Malaysia's new ambassador to US pledges stronger bilateral relations
In a Facebook post on Saturday, the Embassy of Malaysia in Washington, D.C. stated that Muhammad Shahrul Ikram presented his Letter of Credence to Trump during the Presentation of Credentials Ceremony at the White House on July 24.
The ceremony officially marked him as the 18th Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Malaysia to the United States.
"During the ceremony, Muhammad Shahrul Ikram had the opportunity to briefly exchange warm pleasantries with Trump, conveying his commitment to further strengthen the Malaysia–United States bilateral relationship.
"He also thanked the President for Secretary of State Marco Rubio's participation in the recent 58th Asean Foreign Ministers' Meeting and Related Meetings, held in Kuala Lumpur from July 8 to 11, which further reaffirmed the US's commitment to the region as well as the deepening of the Malaysia–US Comprehensive Partnership," the embassy said.
Over the past six decades since 1957, Malaysia-US's ties have grown into a multifaceted partnership encompassing political, economic, defence and security, educational, and people-to-people cooperation.
Muhammad Shahrul Ikram is a former secretary-general of the Foreign Ministry and a veteran diplomat with over 35 years of service.
Born in Pahang, Muhammad Shahrul Ikram holds a Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Ecology from Universiti Malaya and completed the Advanced Management Programme at Harvard Business School in 2009.
He began his career at the Foreign Ministry in 1988 as an Administrative and Diplomatic Officer.
During his career in the public service, Muhammad Shahrul Ikram also served as Malaysia's Ambassador to Qatar and Austria, as well as Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York.
His previous diplomatic assignments included stints at Malaysia's diplomatic missions in Vienna, Washington, D.C., and Beijing.
He also held the positions of deputy secretary-general of Bilateral Affairs, director-general of Asean-Malaysia National Secretariat (during Malaysia's Chairmanship of Asean in 2015) and Undersecretary of Multilateral Political Division. – BERNAMA
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
21 minutes ago
- The Star
Relief in Taiwan as Trump's 100% chip tariff fails to bite, but it's too early to relax
TAIPEI: Taipei heaved a temporary sigh of relief even as US President Donald Trump said that he would slap a shocking 100 per cent tariff on imports of semiconductors, the crucial components that form the backbone of Taiwan's economy. That is because companies that commit to making chips in the US would be exempted, according to Trump, which would mean that Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), the crown jewel of the island's tech industry, would likely be spared. The firm, which is the world's largest contract manufacturer of chips, has so far pledged US$165 billion (S$212 billion) in investment to build six state-of-the-art fabs, or semiconductor plants, in the US state of Arizona. But while things don't look too dire now, the impact of the tariff on Taiwan's chip industry could yet be far-reaching. Large clients of smaller Taiwanese chip suppliers could demand that they move some of their production to the US to sidestep the punishing duties. This could lead to a decline in Taiwan-based chip production and affect the island's position as a key part of the global tech supply chain, say analysts. And while MTrump's latest tariff measure is part of a push to boost domestic chip manufacturing, it could lead to higher prices of electronic devices such as smartphones, which could in turn depress demand for such devices and the chips that drive them. Such an outcome would mean uncertainty for Taiwan's semiconductor industry. Still, on Aug 7, TSMC stocks surged nearly five per cent to close at a record high of NT$1,180 (US$39.53), reflecting investor confidence in the wake of Trump's announcement. Officials in Taiwan were also cautiously optimistic. Speaking to lawmakers during a parliamentary briefing on Aug 7, National Development Council chief Liu Chin-ching argued that a steep 100 per cent tariff rate would not necessarily be disastrous, even for Taiwan's smaller chipmakers that do not have a US presence. 'Taiwan currently holds a leading position in the world (in chipmaking) and I believe that if the leader and competitors are all on the same starting line, the leader will continue to lead,' he said. The island is a global powerhouse in chipmaking, with 60 per cent of the world's chips and almost all of the most advanced ones produced there. But experts warned that the lack of details about how the new tariff would be applied means that it is still early days yet to assess its full impact. 'The scope and mechanism of the chip tariff remain unclear. Further developments will need to be closely monitored,' said Joanne Chiao, assistant research manager at Trendforce, a Taiwanese tech research firm. For starters, how much manufacturing a company would need to commit to the US to qualify for a tariff exemption is unclear. It is also unknown if Trump's exemption would cover only chips produced entirely on domestic soil, or also the semiconductors that foreign companies with a US presence, such as British firm Arm, or American companies import from overseas. American chip designers such as Qualcomm typically send their designs to TSMC to be manufactured in Taiwan before the chips are imported into the US. Moreover, more clarity is needed on whether the new tariff would apply to raw semiconductors and integrated circuits, or also chips in end devices such as smartphones and laptops. During the first quarter of 2025, only around four per cent of Taiwan's total exports of electronic components, including semiconductors, were shipped directly to the US. The vast majority of Taiwan-made chips were sent to other countries where they were assembled into consumer electronics. Professor Julien Chaisse, an international trade expert at City University of Hong Kong, said that it would be 'misleading' to think this would mean that Taiwan's chip exports could be naturally immune to Trump's tariff measure. 'The US government doesn't need a direct shipment to apply pressure – it can change how it interprets rules of origin,' he told The Straits Times. 'If Washington starts insisting that any product with a certain percentage of Taiwanese-made components falls under the tariff, then the effect spreads quickly,' he said. Prof Chaisse added that Trump's tariff also posed a threat to Taiwan's future position in the global tech supply chain. 'Larger buyers may start demanding more Taiwanese capacity be built inside the US, just to sidestep tariffs,' he said, noting that this would, in turn, drain investment from domestic expansion in Taiwan. 'This will have consequences for how Taiwan grows its chip sector over the next five years,' he added. Ultimately, Trump's push to rebuild chip manufacturing in the US will drive up costs for everyone in the supply chain. 'A high tariff on chips would inevitably raise the price of smartphones and laptops, which would also hurt demand for electronic products,' said Liu Pei-chen, an analyst at the Taiwan Institute of Economic Research. 'This will bring a lot of uncertainty to the chip industry,' she added. For now, however, Taiwan retains a major advantage – the US will still need to rely on the island for its semiconductor needs, particularly for advanced chips. Taiwan's intricately connected semiconductor ecosystem, which was built up over decades, is not easily replicated. The island's dominance in the sector extends to the technical prowess and efficiency among its chip engineers, which means it is not a simple matter of plonking a factory wherever one wishes. 'Even with the big investments happening in US fabs, it will take years before local production can cover demand,' said Prof Chaisse. 'In the end, this feels like pressure aimed at getting more investment from Taipei. Not because Taiwan is a threat, but because Trump wants quick wins he can point to.' - The Straits Times/ANN
The Sun
21 minutes ago
- The Sun
Trump asks Supreme Court to lift limits on ICE raids
PRESIDENT Donald Trump's administration on Thursday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to lift a lower court order that barred U.S. government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles based on tactics that critics have called racial profiling. In an emergency filing, the Justice Department asked the high court to halt a judge's order that temporarily blocked agents from stopping or detaining people without 'reasonable suspicion' that they are in the country illegally, by relying solely on their race or ethnicity, or if they speak Spanish or English with an accent. The judge's order applied to her court's jurisdiction over much of Southern California. 'The district court's injunction now significantly interferes with federal enforcement efforts across a region that is larger and more populous than many countries and that has become a major epicenter of the immigration crisis,' the Justice Department said in the filing. Trump won back the White House promising record-level deportations. His administration's immigration raids, including in Los Angeles, have sparked panic in immigrant communities as well as widespread protests, and drawn lawsuits over aggressive tactics carried out by masked and armed federal enforcement agents. In May, Stephen Miller, a senior Trump aide and the architect of the Republican president's immigration agenda, demanded Immigration and Customs Enforcement leaders ramp up deportations, setting a goal of 3,000 arrests per day. Trump called National Guard troops and U.S. Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. Local officials and California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, sharply contested the deployment of troops, saying they were not needed and only served to inflame tensions. A group of Latino individuals caught up in the raids, including U.S. citizens, mounted a proposed class action lawsuit against administration officials in Los Angeles federal court in July. One plaintiff, Jason Gavidia, claimed agents roughed him up after disbelieving his pleas that he is a citizen, demanding to know what hospital he was born in. The lawsuit said the 'indiscriminate' raids, interrogations and detentions violate the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. 'Individuals with brown skin are approached or pulled aside by unidentified federal agents, suddenly and with a show of force, and made to answer questions about who they are and where they are from,' the lawsuit stated. U.S. District Judge Maame Frimpong agreed, finding that the officials' actions likely violate the Fourth Amendment. She issued a temporary restraining order halting agents from using race or ethnicity, language, presence at a particular location such as a car wash or tow yard, or type of work, to carry out stops or arrests, as none of those factors alone can establish 'reasonable suspicion' of illegality. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the administration's request to lift Frimpong's order on August 1. - Reuters
The Sun
21 minutes ago
- The Sun
Trump order bars banks from belief-based ‘debanking'
WASHINGTON: U.S. President Donald Trump stepped up pressure on large banks and their regulators on Thursday, signing an executive order requiring the banking industry to ensure it is not refusing financial services to anyone based on political or religious beliefs, a practice frequently described as 'debanking.' The order directed regulators to review all banks they supervise for any current or past practices that would effectively bar customers based on political or religious beliefs, and levy fines or other disciplinary measures as needed. It said regulators may refer certain cases to the Justice Department for potential civil action and also directed regulators themselves to purge any policies or practices that may discourage banks from providing services based on non-financial reasons. The executive order is the latest in a growing pressure campaign against the financial sector by U.S. conservatives, who argue they have been unfairly deprived of services on the basis of their political beliefs. Trump claimed in a CNBC interview on Tuesday that he personally was discriminated against by banks, asserting without evidence that JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America refused to take his deposits following his first term in office. JPMorgan said on Tuesday it does not close accounts for political reasons. Bank of America said it does not comment on client matters, and would welcome clearer rules from bank regulators on how to conduct its activities. The executive order said some financial institutions participated in 'government-directed surveillance programs' against conservatives following the attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, by Trump supporters. 'Such practices are incompatible with a free society and the principle that the provision of banking services should be based on material, measurable, and justifiable risks,' the executive order said. Large banks have consistently said they do not reject customers on political or other belief-based grounds. Instead, they have argued that overzealous bank regulators and supervisors have discouraged them from engaging with certain sectors and have called for clearer guidelines. In a joint statement, major banking groups thanked the Trump administration for efforts to rein in 'runaway regulations' and said the new order may provide sought-after clarity for lenders. 'It's in banks' best interest to take deposits, lend to and support as many customers as possible. Unfortunately, regulatory overreach, supervisory discretion and a maze of obscure rules have stood in the way,' said a joint statement from the Bank Policy Institute, American Bankers Association, Consumer Bankers Association and Financial Services Forum. Trump-led regulators have already taken steps to loosen regulations, with all three federal bank regulators announcing this year they would no longer police banks on so-called 'reputational risk,' wherein supervisors could sanction institutions for activities that are not strictly prohibited but could expose the bank to negative publicity or costly litigation. The executive order directed all regulators to stop using that standard within 180 days. Banks increasingly complained the reputational risk standard was too subjective and vague, allowing bank supervisors to effectively bar firms from providing services to some people or sectors. The industry has also argued regulators need to update anti-money laundering rules, which frequently can force banks to shut down suspicious accounts without providing a reason. - Reuters
