The United States called Saturday for China to stop harassing Philippine vessels in the South China Sea, pledging to stand with the Philippines at a time of simmering geopolitical tension.

“We call upon Beijing to desist from its provocative and unsafe conduct,” the U.S. State Department said in a statement.

The Philippines accused China’s coast guard of “aggressive tactics” Friday following an incident during a Philippine coast guard patrol close to the Philippines-held Second Thomas Shoal, a flashpoint for previous altercations located 105 nautical miles (195 km) off its coast.

The Second Thomas Shoal is home to a small military contingent aboard a rusty World War II-era U.S. ship that was intentionally grounded in 1999 to reinforce the Philippines’ territorial claims. In February, the Philippines said a Chinese ship had directed a “military-grade laser” at one of its resupply vessels.

China claims sovereignty over almost the entire South China Sea with a “nine-dash line” on maps that stretches more than 1,500 km off its mainland and cuts into the exclusive economic zones of Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia. An international arbitral ruling in 2016 dismissed that line as having no legal basis.

China’s foreign ministry said Friday the Philippine vessels had intruded into Chinese waters and made deliberate provocative moves.

The State Department said Washington “stands with our Philippine allies in upholding the rules-based international maritime order.”
…

your ad here

Hundreds of Americans fleeing two weeks of deadly fighting in Sudan reached the east African nation’s port Saturday in the first U.S.-run evacuation, completing a dangerous land journey under escort of armed drones.

American unmanned aircraft, which have been keeping an eye on overland evacuation routes for days, provided armed overwatch for a bus convoy carrying 200 to 300 Americans more than 800 kilometers to Port Sudan, a place of relative safety, U.S. officials said.

The U.S., which had none of its officials on the ground for the evacuation, has been criticized by families of trapped Americans in Sudan for initially ruling out any U.S.-run evacuation for those among an estimated 16,000 Americans in Sudan who wish to leave.

U.S. special operations troops briefly flew to the capital, Khartoum, on April 22, to airlift out American staffers at the embassy and other American government personnel. More than a dozen other nations have already been carrying out evacuations for their citizens, using a mix of military planes, navy vessels and on the ground personnel.

A wide-ranging group of international mediators — including African and Arab nations, the United Nations and the United States — has only managed to achieve a series of fragile temporary cease-fires that failed to stop clashes but created enough of a lull for tens of thousands of Sudanese to flee to safer areas and for foreign nations to evacuate thousands of their citizens by land, air and sea.

Evacuees see dead in streets

Since the conflict between two rival generals broke out April 15, the U.S. has warned its citizens that they needed to find their own way out of the country, though U.S. officials have tried to link Americans with other nations’ evacuation efforts. But that changed as U.S. officials exploited a relative lull in the fighting and, from afar, organized their own convoy for Americans, officials said.

Without the evacuation flights near the capital that other countries have been offering their citizens, many U.S. citizens have been left to make the dangerous overland journey from Khartoum to the country’s main Red Sea port, Port Sudan. One Sudanese-American family that made the trip earlier described passing through numerous checkpoints manned by armed men and passing bodies lying in the street and vehicles of other fleeing families who had been killed along the way.

U.S. State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said the convoy carried U.S. citizens, local people employed by the U.S., and citizens of allied countries. “We reiterate our warning to Americans not to travel to Sudan,” he said.

From Port Sudan, away from the fighting, the Americans in the convoy can seek spots on vessels crossing the Red Sea to the Saudi port city of Jeddah. U.S. officials also are working with Saudi Arabia to see if one of the kingdom’s naval vessels can carry a larger number of Americans to Jeddah.

U.S. consular officials will be waiting for the Americans once they reach the dock in Jeddah, but there are no U.S. personnel in Port Sudan, officials said.

American doctor stabbed

Two Americans are confirmed killed in the fighting that erupted April 15. One was a U.S. civilian whom officials said was caught in crossfire. The other was an Iowa City, Iowa, doctor, who was stabbed to death in front of his house and family in Khartoum, in the lawless violence that has accompanied the fighting.

In all, the fighting in the east African country has killed more than 500 people.

The U.S. airlifted out all its diplomats and military personnel and closed its embassy April 22. It left behind several thousand U.S. citizens still in Sudan, many of them dual-nationals.

The Biden administration had warned it had no plans to join other countries in organizing an evacuation for ordinary U.S. citizens who wanted out, calling it too dangerous.
…

your ad here

The U.S. Army on Friday said it was grounding its aviation units until they receive further training.

All Army aviators are grounded “except for those participating in critical missions,” the Army said in a statement.

The move comes after two helicopters collided in Alaska earlier this week, killing three soldiers and injuring a fourth.

In March, nine soldiers were killed in Kentucky when two Army Black Hawk medical evacuation helicopters crashed during a nighttime training exercise.

The Associated Press reports that all the training will take place during the month of May.

Army Chief of Staff James McConville said, “The safety of our aviators is our top priority, and this stand down is an important step to make certain we are doing everything possible to prevent accidents and protect our personnel.”
…

your ad here

An unprecedented bilateral nuclear declaration that Washington and Seoul just announced may not be enough to assuage South Koreans’ worries about a U.S. pledge to protect them from North Korea’s nuclear attacks as it was designed to do, according to experts.

U.S. President Joe Biden and South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol presented the Washington Declaration on Wednesday at a post-summit news conference.

With it, the U.S. agreed to “make every effort to consult with the ROK on any possible nuclear weapons employment on the Korean Peninsula” and reassured “the U.S. commitment to extended deterrence” using “the full range of U.S. capabilities, including nuclear.” The ROK stands for South Korea’s official name, the Republic of Korea.

Extended deterrence is described by the U.S. military as the American commitment “to deter and, if necessary, to respond” to attacks on its allies and partners “across the spectrum of potential nuclear and non-nuclear scenarios.” This commitment is often described as providing a “nuclear umbrella” to those allies and partners.

Washington also agreed in the declaration to regularly deploy strategic assets such as nuclear ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) to South Korea.

Biden and Yoon also agreed to establish the Nuclear Consultation Group (NCG), a joint body that will meet regularly to discuss nuclear and strategic planning for contingencies in and around the divided Korean Peninsula.

The U.S. has a similar nuclear planning group within the multilateral body of NATO. But South Korea’s participation in U.S. nuclear planning through the newly announced NCG would be the first agreement Washington has made with a single non-nuclear state to let it in on its nuclear decision-making process.

At the press conference, Yoon said the NCG would raise extended deterrence to a new level.

He said, “Under the nuclear umbrella, our extended deterrence was a lot lower.” He continued, “Now it’s an unprecedented expansion and strengthening of the extended deterrence strategy under the Washington Declaration, which will create the NCG. The implementation and the response at this level has never thus far been this strong.”

Unresolved issues

The Washington Declaration and the NCG are “useful and productive steps,” according to Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for Strategy and Force Development and the cofounder of The Marathon Initiative, a Washington-based institution focused on providing foreign and defense policy recommendations.

However, he continued, these developments “do not appear sufficient to address the fundamental quandary facing the alliance — the growth of North Korea’s nuclear and long-range missile program.” He added, “Washington and Seoul should be prepared to work together to come up with more dramatic measures to meet this very real and indeed growing challenge.”

The measures, while designed to deter North Korean attacks, do not address how the alliance aims to reduce North Korea’s provocations that have been increasing anxiety among South Koreans.

North Korea conducted a record number of ballistic missile tests last year and continued its launches this year, including three intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). In February it conducted what it said was a drill of a super-large multiple rocket launcher able to attack South Korea with tactical nuclear weapons.

In January, Yoon floated the idea of Seoul having nuclear weapons only to dismiss his remarks later, even though polls suggested that more than 70% of South Koreans would support their nation developing its own nuclear weapons or the return of nuclear weapons to the county. The U.S. withdrew nuclear weapons in 1991.

Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, said, “In the minds of Washington and Seoul, [the declaration] will mean they are strengthening deterrence and therefore security.”

He continued, “But seen from Pyongyang, this will likely be another sign that the United States and South Korea are a growing threat, and that North Korea will have to continue to develop more nuclear weapons to defend itself.”

He added, “This is a big dilemma — the dynamics of the two sides continuing to strengthen their capabilities to improve security also drives the decisions that will be seen to increase the risks. The deterrence wheel continues to turn and turn with no solution to the underlying problem.”

Kim Yo Jong, the influential sister of the North Korean leader, vowed on Saturday local time to enhance Pyongyang’s “nuclear war deterrent” in response to the Washington Declaration. Referring to Biden as “an old man with no future,” without naming him, and naming Yoon while calling him “a fool,” Kim said the declaration “fabricated by the U.S. and south Korean authorities” will “expose” the “peace and security of Northeast Asia and the world … to more serious danger.”

Experts said the U.S.-South Korean alliance must consider greater regional threats from China as well as draw up bigger trilateral defense plans with Japan.

“The NCG is mainly focused on the Korean Peninsula, but it is important to understand that security coordination has to look at the broader regional picture to include coordination with Tokyo,” said Toby Dalton, co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

“It would be natural in that context to look broadly at perceived threats in the Indo-Pacific, to include those from China, and to discuss plans and capabilities,” he said.

Nuclear assurance and reliance

Dalton added the NCG “is largely about alliance cohesion and being responsive to ROK interests for stronger coordination on nuclear matters.”

Gary Samore, former White House coordinator for arms control and weapons of mass destruction during the Obama administration, said the same about the Washington Declaration establishing the NCG.

He said, “The main purpose was to reassure the South Korean government and the South Korean public that the U.S. is committed to extended deterrence to protect South Korea against North Korean nuclear and missile threats.”

He continued, “Deterrence is already very strong. [North Korean leader] Kim Jong Un knows that any attack on the South, whether conventional or nuclear, would be met with a very strong response from the ROK and from the U.S.”

At the press conference, Biden said, “A nuclear attack by North Korea against the United States or its allies or partners — is unacceptable and will result in the end of [the] regime, were it to take such an action.”

Under the renewed U.S. pledge to protect, South Korea agreed to have “full confidence in U.S. extended deterrence commitment” and “enduring reliance on the U.S. nuclear deterrent.” Seoul also agreed to abide by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT).

Kristensen said, “The most important goal for the United States has probably been to try to dampen South Korean ideas about developing its own nuclear weapons.”

No nukes

By agreeing to rely on U.S. nuclear deterrence and follow its obligations under the NPT, Seoul effectively has renounced pursuing its own nuclear weapons program, according to experts.

At the same time, by reassuring its extended deterrence commitment, Washington dismissed a possibility of stationing U.S. nuclear weapons in South Korea.

“The Biden administration has made clear that nuclear weapons will not be deployed to South Korea, but that Seoul will be closely tied to planning efforts as well as how South Korean conventional capabilities will be integrated into any U.S. nuclear operation,” said Terence Roehrig, a professor of national security and Korea expert at the U.S. Naval War College.

“The big question is whether the Washington Declaration will quell the calls in South Korea for its own nuclear weapons, and that remains to be seen.”

Kristensen said, “The South might feel better for a while but will probably continue to express doubts about the security commitment.”

Joint nuclear body

In place of its own nuclear program, South Korea opted to participate in U.S. nuclear planning through the NCG, which experts said is a significant development that will increase Seoul’s say in American nuclear planning for contingences on the peninsula.

However, Scott Snyder, director of the program on U.S.-Korea policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, said a challenge is “the ability of the envisioned NCG to stay ahead of future North Korean military developments.”

He continued, “The U.S.-South Korea nuclear consultation group must demonstrate a capability to stay ahead of North Korea’s capability as they continue to expand.”

The scope of South Korea’s role in U.S. nuclear planning decisions would depend on how NCG agreements are implemented, including which agencies and who will be in charge, according to experts.

How much say South Korea has on U.S. decisions is “a question that can only be answered in the implementation of the agreement,” said Samore.

“We have the commitment from the U.S. to consult, jointly plan, exchange information. But we don’t know exactly how that will be translated into action until this consulting group is set up and begins to operate.”
…

your ad here

The United States needs to speed up its diplomatic efforts in the Pacific island region in the face of Chinese competition, a U.S. diplomat said Friday, adding that he was sure President Joe Biden would be warmly welcomed there if he decided to visit.

Joseph Yun, a special presidential envoy who leads efforts to renegotiate U.S. agreements with three Pacific island states, was asked at a U.S. think tank about reports that Biden would make a brief stop in Papua New Guinea (PNG) on May 22 and the response from officials there.

“Obviously for the Pacific, I am sure they would welcome President Biden, if he were to go there,” Yun told the Hudson Institute. 

“I don’t think that decision has been fully made,” he said and added: “It is a good thing whenever heads of state get engaged on new issues.”

A spokesperson from the PNG prime minister’s office told Reuters on Thursday that Biden would stop in the capital, Port Moresby, for three hours on the way from a Group of Seven meeting in Japan to Australia to attend a summit of the Quad countries — the United States, Japan, India and Australia.

A Pacific islands source told Reuters that Biden was also expected to meet with more than a dozen Pacific islands leaders, but the White House National Security Council has not responded to request for comment on the plans. 

Yun said the level of Chinese engagement in the region was concerning. He described the Pacific island region as crucial to U.S. national security but also as having been neglected by the United States.

“So now we’re playing … a little bit of catch-up, I would say, and but you know, we need to accelerate our catch-up,” he said.

Yun has been leading talks to renew Compact for Free Association (COFA) agreements with the Marshall Islands, Palau and the Federated States of Micronesia under which the United States retains responsibility for the islands’ defense and gains exclusive access to huge strategic swaths of the Pacific. The deals are due to expire this year and next.

Yun said the “top line” agreements in the negotiations with the nations would provide them with a total of about $6.5 billion over 20 years.

He said he was very optimistic the agreements would be finalized and that the U.S. Congress would approve them in a short time but that there was still some hard work ahead. 
…

your ad here

The U.S. and Philippines Friday concluded nearly three weeks of annual military drills known as Balikatan in the south Pacific Ocean near the island chain nation.

In a news release, the U.S. military said nearly 18,000 soldiers from both nations took part in the drills, making them the largest in the 38-year history of the military exercises.

Balikatan means “shoulder-to-shoulder” or “sharing the load together,” in Philippine Tagalog dialect, a term becoming more appropriate in the past year as relations between the two longtime allies have improved since the election of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.   

On Wednesday, Marcos watched the exercises in person from an observation tower in the northwestern Philippine coastal town of San Antonio. That day U.S. and Philippines forces, working together, targeted, engaged and sank a decommissioned Philippines battleship.

Marcos has sought to improve relations with the United States that soured under his predecessor, former president Rodrigo Duterte, at least in part because of increased tensions with China regarding the disputed waters in the region.

A Philippines Department of Foreign Affairs spokesperson issued a statement Friday rebuking what she called China’s recent “highly dangerous maneuvers” earlier this week against the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) in the waters off Ayungin Shoal. The PCG was on a routine maritime patrol.  

The Ayungin Shoal – also known as the Second Thomas Shoal – is a submerged reef in the Spratly Islands. The coast guard reported that two Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) vessels “intercepted” them in the vicinity of the shoal and exhibited “aggressive tactics,” coming within 46 meters of the ship.  

The Chinese Foreign Ministry insisted the near miss was caused by the PCG, claiming it was the aggressor.  

Reuters reports China has claimed sovereignty over almost the entire South China Sea, an area that stretches more than 1,500 kilometers off its mainland and cuts into the exclusive economic zones of Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia. An international arbitral ruling in 2016 dismissed that line as having no legal basis.

Tensions with China were mentioned during the closing ceremonies of the Balikatan exercises Friday. Philippines Armed Forces Chief of Staff Andres Centino noted the “strong results” of the exercises are more significant “given the current security environment and the real threats” that continue to evolve within the region.

President Marcos is scheduled to travel to Washington next week for meetings with U.S. President Joe Biden. Their defense alliance is expected to be high on the agenda.

Some information in this report was provided by The Associated Press, Reuters and Agence French-Presse.
…

your ad here

The White House and a newspaper are denying there was collusion this week when a reporter asked U.S. President Joe Biden a question very similar to what was written on a card Biden held while facing journalists in the White House Rose Garden.

“We do not have specific questions in advance. That’s not something that we do,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre responded when asked at Thursday’s briefing about the president’s pocket card, titled “Question # 1,” which contained the name and photograph of Los Angeles Times correspondent Courtney Subramanian, along with a question: “How are YOU squaring YOUR domestic priorities — like reshoring semiconductors manufacturing — with alliance-based foreign policy?”

Close-up images of the notecard were captured by multiple news photographers in the Rose Garden.

Biden, alongside visiting South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol on Wednesday, called first on Subramanian, who asked: “Your top economic priority has been to build up U.S. domestic manufacturing in competition with China, but your rules against expanding chip manufacturing in China is hurting South Korean companies that rely heavily on Beijing. Are you damaging a key ally in the competition with China to help your domestic politics ahead of the election?”

Biden responded with an extensive and nuanced comment on the topic.

‘It seems like there’s collusion’

Jean-Pierre explained the following day that Subramanian was one of two correspondents called on by Biden because California has the largest Korean American community of any U.S. state.

“We are mindful on who we pick and who we want to communicate out to,” added Jean-Pierre.

Her response did not satisfy the briefing room audience. Among those denied an opportunity to ask a follow-up question about the matter was Jon Decker, White House correspondent for Gray Television, whose career spans 16 White House press secretaries and five presidencies.

“I was just simply trying to ask her is it her contention that the question that everyone could read on that so-called cheat sheet was not similar to the question that was asked at the White House press conference? And it was similar,” he told VOA.

“I’ve never seen an instance where the president is being given a question from a reporter that covers the president at a pre-announced White House press conference,” Decker added. “It really reflects poorly on the White House press corps, and it reflects poorly on the White House for allowing that to happen. It seems like there’s collusion, and for the public that has distrust, skepticism and even disdain for the media, it doesn’t put us in a good light.”

The White House continued to rebuff inquiries following Thursday’s briefing.

“Karine addressed this very clearly and in-depth in the briefing room today,” responded principal deputy press secretary Olivia Dalton to VOA, which attempted to pursue the topic of presubmitted questions to the president.

Subramanian has not commented. Her newspaper issued a statement to inquiries from media organizations.

“Our reporter did not submit any questions in advance of the Q&A with President Biden,” said Hillary Manning, vice president of communications for the Los Angeles Times. Subramanian “is in regular contact with the White House press office seeking information for her reporting. You would have to ask the White House who prepared the document for the president and why they included that question.”

April Ryan, Washington bureau chief of The Grio, who refers to herself as the longest-serving black female journalist covering the White House, said while it is not unusual for presidents to have a card listing journalists who could potentially be called on, she had never seen one that contained a picture of the reporter and the “actual question itself.”

Ryan told VOA it is routine prior to news conferences for the president and his principals, who help him with messaging, to discuss potential questions but what occurred Wednesday seemed unprecedented.

Kayleigh McEnany, a press secretary in the previous administration of Donald Trump, on the set of Fox News on Thursday, said “it’s very unordinary to have the question as specific as semiconductors as they pertain to alliances written out and scripted for the president.”

A correspondent, who asked not to be named and covers the White House for a foreign broadcaster, told VOA: “It raises questions of not only President Biden needing a heads up to come up with answers but also transparency of how the White House chooses who gets to ask questions. It is frustrating for reporters who aren’t in their inner circle.”

Reagan, Bush, had a seating chart

The president of the White House Correspondents’ Association, Tamara Keith of National Public Radio, declined to comment on the issue. The association noted it has no involvement on who gets called on by presidents at news conferences.

During the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, the presidents had a seating chart to know where to find a sympathetic questioner, said Charles Bierbauer, who was CNN’s senior White House correspondent from 1983-93.

“The guessing game between the press and the White House has long been to figure out who might ask what of the president at news conferences,” he told VOA.

“I recall presidential aides gleefully telling us when they had anticipated every question. My pattern was to be prepared for the questions I knew I had to ask but always have kind of an offbeat question, too,” recalled Bierbauer, distinguished professor and dean emeritus at the College of Information and Communications at the University of South Carolina.

It is not uncommon for the White House to let a reporter know he or she will be called on during a news conference and to query the reporter about what they might ask, according to former CBS Radio White House correspondent Mark Knoller, who covered eight presidents from Gerald Ford to Trump.

“As a reporter, I always prepared questions on a number of subjects,” Knoller told VOA. “More often than not the White House knows what subjects a reporter is interested in based on questions at briefings and inquiries made previously to the press office. I can’t believe a reporter worth his or her salt would give a detailed question in advance.”
…

your ad here

Pakistan said Thursday that it was buying discounted Russian crude oil with the implicit approval of the United States, and the first shipment is expected to arrive in the country soon. 

  

Masood Khan, the Pakistani ambassador to the U.S., made the remarks at a conference in Washington organized by the Wilson Center’s South Asia Institute on the future of relations between the two countries. 

  

“We have placed the first order for Russian oil, and this has been done in consultation with the United States government. There’s no misunderstanding between Washington and Islamabad on this count,” Khan said. 

  

The top diplomat was responding to suggestions the energy purchase could undermine Pakistan’s already tumultuous relationship with the U.S. 

  

“They have suggested that you are free to buy anything below or up to the price cap, and we have abided by that agreement. I think Washington is fine with that,” Khan added without elaborating. 

Vote of confidence for Sharif

  

He spoke just hours after Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif told the parliament in Islamabad his government was set to receive an inaugural shipment of Russian crude oil. 

  

“As we speak, the Russian oil is being loaded to arrive here,” Sharif said after securing a vote of confidence from the National Assembly, the upper house of parliament, amid opposition allegations he had lost an already thin majority in the house. 

  

A State Department spokesperson responding to Pakistan’s import of Russian energy told VOA that Washington recognizes the pressure governments face to secure affordable fuel, and each country will have to make its own choices regarding energy imports.  

  

“We continue to coordinate with allies and partners to mitigate the impact of [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s war of aggression against Ukraine on global energy markets,” the spokesperson said. “Russia’s actions have clearly demonstrated it is not a reliable supplier of energy, and we encourage steps to reduce long-term dependence on energy supplies from Russia.” 

  

The State Department official, however, did not address VOA’s direct question about whether the U.S. would be comfortable with Pakistan buying Russian oil as long as it’s under the price cap. 

  

Last week, Petroleum Minister Musadik Malik said Pakistan had made its first purchase of Russian crude oil at a discounted rate and the cargo would reach the country next month via sea. He did not share further details, saying Islamabad plans to increase the import volume to 100,000 barrels per day if the first transaction with Moscow goes through smoothly. 

  

The move was expected to bring a much-needed respite to the cash-strapped South Asian nation, with energy imports making up most of its external payments. 

  

The Sharif government has been struggling to avert a balance of payments crisis as it awaits the resumption of financial lending from the International Monetary Fund. The Pakistani central bank’s foreign exchange reserves have lately fallen to nearly $4.5 billion, barely enough to cover a month of imports. 

  

Ties with US back on track 

  

Khan told the audience in Washington on Thursday that Pakistan’s ties with the United States had suffered a “brief period of uncertainty” after the U.S.-led foreign military withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021, when the then-insurgent Taliban seized control of the country. 

  

Despite being an ally of the U.S., Islamabad was accused of sheltering and supporting Taliban insurgents while they were battling the U.S. and NATO troops for almost two decades. 

  

The Pakistani ambassador insisted the relationship with the U.S. was back on track and both sides were working to scale up economic and security partnerships. 

  

“We are back in business. … It is important that the United States restores for Pakistan foreign military financing and foreign military sales, which were suspended by the previous [Trump] administration,” the Pakistani ambassador said. 

  

Former President Donald Trump cut military cooperation with Pakistan, citing its covert support for the Taliban, charges Pakistani leaders rejected. 

  

Khan stressed the need for Islamabad and Washington to work together to eliminate the Islamic State-led threat of terrorism stemming from Afghanistan, noting a surge in terror attacks in Pakistan since the Taliban’s return to power in the strife-torn neighboring country. 

  

He said Pakistan was politically engaging with Taliban authorities to try to persuade them to deny Afghan space to terrorists waging deadly attacks in his country and those linked to Islamic State-Khorasan, the regional branch of Islamic State. Khan asserted that the U.S. was also “talking directly to Taliban cabinet ministers.” 

  

“Let’s work together to eliminate this threat in the region,” he said. “Today, it’s a threat to Pakistan and Afghanistan. If unchecked, it will spread to other parts of the region and beyond. Urgent action is needed to fight this menace.”

Defense talks 

  

Senior State Department official Elizabeth Horst, speaking at the Wilson Center conference Thursday, said the last year had helped reset the U.S.-Pakistan relationship.

  

The two countries held midlevel defense dialogues in Washington and a counterterrorism working group in Islamabad in February and March, respectively, she said. 

  

“Since the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021, we have been more aligned than ever with Pakistan on how to prevent Afghanistan from becoming a base for terrorism,” said the principal deputy assistant secretary and deputy assistant secretary for Pakistan, Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs. 

  

Horst said that Washington was concerned that the number of attacks, mainly targeting Pakistani security forces, has increased. 

  

“Pakistan has much to gain from a peaceful and stable Afghanistan, and the United States and Pakistan have a shared interest in holding the Taliban to its counterterrorism commitments.” The U.S. official said that this topic was the focus of recent dialogues between the U.S. and Pakistan. 

  

Khan also emphasized the need to work “collectively for promoting women’s and girls’ education and inclusive governance in Afghanistan.” 

  

No foreign government has recognized the Taliban as the legitimate ruler of Afghanistan. The international community is pressing the Taliban leadership to remove bans on women’s access to education and work. The hard-line de facto authorities are also required to give representation to all Afghan ethnic groups in their administration. 

 

VOA State Department Bureau Chief Nike Ching contributed to this report.
…

your ad here

Political analysts say with both Turkey’s ruling and opposition parties pledging to improve ties with the United States ahead of next month’s national elections, there are hopeful signs for the bilateral relationship following years of tension.

Relations between Washington and Ankara went into a downward spiral following a coup attempt in Turkey seven years ago. Ties worsened after NATO ally Turkey decided to purchase an S-400 surface-to-air missile system from Russia in 2019, triggering sanctions and its removal from the U.S.’s F-35 fighter jet program.  

Ankara was also upset by the partnership between the United States and the Syrian Democratic Forces, or SDF, including the YPG fighting Islamic State rebels in Syria. Turkey views the YPG as an arm of the Kurdistan Workers Party or PKK, which is considered a terrorist group by both Ankara and Washington.   

Turkey’s significance as a NATO ally has been boosted by the role it played following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but Turkey’s lingering ties with Moscow continue to concern the United States.   

Turkey’s return to F-35 program?  

In a manifesto announced ahead of the May 14 elections, Turkey’s ruling AK Party pledged to strengthen a strategic mechanism with the United States and ensure “concrete steps in line with security priorities are taken with regard to YPG, FETO and sanctions.” FETO is an acronym for the movement loyal to Fethullah Gulen, labeled by the Turkish government as “Fethullah Terrorist Organization” in the aftermath of the 2016 coup plot. Gulen, living in self-imposed exile in the United States, has denied allegations he was behind the coup attempt.

Turkey’s opposition bloc formed by six political parties has been more explicit about improving ties with Washington, promising that it will “advance the alliance relationship with the United States based on mutual trust” if it wins the election.

The lengthy declaration dubbed as a “Memorandum of Understanding on Common Policies” and published in January both in Turkish and English, promises to “take initiatives for Turkey to return” to the F-35 program.

Analysts speaking to VOA say that, no matter who wins the election, Turkey will have to deal with the presence of Russia’s S-400 system on its soil before it can return to the F-35 program.

The United States views the Russian system as a threat to the next-generation fighter jet as well as NATO aircraft operating over Turkey. 

“The big problem is the presence of the S-400. If that can be dealt with, either doing away with it or securing it so it does not pick up signals from the F-35, then something can be worked out,” says Jim Townsend, a senior follow at the Center for a New American Security in Washington. 

While the opposition does not make any explicit reference to the S-400s, the intent to return Turkey to the F-35 program in “coded language” indicates a will to resolve the S-400 issue, one expert argues.   

“Everyone knows the return to the F-35 program cannot happen unless the S-400 issue is resolved,” Alan Makovksy, from the Center for American Progress, told VOA, via Skype.  

Uncertain future of the bigger F-16 deal   

Earlier in April, the Biden administration notified Congress of a planned sale of software upgrades to Turkey for its current F-16 fleet. The deal valued at more than $250 million needs to be cleared through the formal approval process.  

The notification of the proposed deal came two weeks after the Turkish parliament approved Finland’s accession to NATO after holding it off for several months.  

A bigger defense package for new jets and modernization kits requested by Ankara, however, faces an uncertain future due to continuing opposition in the U.S. Congress.   

Experts believe Congress expects more assurances from Turkey. Among them are continuing on the de-escalation path with NATO ally Greece to ease tensions and taking meaningful actions to improve human rights.   

Ankara and Athens, locked in a deep-rooted feud in the Aegean Sea and eastern Mediterranean, have softened their tone following the devastating earthquakes that hit Turkey in February.  

“If there’s calm in the Aegean for several months and human rights changes after the elections, it would be a good start. That would be very significant for Congress,” said analyst Makovksy.   

Sinan Ulgen, director of the Istanbul-based Economic and Foreign Policy Research Center, voiced agreement.  

“If there is going to be a new era in Turkey where the government takes meaningful steps in terms of democratic standards and shows the will to build its relations with the West on more solid ground, I think that will positively affect the views in Congress,” he said in an interview with VOA. 

Turkey, along with Hungary, has yet to ratify Sweden’s NATO accession. U.S. officials are urging Ankara to take action ahead of a NATO summit in July.   

Regardless of the outcome, analysts expect a positive step from Turkey on this following the elections, adding the opposition might have more flexibility if it wins.   

Upholding democratic values

Officials in the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden have underscored democracy as an important component of its foreign policy vision. Turkey was not invited to the Summit for Democracy two years in a row.  

“I think in terms of whoever wins this election, the party that has a stronger stand on supporting those values and principles will be a government that will be easier for us to work with,” said Jim Townsend.   

Sinan Ulgen argues that while the United States can work with democratic and undemocratic countries to advance its national interests, those relationships often differ in scope and depth.  

“Your position in the international system matters. A Turkey that positions itself among democratic nations would be advantageous not only in foreign policy but also in economy, foreign investment and technology,” he said.
…

your ad here

From discussing nuclear war to belting out a beloved hit: South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol’s White House visit ended on a high note when he sang Don McLean’s “American Pie” to great applause.   

Yoon is on a six-day state visit to Washington, where he discussed with U.S. President Joe Biden on Wednesday “the end” of any North Korean regime that used nuclear weapons against the allies.   

But the two leaders had more cheerful topics on the agenda at the White House state dinner in Yoon’s honor later that day, with the South Korean leader — who is known at home to be something of a karaoke buff — sharing his love of American music.   

“We know this is one of your favorite songs, ‘American Pie,'” Biden said to Yoon, having pulled him up onto the stage at the end of the evening to listen to singers perform the classic.   

“Yes, that’s true,” the 62-year-old Yoon admitted, saying that he had loved the Don McLean song, released in 1971, since he was at school.   

“We want to hear you sing it,” said Biden.   

“It’s been a while but…” Yoon responded, offering only token resistance as he took the microphone.   

Yoon belted out the first few lines of the song a cappella, triggering rapturous applause from the crowd and delighting Biden and the First Lady.   

“The next state dinner we’re going to have, you’re looking at the entertainment,” Biden told the crowd, referring to Yoon.    

Then he turned to the South Korean president and said: “I had no damn idea you could sing.”   

Biden told Yoon that McLean could not be at the White House to join them but had sent a signed guitar, which the U.S. president gave to the South Korean leader.   

“Yoon literally tore up the stage and White House!” one Twitter user wrote in Korean in reply to a video of the president singing.   

“Yoon has revealed his hidden singing talent,” another commenter wrote, also in Korean, resharing the video.   

It is not Yoon’s first time singing in public.   

On the campaign trail in 2021, he appeared on the famous South Korean TV show “All the Butlers”, wowing its celebrity hosts with a sparkling rendition of the K-pop ballad “No One Else” by Lee Seung-chul. 
…

your ad here

U.S. President Joe Biden will briefly visit the Pacific islands nation of Papua New Guinea in May, a Papua New Guinea official said on Thursday, as Washington seeks to counter growing Chinese influence in the strategically important region. 

Biden will stop in the capital Port Moresby on May 22 for three hours on his way to Australia to attend the Quad leaders summit, a spokesperson from the PNG Prime Minister’s office told Reuters. 

A Pacific islands source told Reuters Biden is expected to meet with over a dozen Pacific islands leaders during his May visit to Port Moresby. 

The meeting would be a significant move in U.S. efforts to push back against Chinese inroads in the region, and follows Biden hosting Pacific island leaders at the White House in September. 

The Quad summit is being held in Sydney on May 24, with the leaders of India, Australia, Japan and the United States attending, Australia’s government has said. 

India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi is also expected to visit Papua New Guinea on May 21 for a two-day visit en-route to Australia, where he will meet the Pacific island leaders, Papua New Guinea’s government has previously announced. 

The PNG Post Courier newspaper reported on its front page on Thursday that the Biden stopover would be the first visit by a United States president to the resource-rich but largely undeveloped country of 9.4 million just north of Australia. 

The United States embassy in Canberra referred questions to the White House. The White House National Security Council did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment. 

White House officials have been considering tagging on a Pacific islands stop to Biden’s travel to the G-7 in Japan and the Quad meeting in Australia, according to a person familiar with the matter. 

The United States last year stepped up its diplomacy and aid to the Pacific region after China struck a security deal with the Solomon Islands, and Beijing attempted but failed to forge a wider security and trade pact with 10 island nations. 

In a statement on Thursday, Fiji said its ministers for education, employment and women had met in Beijing with China’s foreign minister Qin Gang, and he had “highlighted the need to formalize the China – Pacific Island Countries relationship.”
…

your ad here

House Republicans narrowly passed legislation Wednesday that would raise the government’s legal debt ceiling by $1.5 trillion in exchange for steep spending restrictions, a tactical victory for Speaker Kevin McCarthy as he challenges President Joe Biden to negotiate and prevent a catastrophic federal default this summer. 

Biden has threatened to veto the Republican package, which has almost no chance of passing the Democratic Senate in the meantime, and the president has so far refused to negotiate over the debt ceiling, which the White House insists must be lifted with no strings to ensure America pays its bills. 

But McCarthy’s ability to swiftly unite his slim majority and bring the measure to passage over opposition from Democrats and even holdouts in his own party gives currency to the Republican speaker’s strategy to use the vote as an opening bid forcing Biden into talks. The two men could hardly be further apart on how to resolve the issue. 

The bill passed 217-215. 

“We’ve done our job,” McCarthy said after the vote. “The president can no longer ignore” the issue and not negotiate with the House Republicans, he said. 

As the House debated the measure, Biden on Wednesday indicated he was willing to open the door to talks with McCarthy, but not on preventing a first-ever U.S. default that would shake America’s economy and beyond. 

“Happy to meet with McCarthy, but not on whether or not the debt limit gets extended,” Biden said. “That’s not negotiable.” 

Passage of the sprawling 320-page package in the House is only the start of what is expected to become a weekslong political slog as the president and Congress try to work out a compromise that would allow the nation’s debt, now at $31 trillion, to be lifted to allow further borrowing and stave off a fiscal crisis. 

The nation has never defaulted on its debt, and the House Republican majority hopes to maneuver Biden into a corner with its plan to roll back federal spending to fiscal 2022 levels and cap future spending increases at 1% over the next decade, among other changes. 

McCarthy worked nonstop to unite his fractious Republican majority, making post-midnight changes in the House Rules Committee in the crush to win over holdouts. 

Republicans hold a five-seat House majority and faced several absences this week, leaving McCarthy with almost no votes to spare. In the end, the speaker lost four Republican no votes, and all Democrats opposed. 

“This bill is unacceptable, it’s unreasonable, it’s unworkable, it’s unconscionable — and it’s un-American,” said Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York. “That’s why we oppose it.” 

Democrats derided the Republican plan as a “ransom note,” a “shakedown” and “an unserious bill” that was courting financial danger. 

But as McCarthy worked to shore up support, some of the most conservative rank-and-file Republican members who have never voted for a debt ceiling increase in their quest to slash spending said they were preparing to do just that, rallying behind the speaker’s strategy to push Biden to the negotiating table. 

The Treasury Department is taking “extraordinary measures” to pay the bills, but funding is expected to run out this summer. Economists warn that even the serious threat of a federal debt default would send shock waves through the economy. 

In exchange for raising the debt limit by $1.5 trillion into 2024, the bill would roll back overall federal spending and: 

Claw back unspent COVID-19 funds. 
Impose tougher work requirements for recipients of food stamps and other government aid. 
Halt Biden's plans to forgive up to $20,000 in student loans. 
End many of the landmark renewable energy tax breaks Biden signed into law last year. It would tack on a sweeping Republican bill to boost oil, gas and coal production. 

A nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office analysis estimated the Republican plan would reduce federal deficits by $4.8 trillion over the decade if the proposed changes were enacted into law. 

In the Senate, leaders were watching and waiting. 

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said House passage of the legislation would be a “wasted effort” and that McCarthy should come to the table with Democrats to pass a straightforward debt-limit bill without GOP priorities and avoid default. 

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who stepped aside to give McCarthy the lead, said the speaker has been able to unite the House Republicans. 

Now, he said, Biden and McCarthy must come to agreement. Otherwise, he said, “we’ll be at a standoff. And we shouldn’t do that to the country.” 
…

your ad here