Monday, 30 May 2016

Chinese G20 presidency "ambitious" in seeking solutions for global growth: OECD official

OECD Chief of Staff and Sherpa to the G20, Gabriela Ramos, has hailed Chinese G20 presidency's efforts in seeking to integrate efforts of G20 countries to reboost global growth as "encouraging" and "ambitious."

Editor: Zhang Jianfeng ä¸¨Xinhua

Full coverage: G20 Hangzhou Summit

OECD Chief of Staff and Sherpa to the G20, Gabriela Ramos, has hailed Chinese G20 presidency's efforts in seeking to integrate efforts of G20 countries to reboost global growth as "encouraging" and "ambitious."

Ramos made the remarks during a recent interview on the upcoming G20 summit, set for September in Hangzhou, east China, with Xinhua.

She said the Chinese G20 presidency has brought three messages that are "very welcome" to international community.

Ramos said the first message is innovation. In her opinion, the world economy, hit by a low-growth scenario, is still in a "challenging" time though "we have been for eight years, trying everything to re-boost the growth " since the 2008 international financial crisis.

"And that's where I think that the narrative of the Chinese G20 Presidency, which is to boost for an innovation-based growth, has a good meaning. Because this is where countries are going to build their growth potential going forward," Ramos said.

The second meaningful message is green development. Ramos noted that China's strong support to the Climate Change Agreement reached last December in Paris is "refreshing" and is helpful to the signature of the Agreement in G20 member countries.

It is noted that in April this year, under China's leadership, the G20 issued its first Presidency Statement on Climate Change, committing to signing the Paris Agreement and bringing the Agreement into force as soon as possible.

The third message brought by China is to promote practical exchanges. Citing an example, Ramos said Chinese G20 presidency plans to put together in Hangzhou Summit agenda the subjects of trade and investment for discussion. In her eyes, this plan is favorable for finding solutions to real problems.

"We always seem to compartmentalize these two things, but it is really well integrated. China is actually trying to advance that agenda," Ramos said.

On assisting in preparing for the Hangzhou summit, Ramos said she found China "is really trying to look at the issues and trying to find solutions."

Ramos noted that it's not easy to reach consensus in G20 because every country has its own agenda, interests and its ways to do things.

But Chinese G20 presidency, assisted by OECD and other partners, has been trying to find the most possible consensus, the OECD official said. "The cooperation with China is very encouraging and China is ambitious in trying to find solutions," she added.

Moreover, she expressed hope that G20 members would reach a strong commitment about innovating growth pattern during the Hangzhou Summit.

Uncle Sam's more frequent military moves only escalate tensions in South China Sea

The United States' more frequent military moves in the Sea China Sea in violation of international law and in defiance of protests from a sovereign country concerned, only leads to escalation of tensions in the region.

The United States' more frequent military moves in the South China Sea in violation of international law and in defiance of protests from a sovereign country concerned, only leads to escalation of tensions in the region.

Over recent years, the United States has insisted on its military operations across the South China Sea, with some senior U.S. officials making statements saying that such moves will be even more frequent in future.

Some Western media on Sunday called the recent U.S. military moves in the South China Sea the "new normal" in spite of continuous opposition from China.

A former U.S. defense official, quoted by media reports, said what's the United States doing was for "freedom of navigation" and "following the rules."

By launching frequent moves in the South China Sea one after another, Washington is just deliberately blurring the distinction between commercial navigation and military operation in the region. But such unlawful moves by the United States can never serve to cover up its gross violation of other countries' sovereignty and territorial integrity, or to whitewash its excessive ambition of maintaining a dominant presence in the region.

In the name of "freedom of navigation or overflight," Washington repeatedly shows its force as a global sheriff, neglecting the fact that the South China Sea had enjoyed decades of peace and commercial prosperity before the 1970s.

Launching the "Freedom of Navigation (FON)" program in 1979 under the Jimmy Cater administration, Washington just wants to legitimize its undeserved interests around the world depending on its military supremacy.

Furthermore, Washington has always pointed its finger at China, saying the Asian country's development in the South China Sea inflames regional tension. But such accusations can't hold water either.

In fact, despite the complicated territorial rows between China and some of its neighbors, China has kept exercising restraint and has meanwhile devoted a lot to consultation with other related parties in order to peacefully settle disputes.

As an advocate of freedom of navigation, China also views the South China Sea vital to global trade and its own development, and consequently has no reason to unsettle the region.

Ma Zhaoxu, China's permanent representative to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said on Friday that the South China Sea issue must be resolved peacefully through constructive and meaningful negotiations with neighboring countries.

"To uphold freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea is not only an obligation under the international laws. It is also in line with China's own interests, as well as the interests of all countries in the region," Ma said.

It is advisable for the United States, an outside party, to halt its interference in the South China Sea.

Moreover, Uncle Sam's play of political brinkmanship in the South China Sea should come to an end for the sake of peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region, as well as the hard-won mutual trust with China.

Chinese law enforcement activities in its own territorial waters legitimate and justifiable

In January 2013, the Philippines unilaterally instituted arbitration proceedings against China with respect to its disputes with China in the South China

In January 2013, the Philippines unilaterally instituted arbitration proceedings against China with respect to its disputes with China in the South China Sea. On March 30, 2014, the Philippines presented a Memorial consisting of 15 Submissions. In Submission 13, the Philippines complained about two series of allegedly dangerous actions conducted by China's law enforcement vessels against Philippine law enforcement vessels on April 28 and May 26, 2012. The Philippines alleged that China thus violated relevant provisions of the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGs), and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Luo Jie/China Daily

Luo Jie/China Daily

To support its allegations, the Philippines retained Professor Craig H. Allen of the University of Washington, who presented his written opinion to the arbitration tribunal at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague on March 19, 2014, and Professor Alan E. Boyle of Essex Court Chambers of the United Kingdom, who gave a statement before the tribunal on behalf of the Philippines on Nov 26, 2015.

The argument of Boyle and Allen was: China's law enforcement vessels, by approaching Philippine vessels at close range rather than keeping well clear, violated the COLREGs; China thereby violated Article 94 of UNCLOS as a flag state for failing to exercise effective jurisdiction and control over its vessels.

It should be noted that the two professors retained by the Philippines acknowledged or did not deny the basic fact that the alleged incidents took place within the territorial sea of Huangyan Island, which is thus the territorial sea of China, and that the Philippine law enforcement vessels allegedly threatened by Chinese law enforcement vessels were not conducting innocent passage through the territorial sea, rather they were carrying out illegal activities that were prejudicial to the territorial sovereignty of China.

The principal limitation on sovereignty over territorial seas is the right of foreign vessels to innocent passage. UNCLOS defines "innocent passage" in Article 19 (1) as "not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State". Article 25 (1) of UNCLOS provides that "the coastal State may take the necessary steps in its territorial sea to prevent passage which is not innocent". Article 8 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone states, among other things, that "the Government of the People's Republic of China has the right to take all necessary measures to prevent and stop non-innocent passage through its territorial sea". As such, the only right Philippine vessels have in the territorial sea of Huangyan Island is innocent passage, any activities other than innocent passage are prohibited.

China, as the coastal State, is entitled to take necessary measures to stop activities of vessels that are prejudicial to Chinese sovereignty, which is common practice worldwide.

UNCLOS prevails over the COLREGs.

For the purpose of collision avoidance, the Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea requires ships to keep well clear of each other as a matter of principle, which is contrary to law enforcement practice which often necessitates the approach of another vessel. So when a conflict arises between law enforcement activities as authorized by UNCLOS and actions required by the COLREGs, which shall prevail?

UNCLOS prevails. Adopted by the United Nations at its third Conference on the Law of the Sea, it has been widely accepted as the "Constitution for the oceans". From the perspective of jurisprudence, UNCLOS is legally superior to the COLREGs. Thus, in cases of conflict, the application of Article 25 (1) of UNCLOS, which authorizes Chinese law enforcement vessels to approach its Philippine counterparts as a necessary measure to prevent their prejudicial activities in Chinese territorial sea, takes precedence over the application of the COLREGs. Therefore, in respect of the incidents alleged by the Philippines, the Chinese law enforcement vessels did not violate the COLREGs, it was the Philippine vessels that violated UNCLOS by conducting activities other than innocent passage in China's s territorial sea.

Boyle and Allen put the horse before the cart by holding that the COLREGs prevails over UNCLOS and applies in all circumstances. The absurdity of this logic can be illustrated with the following scenario: Foreign vessels could wantonly trample on the sovereignty of a coastal State by entering its territorial sea and conducting activities prejudicial to its sovereignty. The only response the coastal State could make in order not to violate the COLREGs would be to order its law enforcement vessels to keep well clear of the intruding foreign vessels and not conduct any preventative activities. Such a situation is totally against the regulations and spirit of international law.

The two professors pointed fingers of blame at Chinese vessels for intentional, deliberate behavior that demonstrated a reckless disregard for the safety of Philippine vessels, but they chose to ignore the fact that the Chinese vessels involved are much faster than their Philippine counterparts, had those Chinese vessels intended to collide with the Philippine vessels, many collisions would have taken place. However, there was no collision. This is because the intention of the Chinese vessels was to drive the intruding Philippine vessels out of the Chinese territorial sea as authorized by Article 25(1) of UNCLOS, without any attempt to threaten the safety of the vessels and personnel on board.

The arbitration initiated by the Philippines is intended to defame China by confusing right and wrong.

The authors are professors at Dalian Maritime University.

US election: Libertarians choose candidate Gary Johnson

Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson hopes unfavourability of Clinton and Trump will boost his third party bid
Johnson, 63, won the nomination on the second ballot at the party's convention in Florida [Reuters]

The US' Libertarian Party has nominated former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson as its presidential candidate for the second time.

Johnson, 63, won the nomination of the US' third political party on the second ballot at the party's convention in Orlando, Florida, on Sunday.

He defeated Austin Petersen, the founder of The Libertarian Republic magazine and anti-computer virus company founder John McAfee.

REPORTER'S NOTEBOOK: US Libertarians convene to elect presidential candidate

Johnson told the delegates during his acceptance speech that his job will be to get the Libertarian platform before the voters at a level the party has not seen.

"I am fiscally conservative in spades and I am socially liberal in spades," Johnson told the AP news agency.

"I would cut back on military interventions that have the unintended consequence of making us less safe in the world."

On fiscal matters, Libertarians push for reduced spending and taxes, saying the federal government has gotten too big across the board. Johnson proposes eliminating federal income and corporate taxes and replacing those with a national sales tax.

He would reduce domestic spending by eliminating the Internal Revenue Service, the Commerce and Education departments, the Food and Drug Administration and the Drug Enforcement Administration.

Freedoms high on agenda

On social issues, Libertarians generally support abortion rights, gun rights, same-sex marriage and drug legalisation, saying people should be allowed to do anything that does not hurt others.

Johnson served as New Mexico's governor from 1995 to 2003 as a Republican after a career as the owner of one of that state's largest construction companies.

READ MORE: Donald Trump's world views make world 'less safe': Poll

After failing to gain traction in the Republicans' 2012 primaries, he changed his registration to Libertarian shortly before running for that party's nomination that year.

He won the nomination and got just short of 1 percent of the general election vote against President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney.

For Johnson to make a serious run this year, he needs to qualify for the presidential debates. To do that, he must average 15 percent in five recognized polls.

He hopes that is doable because Republicans' Donald Trump and Democrats' Hillary Clinton are both seen unfavourably by a majority of voters, according to recent polls.

Source: Agencies

Crocodile snatches Australian woman during night swim

Woman missing after crocodile attack during night swim in waist-deep water in Queensland state's Daintree National Park.
Crocodiles became a protected species in Australia in 1971 [Stephen Miechel/EPA]

A woman struggled in vain to drag her friend from a crocodile's jaws off a northeast Australian beach, police said.

The pair were in shallow water at Thornton Beach in the World Heritage-listed Daintree National Park in Queensland state when the 46-year-old woman was taken by the crocodile late on Sunday, police senior constable Russell Parker said.

"Her 47-year-old friend tried to grab her and drag her to safety but she just wasn't able to do that," Parker told the Australian Broadcasting Corp.

If you go in swimming at 10 o'clock at night, you're going to get consumed.

Warren Enstch, Federal MP in Queensland

Police said the women were swimming in waist-deep water, while paramedics reported they were wading in knee-deep water when the crocodile struck.

A rescue helicopter fitted with thermal imaging equipment failed to find any trace of the missing woman on Sunday night, Parker said, with the search resuming on Monday with a helicopter, boat and land-based search teams.

The missing woman is from Lithgow in New South Wales state.

The survivor from Cairns, 93 kilometres south of Thornton Beach, was taken to a hospital in Mossman suffering from shock and a graze to her arm inflicted as the crocodile brushed against her, Queensland Ambulance Service spokesman Neil Noble said.

"The report that we have from the surviving woman is that they felt a nudge and her partner started to scream and then was dragged into the water," Noble told ABC.

Crocodile warning signs

The two women might not have been aware that the area was well known as a crocodile habitat, Parker said.

But Warren Enstch, who represents the area in the Australian Parliament, said the beach was beside a creek where tourism operators run crocodile-spotting tours.

Enstch said the two tourists had to have seen plentiful crocodile warning signs in the region.

"You can't legislate against human stupidity," Entsch said. "If you go in swimming at 10 o'clock at night, you're going to get consumed."

The attack occurred near where a 5-year-old boy was taken and killed by a 4.3-metre crocodile from a swamp in 2009 and a 43-year-old woman was killed by a 5-metre croc while swimming in a creek in 1985.

Darwin-based crocodile expert Grahame Webb said while most crocodiles were found in rivers, swamps and other protected waterways, open beaches in northern Australia were not safe.

"There have been quite a lot of attacks off beaches and off coral reefs where people are snorkelling," Webb said.

The number of crocodiles has boomed across Australia's northern tropics since they became a protected species under federal law in 1971. They pose an increasing threat to humans.

Source: AP

New presidential candidate to enter the race?

Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol says yes, and Donald Trump has been quick to issue his response

Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol sent out a provocative tweet Sunday, suggesting that another presidential candidate -- an independent -- would be entering the race for the White House over the holiday weekend.

Just a heads up over this holiday weekend: There will be an independent candidate--an impressive one, with a strong team and a real chance.

— Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) May 29, 2016


Kristol said no more Sunday evening, beyond the tweet, which referred to the yet-to-be-named candidate as "an impressive one, with a strong team and a real chance."

Donald Trump unleashed a series of tweets in response, insulting Kristol, and both badgering the GOP and calling on the party to unite against this unnamed new opponent. He also implied in his tweets that an independent run would mean a Clinton victory and a liberal nomination to the nation's highest court.

If dummy Bill Kristol actually does get a spoiler to run as an Independent, say good bye to the Supreme Court!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 29, 2016

The Republican Party has to be smart & strong if it wants to win in November. Can't allow lightweights to set up a spoiler Indie candidate!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 29, 2016

Bill Kristol has been wrong for 2yrs-an embarrassed loser, but if the GOP can't control their own, then they are not a party. Be tough, R's!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 29, 2016

The Washington Post had reported a little over two weeks ago that GOP operatives had mounted an effort to derail Donald Trump by bringing in another conservative candidate. CBS News' Julianna Goldman confirmed that several names were being considered at the time, including former Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and retired Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal.

Independents sense an opening -- Trump and Hillary Clinton have the highest unfavorable ratingsin CBS News/New York Times polls going back to 1984, when the question was first asked.

But the time for an independent candidacy is running short -- the deadline to make it onto the Texas ballot for the general election has already passed, and North Carolina's deadline is coming quickly on June 9.


Sunday, 29 May 2016

Judge orders release of documents in Trump University suit

A federal judge is ordering the release of Trump University internal documents.

Embed

Share

Sherri Simpson went to a free seminar then went on to sign up for the extended "elite" level program for $35,000 which was supposed to be a year-long program to get her going in the real estate market. Kelly Jordan, USA TODAY

Donald Trump speaks at a rally in Fresno, Calif., on May 27, 2016.(Photo: Spencer Platt, Getty Images)

WASHINGTON - A federal judge is ordering the release of Trump University internal documents in a class-action lawsuit against the now-defunct real estate school owned by presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

The order by U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel in San Diego, which came Friday in response to a request by The Washington Post, calls for the documents to be released by Thursday. The Post reported the order in a story on its website Saturday.

Trump University has been cited in anti-Trump political ads during the primary campaign as evidence that Trump doesn’t fulfill his promises. Trump’s lawyers deny any wrongdoing in the case before Curiel as well as another class-action suit in San Diego and a $40 million lawsuit filed in 2013 by the state of New York alleging that more than 5,000 people had been defrauded.

The New York real estate mogul, for his part, has claimed that Curiel is a “hater of Donald Trump” and should be ashamed of how he has handled the case. Trump also has questioned whether Curiel, who is Hispanic, is biased against him because of his call for deporting immigrants in the U.S. illegally.

The lawsuit overseen by Curiel states that Trump University’s nationwide seminars and classes were like infomercials and pressured students to buy more but didn’t deliver as promised in spite of students paying as much as $35,000 for seminars. Curiel already has set a Nov. 28 trial date.

The Post reported that Curiel’s order to release an estimated 1,000 pages of documents cites heightened public interest in Trump and that he had “placed the integrity of these court proceedings at issue.” The judge appeared to reject the argument by Trump attorneys that the information had commercial value, saying that there was no support for the assertion that Trump University may resume operations.     
 
 

Bernie Sanders: Democratic primary not "rigged," just "dumb"

The Democratic candidate also told "Face the Nation" he's not surprised Trump backed out of debating him, given the GOP candidate's flip-flopping on other issues

After Donald Trump announced Friday that he would not debate Bernie Sanders, despite being the first one to float the idea, Sanders said Saturday that Trump's change of heart is exactly the kind of flip-flopping he's come to expect from the presumptive Republican nominee.

"Donald Trump said he wanted to go forward, then he changed his mind, said no, then he changed his mind and said yes, then he changed his mind and said no," Sanders told "Face the Nation" moderator John Dickerson in an interview taped for Sunday's broadcast. "Maybe we'll get a call in five minutes and he'll say yes again. I think that is who Donald Trump is, and I think the American people should be very concerned about somebody who keeps changing his mind not only on this debate, but on virtually every issue he's been asked about."

In a press release declining the debate, Trump suggested the Democratic primary is "totally rigged" to prevent Sanders from winning, and that it would be "inappropriate" for him to debate a "second-place finisher."

Dickerson asked Sanders, who trails Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton in pledged delegates as the end of primary season approaches, whether he agrees with Trump's characterization.

"Well, I've been very touched by Donald Trump's love for me," Sanders replied sarcastically. "But John, you know, with all due respect, I think there may be some aspect of this which he thinks will advantage himself. So I do appreciate his love and his compassion for me, but I don't really accept his words."

Turning to the underlying question, Sanders explained, "We knew when we were in this, that we were taking on the entire Democratic establishment. No great secret about that. And yet we have won twenty states, we're in California right now, I think we have a good chance to win here. I think we have an uphill fight, but there is just a possibility that we may end up at the end of this nominating process with more pledged delegates than Hillary Clinton. "

"What has upset me, and what I think is -- I wouldn't use the word 'rigged' because we knew what the rules were -- but what is really dumb, is that you have closed primaries, like in New York State, where three million people who were Democrats or Republicans could not participate," Sanders added. "You have a situation where over 400 super delegates came on board Clinton's campaign before anybody else was in the race, eight months before the first vote was cast. That's not rigged, I think it's just a dumb process which has certainly disadvantaged our campaign."

For more of the interview with Sanders, tune into "Face the Nation" tomorrow. Check your local listings for airtimes.


Xi underscores challenge, opportunity of aging population

President Xi Jinping has called for better care for China's aging population.

Editor: Wang Xuemeng ä¸¨Xinhua

Full coverage: China’s Leaders

BEIJING, May 28 (Xinhua) -- President Xi Jinping has called for better care for China's aging population.

Xi, also general secretary of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee, made the remarks on Friday afternoon at a group study attended by members of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee on the state and future of a graying society.

He emphasized the importance of meeting the needs of the vast number of the elderly and solving social problems.

With the world's largest number of senior citizens, China has improved elder care, Xi said. However, much remains to be done and there is a quite big gap between reality and elderly people's expectation of happy twilight years, he said.

China has the largest number of aging population, thus careful handling of the issue holds a stake over the overall development of the nation and people's well-being, Xi said.

Xi called for "a positive attitude" because the elderly deserve acceptance and respect from the public.

Respecting and caring for the elderly is a Chinese traditional virtue, and it should be carried out in modern times. The elderly should also develop a sense of self-respect and independence, he said.

Xi urged continuous improvement in the elderly-care system by enhancing scientific study and learning constructive experience from other countries.

Pension insurance and medical insurance systems should be perfected, and supporting policies should be provided for the family pension mode and showing loving care and service for rural elderly left at home, Xi said.

The elderly should be encouraged to play an active role in moral education and resolving social conflicts.

Xi also pointed to the bright prospects of the old-age business, given the huge demand for products and services. He said government support should foster new growth points.

There are more than 220 million people aged at 60 or older in China, 16 percent of the total population.

Riteish, Celina Jaitly and others slam AIB’s Tanmay Bhat for insulting Lata Mangeshkar, Sachin Tendulkar

AIB, Riteish Deshmukh, Celina Jaitely, AIB tanmay bhat, AIB comedian Tanmay Bhat, AIB news, Lata Mangeshkar, Sachin Tendulkar, Riteish Deshmukh film, entertainment newsAIB comedian Tanmay Bhat is at it again. And this time the unsuspecting victims of the comedian’s roasting were Lata Mangeshkar and Sachin Tendulkar.

AIB comedian Tanmay Bhat is at it again. And this time the unsuspecting victims of the comedian’s roasting were Lata Mangeshkar and Sachin Tendulkar.

In a new video posted on his official Facebook page, Tanmay is seen roasting the revered Bharat Ratna awardees all in the name of humour. Titled Sachin v/s Lata Civil War, some of the punchlines used against Lata in the video include Jon Snow also died, so should you, Your face looks like someone has kept you in water for eight days.

The act didn’t go down well with denizens of Bollywood. Actors Riteish Deshmukh, Celina Jaitly and others slammed the comedian for crossing the line this time.

“Am absolutely shocked. Disrespect is not cool and neither is it funny,” wrote Riteish on his Twitter timeline.

Am absolutely shocked. Disrespect is not cool and neither is it funny. http://t.co/ymYPi9hxuv

— Riteish Deshmukh (@Riteishd) May 28, 2016

“Absolutely..shocked and appalled. Not amused. Lata Mangeshkarji needs to be apologised to NOW!!,” tweeted Celina.

Absolutely.. Shocked n appalled!! Not amused @mangeshkarlata ji needs to be apologised to .. NOW !! @rasheshshah http://t.co/viTcXyBSI0

— Celina Jaitly (@CelinaJaitly) May 28, 2016

Others who criticised Tanmay included ex Balaji boss Tanuj Garg, KRK.

It looks like after the much debated AIB roast last year, Tanmay has opened doors for yet another controversy.

The great Indian American dream

It is a dream that successive Indian governments have also dreamt, hoping it turns into reality as Indian Americans continue to prosper. Over the years, Indian prime ministers have carefully listened to various, often boastful, Indian American groups and encouraged the dream project.
Seema Sirohi

It is a dream that successive Indian governments have also dreamt, hoping it turns into reality as Indian Americans continue to prosper. Over the years, Indian prime ministers have carefully listened to various, often boastful, Indian American groups and encouraged the dream project.

| May 29, 2016, 10.26 AM IST
A common and recurring dream of India . Americans is to be as powerful as the Jewish American lobby and to have the political muscle to influence US policy in favour of the mother country. 

In this dream, the bid daddies of the Indian American community stride purposefully through the corridors of power — and doors open instantly. They walk in and tell the grey suits what they want and, miraculously, things get done. Cheques are written as thankyou notes and everyone is happy. 

It is a dream that successive Indian governments have also dreamt, hoping it turns into reality as Indian Americans continue to prosper. Over the years, Indian prime ministers have carefully listened to various, often boastful, Indian American groups and encouraged the dream project. 

Enter Narendra Modi , a prime minister who seems specially energised by the Indian diaspora using its heft for the benefit of India. Since he himself travelled the United States widely as a BJP functionary, made connections and stayed in the homes of BJP supporters, the community is eager to please "Narendra Bhai". 

A few Indian Americans decided to flex their financial muscle to bring one of their ongoing projects to fruition — getting the US Congress to pass a law that lifts India into the realm of America's very special friends in time for Modi's visit on June 7-8. It would be an appropriate gift since Modi is spending a day on Capitol Hill, addressing a joint meeting of the US Congress and being feted by Speaker of the House of Representatives Paul Ryan. 

The main organisation behind the efforts is the US-India Security Council Inc (USISC), a group launched in 2010 by a few prominent Indian Americans. Equipped with the advice of expensive lobbyists, its members have been bustling around Washington, meeting senators and congressmen over the last three months and generally whispering that something big is afoot. 

But this first real attempt to be like the legendary pro-Israel lobby has got mired in intrigue, backbiting and preemptive strikes, because another group — the US-India Business Council , an industry organisation of American companies — claimed credit for work that it didn't initiate. The president of USIBC , Mukesh Aghi, has raised eyebrows all around for his undiplomatic and eager bragging. 

Not kosher and surely not a lesson one would draw from Jewish Americans who are organised nationally and locally, down to the village level, as it were. They donate money and time in a disciplined manner mostly to one organisation — the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. AIPAC is the pro-Israel lobby the US Congress fears the most. Indian Americans, on the other hand, have too many organisations, working at cross purposes. 

Shekhar Tiwari, cofounder of the USISC and a BJP activist, said his organisation's main purpose was to get India the same status as a nato country, fast-track defence technology sales and help India get the military edge it needs to stay ahead in a dangerous neighbourhood. Just like Israel. 

TOO BIG TO HANDLE 

But it was a Herculean task — it required changes in the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), a major US law that governs all military sales. The US Congress is generally loath to amend the AECA unless forcefully persuaded that it is in America's best interest. It wants compelling geopolitical reasons, clearly laid out with tangible gains. 

Tiwari said his group had been holding seminars on what plagues US-India relations for a while and how to remove hurdles to make defence relations stronger. "There was a feeling that the US was giving India low-level technology. So we thought why not get the US law modified? It had been done for Israel. For Taiwan." He said the idea came from Sue Ghosh, a prominent Indian American in the Washington area who is active in the Republican Party. 

In Tiwari's telling, they met key senators and their powerful aides to explore the idea. "We were flying under the radar because we didn't want to alert India's enemies" who, like every country worth its salt, keep their ear to the ground on Capitol Hill. If they got wind of the project, they would unleash their lobbyists to block everything. 

Last year, the USISC hired Akin Gump, a prominent lobbying firm, to prepare a draft that would address the legal landscape and suggest changes favourable to India. They later hired K&L Gates, a top law firm, to test the ground. They have paid $170,000 so far to the two firms, according to the Senate Office of Public Records. It was a serious bit of change. 

Their efforts resulted in a list of proposals around February-March to be presented to friendly senators and congressmen. Everything was hush-hush as Ramesh Kapur, also a cofounder of USISC, was seen around Washington, meeting senior Indian government officials. Kapur, an entrepreneur from Massachusetts, is an old Democratic Party donor and was involved in John Kerry's campaign for president in 2004. 

He was heard asking Indian journalists at official dinners what they thought of various senior officials in the Modi government. He tried to project secrecy and mystery of an important mission being underway. A senior official in New Delhi apparently told him to go ahead and if he succeeded, the community would get the credit. 

The USISC draft proposed that India be included in the category of "NATO plus five" — a list of 28 countries in NATO and Australia, New Zealand, Israel, South Korea and Japan. These countries have a shorter waiting period when they buy US defence equipment. 

It also said that since India and the US face "mutual security threats from both state and non-state actors", the US president must ensure that weapon sales to those countries are carefully scrutinised. The president must under law issue a "determination" that such sales would not affect India's "strategic operational advantage". 

The proposals were ambitious. Much as relations between India and the US have steadily improved over the last 15 years, the scope of the draft was unrealistic, according to Congressional sources. Besides, the senators had specific questions. Most of all, they wanted to know if the Modi government supported these proposals. No one was going to move on the basis of a few busy bees, one Congressional aide said. 

Whose Bill Was It? 

New Delhi officially kept a distance even as it appeared to be giving a green signal. Tiwari said the USISC had shared the draft with the Indian Embassy and with the USIBC in good faith. USISC representatives met Senator John McCain , chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and were told to downsize their ambition. They did. 

What exactly happened after that is shrouded in claims and counter-claims. It appears that the USIBC began pitching the proposal as its own and started fishing on Capitol Hill. It got George Holding, the Republican chair of the India Caucus in the House of Representatives, to introduce a bill on March 22 called the US-India Defense Technology and Partnership Act, which essentially was what the USISC had drafted. 

Tiwari claims that the USISC plan, which was to go through the Senate not the House, was pre-empted. The USIBC was working through the House. Obviously, Kapur, Tiwari and Aghi, who also has close ties with the BJP, wanted bragging rights with Modi whose visit was getting closer. The pressure was on, which led to false steps because of the complex workings of the US Congress, its various committees, their separate jurisdictions and the maze of rules. "They were in over their heads," an insider said. 

Holding's bill directed the US president to do an annual assessment of India's "strategic operational abilities", and sell defence articles and technical data accordingly and develop military plans to address threats to mutual security. It also sought to amend the biggie — the AECA — and insert India in the list of NATO plus five countries to make it essentially NATO plus six. 

But the Holding bill got no co-sponsors and is currently languishing in nowhere land. Tiwari says the USISC was never going to go that route, indirectly blaming the USIBC. 

However, an amendment — also proposed by Holding with three key co-sponsors —called Enhancing Defense and Security Cooperation with India was passed on May 18. But it was a watered-down version of Holding's original bill. Most importantly, it eliminated references to amending the big law governing arms sales that would have prioritised India. Limited in reach, it was shorn of teeth. 

But the amendment does institutionalise the relationship to protect it from the ups and downs of American politics and blesses what the Pentagon is already doing. Tiwari is upset at the unfolding scenario and wonders at whose urging did the USIBC and Aghi agree to the compromise. 

The reality is that neither Aghi nor various USISC members properly judged the temperature of India in the US Congress even as they pushed to claim credit. Congressional aides seemed equally sceptical of both organisations. 

Ally? Nah

According to Congressional insiders, hardnosed senators were simply unwilling to treat India as an "ally", a technical and legal status, because India is not one. India has not participated in any US-led military operation and made a public point of saying it won't. 

"India is never willing to be in the coalition of the willing. Gulf countries have sent troops. But even they don't have ally status," a wellinformed observer said. "There is zero chance of India getting that status." He called the USISC "unrealistic" and blamed it for setting up "false expectations". 

He said the USISC was amateurish in its operation. For example, it had a fund-raiser for Senator McCain with an invitation that loudly proclaimed its India agenda, implying a quid pro quo. The invitation was withdrawn within hours and re-issued as a straight-forward invite. An apology was rendered to McCain. "That in a nutshell is the sophistication of this group." 

This observer praised the USIBC for grasping the fact that the US Congress was not quite ready to go the whole hog for India and that ambitions had to be moderated. Besides, India doesn't necessarily want the label of a US ally. But others have found the USIBC's frequent press statements claiming credit unseemly and questioned its grasp of the "process". 

Interestingly, neither the USIBC nor the USISC was able to furnish answers to specific questions from senators: what concrete impact would amending the AECA have on India-US defence trade? They wanted figures in dollars and cents. 

The USISC is still trying to have a stronger amendment through the Senate to overtake the one in the House but success is uncertain. Even if the amendment in its current form becomes law as part of the larger defence authorisation act, it would be a good "building block" for the next president. And New Delhi is apparently fine with that. 

In the end, the attitude is that something is better than nothing. But clearly there is some distance to travel for both Indian Americans and Indian government surrogates before they can be truly effective and evolve into something akin to the pro-Israel lobby. 

Bookmark or read stories offline - Download the TOI app


Judge orders release of documents in Trump University suit

A federal judge is ordering the release of Trump University internal documents.

Embed

Share

Sherri Simpson went to a free seminar then went on to sign up for the extended "elite" level program for $35,000 which was supposed to be a year-long program to get her going in the real estate market. Kelly Jordan, USA TODAY

Donald Trump speaks at a rally in Fresno, Calif., on May 27, 2016.(Photo: Spencer Platt, Getty Images)

WASHINGTON - A federal judge is ordering the release of Trump University internal documents in a class-action lawsuit against the now-defunct real estate school owned by presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

The order by U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel in San Diego, which came Friday in response to a request by The Washington Post, calls for the documents to be released by Thursday. The Post reported the order in a story on its website Saturday.

Trump University has been cited in anti-Trump political ads during the primary campaign as evidence that Trump doesn’t fulfill his promises. Trump’s lawyers deny any wrongdoing in the case before Curiel as well as another class-action suit in San Diego and a $40 million lawsuit filed in 2013 by the state of New York alleging that more than 5,000 people had been defrauded.

The New York real estate mogul, for his part, has claimed that Curiel is a “hater of Donald Trump” and should be ashamed of how he has handled the case. Trump also has questioned whether Curiel, who is Hispanic, is biased against him because of his call for deporting immigrants in the U.S. illegally.

The lawsuit overseen by Curiel states that Trump University’s nationwide seminars and classes were like infomercials and pressured students to buy more but didn’t deliver as promised in spite of students paying as much as $35,000 for seminars. Curiel already has set a Nov. 28 trial date.

The Post reported that Curiel’s order to release an estimated 1,000 pages of documents cites heightened public interest in Trump and that he had “placed the integrity of these court proceedings at issue.” The judge appeared to reject the argument by Trump attorneys that the information had commercial value, saying that there was no support for the assertion that Trump University may resume operations.

How will Ankara and Washington heal their rift?

Turkey accuses the US of siding with a banned Kurdish group, while Washington says the YPG is crucial in defeating ISIL.

Turkey calls them "terrorists". The US sees them as allies against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as ISIS).

Kurdish forces in Syria have been working with the US army for months now. But Turkey found out this week that American troops have been wearing the Kurdish group's insignia.

And they are not happy about it. US troops say they were wearing it to blend in.

The YPG is an armed group made up mostly of Syrian Kurds. And they are one of the most effective groups fighting against ISIL in Syria right now.

But Turkey says it's an extension of the banned PKK, that has been fighting for Kurdish autonomy for three decades.

So, how will this spat between Turkey and the US impact the ongoing war in Syria?

Presenter: Martine Dennis

Guests:

Metin Gurcan, former Turkish military officer and a columnist for Al-Monitor.

Rebwar Fatah, founder and managing director of Middle East Consultancy.

Mike Lyons, senior fellow at the Truman National Security Project. 

Source: Al Jazeera