Category: 2. World

  • Trump scraps India visit for Quad summit amid deteriorating ties: report – World

    Trump scraps India visit for Quad summit amid deteriorating ties: report – World

    United States President Donald Trump has scrapped plans to attend an upcoming summit of the ‘Quad’ grouping in India amid deteriorating ties between Washington and New Delhi, US newspaper The New York Times (NYT) reported on Saturday.

    Relations between the two countries have plummeted, with 50 per cent levies on many Indian imports into the US taking effect this week as punishment for New Delhi’s massive purchases of Russian oil; a part of US efforts to pressure Moscow into ending its war in Ukraine.

    As ties between both nations deteriorate, NYT reported on Saturday that the breakdown in relations was caused after a phone call on June 17.

    “After telling [Indian Prime Minister Narendra] Modi that he would travel to India later this year for the Quad summit, Mr Trump no longer has plans to visit in the fall, according to people familiar with the president’s schedule,” the NYT reported, citing “interviews with more than a dozen people in Washington and New Delhi”.

    The NYT mentioned how Trump’s repeated claims about having ended the recent brief conflict between India and Pakistan reportedly “infuriated” Modi. The paper added that the dispute “dates back more than 75 years and is far deeper and more complicated than Mr Trump was making it out to be”.

    India blamed Pakistan for the April 22 Pahalgam attack without evidence, triggering a military escalation. On May 6–7, New Delhi launched air strikes that killed civilians, followed by a week-long missile exchange. A US-brokered ceasefire ended the war.

    “During a phone call on June 17, Mr Trump brought it up again, saying how proud he was of ending the military escalation,” the NYT reported.

    “He mentioned that Pakistan was going to nominate him for the Nobel Peace Prize, an honour for which he had been openly campaigning. The not-so-subtle implication, according to people familiar with the call, was that Mr Modi should do the same.”

    It added that the “bristled” Indian premier told Trump that American involvement had nothing to do with the ceasefire and the conflict had been settled directly between India and Pakistan.

    “Mr Trump largely brushed off Mr Modi’s comments, but the disagreement — and Mr Modi’s refusal to engage on the Nobel — has played an outsize role in the souring relationship between the two leaders, whose once-close ties go back to Mr Trump’s first term,” the report reads, adding that the two leaders have not spoken since the June 17 phone conversation and Trump has only doubled down on taking credit for the ceasefire.

    Amid this dispute, India has grown closer to Beijing and Moscow. Modi is currently in Tianjin, China, for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation’s Council of Heads of State summit, where he is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    “At its core, the story of Mr Trump and Mr Modi is about two brash, populist leaders with big egos and authoritarian tendencies, and the web of loyalties that help keep both men in power,” the NYT reported.

    “But it is also the tale of an American president with his eye on a Nobel Prize, running smack into the immovable third rail of Indian politics: the conflict with Pakistan.”

    Bloomberg reported earlier this month that Modi turned down an invitation from Trump to visit the White House after a G7 meeting in Canada, over concerns that he would set up a meeting with Chief of Army Staff (COAS) Field Marshal Asim Munir, who was visiting the US at the time.

    Reporting the same, NYT said: “Modi declined an invitation from Mr Trump to stop by Washington before he flew home. His officials were scandalised that Mr Trump might try to force their leader into a handshake with Pakistan’s army chief, who had also been invited to the White House for lunch around the same time. It was another clear sign, a senior Indian official said, that Mr Trump cared little for the complexity of their issue or the sensitivities and history around it.”

    The COAS carried out two visits to the US. The first, in June, saw him meet Trump at the White House for luncheon, making him the first sitting army chief to do so.

    The field marshal termed his second visit to the US in just one-and-a-half months a “new dimension” in ties between Washington and Islamabad. During this trip, the COAS engaged in high-level interactions with senior political and military leadership, as well as members of the Pakistani diaspora.

    Pakistan and the US also finalised a trade deal at the start of August, lowering tariffs to 19pc from the previously announced 29pc and helping develop Pakistan’s oil reserves while trade talks between the US and India have stalled.

    Continue Reading

  • EU Member States divided over Gaza at their Copenhagen meeting – Euronews.com

    1. EU Member States divided over Gaza at their Copenhagen meeting  Euronews.com
    2. EU countries divided on Israel sanctions as foreign ministers meet  Al Jazeera
    3. Sweden and Netherlands call for EU sanctions on Israel, Hamas  Dawn
    4. Academic cooperation or complicity? European universities push for action against Israel  European Newsroom
    5. Israel is undermining the two-state solution, Denmark’s foreign minister says  The Jerusalem Post

    Continue Reading

  • Trump cancels India visit as US-India tensions escalate over tariffs – samaa tv

    1. Trump cancels India visit as US-India tensions escalate over tariffs  samaa tv
    2. Trump scraps India visit for Quad summit amid deteriorating ties: report  Dawn
    3. The Nobel Prize and a Testy Phone Call: How the Trump-Modi Relationship Unraveled  The New York Times
    4. Trump thumbs nose at decades of India courtship  The Express Tribune
    5. Trump called Modi to seek Nobel endorsement, credit for India-Pakistan ceasefire; Indian PM rebuffed: NYT  Firstpost

    Continue Reading

  • Here’s what to know about the court ruling striking down Trump’s tariffs | Trump tariffs

    Here’s what to know about the court ruling striking down Trump’s tariffs | Trump tariffs

    Donald Trump suffered the biggest defeat yet to his tariff policies on Friday, as a federal appeals court ruled he had overstepped his presidential powers when he enacted punitive financial measures against almost every country in the world.

    In a 7-4 ruling, the Washington DC court said that while US law “bestows significant authority on the president to undertake a number of actions in response to a declared national emergency”, none of those actions allow for the imposition of tariffs or taxes.

    It means the ultimate ruling on the legality of Trump’s tariffs, which were famously based on spurious economic science and rocked the global economy when he announced them in April, will probably be made by the US supreme court.

    Here’s what to know.

    Which tariffs did the court knock down?

    The decision centers on the tariffs Trump introduced on 2 April, on what he called “liberation day”. The tariffs set a 10% baseline on virtually all of the US’s trading partners and so-called “reciprocal” tariffs on countries he argued have unfairly treated the US. Lesotho, a country of 2.3 million people in southern Africa, was hit with a 50% tariff, while Trump also announced a tariff of 10% on a group of uninhabited islands populated by penguins.

    The ruling voided all those tariffs, with the judges finding the president’s measures “unbounded in scope, amount and duration”. They said the tariffs “assert an expansive authority that is beyond the express limitations” of the law his administration used to pass them.

    Tariffs typically need to be approved by Congress, but Trump claimed he has the right to impose tariffs on trading partners under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which in some circumstances grants the president authority to regulate or prohibit international transactions during a national emergency.

    The court ruled: “It seems unlikely that Congress intended, in enacting IEEPA, to depart from its past practice and grant the president unlimited authority to impose tariffs.”

    Trump invoked the same law in February to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China, claiming that the flow of undocumented immigrants and drugs across the US border amounted to a national emergency, and that the three countries needed to do more to stop it.

    Are the tariffs gone now?

    No. The court largely upheld a May decision by a federal trade court in New York that ruled Trump’s tariffs were illegal. But Friday’s ruling tossed out a part of that ruling that would have struck down the tariffs immediately.

    The court said the ruling would not take effect until 14 October. That allows the Trump administration time to appeal to the majority-conservative US supreme court, which will have the ultimate say on whether Trump has the legal right, as president, to upend US trade policy.

    What does this mean for Trump’s trade agenda?

    The government has argued that if Trump’s tariffs are struck down, it might have to refund some of the import taxes that it has collected, which would deliver a financial blow to the US treasury.

    Revenue from tariffs totaled $159bn by July, more than double what it was at the same point last year. The justice department warned in a legal filing this month that revoking the tariffs could mean “financial ruin” for the United States.

    The ruling could also put Trump on shaky ground in trying to impose tariffs going forward. The president does have alternative laws for imposing import tariffs, but they would limit the speed and severity with which he could act.

    In its decision in May, the trade court said that Trump has more limited power to impose tariffs to address trade deficits under another statute, the Trade Act of 1974. But that law restricts tariffs to 15% and to just 150 days on countries with which the United States runs big trade deficits.

    How has Trump responded

    He’s not happy. Trump spent Friday evening reposting dozens of social media posts that were critical of the court’s decision. In a post on his own social media site, Trump claimed, as he tends to do when judges rule against him, that the decision was made by a “highly partisan appeals court”.

    “If these Tariffs ever went away, it would be a total disaster for the Country,” Trump wrote. He added: “If allowed to stand, this Decision would literally destroy the United States of America.”

    Trump claimed “tariffs are the best tool to help our workers”, despite their costs being typically borne by everyday Americans. The tariffs have triggered economic and political uncertainty across the world and stoked fears of rising inflation.

    Continue Reading

  • ‘Is Trump Dead?’ Rumors Debunked

    ‘Is Trump Dead?’ Rumors Debunked

    Topline

    President Donald Trump on Saturday was photographed leaving for his golf course in Virginia, dispelling unfounded rumors spread on social media that Trump had died in recent days after not being seen publicly.

    Key Facts

    Trump, seen with his granddaughter Kai Trump, was seen entering a vehicle on the White House’s south lawn Saturday morning while en route to his Trump National golf course in northern Virginia.

    Search inquiries for “Trump,” “is Trump dead” and “Trump dead” were among the top searches on Google as of noon Saturday while “Where is Donald Trump” was trending on X.

    Trump’s previous most recent public appearance came Wednesday as he headed a televised Cabinet meeting and was previously seen golfing earlier in the week, yet Trump also remained active online while posting periodically on his Truth Social platform.

    Why Did Social Media Users Say Trump Was Dead?

    Most social media users pointed to Trump having not been seen publicly since his Cabinet meeting Wednesday and his schedule being cleared for the weekend—though that is not unusual. Others noted Vice President JD Vance told USA Today on Thursday he was prepared to step in as president should a “terrible tragedy” occur, though Vance emphasized he believed Trump was in “good shape” and in “incredibly good health.”

    Key Background

    Concerns have swirled in recent months surrounding the health of Trump, who became the oldest president at the time of swearing in in January. Earlier this month, Trump, 79, was spotted with bruising on the back of his right hand in the Oval Office, days after his other hand was photographed with a smaller bruise. Trump has been seen with bruising on his right hand several times over the last year, including in February and November, though the White House has dispelled health concerns by claiming the bruising is “from shaking hands with thousands of people.” Sean Barbabella, Trump’s physician, elaborated on the bruising in July and said it was “consistent with minor soft tissue irritation from frequent handshaking” and use of aspirin. Barbabella also revealed Trump was diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency, a “prevalent” disease that, in most cases, results in “diminished quality of life and loss of work productivity” if left untreated, according to the National Institutes of Health. Trump’s apparently swollen ankles, which were photographed at the FIFA Club World Cup Final in July, have been connected to the condition.

    Further Reading

    ForbesTrump Seen With Bruised Right Hand Again—Here’s Everything We Know About The ConditionForbesTrump’s ‘Excellent Health’ Touted By White House Physician Who Praises His ‘Frequent Victories In Golf’

    Continue Reading

  • Houthis confirm their prime minister killed in Israeli strike

    Houthis confirm their prime minister killed in Israeli strike

    Yemen’s Houthi rebel movement has confirmed that its self-proclaimed Prime Minister Ahmed Ghaleb Nasser al-Rahawi was killed in an Israeli air strike earlier this week.

    The Iran-backed group said several other senior officials were killed when the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) targeted Yemen’s capital, Sanaa, on Thursday.

    The IDF said at the time that it attacked a Houthi “military target” in the Sanaa area, giving no further details.

    The Houthis have controlled much of north-western Yemen since 2014, after ousting the internationally recognised government from Sanaa and triggering a devastating civil war.

    The Houthis said Rahawi had been killed alongside several Houthi ministers, though it did not name the others.

    Saudi Arabian news site al-Hadath reports the Houthis’ foreign minister, as well as the ministers for justice, youth and sports, social affairs and labour, were killed.

    The office of Mahdi al-Mashat, the Houthis’ president, that several other ministers “sustained moderate and serious injuries” as a result of the strike.

    It added that Muhammad Ahmed Miftah, the Houthi deputy prime minister, would assume Rahawi’s role.

    Rahawi had held his post since August 2024, and was largely seen as a figurehead of the movement instead of being part of the top decision-making circle that plans military operations.

    Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, the movement’s ultimate leader, as well as the group’s defence minister and the chief of staff, were not said to be among the casualties in Thursday’s attack.

    The IDF is yet to publicly comment on the latest developments.

    Since the start of the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, the Houthis have regularly launched missiles at Israel and targeted commercial ships in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, saying they are acting in solidarity with the Palestinians.

    Israel has, in turn, carried out air strikes on targets in Houthi-held parts of Yemen, with the stated aim of curtailing Houthi attacks.

    Last week, Israel said it had hit Houthi targets in Sanaa, in response to the movement’s missile attack which Israel said carried cluster munitions.

    Continue Reading

  • China's support for multilateralism is vital, says UN's Guterres – Reuters

    1. China’s support for multilateralism is vital, says UN’s Guterres  Reuters
    2. China supports UN’s global role, Xi tells Guterres before SCO summit  Al Jazeera
    3. Chinese FM meets UN chief  China Daily
    4. Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Summit 2025 in Tianjin  Colorado Springs Gazette
    5. China’s Xi calls for ‘restoring’ UN’s authority, vitality on 80th anniversary of world body  Anadolu Ajansı

    Continue Reading

  • What happens next after court rules them illegal?

    What happens next after court rules them illegal?

    Getty Images Donald Trump points in the direction of the camera and wears a blue suit and tie. Getty Images

    A federal appeals court has ruled that most of Donald Trump’s tariffs are an overreach of his use of emergency powers as president.

    The so-called reciprocal tariffs – imposed on nearly every country the US trades with – are being illegally imposed, the US Court of Appeals said on Friday.

    The decision upholds a ruling in May from the Court of International Trade, which also rejected Trump’s argument that his global tariffs were permitted under an emergency economic powers act.

    Many of the tariffs that would be affected by the ruling stem from an announcement in April of a flat 10% rate on imports from all countries, which Trump said would even out “unfair” trade relations with the US.

    The court did not halt the tariffs but instead said they would remain in place until mid-October, setting up a further legal challenge in the US Supreme Court.

    There are still a lot of unknowns, but here’s what we understand so far about the ruling – and what it could mean for the US president’s flagship policy.

    What did the appeals court say?

    In its 7-4 decision, the appellate court backed a lower court’s finding that Trump did not have the authority to impose global tariffs.

    This was largely because of the law Trump used to justify the policies, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which the judges said did not grant “the power to impose tariffs, duties, or the like, or the power to tax”.

    The US Court of Appeals rejected Trump’s argument that the tariffs were permitted under his emergency economic powers, calling the levies “invalid as contrary to law”.

    Trump immediately criticised the judgement, taking to Truth Social in the hours after it landed to call the appeals court “highly partisan” and the ruling a “disaster” for the country.

    “If allowed to stand, this Decision would literally destroy the United States of America,” he wrote.

    What is the IEEPA?

    The decades-old act, which has repeatedly been deployed by Trump during both his terms in office, grants a US president significant authority to respond to a national emergency or a major threat from overseas.

    The 1977 law states that a president can pull a number of economic levers “to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy or economy”.

    It’s been used by both Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, who invoked the act to impose sanctions on Russia after the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, and then again after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine eight years later.

    But the appeals court stated in its decision that the emergency law “did not give the president wide-ranging authority to impose tariffs”.

    The IEEPA “neither mentions tariffs (or any of its synonyms) nor has procedural safeguards that contain clear limits on the president’s power to impose tariffs”, they said.

    Trump argued when he unveiled his global tariffs that a trade imbalance was harmful to US national security, and was therefore a national emergency.

    But the court ruled that imposing tariffs is not within the president’s mandate, and “the power of the purse (including the power to tax) belongs to Congress”.

    Why is this important?

    Beyond being a significant setback to a centrepiece of Trump’s agenda, the federal appeals court ruling could have an immediate impact on the US economy, with knock-on effects felt in global markets.

    Tariffs are taxes companies have to pay for importing certain goods from foreign countries – so they can have an affect on sales and profit margins.

    “Businesses are going to be subject to uncertainty,” Dr Linda Yueh, an economist at Oxford University and the London Business School, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

    Tariffs are aimed at deterring domestic firms from buying foreign goods, in turn affecting international trade.

    As countries wait to see if the US Supreme Court will take up the case – which seems likely – they could decide to hold off on conducting business with the US.

    If this happens, Dr Yueh said, it could “dampen down economic activity”.

    There are also significant ramifications that could be felt within the political sphere.

    For instance, if the Supreme Court reverses the federal appeals court decision and sides with the Trump administration, it could set a precedent that emboldens the president to use the IEEPA more aggressively than he has done so far.

    What happens next?

    The case will now most likely proceed to the highest US court, a challenge that Trump signalled on Truth Social.

    “Tariffs were allowed to be used against us by our uncaring and unwise Politicians,” Trump wrote. “Now, with the help of the United States Supreme Court, we will use them to the benefit of our Nation, and Make America Rich, Strong, and Powerful Again!”

    The conservative majority on the US Supreme Court could potentially make it more likely to side with the president’s view.

    Six of the nine justices were appointed by Republican presidents, including three who Trump selected during his first term in the White House.

    But the court has also been more critical of presidents when it seems they’re overreaching on policies not directly authorised by Congress.

    During Joe Biden’s presidency, for example, the court expanded on what it called the “major questions doctrine” to invalidate Democratic efforts to use existing laws to limit greenhouse gas emissions by power plants and to forgive student loan debt for millions of Americans.

    What if the tariffs are ruled illegal?

    The federal appeals court was divided 7-4 in its decision that Trump’s nearly universal tariffs are illegal. It has now given the US administration until mid-October to appeal to the US Supreme Court on a case with implications for both the US economy and its trade relationship with the rest of the world.

    If the Supreme Court affirms the decision, it could trigger uncertainty in financial markets.

    There will be questions over whether the US will have to pay back billions of dollars that have been gathered by import taxes on products.

    It could also throw into question whether major economies – including the UK, Japan and South Korea – are locked into the individual trade deals they secured with the US ahead of the August deadline. Other trade deals currently being negotiated could also be thrown into chaos.

    If allowed to stand, the appeals court decision would also be a tremendous blow to Trump’s political authority and reputation as a dealmaker. But if it were overturned by the Supreme Court, it would have the opposite effect.

    Are there still tariffs in place?

    This ruling affects Trump’s “reciprocal tariffs”, which includes a patchwork of different rates on most countries around the world, including taxes slapped on products from China, Mexico and Canada.

    Those levies on nearly all goods from nearly every country with which the US conducts trade will remain in place until mid-October.

    After 14 October, they will no longer be enforceable, the appeals court has said.

    Separately, the tariffs on steel, aluminium and copper, which were brought in under a different presidential authority, will remain intact and unaffected by the court’s ruling.

    Continue Reading

  • US approves $150m Starlink, $179m Patriot defence sale to Ukraine – World

    US approves $150m Starlink, $179m Patriot defence sale to Ukraine – World

    The US State Department has approved the potential sale of Starlink services and related equipment and Patriot air defence sustainment and related equipment to Ukraine, the Pentagon said on Friday.

    The transactions are worth $150 million and $179 million, respectively.

    On Thursday, the Pentagon announced US approval for the sale of air-launched cruise missiles and related equipment to Ukraine for an estimated $825 million.

    The Trump administration has agreed with European allies to step up military support for Kyiv as US President Donald Trump seeks to pressure Russia into agreeing to a peace deal to end its war in Ukraine.

    Under the agreement, European governments will pay for US weapons on Ukraine’s behalf.

    Starlink has been integral to Ukraine’s communications on the battlefield, including its control of drones, the backbone of its military’s strikes on Russian forces.

    The Patriot systems have proven effective at destroying Russian ballistic missiles aimed at Ukraine’s cities.

    Despite approval by the State Department, the notifications do not indicate that contracts have been signed or that negotiations have concluded.

    Continue Reading

  • Yemen’s Houthis say Israeli airstrike killed prime minister of rebel-controlled government

    Yemen’s Houthis say Israeli airstrike killed prime minister of rebel-controlled government

    An Israeli airstrike killed the prime minister of Yemen’s rebel-controlled government, the Iran-backed Houthi militant group said Saturday.

    Ahmed al-Rawahi was killed Thursday alongside other ministers during a strike on the Yemeni capital, Sanaa, the rebels said in a statement.

    “We declare the martyrdom of the fighter Ahmed Ghalib Al-Rahawi, Prime Minister in the Government of Change and Construction, along with a number of his fellow ministers,” it said.

    Al-Rahawi, who had served as prime minister to the Houthi-led government since 2024, was killed during a government workshop evaluating “its activities and performance during a year of its work,” the statement added.

    Following his death, Houthi President Mahdi Al-Mashat appointed Mohammed Ahmed Ahmed Muftah, the first deputy prime minister, to serve as acting prime minister.

    The Israeli military said Thursday it “precisely struck a Houthi terrorist regime military target in the area of Sanaa in Yemen.”

    The Houthis have repeatedly fired missiles at Israel during its war with Hamas, framing their attacks on Israel and Red Sea shipping as part of an allied defense of Palestinians in Gaza.

    In response to Houthi attacks, Israel has bombarded rebel-held areas in Yemen.

    Continue Reading