by admin | May 25, 2021 | Corporate, Corporate Reports, World
Washington : US President Donald Trump is expected to ask for $716 billion for defence spending in the 2019 budget to be unveiled in February, the American media has reported.
The figure will represent a seven per cent increase over the 2018 budget, which was yet to be passed through the Congress, The Washington Post quoted an US official as saying on Friday.
Trump’s request would cover the Pentagon’s annual budget as well as spending on ongoing wars and the maintenance of the US nuclear arsenal, said the report.
Defence Secretary Jim Mattis unveiled the National Defence Strategy last week, in which he proposed boosting the power of the US military.
Mattis said that the country’s military competitive edge “has eroded in every domain of warfare” because of inconsistent funding.
The increase in defence spending, as pundits say, would be critical to achieving Trump’s vision for the military, including a larger Navy fleet and a bigger Army, Xinhua news agency reported.
But others warned that a long-term increase in the US military spending would dramatically expand the deficit.
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | Opinions
By Arul Louis,
Ironically for a President who ran on a platform of scaling back the government, Donald Trump began the anniversary of his swearing-in on Saturday with his government shut down.
It fell a victim to the deepening polarisation after a year of a post-digital presidency when Trump ran the government through an avalanche of social media bytes racing at the speed of megabits per second with instant reactions magnifying their impact.
It was a year the real-estate billionaire-turned-President kept opponents on edge, his administration on a steeper edge, the world in shock but not in awe, and his core supporters close by his side.
The Senate’s failure to approve an ad-hoc budget when temporary funding ran out in the absence of a regular budget at midnight shutting down the government is symbolic of Trump’s presidency.
He ranked as the least popular of modern Presidents with a NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released on Friday showing that just 39 per cent of Americans approve of his performance.
Trump’s upset election victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton propelled by the white working class and those who fell victims to globalisation and technology, won him the undying hatred of many Democrats and the media and intellectual elites who saw this as a personal affront.
His legitimacy was questioned because he lost the popular vote but squeaked through with a slender majority in the electoral college and his powerful opponents have latched on to the alleged Russian interference to push it further.
An ongoing independent investigation into it has ensnared at least one important figure from the Trump campaign, the disgraced National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, and a lesser figure, George Papadopoulos.
But behind these are some clear achievements, especially in the economic arena. The Dow Jones index, a barometer of the stock markets soared by more than 30 per cent to record highs and unemployment is down to 4.1 per cent.
Trump managed to get a mammoth tax reform law through Congress last month offering most Americans a tax cut and reducing corporate taxes to 21 per cent from 35 per cent.
The controversial corporate tax cut is beginning to show results, with companies like Apple bringing back hundreds of billions of dollars stashed away abroad to avoid high taxes and giving bonuses to workers or increasing their wages.
Trump’s America First policy has shown results in bringing investments and jobs. India’s Mahindra group, for example, is investing $230 million in a manufacturing plant in Michighan.
While his diplomacy — or more specifically the lack of it — has roiled the world, there have been two successes. The Islamic State has been routed in Syria and Iraq.
And with his crude talk and bluster that matches North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Un, Trump has forced him to back down and hold talks with South Korea, something that hasn’t happened in years of diplomatic niceties.
But he has isolated the US on the global stage on many issues. His decision to recognise Jerusalem as Israel’s capital brought out the isolation starkly with a resounding criticism from the UN General Assembly where only eight countries stood behind Washington as even some of its closest European allies deserted it.
Trump has pulled the US out of the hard-won Paris climate change agreement and UNESCO and is threatening to back out of or recast trade pacts like the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Influenced by Israel and Saudi Arabia, he has also threatened to back out of the treaty the five permanent members of the Security Council and Germany entered into with Iran to stop it from developing nuclear weapons.
The world was aghast at a Democrat’s claim that Trump used a colloquial word for excrement to describe African countries while discussing immigration with Congressmen, although the President has denied using it.
Immigration, the most controversial of his stands, ultimately led to the government shutdown. The temporary permits allowing those brought to the US illegally as children to stay on is set to expire in March and the Democrats have virtually made renewing it a condition to pass the ad hoc tax funding to keep the government operating till a proper budget is passed.
Thrown into the mix is Trump’s election promise to build along the Mexican border to keep out illegal immigrants and bargaining with Congress to allocate funds for it.
His attempts to control immigration from eight countries — six of them with Muslim majorities — where the US says it is not able to properly vet the visa applicants have run afoul of courts because of Trump’s assertions that he would stop Muslims from coming in because of terrorism fears.
Courts said the mention of religion in proposing makes the ban unconstitutional. The Supreme Court is to hand down a final verdict on it.
Despite Trump’s hardline, the US has seen terrorist attacks during the year, even if there is a tendency to not describe mass shootings, either carried out or attempted as terrorists when non-Muslims are involved.
Acting on behalf of the Islamic State, a Uzbek immigrant drove a vehicle into a bicycle patch in New York killing eight people in October. In December, a Bangladeshi immigrant tried a suicide bombing in a city transportation hub, but failed.
In October a lone, non-Muslim gunman killed 58 concert-goers and injured over 850 in Las Vegas. No clear motive has emerged. This was the worst ever terrorist attack by an individual in the US.
During an August rally by White supremacists in Charlottsville, a supporter drove a car into a crowd of counter-protesters killing one person and injuring 19.
As passions flared on all sides, a supporter of the Democratic Party’s failed presidential candidate Bernie Sanders launched an attack on a group of about 30 Republican Congressmen at a sports practice in June, but seriously injured only one before he was killed by police.
Trump’s polarisation has come to haunt his party. It lost the governorships of New Jersey and Virginia and a Senate seat in Alabama in elections this year — a trend that could put the Republican’s Senate majority in play during next year’s elections.
(Arul Louis can be reached at arul.l@ians.in)
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
By Arul Louis,
New York : As an upstart candidate aiming for the highest office in the United States, Donald Trump promised an election rally of Indians that they “will have a true friend in the White House” and “we are going to be best friends” with India.
In his first year as President, Trump has stuck to the promise, appointing for the first time an Indian-American, Nikki Haley, to the cabinet and giving India a “leadership role” in Washington’s global strategy across a broad geographic swath.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi, a man of humble origins, and Trump, a billionaire and a flamboyant reality TV personality, have struck an unlikely friendship.
During a White House visit in June, their hitherto phone friendship was sealed with hugs. “The relationship between India and the US has never been stronger, never been better,” Trump declared. “I am thrilled to salute you, Prime Minister Modi, and the Indian people for all you are accomplishing together.”
The ties have been growing strong under the previous three administrations of Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama, and Trump has moved it to a higher trajectory given its preoccupations with China and Afghanistan.
Global security has emerged as the centrepiece of Trump’s approach to India.
“We welcome India’s emergence as a leading global power and stronger strategic and defence partner,” said his national strategy unveiled last month, with a view to making New Delhi a counter-balance to Beijing in the Indo-Pacific region.
And Modi had said in October that India-US ties were growing with a “great deal of speed”.
While Indian-Americans are overwhelmingly Democrat — a Pew Research Center survey said 65 percent support that party — Trump has given members of the community some top administration jobs.
Trump appointed Haley to the high profile US cabinet rank post as UN Permanent Representative in which she is often the face of Trump’s hardline foreign policy.
Ajit Pai became the Chairman of the Federal Communication Commission, a position with a vast portfolio overseeing of the Internet, mobile phones, airwaves, broadcast and communications. He took the administration’s controversial decision to end net neutrality.
Trump appointed Raj Shah as his deputy adviser and principal deputy press secretary. Uttam Dhillon, another deputy adviser, is also his deputy counsel.
Others include Seema Verma, administrator of the health insurance programmes for seniors and the poor; Neomi Rao, administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs; Vishal J. Amin, White House’s intellectual property enforcement official, and Neil Chatterjee, a member of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. They all shape and implement Trump’s controversial policies.
But there have also been areas of friction with India, with immigration as the most contentious. The Trump administration — and his campaign — have signalled plans to fundamentally change the H-1B visa programme for professionals that overwhelmingly benefits Indians. But so far it hasn’t, although it has tightened the scrutiny of the visas.
It also backed off a threat to make H1-B visa holders in line for Green Cards return home while they wait out the years for their permanent residencies.
He has also announced that he wants to end the immigration of relatives beyond the immediate family, categories that mean a lot to Indians. But his proposed reforms also include a points system to rank applicants on the basis of their qualifications, which could benefit Indians.
On the economic front, Trump’s “America First” and Modi’s “Make in India” are likely to come into conflict as each seek manufacturing, jobs and investments in their own economies, and Trump threatening nations with which the US has a trade deficit.
The five Indian Americans in the Congress opposed Trump on most issues. The first Senator of Indian-American ancestry, Democrat Kamala Harris, has emerged as one of the fiercest critics of Trump. She is pushing the Senator Judiciary Committee enquiry into Trump campaign’s alleged links to Russia and has called for his resignation over charges of sexual harassment.
But Trump’s India policy “transcends partisanship” and the party supports his initiatives to strengthen it further, according to Democratic Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi.
An important area of convergence for the two countries is the fight against terrorism. “Both our nations have been struck by the evils of terrorism and we are both determined to destroy terrorist organisations and the radical ideology that drives them,” Trump said during Modi’s visit to the White House in June.
After several warnings to Pakistan that it “has much to lose” by supporting terrorists, the Trump administration tightened the screws on Islamabad by suspending security assistance this month.
The administration has added Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, which carries out attacks in Jammu and Kashmir, and its leader Mohammad Yusuf Shah to the lists of global terrorist organisations and individuals to choke off financial and other support.
In the South Asia region, where Trump’s main focus is on stabilizing Afghanistan and ending terrorism there, Trump said in his August strategy speech, a “critical part of the South Asia strategy for America is to further develop its strategic partnership with India – the world’s largest democracy and a key security and economic partner of the US”.
He asked India “to help us more with Afghanistan”.
But the truly transformational prospects are in the Indo-Pacific region where the US and its allies see a growing threat from China – and for Washington a challenge to its global status.
In his National Strategy document Trump declared: “We will deepen our strategic partnership with India and support its leadership role in Indian Ocean security and throughout the broader region.
“We will seek to increase quadrilateral cooperation with Japan, Australia, and India.”
(Arul Louis can be reached at arul.l@ians.in)
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | Muslim World
Washington : The US has announced that it will withhold more than half of the funding it provides for a UN agency that supports Palestinians, about two weeks after President Donald Trump threatened to pull funding for the group.
Washington will withhold $65 million out of its scheduled $125 million payment to the UN Relief Works Agency (UNRWA), which provides humanitarian aid, education, social services and medical care to Palestinian refugees in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, CNN reported.
Trump had said that the US could cut aid if Palestinians rejected peace efforts with Israel.
The decision drew condemnation from Palestinians and praise from Israel. The UN officials expressed deep concern and refugee groups worried about the humanitarian impact, particularly the potential for further destabilisation of a region already reeling from conflict in Syria.
State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said on Tuesday that the move had nothing to do with “punishing” the Palestinians for their refusal to enter into negotiations with Israel, or their decision to push for a UN vote that resulted in global condemnation of the US decision to unilaterally recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
“This is not aimed at punishing anyone,” Nauert said on Tuesday as she outlined the Trump administration’s decision to release $60 million in funding for the agency, while indefinitely withholding another $65 million.
The decision came two weeks after Trump complained that Washington receives “no appreciation or respect” in return for its aid.
“The move will have devastating consequences for vulnerable Palestinian refugees across the Middle East, including hundreds of thousands of refugee children in the West Bank and Gaza, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria,” said Jan Egeland, former Norwegian Foreign Minister and former UN undersecretary general for humanitarian affairs and emergency relief coordinator.
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said he was “very concerned” about the impact on the region.
Nauert said the money was being withheld because the US would like to see reforms at UNRWA and added that Washington would also like to see other countries contribute more to the relief agency, which was founded in 1949 after the Arab-Israeli war, to deal specifically with Palestinian refugees.
PLO Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi slammed the decision to withhold the funds, saying it targeted “the most vulnerable segment of the Palestinian people”, adding that it “will generate further instability throughout the region”.
Israel’s Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, praising the move said: “UNRWA has proven time and again to be an agency that misuses the humanitarian aid of the international community and instead supports anti-Israel propaganda, perpetuates the plight of Palestinian refugees and encourages hate.”
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | World
Washington : Far from its intended effect, the “Muslim ban” on January 27 last year that barred individuals from seven predominately Muslim countries from entering the US for 90 days, generated public opposition to the policy, according to a new study.
Within a day of Trump’s decree, thousands of protesters flooded airports around the country in opposition to what was quickly deemed a “Muslim ban” and by March 6, the order had been formally revoked, said political scientists.
According to him, visible resistance to the order in the immediate aftermath of its signing may have produced a rare shift in public opinion that resulted in mass opposition to Trump’s policy.
The shift was caused by “an influx of information portraying the ban as being at odds with egalitarian principles of American identity and religious liberty,” said Loren Collingwood, Assistant Professor of Political Science at University of California-Riverside; Nazita Lajevardi of Michigan State University and Kassra A. R. Oskooii of the University of Delaware.
The findings, published in the journal Political Behavior, suggest the bounty of information that surfaced after the order went into effect — information that painted the ban as deeply un-American and in fact “incompatible with American values” — contributed to a broad-based increase in opposition to it.
To reach this conclusion, the researchers compared the results of two surveys of the same 311 people — one conducted just days before the order’s announcement, and the other in the two weeks after.
They found that among those respondents, more than 30 percent moved against the ban in the interim.
Those who shifted most radically, meanwhile, were “high American identifiers.”
Such respondents were shown to consider their status as Americans who belong to one nation to be a defining element of their identities.
Media coverage of anti-ban demonstrations, the researchers noted, often depicted protesters “shrouded in American flags,” visually linking the concept of more inclusive immigration policies to American egalitarianism.
The movement against the ban also benefited from the outspokenness of various news commentators and publications, many of whom were quick to criticise the order by characterising it as antithetical to core American ideals.
The findings suggest that American identity can be “primed” to produce shifts in public opinion. It also demonstrates that public opinion may be more malleable than previously thought.
—IANS
