Five Key Takeaways from Trump-Starmer Meeting in the UK Aylesbury, UK – September 18, 2025 — U.S. President Donald Trump and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer presented a united front on major global issues during a joint press conference at Chequers, wrapping up Trump’s three-day visit to the United Kingdom. Despite recent tensions between Washington and European allies, the meeting underscored strong transatlantic ties as the two leaders discussed Ukraine, NATO, Gaza, Afghanistan, and more. 1. Trump Says Putin ‘Let Him Down’ Over Ukraine President Trump expressed frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the prolonged war in Ukraine, admitting he underestimated the challenge of resolving the conflict. “I thought it would be easiest because of my relationship with President Putin, but he’s let me down,” Trump said. PM Starmer reiterated the UK’s commitment to supporting Ukraine, vowing to increase pressure on Russia and push for a lasting peace deal. 2. Divergence on Gaza, But Unity Against Hamas While both leaders condemned Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, they differed on the broader approach to the Gaza conflict. Trump avoided criticizing Israel’s ongoing military campaign, which has killed over 65,000 Palestinians, calling October 7 “one of the worst days in the history of humanity.” Starmer's previous pledge to recognize a Palestinian state was noted as a “point of disagreement,” but Trump praised the UK leader’s strong stance against Hamas. 3. Trump Praises NATO and Increased Defense Spending Once a vocal NATO critic, Trump struck a different tone, applauding the alliance’s commitment to boost defense spending. “I want to thank NATO and our wonderful head of NATO, Mark [Rutte]… They’ve done a great job,” he said, highlighting a new pledge for members to spend 5% of GDP on defense. Trump emphasized U.S. support in supplying weapons to NATO allies, stressing that the alliance was now “paying its fair share.” 4. Bagram Airbase Back in Focus Trump hinted at possible negotiations with the Taliban for the U.S. to regain access to the Bagram airbase in Afghanistan, which was vacated in 2021 during the Biden administration’s withdrawal. “We’re trying to get it back,” Trump said, citing its strategic location near China’s nuclear facilities. The Taliban, however, quickly dismissed the proposal, stating they welcome engagement with the U.S. but will not allow any foreign military presence. 5. Trump Weighs in on Kimmel Firing Trump also addressed the firing of late-night host Jimmy Kimmel by ABC, following political controversy over remarks involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. “Jimmy Kimmel was fired because he had bad ratings… He’s not a talented person,” Trump said, dismissing concerns about free speech and framing the firing as a business decision. Conclusion: The Trump-Starmer meeting reflected a broad effort to reinforce U.S.-UK ties amid ongoing global crises. While areas of disagreement remain, particularly on Middle East policy, both leaders signaled alignment on Ukraine, NATO, and global security cooperation.

Five Key Takeaways from Trump-Starmer Meeting in the UK

Aylesbury, UK – September 18, 2025 — U.S. President Donald Trump and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer presented a united front on major global issues during a joint press conference at Chequers, wrapping up Trump’s three-day visit to the United Kingdom. Despite recent tensions between Washington and European allies, the meeting underscored strong transatlantic ties as the two leaders discussed Ukraine, NATO, Gaza, Afghanistan, and more. 1. Trump Says Putin ‘Let Him Down’ Over UkrainePresident Trump expressed frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the prolonged war in Ukraine, admitting he underestimated the challenge of resolving the conflict.“I thought it would be easiest because of my relationship with President Putin, but he’s let me down,” Trump said.PM Starmer reiterated the UK’s commitment to supporting Ukraine, vowing to increase pressure on Russia and push for a lasting peace deal. 2. Divergence on Gaza, But Unity Against HamasWhile both leaders condemned Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, they differed on the broader approach to the Gaza conflict.Trump avoided criticizing Israel’s ongoing military campaign, which has killed over 65,000 Palestinians, calling October 7 “one of the worst days in the history of humanity.”Starmer’s previous pledge to recognize a Palestinian state was noted as a “point of disagreement,” but Trump praised the UK leader’s strong stance against Hamas. 3. Trump Praises NATO and Increased Defense SpendingOnce a vocal NATO critic, Trump struck a different tone, applauding the alliance’s commitment to boost defense spending.“I want to thank NATO and our wonderful head of NATO, Mark [Rutte]… They’ve done a great job,” he said, highlighting a new pledge for members to spend 5% of GDP on defense.Trump emphasized U.S. support in supplying weapons to NATO allies, stressing that the alliance was now “paying its fair share.” 4. Bagram Airbase Back in FocusTrump hinted at possible negotiations with the Taliban for the U.S. to regain access to the Bagram airbase in Afghanistan, which was vacated in 2021 during the Biden administration’s withdrawal.“We’re trying to get it back,” Trump said, citing its strategic location near China’s nuclear facilities.The Taliban, however, quickly dismissed the proposal, stating they welcome engagement with the U.S. but will not allow any foreign military presence. 5. Trump Weighs in on Kimmel FiringTrump also addressed the firing of late-night host Jimmy Kimmel by ABC, following political controversy over remarks involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk.“Jimmy Kimmel was fired because he had bad ratings… He’s not a talented person,” Trump said, dismissing concerns about free speech and framing the firing as a business decision. Conclusion:The Trump-Starmer meeting reflected a broad effort to reinforce U.S.-UK ties amid ongoing global crises. While areas of disagreement remain, particularly on Middle East policy, both leaders signaled alignment on Ukraine, NATO, and global security cooperation.

Read More
Qatar PM Meets Trump After Israeli Strike on Doha

Qatar PM Meets Trump After Israeli Strike on Doha Amid Heightened Tensions

Qatar’s Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani, is holding high-level talks with former U.S. President Donald Trump in New York, following Israel’s deadly strike on the Qatari capital earlier this week. The Israeli air raid, which targeted a Hamas meeting in Doha on Tuesday, killed five Hamas officials and a Qatari security officer. The meeting was reportedly convened to discuss a new ceasefire proposal brokered by Trump aimed at ending the Gaza war. Sheikh Mohammed’s diplomatic efforts in the U.S. come at a tense moment in regional and international relations. Prior to his dinner meeting with Trump on Friday, the Qatari leader met U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the White House. According to reports, discussions centered on the fallout from the Israeli strike and the future of U.S.-Qatar security cooperation. Al Jazeera’s correspondent Kimberly Halkett, reporting from Washington, noted that the meetings are part of a broader attempt to navigate the increasingly complicated relationship between Qatar and the U.S. following Israel’s actions. “The concern is that the relationship between Qatar and the United States has become increasingly complicated as a result of those strikes,” Halkett said. “They’re looking for a path forward on both of those issues.” While the exact location and time of the Trump meeting remain undisclosed, sources confirmed the former president is currently in New York, staying at Trump Tower. The attack on Doha has drawn rare international condemnation against Israel, including from the U.S., which typically stands as one of Israel’s staunchest defenders. In a rare move on Thursday, the U.S. joined other United Nations Security Council members in condemning the strike, which many see as an effort to derail ceasefire negotiations. Despite this condemnation, the Trump administration is continuing to walk a diplomatic tightrope. Secretary of State Rubio is scheduled to visit Israel this weekend for a two-day visit, signaling continued U.S. support. The visit comes ahead of a pivotal UN summit on September 22, where several Western nations are expected to back formal recognition of a Palestinian state. According to State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott, Rubio will reaffirm U.S. commitment to Israel’s security and oppose unilateral moves seen as legitimizing Hamas. “He will also emphasise our shared goals: ensuring Hamas never rules over Gaza again and bringing all the hostages home,” Pigott said. Meanwhile, momentum appears to be building globally for a renewed push toward a two-state solution. At a UN General Assembly meeting on Friday, a resolution calling for “collective action” to end the war in Gaza received strong backing, led by France and Saudi Arabia. The Gaza conflict has already claimed more than 64,000 lives, and pressure is mounting on all parties to reach a sustainable political resolution. As tensions escalate, the outcome of Sheikh Mohammed’s meetings in Washington could play a crucial role in shaping the next phase of diplomacy in the region.

Read More
Trump, Other World Leaders Condemn Charlie Kirks Assasination

World Leaders Condemn Assassination of Conservative Activist Charlie Kirk in Utah Shooting

By Kamal Yalwa: September 11, 2025 Charlie Kirk, the conservative American activist and co-founder of Turning Point USA, was fatally shot on Tuesday while speaking at Utah Valley University during an event on his “American Comeback Tour.” The shocking incident, captured on video, has drawn widespread condemnation from leaders across the globe, including U.S. President Donald Trump and several current and former heads of government. Kirk, 31, was known for his prominent role in galvanizing young conservative voters and was a vocal supporter of President Trump. He had gained national attention for his media presence, grassroots organizing, and outspoken views on American politics and culture. President Trump issued a heartfelt statement on his Truth Social platform, mourning the loss of what he called “a legendary” American patriot. “The Great, and even Legendary, Charlie Kirk, is dead,” Trump wrote. “No one understood or had the Heart of the Youth in the United States of America better than Charlie. He was loved and admired by ALL, especially me, and now, he is no longer with us.” In a video posted to his X (formerly Twitter) account, Trump condemned the political violence and urged Americans to reflect on the consequences of what he called a toxic political climate. “It is long past time for all Americans and the media to confront the fact that violence and murder are the tragic consequences of demonising those with whom you disagree.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also paid tribute to Kirk, calling him a “lion-hearted friend of Israel.” “Charlie Kirk was murdered for speaking truth and defending freedom. A lion-hearted friend of Israel, he fought the lies and stood tall for Judeo-Christian civilisation,” Netanyahu said, noting he had recently spoken with Kirk and invited him to Israel. “Sadly, that visit will not take place.” Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney expressed his shock at the assassination. “I am appalled by the murder of Charlie Kirk. There is no justification for political violence, and every act of it threatens democracy,” he wrote. “My thoughts and prayers are with his family, friends, and loved ones.” Former U.S. President Barack Obama also reacted to the tragedy, urging calm and unity in the face of such violence. “We don’t yet know what motivated the person who shot and killed Charlie Kirk, but this kind of despicable violence has no place in our democracy,” Obama posted on X. “Michelle and I will be praying for Charlie’s family tonight, especially his wife Erika and their two young children.” British Prime Minister Keir Starmer echoed similar sentiments, emphasizing the sanctity of free speech. “My thoughts this evening are with the loved ones of Charlie Kirk. It is heartbreaking that a young family has been robbed of a father and a husband,” he wrote. “We must all be free to debate openly and freely without fear – there can be no justification for political violence.” Authorities have not yet released the identity or motives of the shooter, and investigations are ongoing. Meanwhile, tributes continue to pour in from political allies, critics, and citizens alike, many of whom view Kirk’s killing as a stark warning about rising political tensions in America. Charlie Kirk leaves behind his wife, Erika, and their two young children.

Read More
Supreme Court allows Trump to continue ‘roving’ ICE patrols in California

Supreme Court Backs Trump’s Roving ICE Patrols in California Sparking Legal and Civil Rights Concerns

Washington, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sided with President Donald Trump’s administration, allowing federal immigration agents to continue controversial “roving patrols” across Southern California, despite lower court rulings that said the practice likely violates constitutional protections. The court’s unsigned order offered no explanation, but came over a forceful dissent from the three liberal justices—Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson—who warned the ruling paves the way for widespread racial profiling and civil rights abuses. Controversial Tactics Resume The case centered on aggressive immigration enforcement actions by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, who allegedly stopped and interrogated Latino individuals—some of them U.S. citizens—at farms, bus stops, and other locations without reasonable suspicion. A federal district court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had previously restricted such stops, ruling that targeting individuals based largely on ethnicity or location likely violated the Fourth Amendment. Monday’s Supreme Court ruling lifts that restriction for now, affecting seven counties in Southern California. In a concurring opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh argued that ethnicity can be one of several factors used to establish “reasonable suspicion” in immigration enforcement, stating: “Apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish reasonable suspicion… [but] it can be a relevant factor when considered along with other salient factors.” Kavanaugh also emphasized that ICE agents are allowed to “briefly stop the individual and inquire about immigration status.” Sotomayor: ‘Freedoms Are Lost’ Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the court’s first Hispanic justice, issued a blistering dissent, condemning what she described as a “papers please” regime that targets people based on appearance, language, or low-wage employment. “We should not have to live in a country where the government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low-wage job,” she wrote. Sotomayor cited internal statements from DHS officials, including Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who called the district judge an “idiot” and vowed that ICE operations would continue unchanged. She also referenced inflammatory rhetoric from ICE leadership, including promises to “go even harder now” and social media videos showing raids at car washes and farms. “These are not brief stops,” Sotomayor wrote. “They involve firearms, physical violence, and detentions in warehouses—with no legal counsel.” ACLU and Civil Rights Groups Condemn Ruling The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which helped lead the legal challenge, called the decision “dangerous” and said it legitimizes racial profiling under the guise of immigration enforcement. “For anyone perceived as Latino by an ICE agent, this means living in fear of violent arrest and detention,” said Cecillia Wang, ACLU National Legal Director. Legal, Political Implications The ruling is the latest in a growing number of emergency appeals from the Trump administration to reach the high court since Trump began his second term in January. Many of these cases, including this one, have bypassed traditional appellate processes and arrived at the court with little public briefing or oral argument. Sotomayor criticized the court’s increasing reliance on such shadow docket rulings, writing: “The court’s appetite to circumvent the ordinary appellate process and weigh in on important issues has grown exponentially.” While the ruling is technically temporary—pending a full hearing—it will be widely interpreted as a green light for aggressive enforcement tactics across the country. Immigration advocates warn it could encourage ICE agents nationwide to resume or expand similar operations, using race and language as key triggers for stops. The Department of Homeland Security praised the ruling. DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin called it “a win for the safety of Californians and the rule of law.” What’s Next? With the case now cleared for continued enforcement pending further litigation, immigrant communities in California brace for renewed ICE activity. Civil rights groups plan to continue legal challenges and increase public pressure on Congress to impose limits on immigration enforcement powers. Meanwhile, national attention will turn to whether the Supreme Court takes up the case formally—and if it sets new precedent on immigration stops and racial profiling.

Read More
Trump and Putin both agree: Blame falls on Europe as Ukraine peace effort languishes

Trump and Putin Align in Blame Game as Ukraine Peace Talks Stall

Amid stagnant peace efforts in Ukraine, US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin have found rare alignment—blaming Europe for the continued impasse. This comes three weeks after their high-profile summit in Alaska, which ended with no concrete outcomes. In a Thursday call with European leaders, Trump urged the continent to do more to cut economic ties with Russia, particularly oil purchases, which he claimed generated €1.1 billion for Moscow in just one year. “Europe must stop purchasing Russian oil that is funding the war,” a White House official stated. The call followed Trump’s comments that he plans to speak with Putin again, even as the Russian leader continues to ignore multiple peace deadlines. Trump’s approach, while forceful in tone, has been vague on enforcement. “If we’re unhappy about it, you’ll see things happen,” he said, without elaborating. Despite Europe’s efforts—like last week’s Paris summit where 26 nations agreed to provide forces for a future peacekeeping mission—Trump’s administration has offered limited commitment and continues to pressure Europe and China, without applying equivalent pressure to Beijing directly. Double Standards and Shifting Alliances Trump’s foreign policy is increasingly seen as transactional and unpredictable. While demanding European action on Russian oil, he has refrained from sanctioning China, citing ongoing trade talks. Meanwhile, India has faced punitive tariffs from Trump for buying Russian oil—further straining relations with the strategic partner and pushing New Delhi closer to Beijing and Moscow. This week, Chinese President Xi Jinping gave Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi a warm welcome, with Modi even seen riding in Putin’s limousine—mirroring Trump’s recent public camaraderie with the Russian president. Russia Pushes for Division Putin, meanwhile, has ramped up efforts to fracture NATO unity, accusing Europe of “hysteria” over alleged Russian military threats. “Russia has never had, does not have, and will never have any desire to attack anyone,” he claimed during meetings with leaders like Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico in Beijing. In a symbolic echo of Alaska, Putin warned Europe not to “throw a wrench” in his negotiations with Trump. Simultaneously, suspected GPS jamming of a plane carrying EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen was blamed on Russia—though Moscow dismissed the claim as “fake.” Security Guarantees, but No Breakthrough At the Paris summit, French President Emmanuel Macron announced that 26 countries had pledged contributions to a future peacekeeping or reassurance force for Ukraine, should a deal be reached. Macron also emphasized the need for an “American safety net”, indicating that US support—however limited—remains crucial. However, no firm meeting between Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is in sight. While Putin offered to host Zelensky in Moscow, Kyiv views the offer as a non-starter, citing security risks and a likely political trap. There are also concerns that Putin could weaponize a bilateral meeting to undermine Zelensky in Trump’s eyes. Analysis: Big Rhetoric, Few Results Despite dominating headlines with high-stakes diplomacy, Trump appears increasingly frustrated with the lack of progress—yet unwilling to deploy the leverage or consistency needed to change course. His tendency to scold allies, court adversaries, and avoid firm commitments has left both Ukraine and US allies guessing. As Putin continues to exploit divisions and as Trump balances contradictory goals, the only clear outcome is continued gridlock, while Ukraine waits for real peace—and real guarantees.

Read More

US Military Strike Kills 11 in Caribbean Drug Operation Tied to Venezuelan Cartel Trump Announces

Washington, D.C. — U.S. President Donald Trump has announced that American military forces conducted a “kinetic strike” against a suspected drug-trafficking vessel in the southern Caribbean, killing 11 individuals believed to be members of Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua cartel. The strike, carried out in what the administration says were international waters, marks a significant escalation in the U.S. military’s role in combating Latin American drug cartels. The Tren de Aragua (TDA) cartel was designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the U.S. State Department earlier this year, and is accused by U.S. officials of involvement in drug and sex trafficking, mass killings, and transnational criminal activity. “Earlier this morning, on my orders, U.S. military forces conducted a kinetic strike against positively identified Tren de Aragua narcoterrorists in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility,” President Trump posted on Truth Social. “Please let this serve as notice to anybody even thinking about bringing drugs into the United States of America. BEWARE!” The announcement came as Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed the operation, calling it a “lethal strike” against a “drug vessel which had departed from Venezuela.” He said more operations of this kind are likely, as the administration intensifies its counter-narcotics efforts. “We are going to wage combat against drug cartels that are flooding American streets and killing Americans,” Rubio told reporters ahead of his trip to Mexico and Ecuador. Rubio did not elaborate on the legal basis for the strike, only saying that “all of those steps were taken in advance” and that the organizations in question had been designated as terrorist entities. A senior defense official confirmed the strike, describing it as a “precision operation” carried out in the southern Caribbean. Specific operational details, including which military assets were involved, were not disclosed. Background: Military Presence in the Region CNN previously reported that the U.S. military had deployed more than 4,000 Marines and sailors to the Caribbean and Latin American waters as part of a broader campaign to confront drug cartels. The buildup has drawn sharp criticism from Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who accused Washington of using military pressure to destabilize his regime. “It is an extravagant threat… absolutely criminal, bloody,” Maduro said in a televised address Monday. “We have prepared maximum readiness.” The Trump administration recently increased the bounty on Maduro to $50 million, citing his alleged role in international narcotics trafficking. Escalation of U.S. Strategy Analysts say this strike may be the first public acknowledgment of direct military action against a foreign drug cartel. Tom Karako, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told CNN that while he was unaware of prior strikes of this kind, it wouldn’t be surprising if others had taken place without public disclosure. “It would not surprise me in the slightest if there were a dozen instances that we don’t talk about,” Karako said. The move signals a new phase in U.S. counter-narcotics strategy, combining military force with diplomatic pressure in a region where criminal networks have increasingly become transnational threats. International Reactions The Venezuelan government has not yet issued an official response to the strike. CNN has reached out for comment. The Trump administration’s approach has raised questions among legal scholars and international observers, particularly around the use of military force without Congressional authorization and potential violations of international law. However, administration officials maintain that the designations of Tren de Aragua and similar organizations as terrorist groups provide sufficient legal justification under U.S. law.

Read More

Trump’s 50% Tariff on India: Impact, Exemptions, and Future Relations

U.S. President Donald Trump’s new 50 percent tariff on Indian imports, which officially took effect on Wednesday, is poised to disrupt trade worth billions of dollars and could strain relations between Washington and New Delhi. The tariff escalation began in late July, with the U.S. initially imposing a 25 percent tariff on Indian goods. A week later, an additional 25 percent was added, citing India’s continued purchase of Russian oil. This move is seen as part of the ongoing trade tension between the two nations. Which Sectors Will Be Affected? The new 50 percent tariff will apply to a wide range of Indian exports, including gems, jewelry, textiles, footwear, furniture, and industrial chemicals. According to the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI), Indian exports to the U.S. could drop from $86.5 billion this year to an estimated $50 billion by 2026 due to these tariff hikes. Several key sectors, such as textiles, garments, gems and jewelry, shrimp, and carpets, are expected to bear the brunt of this tariff. The GTRI warns of a potential 70 percent drop in exports from these industries, which could jeopardize hundreds of thousands of jobs. “These sectors are labor-intensive, with many small companies that may not survive the hit,” said MK Venu, founding editor of The Wire news outlet. He also noted that businesses could relocate to countries like Vietnam, Bangladesh, and Pakistan, which offer more competitive export conditions. Which Industries Are Exempt? The Indian pharmaceutical industry has been granted an exemption from the new tariffs, as U.S. consumers rely heavily on affordable generic drugs, with India supplying nearly half of the U.S.’s generic medication imports. In 2024, Indian pharmaceutical exports to the U.S. amounted to approximately $8.7 billion. Additionally, products like semiconductors, consumer electronics, aluminum, steel, and passenger vehicles will be subject to separate tariffs, outside the blanket 50 percent rate. India’s Response and Mitigation Plans In response to the new tariffs, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has called for greater self-reliance, emphasizing India’s need to increase its domestic productive capacity. In his Independence Day speech, Modi stressed that India should strive for self-sufficiency “not out of desperation, but out of pride,” particularly as global economic tensions rise. To offset the potential economic damage, the Indian government is offering financial assistance to exporters affected by the tariffs, encouraging them to diversify into new markets, including Latin America and the Middle East. Modi’s government has also promised tax cuts, subsidies, and a simplification of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) to support domestic businesses. Faisal Ahmed, professor of geopolitics at the Fore School of Management, pointed out that India’s push for economic self-sufficiency isn’t new. The tariff situation is expected to accelerate this process. However, critics, including Venu, argue that the government lacks clarity on how to fund these subsidies, which may not be enough to cushion the blow to affected industries. Impact on Bilateral Relations The imposition of these tariffs is likely to strain U.S.-India relations, which were already under pressure due to disagreements over trade imbalances and India’s Russian oil imports. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and other Trump officials have accused India of indirectly funding Russia’s war against Ukraine by purchasing Russian oil, a claim India denies. In response, New Delhi emphasized that its oil imports are driven by market forces and the energy needs of its 1.4 billion people. The U.S. has also expressed dissatisfaction with India’s high tariffs on American agricultural goods, with Trump previously criticizing India’s 39 percent average tariff on agricultural imports. However, New Delhi has refused to open its agriculture sector to cheap U.S. imports, citing the need to protect local farmers. The Path Ahead The tariff dispute has prompted India to reconsider its overreliance on the U.S. market, with New Delhi exploring alternatives such as joining multilateral trade pacts and strengthening ties with countries like China and Russia. The Indian government is also negotiating a trade deal with the European Union, aiming to conclude it by the end of the year. While some analysts predict that the tariffs may only cause a modest impact on India’s GDP, estimates suggest a potential loss of about $36 billion, or 0.9 percent of GDP. Despite the challenges, India is expected to continue growing, with the International Monetary Fund forecasting a 6.4 percent GDP growth in 2026. Trump’s Justification for Tariffs President Trump has repeatedly criticized India’s high tariffs on U.S. goods, arguing that India has been one of the highest-tariffed nations globally. His administration has sought to push India to reduce these trade barriers, particularly in sectors like agriculture and dairy, though India has resisted such demands. With the ongoing geopolitical rivalry between Russia and the West, India’s continued purchase of Russian crude oil remains a significant point of contention. U.S. officials have accused India of “profiteering” from discounted Russian oil, further fueling tensions. As the trade conflict escalates, India is likely to reevaluate its foreign policy and economic strategy, seeking new alliances and trade partners in the face of shifting global dynamics.

Read More

Trump Vows to Pursue Death Penalty in Washington DC Murder Cases

President Donald Trump announced Tuesday that his administration will seek the death penalty in murder cases occurring in Washington, DC, framing the move as a strong deterrent to violent crime in the nation’s capital. “Anybody murders something in the capital, capital punishment. Capital, capital punishment,” Trump said during a Cabinet meeting at the White House. “If somebody kills somebody in the capital, Washington, DC, we’re going to be seeking the death penalty.” The president described the policy as a “very strong preventative” measure against violent crime. “I don’t know if we’re ready for it in this country… we have no choice,” he added. Trump noted that the measure would apply specifically to the District of Columbia, while states would retain the authority to determine their own stance on capital punishment. It remains unclear how the administration intends to enforce the directive. Washington, DC, does not have its own death penalty statute, but the federal government does. In the District, most serious criminal cases are prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office — a federal agency — rather than a local district attorney, giving the federal government a unique level of control over criminal prosecutions in the city. Legal analysts say implementing such a policy would likely involve using federal statutes to pursue capital punishment in eligible murder cases, but noted it could spark legal and political challenges given the city’s historical opposition to the death penalty. No further details were immediately provided by the White House.

Read More