Trump hosts Pakistani army chief; disagrees with India over India-Pakistan war mediation
Pakistani armed forces chief Asim Munir (second from left) joined US President Donald Trump for lunch at the White House on June 18. PHOTO: REUTERS
WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD/NEW DELHI - US President Donald Trump on June 18 hosted Pakistan's army chief for lunch in an unprecedented White House meeting that risked worsening a disagreement with India over the Republican president's claim that he stopped the recent war between the nuclear-armed South Asian foes.
It was the first time that a US president has hosted the powerful head of Pakistan's army, widely regarded as having sway over the country's national security policies, at the White House unaccompanied by senior Pakistani civilian officials.
Mr Trump's lunch with Field Marshal Asim Munir represented a major boost in US-Pakistan ties, which had largely languished under Mr Trump and his predecessor, Mr Joe Biden, as both assiduously courted India as part of efforts to push back against China.
Field Marshal Munir was expected to press Mr Trump not to enter Israel's war with Iran and to seek a ceasefire, Pakistani officials and experts said.
A section of Pakistan's embassy in Washington represents Iran's interests in the United States, as Tehran does not have diplomatic relations with the US.
Pakistan has condemned Israel's airstrikes against Iran, saying they violate international law and threaten regional stability.
Asked what he wanted to achieve from the meeting, Mr Trump told reporters at the White House: 'Well, I stopped a war... I love Pakistan. I think (Indian Prime Minister Narendra) Modi is a fantastic man. I spoke to him last night. We're going to make a trade deal with Modi of India.
'But I stopped the war between Pakistan and India. This man was extremely influential in stopping it from the Pakistan side, Modi from the India side and others,' he did, referring to Field Marshal Munir.
'They were going at it - and they're both nuclear countries. I got it stopped.'
No mediation
Mr Trump had said in May that the nuclear-armed South Asian neighbours agreed to a ceasefire after talks mediated by the US, and that the hostilities ended after he urged the countries to focus on trade instead of war.
However, Mr Modi told Mr Trump in a phone call late on June 17 that the ceasefire was achieved through talks between the Indian and Pakistani militaries and not US mediation, according to India's most senior diplomat, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri.
Pakistan has thanked Washington for playing a mediating role.
However, India has repeatedly denied any third-party mediation.
The June 17 phone call between Mr Modi and Mr Trump on the sidelines of the G-7 summit in Canada, which Mr Modi attended as a guest, was the two leaders' first direct exchange since the May 7-10 conflict.
'PM Modi told President Trump clearly that during this period, there was no talk at any stage on subjects like India-US trade deal or US mediation between India and Pakistan,' Mr Misri said, in a press statement.
'Talks for ceasing military action happened directly between India and Pakistan through existing military channels, and on the insistence of Pakistan. Prime Minister Modi emphasised that India has not accepted mediation in the past and will never do,' he said.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi attending a G-7 Leaders' Summit in Canada, on June 17.
PHOTO: REUTERS
Mr Misri said the two leaders had been due to meet on the sidelines of the G-7 summit but Mr Trump left a day early due to the situation in the Middle East.
Mr Trump asked Mr Modi if he could stop by the US on his return from Canada, Mr Misri said, but the Indian leader expressed his inability to do so due to a pre-decided schedule.
The heaviest fighting in decades between India and Pakistan was sparked by an April 22 attack in Indian Kashmir that killed 26 people, most of them tourists. New Delhi blamed the incident on 'terrorists' backed by Pakistan, a charge denied by Islamabad.
Pakistan has previously said that the ceasefire happened after its military returned a call the Indian military had initiated on May 7.
On May 7, Indian jets bombed what New Delhi called 'terrorist infrastructure' sites across the border, triggering tit-for-tat strikes spread over four days in which both sides used fighter jets, missiles, drones and artillery.
Mr Michael Kugelman, a senior fellow at the Asia Pacific Foundation think-tank, said ties between India and the US, which have thrived in recent years, could suffer if Mr Trump continued to make remarks about a US role in the ceasefire and offered US mediation on Kashmir, a disputed Himalayan territory that India and Pakistan both claim.
'For Delhi, it all boils down to an age-old question: How much can it tolerate US-Pakistan cooperation without having it spoil US-India relations – a partnership that's thrived in recent years despite continued US-Pakistan links,' Mr Kugelman said. REUTERS
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
North Korea slams Israeli attacks on Iran as ‘crime against humanity'
Smoke lingers in the sky above Tehran following an Israeli strike on June 18. PHOTO: AFP SEOUL - North Korea on June 19 slammed Israel's launching of strikes to spark its conflict with Iran, and warned the United States and European powers against 'fanning up the flames of war', according to a foreign ministry spokesperson. The North expressed 'serious concern' over 'Israel's military attack and resolutely denounces it,' the spokesperson said, adding that Israel's killing of civilians was 'an unpardonable crime against humanity.' 'The illegal act of state-sponsored terrorism by Israel (is) raising the danger of a new all-out war in the Middle East region,' said the statement, which was published by state-run news agency KCNA. Israel on June 13 launched strikes that it said targeted Iran's nuclear programme, sparking six days of continuing exchanges that have seen both sides firing salvoes of missiles at each other. Iran said on June 15 that Israeli strikes had killed at least 224 people, including military commanders, nuclear scientists and civilians. It has not issued an updated toll since then. Since June 13, at least 24 people have been killed in Israel and hundreds wounded, according to the Israeli government. Those casualties also reportedly include civilians. North Korea has in recent years grown closer to Russia, supporting its military operations against Ukraine in Moscow's grinding war with that country. Russia and Iran in January inked a far-ranging strategic partnership agreement to broaden military ties, and Kyiv and its allies have long accused Iran of supplying Russia with drones and short-range missiles. US President Donald Trump has fuelled speculation about the US joining its key ally Israel in military action against Iran, saying Wednesday that his patience had 'run out' with Tehran, but that it was still not too late for talks. He later said he had not yet made a decision on whether to join Israel in bombing Iran and warned that the country's current leadership could fall as a result of the war. Pyongyang warned Mr Trump and others against joining Israel's war. 'The present grave situation witnessed by the world clearly proves that Israel, supported and patronized by the US and the West, is a cancer-like entity for the peace in the Middle East and a chief culprit of destroying global peace and security,' said the foreign ministry spokesperson. 'The international community is strictly watching the US and Western forces fanning up the flames of war, taking issue with the legitimate sovereign right and exercise of the right to self-defence of Iran, the victim,' they added. The spokesperson said actions by the United States and European powers were 'pushing the situation in the Middle East to an uncontrollable catastrophic phase'. AFP Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
US colleges face major tax blow in Trump's proposed IRS rules on race
The Trump administration and Harvard University (above) have been engaged in a public battle over governance issues including Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies. PHOTO: REUTERS The Trump administration is privately considering unleashing what advocates and critics agree would be one of its biggest cudgels yet to pressure colleges to end slews of programmes and practices benefiting students who are racial minorities. The Treasury Department is weighing a change to Internal Revenue Service (IRS) policies to allow the revocation of tax-exempt status for colleges that consider race in student admissions, scholarships and other areas. If enacted, it would take the administration's reshaping of higher education well beyond the public battles with Harvard University and Columbia University. Non-profit status is core to the finances of more than 1,500 private colleges and universities – from wealthy bastions such as Duke and Vanderbilt, to smaller schools including Vermont's Middlebury and Oregon's Willamette. Revoking that would not just threaten billions in additional taxes, it would cut off the pipeline of philanthropy that has seeded and expanded schools for decades. Even groups known to back conservative ideas were startled. 'I've never seen anything like this,' said Mr Armand Alacbay, senior vice-president of strategy at the American Council of Trustees and Alumni. For many universities, 'losing their tax-exempt status would be existential, as they're highly reliant on philanthropic support'. The proposal would have to make it through an extensive rule-making process, legal experts say, and even if the measure is put in place and the IRS seeks to revoke a college's tax perks, the school would likely take the fight to court. Non-profit status frees schools from paying corporate income tax, helps them get breaks on property taxes and allows them to sell bonds that pay tax-exempt interest, reducing borrowing costs. It also boosts funding by incentivising donors, letting them deduct gifts from their own taxes. Mr Trump has threatened to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status in posts on his Truth Social platform. He has also signalled interest in challenging it elsewhere. 'Tax-exempt status, that's a privilege – it's really a privilege,' he said in the Oval Office in April. 'And it's been abused by a lot more than Harvard, too.' His threat was swiftly decried as out of his jurisdiction by Democrats and some Republicans. But the Treasury Department's proposals could bring his administration a step closer toward revoking Harvard's tax status and potentially challenging other schools if they do not abide by officials' demands to adopt race-blind policies and programmes. A Treasury Department representative declined to comment. The IRS did not respond to a request for comment. 'Very damaging' Many schools would find it far harder than Harvard to operate without tax-exempt status, leaving them virtually no choice but to bend to administration demands. 'If they revoked Harvard's tax exemption, that would be damaging to Harvard,' said Mr Adam Stern, co-head of research at Breckinridge Capital Advisors. 'That would be very damaging to schools that have less resources.' Colleges have been quietly acknowledging the growing risk to their tax exemptions. The president of Duke University called out 'threats to our non-profit status' this month in a public update on the school's effort to reduce spending. Emory and Northwestern have mentioned similar risks in their bond documents. 'Certainly, this is a new worry they have to deal with,' said Mr Robert Romashko, a lawyer specialising in taxes for Husch Blackwell LLP. It comes on top of Trump administration attempts to freeze federal funding for some institutions and rein in enrolment by international students. Congress is also considering a steep tax increase for the wealthiest schools' endowments. Without Congress The proposals under review in the Treasury's Office of Tax Policy were drawn up as IRS revenue procedures – a form of guidance for interpreting and enforcing tax laws. If enacted, they would pave the way for the IRS to bar non-profit schools from remaining tax exempt if they favour any racial groups in matters such as financial assistance, loans, use of facilities or other programmes, according to people with knowledge of the deliberations. They could take effect without congressional approval. The proposals would amount to a 'sea change' in the IRS' rules for non-profits, said Philip Hackney, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh who spent time in the agency's office of the chief counsel. Schools that have helped minority groups narrow historic gaps in wealth and education in the US could end up getting punished for those efforts. 'Charity has long included an idea of remedying discrimination,' he said. 'This would be a monumental change in terms of charitable law. We've built the whole structure on that basis, and the idea of saying all of that stuff was wrong seems incoherent.' Critics split News of the proposals has stirred excitement among some conservative activists encouraging the administration's efforts to end diversity, equity and inclusion programmes in higher eduction. 'The Treasury Department should absolutely enact this policy of stripping tax-exempt status from universities that discriminate on the basis of race,' Mr Christopher Rufo, one of the preeminent voices of that movement, wrote on X. 'No quarter for left-wing racialism in America's institutions.' The American Council of Trustees and Alumni has also criticised universities over Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) policies and hiring practices that they allege take race and other protected characteristics into account. Still, Mr Alacbay warned that using tax status as a lever could open a 'Pandora's box' with far-ranging consequences as future administrations pursue their own agendas. 'One should be very circumspect about using tax law as a lever to enforce other public policies,' he said. 'There are many other, more established ways to enforce civil rights laws. I would say let those existing enforcement mechanisms play out.' Others welcome the idea of the IRS playing a more active role, which could extend to other controversial topics. 'It's very easy to see how a policy would apply beyond race' to issues like gender and gender identity, said Mr Adam Kissel, a visiting fellow in The Heritage Foundation's Center for Education Policy. While enforcement might veer from administration to administration, he said, that is the reality of a messy democratic process 'in the absence of clear guidance and language from Congress'. 'It's alarming' For the proposal to become established as an enforceable revenue procedure, it would have to work its way through the lengthy requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, according to Ms Megan Brackney, a tax controversy attorney and partner at Kostelanetz LLP. That includes issuing a formal notice, allowing affected parties to provide feedback, then reviewing and addressing the comments before finalising the revenue procedure. 'It's alarming, but there's a lot that has to happen for this change to be made if they really decide to go through with it,' she said. 'It doesn't mean they can't do it, they just can't do it tomorrow.' The Trump administration has run into this before. In 2018, the IRS wanted to drop rules requiring some non-profits to identify major donors in their tax filings. A federal judge blocked the change, saying the agency had to obey the Administrative Procedure Act before updating the rules. If the IRS' internal guidance is changed, it still needs to follow the law to find the basis to legitimately revoke a school's tax exemption, Mr Hackney said. And despite Mr Trump's views, Congress and judges have not declared DEI efforts broadly illegal or unconstitutional, he said. Charities also lose their tax perks by violating a fundamental public policy. That standard was set in 1983 when the Supreme Court upheld the IRS' authority to revoke Bob Jones University's tax exemption, citing policies banning inter-racial dating on campus. Ms Ellen Aprill, a retired law professor and senior scholar in residence at the University of California at Los Angeles' law school, said it is hard to argue that Mr Trump's stance against DEI constitutes a fundamental public policy. 'The anti-DEI policy from the executive branch is one we've only seen in the months since Trump took office for a second time,' she said. 'Can you imagine the whipsaw if all non-profits had to adapt to the new positions of the executive branch?' It would likely take years for the IRS to ultimately revoke a school's tax benefits through a long, established process including audits and opportunities for remedy, appeals and challenges in court. Meanwhile, Ms Brackney said, the proposal may have an impact on schools, even if it never gains legal teeth. 'It has an effect to wind everybody up and make everybody nervous to change their behaviour, even before the government takes the appropriate action to make it an enforceable rule,' she said. BLOOMBERG Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
2 hours ago
- Straits Times
Bolsonaro was main beneficiary in illegal surveillance scheme, Brazil police allege
Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro attends Brazil's Supreme Court trial over an alleged coup attempt, in Brasilia, Brazil June 9, 2025. REUTERS/Diego Herculano/File Photo BRASILIA - Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro allegedly helped orchestrate an illegal surveillance scheme by intelligence agency ABIN to target his political enemies during his term, a federal police report showed on Wednesday. The report, which was released by the Supreme Court, said the group used ABIN to spy on and attack political foes and state institutions and to disseminate fake news. The findings, based on testimony, documents from search operations and other evidence, identified Bolsonaro as the "main beneficiary" from the surveillance. Bolsonaro's lawyer, Celso Vilardi, said he had not yet reviewed the police report and could not comment. Despite implicating Bolsonaro, police did not formally accuse him in the report, which did accuse more than 30 other individuals. Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes said he made the findings public after leaks led to conflicting media reports on the matter on Tuesday. Police noted potential links between the ABIN probe and an investigation into an alleged coup attempt, in which Bolsonaro is already a defendant. The decision on whether to charge Bolsonaro in the surveillance case has been left to Brazil's Prosecutor General's Office. Among those formally accused was Carlos Bolsonaro, the former president's son and a Rio de Janeiro city councilor, who police alleged was part of the criminal organization. The younger Bolsonaro has denied wrongdoing, stating on Tuesday that the investigation aimed to harm him ahead of next year's elections. Alexandre Ramagem, the former head of ABIN under Bolsonaro's administration, and Luiz Fernando Correa, the current head of the agency, were also among the people formally accused by police, the report showed. Ramagem was accused of being part of a criminal organization and using ABIN to illegal ends, while Correa is suspected of obstructing the police investigation into the agency, police said. Ramagem could not be reached for comment on Wednesday, but said in a post on X on Tuesday that he would analyze the accusations once he had access to the police report. ABIN did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Wednesday. It had declined to comment on Tuesday. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
