Taiwan votes to decide whether to oust lawmakers from China-friendly party in closely watched poll
The independence-leaning ruling Democratic Progressive Party won last year's presidential election , but the China-friendly Nationalists, also known as the KMT, and the smaller Taiwan People's Party have enough seats to form a majority bloc.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
39 minutes ago
- New York Times
Live Updates: Markets Fall on Weak Jobs Data and Trump's New Tariffs
Workers at the printed circuit board assembly line at Zetwerk Electronics near Bengaluru, India, in June. Personal electronics is one of India's biggest categories of exports to the United States. President Trump's new list of tariffs on half the world's countries sent the United States' trading partners scrambling to understand how their businesses will be affected. India got the bad news a day earlier — its goods face a tariff of 25 percent or more — but the extra time was hardly enough to adjust to the fresh chaos. Indian negotiators had not expected to conclude a meaningful deal in time to meet Mr. Trump's revised deadline of Aug. 1. But they did expect to be treated as well as their neighbors, and to keep haggling with American officials until October or November, when Mr. Trump was invited to visit India as part of the Quad defense group, which brings together four big democracies — India, the United States, Japan and Australia — with a shared interest in standing up to China. Instead, they were fed a heap of insults and injuries. Along with the 25 percent rate, one of the highest in Asia and only a point lower than what was threatened on Liberation Day in April, India was informed that its existing trade barriers are 'strenuous and obnoxious'; it will be charged an untold penalty for buying Russian oil; it is a 'dead economy.' It's archrival Pakistan was praised and promised an oil-exploration deal. Hurt feelings aside, the results are confusing. Two of the biggest categories of exports to the United States from India are personal electronics, worth about $14 billion a year, and pharmaceuticals, worth $10 billion. Rajesh Sharma, executive director of India Cellular and Electronics Association, said smartphones were exempted from these tariffs; so did executives at pharmaceutical companies. But on Friday, after reading the executive order, the Global Trade Research Initiative in New Delhi concluded the opposite. India's stock markets dipped on the news for two days running. Indian and international banks wrote notices warning that the country's generally hard-charging economic growth is likely to slow measurably as a result of the tariffs. Then there are the unknown tariffs. On July 6, Mr. Trump wrote that countries aligned with the BRICS group, of which India is a founding member, would incur an additional 10 percent penalty. Then on July 14, he said that, if Russia didn't make peace with Ukraine within 50 days, he would punish its trading partners with 'secondary tariffs' of 100 percent. That figure is making Indians worry anew. Mr. Trump added 'plus a penalty' to the 25 percent rate imposed on India, for buying Russian oil and weapons. Shashi Tharoor, a prominent member of the opposition, spoke to an Indian news agency about the possible impact. 'There's even talk of a 100 percent penalty,' he said, 'which will destroy our trade with America.' There is evidence that Indian buyers of Russian oil were already pulling back before the executive order. 'Indian refiners have reduced Russian crude purchases this week,' said Sumit Ritolia, an analyst at Kpler, which tracks shipping and commodities. They were already 'looking to further diversify, amid rising concerns over potential U.S. sanctions,' having spent years taking advantage of discounted Russian oil to reduce their imports from the Persian Gulf. Reducing the United States' trade deficit is one of the Trump administration's goals, so convincing India to buy more American oil and gas would make sense. Last year, India exported $45.7 billion more goods to the United States than it imported. It spent about three times as much importing oil. If a third of that were redirected to American sources, their bilateral trade would be evened out. Mr. Trump's angry barrage of social media has complicated further negotiations. The breakdown of trust between Narendra Modi, India's prime minister, and whom he called his 'true friend,' Mr. Trump, is likely to make it harder to complete any deal, analysts say. Indian news outlets have reported that Mr. Trump wanted to iron out some outstanding issues, after four rounds of direct talks between the two sides, in a phone call with Mr. Modi. The Indian government was anxious to avoid any of his last-minute surprises. The U.S. commerce secretary accused India of 'slow-rolling' its trade negotiations. Indian officials and analysts say the friction is caused by a fundamental difference of approach. Mr. Trump has a penchant for quick, top-down deal-making. India's bureaucracy moves at a methodical pace, especially when it comes to opening up the agriculture market, which is politically sensitive. India's recently concluded trade deal with Britain took three years of talks, under two different British prime ministers. On Friday, India's foreign ministry released a statement that put on a brave face. 'India and the United States share a Comprehensive Global Strategic Partnership,' established in 2013 between President Barack Obama and then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, 'anchored in shared interests, democratic values and robust people-to-people ties.' The ministry stuck to principles, revealing no plan for breaking through Mr. Trump's hard line. 'This partnership has weathered several transitions and challenges,' the statement said. 'We remain focused on the substantive agenda that our two countries have committed to and are confident that the relationship will continue to move forward.' Rebecca Elliott , Mujib Mashal and Hari Kumar contributed reporting.
Boston Globe
41 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Mass. Governor: All shelters are closed, state of emergency for shelter system is over
Advertisement 'We're saving taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars and putting families on a path to self-sustainability,' she said. In addition to the closure of hotel shelters, shelters located at the former Bay State Correctional Center and the Chelsea Rapid Shelter site have also closed. Three families were using the hotel shelter system, a Massachusetts experienced a surge of immigrants arriving here beginning in the At the same time, the Advertisement After Healey took office in January 2023, officials drastically expanded the emergency shelter system to house thousands of homeless and migrant families For decades, homeless families have been guaranteed a roof over their heads under to help families at hotels access medical care, find transportation, and enroll their children in school. With costs skyrocketing, Healey and legislators repeatedly sought to tighten eligibility, including by requiring homeless families to prove lawful immigration status, show they have lived in Massachusetts for at least six months, and undergo The number of families in emergency shelter has fallen to Just last month, however, state officials had the cap set by the Legislature, the state still was not able to keep up with the demand. Healey officials say they issued the declaration specifically so they can continue to impose restrictions on shelters, such as limiting who gets priority for beds and how long they can stay. Advertisement Massachusetts Housing Secretary Ed Augustus wrote in The extended declaration is supposed to last until Nov. 9, which is required under rules set out by the Legislature in a 2023 spending bill. It can be extended again if Augustus determines it's necessary. Former MBTA executive Brian Shortsleeve, who is running in the GOP primary for governor, criticized Healey's comments Friday. He slammed the use of public dollars to fund the state's HomeBase program, which provides rental assistance for families transitioning into permanent housing and is credited with helping reduce the emergency shelter population. Shortsleeve said Healey's claim of saving taxpayer dollars has 'got to go done [sic] in the Guinness Book of Records as the biggest lie ever told by a politician,' 'As the next governor, I will stop the flow of our tax dollars to the migrants,' he said. Samantha J. Gross can be reached at
San Francisco Chronicle
41 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Hong Kong firm appeals for legal protection of investors as its Panama Ports contract faces lawsuits
HONG KONG (AP) — A subsidiary of a Hong Kong conglomerate entangled in U.S.-China tensions appealed on Friday for legal protection for businesses in Panama after the company's contract over its Panama Canal port assets has been faced with lawsuits in the Central American country. Respect for the rule of law is essential to assure businesses that Panama is a safe place to invest in, Panama Ports Company, under Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison Holdings, said in a statement. Panama's Comptroller General filed two lawsuits on Wednesday, seeking to declare unconstitutional a contract that granted the operation of ports at both ends of the canal to the Hong Kong subsidiary, and to nullify its renewal four years ago, saying it was 'abusive' of Panama's interests. In turn, Panama Ports Company said its operations have had a positive impact, from building world-class ports to creating more than 25,000 direct and indirect jobs and contributing billions of balboas — Panama's currency — to the country's economy. It said it wants to work with the government in Panama for a better future. 'Regarding the ongoing legal actions, we firmly believe that respect for legal protection and the rule of law are essential in order to provide businesses and investors with the certainty that Panama is a safe country to invest in,' it said. The company operates the ports of Balboa, in the Pacific, and Cristobal, in the Atlantic, under a concession contract approved in 1997 and renewed in 2021 for 25 more years. CK Hutchison is controlled by the family of Li Ka-shing, the southern Chinese city's richest man. Panama's comptroller authority in April said that an audit of Panama Ports Company found irregularities in the renewal of the concession. But the company denied allegations that it had failed to pay about $1.2 billion to the Central American country. Panama President José Raúl Mulino said during his weekly news conference on Thursday that he fully supported the comptroller's case and would await the court's verdict. 'We have all seen what that contract has costed the Panamanian nation over time,' Mulino said without elaborating. He alluded to some sort of public-private partnership for the ports, saying there was a lot of interest from private companies, but that it was in the early stages and provided no details. CK Hutchison Holdings' initial plan, announced in March, to sell its port assets in dozens of countries to a group that includes the U.S. investment firm BlackRock Inc., also got caught up in tensions between Beijing and Washington. U.S. President Donald Trump, who has alleged that China interferes with the canal, initially welcomed that plan. However, it apparently angered Beijing and drew a review by Chinese anti-monopoly authorities. After months of uncertainty, Hutchison said on Monday that it may seek a Chinese investor to join a consortium of buyers, which also includes BlackRock subsidiary Global Infrastructure Partners and Terminal Investment Limited, a subsidiary of the Mediterranean Shipping Company. The initial deal, valued at nearly $23 billion, including $5 billion in debt, would have given the consortium control over 43 ports in 23 countries, including the two at the Panama Canal. Panama Ports Company said Friday it would communicate with the Panamanian government 'at the appropriate time,' affirming that it believes engaging with the government 'is vital to discuss the way forward for' the company.
