Trump's Leaked NATO Texts PROVE Iran Right
To see the rest of my discussion with Arturo Desimone, please join us on Patreon at – / patreon-arturo-134219033
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
39 minutes ago
- Al Jazeera
Hearing begins in Harvard's case against the Trump administration
A federal court has begun hearings in a pivotal case as Harvard seeks to force the United States government to return $2.6bn in federal funding frozen earlier this year. A lawyer for Harvard, Steven Lehotsky, said at Monday's hearing that the case is about the government trying to control the 'inner workings' of Harvard. The funding cuts, if not reversed, could lead to the loss of research, damaged careers and the closing of labs, he said. President Donald Trump's administration has battered the nation's oldest and wealthiest university with sanctions for months as it presses a series of demands on the Ivy League school, which it decries as a hotbed of liberalism and anti-Semitism. Harvard has resisted, and the lawsuit over the cuts to its research grants represents the primary challenge to the administration in a standoff that is being widely watched across higher education and beyond. The case is before US District Judge Allison Burroughs, who is presiding over lawsuits brought by Harvard against the administration's efforts to keep it from hosting international students. In that case, she temporarily blocked the administration's efforts. At Monday's hearing, Harvard is asking her to reverse a series of funding freezes. Such a ruling, if it stands, would revive Harvard's sprawling scientific and medical research operation and hundreds of projects that lost federal money. A lawyer for the government, Michael Velchik, said the government has the authority to cancel research grants when an institution is out of compliance with the president's directives. He said episodes at Harvard violated Trump's order combating anti-Semitism. Judge questions basis for government's findings on anti-Semitism Burroughs pushed back, questioning how the government could make 'ad hoc' decisions to cancel grants and do so across Harvard without offering evidence that any of the research is anti-Semitic. She also argued the government had provided 'no documentation, no procedure' to 'suss out' whether Harvard administrators 'have taken enough steps or haven't' to combat anti-Semitism. 'The consequences of that in terms of constitutional law are staggering,' she said during Monday's hearing. 'I don't think you can justify a contract action based on impermissible suppression of speech. Where do I have that wrong?' Velchik said the case comes down to the government's choosing how best to spend billions of dollars in research funding. 'Harvard claims the government is anti-Harvard. I reject that,' Velchik said. 'The government is pro-Jewish students at Harvard. The government is pro-Jewish faculty at Harvard.' Harvard's lawsuit accuses the Trump administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university after it rejected a series of demands in an April 11 letter from a federal anti-Semitism task force. A second lawsuit over the cuts filed by the American Association of University Professors and its Harvard faculty chapter has been consolidated with the university's. The April letter demanded sweeping changes related to campus protests, academics and admissions. For example, the letter told Harvard to audit the viewpoints of students and faculty and admit more students or hire new professors if the campus was found to lack diverse points of view. Harvard President Alan Garber has said the university has made changes to combat anti-Semitism but said no government 'should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue'. Monday's hearing ended without Burroughs issuing a ruling from the bench. A ruling is expected later in writing. Trump's pressure campaign has involved a series of sanctions The same day Harvard rejected the government's demands, Trump officials moved to freeze $2.2bn in research grants. Education Secretary Linda McMahon declared in May that Harvard would no longer be eligible for new grants, and weeks later, the administration began cancelling contracts with Harvard. As Harvard fought the funding freeze in court, individual agencies began sending letters announcing the frozen research grants were being terminated. They cited a clause that allows grants to be scrapped if they no longer align with government policies. Harvard, which has the nation's largest endowment at $53bn, has moved to self-fund some of its research, but warned it can't absorb the full cost of the federal cuts. In court filings, the school said the government 'fails to explain how the termination of funding for research to treat cancer, support veterans, and improve national security addresses antisemitism'. The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the April demand letter was sent. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel contracts for policy reasons. The research funding is only one front in Harvard's fight with the federal government. The Trump administration also has sought to prevent the school from hosting foreign students, and Trump has threatened to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status. Finally, last month, the Trump administration formally issued a finding that the school tolerated anti-Semitism – a step that eventually could jeopardise all of Harvard's federal funding, including federal student loans or grants. The penalty is typically referred to as a 'death sentence'.
Qatar Tribune
20 hours ago
- Qatar Tribune
As US and Europe cut aid budgets, China's star is on the rise in Southeast Asia: Report
Agencies China's role as Southeast Asia's largest infrastructure financier is increasing its regional influence at a time when the United States and the European Union are slashing their foreign aid budgets, a new report by an Australian think tank said. With the Trump administration in the United States scrapping about US$60 billion in aid and European countries pulling back more than US$25 billion, 'the centre of gravity' in Southeast Asia's development finance landscape 'looks set to drift East, notably to Beijing, but also Tokyo and Seoul', the Lowy Institute report, which was released today, said. 'China is the single largest partner on infrastructure financing in Southeast Asia, but traditional donors combined still outspend it,' the report's lead authors, Alexandre Dayant, Grace Stanhope and Roland Rajah, wrote. 'As Western aid declines and China recalibrates its strategy, Beijing is well positioned to regain dominance.' Southeast Asia's traditional partners include countries such as the US and Australia, and international organisations such as the United Nations, the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank. With the US expected to cut its foreign assistance by 83 per cent this year, the retrenchment of funds from Europe and tariff uncertainties undermining trade ties between the US and other countries, China is enhancing its influence in the region through infrastructure connections. Recent examples include work on high-speed railway links with Vietnam and Thailand. China International Development Cooperation Agency spokesman Li Ming told a news conference in March that China's 'principles related to foreign aid, including non-interference in internal affairs, no political strings attached and no empty promises made, will not change'.'A major country should act like a major country by shouldering its due international obligations and fulfilling its responsibilities, rather than renege on its promises, be mercenary or bullying,' he Lowy Institute report said that in 2023, China had 'ramped up' non-concessional loan disbursements by almost 50 per cent compared to 2022, accelerating major infrastructure projects such as the Jakarta-Bandung High-Speed Railway in Indonesia and the East Coast Rail Link in Malaysia. 'Even as the infrastructure race slows, China's relative importance as a development actor in the region will rise as Western development support recedes,' the report said. 'Beijing retains a substantial pipeline of infrastructure projects and has shown continued appetite to take on major projects.' Lower-middle-income economies such as the Philippines and Vietnam would engage with China when doing so aligned with their domestic priorities, the report said, while poorer economies such as Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar – which had limited access to alternative financing – remained 'heavily reliant' on China and had 'much less room to negotiate'. There was a fourfold increase in Chinese infrastructure project commitments from a low of US$2.5 billion in 2022 to almost US$10 billion in 2023 due to the revival of the Kyaukphyu Deep Sea Port project in Myanmar, the report said. It said the European Union and the governments of seven European countries – France, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, Austria and Italy – had announced plans last year to implement US$17.2 billion in foreign aid cuts between this year and 2029, while the United Kingdom was cutting around US$7.6 billion a year. Total development finance to Southeast Asia could decline by 8 per cent, or more than US$2 billion, to US$26.5 billion next year, according to Lowy Institute estimates based on budget documents, public announcements and calculations by other researchers.
Qatar Tribune
20 hours ago
- Qatar Tribune
Trump's tariff pressure pushes Asia towards American LNG
Agencies Asian countries are offering to buy more U.S. liquefied natural gas in negotiations with the Trump administration as a way to alleviate tensions over U.S. trade deficits and forestall higher tariffs. Analysts warn that strategy could undermine those countries' long-term climate ambitions and energy security. Buying more U.S. LNG has topped the list of concessions Asian countries have offered in talks with Washington over President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs on foreign goods. Vietnam's Prime Minister underlined the need to buy more of the super-chilled fuel in a government meeting, and the government signed a deal in May with an American company to develop a gas import hub. JERA, Japan's largest power generator, signed new 20-year contracts last month to purchase up to 5.5 million metric tons of U.S. gas annually starting around 2030. U.S. efforts to sell more LNG to Asia predate the Trump administration, but they've gained momentum with his intense push to win trade deals. Liquefied natural gas, or LNG, is natural gas cooled to a liquid form for easy storage and transport that is used as a fuel for transport, residential cooking and heating and industrial processes. Trump discussed cooperation on a $44 billion Alaska LNG project with South Korea, prompting a visit by officials to the site in June. The U.S. president has promoted the project as a way to supply gas from Alaska's vast North Slope to a liquefication plant at Nikiski in south-central Alaska, with an eye largely on exports to Asian countries while bypassing the Panama Canal Thailand has offered to commit to a long-term deal for American fuel and shown interest in the same Alaska project to build a nearly 810-mile (1,300-kilometer) pipeline that would funnel gas from The Philippines is also considering importing gas from Alaska while India is mulling a plan to scrap import taxes on U.S. energy shipments to help narrow its trade surplus with Washington. 'Trump has put pressure on a seeming plethora of Asian trading partners to buy more U.S. LNG,' said Tim Daiss, at the APAC Energy Consultancy, pointing out that Japan had agreed to buy more despite being so 'awash in the fuel' that it was being forced to cancel projects and contracts to offload the excess to Asia's growing economies. 'Not good for Southeast Asia's sustainability goals,' he said. Experts say LNG purchasing agreements can slow adoption of renewable energy in Asia. Locking into long-term deals could leave countries with outdated infrastructure as the world shifts rapidly toward cleaner energy sources like solar or wind that offer faster, more affordable ways to meet growing power demand, said Indra Overland, head of the Center for Energy Research at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs. Building pipelines, terminals, and even household gas stoves creates systems that are expensive and difficult to replace—making it harder to switch to renewables later. 'And you're more likely then to get stuck for longer,' he said. Energy companies that profit from gas or coal are powerful vested interests, swaying policy to favor their business models, he said. LNG burns cleaner than coal, but it's still a fossil fuel that emits greenhouse gases and contributes to climate change. Many LNG contracts include 'take-or-pay' clauses, obliging governments to pay even if they don't use the fuel. Christopher Doleman of the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis warns that if renewable energy grows fast, reducing the need for LNG, countries may still have to pay for gas they no longer need. Pakistan is an example. Soaring LNG costs drove up electricity prices, pushing consumers to install rooftop solar panels. As demand for power drops and gas supply surges, the country is deferring LNG shipments and trying to resell excess fuel. Experts said that although countries are signaling a willingness to import more U.S. LNG, they're unlikely to import enough to have a meaningful impact on U.S. trade deficits. South Korea would need to import 121 million metric tons of LNG in a year — 50% more than the total amount of LNG the U.S. exported globally last year and triple what South Korea imported, said Doleman. Vietnam — with a trade surplus with the U.S. twice the size of Korea's — would need to import 181 million metric tons annually, more than double what the U.S. exported last year. Other obstacles stand in the way. The Alaska LNG project is widely considered uneconomic. Both coal and renewable energy in Asia are so much cheaper that U.S. gas would need to cost less than half its current price to compete. Tariffs on Chinese steel could make building building gas pipelines and LNG terminals more expensive, while longstanding delays to build new gas turbines mean new gas power projects may not come online until 2032. Meanwhile, a global glut in LNG will likely drive prices lower, making it even harder for countries to justify locking into long-term deals with the United States at current higher prices. Committing to long-term U.S. LNG contracts could impact regional energy security at a time of growing geopolitical and market uncertainties, analysts said. A core concern is over the longterm stability of the U.S. as a trading partner, said Overland.
