Dollar index holds firmly above 98 mark; FOMC in focus
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
42 minutes ago
- First Post
Democracies snubbed, dictators courted: Inside Trump's embrace of Pakistan
US President Donald Trump looks on as a member of the media raises their hand, at the White House in Washington, DC, US, August 1, 2025. File Image/Reuters On July 31, 2025, Lara Loomer launched a broadside against billionaire Tom Barrack, President Donald Trump's ambassador to Turkey and special envoy for Syria. Loomer, whose outside vetting of Trump appointees has led to waves of firings across his national security bureaucracy, pulled no punches. 'His [Barrack's] appointment to high-level diplomatic posts is alarming, given that his primary expertise lies in leveraging political connections for financial gain,' she wrote. His actions have enabled Islamists to thrive, even at the expense of US national security. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'Barrack has a history of opaque financial dealings and what many view as political influence peddling,' she continued. 'His real estate empire, intertwined with Gulf investments, has long raised concerns about conflicts of interest and whether he is truly serving America or if he is flashing his political access.' She included in her tweet a copy of Barrack's 2018 indictment for acting as an unregistered foreign agent on behalf of Middle East interests. Barrack is the rule rather than the exception in Trump's inner circle. Many of the most influential people in the Trump administration have pre-service financial entanglements with Qatar. The US magazine Newsweek reported that, in addition to Trump himself, five major Trump administration officials have financial ties to Qatar: Chief-of-Staff Susie Wiles, FBI Director Kash Patel; Attorney General Pam Bondi; Middle East Envoy Steve Witkoff; and Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lee Zeldin. Democrats remain up-in-arms over Trump's acceptance of a $400 million jet from Qatar, alleging it amounts to a bribe; given Republican concern that a desire to influence motivates the $20 billion in assistance that Qatar provides American universities, it is hard to deny that Qatari money is not altruistic. For almost a quarter century, successive American presidents have cultivated relations with India. The development of US-India ties has coincided with perhaps the most contentious period in US foreign policy since the debate between isolationists and internationalists in the 1930s. Israel, Russia, NATO, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, and China each became political footballs. India, however, stood out as a rare example of bipartisanship. Every US president from George W Bush to Joe Biden worked to cultivate US-India ties. That commitment to a US-India partnership included Trump, at least in his first term. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In his second term, Trump has staked out an opposite position. He approached Pakistani terrorism and its Indian victims with moral equivalency and even dined with Pakistan Army Chief Asim Munir, mastermind of the Pahalgam massacre, at the White House. Just as intelligence operatives recruit and compromise targets with either blackmail, bribes, or buffeting ego, so too did Islamabad handle Trump, telling him how much he deserved a Nobel Prize and entrancing Trump with notions of gas deals. The numbers do not lie. On July 31, 2025, Trump slapped 25 per cent sanctions on India, greater than Pakistan (19 per cent), Bangladesh (20 per cent), Sri Lanka (20 per cent), and Afghanistan (15 per cent). Trump treats India with disdain, belittling its economy and privileging countries like Pakistan and Sri Lanka that are Chinese satrapies and Bangladesh and Afghanistan that are hubs for Islamist terror. Each of those countries to which Trump offers better terms ranks well below India on Transparency International's annual corruption index. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD There is no proof that Pakistan, Qatar, or Turkey bribed Trump, though a commonality of Trump's two terms is the conflict of interest between public policy and personal business. Trump's reference to gas deals with Pakistan, his Qatari involvement, and his and Barrack's repeated endorsements of Turkish President Recep Erdogan are coincidences that no Indian should ignore, especially given the coincidences, Trump's policy choices, and the lack of any other logical policy-driven explanation. India must respond in the only way Trump will understand, by denying opportunities to American businesses until Trump or his successors change US policy and again ground it in a partnership of democracies and consensus against terrorism rather than a partnership with corrupt, terror-sponsoring dictatorships. Here, India's decision to abandon the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter makes sense. The US defence industry purposely spreads itself across states and Congressional districts in order to immunise itself from cutbacks by ensuring it always has several dozen, if not hundreds, of lawmakers willing to protect the corporate interest for the sake of their employees. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD According to the Congressional Research Service, F-35 components are produced across 250 different districts in 45 US states. The same pattern holds true with other platforms that the United States would like to sell to India. Cutting contracts makes single headlines, but sending diplomats to each Congressional district to explain why New Delhi made its decision will augment pressure on Trump, especially as midterm elections loom. Trump might even reverse course. While some politicians double down to save face, Trump knows no shame, and if the pressure is great enough, he might simply change policy and try to scrub his recent past in an Orwellian frenzy of sycophantic press and statements. This still leaves India with a problem in the short term: Given the threat China poses to India, some Indian politicians may wish to replace the F-35 with Russia's fifth-generation Sukhoi-57E; this would be a mistake, given Russia's failure to honour previous contracts. Rather, India might shift toward European aircraft until such a time that Trump departs and the United States can right its present wrongs. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Even if New Delhi abandons Lockheed Martin because Trump's antics have raised questions about American reliability, such systems represent not only a lethal combat platform but also a decades-long partnership of training and maintenance. Whatever animus New Delhi might have toward Washington, the long-term stability of Moscow remains a bad bet given the political vacuum that will develop after Putin's death. Trump treats India unfairly, but Trump is an old and, frankly, corrupt man whose time is limited. India will soon be the world's third largest economy; Trump's failure to recognise the benefits of that and the wisdom of choosing democracies over dictatorships and kleptocracies is America's loss. The current crisis, though, can be the stress test to prove the strength of US-India ties. Trump can become the exception that proves the rule. The US Congress still favours India over Pakistan, and every politician motivated more by national security than side business deals will remember which country sheltered Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and which country will drive the international economy through the 21st century. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Bribery can never provide a solid base for bilateral ties like democracy and mutual interests do. Pakistan, like Turkey, will ultimately fall into the dustbin of past American partners no longer worth a future administration's time and energy. India must fight back but should not go scorched earth out of animus toward a man for whom the curtain of power is already closing. Michael Rubin is director of policy analysis at the Middle East Forum and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of Firstpost.
Time of India
42 minutes ago
- Time of India
CK Hutchison's Panama Port subsidiary seeks legal protection amid contract dispute
Advt Advt Join the community of 2M+ industry professionals. Subscribe to Newsletter to get latest insights & analysis in your inbox. Get updates on your preferred social platform Follow us for the latest news, insider access to events and more. A subsidiary of a Hong Kong conglomerate entangled in US-China tensions appealed on Friday for legal protection for businesses in Panama after the company's contract over its Panama Canal port assets has been faced with lawsuits in the Central American for the rule of law is essential to assure businesses that Panama is a safe place to invest in, Panama Ports Company , under Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison Holdings , said in a Comptroller General filed two lawsuits on Wednesday, seeking to declare unconstitutional a contract that granted the operation of ports at both ends of the canal to the Hong Kong subsidiary, and to nullify its renewal four years ago, saying it was "abusive" of Panama's turn, Panama Ports Company said its operations have had a positive impact, from building world-class ports to creating more than 25,000 direct and indirect jobs and contributing billions of balboas - Panama's currency - to the country's said it wants to work with the government in Panama for a better future."Regarding the ongoing legal actions, we firmly believe that respect for legal protection and the rule of law are essential in order to provide businesses and investors with the certainty that Panama is a safe country to invest in," it company operates the ports of Balboa, in the Pacific, and Cristobal, in the Atlantic, under a concession contract approved in 1997 and renewed in 2021 for 25 more years. CK Hutchison is controlled by the family of Li Ka-shing , the southern Chinese city's richest comptroller authority in April said that an audit of Panama Ports Company found irregularities in the renewal of the concession. But the company denied allegations that it had failed to pay about $1.2 billion to the Central American President Jose Raul Mulino said during his weekly news conference on Thursday that he fully supported the comptroller's case and would await the court's verdict."We have all seen what that contract has costed the Panamanian nation over time," Mulino said without elaborating. He alluded to some sort of public-private partnership for the ports, saying there was a lot of interest from private companies, but that it was in the early stages and provided no Hutchison Holdings' initial plan, announced in March, to sell its port assets in dozens of countries to a group that includes the US investment firm BlackRock Inc., also got caught up in tensions between Beijing and President Donald Trump, who has alleged that China interferes with the canal, initially welcomed that plan. However, it apparently angered Beijing and drew a review by Chinese anti-monopoly months of uncertainty, Hutchison said on Monday that it may seek a Chinese investor to join a consortium of buyers, which also includes BlackRock subsidiary Global Infrastructure Partners and Terminal Investment Limited, a subsidiary of the Mediterranean Shipping initial deal, valued at nearly $23 billion, including $5 billion in debt, would have given the consortium control over 43 ports in 23 countries, including the two at the Panama Ports Company said Friday it would communicate with the Panamanian government "at the appropriate time," affirming that it believes engaging with the government "is vital to discuss the way forward for" the government maintains it has full control over the canal and that the operation of the ports by Hutchison does not mean Chinese control of it.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
'Only Thing Dead Is...': BJP Shares Growth Stats After Trump's Barb, Rahul Gandhi's Endorsement
Last Updated: The IMF's World Economic Outlook for July ranked India second only to China among developing economies, projecting a growth rate of 6.7 per cent in 2025 and 6.4 per cent for 2026. The BJP on Sunday offered a subtle rebuttal to US President Donald Trump's 'dead economy" remark by sharing India's strong economic growth, supported by data from the US-based International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF's World Economic Outlook ranked India second only to China among developing economies, projecting a robust growth rate of 6.7 per cent in 2025 and 6.4 per cent for 2026. Sharing the IMF data on X, BJP IT cell chief Amit Malviya took a pointed jab at Donald Trump over his 'dead economy" remark on India and mocked Rahul Gandhi for endorsing the claim. 'India continues to be the fastest-growing economy in the world, confirmed yet again by the IMF's World Economic Outlook update for July 2025," said Malviya. 'The only thing dead is Rahul Gandhi's self-respect and, if it exists, his brain," he added. India continues to be the fastest growing economy in the world, confirmed yet again by the IMF's World Economic Outlook update for July only thing dead is Rahul Gandhi's self-respect and, if it exists, his brain. — Amit Malviya (@amitmalviya) August 3, 2025 Announcing the tariff hike on Indian goods and an unspecified penalty over India's purchase of Russian crude and arms, Trump posted on Truth Social: 'I don't care what India does with Russia. They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care. We have done very little business with India, their tariffs are too high, among the highest in the world." Reacting to the claim, Congress MP Rahul Gandhi on Thursday agreed with Trump's remarks that the Indian economy is 'dead" and said he is 'glad" that the US President stated a fact. Speaking to reporters outside Parliament, Rahul Gandhi remarked that everyone around the world acknowledges the Indian economy is 'dead"—except for the Prime Minister and the Finance Minister. 'Yes, he is right. Everybody knows this except the Prime Minister and the Finance Minister. Everybody knows that the Indian economy is a dead economy. I am glad that President Trump has stated a fact. The entire world knows that the Indian economy is a dead economy," Gandhi said. However, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor appeared to distance himself from Rahul Gandhi's remarks, stating that the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha may have had his 'own reasons" for making such a statement. view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
