North Korea says Trump must accept new nuclear reality
Kim Yo Jong, the powerful sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un who is believed to speak for his brother, said she conceded that the personal relationship between Kim and US President Donald Trump 'is not bad.'
But if Washington intended to use a personal relationship as a way to end the North's nuclear weapons program, the effort would only be the subject of 'mockery,' Kim Yo Jong said in a statement carried by KCNA.
'If the US fails to accept the changed reality and persists in the failed past, the DPRK-US meeting will remain as a 'hope' of the US side,' she said. DPRK is short for North Korea's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
North Korea's capabilities as a nuclear weapons state and the geopolitical environment have radically changed since Kim and Trump held talks three times during the US president's first term, she said.
'Any attempt to deny the position of the DPRK as a nuclear weapons state ... will be thoroughly rejected,' she said.
Trump has said he has a 'great relationship' with Kim, and the White House has said the president is receptive to the idea of communicating with the reclusive North Korean leader.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Arabiya
28 minutes ago
- Al Arabiya
Columbia University deal with Trump admin sets dangerous precedent, academics warn
Columbia University's $200 million agreement with President Donald Trump's administration marks the end of a months-long showdown, but academics warn it is just the first round of a government 'assault' on higher education. Academics from Columbia and beyond have expressed concerns that the deal -- which makes broad-ranging concessions and increases government oversight -- will become the blueprint for how Trump brings other universities to heel. The New York institution was the first to be targeted in Trump's war against elite universities, for what the US president claimed was its failure to tackle antisemitism on campus in the wake of pro-Palestinian protests. It was stripped of hundreds of millions of dollars of federal funding and lost its ability to apply for new research grants. Labs saw vital funding frozen, and dozens of researchers were laid off. But Columbia last week agreed to pay the government $200 million, and an additional $21 million to settle an investigation into antisemitism. According to Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, the lack of due process -- with the government slashing funding before carrying out a formal investigation -- left Columbia in an 'untenable position.' Columbia law professor David Pozen agreed, saying the 'manner in which the deal was constructed has been unlawful and coercive from the start' and slamming the agreement as giving 'legal form to an extortion scheme.' Federal oversight The deal goes beyond addressing antisemitism and makes concessions on international student admissions, race and ethnicity considerations in admissions and single-sex spaces on campus, among other issues. Columbia also agreed to appoint an independent monitor to implement the deal, share ethnicity admissions data with the government and crack down on campus protests. Many of the provisions 'represent significant incursions onto Columbia's autonomy,' said Pozen. 'What's happened at Columbia is part of a broader authoritarian attack on civil society,' he said, pointing to similar pressures on law firms and media organizations to fall in line. According to the law professor, the deal 'signals the emergence of a new regulatory regime in which the Trump administration will periodically and unpredictably shake down other schools and demand concessions from them.' In the coming weeks, Pozen said he expected the 'administration will put a lot of pressure on Harvard and other schools to follow suit.' Harvard University has pushed back against the government, filing a lawsuit in a bid to reverse sweeping funding cuts. But Steven Levitsky, a professor of government at Harvard, said that 'in terms of academic freedom and in terms of democracy, the (Columbia) precedent is devastating.' 'First round' Education Secretary Linda McMahon said she hoped the Columbia deal would be a 'template for other universities around the country.' On Wednesday, McMahon announced a deal with Brown University to restore some federal funding and end ongoing investigations after the Ivy League school agreed to end race considerations in admissions and adopt a biological definition of gender. Brown President Christina Paxson admitted 'there are other aspects of the agreement that were not part of previous federal reviews of Brown policies' but were 'priorities of the federal administration.' Harvard is reportedly considering forking out $500 million to settle, according to the New York Times. Others have made smaller concessions to appease the government, with Trump's alma mater the University of Pennsylvania banning transgender women from competing in women's sports, and the University of Virginia's head resigning after scrutiny over its diversity programs. Brendan Cantwell, a professor at Michigan State University who researches the history and governance of higher education, said government interference in universities 'has not happened at scale like this, probably ever in American history.' While some university staff see striking an agreement as the quickest way to reopen the federal funding spigot, Cantwell warned that concessions such as sharing ethnicity data from admissions could be 'weaponized' and provide fodder for future probes. Levitsky agreed, saying: 'Extortionists don't stop at the first concession. Extortionists come back for more.' 'There's a very high likelihood that this is just the first round,' he said. Pozen noted that it will be harder for 'major research universities to hold the line' compared to smaller colleges which are less reliant on federal funding. But Levitsky still urged Harvard to stand its ground and 'fight back,' including in the courts. 'Fighting an authoritarian regime is costly, but that's what we have to do,' he said. 'This is an unprecedented assault, and universities need to work together.'
Al Arabiya
28 minutes ago
- Al Arabiya
US court keeps bar on Los Angeles federal immigration arrests
A federal appeals court late on Friday affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring US government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled that the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on peoples' appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and US Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge last month blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on 'apparent race or ethnicity,' speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a 'bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day laborer pick up site, agricultural site, etc.' The Department of Homeland Security and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. 'The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now,' she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, welcomed the ruling in statement: 'This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region.'
Arab News
5 hours ago
- Arab News
Pakistan says decision to roll back digital tax on foreign retailers to boost e-commerce sector
KARACHI: A senior Pakistani finance official said on Friday the government had decided to roll back a recently imposed digital tax on foreign retailers in an effort to promote e-commerce in the country. The Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), the government's tax collection body, reversed this week a set of measures introduced in the federal budget that were aimed at regulating cross-border online purchases and affected international firms like China's Temu, Shein and AliExpress. These included a five percent fixed tax on digital platforms and a sharp reduction in the duty-free threshold for imported parcels, slashing it from Rs5,000 ($18) to Rs500 ($1.8). 'The government plans to continue expanding the e-commerce sector by keeping the market open to international players,' Finance Adviser Khurram Schehzad told Arab News. The move has sparked backlash from local retailers, who argue that the policy puts them at a disadvantage. 'The removal of the five percent levy on foreign goods is likely to negatively affect domestic sellers, including small businesses and established retailers,' Asfandyar Farrukh, Chairman of the Chainstore Association of Pakistan (CAP), said. According to CAP, foreign platforms, primarily those belonging to China, are sending as many as 30,000 parcels daily to Pakistani consumers, up from just 1,000 two years ago. Internal courier company data shared by CAP shows this as a nearly 2,900 percent surge in parcel volumes. Farrukh also questioned the timing and motivation behind the policy reversal, linking it to Pakistan's recent trade negotiations with the United States. 'The government's decision to withdraw the digital proceeds levy appears to have been heavily influenced by the US trade deal,' he said, pointing out that American tech giants such as Google and Meta were also affected by the tax and are now exempt. 'The five percent levy should have been maintained on foreign goods, even if removed for services, where it arguably didn't apply.' Still, Farrukh acknowledged parallel budgetary measures, such as the reduction in the duty-free threshold and stricter customs enforcement, may temper some of the impact. 'Authorities are now more vigilant in ensuring that foreign e-commerce goods aren't under-invoiced to evade taxes at import,' he added. Economist Shankar Talreja echoed some of these concerns. 'This tax withdrawal encourages the use of imported products at the cost of domestic manufacturing,' he said. 'It promotes a trading culture rather than production.' Talreja, who heads research at Karachi-based Topline Securities, added the domestic industry is losing competitiveness as local products are taxed through sales and income levies, while foreign goods bypass the same regulatory burden. He agreed with the CAP chairman about the circumstances of the tax withdrawal. 'The government, according to reports, reversed the tax under pressure from trade talks with the US,' he said. Pakistan's retail sector includes about five million shops generating an estimated Rs20 trillion ($71 billion) annually, but only 10 percent of this comes from the tax-compliant formal sector that CAP represents. Temu did not respond to Arab News's request for comment. Shein and AliExpress could not immediately be reached.
