Kash Patel says first FBI office in New Zealand will counter China; Beijing slams comment, Wellington distances itself
FBI director Kash Patel inaugurated FBI's first standalone office in New Zealand and suggested that this would counter China's influence. But the comment led to diplomatic discomfort as New Zealand too distanced itself from what Patel said.
New Zealand trade minister Todd McClay played down New Zealand's role and even insisted that Wellington did not celebrate the opening of the office; it just took place in Wellington.
The Wellington office will provide a local mission for FBI staff who have operated with oversight from Canberra, Australia, since 2017.
New Zealand ministers who met Patel said with the FBI office now there will be joint efforts against crimes such as online child exploitation and drug smuggling and they did not mention anything to do with China.
'When we were talking, we never raised that issue,' New Zealand foreign minister Winston said.
'I don't respond to other people's press releases,' New Zealand's minister for security services Judith Collins said when she was asked to comment on Patel's specific mention about China.
Beijing's foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun denounced Patel's remarks. 'China believes that cooperation between countries should not target any third party,' he said.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Your Finger Shape Says a Lot About Your Personality, Read Now
Tips and Tricks
Undo
'Seeking so-called absolute security through forming small groupings under the banner of countering China does not help keep the Asia Pacific and the world at large peaceful and stable," the spokesperson said.
While New Zealanders did not like the move, the new leadership at the FBI said they were surprised to find out that New Zealand did not have an FBI office.
In DC too, FBI is leaving the old Hoover Building and announced that the headquarters will be moving to the Ronald Reagan Building Complex. Patel said the relocation is necessary as the Hoover Building has become "unsafe". Moving to the Ronald Reagan Building is the most cost-effective and resource-efficient way to carry out our mission to protect the American people and uphold the Constitution," Patel said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
13 minutes ago
- Indian Express
‘Be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric': Russia warns after Trump's submarine move
The Kremlin has said nuclear weapons should be spoken about with care, after US President Donald Trump announced he had ordered two American nuclear submarines to move to unspecified regions. Speaking to reporters on Monday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, 'Everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric.' He added that the US submarines were already on active duty before Trump's comments. 'In this case, it is obvious that American submarines are already on combat duty. This is an ongoing process, that's the first thing,' Peskov said, according to Reuters. 'But in general, of course, we would not want to get involved in such a controversy and would not want to comment on it in any way,' he added. Trump made the submarine announcement last Friday in response to comments from former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev, who warned about the risk of war between nuclear-armed countries. The comments comes as Trump's deadline for new sanctions against Russia approaches. Trump has said he will impose sanctions on Russia and countries that buy its oil including India and China if Russian President Vladimir Putin does not agree to end the war in Ukraine by Friday, August 8. Putin said last week that some progress had been made in peace talks, but also said that Russia had the advantage in the conflict. His comments suggested no change in position. Trump, who has repeatedly said he could end the war within 24 hours, said he may send his envoy Steve Witkoff to Moscow later this week. Witkoff is expected to visit Russia on Wednesday or Thursday, according to Reuters. Witkoff has met Putin several times in the past, but has not succeeded in securing a ceasefire. The Kremlin did not say whether this week's visit was planned at its request or what it hoped to gain from it. 'We are always happy to see Mr Witkoff in Moscow and we are always happy to have contacts with Mr Witkoff. We consider them important, meaningful and very useful,' Peskov said. Trump has recently become more critical of Putin, despite having spoken positively about him in the past. Russia has increased its air strikes on Ukrainian cities in recent weeks, while peace talks in Turkey have brought no major results beyond prisoner and body exchanges. Some analysts in Russia and Western countries have said Trump's public comments about nuclear submarines could make tensions worse, after his online disagreement with Medvedev. Medvedev is known for making provocative remarks on social media. When asked if Russia saw Trump's comments as an escalation, Peskov said: 'We do not believe that we are talking about any escalation now.' He said nuclear issues are very sensitive and are viewed emotionally by many people. Peskov declined to answer when asked whether Putin had advised Medvedev to tone down his online language. 'The main thing, of course, is the position of President Putin,' he said.
News18
23 minutes ago
- News18
Judiciary a stabilising force in country as diverse as India: Justice Surya Kant
Chandigarh, Aug 4 (PTI) Supreme Court judge Justice Surya Kant said judiciary serves as a stabilising force in a country as diverse as India, with democracy permeating every level. 'It reinforces public trust and ensures that the lifeblood of democracy continues to flow unblemished," he said. Justice Kant was delivering the first annual H L Sibal memorial lecture at the main Bar room in Punjab and Haryana High Court in Chandigarh on Sunday. He also said democracy, like nuclear fusion, holds immense generative power. But as with any powerful force, it demands principled restraint, he said. 'In a country as diverse as ours, with democracy permeating every level, the judiciary serves as a stabilising force representing not vote banks but constitutional values," Justice Kant said. 'The Constitution serves as its containment chamber, shaping and guiding that energy and it is the judiciary that plays the role of the stabilising core, ensuring that this power does not fracture into chaos, but is channelled in service of constitutional order and justice," he added. The SC judge reflected on the judiciary's role in upholding constitutional values, particularly through the power of judicial review. 'Another vital dimension of constitutional adjudication, and what I believe is one of the most fascinating aspects of our democracy, is the judiciary's role in safeguarding free and fair elections," he said. In any democracy, 'elections are not merely procedural events; they are foundational to legitimacy and often vulnerable to misuse", he said. 'The power of judicial review to invalidate tainted elections and disqualify those who engage in electoral malpractice serves not only as a deterrent but as an important mechanism to uphold the integrity of our democratic process," Justice Kant said. Among those present on the occasion included Justice Sheel Nagu, Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court; several high court judges, senior advocate and H L Sibal's son Kapil Sibal, Sartej Singh Narula, President of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association. Earlier, in his address, Justice Kant described late H L Sibal as an unparalleled luminary of the law whose brilliance, multifaceted personality and humanity left an everlasting impression on all those who had the privilege of crossing his path. 'On a deeply personal note, Sibal Sahab was a mentor, a guide, and a dear friend to me during the transformative periods of my life, regardless of our substantial age difference. His wisdom shaped my thinking, his generosity uplifted me, and his quiet strength steadied me through pivotal moments in my journey," he said. Justice Kant recalled H L Sibal completed his law education at Lahore, a city that, before Partition, was a centre of intellectual and legal ferment. The era in which he began his legal career was volatile, marked by political upheaval, colonial repression, and the stirring of India's freedom movement, he said. 'As a young lawyer, Sibal Sahab quickly earned a reputation for fearlessly taking on controversial cases, not merely to defend his clients, but to uphold the fundamental values of free expression and to challenge the excesses of state power," Justice Kant said. Though H L Sibal initially joined his family in Jalandhar after migrating from Lahore, he later shifted to Shimla in 1948, and eventually settled in Chandigarh in 1955, he said. From there, he practised before the Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Supreme Court for over six remarkable decades. To be precise, his legal career spanned an extraordinary 67 years, Justice Kant recalled. During this period, he went on to serve as the Advocate General for the States of both Punjab and Haryana twice. PTI SUN VSD NB NB (This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed - PTI) view comments First Published: August 04, 2025, 20:15 IST News agency-feeds Judiciary a stabilising force in country as diverse as India: Justice Surya Kant 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.
The Hindu
44 minutes ago
- The Hindu
SC agrees to hear plea by Bhupesh Baghel on ‘self-incrimination' provisions in PMLA
The Supreme Court on Monday (August 4, 2025) agreed to examine a plea by former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister and Congress leader Bhupesh Baghel claiming specific provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) were violating an accused person's fundamental rights against self-incrimination and to maintain silence under questioning by an investigating agency. 'Section 50 and 63 of the PMLA are unconstitutional, being violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. The framework under Sections 50(2) and 50(3) of the Act infringes the fundamental rights against self incrimination guaranteed under Article 20(3) of the Constitution. The provisions permit the ED to summon any person, compel answers and production of documents under a threat of penalty,' the petition said. A Bench headed by Justice Surya Kant agreed to list Mr. Baghel's plea challenging Section 50 and 63 along with a batch of petitions challenging various provisions of the 2002 Act. These petitions are scheduled to be heard on August 6. Separate petitions rejected But the top court refused to entertain separate petitions filed by Mr. Baghel and his son, Chaitanya Baghel, who was arrested by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) under the PMLA in the Chhattisgarh liquor scam case on July 18, challenging the 'piecemeal investigations' being carried out by the ED. They contended that the probe has become a source of harassment. The Baghels, represented by senior advocates Kapil Sibal and A.M. Singhvi along with advocate Vipin Nair, said the prosecution in the liquor case was systematically misusing Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Section 193(9) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 'These provisions, which permit 'further investigation' without adequate procedural safeguards, confer unfettered discretion on investigating agencies, enabling arbitrary and prolonged investigations that violate the fundamental rights to equality, personal liberty, and fair trial under Articles 14, 20, and 21,' the petitions submitted. Similarly, Section 44 of the PMLA, which merely deals with the procedural aspects concerning the cognisance and trial of offences before the special court, cannot be used to confer the ED with substantive powers of 'further investigation'. 'The ED is illegally and arbitrarily exercising its power despite having no express authority under the PMLA to conduct 'further investigation' in several cases and filing incomplete or piecemeal prosecution complaints, resulting in arbitrary detention, harassment, and grave violation of fundamental rights,' Mr. Bhupesh Baghel argued. In his petition, Mr. Baghel referred to 12 FIRs and multiple chargesheets against specific individuals filed between July 2024 and June 2025 in the liquor scam case. 'This indicates a deliberate strategy to prolong proceedings and circumvent statutory protections, violating the principle that investigations pertain to the offence, not the offender,' it submitted. The Bench asked the Baghels to approach the State High Court and raise their apprehensions about the 'continuous, endless litigation' in the case. The court requested the High Court to hear the Baghels' case expeditiously.
