India seeks ‘permanent solution' to border dispute with China
India's Defence Minister Rajnath Singh said India and China should solve border issues through a structured roadmap. PHOTO: REUTERS
NEW DELHI – Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh has told his Chinese counterpart that the two countries should seek a 'permanent solution' to their decades-old border dispute.
Mr Singh met China's Mr Dong Jun on the sidelines of a meeting of defence ministers of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) in Qingdao on June 26 and stressed on solving issues between the two countries through a structured roadmap, India's Defence Ministry said in a statement on June 27.
The world's two most populous nations – both nuclear powers – share a 3,800km, largely undemarcated and disputed border in the Himalayas and have gone to war over it.
Although the frontier has been mostly peaceful in recent decades, a deadly clash between their troops in 2020 resulted in the deaths of 20 Indian and four Chinese soldiers.
The clash led to a four-year military standoff, with both armies deploying tens of thousands of troops in the mountains until they reached a pact in October to step back, leading to a thaw in ties.
During his meeting with Mr Dong, Mr Singh also called for bridging the trust deficit created after the 2020 standoff, New Delhi said.
SCO is a 10-nation Eurasian security and political grouping whose members include China, Russia, India, Pakistan, and Iran. Their defence ministers' meeting was held as a precursor to the annual summit of its leaders set for the autumn. REUTERS
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
23 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Philippines V-P Duterte must go on trial due to severity of charges, prosecutors say
Philippine Vice-President Sara Duterte is facing removal from her post and a lifetime ban from office if convicted. PHOTO: REUTERS Philippines V-P Duterte must go on trial due to severity of charges, prosecutors say MANILA - Philippine Vice-President Sara Duterte must be tried, and ultimately convicted, over serious charges, including an alleged threat to have the president killed, prosecutors argued in a submission to a Senate impeachment court on June 27. Ms Duterte is facing removal from her post and a lifetime ban from office if convicted. She has denied wrongdoing and maintains her impeachment is politically motivated and the result of an acrimonious falling out between her and President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. Lower House prosecutors said the weight of the evidence against Ms Duterte justifies a full-blown trial, rejecting her defence that the allegations against her in an impeachment complaint were unsubstantiated. 'The severity of the charges leaves no room for technical evasion. A trial is not only warranted but necessary to reinforce justice, uphold democratic principles, and affirm that no individual, regardless of rank of influence, stands above the law,' they said in their response to Ms Duterte's defence. 'It is obvious from a simple reading of (Ms Duterte's response), which relies on misleading claims and baseless procedural objections, that the only legal strategy of the defence is to have the case dismissed and avoid trial,' the prosecutors said. Ms Duterte, who was impeached by the Lower House in February, has described the impeachment complaint as unconstitutional and 'nothing more than a scrap of paper.' Included in the complaint were allegations that she misused public funds while vice-president and education secretary and had plotted to assassinate Mr Marcos, the First Lady and the House Speaker based on remarks during a November press conference about hiring an assassin. Ms Duterte's impeachment is widely seen in the Philippines as part of a broader power struggle ahead of the 2028 election, which Mr Marcos cannot contest due to a single-term limit for presidents and will likely seek to groom a successor to protect his legacy. Mr Marcos has distanced himself from the impeachment. Ms Duterte, the daughter of former President Rodrigo Duterte, is expected to run for the presidency in 2028 if she survives the impeachment and would be a strong contender. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
US Supreme Court may rule on allowing enforcement of Trump birthright citizenship limits
FILE PHOTO: A general view of the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, U.S., November 26, 2021. Picture taken November 26, 2021. REUTERS/Will Dunham/File photo WASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court may rule on Friday on Donald Trump's attempt to broadly enforce his executive order to limit birthright citizenship, a move that would affect thousands of babies born each year as the Republican president seeks a major shift in how the U.S. Constitution has long been understood. The administration has made an emergency request for the justices to scale back injunctions issued by federal judges in Maryland, Washington and Massachusetts blocking Trump's directive nationwide. The judges found that Trump's order likely violates citizenship language in the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment. On his first day back in office, Trump signed an executive order directing federal agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of children born in the United States who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also called a "green card" holder. More than 150,000 newborns would be denied citizenship annually under Trump's directive, according to the plaintiffs who challenged it, including the Democratic attorneys general of 22 states as well as immigrant rights advocates and pregnant immigrants. The case before the Supreme Court was unusual in that the administration used it to argue that federal judges lack the authority to issue nationwide, or "universal," injunctions, and asked the justices to rule that way and enforce the president's directive even without weighing its legal merits. Federal judges have taken steps including issuing nationwide orders impeding Trump's aggressive use of executive action to advance his agenda. The plaintiffs argued that Trump's directive ran afoul of the 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War of 1861-1865 that ended slavery in the United States. The 14th Amendment's citizenship clause states that all "persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." The administration contends that the 14th Amendment, long understood to confer citizenship to virtually anyone born in the United States, does not extend to immigrants who are in the country illegally or even to immigrants whose presence is lawful but temporary, such as university students or those on work visas. In a June 11-12 Reuters/Ipsos poll, 24% of all respondents supported ending birthright citizenship and 52% opposed it. Among Democrats, 5% supported ending it, with 84% opposed. Among Republicans, 43% supported ending it, with 24% opposed. The rest said they were unsure or did not respond to the question. The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, has handed Trump some important victories on his immigration policies since he returned to office in January. On Monday, it cleared the way for his administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own without offering them a chance to show the harms they could face. In separate decisions on May 30 and May 19, it let the administration end the temporary legal status previously given by the government to hundreds of thousands of migrants on humanitarian grounds. But the court on May 16 kept in place its block on Trump's deportations of Venezuelan migrants under a 1798 law historically used only in wartime, faulting his administration for seeking to remove them without adequate due process. The court heard arguments in the birthright citizenship dispute on May 15. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer, representing the administration, told the justices that Trump's order "reflects the original meaning of the 14th Amendment, which guaranteed citizenship to the children of former slaves, not to illegal aliens or temporary visitors." An 1898 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in a case called United States v. Wong Kim Ark long has been interpreted as guaranteeing that children born in the United States to non-citizen parents are entitled to American citizenship. Trump's administration has argued that the court's ruling in that case was narrower, applying to children whose parents had a "permanent domicile and residence in the United States." Universal injunctions have been opposed by presidents of both parties - Republican and Democratic - and can prevent the government from enforcing a policy against anyone, instead of just the individual plaintiffs who sued to challenge the policy. Proponents have said they are an efficient check on presidential overreach, and have stymied actions deemed unlawful by presidents of both parties. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
Iran's hackers keep a low profile after Israeli and US strikes
FILE PHOTO: A man holds a laptop computer as cyber code is projected on him in this illustration picture taken on May 13, 2017. REUTERS/Kacper Pempel/Illustration/ File Photo After Israeli and American forces struck Iranian nuclear targets, officials in both countries sounded the alarm over potentially disruptive cyberattacks carried out by the Islamic Republic's hackers. But as a fragile ceasefire holds, cyber defenders in the United States and Israel say they have so far seen little out of the ordinary – a potential sign that the threat from Iran's cyber capabilities, like its battered military, has been overestimated. There has been no indication of the disruptive cyberattacks often invoked during discussions of Iran's digital capabilities, such as its alleged sabotage of tens of thousands of computers at major oil company Saudi Aramco in 2012, or subsequent break-ins at U.S. casinos or water facilities. "The volume of attacks appears to be relatively low," said Nicole Fishbein, a senior security researcher with the Israeli company Intezer. "The techniques used are not particularly sophisticated." Online vigilante groups alleged by security analysts to be acting at Iran's direction boasted of hacking a series of Israeli and Western companies in the wake of the airstrikes. A group calling itself Handala Hack claimed a string of data heists and intrusions, but Reuters was not able to corroborate its most recent hacking claims. Researchers say the group, which emerged in the wake of Palestinian militant group Hamas' October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, likely operates out of Iran's Ministry of Intelligence. Rafe Pilling, lead threat intelligence researcher at British cybersecurity company Sophos, said the impact from the hacking activity appeared to be modest. 'As far as we can tell, it's the usual mix of ineffectual chaos from the genuine hacktivist groups and targeted attacks from the Iran-linked personas that are likely having some success but also overstating their impact,' he said. Iran's mission to the United Nations in New York did not respond to a request for comment. Iran typically denies carrying out hacking campaigns. Israeli firm Check Point Software said a hacking campaign it ties to Iran's Revolutionary Guards has in recent days sent phishing messages to Israeli journalists, academic officials and others. In one case, the hackers tried to lure a target to a physical meeting in Tel Aviv, according to Sergey Shykevich, Check Point's threat intelligence group manager. He added that the reasoning behind the proposed meeting was not clear. Shykevich said there have been some data destruction attempts at Israeli targets, which he declined to identify, as well as a dramatic increase in attempts to exploit a vulnerability in Chinese-made security cameras – likely to assess bomb damage in Israel. The pro-Iranian cyber operations demonstrate an asymmetry with pro-Israeli cyber operations tied to the aerial war that began on June 13. In the days since the start of the conflict, suspected Israeli hackers have claimed to have destroyed data at one of Iran's major state-owned banks. They also burned roughly $90 million in cryptocurrencies that the hackers allege were tied to government security services. Israel's National Cyber Directorate did not return a message seeking comment. Analysts said the situation is fluid and that more sophisticated cyber espionage activity may be flying under the radar. Both Israeli and U.S. officials have urged industry to be on the lookout. A June 22 Department of Homeland Security bulletin warned that the ongoing conflict was causing a heightened threat environment in the U.S. and that cyber actors affiliated with the Iranian government may conduct attacks against U.S. networks. The FBI declined to comment on any potential Iranian cyber activities in the United States. Yelisey Bohuslavskiy, the cofounder of intelligence company Red Sense, compared Iran's cyber operations to its missile program. The Iranian weapons that rained down on Israel during the conflict killed 28 people and destroyed thousands of homes, but most were intercepted and none significantly damaged the Israeli military. Bohuslavskiy said Iranian hacking operations seemed to work similarly. 'There is a lot of hot air, there is a lot of indiscriminate civilian targeting, and - realistically - there are not that many results,' he said. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
