Shubman Gill press conference: Defends Gautam Gambhir, lashes out at curator; on India Playing XI
Just hours after imposing 25% tariffs on India, former U.S. President Donald Trump ignited fresh geopolitical tension by announcing a strategic oil partnership with Pakistan. In a Truth Social post, Trump revealed plans to help develop Pakistan's oil reserves and even floated the idea of Islamabad eventually selling oil to India. He further escalated rhetoric by criticizing India's ties with BRICS, accusing it of aiding Russia and threatening U.S. dollar dominance. Trump warned of additional penalties, vowing to counter any challenge to American economic supremacy.#Trump #IndiaUSRelations #PakistanOilDeal #Geopolitics #BRICS #USDominance #RussiaIndia #TruthSocial
442 views | 40 minutes ago
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
29 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Why Donald Trump is wrong to take over the DC police
AMERICA'S CAPITAL city was designed as a showcase for its democracy: sweeping boulevards, white-marble palaces of administration, monuments aplenty. This week, however, Washington, DC has become a manifestation of something less inspiring: the grandstanding instincts of the current president. This time, Donald Trump's preoccupation is violent crime. Mr Trump has been banging this drum for decades. 'Roving bands of wild criminals roam our neighbourhoods dispensing their own brand of twisted hatred,' warned Mr Trump nearly 40 years ago. The occasion then was the rape and assault of a white woman in New York's Central Park, for which five black and Hispanic men were later wrongfully convicted. On August 11th Mr Trump all but quoted himself: 'Our capital city has been overtaken by violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals, roving mobs of wild youth, drugged-out maniacs and homeless people,' he said from the White House briefing room. Then he deployed the National Guard to Washington; took control of its police force; and promised to 'get rid of the slums' and clear out its homeless population. This is not the president's first use of the armed forces for civilian law enforcement in a city that reviles him and that he reviles right back. Earlier this summer Mr Trump sent National Guard troops to protect federal property during protests over immigration raids in Los Angeles. In 2020 he ordered them to disperse Black Lives Matter demonstrators in Washington. In neither instance did local Democratic leaders ask for his intervention. Now Mr Trump hints that the Washington deployment could be a blueprint for other troublesome (ie, Democratic-run) places. That will be easier said than done, however. The capital has an unusual legal status as a territory of the federal government granted qualified home rule. Elsewhere the president would face more legal impediments. The practical impact of the president's order may be modest. He has authorised the DC National Guard—which is tiny—to act as cops. About 200 troops will support law enforcement. By law his control of the city police can last for only 30 days; after that Congress would need to extend it. It is a far cry from a federal takeover of Washington. Seeking to justify his order, Mr Trump cited several awful attacks against government workers. In early August carjackers beat up and bloodied a former DOGE staffer. In June stray gunfire killed a congressional intern. Last year an official at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission was shot to death in a carjacking. In 2023 a Senate aide was stabbed and a congressman was robbed at gunpoint. 'It's becoming a situation of complete and total lawlessness,' said Mr Trump, likening the capital to Baghdad and Bogotá. The president is right that violent crime in Washington surged in 2023 and that it numbers among the most dangerous cities in America. He neglected to say that crime there has since tumbled. This year's murder rate is falling towards the pre-pandemic trend. The number of carjackings, which doubled between 2022 and 2023, is declining too, though they are still more frequent than they were before the pandemic. Overall the capital is considerably safer than it was in the 1990s, when it had the highest murder rate in the country, and it is a bit less dangerous than it was a decade ago. Mr Trump's action will irk the 700,000-odd citizens of Washington, whose elected government is being sidelined. And it is hypocritical. Mr Trump and his fellow Republicans in Congress have been impeding the city government, preventing it from spending the taxes it has raised and forcing cuts to services like policing. Republicans have thus exacerbated Washington's crime problem. Mr Trump's focus on the city over more violent ones is not just because he can see it from his bedroom window. It is because the federal government retains more authority over the capital than over states or even other federal territories. The president commands the DC National Guard—in states, governors have that job—and he can take temporary control over the police department. Washington's unique status means these same tactics cannot easily be replicated outside the capital. To 'federalise' the National Guard for arrest purposes elsewhere—to empower troops to act as cops—Mr Trump would have to invoke the Insurrection Act. Only then can the armed forces legally be put to use to quell a domestic uprising. The act was last used in 1992. Invoking it again would be immensely controversial. Mr Trump's approach in Washington, then, is clever when viewed through a lawyer's lens. Which is not to say that his order is justified or good policy. Stay on top of American politics with The US in brief, our daily newsletter with fast analysis of the most important political news, and Checks and Balance, a weekly note from our Lexington columnist that examines the state of American democracy and the issues that matter to voters.
News18
39 minutes ago
- News18
Tariffs, Trade, And Turbulence: India Must Diversify Exports Beyond The US
A sharp increase in tariffs will make Indian exports significantly more expensive and drastically reduce their competitiveness in the American market. In a striking and aggressive maneuver that embodies hardball trade tactics, US President Donald Trump has imposed an average 50 per cent punitive tariff on Indian goods imports, effective August 27. This action has disrupted Indian export sectors, given that the US constitutes approximately 20 per cent of total Indian exports and represents 2 per cent of its GDP. Such drastic measures threaten the future of India-US trade relations, which had been on a strong upward trajectory until now. A sharp increase in tariffs will make Indian exports significantly more expensive and drastically reduce their competitiveness in the American market. The United States stands as India's largest trading partner, with total goods exports reaching $86.51 billion. Remarkably, around 44 per cent of these exports stem from pharmaceuticals ($10.5 billion), electronics including smart phones and semiconductors ($14.6 billion), engineering goods and auto components ($9.3 billion), and petroleum exports ($4.09 billion), all of which are currently exempt from these punitive tariffs. It's important to note that a 25 per cent base tariff on Indian imports was already in place, having previously ranged from 0 per cent to 10 per cent. This exemption provides a crucial lifeline to these sectors, which collectively account for a significant portion of $38.49 billion in merchandise destined for the US. While this exclusion offers some relief, it cannot mask the larger threat looming over other sectors. Key Sectors Affected With the Penal Tariff Agriculture & Food Processing: India currently exports $7 billion worth of agricultural produce to the US, with major items including shrimp, basmati and non-basmati rice, wheat, vegetable extracts, spices, and buffalo meat. These products together account for 60 per cent of India's agricultural trade with the US. Seafood, particularly shrimp, represents nearly 40 per cent of India's seafood exports to the US, valued at $2 billion annually. A proposed tariff of 50 per cent has been suggested, a significant increase from the previous 7 per cent. Spices worth $711 million and psyllium (isabgol) valued at $335 million are now facing this new 50 per cent levy. Additionally, processed foods, sugar, cocoa, and dairy products (including ghee and milk powder) are at risk due to steep tariff differentials—often exceeding 25% to 38%—which threaten the viability of these exports. Textiles and Apparel: India exports $8.4 billion worth of textiles and garments annually to the US. These are highly price-sensitive commodities, and steep duties of 59 per cent on textiles, 63.9 per cent on knitted clothes, 60.3 per cent on woven garments, and 52.9 per cent on carpets could render these exports non-viable, making them significantly more expensive than similar products from competitors like Vietnam, Bangladesh, and Mexico. Bangladesh, which benefits from duty-free access under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) program, stands to gain the most from India's potential loss. Diamonds, Gems, and Gold Jewelry: With $10 billion worth of exports to the US for exceptionally cut and polished diamonds and gold jewelry, this sector will be significantly impacted by a 52.1 per cent tariff. Even a 10 per cent decline in export volume could cost India $1.5 billion. Countries like Belgium, Thailand, and Israel could quickly take advantage of this situation if Indian goods become unaffordable due to tariffs. Machinery and Mechanical Appliances: The engineering sector, often regarded as India's next major growth driver, is also vulnerable. This category includes pumps, compressors, industrial fans, and other electromechanical components worth $6.7 billion in exports. A 51.3 per cent tariff could drastically undermine India's competitive pricing in the U.S. market, which is already dominated by Germany, South Korea, and Japan. Leather and Footwear: With over $2 billion in annual exports to the US, these sectors are highly susceptible to tariff increases. Countries such as Vietnam and Indonesia, which are already major players, would likely capitalize on any struggles faced by Indian exporters. Chemicals and Dyes: This sector, valued at approximately $4.5 to $5 billion, is at risk, particularly given China's dominance and scale in industrial chemicals. Competitors Ready to Pounce Trump's tariff actions are not occurring in isolation. Countries with preferential access to the US, such as Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, Thailand, and Bangladesh (which have tariffs of 15-20 per cent), could benefit as Indian exporters lose their competitiveness. Vietnam, in particular, has capitalised on its free trade agreements and low labour costs to become a favoured supplier for US importers, especially in garments, electronics, and footwear. Mexico also stands to benefit significantly due to its proximity to the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Despite trade tensions, China may still undercut Indian suppliers because of its vast scale and resilient supply ecosystem. India's vulnerability is heightened by the absence of a comprehensive free trade agreement (FTA) with the US, leaving it exposed to unilateral tariff actions without any mechanisms for dispute resolution. Way Forward Historically, every crisis has catalysed transformative reforms in India. The food crisis of the 1960s sparked the Green Revolution, and now the recent steep tariff hike by the US demands urgent action. India must seize this opportunity to aggressively diversify its export destinations, strategically targeting emerging markets in Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East while decisively reducing its dependence on any single market. The impending ratification of the India-UK Free Trade Agreement presents a critical opportunity for boosting exports in high-end textiles, machinery, and professional services. We must fast-track negotiations for Free Trade Agreements with Canada, the EU, and Australia to capitalize on these opportunities without delay. Moreover, India must focus inward to fortify its domestic competitiveness. A robust strategy is essential—prioritizing logistics, simplifying compliance, reforming Special Economic Zones (SEZ), and enhancing infrastructure quality will make Indian goods more resilient to external shocks. We need bold, sector-specific export promotion strategies backed by Production Linked Incentive (PLI) schemes, dynamic branding support, temporary subsidies, and revitalized export financing. Logistical support for labour-intensive sectors such as textiles and gems is not just advisable; it is imperative. Implementing these measures will effectively cushion immediate disruptions and position India for sustained growth. The Author is Vice-Chairman of Sonalika ITL Group, Vice-Chairman (Cabinet minister rank) of the Punjab Economic Policy and Planning Board, and Chairman of ASSOCHAM Northern Region Development Council. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views. tags : India-US relations India-US trade deal view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: August 12, 2025, 17:41 IST News opinion Opinion | Tariffs, Trade, And Turbulence: India Must Diversify Exports Beyond The US Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Time of India
42 minutes ago
- Time of India
Intel issues statement on CEO's meeting with US President Trump after he asked for his resignation; says: Mr. Tan had…
Intel issued a conciliatory statement Monday following CEO Lip-Bu Tan 's White House visit, emphasizing the company's commitment to American technology leadership after President Trump 's recent call for the executive's resignation over alleged China ties . "Earlier today, Mr. Tan had the honor of meeting with President Trump for a candid and constructive discussion on Intel's commitment to strengthening US technology and manufacturing leadership," Intel said. "We appreciate the President's strong leadership to advance these critical priorities and look forward to working closely with him and his Administration as we restore this great American company." The corporate statement followed Trump 's own social media post describing the meeting as "very interesting" and calling Tan 's career rise "an amazing story." The president announced that Tan and cabinet members would continue discussions next week to "bring suggestions to me," signalling a collaborative approach after days of public tension. Intel responds to Presidential criticism with diplomatic messaging by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Khurd Users Prefers Toothsi Aligners Toothsi by MakeO Book Now Undo The company's measured response follows Trump's social media post declaring Tan "highly CONFLICTED and must resign, immediately." The president's criticism centered on concerns raised by Senator Tom Cotton about the CEO's previous business relationships with Chinese companies and his leadership history at Cadence Design Systems . Tan had previously served as CEO of Cadence until 2021, during which time the company recently admitted to unlawfully exporting semiconductor design software to a Chinese university involved in nuclear research. The Justice Department settlement required Cadence to pay nearly $118 million in criminal penalties for the violations. Intel's statement notably avoided addressing these specific allegations while positioning the company as aligned with Trump's America First technology agenda. American chipmaker seeks to protect federal funding and business relationships The diplomatic outreach reflects Intel's vulnerable position as a major recipient of federal CHIPS Act investments totalling $8.5 billion for domestic manufacturing expansion. The company has committed to building advanced semiconductor facilities in Arizona, Ohio, and New Mexico as part of the national security initiative. Tan assumed Intel's leadership in March after the board removed Pat Gelsinger, inheriting significant operational challenges including declining market share and intense competition from rivals like Nvidia in emerging AI chip markets. His White House meeting represents Intel's effort to maintain crucial government partnerships while addressing political concerns about foreign business connections in the increasingly sensitive semiconductor industry. AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
