"Nine Times More Gerans..." Russia Shows "World's Largest And Most Secret" Drone Factory
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- Indian Express
1 in 3 US smartphone imports now made in India, China's lead shrinks
India's share in US smartphone imports surged to nearly 36 per cent in the first five months of 2025, from about 11 per cent in 2024. China, which continues to dominate the product category, saw its share drop from 82 per cent to 49 per cent over the same period. India's growing share — now 1 in 3, driven largely by Apple iPhones — comes amid ongoing trade talks with the US. While smartphones are India's top export to the US by value, President Donald Trump has threatened a 25 per cent tariff on Indian-made iPhones. US smartphone imports from India jumped by over three times year-on-year to 21.3 million units between January and May this year, according to data from the US International Trade Commis-sion (USITC). In value terms (CIF), imports of Indian-made smartphones increased 182 per cent y-o-y to $9.35 billion, already higher than around $7 billion in the whole of 2024. In May, Apple CEO Tim Cook had said the company expects most iPhones sold in the US in the April-June quarter to have India as their country of origin. Roughly 20 per cent of Apple's global iPhone production capacity is now based in India. Meanwhile, China exported 29.4 million smartphones to the US between January and May — a 27 per cent y-o-y drop — valued at around $10 billion. China (49 per cent) and India (36 per cent) were followed by Vietnam with 8.3 million units exported, accounting for a share of 14 per cent. Apple doubled down on production in India in 2020, after the government announced its flagship Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme to support smartphone manufacturing in the country. Through its contract manufacturers, the company has been the biggest beneficiary of the scheme, which has helped it move some production away from China. While it started by making some of its older iPhones in India, Apple today produces all models, including the higher-end Pro range, in the country. Apple's pivot to India from China for US-bound exports has drawn criticism from Trump, who, in May, said he's told Apple's chief executive that he does not want the company to expand its manufacturing operations in India. 'I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else. If that is not the case, a tariff of at least 25% must be paid by Apple to the US. Thank you for your attention to this matter,' Trump had said in a social media post. However, Apple is unlikely to overhaul its India expansion plans in the near-term. In May, its contract manufacturer Foxconn informed the London Stock Exchange of a $1.49 billion investment in one of its India units, Yuzhan Technologies (India) Pvt Ltd. The new plant is expected to come up in Tamil Nadu, where Foxconn already has a major iPhone production base. There are some challenges though. Of Apple's latest official supplier list, in 2023, as many as 157 of the company's various vendors and suppliers manufactured in mainland China, up from 151 the previous year. The number of Indian suppliers was 14. People in the know say that number has now risen to 64, marking a slow but steady shift of Apple's supplier base to India. In a Lok Sabha reply on Wednesday, Union MoS for Electronics and Information Technology Jitin Prasada said mobile manufacturing units in India have increased to 300 in 2024-25, from just 2 in 2014-15. At the same time, production of mobile phones increased 28 times to Rs 5.45 lakh crore, while exports increased 127 times to Rs 2 lakh crore. 'Total FDI in field of electronics manufacturing in last 5 years (i.e. since FY 2020-21) is US$ 4,071 mn, cumulative FDI of US$ 2,802 mn has been contributed by MeitY PLI beneficiaries,' Prasada said. Aggam Walia is a Correspondent at The Indian Express, reporting on power, renewables, and mining. His work unpacks intricate ties between corporations, government, and policy, often relying on documents sourced via the RTI Act. Off the beat, he enjoys running through Delhi's parks and forests, walking to places, and cooking pasta. ... Read More Soumyarendra Barik is Special Correspondent with The Indian Express and reports on the intersection of technology, policy and society. With over five years of newsroom experience, he has reported on issues of gig workers' rights, privacy, India's prevalent digital divide and a range of other policy interventions that impact big tech companies. He once also tailed a food delivery worker for over 12 hours to quantify the amount of money they make, and the pain they go through while doing so. In his free time, he likes to nerd about watches, Formula 1 and football. ... Read More
Mint
5 minutes ago
- Mint
Chicago Wins Dismissal of Trump Suit Over Sanctuary City Policy
A federal judge dismissed the Trump administration's lawsuit against Illinois and Chicago over 'sanctuary' policies that prevent local officials from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement. US District Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins on Friday said the policies at issue are protected by the US Constitution, which says all powers not explicitly granted to the federal government are reserved to the states. It's the first legal setback among several lawsuits the administration has filed against cities and states over sanctuary laws. 'Finding that these same policy provisions constitute discrimination or impermissible regulation would provide an end-run around the Tenth Amendment,' Jenkins said in her ruling. 'It would allow the federal government to commandeer states under the guise of intergovernmental immunity — the exact type of direct regulation of states barred by the Tenth Amendment.' The Trump administration sued Illinois, Chicago, Cook County and local officials including Governor JB Pritzker in February as part of an effort by the US Department of Justice to target local government policies seen as impeding immigration enforcement efforts. The federal government argued the policies are unconstitutional and were obstructing efforts to carry out Trump's immigration crackdown. US Attorney General Pam Bondi filed the suit during her first full day on the job. In the intervening months, the administration sued a handful of other cases, including Los Angeles, New Jersey and San Francisco. New York City became the latest target on Thursday. Jenkins said in her ruling that immigration is primarily the responsibility of the federal government, under US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. She noted that federal law 'merely offers states the opportunity to assist in civil immigration enforcement' and doesn't mandate participation. Therefore, sanctuary policies 'don't make ICE's job more difficult; they just don't make it easier,' she said. The suit was challenging a state law passed in 2017 and strengthened in 2021 that broadly prohibited local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement, as well as a Chicago policy and a Cook County ordinance reflecting similar limitations. Sanctuary cities and immigration advocates argue that expanding law enforcement collaboration with federal immigration authorities erodes trust in migrant communities and makes people less likely to report crimes or take advantage of public services like schools and hospitals. Under Jenkins' order, the Trump administration has until Aug. 22 to amend the lawsuit. The case is US v. Illinois, 25-cv-1285, US District Court, Northern District of Illinois . This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
News18
30 minutes ago
- News18
Ceasefire With Pakistan Was Bilateral Decision, MEA Tells Parliament, Rejects Trump's Claims
Last Updated: Minister of state for external affairs Kirti Vardhan Singh categorically denied any US role in facilitating the ceasefire Amid claims by US President Donald Trump that he was solely responsible for brokering peace between India and Pakistan, the ministry of external affairs (MEA) has clarified in Parliament that the ceasefire agreement of May 10 was entirely a bilateral decision reached after direct military-level talks initiated by Pakistan. Responding to a series of pointed questions from Congress MP Mohammed Javed, TMC MP Mala Roy, and others, the MEA laid out a detailed timeline of events. It stated that by May 8, India had successfully achieved its primary military objectives, including dismantling terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu & Kashmir, following the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam. From April 22 to May 10, Indian diplomats engaged in consultations with several global partners, including the United States. However, India consistently communicated that its actions were strategic, deliberate, and aimed at avoiding unnecessary escalation. Crucially, on May 9, Indian officials informed US Vice President JD Vance that any large-scale retaliation from Pakistan would be met with a firm and decisive Indian response. In Parliament, minister of state for external affairs Kirti Vardhan Singh categorically denied any US role in facilitating the ceasefire. He dismissed Trump's repeated assertions as baseless, including the claim that India's restraint was influenced by prospective trade deals with the US. Singh underlined that India's position on Kashmir remains unchanged—that it is a bilateral issue not open to third-party mediation, a message also conveyed to the United States President. The clarification comes after Trump, in numerous public appearances and campaign events in the US, claimed credit for 'bringing peace" to South Asia. He suggested his intervention helped prevent war and hinted that trade negotiations may have influenced India's decision to de-escalate. These claims ignited a political debate within India. Opposition leaders, including Rahul Gandhi, questioned whether India's strategic autonomy had been compromised. In response, external affairs minister Dr S Jaishankar firmly rejected the allegations and reiterated that India's military and diplomatic decisions were entirely self-driven. The ceasefire came after Operation Sindoor, India's swift military response targeting terror infrastructure across the LoC and deep inside PoJK, following the Pahalgam terror attack. The government has emphasised that the ceasefire was declared only after its objectives were met, and not due to any external pressures. view comments First Published: July 26, 2025, 04:04 IST 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.
