Latest news with #UncleSam
Express Tribune
2 days ago
- Politics
- Express Tribune
A world of blocs: where Pakistan stands
Listen to article During the Cold War, the world was divided between capitalist and communist blocs. Today, the world is again divided, with the new division referred to as the new Cold War. The two great powers around which this geopolitical division is centred are the United States and China. The interesting aspect of the new Cold War division is that countries that prefer to side with one bloc or another not only typically pick a side but also, by doing so, demonstrate their preference for a global order. Both China and Russia advocate a world structured around a multipolar order, with institutions such as SCO, BRICS and AIIB (Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank) being pushed forward as alternative institutions to lead this order. The global promotion of BRI by China is also reflective of the transition of the order towards multipolarity. Which bloc does Pakistan belong to? This is the most frequent question that is asked whenever Pakistan's relations with great powers come under discussion. It may be fair to assume that if this question is asked of the people on the streets, a majority will vote for Pakistan being part of the Chinese bloc. But seen objectively, and seen from the perspective of the dominant interactions that determine which bloc a country belongs to, we might get a different answer. Of late, Pakistan's foreign policy seems to be following the concept of strategic balancing and non-alignment. To be fair, Pakistan has enjoyed an unquestionable relationship of deep-rooted state-to-state friendship with China. China never attached the 'you are with us or against us' string to its relationship with Pakistan. While the US relationship with Pakistan has been 'issue-based', the fundamental determinant of China's relationship with Pakistan has been geography. Some of the dominant interactions that determine which bloc a country belongs to are in the field of politics/diplomacy, economy, military/security and cultural and state signaling. State signaling is immediate in the context, more fluid, and nevertheless an important determining factor. Take the case of the visit to the US of Pakistan's army chief. The general had a meeting with President Trump in June this year. This was unprecedented as President Trump met the army chief without having met either the President or the Prime Minister of Pakistan. This was unprecedented, and there are reports that the army chief might be undertaking another visit to the United States very soon. If state signaling is a determining factor, then the two states in the immediate context are giving a clear signal. From the American point of view, it needs security partnerships in the region and with the US imposing 50% tariffs on Indian imports, and India in return accusing the US of hypocrisy, it might just be the right time for Uncle Sam to play ball with Pakistan. Economically, Pakistan provides access to a market not as large as the Indian market, but still access to the market of an influential player in the region. More than the economy, the military/security drives the current Pak-US relations. The Iran-Israel and Russia-Ukraine wars tell us how the form of warfare has changed. Both Germany and Japan used new technology, which at that time was aircraft, tanks, submarines and aircraft carriers, to pursue outright conquests during World War II. Drones, missiles of all kinds, including hypersonic missiles, and fifth-generation aircraft are the new offensive weapons. If great powers can position such lethal military capabilities at strategic locations, would they need boots on the ground as many as the world needed before the introduction of these lethal military capabilities to generate military influence in a region? What is meant when it is said that a country that joins a bloc indicates its preference for a given world order? The US and its allies have built a liberal order at home, but the order abroad is illiberal. Interestingly, the people of the global south, and particularly the people out on the streets, believe that they have also played an active role in the promotion of this illiberalism abroad. Are China and Russia promoting illiberalism abroad? China has proved to the world that development does not require democracy, that liberalism is not history's natural endpoint. There is no Russo-centric or Sino-centric global order that these two great powers pursue. All that these great powers are doing is resisting an international system that slaps sanctions, imposes arbitrary tariffs, executes military interventions disregarding international law, violates human rights and turns a blind eye towards genocide. When President Putin demands that NATO roll back to the Cold War frontiers or President Xi expects the US and its allies to stay away from its sphere of influence in the South China Sea and the Eastern Pacific, they reassert their great power status within the system. A global order that practices freedom and liberty at home and overlooks democratic abuses abroad cannot be termed a global order of liberal internationalism. That is why this international system faces opposition and contestation, and that is why there are two distinct blocs in the world. The one that promotes this international system and the one that contests it. As long as the system remains immoral and hypocritical, both China and Russia will continue to lead the fight to weaken this system. As far as Pakistan is concerned, our foreign policy decisions must fundamentally be based on pragmatism, but our policy must never draw away from the gravitational pull of geography. Today, a three-dimensional premise defines our security dilemma. American premise: the more the US engages with Pakistan, the more Pakistan will draw away from China and Russia. Pakistan's premise: the more India deals with Afghanistan, the more it will draw away from Pakistan. And the Chinese premise: the more Pakistan engages with the US, the more it will draw away from China. It's not bad to understand premises; it gets bad only when states start formulating the wrong questions and end up making wrong assumptions that eventually drive their policies. The US remains far and away, and its obsession with Pakistan is driven by issues in which Pakistan is expected to play a role to serve primarily the US interests. With the US, we can push our relationship, but we must never ignore or avoid the geopolitical and strategic pull towards China.
Mint
4 days ago
- Politics
- Mint
Moon race II: Nasa mustn't take the risk of a lunar meltdown lightly
'Didn't I promise you the moon?" That's what a harried-looking Uncle Sam is seen telling protestors in a cartoon published in a US newspaper on 20 May 1969, two months before Apollo 11 landed on the moon. In Frankie Morse's drawing, Uncle Sam stands under our only natural satellite, emblazoned with 'US Space Feats" on its dark side. Placards on planet earth yelled 'end the war,' with street crowds drawing attention to disarmament, pollution, human needs, inflation, law-and-order, urban crises and so on. Things seem to have come full circle. Fifty-six years on, as the US plans to set up a nuclear reactor on the moon by 2030, the cartoon's message has a familiar ring. With some variations and updates, that litany of complaints has held constant, just as charges of skewed priorities remain resonant. But this century's race for the moon has a new driver: As the world heats up and worsens our lives, what if we need other habitable places? No wonder the lunar-reactor plan has made the world sit up. Also Read: How ISRO's partnership with NASA will boost India's space industry America's National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Nasa) is in charge of that power project. According to documents obtained by Politico, Nasa administrator Sean Duffy has sped up US plans for reliable energy sources on the moon: specifically, a 100-kilowatt nuclear reactor. The basic idea, it seems, is to beat China and Russia in the space race underway, which is partly aimed at making the moon habitable. 'Since March 2024, China and Russia have announced on at least three occasions a joint effort to place a reactor on the moon by the mid-2030s," Duffy said in his directive. 'The first country to do so could potentially declare a keep-out zone," he added, which would inhibit the US from 'establishing a planned Artemis presence if not there first." Also Read: US-Russia face-off: Nuclear sub moves shouldn't be announced on social media The Artemis accords signed by the US with over 50 other nations—India included—duly pledge adherence to international law. So, would a lunar no-go zone be legal? Or some version thereof? Can the moon be carved up under national flags? The Outer Space Treaty, ratified by the US and others in 1967, bars extra-terrestrial assertions of national sovereignty. Also, while it explicitly bans nuclear weapons in space, it is silent on dual-use technology. True, nuclear power would plug the gaps in solar energy made inevitable by a lunar night that lasts 14 earth-days. Nasa is also right that it would boost its capacity for space exploration. Given the discovery of lunar ice, for which India's Chandrayaan-I mission deserves credit, water may not need to be hauled from earth to run a small fission reactor up there. A human base enabled by this could plausibly be used as a launchpad to explore Mars, moving to which is more than just an Elon Musk fantasy. Living so remotely is not an easy nut to crack. Can India chip in? Several Isro-devised tests done aboard the International Space Station by Shubhanshu Shukla were aimed at growing edible stuff in orbital conditions. Also Read: Atomic hype: Nuclear energy is a story of more frisson than fission Human frisson over lunar fission must not eclipse the challenges posed by this Nasa project. All nuclear reactors must be kept under close watch, given the risk of a meltdown that releases radiation. While the moon is too remote to endanger people on earth, this must not reduce our concern for safety. Standards must never slip. Disasters at Chernobyl and Fukushima have shown the difficulty of rear-guard action even with resources close-by. The lunar imprint left by this leap for humankind mustn't end up as a memorial to human folly.
Int'l Business Times
4 days ago
- Politics
- Int'l Business Times
US Uses War Rhetoric, Superman To Recruit For Migrant Crackdown
From Uncle Sam to Superman, the US government is deploying patriotic icons and increasingly warlike rhetoric to recruit Americans into enforcing Donald Trump's immigration crackdown. Job ads promising $50,000 signing bonuses to new "Deportation Officers" have flooded social media over the past week, accompanied by jingoistic rallying slogans that declare "America Needs You." White House officials have shared World War I-style posters, including one with Uncle Sam donning an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) baseball cap, while a former Superman actor has pledged he will "be sworn in as an ICE agent ASAP." "So many patriots have stepped up, and I'm proud to be among them," Dean Cain, who starred as the Man of Steel in 1990s TV series "Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman," told FOX News. ICE, the agency chiefly responsible for the recent, divisive masked raids on farms, factories and Home Depot parking lots across the nation, is pulling out all the stops to hire new officers at a staggering rate. Flush with $75 billion in extra funding -- making it the highest-funded US law enforcement agency, ahead of even the FBI -- ICE has been tasked by Trump with deporting one million undocumented immigrants per year. To do so, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has pledged to hire 10,000 new officers, in a process that would swell ICE's ranks by a whopping 50 percent. On Wednesday, Noem scrapped pre-existing age caps that prevented over-40s from becoming deportation officers. Student debt forgiveness, generous overtime pay and enhanced retirement benefits are all being flouted -- alongside language about the opportunity to "Fulfill your destiny" and "Defend the Homeland." "Your nation needs you to step into the breach. For our country, for our culture, for our way of life. Will you answer the call?" read one post on Department of Homeland Security social media accounts. DHS officials say they have received 80,000 applications since the recruitment campaign began less than a week ago. But critics have quickly highlighted evidence that the aggressive drive may not be working as effectively as officials claim. Dozens of officials at FEMA -- a separate agency that deals with emergency disaster response -- have been reassigned to ICE and threatened with losing their jobs if they do not move, the Washington Post reported. DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told the Post the move was part of "an all-hands-on-deck strategy to recruit 10,000 new ICE agents." An ICE pilot program offering agents additional cash bonuses for deporting people quickly was scrapped less than four hours after it was announced, when its existence was leaked to the New York Times. And some local law enforcement agencies that have cooperated with the federal immigration crackdown have complained that they are now seeing their own officers poached. "ICE actively trying to use our partnership to recruit our personnel is wrong," a Florida sheriff's office spokesperson told CNN. Perhaps the highest profile and most scathing response has come from "South Park," the popular animated TV satire that is becoming a thorn in the Trump administration's side. In a recent episode, hapless school counselor Mr Mackey is offered an ICE job after a seven-second-long interview, immediately handed a gun and sent on a raid of a children's concert. "If you're crazy, or fat and lazy, we don't care at all," says a fictional ICE job advert. "Remember, only detain the brown ones. If it's brown, it goes down," orders Noem's character during a satirical sequence set during an immigration raid in heaven. ICE raids have been accused using racial profiling by rights groups. Meanwhile, the recruitment drive has been hailed by conservative outlets. Fox News celebrated the news that Superman actor Cain had enlisted with the headline banner "Illegals, meet your Kryptonite." Supportive comments on the channel's Facebook page included "Now that's a REAL Superman." Several others pointed out that Superman, a beloved comic book hero who is closely associated with American patriotism, is "quite literally an alien immigrant."
Straits Times
4 days ago
- Politics
- Straits Times
US uses war rhetoric, Superman to recruit for migrant crackdown
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox The US government is using patriotic icons and war-like rhetoric to recruit Americans into enforcing the immigration crackdown. LOS ANGELES – From Uncle Sam to Superman, the US government is deploying patriotic icons and increasingly warlike rhetoric to recruit Americans into enforcing President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown. Job ads promising US$50,000 (S$64,160) signing bonuses to new 'Deportation Officers' have flooded social media over the past week, accompanied by jingoistic rallying slogans that declare 'America Needs You'. White House officials have shared World War I-style posters, including one with Uncle Sam donning an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) baseball cap, while a former Superman actor has pledged he will 'be sworn in as an ICE agent ASAP'. 'So many patriots have stepped up, and I'm proud to be among them,' American actor Dean Cain, who starred as the Man of Steel in 1990s TV series Lois & Clark: The New Adventures Of Superman, told FOX News. Ice, the enforcement agency chiefly responsible for the recent, divisive masked raids on farms, factories and Home Depot parking lots across the nation, is pulling out all the stops to hire new officers at a staggering rate. Flush with US$75 billion in extra funding – making it the highest-funded US law enforcement agency, ahead of even the FBI – Ice has been tasked by Mr Trump with deporting one million undocumented immigrants per year. To do so, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has pledged to hire 10,000 new officers, in a process that would swell Ice's ranks by a whopping 50 per cent. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Asia Cambodia, Thailand agree on Asean observers monitoring truce, but fundamental differences remain Singapore Flying greener will come at a price, industry players warn Singapore Liquor licences for F&B, nightlife venues extended to 4am in Boat Quay, Clarke Quay Singapore Chikungunya cases in Singapore double; authorities monitoring situation closely Opinion At 79, Liew Mun Leong has no time to be sentimental Singapore Student found with vape taken to hospital after behaving aggressively in school; HSA investigating Singapore CDC and SG60 vouchers listed on e-commerce platforms will be taken down: CDCs Asia Cambodia nominates US President Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize On Aug 6 , Ms Noem scrapped pre-existing age caps that prevented over-40s from becoming deportation officers. Student debt forgiveness, generous overtime pay and enhanced retirement benefits are all being flouted – alongside language about the opportunity to 'Fulfill your destiny' and 'Defend the Homeland'. 'Your nation needs you to step into the breach. For our country, for our culture, for our way of life. Will you answer the call?' read one post on Department of Homeland Security social media accounts. 'All hands on deck' DHS officials say they have received 80,000 applications since the recruitment campaign began less than a week ago. But critics have quickly highlighted evidence that the aggressive drive may not be working as effectively as officials claim. Dozens of officials at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) – a separate agency that deals with emergency disaster response – have been reassigned to ICE and threatened with losing their jobs if they do not move, the Washington Post reported. DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told the Post the move was part of 'an all-hands-on-deck strategy to recruit 10,000 new Ice agents'. An Ice pilot programme offering agents additional cash bonuses for deporting people quickly was scrapped less than four hours after it was announced, when its existence was leaked to the New York Times. And some local law enforcement agencies that have cooperated with the federal immigration crackdown have complained that they are now seeing their own officers poached. 'Ice actively trying to use our partnership to recruit our personnel is wrong,' a Florida sheriff's office spokesperson told CNN. Kryptonite Perhaps the highest profile and most scathing response has come from South Park, the popular animated TV satire that is becoming a thorn in the Trump administration's side. In a recent episode, hapless school counsellor Mr Mackey is offered an Ice job after a seven-second-long interview, immediately handed a gun and sent on a raid of a children's concert. 'If you're crazy, or fat and lazy, we don't care at all,' says a fictional Ice job advert. 'Remember, only detain the brown ones. If it's brown, it goes down,' orders Ms Noem's character during a satirical sequence set during an immigration raid in heaven. Ms Noem's character in the episode shares her name and bears a striking resemblance to her real-life counterpart. Ice raids have been accused using racial profiling by rights groups. Meanwhile, the recruitment drive has been hailed by conservative outlets. Fox News celebrated the news that Superman actor Cain had enlisted with the headline banner 'Illegals, meet your Kryptonite'. Supportive comments on the channel's Facebook page included 'Now that's a REAL Superman.' Several others pointed out that Superman, a beloved comic book hero who is closely associated with American patriotism, is 'quite literally an alien immigrant'. AFP
Hindustan Times
04-08-2025
- Business
- Hindustan Times
Cash Windfall From Trump's Tax Law Is Starting to Show Up at Big Companies
Provisions in President Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' will give windfalls to companies. The magnitude of the cash savings from this summer's federal tax legislation is starting to take shape at America's biggest companies. AT&T recently said it expected $1.5 billion to $2 billion in cash tax savings this year, due to provisions in the tax-and-spending law dubbed the Bill Act">One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The high end of the range is equivalent to an 11% boost to analyst estimates of 2025 free cash flow before the law was enacted. AT&T estimated annual cash tax savings of $2.5 billion to $3 billion in both 2026 and 2027. In short, changes like allowing upfront depreciation of assets and immediate expensing of research-and-development expenses will bring swift windfalls to American corporations but also lasting tailwinds. This in turn has provided incremental fuel to stock markets, a counterweight to risks from tariffs and other policy uncertainty. The cash savings won't affect reported earnings, which are calculated using different accounting rules than taxes. It won't all ultimately end up in free cash flow either, because AT&T plans to reinvest much of the savings in new capital projects. But the change is still a positive for the company's shareholders and valuation, all other things being equal. 'More cash in the company's pocket. Less cash in Uncle Sam's pocket. That in theory should be good for investors,' said David Zion, founder of Zion Research Group and a longtime accounting and tax analyst. AT&T raised its 2026 and 2027 estimates for free cash flow by $1 billion each year to $18 billion and $19 billion, respectively. That means more available cash to pay for things like debt reduction or buying back stock. Free cash flow typically is defined as cash flow from operating activities minus capital expenditures. AT&T's numbers are small potatoes compared with the biggest tech giants' expected windfalls. Zion in a recent report estimated that Meta Platforms' cash tax savings could be as much as $11 billion this year. That is equivalent to 31% of previously estimated free cash flow for the year. Similarly, Zion estimates cash tax savings this year could be $15.7 billion, equivalent to 43% of the average analyst estimate for 2025 free cash flow. Other companies with estimated one-year savings equivalent to 30% of free cash flow or more include Charter Communications, Targa Resources and Texas Instruments. All told, Zion estimates $148 billion in cash tax savings for a sample that covered 369 of the companies in the S&P 500. That is equivalent to 8.5% of the companies' combined full-year estimates for free cash flow as of June 30, right before Congress passed the tax law, using estimates compiled by S&P Global Market Intelligence. Amazon, Meta, Alphabet and Microsoft together accounted for 38% of the total. Most companies, including those four, haven't disclosed estimates yet quantifying the impact. Zion used 2025 estimates for companies with calendar fiscal years and 2026 estimates for companies with non-calendar fiscal years. The firm's $148 billion estimate covers three major tax changes with the biggest potential impact on free cash flow. For starters, the new tax law brings back so-called 100% bonus depreciation. This means businesses can fully and immediately expense most depreciable assets in the U.S. for tax purposes, if they acquired and placed the assets into service after Jan. 19. The government also reinstated upfront expensing for U.S. research and development. That includes letting companies accelerate the expensing of previously unamortized R&D costs, which mainly is a one-time benefit rather than a sustainable source of cash. At Meta, for instance, Zion estimates $4.6 billion of the $11 billion in savings would come from accelerating expensing of unamortized R&D already on the books, while $3.6 billion would be from upfront expensing of new R&D, and $2.8 billion would be from full expensing of business property. Zion used rough, back-of-the-envelope math for his estimates. The savings could be lower, depending, in part, on the tax choices that companies make. For instance, some companies could elect not to fully accelerate expensing of unamortized R&D this year. Another provision in the new tax law relaxed the limit on deductibility of interest expense. The Congressional Budget Office estimated the new law's provisions on deductibility for capital expenditures, R&D and interest expense would cost the government $363 billion, $141 billion and $61 billion, respectively, over 10 years. So while some provisions provide only a near-term boost, others will keep paying off for companies for years to come. Whatever one's views about corporate tax breaks and ballooning budget deficits, they likely have helped bolster stock valuations. Write to Jonathan Weil at
