Categories
Politics

Afghan warfare has entered ‘deadlier and extra damaging section,’ UN says

Taliban fighters with a vehicle on a highway in Afghanistan.

Saibal Das | The India Today Group | Getty Images

The U.N. special envoy for Afghanistan on Friday said the war in the country has entered a “deadlier and more destructive phase” and questioned the Taliban’s commitment to political settlement. 

“A party that was genuinely committed to a negotiated settlement would not risk so many civilian casualties, because it would understand that the process of reconciliation will be more challenging, the more blood is shed,” Deborah Lyons told the U.N. Security Council on Friday. 

This comes after Afghan civilian casualties climbed to more than 1,000 in the past month, and as the Taliban continues to achieve territorial gains in Afghanistan. 

Fighting between the Taliban and Afghan security forces has raged since April when U.S. and coalition forces began their withdrawal from the country. The withdrawal is set to be completed later this month. 

On Friday, the Taliban captured its first provincial capital, Zaranj of the Nimroz province, since launching its offensive. 

The group also killed the Afghan government’s top media officer in Kabul on Friday, just days after attempting to assassinate the country’s acting defense minister, according to The Associated Press. 

The Taliban is also in control of large rural areas of Afghanistan, and is now challenging Afghan security forces in several large cities, Lyons said. This includes Herat, near the western border with Iran, as well as Kandahar and Lashkar Gah in the south, which are “under significant pressure.”

“To attack urban areas is to knowingly inflict enormous harm and cause massive civilian casualties. Nonetheless, the threatening of large urban areas appears to be a strategic decision by the Taliban, who have accepted the likely carnage that will ensue,” she said.

Peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban that began last year have not made any substantive progress, Lyons said. 

Lyons added that the U.N. expected a reduction in violence in Afghanistan after the U.S.-Taliban deal was signed in February. But instead, there was a 50% increase in civilian casualties in the country as more cities were attacked by the Taliban. 

Afghan citizens “expect far greater engagement and visible support” from the U.N. Security Council, Lyons said. She urged the council to issue a statement that calls for an end to violence in the country, and to ensure “a meaningful peace process.”

White House press secretary Jen Psaki also addressed the recent attacks by the Taliban at a Friday press briefing, stating that their actions won’t help them gain international legitimacy.

“Our view is that, if the Taliban claim to want international legitimacy, these actions are not going to get them the legitimacy they seek,” Psaki said.

 “They do not have to stay on this trajectory. They can choose to devote the same energy to the peace process as they are to their military campaign.”.

Categories
Business

U.S.-China Section 1 Commerce Deal May Set Guidelines for Commerce

SHANGHAI — Just days before the coronavirus shut down the Chinese city of Wuhan and changed the world, the Trump administration and China signed what both sides said would be only a temporary truce in their 18-month trade war.

Since then, the pandemic has scrambled global priorities, international commerce has stalled and surged again and President Biden has taken office. But the truce endures — and now appears to be setting new, lasting ground rules for global trade.

The agreement didn’t stop many of the same practices that sparked the trade war, the biggest in history. It does nothing to prevent China from throwing huge subsidies at a range of industries — from electric cars to jetliners to computer chips — that could shape the future, but for which the country often relies heavily on American technology.

In return, the truce enshrined most of the tariffs that the Trump administration imposed on $360 billion a year in Chinese-made goods, many of them subsidized. Such unilateral moves run counter to the spirit of the rules of global trade, which were set up to stop nations from starting economic conflicts on their own and to keep them from spiraling out of control.

But the new model seems to be catching on. The European Union announced on May 5 that it was drafting legislation that would allow it to broadly penalize imports and investments from subsidized industries overseas. E.U. officials, who had initially looked askance at the U.S.-China truce, said their policy was not aimed specifically at China. But trade experts were quick to note that no other exporter has the scale of manufacturing and breadth of subsidies that China has.

“You see a real appetite in the U.S. but also in the E.U. for unilateral measures,” said Timothy Meyer, a former State Department lawyer who is now a professor at Vanderbilt Law School.

The truce, known as the Phase 1 agreement, could still be supplanted by a new deal. The agreement requires that the two sides conduct a high-level review of it this summer. On Wednesday in Washington, Katherine Tai, the United States trade representative, held an introductory call with a senior Chinese official, Vice Premier Liu He — a signal that Mr. Liu, the same top negotiator who squared off against the Trump administration, will be kept in place by China.

But prospects for a far-reaching new deal this year are slim. The Biden administration is drafting a comprehensive strategy toward China, a complex interagency procedure that could last into early next year. It has also shown little appetite for easing up on China’s trade practices, and it has publicly discussed smoothing ties with European and other allies that were ruffled by other disputes during the Trump administration.

“We welcome the competition,” Ms. Tai told lawmakers earlier this month. “But the competition must be fair, and if China cannot or will not adapt to international rules and norms, we must be bold and creative in taking steps to level the playing field and enhance our own capabilities and partnerships.”

On the Chinese side, Beijing won’t budge on the issue of subsidies, said people familiar with both countries’ positions who insisted on anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. Apart from numerous demands that the United States simply abandon its tariffs, China has not even made a proposal to revamp the agreement, they said, because Chinese officials do not want to discuss subsidy limits.

If that intransigence lasts, Phase 1 could keep setting trade rules for years to come.

Though a few provisions expire at the end of the year, the agreement includes permanent requirements, such as that China stop forcing foreign companies to transfer technology to Chinese firms as a condition of doing business there. An obscure clause also calls for China to buy rising amounts of American goods through 2025.

That could set the stage for more narrowly targeted talks, including about whether China has lived up to the agreement’s annual purchase targets. The two sides might also discuss the solar industry, which sparked previous trade spats between them but could get a new look as the Biden administration emphasizes climate change.

On its face, the Phase 1 trade agreement has fallen short of the Trump administration’s goals. The administration had hoped negotiations would even out the huge trade imbalance between the two countries and rein in Chinese subsidies, which American companies and officials see as creating huge, state-funded competitors to U.S. industries.

Today in Business

Updated 

May 26, 2021, 4:06 p.m. ET

Instead, the U.S. trade deficit with China grew by nearly half again, to $78.6 billion, in the first three months of this year compared with a year earlier, fueled by pandemic purchases like consumer electronics, exercise equipment and other goods made mainly in China.

But China’s imports from the United States have been catching up since bad weather and a deadly pig disease sharpened China’s appetite for American-grown food. He Weiwen, a retired Commerce Ministry official who is now an executive director of the China Association of International Trade in Beijing, said that China had made a sincere effort to meet its pledges.

“China is not violating that Phase 1 agreement,” he said.

Over the long term, the Phase 1 deal could cement the American approach of using tariffs to offset China’s drive to retool and upgrade its economy through lavish subsidies.

The Trump administration tried during the trade war to persuade China to renounce subsidies for its exporters, which include cheap land for factories and huge loans to manufacturers at below-market interest rates. The Biden administration plans extensive subsidies as well, but those are aimed mostly at research and development, a category of subsidies that seldom violates international trade rules.

Some economists in China have also tried without success over the years to argue that the country’s industrial policy is too expensive and adds to its debt burden.

But Beijing has stood fast, reluctantly tolerating American tariffs instead of accepting limits on subsidies. In the year and a half since, China has doubled down on subsidies in many sectors. Xi Jinping, the country’s top leader, has strongly endorsed a drive by China to achieve industrial self-reliance.

Even coming up with a serious offer now to exchange reductions in Chinese subsidies for cuts in American tariffs would require confronting powerful domestic constituencies in China. Most government ministries now appear to be determined to spend whatever it takes to turn the country into a technological powerhouse, said the people familiar with China’s economic policies.

Premier Li Keqiang signaled in his annual report to the legislature in March that China remained committed to strengthening its manufacturing sector, already the world’s largest by a wide margin. “In pursuing economic growth, we will continue to prioritize the development of the real economy, upgrade the industrial base, modernize industrial chains and keep the share of manufacturing in the economy basically stable,” he said.

Chinese officials appear more open to talking narrowly about solar energy. Such a deal could involve lifting Chinese tariffs on American polysilicon, the main raw material for solar panels, in exchange for removing American tariffs on Chinese panels. That would make solar energy less expensive in the United States and help Americans rely less on coal and other fuels that contribute to climate change.

Exports of American polysilicon, mainly produced with electricity from hydroelectric dams in the Pacific Northwest, would also lessen China’s dependence on producing polysilicon using coal-fired power in its western Xinjiang region. A recent report alleged that the Chinese government worked with big Chinese solar companies to create jobs in programs that activists describe as prone to human rights abuses.

The Chinese government has denied that any abuses took place.

But a deal would worry those in Congress and elsewhere who contend that the West needs to shore up its industrial base and who point to its dependence on Chinese solar panels.

“Countries outside China,” said Seamus Grimes, a professor emeritus at the National University of Ireland who studies Chinese supply chains, “are becoming much more aware of how dependent they are.”

Categories
Business

Five9 CEO says development is accelerating as cloud adoption sees new part

Five9 has taken on a new growth spurt after cloud services became the standard for businesses, CEO Rowan Trollope told CNBC on Friday.

Digital transformation has forced companies to rethink their customer relationship strategies, which has resulted in 45% revenue growth in the last quarter for Five9, a cloud contact center platform.

“The evangelism phase for cloud software is really over,” he told Jim Cramer to Mad Money. “We no longer have to convince customers that cloud is an acceptable option. They just dive in.”

Demand for cloud services and technology stocks increased when society switched to remote working and schooling during the Covid-19 restrictions last year. As more and more companies went online, they began to move away from traditional call tone call center operations and include automated services and text services.

According to Trollope, Five9 signed two of its largest contracts during the reporting period, which together are expected to generate more than $ 20 million annually.

“AI and automation are leading the way with large customers right now,” he said. “The contact center has become the new entrance door for many companies, especially because they want to use digital channels.”

Five9’s business has accelerated steadily since the pandemic began. The company posted revenue of $ 137.88 million for the first quarter, up from 27.6% a year earlier. The growth was 38.6% in the fourth quarter and 33.9% in the third quarter.

Five9’s shares were up 3% on Friday, trading at $ 164.50. The stock is down 17% from its March highs, driven by a broader decline in technology stocks.

Categories
World News

AstraZeneca points up to date part three trial knowledge

A healthcare worker prepares to inject a vaccine against AstraZeneca coronavirus disease (COVID-19).

Eloisa Lopez

AstraZeneca released updated Phase 3 trial data for its Covid-19 vaccine on Wednesday after asking accuracy questions related to a preliminary report from its US study earlier this week.

The company now says its vaccine is 76% effective against symptomatic virus cases. A press release published on Monday reported a symptomatic efficacy rate of 79%. The updated report claims the shot is 100% effective against serious illness and hospital stays.

A group of US health officials criticized the company over the past few days for claiming that they are collecting data to make the results seem more favorable.

The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases announced Tuesday that the UK-based company may have included information from its US findings that provided an “incomplete view of efficacy data”.

AstraZeneca said at the time that the numbers were based on a “pre-determined interim analysis” and promised to share the updated analysis in the coming days.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, Chief Medical Officer and White House Director at NIAID, described the situation as “unfortunate” and said it was likely that AstraZeneca would issue a modified statement.

“This is really what you call an easy mistake as it is most likely a very good vaccine,” Fauci told ABC’s Robin Roberts on Good Morning America Tuesday. “Something like that … really creates doubts about the vaccines and maybe adds to hesitation. It wasn’t necessary.”

The updated results include data from 190 symptomatic cases in more than 32,000 participants – an increase of around 50 symptomatic cases studied compared to the dataset published Monday.

The results suggest that the vaccine is more effective than previously thought in patients aged 65 and over, with a newly reported efficacy rate of 85% for this population versus 80% previously reported.

AstraZeneca reiterated Wednesday that the vaccine was “well tolerated” among participants and that no safety concerns were identified.

AstraZeneca has faced a separate backlash over the past few weeks due to reports of blood clotting related to its vaccine, which is already approved and used by dozen of countries around the world. Several European nations have suspended and then resumed use of the vaccine after independent safety reviews.

– CNBC’s Berkeley Lovelace Jr., Sam Meredith, and Steve Kopack contributed to this report.

Categories
Politics

Biden tax hikes would possible section in slowly, Treasury Secretary Yellen says

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Janet L. Yellen, President-elect Joe Biden, who was elected Treasury Secretary, speaks to the Queen in Wilmington, DE on December 1, 2020.

Demetrius Freeman | The Washington Post | Getty Images

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said Thursday that any tax hikes sought by the Biden government to fund spending on large tickets would be phased in.

Yellen, speaking to CNBC’s “Closing Bell,” added that the proposed tax increases would likely come later in 2021 as part of a larger legislative package.

It would “include spending and investing over several years” on agenda items like education and infrastructure, said the CFO. “And likely tax hikes to pay at least part of that, which would likely slowly materialize over time.”

Yellen’s comments are of particular interest to investors who have been searching for months’ insight into the timing or size of future tax increases.

Last month, the new Treasury Secretary testified that the US could afford to impose a higher corporate tax rate that corporations pay on their profits when they coordinate with other economies around the world.

During his campaign, President Joe Biden suggested increasing the corporate rate from the current 21% to 28%. Before former President Donald Trump’s tax cuts in 2017, the U.S. corporate rate was 35%.

Still, Biden and Yellen were both quick to say that plans for a higher corporate rate could not begin until after the Covid-19 threat to the economy passes.

Biden “has said that as part of a larger package that would include significant spending and investment proposals – not now while the pandemic is really depressing the economy – he wants to reverse parts of the 2017 tax cuts that have benefited the highest. Income Americans and big corporations, “Yellen said in January.

Biden’s Treasury Secretary also reiterated her belief that the government’s $ 1.9 trillion proposal could help the US get back to full employment in a year.

“We think it’s very important to have a big package [that] addresses the pain this has caused – 15 million Americans default, 24 million adults and 12 million children who don’t have enough to eat, small businesses fail, “she told CNBC’s Sara Eisen.

“I think the price of too little is much higher than the price of something big. We believe the benefits will far outweigh the costs in the long run,” she said, adding that given the fact, she wasn’t worried historical government spending is about rising inflation.

Yellen is the first woman to lead the finance department.

Subscribe to CNBC PRO for exclusive insights and analysis as well as live business day programs from around the world.

Categories
Business

Ford says it would part out gasoline-powered automobiles in Europe.

Ford Motor was the youngest automaker to accelerate the transition to electric cars, and said on Wednesday that its European division will soon begin phasing out production gasoline-powered vehicles. The company will only offer electric and plug-in hybrid models until 2026.

The plan is part of an offer to achieve constant profits in Europe, where Ford has had problems for several years, and to meet increasingly stringent emissions standards in the European Union.

“We have successfully restructured Ford of Europe and returned to profitability in the fourth quarter of 2020,” said Stuart Rowley, President of Ford of Europe, in a statement. “Now we are storming into a fully electric future.”

Ford and other automakers are moving faster with electric vehicles in Europe than in the US. Last year, the European Union began to impose fines on automakers for not complying with carbon dioxide emissions limits, forcing them to sell more electric cars.

Ford said it plans to spend $ 1 billion on the overhaul of its main European facility in Cologne to manufacture electric vehicles. The first new model is slated to go into production in 2023, Ford said.

All Ford of Europe vans and commercial vehicles will be electric or plug-in hybrids by 2024, and two years later the entire range of vehicles will be electric or plug-in hybrids.

Last month General Motors announced that it would only produce electric vehicles until 2035, but GM nearly pulled out of Europe after selling its Opel division to Frances Peugeot SA in 2017. Peugeot recently teamed up with Fiat Chrysler and is now known as Stellantis.

Categories
World News

What to Know as Troubled Afghan Peace Talks Enter a New Part

KABUL, Afghanistan – After four decades of fierce fighting in Afghanistan, peace negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban have at least opened the possibility that the long cycle of violence may one day end.

But that milestone is still a long way off. The most recent round of discussions, which started in September, was fraught with bureaucratic problems and months of debates on minor issues.

And although these talks resulted in an agreement on the principles and procedures that will guide the next round of peace negotiations, they came with a price. As the two sides met in Doha, Qatar, bloodshed on battlefields and in Afghan cities rose sharply.

Now that the peace talks are due to resume on January 5th, details of the next negotiations remain unclear.

While both the Afghan government and the Taliban have announced that they will not publicly publish their priority lists for the next round of negotiations, security analysts, researchers, and government and Taliban officials expect the following – and what hinders these talks must be overcome.

The ultimate goal of the negotiations is to establish a political roadmap for a future government. The head of the government’s negotiating team, Masoom Stanikzai, said Wednesday that a ceasefire would be the delegation’s top priority. The Taliban, who have leveraged attacks against security forces and civilians, are instead trying to negotiate a form of government based on strict Islamic laws before discussing a ceasefire.

However, it will not be easy to get to these larger fundamental questions as both sides continue to cling to the meanings of fundamental terms such as “ceasefire” and “Islamic”. There are many forms of ceasefire, from permanent and federal to partial and conditional, yet the public portion of the February US-Taliban agreement calling for the full withdrawal of American troops mentions but does not specifically mandate or fully define them how it should look.

The Taliban also refuse to specify what they mean by “Islamic” and the government’s insistence on an “Islamic” republic has been the subject of intense debate.

“The Taliban say they want an Islamic system, but they don’t specify which ones,” said Abdul Haific Mansoor, a member of the Afghan negotiating team, pointing out that there are almost as many systems as there are Islamic countries.

The next round of talks will also be made more difficult by the Taliban’s demand that the government release more Taliban prisoners. The government’s release of more than 5,000 prisoners removed the final barrier to negotiations in September, but President Ashraf Ghani has so far refused to release any more.

Both sides used the violence on the ground in Afghanistan as leverage during the Doha negotiations, but the Taliban have been more aggressive in their attacks than the government, whose troops tend to stay at bases and checkpoints to respond to sustained attacks.

According to a New York Times review, the number of security forces and civilians rose during the ongoing talks in the fall, before the Afghan government and Taliban negotiators announced in early December that they had reached an agreement on procedures for future talks had cold weather likely contributed to the decline as well. At least 429 pro-government forces were killed in September and at least 212 civilians were killed in October – the worst tolls in any category in more than a year.

“The killing and bloodshed have reached new heights,” said Atiqullah Amarkhel, a military analyst in Kabul. “What kind of will for peace is that?”

Ibraheem Bahiss, an independent Afghan research analyst, said the Taliban are pursuing two paths simultaneously: violence and negotiation.

“Your goal is to come to power and have a particular system of government,” said Bahiss. “Whether they achieve it through conversation or through fighting, both of them have costs that they are willing to bear.”

Although the Taliban have greatly reduced direct attacks on US forces since February, the insurgent group has relentlessly expanded the territory it controls by besieging local security forces.

In response, the Americans have launched air strikes where Afghan troops were under extreme stress during the Taliban’s attacks. One Taliban official said the level of violence in the group was direct response to air strikes from the United States or to military and poorly received diplomatic action by the Afghan government.

US air strikes this fall rescued the crumpled defenses of Afghan units in Kandahar and Helmand provinces, revealing deficiencies in Afghan ground and air forces that are under constant attack. US officials said the deteriorating morale of the armed forces has raised concerns about General Austin S. Miller, commander of the US-led mission in the country.

At the same time, the number of American troops dropped from around 12,000 in February to an estimated 2,500 by mid-January. A full withdrawal is planned by May, when the deal goes into effect. This has left Afghan officials unsure of how their forces can survive without American support.

The importance of the talks with the United States was underscored in November when Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited Doha and met with negotiators, and again in mid-December when the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Mark A. Milley, did the same.

A Pentagon statement said General Milley urged the Taliban to “reduce violence immediately,” a term that American officials have used several times this year and that is open to a wide range of interpretations. US officials are trying to balance the battlefield.

Both sides are also waiting to see whether President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. will stick to the troop withdrawal schedule or possibly renegotiate the entire deal.

If Mr Biden decides to leave any remaining American anti-terrorist military force in Afghanistan after May 2021, as suggested by some US lawmakers, Mr Bahiss said, “The Taliban have made it clear that the entire deal would be void.”

In light of the allegations and suspicions in Doha, some Afghan analysts fear that talks could stall for months.

“The distrust between the two sides has increased violence, but nothing has been done to eradicate that distrust,” said Syed Akbar Agha, a former leader of the Taliban’s Jaish-ul Muslim group.

This could indefinitely delay serious attempts to address core government issues such as human rights, free press, rights for women and religious minorities, and democratic elections, among others.

Taliban negotiators have stated that they support women’s rights, for example, but only under strict Islamic law. Many analysts interpret this as the same harsh oppression of women practiced by the Taliban when they ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001.

The deeply divided government in Kabul also fears that the Taliban will try to shorten the time before all American forces depart, while the Taliban claim that Mr Ghani, who was re-elected in a bitterly controversial election last spring, stands still to serve out his five year tenure. If a form of national unity or an interim government were agreed, Mr Ghani would be unlikely to remain in office.

Another complication is the division within the Taliban, from stubborn commanders in Afghanistan to political negotiators in Doha’s hotels. Some Taliban factions believe they should fight and defeat the Americans and the Afghan government, not negotiate with them.

Mr. Agha, the former Taliban leader, said little progress was likely unless an impartial mediator emerged that could destroy the lack of confidence in Doha.

“If not,” he said, “I don’t think the next round of talks will end with a positive result.”

Some analysts fear an even more threatening result. Torek Farhadi, a former advisor to the Afghan government, said: “One thing is clear – without an agreement we are facing civil war.”

Najim Rahim, Fahim Abed and Fatima Faizi reported from Kabul.