Fatal illness in children caused by missing a meal and lychee intake, says study There have been reports of the mystery disease in Bihar since 1995, says the report Every year since 1995, a mystery illness has plagued the town of Muzaffarpur in Bihar, India. Around May and June each year, large numbers of young children would start showing signs of fever. They’d have seizures and convulsions, before slipping in and out of consciousness. In 2014, hundreds of children were admitted to hospital exhibiting symptoms of this illness, branded locally as “chamki ki bimari,” or “tinsel disease.” Of 390 admitted for treatment, 122 died. Teams of researchers and medical experts searched exhaustively to find the cause, but to no avail. Until now. A new report, published in The Lancet Global Health medical journal on Tuesday, claims to have discovered what’s behind the devastating disease: the unassuming lychee, otherwise known as litchi. Heat, humidity, malnourishment, the monsoon and pesticides have all been considered at one stage to be contributing factors to the illness – said to resemble encephalitis symptomatically, a disease that causes inflammation of the brain. Researchers from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and India’s National Centre for Disease Control compared test results of children who had developed the mysterious illness, and children who had not. Analysis of blood and spinal fluid samples showed no signs of infection or exposure to chemicals and insecticides. However, most of the children who had fallen ill had eaten lychee fruit recently. They were also six times more likely to have visited a fruit orchard in the last 24 hours, the study said. Muzaffarpur, Bihar, is the largest lychee farming region in India. According to the study, parents reported that children in the affected villages spent most of the day eating lychees from the surrounding orchards, often returning home in the evening “uninterested in eating a meal.” See the latest news and share your comments with CNN Health on Facebook and Twitter. The results said that children who fell ill were twice as likely to have skipped dinner, which, according to the researchers probably resulted in “night-time hypoglycaemia.” When their blood sugar level dropped, the body would start to metabolize fatty acids to produce a necessary boost of glucose. However, urine samples showed that two-thirds of the ill children showed evidence of exposure to toxins found in lychee seeds – found in higher levels in unripe fruits. In the presence of these toxins “glucose synthesis is severely impaired,” the study said, leading to dangerously low blood sugar and brain inflammation in the children. The Indian government issued a statement Wednesday advising children to henceforth “minimize litchi fruit consumption” in affected areas, and eat an evening meal during the “outbreak period.” However, the researchers said there are still some questions surrounding the mystery. For example, while orchards surround many villages in the area, typically only one child in each village develops the illness. The report suggests it may be something to do with genetics. “The synergistic combination of litchi consumption, a missed evening meal, and other potential factors such as poor nutritional status, eating a greater number of litchis, and as yet unidentified genetic differences might be needed to produce this illness,” the study said. However, it added that similar outbreaks had been reported in another lychee cultivation areas in West Bengal, and also beyond India in parts of Vietnam and Bangladesh. Previous research had focused on pesticides rather than the fruit itself, but “the findings of our investigations might help to shed light on the cause of illness in the Bangladesh and Vietnam outbreaks,” the study said.

lychee fruit consumption in affected areas


Editor’s Note: “The Seventies” focuses on the sexual revolution Thursday at 9 p.m. ET/PT on CNN. Sally Kohn is an activist, columnist and television commentator. Follow her on Twitter: @sallykohn. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author. Kohn: In the 1970s, the sexual revolution, women's movement and gay liberation movement changed culture It turned out to be more about personal empowerment than changes in law and politics, she says To borrow a cliché, the 1970s was all about sex, drugs and rock and roll. But arguably, it was the sex part that had the most enduring and profound effect on American society. The 1970s saw the convergence of several phenomena related to sex, sexuality and gender.  There was the women’s liberation movement, in which women and girls who had been long told they were the inferior sex finally took to the streets, the courts and the voting booths to assert their equality. In 1970, the first Women’s Liberation Conference took place in England — the same year that Germaine Greer published “The Female Eunuch” and Robin Morgan published “Sisterhood Is Powerful, An Anthology of Writings from the Women’s Liberation Movement.”  The next year, the first women’s liberation march took place. There also was sexual liberation, which had something to do with women liberating themselves in the bedroom, too, but had as much to do with loosening norms around sex.  In 1960, half of 19-year-old women who were unmarried had not yet had sex.  By the late 1980s, as Nancy Cohen pointed out, two-thirds of all women had done the deed by age 18. Cohen also noted that the invention of the birth control pill in the 1960s helped pave the way.  Within five years after the first pill went on the market in 1960, 6 million American women were taking it. These women and others, and their male partners, entered the next decade literally with a radically different experience of sex and freedom.  The year 1972 alone saw the publication of such groundbreaking books as “The Joy of Sex” and “Open Marriage.” The ’70s also brought nonheterosexual sex into the spotlight.  In 1969, when a gay bar in New York was raided by police, protests erupted and what became known as the Stonewall Riots was the formative moment of the gay rights movement that would continue to grow into the next decades. For gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans, the 1970s was an era of increasing awakening and visibility, as well as backlash and persecution. In 1970, the first gay pride parade was held to commemorate the Stonewall Riots, and in 1973, the American Psychiatric Association finally saw fit to remove homosexuality from its official list of mental disorders. Arguably, one of the quintessential songs of the 1970s captures all perspectives on the sexual revolution.  “Aaaaaah, FREAK OUT!” sang the band, Chic, in their 1978 chart topper.  While the old guard was certainly freaking out about the quickly and wildly shifting terrain of traditional American values, those doing the shifting were enjoying the ride.  The song almost mocks those who are actually freaking out, turning their angst into a dance craze.  “Come on along and have a real good time,” Chic invites.  That moral ground you feel shifting below you?  Think of it more as a sensual undulating and get with the groove. Related video The fight for women's rights It’s easy to look back and see the boundaries of the era’s aspirations. The Vietnam War, in the 1970s, and AIDS, in the 1980s, killed people and rightfully became preoccupying life-and-death issues. Complete sexual liberation and the brave new peaceful world a generation longed for ran headlong into hard and brutal reality. In hindsight, the movements of the 1970s were much more about cultural triumphs than they were about legal and political changes.  That the idea of women’s equality is more widely accepted today than it was 40 years ago is a victory.  Yet the fact that women still earn a fraction of what men earn on average, and women of color even less, that rape and sexual assault remain so prevalent, that access to birth control and abortion and sex education are so actively still contested — these are reminders of how far we have yet to go. “In the 1970s the sexual revolution was really mostly about sex,” wrote Hanna Rosin.  “But now the sexual revolution has deepened into a more permanent kind of power for women.”  Or, more accurately I think, at least a sense of personal power.  But empowerment hasn’t necessarily translated into real economic and political leverage. Are there more women running major companies, transgender men and women starring in Hollywood productions, parents nurturing their children’s healthy sexuality and now the nationwide right to marriage equality?  Yes!  But all around us — from the Bill Cosby story to campus rape to the killing of Kristina Gomez Reinwald, one of many transgender murder victims — there are almost daily reminders of the reality of subjugation based on gender, race and sexuality. Without a doubt, women and gay people, but straight men, too, experienced more individual freedom in the 1970s. But that doesn’t mean we are all liberated.  Just like one black president or one female president doesn’t mean there’s no more racism or sexism. Thus perhaps the greatest legacy of the 1970s wasn’t that it set us on a path to a destination — one we clearly haven’t reached yet— but that it defined desire, desire not only for individual, bodily autonomy, self-expression and pleasure but a desire that society fully reflect and respect our freedom.  Wherever we are now, with respect to women’s rights and LGBT rights and sexual freedom, is a direct result of the 1970s.  And the fact that we’re not satisfied yet is also the legacy of that era. Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.Read CNNOpinion’s Flipboard magazine.


The men conspired to smuggle nearly a ton of cocaine into the United States Sentencing is set for March Two nephews of Venezuela’s first lady, Cilia Flores, have been convicted in US federal court for conspiring to smuggle more than 800 kilograms (1,763 pounds) of cocaine into the United States. Franqui Francisco Flores de Freitas, 31, and Efrain Antonio Campo Flores, 30, were convicted Friday at the US District Court for the Southern District of New York in Lower Manhattan. Judge Paul Crotty presided over the trial, which began November 7. The two men were apprehended in Haiti and transported to New York a year ago in a collaborative operation between the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and the Haitian equivalent, BLTS. In January, Flores, the wife of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, said her nephews had been “kidnapped” by the DEA for political reasons. Venezuelan officials have not yet commented on the verdict. The jury heard testimony from 14 witnesses including DEA agents, informants for the agency, a member of Haitian drug law enforcement, data analysts and translators. The prosecution utilized the witness testimony, plus an array of evidence, to convince the jury that the defendants were guilty. The evidence included photos, videos and messages from the defendants’ smartphones, as well as audio and video recordings obtained by DEA informants using hidden recording devices. The defense attempted to cast doubt on both the weight of the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses throughout the trial. No cocaine or cash was seized when the pair was arrested November 10, 2015. Instead, the prosecution relied heavily on communications over a multitude of media. DEA Special Agent Sandalio Gomez, who conducted the defendants’ post-arrest interview on an agency Learjet from Haiti to New York, used only hand-written notes to write down their statements, translating from Spanish to English as he wrote. Additionally, two of the witnesses came to court wearing prison uniforms, as they have been convicted for their own drug crimes. One was an ex-DEA informant who conducted drug deals behind the agency’s back, and the other was a Honduran air traffic controller who facilitated drug shipments at the Roatán airport in Honduras. Some of the more compelling evidence included a video recording of a meeting in Honduras that included two DEA informants and Flores de Freitas, in which they could be heard planning the logistics of a flight from the presidential hangar of the Caracas airport to Roatán in a private jet full of cocaine, which prosecutors alleged would have amounted to more than 800 kilograms of the illegal drug. The flight never occurred, but the men were charged with conspiring to import five or more kilograms of cocaine into the United States. After more than five hours of deliberation a court clerk told members of the media that the jury had not reached a verdict and they would resume deliberation on Monday morning. The jury was expected to appear briefly to say publicly to the court that this was the case, however, when the judge asked them if they had reached a verdict, a delegate from the jury said yes. The tentative sentencing date is March 7, 2017.


A US Navy and Chinese plane flew within 1,000 feet of each other, official says The incident took place near the contested Scarbororugh Shoal in the South China Sea Two US defense officials told CNN that there was an “unsafe” close encounter between a US Navy P-3 Orion aircraft and a Chinese surveillance aircraft Wednesday. One official said the Chinese plane was a People’s Liberation Army Air Force KJ-200. The two planes flew within 1,000 feet of each other in the general vicinity of the contested Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea. A spokesperson for US Pacific Command, which oversees US troops in the region confirmed, the incident, calling it “unsafe” in a statement provided to CNN. “The U.S. Navy P-3C was on a routine mission operating in accordance with international law,” Maj. Rob Shuford said. “The Department of Defense and US Pacific Command are always concerned about unsafe interactions with Chinese military forces,” he added. “We will address the issue in appropriate diplomatic and military channels.” A second official said that the American P-3 had to alter course to ensure that there wasn’t an aerial collision. While the Navy considers the encounter to be “unsafe,” it does not assess that any malign intent was behind the incident, though the event was considered serious enough to be raised up the chain of command. The official called encounters between US and Chinese aircraft like the one that took place Wednesday “extremely rare,” noting that there were zero such incidents in 2015 and two in 2016. It was the first such instance of 2017. China claims almost all of the South China Sea, including islands more than 800 miles from the Chinese mainland, despite objections from neighbors including the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Vietnam. Beijing has also created artificial islands in the area, outfitting some of them with military features. The area around the Scarborough Shoal, which lies 130 miles west from the Philippine island of Luzon, has been at the epicenter of the China-Philippines dispute over territorial claims in the South China Sea, with Chinese Coast Guard ships frequently operating in the area. Related article Chinese ships sail near disputed Japanese islands The US does not take a position as to the sovereignty of the waters but has insisted on the right to conduct freedom of navigation operations. The need for the two militaries to keep an eye on each other could help explain the presence of surveillance aircraft like the P-3 and KJ-200. During his confirmation hearings, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson suggested that the US should take a harder line in addressing China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea. On Monday, three Chinese Coast Guard ships entered waters near a chain of islands, called the Senkakus by Tokyo, which are claimed by both China and Japan in the East China Sea, according to Chinese and Japanese authorities.


Australia is seeking to confirm reports a Melbourne teen killed himself in an ISIS suicide attack Jake Bilardi, 18, joined ISIS last year, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said ISIS claimed that "Abu Abdullah al-Australi" was killed in an assault on Ramadi, Iraq Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop says the government is seeking to confirm reports that an Australian teenager has carried out a suicide attack on behalf of ISIS in Iraq. “I can confirm that the Australian government is currently seeking to independently verify reports that 18-year-old Melbourne teenager Jake Bilardi has been killed in a suicide bombing attack in the Middle East,” she told reporters. “If these reports are confirmed, this is another tragic example of a young Australian being lured to a senseless and violent death by a brutal terrorist organization that is intent on imposing suffering and misery not only in Iraq and Syria but beyond.” On Wednesday, ISIS claimed that “Abu Abdullah al-Australi,” along with four other foreign fighters, had been killed while carrying out suicide attacks during an offensive launched on the city of Ramadi in Iraq. The claim, issued on a Twitter account associated with the Anbar provincial division of ISIS, was accompanied by a series of 20 images, including a photo of a young man who looked like Bilardi. The image appeared to show Bilardi at the wheel of a car with the caption, “Abu Abdullah al-Australi (may Allah accept him), the attacker on the 8th Brigade.” The other attackers hailed from Belgium, Syria, Uzbekistan and the Caucasus, the Twitter account claimed. Victoria police said Bilardi first came to their attention when his family reported him missing last year. A search of his family’s home in the Melbourne suburb of Craigieburn following his disappearance uncovered chemicals that could be used to make an explosive device, police said, although no actual bombs were found. Bishop said Bilardi’s passport had been canceled in October on the advice of Australian security agencies. Australian media have reported that Bilardi kept a since-deleted blog, written under his alias Abu Abdullah al-Australi. Entitled “From Melbourne to Ramadi: My Journey,” it reportedly detailed his transition from an “atheist school student in affluent Melbourne to a soldier of the Khilafah preparing to sacrifice my life for Islam.” The blog reportedly described a plan to attack targets in Melbourne, after an initial attempt to move to Iraq or Syria failed. “This plan involved launching a string of bombings across Melbourne, targeting foreign consulates and political/military targets as well as grenade and knife attacks on shopping centres and cafes and culminating with myself detonating a belt of explosives amongst the kuffar,” he wrote, according to the Sydney Morning Herald. Member of Bilardi’s family have linked the teen’s radicalization to the loss of his mother from cancer. “He’s just a young boy that went looking for something after he lost someone very very dear to him, his mother,” his aunt, Connie Bilardi, told CNN affiliate Seven on Monday. A former classmate of Bilardi’s from Melbourne’s Craigieburn Secondary College described the teen on Facebook as a “shy kid who didn’t like to be disturbed”. “One day, he randomly got angry at me and tried to punch me,” he posted. “Always keep an eye out on the quiet ones.” A former penpal of Bilardi told CNN he cut off communication with the teenager about two years ago, when Bilardi started posting Islamic extremist messages on his Facebook page. The friend, who requested not to be named, said he first met Bilardi on the website interpals.net about seven years ago. They shared a love for soccer – Bilardi was a supporter of Chelsea Football Club – and became penpals. Bilardi told him about his mother’s death, and confided that he was fighting with his family, because they would not allow him to go overseas to study. The penpal said he started noticing a change in Bilardi’s behavior when the teen started posting “things that supported Osama bin Laden” on Facebook. “I got scared,” the friend said. “My friends here told me that maybe I should stop talking to him.” He blocked Bilardi on the social networking site about two years ago. After a while, he said, he got curious about how his old penpal was doing. “I thought he was my friend. I wanted to make sure he was okay… I sent him an email saying ‘Are you well?’ but he never wrote back.” Bishop said that 90 Australian citizens are in Iraq and Syria fighting on the side of ISIS, and that at least 20 Australians have been killed in the conflict. The passports of some 100 Australians had been canceled on national security grounds, she said. Bishop appealed to young Australians “not to fall victim to this brutal terrorist organization, to not be lured into believing that they’re embarking on some adventure or some romantic endeavor.” “This is a brutal organization dedicated to creating misery and hardship,” she said. “Its activities of beheadings and executions and crucifixions all take us back to the dark ages.” Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott addressed Bilardi’s alleged suicide attack in comments to the press Thursday. This is a horrific situation – an absolutely horrific situation – and it shows the lure of this death cult to impressionable youngsters,” he said. “It’s very, very important that we do everything we can to try to safeguard our young people against the lure of this shocking alien and extreme ideology.” Last week, two Australian teen brothers were arrested at Sydney Airport on suspicion of trying to leave the country to join ISIS. CNN’s Jennifer Z. Deaton, Naomi Ng and Marilia Brocchetto contributed to this report.


Saudi Arabia to take "appropriate measures" against Iran Anti-corruption arrests linked to investment drive, Foreign Minister says Saudi Arabia regards the failed ballistic missile attack on Riyadh’s international airport Saturday as an act of war by Iran and will take “appropriate” measures when the time is right, the country’s Foreign Minister Adel bin Ahmed al-Jubeir told CNN Monday. Yemen’s Houthi rebels have claimed responsibility for firing the projectile on Saturday, which was intercepted by Saudi defense forces before it hit the ground. Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies accuse Iran of providing material support to the rebels. “It was an Iranian missile, launched by Hezbollah, from territory occupied by the Houthis in Yemen,” al-Jubeir told CNN, referring to Shia militias in Lebanon and Yemen closely allied to Tehran. “We see this as an act of war,” he said. “Iran can not lob missiles at Saudi cities and towns and expect us not to take steps,” he added, citing article 51 of the UN Charter whereby a nation can act if an armed attack occurs against it. Al-Jubeir said the missile was made in Iran and smuggled in parts into Yemen, where he claimed “operatives from the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and Hezbollah” helped put it back together again and then launch it. “We reserve the right to respond in the appropriate manner at the appropriate time,” said the softly-spoken career diplomat. He declined to say what those measures against Iran might be. “This is a very, very hostile act,” he said. “We have been extending our hand to Iran since 1979 in friendship, and what we get back is death and destruction.” Earlier Monday, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Qassemi described Saudi claims about Tehran’s involvement as “false, irresponsible, destructive and provocative,” the Iranian news agency Tasnim reported. CNN spoke to al-Jubeir – who was the Saudi ambassador to the United States before becoming Foreign Minister – after an extraordinary series of events at the weekend that began with the resignation of the Lebanese Prime Minister from the Saudi capital and ended with the detainment of a large group of high-profile Saudi princes and ministers on corruption charges, along with other officials and prominent businessmen. Al-Jubeir said Iran could not just “sit there” and expect to get “a free pass” to meddle in countries in the region, citing Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, Iraq and Bahrain. He added that Saturday’s missile was similar to one fired from Yemen in July that was shot down close to the Saudi city of Mecca, a month before the annual Hajj pilgrimage to Islam’s holiest site. Al-Jubeir confirmed to CNN on Monday that his country was closing its ports and borders with Yemen to stop Iranian penetration of the Kingdom. He insisted however that humanitarian aid would still make it through to the millions of people suffering from malnutrition and cholera brought on by the years-long proxy war between the Iran-backed Houthi rebels and Saudi Arabia. “Our objective is to increase the flow of humanitarian assistance in Yemen, but do it in such a way that Iran and its militias and its proxies cannot use that access in order to smuggle weapons and technology that can be re-assembled into missiles in Yemen, that will then be used against us and against the Yemeni people,” he said. Related article Lebanon's Prime Minister resigns, plunging nation into new political crisis With regard to Hariri’s bombshell resignation Saturday, al-Jubeir said:  “It is very clear that Hezbollah is undercutting him at every turn, that it is doing Iran’s bidding, that the Lebanese political system became paralyzed, that the issue of a government that could act independently was a sham, it was Hezbollah who were calling the shots, and he basically said enough is enough.” The Saudi Foreign Minister said that as a dual passport holder with both Saudi and Lebanese citizenship, Hariri would be able to leave the Kingdom if he so chooses. Lebanon’s Interior Minister said Monday he expected Hariri to return in a few days. Related article A resignation, detentions and missiles: 24 hours that shook the Middle East Al-Jubeir also described as “nonsense” speculation that Saturday’s shock arrests of princes and ministers on corruption charges amounted to a grab for power and a purge of opponents by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The Kingdom has a “zero tolerance policy on terrorism” and now, also “a zero tolerance policy on corruption,” al-Jubeir said. “I assure you that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia takes very, very seriously the issue of corruption, waste, and mismanagement.” “There is a reason why everybody was brought in or detained and will be questioned and will be investigated and these have to do with the commission. I’m sure when the investigations are complete that people will know what the reasons are.” Al-Jubeir said the arrests were in line with the Kingdom’s plans to diversify the economy and modernize society by 2030 and achieve economic growth, rejecting suggestions that the detentions could put off potential investors. “We want investors to have confidence in our system,” he said. “We want companies to know that when they come to compete in Saudi Arabia they will compete fair and square with any other company and not be subject to people using their influence or their position in order to extract better deals.”


Editor’s Note: Aaron David Miller is a vice president and distinguished scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and author of “The End of Greatness: Why America Can’t Have (and Doesn’t Want) Another Great President.” Miller was a Middle East negotiator in Democratic and Republican administrations. Follow him on Twitter @aarondmiller2. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his. President Obama visited Saudi Arabia this week, after tensions between the two nations Aaron David Miller says the two allies have drifted apart but still need each other for many reasons What do you do when it’s increasingly clear that one of your longtime Middle East partners doesn’t share either your values or many of your interests? This is only one of the troubling questions that President Obama confronted this week as he sat with Saudi King Salman to discuss the state of the region and the U.S.-Saudi relationship. The Saudis sent a lower-level official to greet Obama  and Saudi state television didn’t even bother covering the President’s arrival. So to paraphrase Hamlet, clearly something is rotten in the state of the U.S.-Saudi relationship. Related article White House: Obama 'cleared the air' with Saudi Arabia And regardless of how this week’s meetings conclude the Saudi-American enterprise will remain a delicate and fraught affair. The answers to the following five questions tell you why. That depends of course on how you define the word ally. But by any measure countries that don’t share common values and whose interests on many critical issues seem to fundamentally collide can’t simply be described the way we might look at U.S. relations with fellow democracies like Britain or Canada. Saudi Arabia is an authoritarian regime that discriminates  against women, doesn’t permit religious freedom, and prevents freedom of the  press. It has been exporting a fundamentalist Wahhabist ideology for years that demonizes Shia, Jews, Christians and  the West. Yet Saudi Arabia isn’t the Islamic state, nor as some analysts have suggested, a junior version of it. It’s not seeking to undermine the regional order or sponsor terror against the West and create a caliphate. In fact, the Saudis are themselves a victim of jihadi terror and have worked closely with the United States against al Qaeda in Yemen and on counterterrorism against ISIS. Related article Administration wrong about terrorism sponsor act Still al Qaeda developed out of Wahhabist doctrine and Saudi Arabia has done more than its fair share to nurture Islamic extremists and to fund jihadi groups in Syria such al Nusra. And the latest Saudi threat to sell off U.S. securities if Congress passes legislation holding them responsible for any official involvement in the 9/11 terror attacks highlights a disturbing possibility of some link. Related article Gulf allies losing faith in U.S. On a number of issues, you bet they do.  It’s tempting to turn the U.S.-Saudi relationship into a morality play that pits the forces of goodness on one side against the forces of darkness on the other. But the inconvenient reality is that over the past two decades, the two sides’ interests have simply diverged in fundamental ways. The broad  trade-off between access to Saudi oil in exchange for a U.S. commitment to its security from external threats  has broken down, and even though the Obama administration has sold almost $95 billion in arms to the Saudis, on core issues such as Syria, Iran, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Egypt and democratization in the region, there are major differences. The perception that the United States is withdrawing from the region, the Iranian nuclear deal  and what must appear to the Saudis as U.S. acquiescence in a rising Iran have combined to create a foundation of suspicion and mistrust. Not really. Despite some analysts who believe Saudi Arabia is somehow on the verge of collapse, the Saudis are likely to be around for some time to come. The Saudis have many serious problems. The transition to a new King and his young, inexperienced and risk-ready son have created some turmoil within the royal family and could pose problems during the succession after Salman. Falling oil prices have created budgetary deficits and spending restrictions; the Saudis are trapped in a costly war in Yemen and pressed by a rising Iran. But the kingdom weathered the Arab spring and regional turbulence with little difficulty and remains a stable and highly functional state, with the world’s  largest oil reserves, low debt and high cash reserves. If you compared Saudi Arabia to Egypt, Yemen, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon, it would seem a model of stability. Still, internal problems over succession can only complicate the U.S.-Saudi relationship and create tension and turmoil in the years ahead. Saudi Arabia will change; the question is whether that process will be an evolutionary or revolutionary one. Probably for now.  However imperfect Saudi policies, the United States still requires local friends in the region to help stabilize matters and pursue American interests. The United States may increasingly be weaning itself off  Arab hydrocarbons, but the rest of the world isn’t. And since oil still trades in a single market, a disruption in supply will impact the economies and markets around the world, including the United States. So, stability in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf is still a vital American interest. And Saudi Arabia with all its imperfections is still the key element in that. Moreover, Wahhabis or not, Washington still needs the Saudis for intelligence sharing and operations against ISIS and al Qaeda affiliates in Yemen and requires Riyadh’s cooperation in trying to manage the Syrian problem if there is to be an outcome to the current civil war more favorable than the black hole of chaos that exists there now. Related article Can Amy Schumer defeat ISIS? Clearly, the Saudis are looking past President Obama to the next administration and doubtless hoping for a different kind of President. Obama’s comments to the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg that Saudi Arabia was  a “free rider” essentially benefiting from a U.S. security guarantee without doing its fair share to support U.S. goals hasn’t  endeared him to the King. Nor has his risk-aversion on Syria or risk-readiness to reach an accommodation with Iran. But these policies may not change significantly in 2017. The painful fact is that the United States is stuck in a bad marriage with Saudi Arabia, where neither divorce nor reconciliation is likely.  The same Middle East mess that estranged the two sides will likely also force them to cooperate. Indeed, despite what divides them it’s more than likely that for the foreseeable future the United States and Saudi Arabia will find a way to muddle through – cooperating where they can and agreeing to disagree where they must. Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion. Read CNNOpinion’s Flipboard magazine. Aaron David Miller is a vice president and distinguished scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and author of “The End of Greatness: Why America Can’t Have (and Doesn’t Want) Another Great President.” Miller was a Middle East negotiator in Democratic and Republican administrations. Follow him on Twitter @aarondmiller2. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his.


Changes are only a partial shift from Obama's policies Trump said that he, as President, will "expose the crimes of the Castro regime" President Donald Trump slammed former President Barack Obama’s dealings with the communist regime in Cuba on Friday in Miami, charting his own course of more confrontational relations with the Castro-led government. The speech, which came as the President signed a directive outlining his posture toward Cuba, is the latest attempt by the Trump administration to chip away at Obama’s legacy. Obama spent the last two years of his presidency looking to warm relations with Cuba, including a trip to the island in 2016. “I am canceling the last administration’s completely one-sided deal with Cuba,” Trump said. Casting the Obama administration as people who looked the other way on the Castro regime’s human rights violations, Trump said that he, as President, will “expose the crimes of the Castro regime.” “They made a deal with a government that spread violence and instability in the region and nothing they got, think about it, nothing they got, they fought for everything and we just didn’t fight hard enough, but now, those days are over,” Trump said. “We now hold the cards. The previous administration’s easing of restrictions of travel and trade does not help the Cuban people. They only enrich the Cuban regime.” Trump listed some of the Castro regime’s anti-United States actions, ranging back to the Cuban Missile Crisis, and added, “We will never, ever be blind to it. We know what is going on and we remember what happened.” Although Trump said he was “completely” canceling Obama’s Cuba policy, the change is posture is only a partial shift from Obama’s policy. Related article Trump says he is being investigated over Comey firing Diplomatic relations between the United States and Cuba will remain open, as will the newly opened embassies in Washington and Havana. And there will be no further restrictions on the types of goods that Americans can take out of Cuba, including the country’s popular rum and cigars. Trump said he is keeping the embassy open “in the hope that our countries can forge a much stronger and better path.” The changes do, however, tighten restrictions on Cuba and ratchet up rhetoric on the Castro regime in hopes that it will lead to a transition of power on the island. Many presidents, though, have predicted the end of the Castros and, to date, none have been correct. The Trump administration will begin strictly enforcing the authorized exemptions that allow travel between the US and Cuba and prohibit commerce with Cuban businesses owned by the military and intelligence services. The President also directed Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to convene a task force on expanding Internet access on the island and reiterate the United States’ opposition to efforts in the United Nations to lift the Cuban embargo until more is done to honor human rights. “To the Cuban government, I say, put an end to the abuse of dissidents, release the political prisoners, stop jailing innocent people, open yourselves to political and economic freedoms, return the fugitives from American justice, including the return of the cop killer Joanne Chesimard,” Trump said, referencing the former Black Panther who was convicted of murder in 1977. Trump responded well to the adoring crowd, even at one point kissing a Cuban dissident on the cheek and pronouncing “Little Havana” with a mimic Cuban accent. He challenged the Castro regime “to come to the table with a new agreement that is in the best interest of both their people and our people.” And in possibly his toughest rhetoric directed at Castro, Trump flatly said, “the harboring of criminals and fugitives will end. You have no choice. It will end.” The Castro government criticized Trump’s move, calling it “ill-advised” in a statement Friday. “The United States are not in the condition to lecture us” on human rights, Havana added, citing police brutality, firearm deaths and estimates that as many as 23 million Americans would lose health insurance under the House GOP health care plan. Ahead of Friday’s remarks, the Cuban government – including Cuban President Raul Castro – signaled a willingness to negotiate with Trump. “We know they have a different view of the world,” a Cuban official told CNN. “We understand that.” None of these new regulations take effect immediately, a White House official said, adding that government agencies are expected to officially issue the regulatory amendments in the coming months. Trump was knocked Friday, though, from both sides. Some Republicans said the policy did not go far enough, while Democrats charged the roll back as reactionary. “The policy isn’t going to do anything new,” a source from the office of one Cuban American lawmaker complained. “It’s pretty weak.” Sen. Mark Warner, a Virginia Democrat, said Friday the “decision by the Trump Administration to reverse progress in US-Cuba relations sends the wrong message to the world about American leadership.” “We must never stop pressing the Cuban government on democracy and human rights, but further restricting economic and cultural engagement between our two nations betrays the spirit of cooperation that will ultimately help empower the Cuban people to choose their own destiny,” he said. Obama, after years of clandestine work with the Castro regime, announced in 2014 that the United States would re-establish diplomatic relations and reopen the American embassy in Havana, which was closed in 1961 following the Cuban revolution. The announcement led Obama to visit Cuba in 2016, making him the first sitting president to visit the island in more than 50 years. Related article Cuba-US relations: 6 key things you need to know The moved allowed for more Americans to travel to Cuba, with US air carriers marketing commercial flights direct to the island and cruise ships to port in the nation. The thaw also allowed Americans to bring more goods back from the island nation. Trump was personally invested in drafting the plans on Cuba, multiple aides told CNN, with one adding that the President deeply believes that the changes Obama announced in 2014 were a “bad deal for the United States and a bad deal for the Cuban people.” “It has not led to greater freedom in Cuba,” the official said. “I don’t think you would see him go back to the embargo wholesale, look for ways to leverage America’s influence over Cuba in a way that will encourage greater freedom for the Cuban people and economic interaction.” Trump’s new policy will directly limit commerce with GAESA, the Cuban military’s business and commerce wing. The company is run by Gen. Luis Alberto Rodríguez López-Callejas, Raul Castro’s son-in-law. That action could adversely impact hotel brands that directly compete with Trump’s business empire, making it more difficult for them expand their foothold in Cuba. Gaviota, GAESA’s tourism arm, currently operates the Four Points by Sheraton Havana, a hotel that, when it opened, was the first US hotel to open in Cuba in nearly 60 years. Related article Changes in Cuba policy could adversely impact Trump's hotel competitors Although officials said Trump’s plans were not meant to “disrupt existing transactions that have (already) occurred,” the new policy would make it difficult for any American company to expand their footprint in Cuba. White House officials said the effort was meant to direct American business to private companies and AirBnB, the vacation rental company that began allowing Cubans rent out their homes in 2016. And on non-Cuban American travel, a change would make Americans who travel under the Obama administration categories of permitted travel subject to a Treasury Department audit, a move that could have a cooling effect on travel as it adds a potential layer of inconvenience to travelers. Marco Rubio, who joined Trump on Air Force One on Friday, spent months working to push Trump toward more strict rules and though Trump and Rubio sparred – at times personally – during the 2016 campaign, the President heralded the Rubio’s views on Cuban relations after a February dinner. “We had dinner with Sen. Rubio and his wife, who was, by the way, lovely, and we had a very good discussion about Cuba because we have very similar views on Cuba,” Trump said, adding that “Cuban people” were “very good” to him in the 2016 election. Rubio, in particular, made Friday’s policy announcement about Obama, charging the former president with looking the other way on Cuba’s human rights abuses. “A year and a half ago, an American president landed in Havana and outstretched his hand to a regime,” Rubio said. “Today, a new president lands in Miami to reach out his hand to the people of Cuba.” Trump said throughout the 2016 campaign that he was willing to rollback diplomatic relations with the communist regime in Cuba. Especially in Southern Florida, where Cubans make up a key voting bloc for Republicans, Trump railed on Obama for building relations with the Castros. Trump has long hanged his understanding of the deal between the United States and Cuba on his “Cuban friends” in Florida, whom he said throughout the campaign supported him over Democrat Hillary Clinton. To a degree, he was right: Trump did beat the former secretary of state in Florida, providing the effective knock out blow to Clinton on Election Night. But Republicans were not unified behind Trump’s action. Sen. Jeff Flake, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, panned Trump on Friday. “Any policy change that diminishes the ability of Americans to travel freely to Cuba is not in the best interests of the United States or the Cuban people,” Flake said. “It is time Senate leadership finally allowed a vote on my bipartisan bill to fully lift these archaic restrictions which do not exist for travel by Americans to any other country in the world.”


With the approval of President Donald Trump, House Republicans have released a disputed GOP intelligence memo that alleges FBI abuses of its surveillance authority – and Democratic members of Congress are fuming. Related article Disputed GOP-Nunes memo released The memo, from the GOP and led by House Intelligence Committee’s chairman, Devin Nunes, alleges that then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe told the committee that no surveillance warrant would have been sought for a Trump campaign aide without the opposition research dossier on Trump written by ex-British intelligence office Christopher Steele. Democrats – and a few Republicans – shared their disapproval of the release of the document, which most of them initially called a “dangerous” move. Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, slammed the release of the memo, saying it was “reckless and demonstrates an astonishing disregard for the truth.” “This will make it far more difficult for the Intelligence Committees to conduct meaningful, bipartisan oversight of intelligence activities in the future,” he said in a statement. “This action was also taken without regard to the damage it could do to our ability to protect Americans from threats around the globe.” “Law enforcement opposes this,” tweeted Sen. Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat. “The intelligence community opposes this. Even many Republicans oppose this. This is dangerous territory, it disrespects law enforcement, and it’s an alarming partisan attack on efforts to investigate hostile foreign interference in our democracy.” Law enforcement opposes this.The intelligence community opposes this.Even many Republicans oppose this.This is dangerous territory, it disrespects law enforcement, and it's an alarming partisan attack on efforts to investigate hostile foreign interference in our democracy. https://t.co/kMVVhUQ35I Their colleague, Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, also criticized the release of the memo, echoing that it’s “dangerous.” She tweeted, “.@realDonaldTrump’s decision to declassify the partisan memo, made in cooperation w/ Congressional Republicans, is a dangerous attack on our justice system and the rule of law.” .@realDonaldTrump’s decision to declassify the partisan memo, made in cooperation w/ Congressional Republicans, is a dangerous attack on our justice system and the rule of law. Patriotic Rs & Ds must unite & defend the independence of @TheJusticeDept & @FBI. My statement: pic.twitter.com/8UCbL7ZHgL Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon called the memo “cherry-picked classified information” in a statement. “This puts us in extremely dangerous territory,” he said. “It upends the relationship between the intelligence community and Congress, threatening the ability for different branches of government to work together to protect the American people’s safety.” And it wasn’t just Democratic senators who slammed the decision to release the memo. Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine said the memo should have been further reviewed because of its “implications for our national security.” “Oversight of the intelligence community, the FISA process, and this investigation are far too important to be tarnished by partisanship,” she said in a statement. “When the Senate Intelligence Committee released a controversial report some years ago, we spent months meeting with the intelligence community to redact sensitive information …   This model of bipartisanship and careful vetting would have been a far better way to proceed.” House Republicans praised Trump for deciding to release the memo, arguing it revealed problems with US surveillance. House Speaker Paul Ryan said in a statement he was “glad” the memo helps “provide greater transparency.” “Unlike most judicial proceedings, the FISA system depends not on an adversarial process, but instead on the government providing a complete presentation of the facts and circumstances underlying its warrant applications,” he said in a statement. “It is clear from this memo that didn’t happen in this case, and as a consequence an American’s civil liberties may have been violated.” He also said again he supports Democrats releasing their own memo, which charges that the Nunes memo is an attempt to help the White House with the Russia investigation. It argues that proper procedures were followed in obtaining FISA warrants. “I reiterate my support for the similar release of the minority’s memo once it is properly scrubbed of all intelligence sources and methods,” he said. Rep. Trey Gowdy, who announced his retirement from Congress earlier this week and serves on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said the public should know the the facts behind the creation of the dossier. It is important for the American public to know if the dossier was paid for by another candidate, used in court pleadings, vetted before it was used, vetted after it was used, and whether all relevant facts were shared with the tribunal approving of the FISA application. “While this memo raises serious concerns with the FISA process, I have been and remain confident in the overwhelming majority of the men and women serving at the FBI and DOJ,” he said on Twitter. “As I have said repeatedly, I also remain 100 percent confident in Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The contents of this memo do not – in any way – discredit his investigation.” As I have said repeatedly, I also remain 100 percent confident in Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The contents of this memo do not - in any way - discredit his investigation. Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz commended the release of the memo, saying in a statement it should “cause all American citizens to be outraged, regardless of political affiliation.” “I read the memo as soon as it was released to Members of Congress, and my heart sank,” he continued. “Not only did it lay bare a systemic pattern of abuse within the FBI and the DOJ, it confirmed my worst fear: America’s free and fair elections were being threatened from within.” Iowa Rep. Steve King said in a statement that the memo proves that under the Obama administration, the FBI and the Department of Justice were “weaponized” against political opponents. “The memo now commands FISA Warrant requests be released to Congress,” he said in his statement. “The statement that the FBI & the DOJ were ‘weaponized’ holds up pretty well.” Meanwhile, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr declined to comment on the release of the memo. “Sen. Burr won’t have comment on the memo. The Committee’s own investigation remains ongoing,” a spokesman for Burr told CNN. This story has been updated. CNN’s Ashley Killough contributed to this report.

House Republicans' release of the GOP intelligence memo


DHS Secretary believes North Korea president "knows what he's doing" Kelly adds his name to list of US officials who think Kim Jong Un is rational Shortly after news broke of another North Korean missile test, Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said the country’s dictator, Kim Jong Un, “seems like someone who knows what he’s doing.” Asked by CNN’s Jake Tapper on “The Lead” whether the North Korean president is “mentally unbalanced,” Kelly responded that “clearly the No. 1 thing in his mind is to remain in power.” Kim appears to be solidifying his power by instilling fear in his subjects and showcasing military might, Kelly said. The DHS secretary admitted he may not be the best person to assess Kim’s mental state, telling Tapper: “The only way to decide whether he’s insane or not is to lay him down on a couch and have a battalion’s worth of therapists figure him out.” Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said Thursday that he also believes Kim is a rational actor. “He may be ruthless,” he said. “He may be a murderer. He may be someone who, in many respects, we would say by our standards is irrational. But he is not insane.” Trump was less certain, telling Reuters that he has “no opinion” on whether the North Korean dictator was rational or not. “I hope he’s rational,” Trump said. CORRECTION: This story has been updated to correctly identify North Korea’s test Friday.


A video posted by Boko Haram shows the apparent beheading of two men The video is similar in style and content to beheading videos posted by ISIS "It's clear Boko Haram is leaning toward ISIS," says an expert who monitors Boko Haram Boko Haram, the Islamist extremist group already blamed for numerous horrific attacks in West Africa, posted a graphic video online Monday showing the apparent beheadings of two men who the group said were suspected spies. The six-minute video shows two men with their arms tied to their backs. They are made to face the camera on their knees, with another man towering over one of them brandishing a knife. The knife-wielding man reaches toward the throat of one of the kneeling men, then the video switches scenes to show what appear to be the bloody severed heads of the two men placed on their headless bodies. The SITE Intelligence group, which monitors extremist activities, released a translated transcript from the video, including what SITE called an “interrogation” of one of the two men. The man identifies himself as a farmer from the Nigerian town of Baga. He says he was told by a policeman that if he provided information about “the residents who live in here … I will become rich and never go back to be a farmer again.” The apparent beheadings then follow on the video. SITE said the video, which included Arabic, English and French subtitles, was posted online via Twitter and “borrows certain elements from productions” of beheadings by ISIS. The video was posted by the media division of Boko Haram, SITE said. Although this is the first purported beheading video Boko Haram posted online. the group has previously issued more detailed and extremely violent beheading videos directly to journalists through intermediaries. Unlike the video posted Monday, previous ones have shown the actual decapitations. In October 2014, Boko Haram handed out a 10-minute video showing the decapitation of a Nigerian military pilot the group said it had seized a month earlier after shooting down his fighter jet during a mission against Boko Haram in northeast Nigeria. In April 2014, the Islamist group released 16-minute video showing what it said was the beheading of a soldier its fighters captured in a battle in Sambisa forest, the group’s main enclave. In February 2014, another video showing the beheading of an alleged informant who led the military to a Boko Haram camp in Sambisa forest during an offensive was issued by the group. And in February 2010, Boko Haram released a 12-minute video in which two policemen were beheaded in an undisclosed location. Those videos all ended with a speech from an “executioner” warning that the group would carry out similar punishment for anyone it captures supporting the Nigerian government against it. Observers of Boko Haram, which has inflicted years of terror on northern Nigeria, note that its actions in the past six months have frequently mimicked those of ISIS – from punishments such as stoning and beheading of its victims to taking territory and an increasingly sophisticated use of social media that’s very much in the ISIS “style.” Related video Boko Haram: What you need to know Jacob Zenn, who follows Boko Haram’s operations and propaganda closely, recently told CNN, “It’s clear Boko Haram is leaning toward ISIS in terms of doctrine, ideology and an emphasis on holding territory after operations.” In terms of ideology, Boko Haram’s leader, Abubakar Shekau, has said that kidnappings and hostage-taking are approved in the Quran, a claim ISIS also makes. “Our hostages are Christians or corrupted Muslims who follow the Christian way,” he said last year, referring to schoolgirls kidnapped in Chibok, Nigeria, most of whom remain missing. ISIS later referred to the Chibok abductions in its kidnapping of hundreds of Yazidi women and girls. Zenn and other analysts point out that recent Boko Haram videos have resembled the polished media productions of ISIS. Zenn notes they “have the same choreography and lens angles as ISIS.” Boko Haram has begun using ISIS symbolism in its media productions and operations. The Nigerian press noted with alarm last July that Boko Haram militants had been seen raising ISIS’ rayat al-uqab flag along the Nigerian-Cameroon border. Recent videos have featured the same flag. CNN’s Tim Lister contributed to this report.


Street artist Sean Yoro creates hauntingly beautiful portraits on pieces of floating ice Yoro creates the fleeting murals while balanced atop his paddle board Surfer turned street artist Sean Yoro has created hauntingly beautiful portraits on icebergs in Iceland and remote waterside walls, navigating his aquatic locations on a paddle board. But his latest balancing act proved to be his most ambitious yet, as he braved the rapidly disappearing ice floes of the Canadian Arctic in his ongoing quest to raise awareness of the impacts of climate change. “It was tricky because you can’t see and there’s some clear ice that I was bumping into while I was on my paddle board,” says Yoro of his latest project, titled “What if you Fly”. “And there were definite close calls where I almost fell in, but I’m lucky to have grown up on a surf board, so I’m very comfortable in all types of situations which made it easier for me. Yoro, who grew up in Hawaii and also goes by the name Hula, describes his fleeting works as a “balance between nature and art” and says his Hawaiian upbringing instilled in him the belief that it’s his responsibility to take care of the environment. For “What if you Fly”, Yoro teamed up with well known extreme wilderness photographer and filmmaker, Renan Ozturk to document his work and try to take his message to the “younger generation.” This is how you capture the spectacular beauty of arctic wilderness The photographer and artist spent two weeks in Nunavut, on Baffin Island in Canada, working with the locals to get to know their culture and local environmental issues. One girl that Ozturk photographed ended up being Yoro’s muse. “The portrait I painted was of a local Inuit girl that we had met up there, and she’s spoken on climate change, which is what I love to get inspired by,” says Yoro. But while choosing a subject was easy, finding the floating canvas for his art proved much harder, as the ice floes in the area were melting fast. “Even the locals were saying how quickly the pack ice, which is the main ice that they usually hunt on for most of the year, was melting,” says Yoro. “Basically the week that we were there, probably 80% of the ice was gone. So when we were scouting for the smaller ice floes, it was very tricky. When testing how thick the ice was, some of the ice was cracking just while I was standing on it.” Yoro finally settled on a piece of suitable ice and set to work creating the girl’s image with paint. Although he said it was a quick process once they started, the ice eventually proved too fragile for the artist. “With one head I painted she’s kind of embracing the ice, lying on her back. That’s the big one that we tried to complete but the ice ended up cracking and we basically had to bail out of it at the last minute.” Incredible paintings that actually breathe While not complete, Yoro’s work is a striking piece of art, with the lone eye of the girl glaring accusingly from among the remnants of floating ice. From that perspective, it certainly seems to have met its goal. “I think just visually its important that people can see how quickly that ice is melting,” says Yoro. “You know there’s hundreds of articles on climate change, but I want to be that little visual voice that people can actually, hopefully, have more of a connection with.”


The United States has proposed a resolution at the United Nations that would include broad new sanctions on North Korea and freeze the assets of leader Kim Jong Un, according to a UN diplomat. The draft resolution includes a full ban on exports of oil to North Korea, a full ban on textile imports from North Korea, a ban on North Korean laborers generating earnings overseas, and the asset freeze, which will also target members of the ruling worker’s party, the diplomat said, calling it a “hard-hitting, ambitious resolution.” Another diplomat confirmed to CNN that the US delegation has circulated the resolution to security council members who will engage in intense negotiations. Details of the draft resolution were first reported by AFP. Related article Trump says military action is not his 'first choice' on North Korea On Sunday, North Korea tested what it claimed was a hydrogen bomb, marking the sixth time the isolated state has tested a nuclear weapon. The move was met with outrage at the United Nations, where diplomats convened Monday for an emergency session of the security council. US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley argued forcefully for harsher sanctions, saying, “enough is enough,” and that Kim was “begging for war.” “We have taken an incremental approach, and despite the best of intentions, it has not worked,” Haley said. “War is never something the Unites States wants – we don’t want it now. But our country’s patience is not unlimited. We will defend our allies and our territory.” Related article Congress eyes China as it struggles to find a North Korea solution At the conclusion of the meeting, Haley said that the US would circulate a resolution in response to the nuclear test, with plans for a vote on it next week. But international consensus on how to address the North Korean nuclear threat remains elusive. North Korea’s largest trading partner, China, has urged all sides to ratchet down their rhetoric. China, along with Russia, has advocated for a so-called “freeze for freeze” approach, under which North Korea would cease conducting nuclear and missile tests in exchange for the United States and South Korea ending longstanding joint military exercises – a proposal that Haley has called “insulting.” On Wednesday, President Donald Trump spoke with his Chinese counterpart, President Xi Jinping, to discuss the recent hydrogen bomb test. Related article Putin: North Korea crisis may be 'impossible' to solve According to a readout released by the White House, the leaders “condemned North Korea’s latest provocative and destabilizing action and noted North Korea’s current path is dangerous to the world and not in its own interest.” “President Trump and President Xi committed to strengthen coordination and take further action with the goal of achieving the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,” the statement went on to say. CNN’s Jeremy Herb, Joshua Berlinger and Taehoon Lee contributed to this report.


Chemical weapons authority's results from samples of 10 victims Findings show stockpiles of Sarin still exist in Syria International chemical weapons inspectors have found “incontrovertible” evidence that Sarin gas, or a similar substance, was used in a chemical attack in Syria earlier this month that killed 89 people. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) took biomedical samples from 10 victims of the April 4 attack on Khan Sheikhoun and found indications that they had been exposed to Sarin or a Sarin-like substance. The findings show that stockpiles of Sarin still exist in Syria. The OPCW was in 2013 responsible for overseeing the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapon stockpile, following an attack in the Ghouta area of Damascus that activists say killed 1,400 people. The OPCW’s director-general, Ahmet Uzumcu, said the biomedical samples were collected from three victims during their autopsies, as well as seven others undergoing treatment in hospital. “While further details of the laboratory analyses will follow, the analytical results already obtained are incontrovertible,” Uzumcu said in a statement. UK scientists had already found that Sarin or a similar chemical had been used in the attack, having tested samples smuggled from the site. Asked by CNN whether its evidence amounted to proof that the Syrian regime carried out the attack, the OPCW said that it was still investigating the incident. It pointed out that its mandate was to investigate the facts surrounding the attack. In a statement issued Thursday, the Russian Defense Ministry said Uzumcu’s comments raise questions about the OPCW’s impartiality. Related article UK says Sarin-like gas used in Syria chemical attack Russia reported a case of sulfur mustard use by insurgents in Aleppo in 2016 but the OPCW “has not managed to make a definite conclusion,” the statement said. However, Uzumcu quickly came to a conclusion about what happened in the Khan Sheikhoun attack, the statement said. “Mr. Uzumcu let the OPCW down,” the statement said. “How can they explain that there are lots of charlatans of the White Helmets ‘working’ in sarin vapors in Khan Sheikhoun if the sarin had been used there really?” The attack in Khan Sheikhoun has been widely blamed on the Syrian government, though Damascus denies it had anything to do with the attack and also denies it has any chemical weapons. Syria has blamed terrorist groups for the attack, and Russian President Vladimir Putin suggested that the attack was carried out by “forces” trying to frame the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Russia is Syria’s most powerful ally and has bankrolled much of the six-year conflict, carrying out regular airstrikes in Syria to prop up Assad’s regime. The attack in Syria prompted the United States to launch its first military strike on the Syrian regime in the six-year war, causing a major rift between Washington and Moscow. On President Donald Trump’s orders, US warships launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at the airbase that was home to the warplanes that carried out the chemical attacks, US officials said. The chemical attack has boosted international calls to oust Assad from power as international ceasefire and peace talks continue to end the conflict, which has killed 400,000 people, according to UN data. CNN’s Lauren Said-Moorhouse contributed to this report.


Editor’s Note: Porter Erisman was one of Alibaba’s first western employees and helped spearhead its international expansion. He has documented his experiences in the book  “Alibaba’s World: How a Remarkable Chinese Company is Changing the Face of Global Business”. The views expressed are those of the author alone. When I was born in 1970, my parents could have never imagined their son would grow up to work for a Chinese company.  At the time, China was closed to the world, mired in the depths of Mao’s Cultural Revolution. Capitalists were punished and sent to the countryside.  Would-be entrepreneurs could be thrown in jail just for opening a small shop. But at the age of 30, I found myself working inside a Chinese company, Alibaba, which to my astonishment rose to become the world’s largest e-commerce company. From 2000 to 2008 I worked as a vice-president at Alibaba Group in a variety of roles. I saw the company grow from a schoolteacher’s apartment into China’s first global Internet giant, battling and beating eBay in China along the way. The experience taught me a lot about both business and life, which I recount in my book, Alibaba’s World: How a Remarkable Chinese Company is Changing the Face of Global Business. My last chapter, “Alibaba and the Forty Lessons,” sums up the many ways in which the experience challenged my assumptions about both business and life. I’ve distilled these lessons into the list below from my Alibaba experience. It is worth mentioning that I am not an employee or consultant to Alibaba and do not have any stock options in the company, however,  I continue to invest in Alibaba, eBay and Amazon independently. There seems to be a running narrative about tech entrepreneurs in China: the Chinese are great imitators but not great innovators. I’ve even heard it said that Alibaba is simply a copy of eBay or Amazon. But that’s like saying Steve Jobs copied the idea for the iPhone from Alexander Graham Bell. Alibaba’s ecosystem in many ways bears no resemblance to its U.S. counterparts and is creating entirely new ways of doing business for China’s entrepreneurs. Alibaba is not alone in its innovative spirit. China’s rapidly changing and dynamic market leads to a more nimble breed of entrepreneur which I found moves even more quickly than their Silicon Valley counterparts. While it is true that some sectors in China’s economy are led by imitators, China’s Internet boom has given rise to an entirely new generation of entrepreneurs that in my view are just as creative and innovative as their western counterparts. In the past, people observed that China’s consumers were leapfrogging from devices such as a landline telephone straight to a mobile phone without having to build out the costly infrastructure of telephone poles and landlines. Alibaba’s experience has shown that entire economic systems can leapfrog ahead, especially in developing countries. Whereas the U.S. and Western Europe spent the last several hundred years developing a retail infrastructure, China’s commercial infrastructure was able to leapfrog directly online without the retailers first building out an extensive offline retail infrastructure. This was a favorite quote of Alibaba’s founder, Jack Ma, and over time it made sense to me. Entrepreneurs need to move quickly, especially in a fast-paced environment like China.  But they also need to maintain a long-term view, such as Jack Ma’s goal of creating a company that lasts 102 years. When SARS hit China in 2003, it threatened Alibaba’s very survival. When an Alibaba colleague was diagnosed with SARS, 500 employees at company headquarters were sent into quarantine and forced to work remotely from home to operate the company. But from this danger emerged an opportunity.  Alibaba wasn’t the only company that had difficulty doing business face to face during that period. Our customers did too. We created a number of educational programs to teach small businesses how to do business online in the SARS era and our website traffic hit new levels. When I joined Alibaba in 2000, the company was assembling a team of managers with amazing resumes that looked great on paper -  but didn’t work well together. Soon the company was adrift and heading dangerously close to bankruptcy.  When this “dream team” was laid off, management reverted to the original founders, most of whom had little or no business experience. Although there were no all-stars among this team, they worked well together as a tightly-knit group, achieving more together than someone might have predicted from their resumes. Yes, it’s a cliché that sounds almost corny or naïve. But watching as Alibaba grow from a David into a Goliath, I came to realize that the greatest limitations we have are the ones we impose on ourselves. Porter Erisman worked as a Vice-President at Alibaba.com and Alibaba Group from 2000-2008.  The views expressed in this commentary are those of the author alone. Read more: See: 9 Instagrams that’ll make you pack for the Silk Road Read: 6 Wonders of science made from silk Read CNNOpinion’s new Flipboard magazine Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion. Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.


Here’s what you might have missed on CNN today: – One person is dead in an incident involving a Southwest plane that experienced engine damage and was forced to make an emergency landing, the National Transportation Safety Board said. – Stormy Daniels released a sketch of the man who she says threatened her over an alleged Trump affair. – Supreme Court justices nixed part of a law that requires mandatory deportation of immigrants convicted of certain crimes. – The two black men whose arrests at a Philly Starbucks ignited protests met with the company’s CEO. Starbucks said it will close 8,000 stores on the afternoon of May 29 for racial-bias training. – Chemical weapons experts visited the Syrian town where an alleged gas attack took place in order to assess the site. – Another GOP congressman announced he is resigning. – President Trump is meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe today. Follow here for the latest. – It’s the last day to file your tax returns. If you’re having trouble accessing the IRS’ online service, you’re not alone. – A judge again ruled that a jury can consider Bill Cosby’s 2005 admission that he intended to use Quaaludes on women he wanted to sleep with. – More than 95% of the world’s population is breathing in unhealthy air, according to a new report. – A study of New York City house mice found that the rodents carry previously unseen viruses as well as bacteria capable of causing life-threatening human illness. – Four baboons escaped from a biomedical research lab by jumping out of a 55-gallon barrel and jumping out of their enclosure.


Pope Francis spoke to a GOP-dominated Congress about the ills of income inequality. He claimed that human activity was destroying the environment. And he said the U.S. should welcome immigrants coming from Mexico. But conservative Republicans were hardly offended. In fact, many were effusive over Pope Francis’ overall message and argued that the Pope deftly – and effectively – avoided antagonizing the GOP with his famously progressive views. The Pope also spoke quietly and calmly, not in a confrontational tone. Moreover, lawmakers – who did not have a copy of his prepared remarks – also had a hard time understanding the pope in a chamber with poor acoustics. Instead, the Pope’s remarks were seen as cautious and compassionate. And his nuanced – and sometimes ambiguous – comments left many lawmakers thinking they heard what they wanted to hear. “You know politics doesn’t involve as much nuance as he was giving to all those subjects so I think people are going to look for things they can glom onto to say, ‘This supports what we’ve been trying to say,’” said Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas. Indeed, climate change is one of them. Despite being an outspoken advocate of controlling global warming, a message he delivered at the White House on Wednesday, Francis did not say the words “climate change.” Instead, he said that “environmental deterioration” is caused by “human activity.” “I am convinced that we can make a difference, and I have no doubt that the United States – and this Congress have an important role to play,” Francis said. Global warming skeptics took heart in his statements. “He didn’t mention the words ‘climate change’ at all!” said Rep. Andy Harris, R-Maryland. “This was an equal opportunity speech.” Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, the Senate’s leading climate skeptic, said the Pope was saying things that “everyone would agree” upon. “Everyone agrees that it’s responsibility to do what we can to provide a good environment,” Inhofe said. But the Oklahoma Republican said that the Pope seemed to be striking a “cautious” tone to avoid offending the audience, something Inhofe noted Francis also did in his remarks in Cuba and at the White House. “I would think he would use his influence where the audience could actually do something about it,” Inhofe said. “In a way, I think it was less forceful on those subjects than I thought it would be.” For Republicans, perhaps that was a good thing. Ahead of the speech, many Republicans were wringing their hands over the first-ever papal address to a joint meeting of Congress. They feared he would use the worldwide platform to speak aggressively to rail on climate change, capitalism, gun violence and other hot-button topics as he has since assuming the papacy in 2013. One lawmaker, Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Arizona, even boycotted the address. But many Republicans came away thinking that the Pope delivered an overall unifying message. Texas Republican Rep. Pete Sessions said he didn’t feel like Pope trod on political turf, telling CNN, “He respectfully approached us.” “His Holiness spoke about America in fair and glowing terms, and challenged us to accept our roles and responsibility not only in the United States but around the world with American exceptionalism,” Sessions said. California Republican Rep. Devin Nunes downplayed any partisan split on the issues that the Pope covered like immigration and addressing the refugee crisis. “There’s very little disagreement with the goals that the Pope laid out,” he said. “The question is what happens, how do you implement that?” Indeed, many Democrats had a similar view. Minnesota Democratic Rep Keith Ellison, who was raised Catholic but converted to Islam at the age of 19, said: “I thought that was a very appropriate message for the world we live in today and it was a good reminder to some of the people in the presidential race that we need to understand there is good and bad in all, and we shouldn’t demonize people based on religion.” Presidential candidate and former Sen. Rick Santorum echoed Ellison’s feelings on an interview with CNN’s “New Day” on Friday, shortly after one with Ellison. “To see the kind of unanimity of interest and support in the Pope and his message, I think it’s a wonderful thing,” Santorum said. “I agree with Congressman Ellison, it’s a tone changer. It allows everyone to take sort of a step back from politics and the decisiveness and and listen to someone who’s a shepherd.” Another presidential candidate, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, called Pope Francis’ remarks “powerful” and said he “encouraged all of us to appeal to our better angels.” Indeed, on immigration, Pope Francis talked about the plight of ‘thousands of persons (who) are led to travel north in search of a better life for themselves and their loved ones.” “Is this not what we want for our own children?” the Pope said. Outside the chamber, Cruz and other immigration hardliners took away a different message from the Pope. “When we speak of welcoming immigrants, I believe that we should refer to legal immigrants,” Cruz said. “With regard to compassion, we should have compassion to everyone.” Similarly, Francis spent little time discussing his opposition to abortion, an issue that would put him on the opposite sides of most Democrats. But most Republicans weren’t critical that Francis largely skirted that topic. “It inspired me to be a better person in my personal life but I didn’t take a legislative mandate from it,” Cruz said. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-New York, said, “I think that’s a very important religious teaching but my view is that women should make those choices with their family, with their doctor, with their God.” Gillibrand added that the Pope offered a unifying position on the issue of life by calling for the abolition of the death penalty. “That’s an important message that I think all of us can take away,” she said. And though he made calls for more traditional families, Democrats declined to criticize the Pope, instead expressing their own support for gay marriage. Yet, despite the bipartisan praise for Pope Francis, few expect it to change much. Asked whether the Pope’s message would change the partisan dynamic on Capitol Hill, Nunes started to chuckle and said, “I don’t even think the Pope can alter that.” CNN’s Tal Kopan contributed to this report.


Angela Merkel describes Turkey's political path as "deeply problematic" for future relations She slams comments by Turkey's President that drew a comparison with Nazi Germany German Chancellor Angela Merkel warned Thursday that Turkey’s approach to democracy and the rule of law are “deeply problematic” to the country’s future cooperation with the European Union. “These deep differences of opinion relate to basic questions of democracy and the rule of law. They relate to freedom of expression in Turkey. They also relate to the many journalists that have been jailed for expressing their opinion,” Merkel said in an address to the German parliament, ahead of a European Council leaders’ meeting later in the day. In the speech, Merkel also reiterated her strong objections to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s weekend comment that Germany’s Nazi past might not be entirely behind it. “This is completely out of hand and why it’s almost impossible to comment on this. It cannot be justified,” she said. “SS comparisons only lead to misery because it means the crimes committed by the National Socialists in Germany are rendered much more harmless than they actually were.” Such comparisons must stop, she said, adding that they “are not good for the close ties between Germany and Turkey.” And while Germany must speak up for freedom and democracy, Merkel said, it must not let Turkey – an important ally in European efforts to handle the current migration crisis and combat Islamist extremism – distance itself. “As difficult as all of this might be, our geopolitical interest cannot be that Turkey – which is after all a NATO partner – continues to distance itself from us,” Merkel said. “That is why it is well worth it to stand for the German-Turkish relationships – but on the basis of our values, our perceptions and in all transparency.” Erdogan lashed out over the weekend after rallies in the German city of Cologne and the town of Gaggenau in support of his government were canceled due to concerns about overcrowding. Related article What happens if Turkey passes Erdogan's 'power bill'? In a video on Anadolu, the Turkish state news agency, Erdogan said: “I thought that Nazism was over in Germany, but it turns out that it is still going on. It is still going on, it is clear.” The rallies, at which Turkish government ministers were due to speak, were being held to drum up support for the upcoming referendum vote on the Turkish constitution on April 16. The sweeping constitutional changes, introduced by Erdogan’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), would grant new powers to the President and transform the way the country is governed. The world’s largest Turkish diaspora is found in Germany, where about 3 million people with Turkish ethnicity reside. In her speech, Merkel praised the contribution of that Turkish community to Germany and appealed for everyone to work together. She added that future appearances by Turkish representatives could be possible if they were properly arranged. Relations between the two countries have been increasingly strained since Erdogan cracked down on government critics in the aftermath of an attempted coup last July. Last Monday, a Turkish court arrested Deniz Yucel, a correspondent with the German newspaper Die Welt, on charges of terror propaganda and inciting hatred and enmity. Merkel also spoke Thursday of the need for solidarity in Europe as it faces its current challenges, including migration, the threat of international terrorism, Britain’s impending exit from the union and the change of US administration. Related video Trump's rhetoric worries European leaders “Many things are changing in the world, including the character of the transatlantic relationship,” she said. Nonetheless, she said, that partnership, based on shared values and interests, “is extremely important for all of us, not only for us Europeans, and it is in this spirit that I’m going to have my conversations with Donald Trump in Washington in the weeks to come.” EU nations will have to take on more responsibility for defense and handling issues in their own backyard, Merkel said, including in the Balkans. And she said Brexit should be seen as a “wake up call” for the other 27 EU states, which should work together to improve and strengthen what she described as a very successful union. CNN’s Simon Cullen contributed to this report.


The aircraft, known as the TU-214R, arrived at the Syrian airbase in Latakia in the last several days, according to a U.S. official The move comes as Moscow has stepped up airstrikes in northwest Syria For the first time, Russia has deployed to Syria what the U.S. believes is one of its most advanced reconnaissance and surveillance aircraft. The aircraft, known as the TU-214R, arrived at the Syrian airbase in Latakia in the last several days, according to a U.S. official. The move comes as Moscow has stepped up airstrikes in northwest Syria, dropping as many as 100 bombs a day, according to U.S. estimates. The Russian plan to send the aircraft to Syria was first reported by The Aviationist website, which tracks military aircraft worldwide. It noted the aircraft is capable of using its radars and sensors to track hidden or camouflaged targets. The U.S. official declined to discuss the aircraft’s specific capabilities, but underscored that the U.S. believes its sensor suite is highly-advanced. The Aviationist described the plane as an “advanced spyplane” with “all-weather radar systems and electro optical sensors that produce photo-like imagery of large parts of the ground.” It also can monitor electronic signals and communications of enemy forces. With that type of capability, it could also potentially give the Russians greater ability to monitor U.S. aircraft in Syria, the U.S. official said.