Turkish authorities have once again refused to allow a group of German politicians to visit Bundeswehr soldiers stationed at Incirlik air base, Deutsche Welle reported on Monday, May 15.

Germany currently has several Tornado surveillance aircraft and a refueling plane deployed at the base that are assisting an international coalition carrying out aerial attacks on positions of the so-called “Islamic State” terrorist group in Iraq and Syria. Some 260 German military personnel are stationed at Incirlik.

According to dpa information, one reason given for the denial of access was Germany’s granting asylum to a number of Turkish officers who faced persecution following the failed coup in Turkey on July 15 last year.

The German government is now considering withdrawing the Bundeswehr troops from the air base, according to information from the Bundestag Defense Committee. A decision on where to move the Tornado units is to be made in the next few weeks, with Jordan seen as a favorite, sources from the committee said.

King Salman on Monday expressed hope a “historic” summit between Arab and Muslim nations and US President Donald Trump will enhance ties and promote tolerance.

The king, during the weekly Cabinet meeting, welcomed the pending visit of Trump and other Arab and Islamic leaders to the Kingdom.

The leaders will join the 17th consultative meeting of the GCC leaders, US-GCC Summit and the US-Arab-Islamic Summit to be hosted by the Kingdom.

King Salman, addressing the session at Al-Salam Palace in Jeddah, expressed hope the May 21 summit with Arab and Muslim leaders “will establish a new partnership in confronting extremism and terrorism,” Saudi Press Agency (SPA) reported.

The king expressed confidence that the Saudi-US Summit, to be held on Saturday, will boost the strategic relations between the two countries.

He said the meeting will boost cooperation at regional and international levels in a manner that will enhance global security and stability.

The king also expressed hope that the GCC consultative meeting will bolster the GCC solidarity and that the GCC-US summit will exert more efforts to realize and strengthen security, stability and peace in the region.

He stressed that the US-Arab-Islamic Summit comes in light of challenges and delicate situations witnessed by the world and expressed hope the summit will build a new partnership in the face of extremism and terrorism.

He also stressed the spread of tolerance and coexistence, the enhancement of security, stability and cooperation “to serve the present and future of our people.”

Whether in your allotment or in horticulture, fossil peat is frequently used to improve soil quality – yet the harvesting of this substrate, which occurs in moors, is destroying their ecosystem and contributing to global warming through increased carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.

Professor Dr. Ralf Reski and Dr. Eva Decker from the Faculty of Biology at the University of Freiburg, Germany, want to develop peat moss as a sustainable and renewable alternative as part of the “MOOSzucht” (moss cultivation) project. The University of Greifswald is co-ordinating the joint project, the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology and an enterprise from Lower Saxony are also involved. The German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) is funding the project with approx. 1.1 million Euros for the next 3 years.

Moorlands play an important role in climate regulation: they increase biodiversity and store large amounts of water and the greenhouse gas CO2. Moors have their main component to thank for their water storage abilities, namely the decomposed peat mosses, which are used for horticulture. Worldwide 30 million cubic meters of fossil peat are used yearly, nine million alone in Germany. Peat harvesting and drainage by agriculture mean only about 5% of moorland areas are still intact in these parts.

In previous projects the Greifswald ecobiologists have already shown that peat-exhausted moors make an ideal basis on which newly planted mosses from the Sphagnum family can grow. These renewable peat mosses can be harvested after a few years and used as peat substitute in horticulture. This usage of wet moorlands is called paludiculture. It reduces CO2 emission, preserves agricultural areas, increases biodiversity, secures jobs in rural areas and strengthens the regional economy. “Until now a shortage of “moss seeding material” prevented the commercial use of paludiculture. Moreover their efficiency must be increased by at least 30%”, says Reski.

The team of biologists from Freiburg has already propagated a pure version of Sphagnum in bioreactors as part of the EU-funded project “MossClone”.

“This technology will be improved upon in the “MOOSzucht” project together with our colleagues from the KIT in Karlsruhe”, explained Reski. “Furthermore we will be applying our knowledge of the genetic composition of Physcomitrella and Sphagnum mosses, in order to obtain fast-growing peat mosses via smart breeding.”

The BMEL reviewers assessed the combination of plant biotechnology, bioprocess engineering, ecobiology, horticulture and agriculture as a particularly innovative and successful example for creatively combining ecology with economics.

The biologists from Freiburg are specialists in moss research and contributed significantly in developing mosses as model organisms for biology and biotechnology on a world-wide scale. Ralf Reski heads the Chair of Plant Biotechnology at the University of Freiburg. The biologist is a member of the BIOSS Excellence Cluster (Centre for Biological Signalling Studies) and was Senior Fellow at the Freiburg Institute for Advanced Studies (FRIAS) and its French counterpart USIAS, the University of Strasbourg Institute for Advanced Study, France.

The beginnings of agriculture changed human history and has fascinated scientists for centuries.

Researchers from the Grantham Centre for Sustainable Futures at the University of Sheffield have shed light on how hunter-gatherers first began farming and how crops were domesticated to depend on humans.

Domesticated crops have been transformed almost beyond recognition in comparison with their wild relatives – a change that happened during the early stages of farming in the Stone Age.

For grain crops like cereals, the hallmark of domestication is the loss of natural seed dispersal – seeds no longer fall off plants but have become dependent on humans or machines to spread them.

Professor Colin Osborne, from the Grantham Centre for Sustainable Futures at the University of Sheffield, said: “We know very little about how agriculture began, because it happened 10,000 years ago – that’s why a number of mysteries are unresolved. For example why hunter-gatherers first began farming, and how were crops domesticated to depend on people.

“One controversy in this area is about the extent to which ancient peoples knew they were domesticating crops. Did they know they were breeding domestication characteristics into crops, or did these characteristics just evolve as the first farmers sowed wild plants into cultivated soil, and tended and harvested them?”

The new research, published in the journal Evolution Letters, shows the impact of domestication on vegetable seed size.

Any selective breeding of vegetables by early farmers would have acted on the leaves, stems or roots that were eaten as food, but should not have directly affected seed size.

Instead, any changes in vegetable seed size must have arisen from natural selection acting on these crops in cultivated fields, or from genetic links to changes in another characteristic like plant or organ size. In the last instance, people might have bred crops to become bigger, and larger seeds would have come along unintentionally.

The University of Sheffield researchers gathered seed size data from a range of crops and found strong evidence for a general enlargement of seeds due to domestication.

They discovered domesticated maize seeds are 15 times bigger than the wild form, soybean seeds are seven times bigger. Wheat, barley and other grain crops had more modest increases in size (60 per cent for barley and 15 per cent for emmer wheat) but these changes are important if they translate into yield.

“We found strong evidence for a general enlargement of seeds due to domestication across seven vegetable species,” said Professor Osborne.

“This is especially stunning in a crop like a sweet potato, where people don’t even plant seeds, let alone harvest them. The size of this domestication effect falls completely within the range seen in cereals and pulse grains like lentils and beans, raising the possibility that at least part of the seed enlargement in these crops also evolved during domestication without deliberate foresight from early farmers.”

Professor Osborne added: “Our findings have important implications for understanding how crops evolved, because they mean that major changes in our staple crops could have arisen without deliberate foresight by early farmers.

“This means that unconscious selection was probably more important in the genesis of our food plants than previously realised. Early increases in the yields of crops might well have evolved in farmers’ fields rather than being bred artificially.”

The AP news story “Demonization of Soros Recalls Old anti-Semitic Conspiracies,” written by Vanessa Gera,  is a wholly indefensible whitewash of George Soros, one that accuses his critics of anti-Semitism. Yet not a single anti-Semitic quote that his critics have made is cited.

AP would have us believe that Soros has “advanced human rights,” along with many other noble goals. Not for Catholics. In fact, Soros has funded more anti-Catholic groups than any person in American history. That he is a self-hating Jew who has worked tirelessly against Israel is also indisputable.

After quoting a Catholic woman broadcaster from Poland accusing Soros of using his foundations to “finance anti-Christian and anti-national activities,” the story says, “Sociologists see such rhetoric…as a modern manifestation of old anti-Semitic conspiracies.”

A Polish sociologist, who relies totally on conjecture, is then mentioned. He must resort to conjecture: He offers no evidence that anti-Semitism is driving Soros’ critics. I am a sociologist, too, and I see the broadcaster’s remark as spot-on.

I will now do what AP cannot do: I will offer proof of my accusations against Soros. I could say a whole lot more, but the following will do.

The AP story focuses mostly on Soros’ campaigns in Central and Eastern Europe, detailing his work amidst charges that he is interfering in the internal affairs of these nations. Guilty as charged—injecting himself into the sovereign affairs of other nations is what Soros does.

His many foundations, in particular his Open Society Foundations, fund anti-Catholic projects in Ireland, as well as in many African, Asian, and Latin American nations. How so? By promoting abortion and working to sideline the Catholic Church.

“For George Soros, Ireland Abortion Fight May be First Step Against Catholic countries.” That was the title of an article last year by Kevin Jones posted on the website of Catholic News Agency. Soros’ foundations funded Abortion Rights Campaign, Amnesty International Ireland, and the Irish Planning Association, all aimed at repealing Ireland’s anti-abortion law. Jones also detailed similar efforts in Mexico, Zambia, Nigeria, and Tanzania.

The Soros document that Jones cited shows how Soros’ Open Society Foundations boasted that if they won in Ireland, “a win there could impact other strongly Catholic countries in Europe, such as Poland, and provide much needed proof that change is possible, even in highly conservative places.”

In 2005, the Soros-funded PAC arm of MoveOn.org posted a smiling picture of Pope Benedict XVI holding a gavel outside the U.S. Supreme Court. Above the picture it said, “God Already has a Job…He does not need one on the Supreme Court. Protect the Supreme Court Rules.”

In 2016, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, lavishly funded by Soros, worked against the Catholic Church’s efforts to promote religious liberty; the Church was campaigning against the HHS abortion-inducing mandate being foisted on it by the Obama administration.

In 2012, Faith in Public Life, a Soros-funded entity, provided talking points to its ideological kin by instructing them on how to handle “the war on the Catholic Church.” The following year, Faithful America, which is funded by Faith in Public Life, condemned two cardinals, and the Catholic University of America, for upholding Catholic values.

Catholics for Choice is a pro-abortion, anti-Catholic letterhead that has no members, but is nicely greased by Soros. Its sole purpose is to sell the invidious notion that being pro-abortion is an acceptable Catholic position. Soros has also funded Catholics United, a bogus Catholic group that triggered a campaign against me in 2008. It tried to get me kicked off CNN and it abetted a failed IRS probe against me.

Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, which had its IRS tax-exempt status pulled in 2013, is a real Soros gem. It was founded by John Podesta for the purpose of planting “the seeds of the revolution” in the Catholic Church. We know this because of the infamous Wikileaks documents.

Imagine a Catholic foundation that funded a “revolution” in the Jewish community by setting up dummy Jewish organizations. Would AP do a story painting the primary donor as a hero?

Jews have been harshly critical of Soros as well. In 2003, the ADL accused Soros of blaming anti-Semitism in Israel on the Israeli government. In 2006, an article in the Jerusalem Post accused Soros of  weakening support for Israel in the Democratic Party, seeking “to undermine Israel’s positions in the U.S. in general.”

In 2007, the Jewish Forward said that “The editor of the New Republic, Martin Peretz, renewed an attack on Soros that he began a month ago when he called the Hungarian-born Holocaust survivor a cog in the Hitlerite wheel.” In 2016, the Jerusalem Post noted that some hacked emails show that the stated goal of Soros’ Open Society Foundations was “challenging Israel’s racist and anti-democratic policies.”

This news story by AP is an affront to the sensibilities of those Catholics and Jews who know better. George Soros is no champion of human rights. He is a manipulative atheist billionaire deserving of our condemnation, not commendation. Shame on AP for trying to make him a victim—he is a master victimizer.

Contact Vanessa Gera: vgera@ap.org

Dynasty has its own reasons and the 40 decrees that King Salman issued last month were designed to hand more power to the Salman branch of the House of Saud. Is a promotion in the offing for his son, the deputy crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman? What does this bode for the country’s foreign policy? President Trump’s first foreign visit will be to Saudi Arabia later this month.

By Olivier Da Lage*

Blood is thicker than water, especially where royalty is concerned. On April 22-23, King Salman quite unexpectedly promulgated 40 or so royal decrees that were designed to strengthen the House of Saud’s Salman branch and its grip on power besides raising the public profile of his son, the 31-year-old deputy crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, the kingdom’s strongman.

One of the decrees had the king reinstate the financial benefits for military personnel and civil servants that had been withdrawn as part of the economic modernisation of the kingdom under the deputy crown prince’s Vision 2030 programme. The Saudi middle class, which is largely made up of civil servants, had balked at these curtailments. Surprisingly enough, Mohammed bin Salman got most of the credit for the restoration of the allowances—even though it was he who had sought their removal in the first place. He has an omnipresence on Saudi TV, and makes himself available to foreign journalists to periodically present his “vision” for the future of Saudi Arabia.[1]

Another of King Salman’s sons, Prince Abdulaziz, was a dynastic priority too as he was appointed minister of energy, a key portfolio for the kingdom.

The most spectacular decision though was the replacement of the incumbent Saudi ambassador in Washington by yet another offspring of the king’s, Khaled bin Salman, an F-15 pilot who is still in his 20s. Being related by blood to the monarch is supposed to make up for his lack of experience. With him at the embassy, the Trump administration knows its messages to the Saudi king will be delivered without undue bureaucratic delay.

Among the decrees published during that fateful week-end of April 22-23, was the creation of a new National Security Centre, answering directly to the Royal Diwan (court), and the appointment of a national security advisor, Mohammed bin Salih Alghfaili, whose role is not entirely clear at this stage. What bears noting here is that the Centre is not reporting to the minister in charge of security, Mohammed bin Nayef, 57, the current crown prince.

Looking at the general pattern of these decisions, the aim seems to be to further isolate the crown prince, who is the only visible obstacle in his cousin–and deputy–Mohammed bin Salman’s path to the throne. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef is the only royal who is not a direct descendant of King Salman’s occupying a top position in government. He has won credit, both at home and in the U.S., for success in his relentless fight against the al-Qaeda, and more generally, terrorism–and has long been seen as Washington’s pick for successor to the throne. But is this still so?

Saudi Arabia’s relationship with Washington reached an all time low under Obama: they disagreed on everything–from the significance of the Iranian threat, to the U.S.’s role in West Asia and the Syrian conflict. With the election of Donald Trump, Riyadh was quick to seize the opportunity of a “reset” of their relations, notwithstanding the new president’s professed hostility towards Muslims. His rather  more confrontationist approach vis-à-vis Iran can only please the Saudi kingdom.

The first Saudi visitor to the Oval Office after Obama’s departure, though, was not Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, but his deputy, Mohammed bin Salman, the king’s son, who was bestowed the honour of a private lunch with Donald Trump at the White House mid-March. It is too early to draw definite conclusions from this, but Defence Secretary Jim Mattis did make a successful trip mid-April to Saudi Arabia; and later this month, it’s the destination of President Trump’s first foreign visit.

If Mohammed bin Salman succeeds in establishing direct contact with the Trump administration, he will effectively deprive his cousin and rival of the life support needed to retain his position. This has led most Saudi watchers to believe that King Salman might, sooner rather than later, replace Mohammed bin Nayef with son, Mohammed bin Salman, who will then be nearly assured of becoming the next monarch of Saudi Arabia, a country that has, for decades, been ruled by septuagenarians or octogenarians.

So, what are Mohammed bin Salman’s credentials? He has been associated with two bold, ongoing initiatives: attempting to modernise the domestic economy through privatisation and the creation of a $2 trillion sovereign fund, and confronting Iran externally on all fronts. But the much heralded initial public offering of 5% of the capital of Aramco, the national oil company, is unlikely to take place before 2018, thereby delaying the creation of the fund, the capital for which will stem from the privatisation projects. The investments he announced two years ago have been partially shelved as the oil price fell in 2016 to below $30 a barrel. With the current price around $50, which is unlikely to climb in the years to come, his Vision 2030 seems to have taken a hit and unpopular austerity measures might have to stay in place, despite the recent rollback, even if this risks incurring widespread disapproval.

The war in Yemen, launched two years ago by him, in which at least 10,000 have been killed, according to the UN, has not yielded any visible positive results while being a heavy burden on the kingdom’s budget.[2] Reputed news agencies, including Reuters, estimated in 2015 that the bombings alone were costing Saudi Arabia $175 million per month. The German intelligence agency, Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), characterised it, in an unusually blunt public assessment, as “an impulsive interventionist policy”[3]. Success in its resolution and/or on the economic front will strengthen his chances of bypassing his cousin and becoming the next king.

But even if such a situation does come to pass—and it will be totally unprecedented–the Council of Allegiance, a body in which the 35 branches of the House of Saud are represented and which has been totally sidelined since Salman became king in January 2015, might refuse to confirm Mohammed bin Salman as the new king. Its current silence should not be mistaken for tacit approval of the deputy crown prince’s policies. The most likely scenario will be a return by Saudi Arabia to a more traditional and cautious diplomacy.

About the author:
*Olivier Da Lage is editor-in-chief at Radio France International. He contributes to Gateway House in his personal capacity.

Source:
This feature was written for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations.

References
[1] Ignatius, David, ‘A young prince is reimagining Saudi Arabia. Can he make his vision come true?’, The Washington Post, 20 April 2017, <https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/a-young-prince-reimagines-saudi-arabia-can-he-make-his-vision-come-true/2017/04/20/663d79a4-2549-11e7-b503-9d616bd5a305_story.html?utm_term=.7ccf08e1ab82>

[2] Press Release, UNICEF, Race against time to save millions of lives in Yemen, 25 April 2017, <https://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/media_95886.html>

[3] ‘German spy agency warns of Saudi shift to ‘impulsive’ policies’, Reuters, 2 December 2015, <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-saudi-germany-warning-idUSKBN0TL1O020151202>

By Alasdair Macleod*

The EU cannot afford to prevaricate over Brexit because a bad Brexit risks causing it immeasurable harm. Not only does big business in Europe want a Britain with which it can freely trade, but confidence in the European Project is rapidly diminishing. The EU is a mega-state that is fading, and no one knows how to ensure its survival. Inevitably, the failings of the EU are catching up with it, and Britain’s leaving exposes the financial consequences of decades of bad management, capital destruction through wasteful redistribution and the lack of any contingency planning.

Britain’s €8bn annual contribution to the EU budget is almost the same as the cost of administering the whole Brussels establishment, so Brexit will create a budget shortfall that is almost total, which Brussels will have to make up from the remaining members. Inevitably, some of the redistribution to Brussel’s pet projects will end up being cut as well. It is for this reason that the Brussels politicians hope for a capital payment from Britain.

The Commission also has a commitment to redistribute member funds estimated at €238bn. It must have assumed prior to last year’s referendum that Britain would vote to remain and pay its share. Instead, it voted for Brexit, and the Commission will have to find the money from a capital contribution either from Britain, somewhere else, or cancel some of the projects. With these problems, the Commission is in a difficult position, wrong-footed by Brexit. And when Theresa May says no deal is better than a bad deal and means it, it really could mean an end to Brussels as we know it.

EU Politicians are in Panic Mode

Concerns over the EU’s finances are almost certainly behind the wild statements being made by some EU leaders. According to Jean-Claude Juncker, Theresa May is living in another galaxy, which begs the question about his own galactic residence, relatively speaking. After requests from several member states, which suddenly realise they are going to lose subsidies, the Commission has mechanically increased its demand for an up-front payment by Britain from €60bn to €100bn. This is despite the EU’s own legal advice from the Commission’s lawyers that no money can be claimed. France, Hungary, Italy, Spain, and Poland also want Britain to continue to pay their farmers after Britain has left the EU.

It’s become like an opera buffa, a satire on a barely tangential relationship between the EU Commission and British democracy. Jean-Claude Juncker, prefacing a recent speech in French said somewhat absurdly that English is losing its importance in Europe due to Brexit, despite it being the most commonly spoken. This is the mentality against which Britain will be negotiating.

The politicking of the senior commissioners is far removed from democratic reality. When David Davis for the UK sits down opposite Michel Barnier for the EU, does he counter the demand for an up-front payment of €100bn with a lesser amount, or a counter-claim for Britain’s share of the estimated €154bn of assets owned by the EU, which the EU side fails to mention? A claim on EU assets is equally flaky. Davis can only accept a position in accordance with his legal advice, or at least not very far adrift from it, because he has democratic accountability, though Barnier does not. Both the EU’s and Britain’s lawyers say there’s no capital liability for Britain, and there’s no mention of it in Article 50, or articles referred to in it. Capital payments and asset claims are just a try-on.

The British position is that no treaty is better than a bad treaty, so most of the movement in negotiations must come from the EU side. As their treatment of Greece illustrated (conveniently reminded to us last week by Yanis Varoufakis in his new book, Adults in the Room), the EU might be obstinate to the point of destruction. Fortunately for Britain, it is not in the position Greece was, and can afford to walk away.

But the Commissioners know of no other approach other than to bully. Remember that when Ireland refused to ratify the Nice Treaty in a referendum, the EU told them to vote again, and get it right. They did the same again to Ireland over the Lisbon Treaty. Denmark was told to hold a second referendum on Maastricht, and to get it right as well. Perhaps they thought that by upping the cost of leaving, the UK might back down and go for a soft Brexit, or even decide to stay after a second referendum. So, when Juncker had dinner with Theresa May on 26^th April and was told plainly Britain’s point of view, he threw his toys out of the pram.

All they have achieved is to get the British electorate’s collective backs up, just as Obama did when he said Britain would go to the back of the queue on T-TIP. Thanks to these threats, it is now likely that Mrs. May will have an even greater landslide victory in the upcoming general election, with an increased number of ardent Brexiteers for MPs.

All that is for public consumption. Fortunately, behind the scenes the officials doing the real negotiation are quietly making progress. Politicking is one thing, practicality is another. According to Daniel Korski, who was deputy head of the No 10 Policy Unit, writing in an article for last Wednesday’s Daily Telegraph, EU negotiators now accept it is in everyone’s interest to avoid a cliff-edge. Many months ago, Iain Duncan-Smith reported that German manufacturers had secretly agreed with Angela Merkel’s administration that any trade barriers would be minimal. The reality behind the rhetoric is European business, which after all employs EU residents and collects and pays the bulk of the taxes, will determine the outcome.

In theory, Britain has two years from March before formally leaving, though Article 50(3) allows for this period to be extended by agreement. This opens the possibility for transitional arrangements if need be. Furthermore, the EU side will be able to ratify the decision on the new basis of qualified majority voting. This means the support of Germany, France, Italy, and Spain for an agreement should be sufficient, so Britain is likely to target these governments behind the scenes, along with their major corporations. The reality is European businesses want to protect their markets and investments in the UK, and perhaps to use the UK after Brexit as a springboard for global business.

Therefore, expect covert briefing by the British for the major European car manufacturers, the banks, and any other major multinationals based in these countries. Contentious issues, such as agricultural subsidies and citizens’ rights, while important, are unlikely to stand in the way of an agreement. However, the procedures of the EU, which involve all 27 nations being consulted, usually involves protracted lead-times. The only way trade and the rights of affected citizens can be agreed within the two-year time scale is for the Commission to initially work with Germany, France, Italy, and Spain to complete negotiations, keeping consultations with the other states to the bare minimum, before presenting a final solution to the other states. Otherwise, a lengthy time extension will almost certainly be required.

There can be little doubt where the power lies. Britain can walk away, the EU cannot. Britain’s Commonwealth members rejoice at Brexit. Furthermore, Britain can rapidly come to a Most Favoured Nation (MFN) agreement with China, which would take decades for the EU to achieve. China is already sending freight by rail to Europe, including the UK. A quick MFN deal with China opens a trade network which will eventually include the whole of Asia and those parts of Europe not bound by the EU. In the fullness of time, this is likely to be a far better arrangement for Britain than being restricted by the EU’s trade agreements. Combining the Commonwealth and Asia in a massive liberated trade arrangement has the benefit of making the UK a suitable base for European companies selling services into what promises to become the largest trading area in the world.

Being free of the EU is a no-brainer, and the British electorate is beginning to understand it. The City is also anticipating the new opportunities with growing relish.

All this assumes that there isn’t a banking or financial crisis by March 2019. Nobody will be immune to a banking blow-up in Euroland, but from the British point of view there must be an urgency to get out of the EU before it happens. It also assumes Theresa May gets the electoral mandate she seeks on 8^th June.

About the author:
*Alasdair Macleod is the Head of Research at GoldMoney.

Source:
This article was published by the MISES Institute

The Kremlin would have been thrilled with the happy snaps, but these were, in the end, purely that. History is an assemblage of misguided images and false assumptions. The pictures of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact of 1939 remain rank, but brilliant for what modern gibberish-driven commentary terms “poor optics”. A pact featuring the signatures of Nazi Germany and Stalin’s Soviet Union made one British official claim that that all “isms” had become “wasms” as a result.

Since political commentators became amateur optometrists, the obsessions with how events are viewed has begun to populate columns. From across the political spectrum, there is a terror that the Trump train has done its next dramatic swerve, defying decades of practice towards old foes. Bad optics!

What should have been noted was the predictability of it all. One on level, the Lavrov-Trump meeting in the White House was dull. On another, it was a relief. Hostility between Russia and the United States has over the years proven to be a cottage industry for academics, specialists and theorists, in time ballooning into an entire industrial complex.

If swords can be made into ploughshares, well and good. Not so, for the optically deranged and suspicious. For a stricken Senator Dick Durbin from the Democrats, “President Trump in these pictures is shaking hands with Russians, and the Kremlin is gleefully tweeting these pictures around the world.”

It was certainly a chance for Lavrov to have a bit of fun, which he duly did to reporters knowing that he would be in the company of a Russian photographer, with an accommodating US President. Given the timing of the visit – a day after the sacking of FBI Director James Comey – Lavrov was thespian-perfect, almost hamming his role. “Was he fired? You’re kidding! You’re kidding!”

To keep him company was the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak, who has done what few Russian ambassadors have before him: cultivate the Washington social scene, build bridges, and, it might be said, some illusions. There are those who still remember the May 2010 black-tie benefit for the Washington National Opera, whose steep bill was covered by opera benefactor Susan Lehrman.[1]

Naturally, Kislyak’s presence also raised eyebrows amongst the beady-eyed critics. Careers, notably that of Michael T. Flynn, had been ruined after alleged improper associations. An unnamed White House official on CNN’s informer list called it “ridiculous” that “an ambassador can’t meet with the President as part of a visit from a foreign minister. It’s standard practice.”

Lavrov, beaming like a pig in mud, duly had a poke at the idea that Russia had, miraculously, seized control of the White House in a manner befitting the finest conspiracy tales. “I believe that politicians are damaging the political system of the US, trying to pretend that someone is controlling America from the outside.”

Good of him to care, though the political system of the Republic was already well and truly withered before the Kremlin became a convenient alibi, explaining why Mr Trump sprung forth like a nasty Jack in the unnoticed, neglected Box.

The Trump administration should have simply let matters be, but decided to retaliate at the bad mood photos of the meeting generated. The photographer, it transpired, was not only Lavrov’s official photographer, but an employee of the Russian state-run news agency, Tass.

This is proving to be standard form in the Trump administration, largely because theatre, rather than reality, is what is assiduously cultivated. To the outraged go the spoils. “We had an official photographer in the room, as did they,” claimed spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Thursday.

CNN noted the words of an irate White House official, who naturally remained enchantingly anonymous: “They tricked us.” More, it would seem, Kabuki here, the necessary performance in yet another instalment of the chaotic, near illegal mini-series, Trumpistan. “That’s the trouble with the Russians – they lie.”[2]

From another perspective, the Russians may well have simply been living up to expectations. Adding to the drama was speculation that the photographer’s presence, not to mention conduct, might well have constituted a security breach. “Deadly serious Q,” posed former vice-president Joe Biden’s national security advisor Colin Kahl, “Was it a good idea to let a Russian gov photographer & all their equipment into the Oval office?”[3] Former CIA deputy director David S. Cohen did not think so.

Tongues wagged aggressively: those sneaky Russians might well have secreted a listening device into the White House. After all, a listening device was unveiled in a State Department conference room during the Clinton presidency.

And so it goes, the seeds of speculation sown, the trees of doubt grown, and the wonder about what, exactly, is taking place in the White House in its flirt and tug with the Kremlin. In all likelihood, this is the usual much ado about nothing, though that explanation will not satisfy the nostalgic bridges from the Cold War.

Notes:
[1] http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a54959/forgetting-sergey-kislyak/

[2] http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/11/politics/oval-office-photos-donald-trump-russians/

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/11/donald-trump-meeting-russia-sergei-lavrov-photos

Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, condemned the Iranian government of Hassan Rouhani for supporting a UNESCO education agreement. Khamenei stated that the Rouhani administration has been ratifying this agreement in secret and that the agreement is against Islamic teachings.

On 7 May 2017 Khamenei in a meeting with Iranian teachers and university professors, rendered an agenda proposed by United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) void saying that Iran will not submit to such an agreement.

UNESCO 2030, that has angered the Iranian leader, is not an agreement to be signed or ratified but an agenda for member states who pledge to work together to sustain education for all genders and marginalized groups from all ethnic and religious backgrounds.

Claiming that such agenda is a tool at the hands of the Western superpowers, the leader of the Islamic Republic said: “Why should a so-called International community that is definitely infiltrated by the superpowers, have the right to make decisions for the nations of the world with various cultures?”

It is unclear whether the Iranian government will stop supporting UNESCO inside Iran. There is an Ethics Teachers’ Training Course in Karaj, Iran, organized by UNESCO scheduled for July 2017 as part of the UNESCO 2030 program which has not yet been cancelled.

Why is the Iranian supreme leader so furious about the UNESCO 2030 educational agenda?

In September 2015 Sustainable Development Summit was held at the at the United Nations in which member states including Iran formally adopted the “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” containing 17 goals including a new global education goal named SDG4.

It is SDG4 and articles within it that deal with human rights and discrimination that has made the Iranian supreme leader infuriated.

By supporting SDG4 member states agree to provide for an “inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.”

Member states, including Iran, have agreed that by 2030 they will try and “eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable.”

Making education available to all minorities, including persons living with disabilities, is also a goal of the agenda.

The leader of IRI in his speech for the teachers argues that enemy state through UNESCO 2030 agenda are trying to infiltrate Iranian culture: “It is the Islamic Republic here! Here Islam is the benchmark. Quran is the benchmark. It is not a place where the deficient, destructive and corrupt Western lifestyle can infiltrate.”

Mashregh News that is closely affiliated with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard has also voiced criticism towards the UNESCO 2030 pinpointing an article in the agenda that is about promotion of peace.

The newspaper states that an agenda for regional peace is pro-Israel agenda. It further notes that international bodies like the United Nations – trough UNESCO 2030 – want to conduct statistical research in Iran and gather data to be used against IRI.

Sadollah Nasiri Gheydari, Secretary-General of the Iranian National Commission for UNESCO, has been a vocal supporter of the UNESCO 2030 educational agenda. He has voiced concerns that without monitoring, analysis and evaluation of the status quo, achieving SDG4 goals in Iran is difficult.

Other Iranian conservative media organizations have also stated that human rights and gender equality is a pretext for United Nations pressuring Iran by using the SDG4 agreement.
Mashregh News writes that “promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity” as stated in SDG4 is a pretext for infiltration of Iran by enemy states and their agents.

On May 19th Iranian will go to the polls to vote for the next president. Rouhani is running for re-election. Khamenei’s harsh criticisms of Rouhani’s moderate government 12 days to the election is read as a sign by hardliners who affirm closer allegiances with the leader.

Many observers in the world are surprised that the Government of Pakistan has taken the calculated risk to allow China to have an overwhelming participation in building the infra structure projects in Pakistan by way of China Pakistan Economic Corridor plans. The huge project envisages billions of dollars of investment and the investment amount would be provided to Pakistan by China as loan that would bear interest.

Pakistan has to repay the loan over the years. What would be China’s action if Pakistan would fail to do so? Obviously, in such scenario, Pakistan runs the risk of becoming a Tibet for China.

Unconcealed territorial ambitions of China

China has not concealed its ambition to become the most powerful country in the world.

With this objective, China has been trying to expand its territory and it succeeded to some extent when it forcibly occupied Tibet claiming that Tibet was part of China. The world appears to have decided to simply accept China’s claims on Tibet without caring for the plight of the Tibetans who have lost the freedom . In this case, China has the last laugh.

China is already occupying part of Indian territory that it seized after 1962 war claiming that the territory belongs to it. Now, it is claiming that Arunachal Pradesh province in India should be part of China.

China has serious disputes with neighboring countries like Philippines over south China sea and also has bitter dispute with Japan over Senkaku islands. It also has disputes with other countries like Vietnam and South Korea.

There have been protests from the neighbours about the territorial claims of China but China does not seem to care.

In such circumstances, it is surprising that the Government of Pakistan is not seeing the writing on the wall.

CPEC projects give dominant role for China in Pakistan

The China Pakistan Economic Corridor is bringing China alarmingly closer to Pakistan that will make Pakistan helplessly dependent on China in the coming years.

The China Pakistan Economic Corridor plan ( CPEC) envisages a deep and broad based penetration of many sector of industry, infrastructure , agriculture and economy of Pakistan.Modern transportation networks built under CPEC will link seaports in Gwadar and Karachi with northern Pakistan, as well as points further north in western China and Central Asia.

A 1,100 kilometre long motorway will be built between the cities of Karachi and Lahore as part of CPEC, while the Karakoram Highway between Rawalpindi and the Chinese border will be completely reconstructed and overhauled.

The Karachi–Peshawar main railway line will also be upgraded to allow for train travel at up to 160 km per hour by December 2019. Pakistan’s railway network will also be extended to eventually connect to China’s Southern Xinjiang Railway in Kashgar. CPEC will provide connectivity from Xinjiang in China to the Arabian sea at Gwadar in Balochistan.

The estimated $11 billion required to modernize transportation networks will be financed by subsidized concessionary loan from China to Pakistan. It is also reported that CPEC envisage thousands of acres of agricultural land in Pakistan being leased to Chinese enterprises to set up demonstration projects and fibre optic system that will facilitate the dissemination of Chinese culture. Further, thousands of acres of land will be leased to China for projects ranging from seed varieties to irrigation technology. There are also other projects such as mines that has not escaped China’s attention.

What logic for Pakistan?

Pakistan government is defending it’s decision to provide China huge dominance, in Pakistan by stating that CPEC would spur the economy and would bring benefits to citizens. While this argument would be correct by the face value, the implications of excessive dependence on another large, powerful, ambitious neighboring country for sustaining Pakistan’s economy can end up with Pakistan becoming an economic colony of China in the immediate future and later on facing the threat of losing it’s sovereignty.

It is surprising that while the observers all over the world can clearly visualize such possibility, Pakistan leadership remains blind or gives an appearance of remaining blind to the grave and adverse possibilities.

It is equally surprising that the protests against the CPEC projects in Pakistan by concerned citizens of Pakistan are only mute. Perhaps, citizens of Pakistan hope that implementation of such massive projects is the only way to make Pakistan’s economy leap forward and cooperation with China appears to be the only way of doing it.

Obviously, citizens of Pakistan are reconciling to the project knowing well that it is a calculated risk and hoping against hope that Pakistan will not suffer the fate of Tibet due to it’s extreme proximity to the ambitious China.

Opera ballet programs come to end at the end of May, then the summer festivities begin in Turkey. We have compiled a list of festivals in Istanbul, Izmir, Bodrum and Antalya where opera ballet companies will be performing this summer. Internet addresses are provided for details, where you can visit for more information as well as to purchase tickets.

Foreign tour companies are taking their programs to these festivals, giving their guests the chance to participate to opera ballet nights at summer resorts. It is a very pleasant feeling to watch opera or ballet in warm evening outdoors with your loved ones.

Istanbul 8th International Opera festival, 13-23 June 2017
The abduction from Seraglio, opera by Mozart, Archeology Museum
Opera stars, by Mersin Opera, Zorlu Performance Arts Center (PSM)
Macbeth, by Verdi, Mersin Opera company, Zorlu PSM
Faust, by Gounod, Istanbul Opera, Zorlu PSM
www.istanbuloperafestival.gov.tr

Bodrum 15th International Ballet Festival, 18th July – 12th August
Sleeping beauty, by Tchaikovsky, Istanbul state opera and ballet
Cuba vira !, modern dance, Cuba
Harem, Ankara opera and ballet
Zorba, Theodorakis, Ankara opera and ballet house
Romeo Juliet, Tchaikovsky, Izmir
Gaia- a fuego lento, Kazakhstan Astana ballet group
Amore, Svetlana Zakharova Moscow ballet company
Dance of color, by Mozart, Mersin opera and ballet company
Born to dance, Flamenco, Los Vivancos
www.bodrumballetfestival.gov.tr

Antalya 24. International Aspendos 23 August- 7 September
Aida, by Verdi, Antalya Opera,
Macbeth, by Verdi, Izmir Opera
Sleeping Beauty, Istanbul Ballet
Samson and Dalila, Saint-Sans, İzmir Opera
Scheherazade-Chopina- Polonaise dances by Moscow State Opera
Tosca, by Puccini, Estonia National opera
www.aspendosfestival.gov.tr

Here are opera and ballet days you can also follow:

Eskişehir opera ballet days, 3-12 May
Mardin opera ballet days 20-23-25 May
Trabzon opera ballet days 18-21-23 April
Gaziantep opera ballet days, 22-23-25 April
İzmir Ephesus opera ballet days, 16-19-22 September

Here are the performances in opera days:

Looking for a tenor, musical comedy, by Ankara opera and ballet
Harem, by Ankara opera and ballet
Nasreddin Hodja, children’s opera

When “Looking for a Tenor” banners are announced on the local billboards, many people think that it is a business proclamation. They say “I do not know what tenor is, but I can handle every job”, so they apply to opera ballet administration. This is not a joke.

Istanbul 5th International Ballet Competition is to be held on 8-13 July. All details and ticket informations are available at www.dobgm.gov.tr.

We also need to follow the D-marine Turgutreis Classical Music Festival and the Bodrum Gümüşlük Piano Days.

We wish you warm peaceful beautiful days, warm and happy summer season,

(RFE/RL) — U.S. President Donald Trump has defended his “absolute right” to share information with Russian officials amid controversy over classified information.

Trump’s comments, made in series of Twitter posts on May 16, appeared to confirm U.S. media reports that he had disclosed highly classified material to Russia’s top diplomat during a meeting at the White House last week.

The disclosure, which may have jeopardized intelligence sourcing about the Islamic State extremist group, further roiled lawmakers and policymakers in Washington still grappling with the fallout from Trump’s abrupt firing of FBI Director James Comey a day before the meeting with the Russians.

“As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. [White House] meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining to terrorism and airline flight safety,” he wrote

“Humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against ISIS & terrorism,” he added, using an acronym for the IS group.

The Kremlin described the reports published by The Washington Post, The New York Times, Reuters, and other media late on May 15 as “complete nonsense.”

But congressional Democrats and some Republicans condemned the reported disclosures as “troubling,” “dangerous,” and “reckless.”

“Reports that this information was provided by a U.S. ally and shared without its knowledge sends a troubling signal to America’s allies and partners around the world and may impair their willingness to share intelligence with us in the future,” John McCain, an influential Republican senator and vocal critic of Kremlin policies, said in a statement on May 16.

The media reports, which cited anonymous officials, said the information Trump relayed to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak during their May 10 meeting had been provided by a U.S. partner country through a highly sensitive intelligence-sharing arrangement.

The reports quoted the sources as saying that the partner had not given Washington permission to share the material with Moscow, and that Trump’s alleged decision to do so jeopardized cooperation from an ally that has access to the inner workings of IS.

‘Off-Script’

During his Oval Office meeting with Lavrov and Kislyak, Trump reportedly went off-script and began describing details about an IS threat related to the use of laptop computers on aircraft, reports said.

They said that in his conversations with the Russian officials, Trump boasted about his knowledge of the looming threats, telling them he was briefed on “great intel every day.”

While discussing classified matters would be illegal for most people, the president has broad authority to declassify government secrets, making it unlikely that Trump’s disclosures broke the law.

After the reports of Trump’s disclosures came out, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Trump’s national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, denied that anything improper took place.

“The story that came out tonight as reported is false,” McMaster told reporters at the White House.

“The president and the foreign minister reviewed common threats from terrorist organizations to include threats to aviation,” said McMaster, who participated in the meeting.

“At no time were intelligence sources or methods discussed. The president did not disclose any military operations that were not already publicly known…I was in the room. It didn’t happen,” he added.

“During President Trump’s meeting with Foreign Minister Lavrov, a broad range of subjects were discussed, among which were common efforts and threats regarding counterterrorism,” Tillerson said. “During that exchange the nature of specific threats [was] discussed, but they did not discuss sources, methods or military operations.”

‘Worrisome Environment’

Neither McMaster nor Tillerson appears to have directly addressed the allegation that classified information was revealed.

U.S. Senator Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said that, if the allegations were true, that would be a “slap in the face” to the U.S. intelligence community.

“Risking sources & methods is inexcusable, particularly with the Russians,” Warner said on Twitter.

The second-most-senior Democrat in the Senate, Dick Durbin of Illinois, called the reported disclosures “dangerous” and “reckless.”

Тhe Republican chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Bob Corker, told reporters that the Trump White House “has got to do something soon to bring itself under control and order.”

“The shame of it is there’s a really good national security team in place and there are good, productive things that are under way through them and through others,” Corker said. “But the chaos that is being created by the lack of discipline…it creates a worrisome environment.”

On May 16 in Moscow, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov rejected the media reports, saying, “We don’t want to have anything do to with this nonsense. It’s complete nonsense, not a subject to be denied or confirmed.”

In an acerbic Facebook post, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova suggested that the reports were “the latest fake,” but did not comment directly on their substance.

In response to what she said was a wave of requests for comment, she wrote: “Guys, have you been reading the American papers again? You shouldn’t do that.”

By Sarantis Michalopoulos

(EurActiv) — Turkish aeroplanes and helicopters illegally entered Greece’s airspace 141 times on Monday, the Hellenic National Defence General Staff reported.

According to Greek press reports, 20 Turkish F-16, 5 CN-235 maritime surveillance aircraft and 19 helicopters entered the Athens flight information region (FIR) without submitting a flight plan.

In all cases, Turkish aircraft were identified and intercepted by Greek fighters, while in nine cases the interception process resulted in near combat situations.

In addition, two Turkish missile boats entered Greek territorial waters off the southeast Aegean island of Agathonisi.

The vessels, which were taking part in a maritime exercise code-named Denizkurdu (Seawolf), stayed in Greek territorial waters for about 20 minutes. As Kathimerini journal reported, last month Agathonisi was described as a “Turkish island” by Turkey’s Minister of European Union Affairs Omer Celik.

While the EU and the international community recognise the sovereignty of Greece over the Greek Aegean islands, Turkey has a list of issues regarding the delimitation of territorial waters, national airspace, exclusive zones, etc. Ankara also claims “grey zones” of undetermined sovereignty over a number of small islets, most notably the islets of Imia/Kardak.

The serious incidents occurred just a few hours after the meeting of Greek premier Alexis Tsipras with Turkish President Tayyip Erdoğan in Beijing.

The Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a strong communique saying that the incident “constitutes a flagrant violation of international law”.

“It is clear that there are forces in Turkey that do not want understanding and good neighbourly relations between the two countries,” the Greek ministry added.

In the meantime, tensions between Ankara and Berlin also escalated.

The German government is exploring the possibility of moving its troops out of Turkey’s Incirlik air base, which is crucial for the fight against ISIS, after a second German parliamentary delegation was prevented from visiting the Incirlik facility.

German news agency dpa quoted Wolfgang Hellmich, the chairman of the Bundestag Defense Committee, as saying “we’re not going to be blackmailed” by the Ankara government.

Commission warns Ankara

Contacted by EURACTIV.com, an EU spokesperson sent a strict message to Turkey, urging that it respect the sovereignty of the EU’s member states.

“The EU underlines that Turkey needs to commit itself unequivocally to good neighbourly relations and urges Turkey to avoid any kind of source of friction, threat or action directed against a member state, which damages good neighbourly relations and the peaceful settlement of disputes,” the spokesperson said.

The same official added that negative statements that damage good neighbourly relations should also be avoided.

“Moreover, the EU also stresses the need to respect the sovereignty of member states over their territorial sea and airspace,” the spokesperson told EURACTIV.

“At the Informal Meeting of Foreign Ministers (Gymnich) of last 28 April, the EU High-Representative and Vice-President Federica Mogherini recalled that good neighbourly relations are one of the core principles which Turkey is called upon to respect as a candidate country,” the EU official concluded.

The European Commission said Tuesday that it has identified potentially serious allegations related to one of the humanitarian projects being implemented by a partner in Greece, and another allegation concerning potential financial corruption by these staff members.

The European Commission said in a statement that it has in place a thorough mechanism to monitor and ensure that its humanitarian funding worldwide is implemented in full respect of all humanitarian principles and sound financial management.

“Although these remain allegations under investigation, the Commission is taking them very seriously,” the European Commission said. “We take a zero tolerance approach to any abuse of the rights and personal integrity of all refugees and migrants as well as to any misuse of funds.”

The European Commission said its primary concern is the welfare of the potential victims.

“Accordingly, we shall ensure that immediate support is provided to them,” the European Commission said, adding, “We have already informed the Greek authorities and submitted the case to OLAF, the EU’s anti-fraud office for immediate investigation.”

Steps are being taken to suspend payments to the partner until the investigation is concluded, the European Commission said.

Sources suggest that having already sabotaged his policy agenda with a series of leaks, turncoats from within the administration could be instrumental in going rogue and pushing for the impeachment of US President Trump.

The only way for impeachment to succeed would be if it was a bi-partisan effort. Bringing articles of impeachment against the president requires a majority vote in Congress, while a vote from at least two thirds of the Senate would be required to remove Trump from office.

The only way this could be accomplished was if former and current members of the administration acted as whistleblowers against Trump, which is precisely what could unfold in the coming months.

Some of Trump’s most prominent conservative media supporters have already been tipped off about the impeachment plan, including Matt Drudge, who has been desperately warning Trump in recent weeks that he needs to purge his administration of disloyal figures.

The initial call for impeachment is likely to come from within the Congressional Black Caucus, sources suggest. Its members have been the most vocal in calling for Trump to be removed from office.

Back in February, Rep. Yvette Clarke called for Trump’s impeachment, stating, “All of the ducks are beginning to line up, they are really beginning to line up around this presidency and I will just say to you, it won’t be long.”

With Trump set to take the gloves off and initiate a purge of administration insiders in the near future, the deep state and the Democratic Party establishment that has sought to sabotage Trump from day one will not relent on their hysterical mission to overthrow a democratically elected president.

This, combined with Trump’s frustration at members of his own team not being strong enough in retaliating to constant media smear campaigns, in addition to endless leaks, makes for a toxic combination.

In an effort to promote the idea that Trump’s impeachment is inevitable, prompting insiders to break rank, major news outlets have all published articles calling for the impeachment of Trump in recent days, including the Washington Post, The Nation, The Guardian, and the Chicago Tribune.

The Washington Post is so gung-ho for impeachment that members of its newsroom applauded themselves when traffic to the website broke records after the release of the Russia leak story yesterday.

Although impeachment is the ultimate end game, it doesn’t look to be on the immediate horizon.

During a town hall yesterday, Nancy Pelosi of all people emphasized that articles of impeachment can’t be brought on negative feelings alone

“What are the facts that you would make a case on? What are the rules that he may have violated? If you don’t have that case, you are just participating in more hearsay,” she said.

In a meeting at the White House Tuesday, US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and Turkish Defense Minister Fikri Işık firmly agreed on concerns regarding the PKK, a U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organization, chief Pentagon spokesperson Dana W. White said.

In a statement summarizing the meeting, White said the PKK has orchestrated the killing of innocent Turkish civilians and Turkish soldiers. Mattis reaffirmed support for Turkey in its fight against the PKK, she added, and its plan to increase cooperation on counter-PKK efforts.

Other Topics

The secretary and minister also discussed the crisis in Syria and agreed to continue cooperate to end the scourge of violence and alleviate human suffering, White said.

“The secretary recognized the generosity of the Turkish government and people in managing the refugee and humanitarian challenges stemming from Syria,” she said. “Both leaders affirmed their support for peace and stability in both Iraq and Syria and look forward to continuing to work together on the U.S.-Turkey security alliance.”

The US and the United Arab Emirates have signed a new agreement that would dictate “the magnitude and conditions” of the US military in the UAE, allowing the United States to send more troops and equipment to the region.

On Monday, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis met with Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Zayed Al Nahyan of the UAE to discuss the defense partnership between the two allies.

The accord, which was signed May 8, was disclosed by the Pentagon on Tuesday. The agreement will replace a previous agreement reached in 1994 after the first Gulf War.

“The agreement marks a new chapter in our partnership and reflects the breadth and depth of our ongoing cooperation, which is underpinned by the mutual respect we share for the professionalism and efficacy of our armed forces,” Mattis said in a statement.

Prince Mohammed, who is also the deputy supreme commander of the UAE’s armed forces, praised the new bilateral defense cooperation agreement, which Pentagon spokeswoman Dana White said will “enable closer and more agile collaboration against a range of threats over the next 15 years.”

The accord gives the US military “the ability to more seamlessly respond to a range of scenarios in and around the UAE, if necessary,” Department of Defense spokesman Christopher Sherwood told Reuters.

“The Defense Cooperation Agreement does not prescribe cooperation against particular actors or in particular theaters; it is not a policy document. Rather, it is a framework that dictates the magnitude and conditions of the US military presence in-country,” Sherwood told Sputnik News.

The crown prince and the defense secretary also discussed security threats, including the instability in Yemen and Libya and the campaign in Iraq and Syria to defeat Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISlL).

The meeting with Mattis followed Prince Mohammed’s first meeting with President Donald Trump, where the two leaders discussed a range of issues surrounding the new bilateral defense cooperation including counterterrorism, the conflicts in Yemen and Syria and “the threat to regional stability posed by Iran,” according to the White House.

In the meeting, the two men shared “assessments of Iran’s increasingly aggressive behavior” and Prince Mohammed emphasized “the critical US role in strengthening regional stability,” according to a statement from the UAE embassy.

Mattis and Prince Mohammed also discussed expanding trade and investment between the two countries. The UAE is the second-largest economy in the Arab world, according to the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR). In 2013, the USTR said the US had a $22.3 billion goods trade surplus with the UAE.

Prince Mohammed also met with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) and other leaders to discuss relations between the two allies.

Myanmar police detained two suspects on May 15 for their involvement in a confrontation between Buddhists and Muslims last week in a Yangon neighborhood where monks had claimed that ethnic Rohingya Muslims were hiding “illegally.”

Meanwhile, police continue to search for three others believed to be involved in the melee that left two people injured.

Police apprehended Tin Lin Htike and Tin Htay Aung who were involved in the incident in Mingala Taungnyunt township in the east-central part of the city, Radio Free Asia reported.

The pair will be tried along with others arrested last week, including Tin Htut Zaw and Ma Aung, both of whom were apprehended on May 11.

On that day, Myanmar police apprehended and charged two monks and five Buddhist nationalists for their involvement in the confrontation, during which police fired warning shots in the air to disperse a crowd that had gathered after an altercation between monks and Muslim residents.

They face charges that carry a penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine.

Monks from the Patriotic Myanmar Monks Union, also known at Ma Ba Tha, had received information that some Rohingya were hiding in a building in the township, and alerted police and immigration officials who searched the premises on May 9.

Myanmar’s Buddhist majority views the Rohingya, a stateless group of 1.1 million who live mainly in Rakhine State, as illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, and government policy has denied them citizenship and access to other basic rights for decades.

After a search, police determined that the occupants were there legally and took no further action.

Different witness accounts identified either Muslims who live in the area or a group of nationalist outsiders with weapons for starting the melee as the monks left the building.

U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday, May 16 defended his decision to disclose information to Russian officials during a White House meeting last week, saying he had an “absolute right” to share “facts pertaining to terrorism and airline flight safety,” Reuters reports.

The president took to Twitter to counter a torrent of criticism, including from his fellow Republicans, after reports that he had revealed highly classified information about a planned Islamic State operation.

Two U.S. officials said Trump shared the intelligence, supplied by a U.S. ally in the fight against the militant group, with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak during a meeting last Wednesday.

The disclosures late on Monday roiled the administration as it struggled to move past the backlash over Trump’s abrupt firing of FBI Director James Comey, who was investigating the president’s ties to Russia.

“As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining to terrorism and airline flight safety,” Trump said on Twitter. “Humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against ISIS & terrorism.”

Trump weighed in personally the morning after his secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, and national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, issued statements saying no sources, methods or military operations were discussed at the Russian meeting.

McMaster said the story, initially reported by the Washington Post, was false.

The U.S. officials told Reuters that while the president has the authority to disclose even the most highly classified information at will, in this case he did so without consulting the ally that provided it, which threatens to jeopardize a long-standing intelligence-sharing agreement.