still voters’ first choice among other Democratic contenders, with support ranging from 20 to 35 per cent as per various polls. He is also popular among black voters, who remain crucial supporters of Democrats. 2. Bernie Sanders Despite being the oldest candidate, Bernie Sanders' persuasive and energetic campaign has shed away the health-related concerns in the minds of voters, at least for now. Sanders and the other liberal candidate's, Elizabeth Warren, spar was the talking point during the January debate wherein Sanders flatly denied that he told Warren that a woman could not beat Trump in 2016 elections. This controversy didn't manage to cause any harm to Sanders and he took on Biden for supporting the war in Iraq in 2002-03. Sanders also reiterated his 'Medicare-for-all' policy. He became the first-choice Democratic candidate for the US elections after the debate as he garnered 20 per cent support as compared to Biden's 19 per cent, as per Ipsos poll released on January 16. According to most polls, Sanders has improved his position from last few months and is now in No 2 spot in the Democratic race after Biden. The gap between Biden and Sanders is also narrowing. 3. Elizabeth Warren Elizabeth Warren was undoubtedly the best performer in the January debate. In the debate, Warren was once again articulate in her arguments and convincing on the healthcare policy. Warren also reiterated that Sanders doubted women’s electability in the 2016 polls and pointed out that women on the stage (she and Amy Klobuchar) never lost any election. Despite her consistent performance, Warren is still behind her leftist rival Sanders in terms of public support. The good thing with Warren is that she has plans for most of the things, ranging from anti-corruption law, foreign policy to child-care and education. Warren is currently Americans third choice and her popularity has taken a hit since October, when she came very close to Biden, as per surveys by IPSOS, ABC News and Fox News show. However, a poll by YouGov suggests Warren is ahead of Sanders by a whisker and the trends also predict a close fight between Democrats liberal flag-bearers. 4. Michael Bloomberg The latest and one of the oldest entrants in the Democratic race is in the list of top five candidates despite not participating in any debate yet. Interestingly, when the other candidates were debating in Iowa, Bloomberg’s campaign was busy tweeting live to grab the spotlight. One of the major reasons for the billionaire and three-time New York mayor’s rise in support is advertisements in TV, radio and digital platforms, for which he already spent $248 million. Bloomberg currently holds number 4 spot ahead of Pete Buttigieg, with voters backing ranging from 7 to 10 per cent, as per polls by ABC News, YouGov and Ipsos. 5. Pete Buttigieg Buttigieg’s profile speaks for itself: a Harvard graduate, military veteran, very young and a charismatic speaker. The 38-year-old openly gay contender has done most things right, but still is way behind the top three candidates. Buttigieg’s performance in the last debate was neither disappointing nor exemplary, but he failed to grab the spotlight. After the debate, Buttigieg’s support remains stagnant or declining, oscillating from 4 to 9 per cent, which is a blow to his nomination’s chances. 6. Amy Klobuchar Amy Klobuchar’s campaign has found some momentum from the strong performance in the last debate. She took on Sanders and Warren on healthcare and emphasised that her experience in Senate is more suitable for the Presidency than Buttigieg who was a naval intelligence officer in Afghanistan. Klobuchar’s campaign focussed on tackling climate change, some of which include big investments in green infrastructure, and cutting down emissions. So far, most of the polls show Klobuchar trailing behind the top tier candidates and her campaign needs the push in order to garner the 15 per cent required support from Iowa. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US Presidential elections 2020: Which Democratic contender stands where

The US House of Representatives has passed a bill strengthening Washington's support for human rights and environmental protection in <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/tibetans-retain-power-of-truth-china-exercises-power-of-guns-dalai-lama-270151">Tibet</a>, and advocating sanctions against China if it interferes in the succession of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/tibetan-government-passes-resolution-on-reincarnation-of-dalai-lama-254071">Tibetan spiritual leader Dalai Lama</a>.

The bill, Tibet Policy Support Act of 2019, states that if <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/chinas-increased-influence-in-nepal-led-to-ban-on-dalai-lama-birthday-celebration-us-envoy-257843">Chinese officials</a> interfere in the process of recognizing a successor or reincarnation of the Dalai Lama, they will be subject to sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Act.

Also Read:<iframe data-google-container-id="4" data-load-complete="true" frameborder="0" height="1" id="google_ads_iframe_/6516239/outofpage_1x1_desktop_0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" name="google_ads_iframe_/6516239/outofpage_1x1_desktop_0" scrolling="no" srcdoc="" title="3rd party ad content" width="1"></iframe>&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/dalai-lama-a-monk-in-the-middle-of-two-rival-nations-270442">Dalai Lama: A monk in the middle of two rival nations</a>

Introduced by Congressman James P McGovern, Chairman of the House Rules Committee and the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, the bill passed with an overwhelming vote of 392-22, reported CNN.

Stating that the US is sending a 'clear signal' to China, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, "We are sending Beijing a clear signal that they will be held accountable for interfering in Tibet's religious and cultural affairs. We are making clear that Chinese officials who meddle in the process of recognizing a new Dalai Lama will be subject to targeted sanctions, including those in the Global Magnitsky Act."

"I rise in support of the Tibetan Policy Act of 2019: strong, bipartisan and urgently-needed legislation to strengthen America's commitment to the Tibetan people and their right to safeguard their distinct identity," she added.

Further, she added that this legislation deploys America's diplomatic weight to encourage a genuine dialogue between Tibetan leaders and Beijing.

"It is unacceptable that the Chinese government still refuses to enter into a dialogue with Tibetan leaders," she added.

The US House of Representatives has passed a bill strengthening Washington's support for human rights and environmental protection in Tibet, and advocating sanctions against China if it interferes in the succession of Tibetan spiritual leader Dalai Lama.

The US House of Representatives has passed a bill strengthening Washington's support for human rights and environmental protection in Tibet, and advocating sanctions against China if it interferes in the succession of Tibetan spiritual leader Dalai Lama. The bill, Tibet Policy Support Act of 2019, states that if Chinese officials interfere in the process of recognizing a successor or reincarnation of the Dalai Lama, they will be subject to sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Act. Also Read: Dalai Lama: A monk in the middle of two rival nations Introduced by Congressman James P McGovern, Chairman of the House Rules Committee and the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, the bill passed with an overwhelming vote of 392-22, reported CNN. Stating that the US is sending a 'clear signal' to China, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, "We are sending Beijing a clear signal that they will be held accountable for interfering in Tibet's religious and cultural affairs. We are making clear that Chinese officials who meddle in the process of recognizing a new Dalai Lama will be subject to targeted sanctions, including those in the Global Magnitsky Act." "I rise in support of the Tibetan Policy Act of 2019: strong, bipartisan and urgently-needed legislation to strengthen America's commitment to the Tibetan people and their right to safeguard their distinct identity," she added. Further, she added that this legislation deploys America's diplomatic weight to encourage a genuine dialogue between Tibetan leaders and Beijing. "It is unacceptable that the Chinese government still refuses to enter into a dialogue with Tibetan leaders," she added.

US House passes bill to support Tibet, warns sanctions on Chinese officials for interfering in Dalai Lama's succession

Now, Iran media claims CIA chief behind Soleimani’s assassination killed in Afghanistan plane crash

US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin ridiculed the <a href="Meet Greta Thunberg, the pioneer of climate activism">seventeen-year-old climate activist</a> Greta Thunberg two days after his superior, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/greta-thunberg-ought-to-focus-on-other-countries-says-trump-at-davos-275938">US President Donald Trump</a> had engaged in a heated repartee&nbsp;with Thunberg at the World Economic Forum, being held at the Swiss ski resort of Davos.

"Is she the chief economist?" Mnuchin quipped. "After she goes and studies economics in college, she can come back and explain that to us," he added in response to the activist's call on governments to divest from fossil fuels.

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/ahead-of-davos-summit-greta-thunberg-calls-for-real-climate-action-274917">Ahead of Davos summit, Greta Thunberg calls for 'real climate action'</a>

<img alt="Greta Thunberg" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="6863a937-e52d-4d46-84ab-4d4709d69dc0" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design%20%2889%29_0.jpg" /> 
[&nbsp;Climate activist Greta Thunberg (Courtesy: AFP)

Trump seemed to have made a lazy attempt at adding&nbsp;fuel to the fire before he left Davos when he said he wished he had seen Greta Thunberg speak. Mnuchin emphasized that the stance of the Trump administration on climate has been "misunderstood".

Mnuchin affirmed that "There is a real misinterpretation of the US policy." He stated that "President Trump believes in clean air and clean water and having a clean environment."

US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin ridiculed the seventeen-year-old climate activist Greta Thunberg two days after his superior, US President Donald Trump had engaged in a heated repartee with Thunberg at the World Economic Forum, being held at the Swiss ski resort of Davos.

US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin ridiculed the seventeen-year-old climate activist Greta Thunberg two days after his superior, US President Donald Trump had engaged in a heated repartee with Thunberg at the World Economic Forum, being held at the Swiss ski resort of Davos. "Is she the chief economist?" Mnuchin quipped. "After she goes and studies economics in college, she can come back and explain that to us," he added in response to the activist's call on governments to divest from fossil fuels. Also Read: Ahead of Davos summit, Greta Thunberg calls for 'real climate action' [ Climate activist Greta Thunberg (Courtesy: AFP) Trump seemed to have made a lazy attempt at adding fuel to the fire before he left Davos when he said he wished he had seen Greta Thunberg speak. Mnuchin emphasized that the stance of the Trump administration on climate has been "misunderstood". Mnuchin affirmed that "There is a real misinterpretation of the US policy." He stated that "President Trump believes in clean air and clean water and having a clean environment."

US Treasury Secretary asks climate activist Greta Thunberg to get an economics degree

In his first Friday prayers sermon for eight years, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/these-american-clowns-who-lie-says-khamenei-in-friday-sermon-referring-to-trump-274902">Ayatollah Ali Khamenei</a> also told worshippers chanting "Death to America" that the elite Guards could take their fight beyond Iran's borders after the U.S. killing of a top Iranian commander.

U.S. President Donald Trump hit back later on Twitter, writing that Khamenei should be careful what he says.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/khamenei-iran-gave-us-slap-on-face-calls-missile-strikes-day-of-god-274857">Khamenei's address</a> came amid a deepening crisis for Iran as it grapples with unrest at home and rising pressure from abroad.

Tension has steadily ratcheted higher since 2018 when the United States withdrew from Tehran's nuclear pact with world powers and reimposed sanctions that have hammered the economy.

In the tense aftermath, a Ukrainian airliner was shot down by mistake. But it took days for the Guards to admit this and protesters directed their rage at the elite force and the clerical system it was set up to defend.

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/irans-supreme-leader-khamenei-to-lead-prayers-amid-outrage-over-ukrainian-plane-crash-274821">Iran's supreme leader Khamenei to lead 'prayers' amid uproar over Ukrainian plane crash&nbsp;</a>

"Our enemies ... were happy that they found an excuse to undermine the Guards, the armed forces and our system," Khamenei said in his sermon, heaping praise on the Guards for protecting Iran and renewing a call for U.S. troops to leave the region.

Khamenei said Soleimani's work of projecting Iran's military influence abroad would continue and said the Quds Force he commanded "protects oppressed nations across the region."

He said Quds Force soldiers were "fighters without borders".

The U.S. State Department's special representative for Iran, Brian Hook, said in Washington that Iranian threats risked further isolating the country.

But Russia lent Iran some support over the airliner disaster, saying it had been shot down when Tehran was spooked by reports of advanced U.S. stealth fighters in the area.

"I'd like to underline the edginess that always accompanies such situations," Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said.

<img alt="Iranian worshippers chant slogans during the Friday prayers sermon" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="bf0f70db-c26a-4a42-ab67-c116316536ab" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design%20-%202020-01-18T115726.008.jpg" /> 
[&nbsp;Iranian worshippers chant slogans during the Friday prayers sermon (Courtesy: Reuters) ]

'BITTER TRAGEDY'

Protests led by students erupted in Tehran and other cities for four days over the shooting down of Ukraine International Airlines flight 752, in which all <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iranians-bury-dead-from-downed-plane-after-days-of-rage-on-the-street-274513">176 aboard were killed</a>, mostly Iranians or dual nationals.

As the unrest picked up, Trump sent tweets in Farsi and English supporting the protesters, who were chanting "Death to Khamenei" and slogans against the Guards.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
The so-called “Supreme Leader” of Iran, who has not been so Supreme lately, had some nasty things to say about the United States and Europe. Their economy is crashing, and their people are suffering. He should be very careful with his words!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1218297466656829440?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 17, 2020</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>

Trump responded on Twitter: "The so-called 'Supreme Leader' of Iran, who has not been so Supreme lately, had some nasty things to say about the United States and Europe. Their economy is crashing, and their people are suffering. He should be very careful with his words!"

Khamenei said the shooting down of the plane was a "bitter tragedy that burned through our heart," but stopped short of offering a direct apology.

"Some tried to use it as an excuse to overshadow the martyrdom of our great commander Soleimani," he said, urging Iranians to unite and show solidarity by turning out in numbers for the February parliamentary election.

The funeral of Soleimani, long portrayed as a national hero in Iran but seen by the West as a ruthless adversary, had brought huge numbers of Iranian mourners to the streets.

On social media, some Iranians reacted angrily to Khamenei's sermon and his comments on the plane disaster. "Not a word of apology. Only arrogance," tweeted Mike Pouraryan.

Online footage during demonstrations had shown protesters being beaten and recordings of gunshots. Riot police were deployed in force on the streets, particularly outside universities, a focus for the unrest.

Iran's police denied firing at protesters.

Two months earlier, police launched a bloody crackdown on protests that erupted over sharp fuel price hikes, which added to the suffering of Iranians already hurt by U.S. sanctions.

In reaction to Washington's "maximum pressure" policy, Tehran has gradually scaled back on commitments to the nuclear deal, including lifting limits on its uranium enrichment.

Britain, France and Germany, which have been trying to salvage the pact, have subsequently launched the deal's dispute mechanism over Iran's violations, starting a diplomatic process that could lead to reimposing U.N. sanctions.

"These European countries cannot be trusted. Even their negotiations with Iran are full of deceit," Khamenei said.

In his first Friday prayers sermon for eight years, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also told worshippers chanting "Death to America" that the elite Guards could take their fight beyond Iran's borders after the U.

In his first Friday prayers sermon for eight years, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also told worshippers chanting "Death to America" that the elite Guards could take their fight beyond Iran's borders after the U.S. killing of a top Iranian commander. U.S. President Donald Trump hit back later on Twitter, writing that Khamenei should be careful what he says. Khamenei's address came amid a deepening crisis for Iran as it grapples with unrest at home and rising pressure from abroad. Tension has steadily ratcheted higher since 2018 when the United States withdrew from Tehran's nuclear pact with world powers and reimposed sanctions that have hammered the economy. In the tense aftermath, a Ukrainian airliner was shot down by mistake. But it took days for the Guards to admit this and protesters directed their rage at the elite force and the clerical system it was set up to defend. Also Read: Iran's supreme leader Khamenei to lead 'prayers' amid uproar over Ukrainian plane crash "Our enemies ... were happy that they found an excuse to undermine the Guards, the armed forces and our system," Khamenei said in his sermon, heaping praise on the Guards for protecting Iran and renewing a call for U.S. troops to leave the region. Khamenei said Soleimani's work of projecting Iran's military influence abroad would continue and said the Quds Force he commanded "protects oppressed nations across the region." He said Quds Force soldiers were "fighters without borders". The U.S. State Department's special representative for Iran, Brian Hook, said in Washington that Iranian threats risked further isolating the country. But Russia lent Iran some support over the airliner disaster, saying it had been shot down when Tehran was spooked by reports of advanced U.S. stealth fighters in the area. "I'd like to underline the edginess that always accompanies such situations," Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said. [ Iranian worshippers chant slogans during the Friday prayers sermon (Courtesy: Reuters) ] 'BITTER TRAGEDY' Protests led by students erupted in Tehran and other cities for four days over the shooting down of Ukraine International Airlines flight 752, in which all 176 aboard were killed, mostly Iranians or dual nationals. As the unrest picked up, Trump sent tweets in Farsi and English supporting the protesters, who were chanting "Death to Khamenei" and slogans against the Guards. The so-called “Supreme Leader” of Iran, who has not been so Supreme lately, had some nasty things to say about the United States and Europe. Their economy is crashing, and their people are suffering. He should be very careful with his words! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 17, 2020 × Trump responded on Twitter: "The so-called 'Supreme Leader' of Iran, who has not been so Supreme lately, had some nasty things to say about the United States and Europe. Their economy is crashing, and their people are suffering. He should be very careful with his words!" Khamenei said the shooting down of the plane was a "bitter tragedy that burned through our heart," but stopped short of offering a direct apology. "Some tried to use it as an excuse to overshadow the martyrdom of our great commander Soleimani," he said, urging Iranians to unite and show solidarity by turning out in numbers for the February parliamentary election. The funeral of Soleimani, long portrayed as a national hero in Iran but seen by the West as a ruthless adversary, had brought huge numbers of Iranian mourners to the streets. On social media, some Iranians reacted angrily to Khamenei's sermon and his comments on the plane disaster. "Not a word of apology. Only arrogance," tweeted Mike Pouraryan. Online footage during demonstrations had shown protesters being beaten and recordings of gunshots. Riot police were deployed in force on the streets, particularly outside universities, a focus for the unrest. Iran's police denied firing at protesters. Two months earlier, police launched a bloody crackdown on protests that erupted over sharp fuel price hikes, which added to the suffering of Iranians already hurt by U.S. sanctions. In reaction to Washington's "maximum pressure" policy, Tehran has gradually scaled back on commitments to the nuclear deal, including lifting limits on its uranium enrichment. Britain, France and Germany, which have been trying to salvage the pact, have subsequently launched the deal's dispute mechanism over Iran's violations, starting a diplomatic process that could lead to reimposing U.N. sanctions. "These European countries cannot be trusted. Even their negotiations with Iran are full of deceit," Khamenei said.

Iran's Khamenei stands by Revolutionary Guards after unrest over downed plane

Two days after the US assassinated top Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani, a red flag was raised over the dome of the Jamkaran Mosque in the holy city of Qom in Iran.

It was a rare sight for the flag which symbolises revenge to be unfurled outside the month of Muharram. The flag’s video was widely shared on social media with many saying that it signified an impending battle.&nbsp;

War had become too real. The killing united Iran which had been reeling under anti-government protests over the fuel price hike. Slogans against the establishment were replaced by those against America.

In the US, Congress condemned President Trump’s decision to order the strike without its approval. It later voted to limit Trump's power to declare war on Iran.

Many questioned the timing of the killing which happened in an election year. President Trump had his own battles to fight. He has recently been impeached and is awaiting trial in the Senate. Countries around the world including Washington's allies called for de-escalation.

Then came January 8.&nbsp;

Less than a week after Soleimani’s killing, Iran launched a series of rockets at two Iraqi bases hosting US troops. There were no casualties in the attacks but in a separate incident, 176 innocent people lost their lives.

Hours after the strikes, a Ukrainian passenger plane crashed near Tehran’s Imam Khomeini International Airport. All 176 on board were killed.

Majority of the victims were Iranians while others included citizens of Canada, Ukraine and Sweden. Almost immediately after the accident, US and Canada said that they had intelligence that a missile shot down the Boeing 737 jet.

Iran denied the claims but it also refused to hand out the plane’s black box to Boeing. Three days after the crash, Iran admitted that it had unintentionally shot down the plane mistaking it for a ‘hostile jet’. The country vowed to bring the guilty to justice.

Internationally, Iran signalled that it favoured the diffusion of tensions. Speaking at the ‘Raisina Dialogue’ in the Indian capital of New Delhi, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said that there was still room for diplomacy with the United States.

Amid heightened tensions, the crash exposed the possible cracks within the top Iranian military leadership. The missile was launched by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps- a paramilitary which has its own army, air force and navy which are independent of the Iranian military.

Soleimani was the head of the ‘Quds Force’ or the foreign unit of the IRGC. Iran said that it was in a state of ‘high-readiness’ over fears of US retaliation. If missiles had to be deployed then why was Iranian airspace not closed?

Was there a lack of communication between the military, IRCG and the government? While these questions remain unanswered, an old challenged threatened the Iranian regime. Protesters took to the streets of capital Tehran chanting slogans against their leaders and calling them liars for initially denying the downing of the Ukrainian jet.

The demonstrators found support from Trump who in an unusual move, tweeted in Persian asking the Iranian government ‘to not massacre peaceful protesters.’

The Iranian leadership has a lot to worry about. It is not just an election year for the US but Iran too. In fact, the country is heading to polls next month. But as of now, a major war has been averted. 
 
(Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Two days after the US assassinated top Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani, a red flag was raised over the dome of the Jamkaran Mosque in the holy city of Qom in Iran.

Two days after the US assassinated top Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani, a red flag was raised over the dome of the Jamkaran Mosque in the holy city of Qom in Iran. It was a rare sight for the flag which symbolises revenge to be unfurled outside the month of Muharram. The flag’s video was widely shared on social media with many saying that it signified an impending battle. War had become too real. The killing united Iran which had been reeling under anti-government protests over the fuel price hike. Slogans against the establishment were replaced by those against America. In the US, Congress condemned President Trump’s decision to order the strike without its approval. It later voted to limit Trump's power to declare war on Iran. Many questioned the timing of the killing which happened in an election year. President Trump had his own battles to fight. He has recently been impeached and is awaiting trial in the Senate. Countries around the world including Washington's allies called for de-escalation. Then came January 8. Less than a week after Soleimani’s killing, Iran launched a series of rockets at two Iraqi bases hosting US troops. There were no casualties in the attacks but in a separate incident, 176 innocent people lost their lives. Hours after the strikes, a Ukrainian passenger plane crashed near Tehran’s Imam Khomeini International Airport. All 176 on board were killed. Majority of the victims were Iranians while others included citizens of Canada, Ukraine and Sweden. Almost immediately after the accident, US and Canada said that they had intelligence that a missile shot down the Boeing 737 jet. Iran denied the claims but it also refused to hand out the plane’s black box to Boeing. Three days after the crash, Iran admitted that it had unintentionally shot down the plane mistaking it for a ‘hostile jet’. The country vowed to bring the guilty to justice. Internationally, Iran signalled that it favoured the diffusion of tensions. Speaking at the ‘Raisina Dialogue’ in the Indian capital of New Delhi, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said that there was still room for diplomacy with the United States. Amid heightened tensions, the crash exposed the possible cracks within the top Iranian military leadership. The missile was launched by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps- a paramilitary which has its own army, air force and navy which are independent of the Iranian military. Soleimani was the head of the ‘Quds Force’ or the foreign unit of the IRGC. Iran said that it was in a state of ‘high-readiness’ over fears of US retaliation. If missiles had to be deployed then why was Iranian airspace not closed? Was there a lack of communication between the military, IRCG and the government? While these questions remain unanswered, an old challenged threatened the Iranian regime. Protesters took to the streets of capital Tehran chanting slogans against their leaders and calling them liars for initially denying the downing of the Ukrainian jet. The demonstrators found support from Trump who in an unusual move, tweeted in Persian asking the Iranian government ‘to not massacre peaceful protesters.’ The Iranian leadership has a lot to worry about. It is not just an election year for the US but Iran too. In fact, the country is heading to polls next month. But as of now, a major war has been averted. (Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

How a war between US and Iran was averted

By Sarah Burns

To many observers, President Donald Trump’s decision to kill a senior Iranian general is yet another example of his unique impetuousness and determination to go it alone in his foreign policy. Congress has begun to take steps to reel in Trump’s independence.

There are important similarities between Trump’s action and the decision by President Barack Obama to attack Libya in 2011.

Both acted unilaterally without much apparent concern for Congress’ role in military actions, a topic I discuss in my recent book, “The Politics of War Powers.”

But there are some pretty significant differences, too.

Congressional power

The Constitution reserves for Congress the power to declare war. However, after World War II, several presidents – including John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon – initiated military operations without congressional approval. They claimed that they could take military action short of actual war through their constitutional capacity as commander-in-chief of the military. Often they also said they needed to support UN or NATO allies who were using force.

By 1973, Congress wanted to reclaim its authority. Over President Nixon’s veto, bipartisan supermajorities passed the War Powers Resolution, requiring presidents to get congressional permission in advance of military action that goes beyond defending against an actual attack.

There are two loopholes, though: If the president does take unilateral action, he must inform Congress within 48 hours. And the president can initiate and carry out military operations for up to 90 days even without congressional approval.

Obama attacks Libya and Congress wags a finger 
 
In 2011, the Arab Spring movement saw citizens across North Africa and the Middle East call on authoritarian regimes to become more democratic.

Many leaders in the region responded with violent crackdowns on protests, some of which appeared to violate the protesters’ human rights. Due to the especially violent repression in Libya, the United Nations Security Council authorized countries to take “all necessary measures” to protect the protesters there.

Without informing or consulting Congress, as the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution require, Obama launched airstrikes against Libyan armed forces on March 19, 2011, alongside NATO allies. Two days later, the president formally informed Congress of his action.

Only a few hawkish Republicans supported the president’s unilateral action. Most Republicans criticized the move. Sens. Richard Lugar and Rand Paul decried Obama’s actions as unconstitutional, claiming he had encroached on legislators’ war powers. Michigan Congressman Justin Amash said, “When there is no imminent threat to our country, he cannot launch strikes without authorisation from the American people, through our elected representatives in Congress.”

Some Democrats also criticised Obama’s action. Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich and other liberal Democrats went so far as to file a lawsuit against him, objecting to the use of military force without congressional approval.

Obama’s Cabinet members and the Pentagon coordinated with each other and NATO allies to organise the operation, but the operation took time. As the airstrikes passed the 90-day mark, Obama didn’t follow the War Powers Resolution’s requirement to pull troops out.

Instead, he sent a State Department lawyer, Harold Koh, to Congress to explain that their US&nbsp;military actions didn’t actually amount to the sort of “hostilities” defined by the law.

Koh’s testimony took a certain amount of criticism, but beyond wagging their fingers, senators did nothing to impede or authorize Obama’s actions. The House chastised Obama for failing to notify Congress, but a motion to pull all US&nbsp;forces out of Libyan action failed – with most Democrats choosing not to limit Obama’s unilateral action, even though it encroached on their legislative powers.

Trump’s drone strike 
 
President Trump’s decision to order a lethal drone strike against Iranian Major&nbsp;General&nbsp;Qasem Soleimani on January&nbsp;3 has some similarities. They include both sudden, unilateral action by a president and sharp criticism from his political opponents.

But there are important differences that show how much farther Trump is willing to push the boundaries of his own individual power.

First, with Obama’s action, there was a humanitarian crisis and broad multilateral support. But with Trump’s killing of Soleimani, there was no U.N. resolution calling for Soleimani’s death nor a humanitarian crisis.

Congress had already been worried about Trump taking unilateral military action: In April 2019, Congress tried to invoke the War Powers Resolution to pull U.S. support out of Yemen.

And in December 2019, Congress tried to pass a defense spending bill that limited Trump’s ability to engage militarily with Iran. Missouri Republican Sen. Roy Blunt, along with others, objected to that proposal, however, saying he favoured “flexibility” for the president. That objection won out over Congress asserting its war powers.

When Trump exercised that “flexibility” and ordered Soleimani killed, there was – as with Obama – a great deal of congressional criticism. But this time, it was split along partisan lines.

Republican Sen. Jim Risch from Idaho praised Trump’s “decisive action” and the “successful outcome.” South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham tweeted a threat to the Iranian government saying, “if you want more, you will get more.”

Conversely, Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi worried that Trump’s action “risks provoking further dangerous escalation of violence.” Democrats demanded Trump consult with Congress and called on their fellow legislators to reassert their authority under the War Powers Resolution.

The Democratic-controlled House has approved a resolution that would limit Trump’s ability to fight against Iran. It is unlikely to make it through the Republican-controlled Senate.

A new view of presidential power

Trump’s unilateral action stands out from his predecessors’ in part because of his apparent disregard for congressional power.

A week after the killing of Soleimani, Trump’s administration began to formally tell Congress about the strike on Soleimani.

In the meantime, the US President unilaterally decided to send troops to Kuwait. He also claimed that sending a tweet about military force could serve as a formal notification of Congress.

Trump has claimed various authorities for the drone strike, including a 2002 law authorising the president – then George W Bush – to use military force in Iraq.

Trump has also said he acted against Soleimani to stop “imminent and sinister attacks on American diplomats and military personnel,” a justification that isn’t allowed under the War Powers Resolution, which only authorizes a response to an actual attack after it happens.

Public opinion may be a factor

With Congress bitterly divided along partisan lines, it’s clear the majority of senators – Republicans – will have veto power over any congressional effort to check Trump’s actions. If lawmakers do nothing, Congress will have effectively ceded its war powers to the president. If the dispute goes deeper, the Supreme Court would likely avoid getting involved, because it’s a dispute between the other two branches about their respective claims to constitutional powers.

The only remaining check would be a popular opinion, which can rise and fall as national security crises unfold. But Trump’s popularity is unusually stable, leaving him free to act with the confidence that his base won’t abandon him.

The executive branch will continue to determine the course of action with Iran. On January 8, Trump himself told the nation, “As long as I’m president of the United States, Iran will never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon.” Without congressional restraint, what that means – and how he carries out that promise – rests entirely in Trump’s hands.

(Sarah Burns is Associate Professor of Political Science, Rochester Institute of Technology)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/trump-like-obama-tests-the-limits-of-presidential-war-powers-129528">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

By Sarah Burns To many observers, President Donald Trump’s decision to kill a senior Iranian general is yet another example of his unique impetuousness and determination to go it alone in his foreign policy.

By Sarah Burns To many observers, President Donald Trump’s decision to kill a senior Iranian general is yet another example of his unique impetuousness and determination to go it alone in his foreign policy. Congress has begun to take steps to reel in Trump’s independence. There are important similarities between Trump’s action and the decision by President Barack Obama to attack Libya in 2011. Both acted unilaterally without much apparent concern for Congress’ role in military actions, a topic I discuss in my recent book, “The Politics of War Powers.” But there are some pretty significant differences, too. Congressional power The Constitution reserves for Congress the power to declare war. However, after World War II, several presidents – including John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon – initiated military operations without congressional approval. They claimed that they could take military action short of actual war through their constitutional capacity as commander-in-chief of the military. Often they also said they needed to support UN or NATO allies who were using force. By 1973, Congress wanted to reclaim its authority. Over President Nixon’s veto, bipartisan supermajorities passed the War Powers Resolution, requiring presidents to get congressional permission in advance of military action that goes beyond defending against an actual attack. There are two loopholes, though: If the president does take unilateral action, he must inform Congress within 48 hours. And the president can initiate and carry out military operations for up to 90 days even without congressional approval. Obama attacks Libya and Congress wags a finger In 2011, the Arab Spring movement saw citizens across North Africa and the Middle East call on authoritarian regimes to become more democratic. Many leaders in the region responded with violent crackdowns on protests, some of which appeared to violate the protesters’ human rights. Due to the especially violent repression in Libya, the United Nations Security Council authorized countries to take “all necessary measures” to protect the protesters there. Without informing or consulting Congress, as the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution require, Obama launched airstrikes against Libyan armed forces on March 19, 2011, alongside NATO allies. Two days later, the president formally informed Congress of his action. Only a few hawkish Republicans supported the president’s unilateral action. Most Republicans criticized the move. Sens. Richard Lugar and Rand Paul decried Obama’s actions as unconstitutional, claiming he had encroached on legislators’ war powers. Michigan Congressman Justin Amash said, “When there is no imminent threat to our country, he cannot launch strikes without authorisation from the American people, through our elected representatives in Congress.” Some Democrats also criticised Obama’s action. Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich and other liberal Democrats went so far as to file a lawsuit against him, objecting to the use of military force without congressional approval. Obama’s Cabinet members and the Pentagon coordinated with each other and NATO allies to organise the operation, but the operation took time. As the airstrikes passed the 90-day mark, Obama didn’t follow the War Powers Resolution’s requirement to pull troops out. Instead, he sent a State Department lawyer, Harold Koh, to Congress to explain that their US military actions didn’t actually amount to the sort of “hostilities” defined by the law. Koh’s testimony took a certain amount of criticism, but beyond wagging their fingers, senators did nothing to impede or authorize Obama’s actions. The House chastised Obama for failing to notify Congress, but a motion to pull all US forces out of Libyan action failed – with most Democrats choosing not to limit Obama’s unilateral action, even though it encroached on their legislative powers. Trump’s drone strike President Trump’s decision to order a lethal drone strike against Iranian Major General Qasem Soleimani on January 3 has some similarities. They include both sudden, unilateral action by a president and sharp criticism from his political opponents. But there are important differences that show how much farther Trump is willing to push the boundaries of his own individual power. First, with Obama’s action, there was a humanitarian crisis and broad multilateral support. But with Trump’s killing of Soleimani, there was no U.N. resolution calling for Soleimani’s death nor a humanitarian crisis. Congress had already been worried about Trump taking unilateral military action: In April 2019, Congress tried to invoke the War Powers Resolution to pull U.S. support out of Yemen. And in December 2019, Congress tried to pass a defense spending bill that limited Trump’s ability to engage militarily with Iran. Missouri Republican Sen. Roy Blunt, along with others, objected to that proposal, however, saying he favoured “flexibility” for the president. That objection won out over Congress asserting its war powers. When Trump exercised that “flexibility” and ordered Soleimani killed, there was – as with Obama – a great deal of congressional criticism. But this time, it was split along partisan lines. Republican Sen. Jim Risch from Idaho praised Trump’s “decisive action” and the “successful outcome.” South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham tweeted a threat to the Iranian government saying, “if you want more, you will get more.” Conversely, Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi worried that Trump’s action “risks provoking further dangerous escalation of violence.” Democrats demanded Trump consult with Congress and called on their fellow legislators to reassert their authority under the War Powers Resolution. The Democratic-controlled House has approved a resolution that would limit Trump’s ability to fight against Iran. It is unlikely to make it through the Republican-controlled Senate. A new view of presidential power Trump’s unilateral action stands out from his predecessors’ in part because of his apparent disregard for congressional power. A week after the killing of Soleimani, Trump’s administration began to formally tell Congress about the strike on Soleimani. In the meantime, the US President unilaterally decided to send troops to Kuwait. He also claimed that sending a tweet about military force could serve as a formal notification of Congress. Trump has claimed various authorities for the drone strike, including a 2002 law authorising the president – then George W Bush – to use military force in Iraq. Trump has also said he acted against Soleimani to stop “imminent and sinister attacks on American diplomats and military personnel,” a justification that isn’t allowed under the War Powers Resolution, which only authorizes a response to an actual attack after it happens. Public opinion may be a factor With Congress bitterly divided along partisan lines, it’s clear the majority of senators – Republicans – will have veto power over any congressional effort to check Trump’s actions. If lawmakers do nothing, Congress will have effectively ceded its war powers to the president. If the dispute goes deeper, the Supreme Court would likely avoid getting involved, because it’s a dispute between the other two branches about their respective claims to constitutional powers. The only remaining check would be a popular opinion, which can rise and fall as national security crises unfold. But Trump’s popularity is unusually stable, leaving him free to act with the confidence that his base won’t abandon him. The executive branch will continue to determine the course of action with Iran. On January 8, Trump himself told the nation, “As long as I’m president of the United States, Iran will never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon.” Without congressional restraint, what that means – and how he carries out that promise – rests entirely in Trump’s hands. (Sarah Burns is Associate Professor of Political Science, Rochester Institute of Technology) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US President Donald Trump, like Barack Obama, tests the limits of presidential war powers

The biggest question across the world right now is Iran retaliating against the US. The missile attacks on Iraqi bases hosting US personnel is Iran's revenge for the killing of Qasem Soleimani.

Experts say that this was aimed at satisfying the domestic audience in Tehran.&nbsp;

With missile attacks, Iran's Supreme Leader has used a dangerous language, "Slap on the face of the US, but such military actions are not enough".

Iran's strikes were highly symbolic. It happened around the same time as Soleimani's killing on Friday - 1.30 am.

Like Donald Trump, many Iranian officials tweeted pictures of the national flag. And Iranian media is hailing the strikes, but there is no clarity on the casualties.

Upon closer look, it is clear that Iran targetted bases that were on high alert. Foreign Minister of Iran says that the strikes were in 'self-defence' and 'within the boundaries of international law'.

Meanwhile, after the attacks, President Trump tweeted "All is well", "So Far So Good". He also highlighted America's military might.

The 'All is Well' comment does not mean that the US will not attack Iran if provoked further. Right now, there is a chance for both the parties to de-escalate the conflict.&nbsp;

But the question is, will the US take that chance? Will Iran refrain from further attacks?

These are the important questions, but it is unwise to look for clear answers at this juncture. There are many reasons for this lack of clarity.

First, Iran did not show any regard for Iraq's sovereignty. This could be a sign of things to come.

Iran runs many proxy wars in the region outside the range of the US counter strikes - the Houthis in Yemen,&nbsp;Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza.

Iran could initiate conflicts in these regions simultaneously. Second, Iran can continue with its typical dangerous tactics, like rocket strikes on oil facilities in Saudi Arabia and cyber warfare.

Three, if US President Donald Trump is unpredictable, then Iran's Supreme Commander Khamenei wants more revenge.

While most countries have urged both the countries to calm down, the chances of a full-blown conflict remain at large. Israel has given its complete backing to the US.

But now, it is a game of who-blinks-first. Iran wants to end the presence of America in the region, but Trump won't take any attack from Iran lying down.

Both the sides have an option now to de-escalate, but the rhetoric from Tehran is worrisome - for regional peace, global peace and global economy.

(Disclaimer: WION Edit is the channel's take on the big events of the world)&nbsp;

The biggest question across the world right now is Iran retaliating against the US. The missile attacks on Iraqi bases hosting US personnel is Iran's revenge for the killing of Qasem Soleimani.

The biggest question across the world right now is Iran retaliating against the US. The missile attacks on Iraqi bases hosting US personnel is Iran's revenge for the killing of Qasem Soleimani. Experts say that this was aimed at satisfying the domestic audience in Tehran. With missile attacks, Iran's Supreme Leader has used a dangerous language, "Slap on the face of the US, but such military actions are not enough". Iran's strikes were highly symbolic. It happened around the same time as Soleimani's killing on Friday - 1.30 am. Like Donald Trump, many Iranian officials tweeted pictures of the national flag. And Iranian media is hailing the strikes, but there is no clarity on the casualties. Upon closer look, it is clear that Iran targetted bases that were on high alert. Foreign Minister of Iran says that the strikes were in 'self-defence' and 'within the boundaries of international law'. Meanwhile, after the attacks, President Trump tweeted "All is well", "So Far So Good". He also highlighted America's military might. The 'All is Well' comment does not mean that the US will not attack Iran if provoked further. Right now, there is a chance for both the parties to de-escalate the conflict. But the question is, will the US take that chance? Will Iran refrain from further attacks? These are the important questions, but it is unwise to look for clear answers at this juncture. There are many reasons for this lack of clarity. First, Iran did not show any regard for Iraq's sovereignty. This could be a sign of things to come. Iran runs many proxy wars in the region outside the range of the US counter strikes - the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. Iran could initiate conflicts in these regions simultaneously. Second, Iran can continue with its typical dangerous tactics, like rocket strikes on oil facilities in Saudi Arabia and cyber warfare. Three, if US President Donald Trump is unpredictable, then Iran's Supreme Commander Khamenei wants more revenge. While most countries have urged both the countries to calm down, the chances of a full-blown conflict remain at large. Israel has given its complete backing to the US. But now, it is a game of who-blinks-first. Iran wants to end the presence of America in the region, but Trump won't take any attack from Iran lying down. Both the sides have an option now to de-escalate, but the rhetoric from Tehran is worrisome - for regional peace, global peace and global economy. (Disclaimer: WION Edit is the channel's take on the big events of the world)

WION Edit: US-Iran conflict - what's next?

January 07 in History: From discovery of Jupiter to USA's first presidential elections and more

Iran on Wednesday launched ballistic missile attacks on US bases in Iraq in retaliation to the US drone strike which killed Iranian commander General Qasem Soleimani, this has raised fears of a wider war in the Middle East. #WION #Iran #Trump

15 ballistic missiles hit US troops in Erbil, al-Asad

Iran today fired over a dozen ballistic missiles on US airbases in Iraq targeting Al-Assad and Irbil. Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Jonathan Hoffman said, "At approximately 5.30 pm (2230 GMT) on January 7, Iran launched more than a dozen ballistic missiles against US military and coalition forces in Iraq," said. US President Trump tweeted, "All is well, missiles launched from Iran at two military bases located in Iraq. Assessment of casualties & damages taking place now. So far, so good!". #WION #Iran #Trump

Trump says 'all is well' after Iran's missile attack

Iran today fired over a dozen ballistic missiles on US airbases in Iraq targeting Al-Assad and Irbil. Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Jonathan Hoffman said, "At approximately 5.30 pm (2230 GMT) on January 7, Iran launched more than a dozen ballistic missiles against US military and coalition forces in Iraq," said. #WION #Iran

Iran attacks two Iraqi bases housing US troops

The burial ceremony of Iran's General Qasem Soleimani is underway, burial was scheduled for Tuesday but due to stampede during the funeral procession, it is happening today. #WION #Iran #QasemSoleimani

Qasem Soleimani's burial ceremony underway

Iran fires over a dozen ballistic missiles

The recent Golden Globe Awards handed out the Best Actor in a Limited Series or TV Movie to Russell Crowe for his role in 'The Loudest Voice'. It is the saga of Fox News, the Rupert Murdoch owned American TV news-from-the-Right channel. And, of course, its pit bull-like head honcho Roger Ailes, played by a wonderfully made up Crowe. &nbsp;

When it was launched, all the other News TV channels in America were competing for the left-of-centre eyeballs, leaving the entire 50 of the field that spoke to middle-America, open to Fox. And unlike in other countries that favoured newspapers, Americans preferred to get their news from 24x7 TV channels. Fox News soon topped the charts in cable news TV.&nbsp;

Though, The Loudest Voice TV serial takes you back to 9/11 and the George W Bush- Dick Cheney era, it does remind you of one thing more. It reminds you that the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) charge put on Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was a complete myth. &nbsp;

America decided to use 9/11 to effect regime change in Iraq, a matter treated as 'unfinished business' from the term of George Walker Bush, Dubya’s father. Fox was privy to this government objective and worked hard to propagate its merits.&nbsp;

Iraq was a Sunni minority-run country under Saddam and his Ba’ath Party, but quite unrelated to America’s &nbsp;9/11, or the Al Qaeda that perpetrated it. If anything, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were the authors of 9/11 and not Iraq. But America was not keen to put them in the dock owing to overlapping and multifarious common interests.&nbsp;

Nevertheless, today, when we see war clouds hovering over West Asia after the US drone strike killing of General Qasem Soleimani five days ago, one has to wonder why it was done at this time. What intelligence input does America have? Soleimani, a military man, was the de facto no. 2 of Iran.&nbsp; &nbsp;

The simple answer is that Soleimani was held responsible as the mastermind of multiple terrorist strikes against Americans. But, his elimination poses a threat to the stability of the present regime. That the strike took place outside Baghdad airport is remarkable. And while an unstable, unhappy, ruined, and insurgency-torn Iraq is now under a Shi’ite administration- it is not doing very well. But it is close to Iran, a country that Saddam fought an eight-year war within his time. &nbsp;

Iran has been firing missiles ever since at the US bases in Iraq. Present reports mostly state that these Iranian strikes have not resulted in the loss of Allied lives. Others, from Iran, indicate 80 American soldiers have been killed. &nbsp;

President Trump has not addressed the nation on his next move as yet, apart from debunking the report of casualties by tweeting “All is well”. &nbsp;

But the Russians and Chinese are warning against retaliatory strikes by America. Russia has raised the bogey of nuclear war. Britain has spoken up in support of the American action. Israel is in strong support. France and Germany too are advising caution. As is India, eyeing the 5 per cent escalation in petroleum prices already. Iran has asked India to help in the de-escalation process. Other international voices too, from the Gulf and elsewhere, almost unanimously, are clamouring for de-escalation.&nbsp;

But what does America want? It eliminated Soleimani unilaterally despite the near-certainty of strong reaction. The desired end result, backed no doubt by Saudi Arabia and Israel, from the near region, is to see the back of the Khamenei regime. &nbsp;

This is not the first time the West has intervened to bring about regime change in Iran. It installed the Shah when his predecessor nationalised the oil fields. Much later, the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini broke the link of American influence. Now, successor Ali Khamenei and his cohorts must go, to be replaced by an order more favourable to the US and its friends. &nbsp;

The economic sanctions placed on Iran by the US and its allies to stop it going nuclear are hurting the ordinary people. Most of Iran’s 80 million are fed up with its rulers. As a consequence, there have been large protests, put down harshly. The grass-roots in Iran may be quite ready and ripe to get rid of the puritanical mullahs, but they don’t have the strength to do it by themselves. &nbsp;

America’s attempt to bring about regime change by military means in different countries has generally succeeded; but not in bringing a consequent peace and prosperity to the natives. However, this has never stopped it from pushing ahead with its perceived strategic objectives.&nbsp;

The main one, with regard to Iran, is to stop it becoming a nuclear power fearing that this will make it unmanageable. But is it too late? What was that seismic activity near Iran’s nuclear weapons development site? &nbsp;

Will the other major powers intervene militarily on the side of Iran if America attacks it? It seems very unlikely because both China and Russia cannot afford to precipitate war against America. &nbsp;

As a consequence, while oil prices will be very volatile going forward, President Trump will probably be able to attack Iranian strategic assets and nuclear facilities and drive the current regime out of office, if it acts quickly. And yes, undertaking this aggression successfully will see to it that President Trump will be re-elected to his second term. &nbsp;

The impeachment drama is already deleted from the news cycles, and most recent opinion polls show an uptick in support for President Donald Trump. &nbsp; &nbsp; 
 
(Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The recent Golden Globe Awards handed out the Best Actor in a Limited Series or TV Movie to Russell Crowe for his role in 'The Loudest Voice'. It is the saga of Fox News, the Rupert Murdoch owned American TV news-from-the-Right channel.

The recent Golden Globe Awards handed out the Best Actor in a Limited Series or TV Movie to Russell Crowe for his role in 'The Loudest Voice'. It is the saga of Fox News, the Rupert Murdoch owned American TV news-from-the-Right channel. And, of course, its pit bull-like head honcho Roger Ailes, played by a wonderfully made up Crowe. When it was launched, all the other News TV channels in America were competing for the left-of-centre eyeballs, leaving the entire 50 of the field that spoke to middle-America, open to Fox. And unlike in other countries that favoured newspapers, Americans preferred to get their news from 24x7 TV channels. Fox News soon topped the charts in cable news TV. Though, The Loudest Voice TV serial takes you back to 9/11 and the George W Bush- Dick Cheney era, it does remind you of one thing more. It reminds you that the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) charge put on Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was a complete myth. America decided to use 9/11 to effect regime change in Iraq, a matter treated as 'unfinished business' from the term of George Walker Bush, Dubya’s father. Fox was privy to this government objective and worked hard to propagate its merits. Iraq was a Sunni minority-run country under Saddam and his Ba’ath Party, but quite unrelated to America’s 9/11, or the Al Qaeda that perpetrated it. If anything, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were the authors of 9/11 and not Iraq. But America was not keen to put them in the dock owing to overlapping and multifarious common interests. Nevertheless, today, when we see war clouds hovering over West Asia after the US drone strike killing of General Qasem Soleimani five days ago, one has to wonder why it was done at this time. What intelligence input does America have? Soleimani, a military man, was the de facto no. 2 of Iran. The simple answer is that Soleimani was held responsible as the mastermind of multiple terrorist strikes against Americans. But, his elimination poses a threat to the stability of the present regime. That the strike took place outside Baghdad airport is remarkable. And while an unstable, unhappy, ruined, and insurgency-torn Iraq is now under a Shi’ite administration- it is not doing very well. But it is close to Iran, a country that Saddam fought an eight-year war within his time. Iran has been firing missiles ever since at the US bases in Iraq. Present reports mostly state that these Iranian strikes have not resulted in the loss of Allied lives. Others, from Iran, indicate 80 American soldiers have been killed. President Trump has not addressed the nation on his next move as yet, apart from debunking the report of casualties by tweeting “All is well”. But the Russians and Chinese are warning against retaliatory strikes by America. Russia has raised the bogey of nuclear war. Britain has spoken up in support of the American action. Israel is in strong support. France and Germany too are advising caution. As is India, eyeing the 5 per cent escalation in petroleum prices already. Iran has asked India to help in the de-escalation process. Other international voices too, from the Gulf and elsewhere, almost unanimously, are clamouring for de-escalation. But what does America want? It eliminated Soleimani unilaterally despite the near-certainty of strong reaction. The desired end result, backed no doubt by Saudi Arabia and Israel, from the near region, is to see the back of the Khamenei regime. This is not the first time the West has intervened to bring about regime change in Iran. It installed the Shah when his predecessor nationalised the oil fields. Much later, the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini broke the link of American influence. Now, successor Ali Khamenei and his cohorts must go, to be replaced by an order more favourable to the US and its friends. The economic sanctions placed on Iran by the US and its allies to stop it going nuclear are hurting the ordinary people. Most of Iran’s 80 million are fed up with its rulers. As a consequence, there have been large protests, put down harshly. The grass-roots in Iran may be quite ready and ripe to get rid of the puritanical mullahs, but they don’t have the strength to do it by themselves. America’s attempt to bring about regime change by military means in different countries has generally succeeded; but not in bringing a consequent peace and prosperity to the natives. However, this has never stopped it from pushing ahead with its perceived strategic objectives. The main one, with regard to Iran, is to stop it becoming a nuclear power fearing that this will make it unmanageable. But is it too late? What was that seismic activity near Iran’s nuclear weapons development site? Will the other major powers intervene militarily on the side of Iran if America attacks it? It seems very unlikely because both China and Russia cannot afford to precipitate war against America. As a consequence, while oil prices will be very volatile going forward, President Trump will probably be able to attack Iranian strategic assets and nuclear facilities and drive the current regime out of office, if it acts quickly. And yes, undertaking this aggression successfully will see to it that President Trump will be re-elected to his second term. The impeachment drama is already deleted from the news cycles, and most recent opinion polls show an uptick in support for President Donald Trump. (Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US wants no less than regime change in Iran

Iran on Wednesday launched ballistic missile attacks on US bases&nbsp;in Iraq in retaliation to&nbsp;the US drone strike which killed Iranian commander General Qasem Soleimani, which has raised fears of a wider war in the&nbsp;Middle East. 
&nbsp;

<ul>
	<li>Iran launched ballistic missile strikes on the US bases in Iraq. <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/irans-slain-general-soleimani-laid-to-rest-in-hometown-kerman-272814">Read More</a></li>
	<li>Donald Trump tweeted, "All is well!" after the Iran missile strikes.</li>
	<li>Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps confirmed that they fired the missiles in retaliation to General&nbsp;Qasem Soleimani's killing.</li>
	<li>US Federal Aviation Administration said it would ban US carriers from operating in Iraq&nbsp;airspace including in Iran as&nbsp;several Asian carriers said there were avoiding flying over the region.</li>
	<li>A stampede had broken&nbsp;out at the funeral of&nbsp;General&nbsp;Qasem Soleimani killing&nbsp;56 people and injuring&nbsp;more than 210.</li>
	<li>General Qasem Soleimani's burial which was postponed on Tuesday due to a stampede began on Wednesday at Kerman even as Iran fired missiles at US bases in Iraq.</li>
</ul>

Read More:&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/us-iran-tensions-and-why-india-should-care-271967">US-Iran tensions and why India should care</a>

Read More:&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/irans-slain-general-soleimani-laid-to-rest-in-hometown-kerman-272814">Iran's slain general Soleimani laid to rest in hometown Kerman</a>

Watch Video:&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/iran-attacks-two-iraqi-bases-housing-us-troops-272826/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Iran on Wednesday launched ballistic missile attacks on US bases in Iraq in retaliation to the US drone strike which killed Iranian commander General Qasem Soleimani, which has raised fears of a wider war in the Middle East.

Iran on Wednesday launched ballistic missile attacks on US bases in Iraq in retaliation to the US drone strike which killed Iranian commander General Qasem Soleimani, which has raised fears of a wider war in the Middle East. Iran launched ballistic missile strikes on the US bases in Iraq. Read More Donald Trump tweeted, "All is well!" after the Iran missile strikes. Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps confirmed that they fired the missiles in retaliation to General Qasem Soleimani's killing. US Federal Aviation Administration said it would ban US carriers from operating in Iraq airspace including in Iran as several Asian carriers said there were avoiding flying over the region. A stampede had broken out at the funeral of General Qasem Soleimani killing 56 people and injuring more than 210. General Qasem Soleimani's burial which was postponed on Tuesday due to a stampede began on Wednesday at Kerman even as Iran fired missiles at US bases in Iraq. Read More: US-Iran tensions and why India should care Read More: Iran's slain general Soleimani laid to rest in hometown Kerman Watch Video:

Latest updates on general Soleimani's killing: Iran launches ballistic missile strikes on US bases in Iraq

Iran threatens to attack US allies

Post-Soleimani’s death, tensions have been escalating between Iran and the United States&nbsp;even as the funeral procession of slain Iran General Soleimani began in his hometown Kerman today. The Iranian general will be buried later on Tuesday.

<meta charset="utf-8" />

<ul>
	<li>Iran’s Quds Force Commander, Qasem Soleimani will be buried in his hometown, Kerman. 
	&nbsp;</li>
	<li>The three-day national funeral procession in Iran and Iraq will end today. 
	&nbsp;</li>
	<li>Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei promised "severe revenge". 
	&nbsp;</li>
	<li>Mourners shouted ‘revenge’ during the national funeral procession observed in Soleimani’s death. 
	&nbsp;</li>
	<li>Addressing the crowd during a funeral procession on Monday, Soleimani’s daughter, Zeinab Soleimani, called&nbsp;US President ‘Crazy Trump and added, "Don’t think everything is over",&nbsp;and promised "dark days"&nbsp;for the US in the days ahead.&nbsp; 
	&nbsp;</li>
	<li>The Tehran government said it will roll back from the international nuclear accord. 
	&nbsp;</li>
	<li>Saudi’s foreign minister, Prince Faisal, said,&nbsp;“It is certainly a very dangerous moment." 
	&nbsp;</li>
	<li>President Donald Trump tweeted, "IRAN WILL NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON!" over Iran’s announcement on Uranium extraction.&nbsp;</li>
</ul>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
IRAN WILL NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1214197038063243266?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 6, 2020</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>

<ul>
	<li>Amid rising global tensions, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres expressed his concern and called for ‘maximum restraint’.</li>
</ul>

Watch:&nbsp;Soleimani to be buried today in Iranian hometown

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/soleimani-to-be-buried-today-in-iranian-hometown-272599/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

 
Read More: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-criticises-russia-china-at-un-over-failure-to-condemn-baghdad-embassy-attack-272600">US criticises Russia, China at UN over failure to condemn Baghdad embassy attack</a>

Read More:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-will-never-have-a-nuclear-weapon-says-trump-as-tehran-mourns-suleimani-272585">Iran will never have a nuclear weapon, says Trump as Tehran mourns Suleimani</a>

Read More:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-reaches-out-to-countries-in-west-asia-amid-us-iran-tensions-272367">India reaches out to countries in West Asia amid US-Iran tensions</a>

(With Inputs from AFP)

Post-Soleimani’s death, tensions have been escalating between Iran and the United States even as the funeral procession of slain Iran General Soleimani began in his hometown Kerman today.

Post-Soleimani’s death, tensions have been escalating between Iran and the United States even as the funeral procession of slain Iran General Soleimani began in his hometown Kerman today. The Iranian general will be buried later on Tuesday. Iran’s Quds Force Commander, Qasem Soleimani will be buried in his hometown, Kerman. The three-day national funeral procession in Iran and Iraq will end today. Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei promised "severe revenge". Mourners shouted ‘revenge’ during the national funeral procession observed in Soleimani’s death. Addressing the crowd during a funeral procession on Monday, Soleimani’s daughter, Zeinab Soleimani, called US President ‘Crazy Trump and added, "Don’t think everything is over", and promised "dark days" for the US in the days ahead. The Tehran government said it will roll back from the international nuclear accord. Saudi’s foreign minister, Prince Faisal, said, “It is certainly a very dangerous moment." President Donald Trump tweeted, "IRAN WILL NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON!" over Iran’s announcement on Uranium extraction. IRAN WILL NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 6, 2020 × Amid rising global tensions, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres expressed his concern and called for ‘maximum restraint’. Watch: Soleimani to be buried today in Iranian hometown × Read More: US criticises Russia, China at UN over failure to condemn Baghdad embassy attack Read More: Iran will never have a nuclear weapon, says Trump as Tehran mourns Suleimani Read More: India reaches out to countries in West Asia amid US-Iran tensions (With Inputs from AFP)

Latest updates on Iran general Qasem Soleimani's killing: Funeral procession begins in Kerman

The US triggered a geopolitical earthquake by killing a top Iranian General. The whole world is now bracing for the fallout.&nbsp;

World War 3 has been the top trend globally and not without reason. There is a threat of a major escalation.

There's no denying the situation is precarious. People over the world are concerned if there will be a war, and if their country will be sucked into it.

The killing of Qasem Soleimani is no small matter. The US may have labelled him a terrorist, but unlike other terrorists America has killed - Soleimani was a state actor.

He was part of a legitimate government - a cult figure and his killing is an attack on a government. Iran has a difficult needle to the thread and its choices are limited.

Not acting is not an option, but the action comes at a cost. And frankly, Iran doesn't have the money.

The Iranian government cannot afford a war with a country like America. The United States has the world's biggest and best-equipped military force.

The US spends more on defence than any other country in the world and it is number one in the rank of power.

Iran which is slowed by sanctions stands at the 13th position. The military budget of the US is more than six hundred billion dollars.

Iran has a military budget of fourteen billion dollars. The US has over one million active personnel as compared to Iran which has over five hundred thousand active military personnel.

So there will be counter-strikes but they may not qualify as a traditional all-out war.&nbsp;

Experts say Iran will go for American soft targets. As for America, it may not have the appetite for a straightforward invasion from Vietnam to Afghanistan to Iraq.

America has failed miserably every time it has tried to capture territory. It's at best, a very effective disruptor.

The definition of war today has changed, conflicts come in many shapes and with deadlier consequences.

So to answer the question we began with - will this lead to the third world war? No, but that doesn't mean there won't be bloodshed and casualties. 
 
(Disclaimer: WION Edit is the channel's take on the big events of the world)&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

The US triggered a geopolitical earthquake by killing a top Iranian General. The whole world is now bracing for the fallout. World War 3 has been the top trend globally and not without reason.

The US triggered a geopolitical earthquake by killing a top Iranian General. The whole world is now bracing for the fallout. World War 3 has been the top trend globally and not without reason. There is a threat of a major escalation. There's no denying the situation is precarious. People over the world are concerned if there will be a war, and if their country will be sucked into it. The killing of Qasem Soleimani is no small matter. The US may have labelled him a terrorist, but unlike other terrorists America has killed - Soleimani was a state actor. He was part of a legitimate government - a cult figure and his killing is an attack on a government. Iran has a difficult needle to the thread and its choices are limited. Not acting is not an option, but the action comes at a cost. And frankly, Iran doesn't have the money. The Iranian government cannot afford a war with a country like America. The United States has the world's biggest and best-equipped military force. The US spends more on defence than any other country in the world and it is number one in the rank of power. Iran which is slowed by sanctions stands at the 13th position. The military budget of the US is more than six hundred billion dollars. Iran has a military budget of fourteen billion dollars. The US has over one million active personnel as compared to Iran which has over five hundred thousand active military personnel. So there will be counter-strikes but they may not qualify as a traditional all-out war. Experts say Iran will go for American soft targets. As for America, it may not have the appetite for a straightforward invasion from Vietnam to Afghanistan to Iraq. America has failed miserably every time it has tried to capture territory. It's at best, a very effective disruptor. The definition of war today has changed, conflicts come in many shapes and with deadlier consequences. So to answer the question we began with - will this lead to the third world war? No, but that doesn't mean there won't be bloodshed and casualties. (Disclaimer: WION Edit is the channel's take on the big events of the world)

WION Edit: Are US and Iran on the brink of war?

International law may not be a major consideration in debates about the US killing of Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani, yet the legality of the assassination could prove to have long-term consequences for whether the rule of law or the law of the jungle dominates a new world order.

The Trump administration has asserted that killing Soleimani was necessary to avert an imminent attack on US targets that allegedly was being planned by Soleimani and Abdul Mahdi al-Muhandis - the leader of an Iranian-backed Iraqi militia - who also died in the attack.

The assertion, yet to be backed up by evidence, served to justify the attack and fend off allegations that the targetted killing violated both the US and international law.

The implication was that Soleimani’s death would thwart an unspecified imminent attack and stop the Iranians in their tracks, an assumption that has little foundation in reality given Iran’s track record, most recently its refusal to buckle under following the imposition in 2018 of harsh US economic sanctions, some of the harshest ever imposed.

The notion that the killing of Soleimani amounted to rule of the jungle rather than rule of law was reinforced by assertions by Iraqi prime minister Adel Abdul Mahdi that he had been asked by Trump to mediate with Iran and that the Iranian military leader had been carrying Iran’s response to a Saudi initiative to defuse tension when he was assassinated.

Abdul Mahdi’s allegation that Soleimani was involved in efforts to dial down tensions came in a debate in Parliament in which lawmakers called in a resolution for the removal from Iraq of foreign forces, the bulk of which are Americans.

Abdul Mahdi’s assertion that Iran was responding to a Saudi initiative was all the more noteworthy given that the kingdom had reportedly recently put its indirect outreach to Iran on hold as anti-government protesters in Iraq and Lebanon targeted Iranian influence in their countries.

“Americans, once the most prominent proponents of international law as the regulator of relations between nations, have now fully validated the law of the jungle. We are now likely to experience it," said Chas W Freeman Jr, a former career US State Department official in an email to a private mailing list.

Conservative commentator Robert Kagan warned in a book published last year, bemoaning America’s withdrawal as an enforcer of international law, a notion challenged by an array of critics, that chaos was the world’s historical norm. “The jungle will grow back, if we let it,” Kagan argued.

The sense that Trump, like many of the world’s civilisational leaders, has no regard for international law was evident, particularly to Iranians, in his threat to attack Iranian cultural sites if Iran retaliates for the killing of Soleimani.

Trump did not specify what he meant by cultural. Some analysts suggested the President may have been referring to symbols like the mausoleum of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of Iran’s Islamic republic.

Legal experts nonetheless warned that attacks on cultural sites amount to a war crime.

With millions in the streets to welcome the return of Soleimani’s body, Iranians used the hashtag #IranianCulturalSites to respond to the threat by posting online pictures of mosques, museums, monuments, archaeological sites, and other Iranian architectural marvels.

Similarly, with Iraq perceiving the US strikes as a violation of the country’s sovereignty, Iraqis may, alongside Iranians, be one of the few who, perhaps self-serving, factor adherence to international law in their debates.

In line with the comments of Messrs. Freeman and Kagan, the legal aspects of &nbsp;Soleimani’s killing take on a significance that goes far beyond the Middle East in an environment in which civilisational leaders like India’s Narendra Modi, China’s Xi Jinping, Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Myanmar’s Win Myint flout international law with impunity.

Violations of international law grounded in the propagation of concepts of a civilizational rather than a nation-state that defines its borders not in terms of internationally recognised frontiers, but blurry lines of civilisational reach, have occurred in recent years fast and furious.

Iraqi assertions of a US violation of sovereignty echo Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and intervention in eastern Ukraine. Trump has ignored United Nations Security Council resolutions by unilaterally recognising Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights.

Myint stands accused of ethnic cleansing by the United Nations that has prompted hundreds of thousands of Rohingya to flee to Bangladesh. Massive evidence documents Jinping’s authorisation of the brutal repression of Turkic Muslims in the troubled north-western Chinese province of Xinjiang while Modi appears to be progressively disenfranchising his country’s Muslim minority.

For his part, Soleimani is believed to have been responsible for numerous incidents of political violence, including a 2012 attack on tourists in Bulgaria executed by a Lebanese suicide bomber. Five of the six casualties were Israelis.

Adopting the principle of might is right, civilizational leaders’ abandonment of international law, including guarantees of basic and minority rights, risks creating a global jungle in which wars, political violence, marginalisation of ethnic and religious groups, and destabilising&nbsp;mass migration contribute to rule of the jungle rather than rule of law.

So do Western approaches adopted almost two decades ago in the wake of the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington.

Said at the time Robert Cooper, a British diplomat, former advisor to prime minister Tony Blair, a current advisor to the European Commission on Myanmar, and a proponent of the doctrine of new liberal imperialism who in 2011 defended Bahrain’s brutal repression of a popular uprising:

If the world has a civilized core that deserves lawful conduct, there also is a barbarous periphery that warrants “rougher methods of an earlier era… Postmodern states operate on the basis of laws and open co-operative security” but “in the jungle, one must use the laws of the jungle.”

Some two decades after Cooper wrote those words, the jungle rather than the rule of law threatens to become the norm, putting the global community on a dangerous and slippery slope.

(Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

International law may not be a major consideration in debates about the US killing of Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani, yet the legality of the assassination could prove to have long-term consequences for whether the rule of law or the law of the jungle dominates a new world order.

International law may not be a major consideration in debates about the US killing of Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani, yet the legality of the assassination could prove to have long-term consequences for whether the rule of law or the law of the jungle dominates a new world order. The Trump administration has asserted that killing Soleimani was necessary to avert an imminent attack on US targets that allegedly was being planned by Soleimani and Abdul Mahdi al-Muhandis - the leader of an Iranian-backed Iraqi militia - who also died in the attack. The assertion, yet to be backed up by evidence, served to justify the attack and fend off allegations that the targetted killing violated both the US and international law. The implication was that Soleimani’s death would thwart an unspecified imminent attack and stop the Iranians in their tracks, an assumption that has little foundation in reality given Iran’s track record, most recently its refusal to buckle under following the imposition in 2018 of harsh US economic sanctions, some of the harshest ever imposed. The notion that the killing of Soleimani amounted to rule of the jungle rather than rule of law was reinforced by assertions by Iraqi prime minister Adel Abdul Mahdi that he had been asked by Trump to mediate with Iran and that the Iranian military leader had been carrying Iran’s response to a Saudi initiative to defuse tension when he was assassinated. Abdul Mahdi’s allegation that Soleimani was involved in efforts to dial down tensions came in a debate in Parliament in which lawmakers called in a resolution for the removal from Iraq of foreign forces, the bulk of which are Americans. Abdul Mahdi’s assertion that Iran was responding to a Saudi initiative was all the more noteworthy given that the kingdom had reportedly recently put its indirect outreach to Iran on hold as anti-government protesters in Iraq and Lebanon targeted Iranian influence in their countries. “Americans, once the most prominent proponents of international law as the regulator of relations between nations, have now fully validated the law of the jungle. We are now likely to experience it," said Chas W Freeman Jr, a former career US State Department official in an email to a private mailing list. Conservative commentator Robert Kagan warned in a book published last year, bemoaning America’s withdrawal as an enforcer of international law, a notion challenged by an array of critics, that chaos was the world’s historical norm. “The jungle will grow back, if we let it,” Kagan argued. The sense that Trump, like many of the world’s civilisational leaders, has no regard for international law was evident, particularly to Iranians, in his threat to attack Iranian cultural sites if Iran retaliates for the killing of Soleimani. Trump did not specify what he meant by cultural. Some analysts suggested the President may have been referring to symbols like the mausoleum of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of Iran’s Islamic republic. Legal experts nonetheless warned that attacks on cultural sites amount to a war crime. With millions in the streets to welcome the return of Soleimani’s body, Iranians used the hashtag #IranianCulturalSites to respond to the threat by posting online pictures of mosques, museums, monuments, archaeological sites, and other Iranian architectural marvels. Similarly, with Iraq perceiving the US strikes as a violation of the country’s sovereignty, Iraqis may, alongside Iranians, be one of the few who, perhaps self-serving, factor adherence to international law in their debates. In line with the comments of Messrs. Freeman and Kagan, the legal aspects of Soleimani’s killing take on a significance that goes far beyond the Middle East in an environment in which civilisational leaders like India’s Narendra Modi, China’s Xi Jinping, Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Myanmar’s Win Myint flout international law with impunity. Violations of international law grounded in the propagation of concepts of a civilizational rather than a nation-state that defines its borders not in terms of internationally recognised frontiers, but blurry lines of civilisational reach, have occurred in recent years fast and furious. Iraqi assertions of a US violation of sovereignty echo Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and intervention in eastern Ukraine. Trump has ignored United Nations Security Council resolutions by unilaterally recognising Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. Myint stands accused of ethnic cleansing by the United Nations that has prompted hundreds of thousands of Rohingya to flee to Bangladesh. Massive evidence documents Jinping’s authorisation of the brutal repression of Turkic Muslims in the troubled north-western Chinese province of Xinjiang while Modi appears to be progressively disenfranchising his country’s Muslim minority. For his part, Soleimani is believed to have been responsible for numerous incidents of political violence, including a 2012 attack on tourists in Bulgaria executed by a Lebanese suicide bomber. Five of the six casualties were Israelis. Adopting the principle of might is right, civilizational leaders’ abandonment of international law, including guarantees of basic and minority rights, risks creating a global jungle in which wars, political violence, marginalisation of ethnic and religious groups, and destabilising mass migration contribute to rule of the jungle rather than rule of law. So do Western approaches adopted almost two decades ago in the wake of the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington. Said at the time Robert Cooper, a British diplomat, former advisor to prime minister Tony Blair, a current advisor to the European Commission on Myanmar, and a proponent of the doctrine of new liberal imperialism who in 2011 defended Bahrain’s brutal repression of a popular uprising: If the world has a civilized core that deserves lawful conduct, there also is a barbarous periphery that warrants “rougher methods of an earlier era… Postmodern states operate on the basis of laws and open co-operative security” but “in the jungle, one must use the laws of the jungle.” Some two decades after Cooper wrote those words, the jungle rather than the rule of law threatens to become the norm, putting the global community on a dangerous and slippery slope. (Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Does the killing of Qasem Soleimani violate international law?

The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-impeachment-row-us-senate-in-stalemate-over-how-to-proceed-272003">White&nbsp;House</a>&nbsp;sent to Congress on Saturday&nbsp;formal&nbsp;notification of Friday's US&nbsp;drone&nbsp;strike&nbsp;that killed a top Iranian general,&nbsp;amid&nbsp;complaints&nbsp;from&nbsp;Democrats&nbsp;that President Donald Trump did not notify&nbsp;lawmakers&nbsp;or seek advance approval for the attack.

The US&nbsp;strike&nbsp;that killed Iranian military commander <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-will-respond-to-soleimani-killing-any-time-in-any-manner-foreign-minister-zarif-272013">Qassem Soleimani</a> in&nbsp;Iraq&nbsp;has caused a dramatic rise in tensions between Iran and the United States and its allies.

The classified notification was sent under a 1973 US&nbsp;law called the War Powers Act, which requires the administration to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action or imminent actions.

White&nbsp;House&nbsp;national security adviser <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/north-korean-leader-kim-jong-un-calls-for-positive-offensive-measures-to-ensure-safety-270976">Robert O'Brien</a> confirmed the&nbsp;notice&nbsp;had been sent and told Fox News on Saturday there were numerous legal grounds for the attack. He said Justice Department lawyers had signed off on the plan.

"This was an absolute legal operation," O'Brien said. "We feel very good about the legal basis for this military operation."

House&nbsp;of Representatives Speaker <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/treasurys-mnuchin-to-head-us-delegation-to-davos-conclave-271625">Nancy Pelosi</a>, a Democrat, said it raised more questions than it answered.

"This document prompts serious and urgent questions about the timing, manner and justification of the Administration's decision to engage in hostilities against Iran," Pelosi said in a statement.

She said the "highly unusual" decision to classify the entire document compounded her concerns and "suggests that the Congress and the American people are being left in the dark about our national security."

A senior Democratic aide described the notification as "brief and insufficient."

In the notification, Trump's administration was expected to have explained the circumstances, the authority under which the action was taken and the expected scope and duration of the military involvement. The&nbsp;White&nbsp;House&nbsp;declined to comment.

Senator <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/uk-labour-party-must-talk-values-to-win-back-the-asian-community-270978">Bernie Sanders</a>, a contender for the Democratic nomination to run against Trump in November's presidential election, said on Saturday that Congress must take immediate steps to restrain the president "from&nbsp;plunging our nation into yet another endless war."

Senator Elizabeth Warren, another Democratic presidential candidate, told reporters on Saturday that Trump has taken the United States "to the brink of war" and called his actions "reckless. He evidently has no plan."

Pelosi has said the&nbsp;strike&nbsp;in <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-to-target-52-iranian-sites-if-americans-are-attacked-donald-trump-272166">Baghdad</a> was conducted without specific authorization&nbsp;from&nbsp;Congress and "without the consultation of the Congress."

On Saturday she described the administration's military engagement as "provocative, escalatory and disproportionate" and said it put US&nbsp;citizens, troops and their allies in danger.

The Pentagon on Friday briefed staff members&nbsp;from&nbsp;the&nbsp;House&nbsp;Armed Services Committee and Senate Armed Services Committee on the attack.

On Friday, Democratic US&nbsp;Senator Tim Kaine introduced a resolution to force a debate and vote in Congress to prevent further escalation of hostilities with Iran.

Republicans in Congress have generally backed Trump's action. Senate Majority Leader <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/treasurys-mnuchin-to-head-us-delegation-to-davos-conclave-271625">Mitch McConnell</a> said on Friday that "no man alive was more directly responsible for the deaths of more American service members than Qassem Soleimani."

The White House sent to Congress on Saturday formal notification of Friday's US drone strike that killed a top Iranian general, amid complaints from Democrats that President Donald Trump did not notify lawmakers or seek advance approval for the attack.

The White House sent to Congress on Saturday formal notification of Friday's US drone strike that killed a top Iranian general, amid complaints from Democrats that President Donald Trump did not notify lawmakers or seek advance approval for the attack. The US strike that killed Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani in Iraq has caused a dramatic rise in tensions between Iran and the United States and its allies. The classified notification was sent under a 1973 US law called the War Powers Act, which requires the administration to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action or imminent actions. White House national security adviser Robert O'Brien confirmed the notice had been sent and told Fox News on Saturday there were numerous legal grounds for the attack. He said Justice Department lawyers had signed off on the plan. "This was an absolute legal operation," O'Brien said. "We feel very good about the legal basis for this military operation." House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, said it raised more questions than it answered. "This document prompts serious and urgent questions about the timing, manner and justification of the Administration's decision to engage in hostilities against Iran," Pelosi said in a statement. She said the "highly unusual" decision to classify the entire document compounded her concerns and "suggests that the Congress and the American people are being left in the dark about our national security." A senior Democratic aide described the notification as "brief and insufficient." In the notification, Trump's administration was expected to have explained the circumstances, the authority under which the action was taken and the expected scope and duration of the military involvement. The White House declined to comment. Senator Bernie Sanders, a contender for the Democratic nomination to run against Trump in November's presidential election, said on Saturday that Congress must take immediate steps to restrain the president "from plunging our nation into yet another endless war." Senator Elizabeth Warren, another Democratic presidential candidate, told reporters on Saturday that Trump has taken the United States "to the brink of war" and called his actions "reckless. He evidently has no plan." Pelosi has said the strike in Baghdad was conducted without specific authorization from Congress and "without the consultation of the Congress." On Saturday she described the administration's military engagement as "provocative, escalatory and disproportionate" and said it put US citizens, troops and their allies in danger. The Pentagon on Friday briefed staff members from the House Armed Services Committee and Senate Armed Services Committee on the attack. On Friday, Democratic US Senator Tim Kaine introduced a resolution to force a debate and vote in Congress to prevent further escalation of hostilities with Iran. Republicans in Congress have generally backed Trump's action. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on Friday that "no man alive was more directly responsible for the deaths of more American service members than Qassem Soleimani."

White House gives lawmakers formal notice of Iraq strike amid complaints from Democrats

Iran condemned <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-media-challenges-vice-president-mike-pences-claims-of-soleimani-assisting-911-terrorists-272199">Donald Trump</a> on Sunday as a "terrorist in a suit" after the US&nbsp;president threatened to hit 52 Iranian sites hard if Tehran attacks Americans or US&nbsp;assets in retaliation for the killing of military commander Qassem Soleimani.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Like ISIS, like Hitler, Like Genghis! 
 
They all hate cultures. Trump is a "terrorist in a suit". He will learn history very soon that NOBODY can defeat "the Great Iranian Nation &amp; Culture".<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/HardRevenge?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#HardRevenge</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/QasemSoleimani?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#QasemSoleimani</a> <a href="https://t.co/N2iQ5AMX7M">https://t.co/N2iQ5AMX7M</a>
— MJ Azari Jahromi (@azarijahromi) <a href="https://twitter.com/azarijahromi/status/1213743924952666114?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 5, 2020</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>

"Like ISIS, Like Hitler, Like Genghis! They all hate cultures. Trump is a terrorist in a suit. He will learn history very soon that NOBODY can defeat 'the Great Iranian Nation &amp; Culture'," Information and Telecommunications Minister <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/foiled-very-big-foreign-cyber-attack-iran-267687">Mohammad Javad Azari-Jahromi</a> tweeted.

Soleimani, Iran's pre-eminent military commander, was killed on Friday in a US&nbsp;drone strike on his convoy at Baghdad airport, an attack that has taken long-running hostilities between Washington and Tehran into uncharted territory and raised the spectre of a wider conflict in the Middle East.

Soleimani was the architect of Tehran’s overseas clandestine and military operations as head of the Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force.

Giving no indication of seeking to defuse tensions after the strike he ordered, Trump issued a stern threat to the Islamic Republic.

In a series of tweets on Saturday, he said Iran "is talking very boldly about targeting certain USA assets" to avenge Soleimani's death.

Trump said the United States has "targeted 52 Iranian sites" and that some were "at a very high level &amp; important to Iran &amp; the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD."

He said the 52 targets represented the 52 Americans held hostage in Iran after being seized at the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/it-will-be-a-war-crime-if-us-attacks-irans-cultural-sites-foreign-minister-zarif-272268">US&nbsp;Embassy</a> in 1979 during the country's Islamic Revolution.

Iran's army chief, Major General <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-lacks-courage-for-military-confrontation-with-iran-iran-army-chief-272304">Abdolrahim Mousavi</a>, was quoted by state television on Sunday as saying the United States lacked the courage for a military confrontation with Iran.

"In a potential conflict in the future, which I don't think they (Americans) have the courage to carry out, there it will become clear where the numbers five and two will belong," he said.

Trump said on Friday Soleimani had been plotting "imminent and sinister" attacks on US&nbsp;diplomats and military personnel. Democratic critics said the Republican president's action was reckless and risked more bloodshed in a dangerous region.

Thousands of mourners turned out to pay respects to the slain commander on Sunday after Soleimani's body was returned to Iran, the official IRIB news agency reported.

While many Iranians have rallied in to show grief over the death of Soleimani, regarded as the country’s second most powerful figure after Supreme Leader <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/thousands-of-mourners-pay-respect-as-qasem-soleimanis-body-reaches-iran-272228">Ayatollah Ali Khamenei</a>, others worry that his death might push the country to war with a superpower.

On Friday, Khamenei promised harsh revenge and declared three days of mourning.

Soleimani's body was flown to the city of Ahvaz in southwest Iran. IRIB posted a video clip of a casket wrapped in an Iranian flag being unloaded from a plane as a military band played.

Thousands of mourners dressed in black marched through the streets of Ahvaz beating their chests in live footage aired on state TV.

British foreign minister <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/dominic-raab-calls-for-de-escalation-of-tensions-after-killing-of-menace-soleimani-272295">Dominic Raab</a> said on Sunday he had spoken to Iraq's prime minister and president to urge efforts to relieve tensions in the region following the US&nbsp;strike.

Raab, who described Soleimani as a "regional menace" and said he was sympathetic to the situation the United States found itself in, said he also planned to speak to Iran's foreign minister.

"There is a route through which allows Iran to come in from out of the international cold," he told Sky News. "We need to contain the nefarious actions of Iran but we also need to de-escalate and stabilise the situation."

Friday's US&nbsp;airstrike also killed Iraqi militia leader <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-to-target-52-iranian-sites-if-americans-are-attacked-donald-trump-272166">Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis</a>.

Iraq's parliament was set to convene an extraordinary session on Sunday where lawmakers told media that they would push for a vote on a resolution requiring the government to request the withdrawal of US&nbsp;troops from Iraq.

"There is no need for the presence of American forces after defeating Daesh (Islamic State)," said Ammar al-Shibli, a Shi'ite lawmaker and member of parliament's legal committee.

Despite decades of enmity between Iran and the United States, Iran-backed militia and US&nbsp;troops fought side by side during Iraq's 2014-2017 war against Islamic State militants.

Around 5,000 US&nbsp;troops remain in Iraq, most of them in an advisory capacity.

The militia was incorporated into government forces under the umbrella of the Popular Mobilisation Forces which Muhandis led.

Many Iraqis, including opponents of Soleimani, have expressed anger at Washington for killing the two men on Iraqi soil and possibly dragging their country into another conflict.

On Saturday evening, a rocket fell inside Baghdad’s heavily-fortified Green Zone near the US&nbsp;embassy, another hit the nearby Jadriya neighbourhood and two more were fired at the Balad air base north of the city. No one was killed, the Iraqi military said.

The US&nbsp;strike followed a spike in US-Iranian hostilities in Iraq since last week when pro-Iranian militias attacked the US&nbsp;embassy in <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pak-ditches-iran-extends-tacit-support-to-us-over-airstrikes-for-resumption-in-military-cooperation-272236">Baghdad</a> after a deadly US&nbsp;air raid on Kataib Hezbollah, a militia founded by Muhandis. Washington accused the group of an attack on an Iraqi military base that killed an American contractor.

Iran condemned Donald Trump on Sunday as a "terrorist in a suit" after the US president threatened to hit 52 Iranian sites hard if Tehran attacks Americans or US assets in retaliation for the killing of military commander Qassem Soleimani.

Iran condemned Donald Trump on Sunday as a "terrorist in a suit" after the US president threatened to hit 52 Iranian sites hard if Tehran attacks Americans or US assets in retaliation for the killing of military commander Qassem Soleimani. Like ISIS, like Hitler, Like Genghis! They all hate cultures. Trump is a "terrorist in a suit". He will learn history very soon that NOBODY can defeat "the Great Iranian Nation & Culture".#HardRevenge#QasemSoleimani https://t.co/N2iQ5AMX7M — MJ Azari Jahromi (@azarijahromi) January 5, 2020 × "Like ISIS, Like Hitler, Like Genghis! They all hate cultures. Trump is a terrorist in a suit. He will learn history very soon that NOBODY can defeat 'the Great Iranian Nation & Culture'," Information and Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Javad Azari-Jahromi tweeted. Soleimani, Iran's pre-eminent military commander, was killed on Friday in a US drone strike on his convoy at Baghdad airport, an attack that has taken long-running hostilities between Washington and Tehran into uncharted territory and raised the spectre of a wider conflict in the Middle East. Soleimani was the architect of Tehran’s overseas clandestine and military operations as head of the Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force. Giving no indication of seeking to defuse tensions after the strike he ordered, Trump issued a stern threat to the Islamic Republic. In a series of tweets on Saturday, he said Iran "is talking very boldly about targeting certain USA assets" to avenge Soleimani's death. Trump said the United States has "targeted 52 Iranian sites" and that some were "at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD." He said the 52 targets represented the 52 Americans held hostage in Iran after being seized at the US Embassy in 1979 during the country's Islamic Revolution. Iran's army chief, Major General Abdolrahim Mousavi, was quoted by state television on Sunday as saying the United States lacked the courage for a military confrontation with Iran. "In a potential conflict in the future, which I don't think they (Americans) have the courage to carry out, there it will become clear where the numbers five and two will belong," he said. Trump said on Friday Soleimani had been plotting "imminent and sinister" attacks on US diplomats and military personnel. Democratic critics said the Republican president's action was reckless and risked more bloodshed in a dangerous region. Thousands of mourners turned out to pay respects to the slain commander on Sunday after Soleimani's body was returned to Iran, the official IRIB news agency reported. While many Iranians have rallied in to show grief over the death of Soleimani, regarded as the country’s second most powerful figure after Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, others worry that his death might push the country to war with a superpower. On Friday, Khamenei promised harsh revenge and declared three days of mourning. Soleimani's body was flown to the city of Ahvaz in southwest Iran. IRIB posted a video clip of a casket wrapped in an Iranian flag being unloaded from a plane as a military band played. Thousands of mourners dressed in black marched through the streets of Ahvaz beating their chests in live footage aired on state TV. British foreign minister Dominic Raab said on Sunday he had spoken to Iraq's prime minister and president to urge efforts to relieve tensions in the region following the US strike. Raab, who described Soleimani as a "regional menace" and said he was sympathetic to the situation the United States found itself in, said he also planned to speak to Iran's foreign minister. "There is a route through which allows Iran to come in from out of the international cold," he told Sky News. "We need to contain the nefarious actions of Iran but we also need to de-escalate and stabilise the situation." Friday's US airstrike also killed Iraqi militia leader Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis. Iraq's parliament was set to convene an extraordinary session on Sunday where lawmakers told media that they would push for a vote on a resolution requiring the government to request the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. "There is no need for the presence of American forces after defeating Daesh (Islamic State)," said Ammar al-Shibli, a Shi'ite lawmaker and member of parliament's legal committee. Despite decades of enmity between Iran and the United States, Iran-backed militia and US troops fought side by side during Iraq's 2014-2017 war against Islamic State militants. Around 5,000 US troops remain in Iraq, most of them in an advisory capacity. The militia was incorporated into government forces under the umbrella of the Popular Mobilisation Forces which Muhandis led. Many Iraqis, including opponents of Soleimani, have expressed anger at Washington for killing the two men on Iraqi soil and possibly dragging their country into another conflict. On Saturday evening, a rocket fell inside Baghdad’s heavily-fortified Green Zone near the US embassy, another hit the nearby Jadriya neighbourhood and two more were fired at the Balad air base north of the city. No one was killed, the Iraqi military said. The US strike followed a spike in US-Iranian hostilities in Iraq since last week when pro-Iranian militias attacked the US embassy in Baghdad after a deadly US air raid on Kataib Hezbollah, a militia founded by Muhandis. Washington accused the group of an attack on an Iraqi military base that killed an American contractor.

Iran's I&T Minister MJ Azari condemns Preisdent Donald Trump as 'terrorist in a suit' after attack threat

How people in Iraq mourn death of Qasem Soleimani

Soleimani's killing: How was the operation carried out and what are the consequences?

US&nbsp;citizens working for foreign&nbsp;oil&nbsp;companies in the southern&nbsp;Iraqi city of Basra were leaving the country on Friday, the&nbsp;oil&nbsp;ministry said after&nbsp;a&nbsp;US&nbsp;airstrike&nbsp;killed a top&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/oil-prices-surge-after-us-strike-kills-iranian-general-271775">Iranian&nbsp;commander</a> in&nbsp;Iraq.

Hours&nbsp;after&nbsp;the killing of&nbsp;Iranian&nbsp;Quds&nbsp;Force&nbsp;leader&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/deputy-commander-of-quds-force-to-replace-soleimani-irans-supreme-leader-ayatollah-ali-khamenei-271905">Qassem Soleimani</a> and&nbsp;Iraqi militia commander <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/deputy-head-of-group-irans-quds-force-head-qasem-soleimani-killed-hashed-al-shaabi-271762">Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis</a>, who was with him, the&nbsp;US&nbsp;embassy in Baghdad urged all its citizens to&nbsp;leave&nbsp;Iraq&nbsp;immediately.

Iraqi officials said the evacuation would not affect&nbsp;oil&nbsp;operations, production or exports from the country, the second-biggest producer in the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/oil-prices-tumble-ahead-of-opec-meeting-global-stocks-fall-265363">Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries</a> with the output of about 4.62 million barrels per day (BPD), according to a&nbsp;survey of OPEC output.

Oil&nbsp;company sources told&nbsp;earlier on Friday that dozens of foreign&nbsp;workers&nbsp;were expected to fly out of the country. A&nbsp;witness saw a number of foreigners, including&nbsp;US&nbsp;citizens, queuing at Basra&nbsp;airport and described the atmosphere as relaxed.

Some were travelling to Dubai on&nbsp;airline FlyDubai and others were checking in at the Qatar&nbsp;Airways counter.

A spokesman for BP, which operates the giant Rumaila&nbsp;oil&nbsp;field near Basra, declined to comment. Rumaila produced around 1.5 million BPD as recently as April.

Italian energy group Eni&nbsp;said the Zubair&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iraq-protesters-lock-down-oil-field-call-strike-270855">oil&nbsp;field</a>, which produced around 475,000 BPD in 2018, was "proceeding regularly", adding it was closely monitoring the situation.

US&nbsp;major Exxon Mobil declined to comment on whether it was evacuating staff but said the production "continues&nbsp;normally" at its West Qurna 1&nbsp;oil&nbsp;concession in the south of the country near the&nbsp;Iranian&nbsp;border.

"We continue to watch the situation closely," a spokeswoman said.

Exxon removed around 60 foreign staff from West Qurna last May&nbsp;after&nbsp;attacks near its&nbsp;oil&nbsp;facilities. The employees returned about two weeks later&nbsp;after&nbsp;the government agreed to provide additional security.

Schlumberger, which also works in southern&nbsp;Iraq, is evaluating the security situation, a spokesman said, declining to comment on the&nbsp;US&nbsp;call for citizens to evacuate. Last year it won a two-year contract to drill 40 wells for Basra&nbsp;Oil&nbsp;Co.

Ian Bryant, chief executive of Canadian&nbsp;oilfield company Packers Plus, said he was "more concerned than ever" about the safety of their staff in&nbsp;Iraq, adding he was worried that&nbsp;US, British and Canadian citizens might get caught up in any unrest.

Genel, an&nbsp;oil&nbsp;producer in the autonomous region of Kurdistan in northern&nbsp;Iraq, said its operations were continuing normally. It did not comment on any staff movements.

Gulf Keystone Petroleum, which also operates in Kurdistan, said "while these events are taking place ... Gulf Keystone is closely monitoring the situation and operations at (the Shaikan field) are carrying on as per usual".

US citizens working for foreign oil companies in the southern Iraqi city of Basra were leaving the country on Friday, the oil ministry said after a US airstrike killed a top Iranian commander in Iraq.

US citizens working for foreign oil companies in the southern Iraqi city of Basra were leaving the country on Friday, the oil ministry said after a US airstrike killed a top Iranian commander in Iraq. Hours after the killing of Iranian Quds Force leader Qassem Soleimani and Iraqi militia commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, who was with him, the US embassy in Baghdad urged all its citizens to leave Iraq immediately. Iraqi officials said the evacuation would not affect oil operations, production or exports from the country, the second-biggest producer in the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries with the output of about 4.62 million barrels per day (BPD), according to a survey of OPEC output. Oil company sources told earlier on Friday that dozens of foreign workers were expected to fly out of the country. A witness saw a number of foreigners, including US citizens, queuing at Basra airport and described the atmosphere as relaxed. Some were travelling to Dubai on airline FlyDubai and others were checking in at the Qatar Airways counter. A spokesman for BP, which operates the giant Rumaila oil field near Basra, declined to comment. Rumaila produced around 1.5 million BPD as recently as April. Italian energy group Eni said the Zubair oil field, which produced around 475,000 BPD in 2018, was "proceeding regularly", adding it was closely monitoring the situation. US major Exxon Mobil declined to comment on whether it was evacuating staff but said the production "continues normally" at its West Qurna 1 oil concession in the south of the country near the Iranian border. "We continue to watch the situation closely," a spokeswoman said. Exxon removed around 60 foreign staff from West Qurna last May after attacks near its oil facilities. The employees returned about two weeks later after the government agreed to provide additional security. Schlumberger, which also works in southern Iraq, is evaluating the security situation, a spokesman said, declining to comment on the US call for citizens to evacuate. Last year it won a two-year contract to drill 40 wells for Basra Oil Co. Ian Bryant, chief executive of Canadian oilfield company Packers Plus, said he was "more concerned than ever" about the safety of their staff in Iraq, adding he was worried that US, British and Canadian citizens might get caught up in any unrest. Genel, an oil producer in the autonomous region of Kurdistan in northern Iraq, said its operations were continuing normally. It did not comment on any staff movements. Gulf Keystone Petroleum, which also operates in Kurdistan, said "while these events are taking place ... Gulf Keystone is closely monitoring the situation and operations at (the Shaikan field) are carrying on as per usual".

US oil workers leave Iraq after air strike on Iranian leader Qassem Soleimani

U.S. Presidents Have Always Used Wars To Divert Attention From Domestic Political Troubles. #Gravitas #WION #US

WION Edit: US Presidents, domestic politics, foreign wars...

US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo on Friday issued sanctions on Cuban General, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/fidel-castro-as-seen-by-allies-and-enemies-9356">Leopoldo Cintra Frias</a> for use of violence to assist the former Maduro regime in Venezuela.

"Today we designate <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/cuba-manuel-merrero-becomes-prime-minister-40-years-after-fidel-castro-269513">Cuba</a> regime official Leopoldo Cintra Frias for his involvement in gross violations of human rights and use of violence to prop up the former Maduro regime in Venezuela. We will promote accountability for those who abuse human rights, wherever they may reside," Michael Pompeo wrote in a tweet.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Today we designate <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Cuba?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Cuba</a> regime official Leopoldo Cintra Frias for his involvement in gross violations of human rights and use of violence to prop up the former Maduro regime in <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Venezuela?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Venezuela</a>. We will promote accountability for those who abuse human rights, wherever they may reside.
— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) <a href="https://twitter.com/SecPompeo/status/1212848892867420181?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 2, 2020</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>

Last year, the United States imposed sanctions on Cuban Interior Minister Julio Ceaser Gandarilla Bermejo for involvement in "gross human rights violations in Venezuela."

Friday's sanction was the latest in a series of punitive measures that the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/kim-a-man-of-his-word-on-denuclearization-donald-trump-271377">Trump</a> administration has taken against Washington's old Cold War foe.

The Trump administration has stopped short of breaking off diplomatic relations with Cuba restored by former president Obama in 2015 after more than five decades of hostility.

US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo on Friday issued sanctions on Cuban General, Leopoldo Cintra Frias for use of violence to assist the former Maduro regime in Venezuela.

US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo on Friday issued sanctions on Cuban General, Leopoldo Cintra Frias for use of violence to assist the former Maduro regime in Venezuela. "Today we designate Cuba regime official Leopoldo Cintra Frias for his involvement in gross violations of human rights and use of violence to prop up the former Maduro regime in Venezuela. We will promote accountability for those who abuse human rights, wherever they may reside," Michael Pompeo wrote in a tweet. Today we designate #Cuba regime official Leopoldo Cintra Frias for his involvement in gross violations of human rights and use of violence to prop up the former Maduro regime in #Venezuela. We will promote accountability for those who abuse human rights, wherever they may reside. — Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) January 2, 2020 × Last year, the United States imposed sanctions on Cuban Interior Minister Julio Ceaser Gandarilla Bermejo for involvement in "gross human rights violations in Venezuela." Friday's sanction was the latest in a series of punitive measures that the Trump administration has taken against Washington's old Cold War foe. The Trump administration has stopped short of breaking off diplomatic relations with Cuba restored by former president Obama in 2015 after more than five decades of hostility.

US sanctions Cuban general Leopoldo Cintra Frias for supporting Maduro regime in Venezuela

After the surprise airstrike by the USA that has killed Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, tensions have substantially spiked between the two nations. So much so that the possibility of war has been brought up by media, creating fear among the masses globally. Specifically, India should take special heed of this because of our economic and oil interests, at a time when we are undergoing rapid growth in multiple sectors. &nbsp;

Approximately 66 per cent of the crude oil imported in the last financial year was from the Middle East. With India, this dependent, a major war in the Middle East region; an area that is in any case, conflict-prone, will substantially increase consumer prices. Geographically speaking, the Strait of Hormuz, located between Oman and Iran, is the planet’s most important oil checkpoint because of the large volumes of oil that flows through the strait. Furthermore, the Persian Gulf holds a significant percentage of the world’s oil reserves and production. This gulf shares coastlines with Iran, Oman, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. &nbsp;

US-Iran Tensions &nbsp;

The USA and Iran share a rocky relationship that dates back to the Islamic Revolution, 1979 that overthrew the Shah, an American ally and brought Iran under a regime that was incompatible to the USA. America placed sanctions on Iran in the 1980s and 1990s in order to put a check on Iran’s regional activities. Heavy economic sanctions were again placed on Iran when President Trump pulled out of the JCPOA in 2018. The pact was signed under the Obama administration in 2015. The JCPOA basically aimed to halt Iran’s nuclear agenda. For Trump, the JCPOA was not enough. Trump said that the pact provisions would still let Iran attain nuclear weapons. Additionally, the American President has made multiple statements expressing that Iran’s nuclear issues, missile program and military expansionism (which garners support from non-state actors) undermine US national interests. &nbsp;

India-Iran Relations&nbsp;

Bilateral relations are strong via economic, cultural and historical links. India and Iran look to each other as key actors in maintaining stability in the region. In 2016, PM Modi and Iran President Rouhani strengthened relations even further through strong partisan engagements. In terms of trade, energy is the most important between India and Iran. Moreover, the development and operationalisation of the Chabahar Port also ties the two nations together. India sees Chabahar Port as a key transport and trade corridor with Afghanistan and Central Asia.&nbsp;

The Impact on India’s Economy&nbsp;

Continued tensions between America and Iran Is detrimental to India’s economy. Because oil prices would heavily increase, India would have to spend much more on oil. This means that less money would be allocated to integral areas such as affordable housing, healthcare and infrastructure and development. Since the death of General Soleimani, oil prices have already surged four per cent in India. This increasing rise in crude oil will also undesirably affect India’s energy supply. It will result in an increase in India’s exports and deplete foreign exchange reserves. There is a more than definite probability that the value of the rupee will go down. And at a time where India’s economy is facing temporary slow growth, this could have severe consequences to national development and infrastructure. &nbsp;

Tensions also affect approximately eight million Indians who live and work in West Asia. India currently receives a whopping $70 billion in remittances from Indian nationals. If eight million are affected by tensions, this means India stands to lose $40 billion in remittances overall. That’s over 57 per cent of received money instantly gone! &nbsp;

The Impact on India’s Foreign Policy &nbsp;

Rising US-Iran tensions massively hinders India’s foreign policy agenda. Development of the Chabahar Port would be halted or, in grave circumstances, ceased altogether. &nbsp;

On one hand, India and Iran carry good relations and cooperate on trade, oil and development. India, Iran and Afghanistan had also recently signed a trilateral agreement to increase trade, collaboration and transit. On the other hand, India carries very strong relations with America as well. We even have a preferred military partnership with the USA. Notably, in 2019, India had to stop importing Iranian oil to comply with US sanctions on Iran to appease Trump’s continued cooperation at a preferred level. &nbsp;

Conclusion&nbsp;

The United States of America and Iran are incredibly strategic for India; a rapidly developing country. Prime Minister Modi has actively worked to meaningfully improve India’s relationship with America over the past few years. India cannot lose such an important ally. Simultaneously, however, our energy security is heavily dependant on Iran. If the USA and Iran cannot work this out and war becomes a stark reality, India faces severe drawbacks to growth, progress and relations. &nbsp;&nbsp;

What is the best plan of action? PM Modi should step up and play an active role in any capacity to ensure that these two countries can somehow work it out without resorting to a full-scale conflict. A hand of help should be offered to both Iran and the USA to help in any way to alleviate tensions. &nbsp;

(Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

After the surprise airstrike by the USA that has killed Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, tensions have substantially spiked between the two nations. So much so that the possibility of war has been brought up by media, creating fear among the masses globally.

After the surprise airstrike by the USA that has killed Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, tensions have substantially spiked between the two nations. So much so that the possibility of war has been brought up by media, creating fear among the masses globally. Specifically, India should take special heed of this because of our economic and oil interests, at a time when we are undergoing rapid growth in multiple sectors. Approximately 66 per cent of the crude oil imported in the last financial year was from the Middle East. With India, this dependent, a major war in the Middle East region; an area that is in any case, conflict-prone, will substantially increase consumer prices. Geographically speaking, the Strait of Hormuz, located between Oman and Iran, is the planet’s most important oil checkpoint because of the large volumes of oil that flows through the strait. Furthermore, the Persian Gulf holds a significant percentage of the world’s oil reserves and production. This gulf shares coastlines with Iran, Oman, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. US-Iran Tensions The USA and Iran share a rocky relationship that dates back to the Islamic Revolution, 1979 that overthrew the Shah, an American ally and brought Iran under a regime that was incompatible to the USA. America placed sanctions on Iran in the 1980s and 1990s in order to put a check on Iran’s regional activities. Heavy economic sanctions were again placed on Iran when President Trump pulled out of the JCPOA in 2018. The pact was signed under the Obama administration in 2015. The JCPOA basically aimed to halt Iran’s nuclear agenda. For Trump, the JCPOA was not enough. Trump said that the pact provisions would still let Iran attain nuclear weapons. Additionally, the American President has made multiple statements expressing that Iran’s nuclear issues, missile program and military expansionism (which garners support from non-state actors) undermine US national interests. India-Iran Relations Bilateral relations are strong via economic, cultural and historical links. India and Iran look to each other as key actors in maintaining stability in the region. In 2016, PM Modi and Iran President Rouhani strengthened relations even further through strong partisan engagements. In terms of trade, energy is the most important between India and Iran. Moreover, the development and operationalisation of the Chabahar Port also ties the two nations together. India sees Chabahar Port as a key transport and trade corridor with Afghanistan and Central Asia. The Impact on India’s Economy Continued tensions between America and Iran Is detrimental to India’s economy. Because oil prices would heavily increase, India would have to spend much more on oil. This means that less money would be allocated to integral areas such as affordable housing, healthcare and infrastructure and development. Since the death of General Soleimani, oil prices have already surged four per cent in India. This increasing rise in crude oil will also undesirably affect India’s energy supply. It will result in an increase in India’s exports and deplete foreign exchange reserves. There is a more than definite probability that the value of the rupee will go down. And at a time where India’s economy is facing temporary slow growth, this could have severe consequences to national development and infrastructure. Tensions also affect approximately eight million Indians who live and work in West Asia. India currently receives a whopping $70 billion in remittances from Indian nationals. If eight million are affected by tensions, this means India stands to lose $40 billion in remittances overall. That’s over 57 per cent of received money instantly gone! The Impact on India’s Foreign Policy Rising US-Iran tensions massively hinders India’s foreign policy agenda. Development of the Chabahar Port would be halted or, in grave circumstances, ceased altogether. On one hand, India and Iran carry good relations and cooperate on trade, oil and development. India, Iran and Afghanistan had also recently signed a trilateral agreement to increase trade, collaboration and transit. On the other hand, India carries very strong relations with America as well. We even have a preferred military partnership with the USA. Notably, in 2019, India had to stop importing Iranian oil to comply with US sanctions on Iran to appease Trump’s continued cooperation at a preferred level. Conclusion The United States of America and Iran are incredibly strategic for India; a rapidly developing country. Prime Minister Modi has actively worked to meaningfully improve India’s relationship with America over the past few years. India cannot lose such an important ally. Simultaneously, however, our energy security is heavily dependant on Iran. If the USA and Iran cannot work this out and war becomes a stark reality, India faces severe drawbacks to growth, progress and relations. What is the best plan of action? PM Modi should step up and play an active role in any capacity to ensure that these two countries can somehow work it out without resorting to a full-scale conflict. A hand of help should be offered to both Iran and the USA to help in any way to alleviate tensions. (Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US-Iran tensions and why India should care

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