Shortly after the removal of the Confederate flag from the South Carolina statehouse grounds, Gov. Nikki Haley told CNN’s Don Lemon that placing the flag in 2000 was a poor decision. “I think the more important part is it should have never been there,” she said. “These grounds are a place that everybody should feel a part of. What I realized now more than ever is people were driving by and felt hurt and pain. No one should feel pain.” Haley, a rising star in the Republican Party, is the youngest current governor in the U.S. She is also the first woman and the first Indian American to serve as Governor of South Carolina. Haley said the flag should be in a museum, a place that preserves history, not in a place where people gather to implement policies about the state’s future. “There is a place for that flag,” she said. “It’s not in a place that represents all people in South Carolina.” Haley had previously been a supporter of the flag as a symbol of Southern heritage honoring residents’ ancestors. But it was the Friday night after a week of funerals for the Charleston Massacre victims that Haley said she decided that the flag had to come down. Dylann Roof is accused of murdering nine people at a church shooting with the goal of starting a race war. He was repeatedly photographed with the Confederate Flag. Haley stayed up late that Friday night discuss the situation with her husband. “I told him what I was thinking and he told me I was right and that’s all I needed,” she said. “That next day I called the staff in.” Haley said she met with local leaders as well as South Carolina’s federal delegation to share that she planned to give a speech calling for the removal of the flag. “I said ‘I will be forever grateful if you stand with me, but if you choose not to, I will hold no ill will,’” she said. Some individuals supported Haley’s shift in perspective, while others did not. The South Carolina Senate and House voted to remove the flag this week. Haley said national conversation about being viewed differently because of your ethnicity forced her to reflect on here days growing up as a minority in a small town in South Carolina. One day her father drove to Columbia to buy produce at a fruit stand when two police officers were called to the stand to keep their eyes on him. The officers just stood at the register until Haley’s father made his purchase. “I remember how bad that felt. And my dad went to the register, shook their hands, said thank you, paid for his things and not a word was said going home. I knew what had just happened,” Haley said. “That produce stand is still there and every time I drive by it, I still feel that pain. I realized that that Confederate Flag was the same pain that so many people were feeling.” Haley said the importance of teaching the next generation about how to treat people was a major motivator of her decision. “The biggest reason I asked for that flag to come down was I couldn’t look my children in the face and justify it staying there,” she said. Haley said racism is a reality that parents can’t afford to ignore and must be proactive in addressing with their children. “You’re not born with hate, you’re taught hate,” she said. “Parents need to be very conscious of the fact that that flag hurts people and they need to talk to their kids about it.” The state took a lot of heat for the flag, Haley acknowledged. She spent much of her time trying to communicate to national audiences that the state was committed to moving forward. The NCAA is dropping their 15 year boycott of the state because of the flag, and Haley said she hopes the NAACP does as well. “Now there’s more reason to come to this state. I am proud to say that it’s a new day in South Carolina.” The flag didn’t kill the Charleston nine. But removing it should help South Carolinians move forward in its quest for racial reconciliation, she said. “I hope it gives those families a little bit of peace. That has always been my prayer and I hope this allows our state to heal,” she said. “The grief of this tragedy is going to last for a really long time.”

Confederate flag removal in South Carolina


'There has been a de facto rebellion among illegal migrants,' Hungarian premier says Video shows police officers lobbing sandwiches into crowd of refugees Migrants have complained of inhumane treatment at Hungary reception centers Video has emerged that shows police throwing bags of food into crowds of refugees from behind a barrier at a migrant transit camp in Hungary, a country at the forefront of Europe’s migrant crisis. Men, women and children can be seen being pushed and jostled as the crowd surges to try to catch the plastic-wrapped sandwiches, lobbed by helmet-clad police from behind a line of fellow officers, some wearing hygiene masks. An activist shot the footage Wednesday at a facility that authorities run in Roszke, on Hungary’s southern border with Serbia. The video emerged Friday. Hungary, which lies on a popular transit route from Greece through the Balkans to Northern and Western Europe, has seen tens of thousands of refugees and migrants – many of them fleeing war-torn Syria – cross the border in recent weeks. It’s one of many European countries struggling to cope with the influx – but has been singled out for criticism by rights groups for alleged mistreatment of the migrants. On Friday, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban provided a different picture of the migrants’ overall conduct, which he described as “a de facto rebellion.” The Premier praised police for dealing with the massive migration “without the use of force.” “I would like to thank the Hungarian police because in recent days there has been a de facto rebellion among illegal migrants,” Orban said in televised comments. “They occupied a railway station, they refused to be fingerprinted, they did not cooperate and they refused to enter facilities where they could receive care, such as food, water, shelter or medical treatment. They have rebelled against Hungarian law,” Orban said. Related video Hungary building wall to stop flood of migrants Authorities provided a similar defense of police when asked about the video. Government spokesman Zoltan Kovacs told CNN that the “video shows people within the facility don’t wait until they get provisions. The police are trying to hold them back; they were almost rioting.” Kovacs said the facility was a registration area for refugees, not a shelter, and that police – who had been working nonstop for nine months – were showing great restraint. The footage of food being thrown tallies with the accounts of migrants who’ve told CNN in recent days of receiving inhumane and degrading treatment at the Roszke camp, where many have been held for days after crossing the border. Some described food and water being thrown to them as if they were animals. They also spoke of cramped conditions inside the facility, which resembles a concrete hangar, and a lack of access to adequate medical care. The refugees’ reception has fueled frustration, leading some to break through police lines or embark on long marches across the country as they seek to move on. Hungary, a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention aimed at protecting refugees, has also come under fire for erecting a razor-wire fence along its border with Serbia to halt the flow. But the government has said it is just trying to enforce European Union rules on the movement of migrants without proper documentation. Related video Refugees break past police in sprint toward border Last week, attention focused on the plight of thousands of refugees stranded at Budapest’s main Keleti rail station after Hungarian authorities temporarily halted international train services. The migrants have said they simply want to pass through Hungary to reach countries seen as more welcoming to refugees, such as Germany and Sweden. A Human Rights Watch report released Friday cited what it described as “abysmal conditions” in two reception centers in Roszke. Its assessment was based on footage filmed inside the centers and interviews with migrants who had been held there, it said. “The detainees at Roszke are held in filthy, overcrowded conditions, hungry, and lacking medical care,” said Peter Bouckaert, emergencies director at Human Rights Watch. “The Hungarian authorities have an obligation to ensure that migrants and asylum-seekers are held in humane conditions and that their rights are respected.” An Amnesty International researcher also last week cited refugees who spoke of “rough treatment” at the hands of Hungarian authorities. One woman, named as Dina, 46, told the rights group she had come to Hungary with her son and his wife, who is seven months’ pregnant, and they were seeking to travel on from Keleti to Germany as soon as possible. Border police detained them for 16 hours without giving them food or water, she said. “I want to start a new life in peace. … They are treating us like animals, worse than animals.” Meanwhile, the scale of the refugees’ migration on one route apparently has been seriously underestimated, according to one group. At least 175,000 migrants from Syria have reached Greece in 2015, a figure that’s twice the previous estimate, the International Organization for Migration said Friday. Overall, a record number of 423,761 migrants, including refugees seeking asylum in the European Union, have made the dangerous journey across the Mediterranean so far this year, the IOM said. That number is more than twice the 219,000 figure for all of 2014, the group said. Most of the arrivals in 2015 were registered in Greece, with 309,356 people. The next top destination was Italy with 121,139. A total of 2,748 migrants have died so far in 2015 while trying to cross the Mediterranean, accounting for 73% of all migrant deaths worldwide, the IOM said. On Wednesday, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker set out proposals for mandatory quotas for EU states to take in 120,000 refugees who were already in Italy, Greece and Hungary on top of plans made in May to relocate 40,000 from Italy and Greece. A spokesman for the U.N. refugee agency, UNHCR, welcomed the plans but said the relocation needs of the 160,000 refugees – including their preferences and qualifications – should be taken into account. Addressing reporters Friday in Geneva, Switzerland, William Spindler said that given the urgency of the situation, the proposals would need to be implemented “fully” and “swiftly.” UNHCR is ramping up its capacity in all countries affected by the flow of refugees and stands ready to support all EU measures to respond to the crisis, Spindler said. He emphasized that refugees must find a welcoming environment when entering the European Union and that borders must be managed in line with national and international laws, which include guaranteeing the right to seek asylum. Pope Francis discussed the refugee crisis in a meeting Friday at the Vatican with Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic, the Vatican said via Twitter. Both leaders addressed “the condition of Syrian and Iraqi refugees and displaced persons, and the importance of promoting a shared solution to the current crisis,” it said. EU member states must still agree to the European Commission’s proposals. Their interior ministers are due to meet Monday to discuss the issue. Amid concern over the welcome – or lack thereof – given to some migrants, the Council of Europe issued new guidelines Wednesday to its 47 member states on their treatment of the new arrivals. The recommendations address “the reception and temporary living conditions of migrants and asylum seekers, to ensure respect for their human rights,” Secretary General Thorbjorn Jagland said in a letter. Jagland added that “many of the incomers are asylum-seekers whose requests to stay in Europe will be accepted” and said that “it is self-defeating to mistreat or demean any future member of our societies.” Are countries obligated to take in refugees? In some cases, yes CNN’s Arwa Damon reported from Roszke, and Laura Smith-Spark wrote and reported from London. CNN’s Brent Swails, Pierre Meilhan, and Christine Theodorou contributed to this report.


Editor’s Note: Lisa Monaco served as White House Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Adviser from 2013-2017. She is now a Distinguished Senior Fellow at New York University Law School’s Center on Law & Security and a CNN Senior National Security Analyst. The views expressed in this commentary are her own. Last week, the White House announced that President Trump would visit Saudi Arabia on his first foreign trip Lisa Monaco: Hopefully this visit signals that the administration is willing to form global partnerships to fight terrorism The White House has billed the President’s first foreign trip to Saudi Arabia as a “historic gathering” to “combat extremism, terrorism and violence” and “build a coalition of friends and partners who share the goal of fighting terrorism and bringing safety, opportunity and stability to the Middle East.” Of course, a global coalition to combat ISIS already exists; it was built by the Obama administration.  And far from a historic gathering, this trip follows President Obama’s four trips to the Kingdom (more than any other President) and two prior summits of Gulf leaders – one convened by Obama at Camp David and one by King Salman in Saudi Arabia – to combat ISIS and enhance support for our Gulf partners. But history lessons aside, if this trip signals that partnerships and not isolationism will drive this administration’s counterterrorism strategy, as it did in the last, then that should be welcome news. The terrorism fight is one area where we need a “globalist” approach. To start with, ISIS is not the only terrorist group the United States should be focused on. Al Qaeda’s franchises in Yemen and Syria remain intent on attacking the US homeland and must be the subject of relentless pressure. Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen has been the most persistent in plotting to blow up American airliners and al Qaeda in Syria is currently the largest affiliate of the group that attacked America on 9/11.  It seeks to exploit the civil war in Syria to create a new haven for its members. And ISIS, despite its losses in Iraq and Syria, still remains a threat. Yes, ISIS has been rolled back from the majority of the territory it once held, and its caliphate is shrinking. But, as the saying goes, like a balloon squeezed in one place, it will bulge in another. ISIS wants to demonstrate its relevance, and we need to recognize that it poses a hybrid threat that won’t be vanquished with bombs alone. Related article Trump's tour to the seats of three religions ISIS is simultaneously an insurgent army, a terror group that has directed attacks with trained foreign fighters and a social media phenomenon the likes of which the world has not confronted before. The Trump administration needs a strategy for dealing with all aspects of this problem. Chief among these threats is the ability of ISIS to train and deploy foreign fighters to carry out brutal attacks on the soil of some of our allies across Europe. ISIS-directed attacks across Europe have revealed serious gaps in European ability to identify and stop terrorists in their midst. So, in addition to President Trump’s welcome turnabout in support of NATO, the administration should also prioritize building nonmilitary capabilities with our European allies and other partners. The National Counterterrorism Center estimates that more than 40,000 foreign fighters have traveled to join ISIS and other groups. Many of these are European and Western passport holders. To really understand the magnitude of this problem – and whether some could be an e-ticket away from the United States – we need to dramatically improve information sharing with and among our European partners. That’s why in the wake of attacks in Paris and Brussels the Obama administration dispatched “Foreign Fighter Surge Teams” to European capitals. These intelligence, homeland security and law enforcement professionals worked with counterparts to identify foreign fighters and build the type of screening and analytic capabilities the US has leaned on so heavily since 9/11 to uncover and thwart plots. Will the Trump administration continue this effort and provide the State Department and other agencies the necessary resources to do so? Related article Secretary Tillerson, US diplomats are looking to you for leadership Closer to home, the real test will be in how the new administration deals with the exploitation of social media to recruit and radicalize young people to violence. So far, rather than countering the ISIS narrative, the Trump administration’s policies have played into ISIS recruiting tactics. The recent travel ban, for example, lent credence to the ISIS claim that the United States is at war with Islam and wants to promote a clash of civilizations. To be sure, federal efforts to combat ISIS messaging have long experienced fits and starts, but the Obama administration ultimately learned that the federal government is not the best messenger, and overhauled its approach to focus on building a network of credible voices – from government and nongovernmental organizations – to counter the ISIS message across the Arab world and here at home. Today, the bureau in the State Department responsible for these global efforts lacks a Senate-confirmed leader. On a more promising note, recently Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly made an appeal to communities in the US to be part of the solution in diverting young people from violent paths.  Importantly, he did not confine his comments to Muslim communities, noting that the homegrown terrorism threat extends to all types of extremism – including that of white supremacists – and therefore all communities need to help. Sign up for CNN Opinion’s new newsletter.Join us on Twitter and Facebook It will take that kind of broad-based appeal to build trust in communities of all stripes and sizes and to address what truly threatens us on the homeland security front. How the administration works with foreign partners, engages with the technology industry to stop abuse of its platforms and enlists communities of all faiths – these will be the tests of its counterterrorism policy. One trip does not a policy make, but it’s a start.

Trump administration counterterrorism strategy


President Donald Trump retrieves and returns a Marine's hat blown off by the wind Trump returned from the G20 conference in Hamburg, Germany and will travel to France later this week A Marine standing on a windy tarmac got some help from President Donald Trump over the weekend. While boarding Marine One at Joint Base Andrews on Saturday, Trump stopped to retrieve the Marine’s cover – the term used to describe the hat worn by the Marines – which had been blown off his head. While walking up to the helicopter, Trump noticed the cover on the ground in front of him, reached down to pick it up and returned it to the head of the Marine, who was standing at attention next to the helicopter. Trump is back in Washington following a trip to Hamburg, Germany, last week for the Group of 20 conference. He will travel back to Europe later this week for France’s Bastille Day.


Donald Trump’s weekend of assaults on Robert Mueller’s investigation pushed Washington closer than ever to the major crisis of governance that could ensue if the President were to act on his fury and fire the special counsel. The President’s lambasting of the Russia probe and the administration’s sacking of former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe prompted warnings from key Republicans that he would send the country over a cliff if he tried to dismiss Mueller. And the White House will Monday face uncomfortable new questions about the Trump team’s conduct during the 2016 election after Facebook suspended Cambridge Analytica, a data firm used by President’s campaign, over allegations it used the data of 50 million users of the social media site without their permission. Trump’s major agenda push this week will highlight his plan to tackle the opioid crisis. But it’s a good bet that initiative will be overtaken by a fresh round of West Wing chaos, speculation about personnel shake-ups and revelations about the legal duel between the President and Stormy Daniels, a porn star who claims she had an affair with Trump more than decade ago. But, far from being put off by the turmoil rocking his administration, Trump appears to be relishing a new chapter of his presidency, as he axes and undermines aides he distrusts and gives his impulsive personality free rein. The result is that the President is leading Washington, the nation and the world into an even more unpredictable phase, testing the limits of his political power at home and putting the international system under extreme strain. CNN Money: Facebook investigating employee’s links to Cambridge Analytica Trump spent the weekend gloating over the firing of McCabe, who he portrayed as the epitome of corruption at the tip of the bureau, and one of those responsible for what he sees as the unjustified investigation into allegations of collusion between his campaign and Russia. But sources familiar with the matter told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins that as he phoned his outside advisers and allies over the weekend, Trump’s growing irritation with special counsel Robert Mueller overshadowed his delight over McCabe’s late-night dismissal. He escalated his assault on Mueller over the weekend in a way that made it look like an attempt to fire the special counsel, once thought impossible owing to its constitutional implications, is very much on his mind. “The Mueller probe should never have been started in that there was no collusion and there was no crime,” Trump wrote on Twitter Saturday night. He reiterated that point Monday morning, dismissing the investigation as a “WITCH HUNT.” The Mueller probe should never have been started in that there was no collusion and there was no crime. It was based on fraudulent activities and a Fake Dossier paid for by Crooked Hillary and the DNC, and improperly used in FISA COURT for surveillance of my campaign. WITCH HUNT! McCabe was fired at the recommendation of an FBI internal disciplinary process into his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation. But suspicions he was cast out for political reasons have been stoked by Trump’s incessant public campaign for his ouster. McCabe, however, hit back at his firing and complained that he had been pushed out hours before he was due to retire because Trump wanted to slander the FBI and the Mueller probe, in which he is a key witness. Trump’s fresh attacks on Mueller immediately renewed speculation that the President would try to dismiss the special counsel, potentially by replacing Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who is recused from any matter relating to the 2016 elections, and replacing him with an ally willing to do his bidding. That prospect prompted some Republicans to warn that Trump was on the threshold of dangerous territory. “I think that people see that as a massive red line that can’t be crossed,” Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” Related video Flake: Trump firing Mueller is a 'red line' “So, I hope that that’s the case. And I would just hope that enough people would prevail on the president ‘now, don’t go there. Don’t go there.’” South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham warned that if Trump fired Mueller he would face grave consequences. “As I have said before, if he tried to do that, that would be the beginning of the end of his presidency, because we’re a rule of law nation,” Graham said. Trump’s lawyer Ty Cobb however told CNN’s Gloria Borger on Sunday night that nothing had changed in the White House’s attitude to the special counsel. “In response to media speculation and related questions being posed to the administration, the White House yet again confirms that the President is not considering or discussing the firing of the Special Counsel, Robert Mueller,” Cobb said. One reason why Trump may be lashing out at Mueller is the special counsel seems to be edging closer to the President by the day. Last week, it emerged that he had subpoenaed documents from the Trump organization – including some that related to its business dealings with Russia. But the Russia probe is not the only source of turmoil rocking Washington. Many White House and Cabinet officials return on Monday with the axe hanging over them, after Trump said last week following the firing of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson that he was finally gathering the team he wanted around him. Among those thought to be on the way out or on borrowed time include national security adviser H.R. McMaster, White House chief of staff John Kelly, and cabinet members including Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson and Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin, who are like many colleagues fighting off scandals related to lavish spending. Related article Every job is safe in the White House -- until it's not The extraordinary legal showdown between the President and Stormy Daniels, who said she had an affair with Trump long before he ran for office is certain to escalate in the days ahead – if for no other reason than the porn star’s lawyer is determined to keep her case in the news. On Friday, attorneys defending Trump and the company of his personal legal counsel, Michael Cohen, filed to move the lawsuit to federal court and claimed she could owe in excess of $20 million for violating a nondisclosure agreement. Related video Is Stormy Daniels more media savvy than Trump? The world outside the United States, reeling after several weeks of mind-boggling Trump behavior that matched the disruption his supporters had in mind when they elected him, will keep a close eye on Washington this week. There remains no clarity on the administration’s strategy heading into the President’s planned summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un which the White House has said will take place as soon as May. The fate of the Iran deal, that Trump is threatening to scrap by May but is strongly backed by America’s European allies, will be in focus when the President welcomes Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to the White House on Tuesday. Related article Saudi Arabia warns it will pursue nuclear weapons if Iran does And the reverberations from Trump’s demand for import tariffs on aluminum and steel are still powering a frantic effort by US allies to win opt-outs. A White House plan to crank up the heat on China’s trade practices that is in preparation behind the scenes could drive a new nail into the coffin of the World Trade Organization and spark global economic turmoil.


Jeb Bush once had to pass a gift of a lasso on to his brother, President George W. Bush George W. Bush once revised an official note to refer to Jeb Bush as "my brother" Being a governor while also being the brother of a U.S. president sometimes means that you pass along gifts and letters to the commander in chief. And shortly after Jeb Bush was elected to his second term as Florida governor in 2002, he was visited by Uruguayan President Jorge Batlle Ibáñez, who brought presents for both the governor, then-President George W. Bush and their father, former President George H.W. Bush. New documents released from the George W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum on Monday include a December 2002 letter that Ibáñez wrote to George Bush, explaining the “boleadoras” – or hunting lasso – that he brought for the President. The lasso, made of three stone balls tied together with a horse hide, was used by Uruguayan natives to hunt “nandues,” or South American ostriches, the Uruguayan president wrote. They were also used to catch “galloping horses by throwing them at their hind legs.” They were worn around the waist as an ornament in special occasions, he continued, but, “Nevertheless, they can be useful still!” There were no details of the gifts brought for Jeb Bush or Bush 41. The records also revealed that in the draft process, George W. Bush’s original thank you letter to Ibáñez carried a formal tone, thanking the president for the lasso that was “passed along to me by Governor Jeb Bush.” But handwritten edits show that “Governor” was crossed out and replaced by “my brother,” so that the letter read more casually: “… passed along by my brother, Jeb.” The draft process shows not only the careful editing that takes place in official letters but also the rare reality that the White House had multiple ways of referring to the governor of one of the largest states. Jeb Bush was governor of Florida for six of the eight years that his brother served as president. The batch of documents, released in response to public records requests, also shows a letter that President George W. Bush wrote to Emma E. Booker elementary school in Sarasota County, Florida, acknowledging that he had to leave early from a school visit after learning of the 9/11 attacks. “Thank you for inviting me to come to your school last week. I enjoyed my visit and really appreciate your understanding why it was important for me to leave early,” said the letter, dated six days after the attacks. “Mrs. Bush and I hope you have a great school year and that you already remember to study hard and read a lot!” While the letter makes no mention of Jeb, who was governor of Florida at the time, the letter marks an interesting relic that highlights how George W. Bush was in his brother’s state at the time of the attacks. Furthermore, the files include a letter that Jeb Bush wrote to his brother along with then Colorado Gov. Bill Owens and then Connecticut Gov. John Rowland on January 16, 2003, with suggestions on how the federal government should reform Medicaid. “We must proceed as if lives depend on our very action. They surely do,” the governors concluded at the end of the letter. The letter, which was reported at the time, came just months before the administration would release a proposal for reform that would give states more flexibility in administrating Medicaid. Also of note in the documents, Jeb Bush emailed then-chief of staff Andy Card on August 24, 2004, thanking his brother’s administration and FEMA for acting quickly after his state was struck by a hurricane. “Please tell the President and your team how grateful we are. The response has been awesome from FEMA and other departments,” Jeb wrote, less than 10 minutes after one of his state employees sent him an email showing how fast the state was able to send federal funds. All told, Florida would suffer four major hurricanes in the second half of 2004.


The Seychelles is not typically associated with geopolitics. But beyond the white sandy beaches and tropical jungles, the tiny archipelago nation is emerging as a key player in India’s battle to counter growing Chinese influence in the Indian Ocean. Late last month, India and the Seychelles signed a revised agreement granting India permission to construct a military base on the Seychelles’ Assumption Island, roughly 1,650 kilometers (1,025 miles) east of mainland East Africa. The deal, which follows several years of diplomatic negotiations, will provide India with a crucial military staging point in what is fast becoming a critically strategic region. In 2016, approximately 40 million barrels of oil per day – equivalent to just under half of the world’s total oil supply – traveled through Indian Ocean entry and exit points, including the Straits of Hormuz, Malacca and Bab el-Mandeb. India, which has more than 7,500 kilometers (4,700 miles) of coastline and sits at the very center of the Indian Ocean, is dependent on free and open access to those same shipping lanes for trade. According to the Indian Ministry of Shipping, around 95% of the country’s trade by volume, and 70% by value, comes via the Indian Ocean. India’s attempts to better secure its access to the region mirrors a similar strategy deployed by its neighbor and long-standing rival China. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping, China’s naval reach has grown considerably, expanding far beyond its immediate coastline into areas not previously considered within its sphere of influence. In July last year China established its first overseas military base in Djibouti, near the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, among the world’s busiest shipping lanes and one of three crucial Indian Ocean arteries. The strait, which is only 29 kilometers (18 miles) wide at its narrowest point, connects the Mediterranean Sea via the Suez Canal, and the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean beyond. The opening of the Djibouti base was followed several months later by the country’s controversial acquisition of the Hambantota port in Sri Lanka, just 22.2 kilometers (13.8 miles) by some estimates from the primary Indian Ocean sea lane that links the Malacca Straits to the Suez Canal. Related article China sends troops to Djibouti, establishes first overseas military base Speaking to CNN, Malcolm Davis, a senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute in Sydney, described the Hambantota deal – which saw Sri Lanka grant China a 99-year lease on the port to service some of the billions in debt it owes to Beijing – as part of a “determined strategy by China to extend its influence across the Indian Ocean at the expense of India.” “That port then gives them not only a strategic access point into India’s sphere of influence through which China can deploy its naval forces, but it also gives China an advantageous position to export its goods into India’s economic sphere, so it’s achieved a number of strategic aims in that regard,” said Davis. Earlier this month, China took the unusual step of denying accusations that it was “land grabbing” in another critical Indian Ocean seaport – this time in the Maldives. Like Sri Lanka, the Maldives has long been considered within India as a close regional ally. But in recent years, the country, led by President Abdulla Yameen, has drawn closer to China, inviting investment under Beijing’s expansive “One Belt, One Road” economic initiative. This has prompted concern in some corners, not least from the country’s opposition leader, Mohamed Nasheed, who has stated publicly that China is “buying up the Maldives” under Yameen’s rule. Speaking to reporters last month, Nasheed claimed as much as 80% of the Maldives’ foreign debt was owed to China, raising the prospect that the nation, much like Sri Lanka, could eventually be forced to hand over infrastructure to help pay off its debts. Though China has denied the accusations, such views have helped to stoke fears in India of potential encirclement by China, and that analysts say, is playing into India’s renewed push to consolidate regional alliances. Speaking to CNN, Gurpreet Khurana, the executive director of India’s National Maritime Foundation, said the new Seychelles deal was part of an Indian effort to safeguard territorial integrity. “India has a primary area in the northern Indian Ocean and the secondary is the Indo-Pacific region. We (India) have interests that we have to preserve. With the Chinese going into the Indian Ocean in a big way, our strategic interests are expanding as well, and this is the only way India will be able to preserve itself,” said Kurana. Though specific details of India’s newly signed Seychelles agreement have not been released, a report by Janes suggests it includes provisions for a naval base and air strip. A previous version of the accord, first proposed by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in 2015, failed to takeoff, due to concerns over sovereignty and costs. Issues that this time around appear to have been ironed out. A statement released by the Indian Ministry of External Affairs sought to characterize the new, revised agreement as a joint endeavor. “India and Seychelles have drawn up a cooperation agenda that covers within its purview joint efforts in anti-piracy operations, and enhanced EEZ surveillance and monitoring to prevent intrusions by potential economic offenders indulging in illegal fishing, poaching, drug and human trafficking,” read the statement. Related article US, India and Japan begin naval exercises, as China looks on The move has stirred resistance in the Seychelles, however, where earlier this month, a group of 50 residents held a demonstration to protest the accord, citing a lack of transparency and environmental concerns. The organizer of the protest, Ralph Volcere, told the official Seychelles News Agency that the island republic should not become involved in the “conflicts of superpowers.” “We need to remain nonaligned, friendly to all – enemy to none,” Volcere was quoted as saying. Speaking to CNN, Arun Prakash, a retired four-star admiral and former Indian naval chief, refuted claims that the Seychelles agreement draws the island nation into a wider geopolitical rift. “(What India is building in the Seychelles) is a facility, not a military base. It has not been our policy to set up military bases on foreign soil … We were a colony for centuries, and after we became free, we do not want to do the same to another country. Setting up military bases is another form of colonialism,” said Prakash. “In international relations, China’s approach is called a realist approach. India is far more sensitive to the opinions to its neighbors. Ours is a softer one … China has a lot of money to spend. If they want to build a base, they can do it overnight. We don’t have the financial and technical means to do this like them,” said Prakash. Related article With Sri Lankan port acquisition, China adds another 'pearl' to its 'string' Close ties between India and the Seychelles stretch back several decades, though have tightened in recent years under Prime Minister Modi. During a previous visit to the Seychelles by Modi in May 2015, the Indian leader outlined a vision for the Indian Ocean region with “collaboration as its backbone.” Under the banner of SAGAR (Security and Growth for All in the Region), a Modi-led initiative that seeks to develop better cooperation among Indian Ocean nations, Indian naval ships have helped to patrol the waters around the Seychelles, and in 2016, India installed a coastal surveillance radar system in the archipelago to gather and analyze intelligence. The new agreement, which according to the Seychelles News Agency will be valid for an initial 20-year period once ratified, includes a clause that allows the Seychelles government to suspend operations at the base in certain circumstances it considers detrimental to its national interest, such as the outbreak of war.


Trump addressed Iraq at a reception for all US senators and their spouses American troops are now in the country primarily to advise and assist Iraqi forces President Donald Trump offered rare public remarks about Iraq Tuesday, declaring to a group of Senators gathered at the White House that the US is performing “very well” in the country, which remains besieged by violence. “We’re doing very well in Iraq,” Trump said at a reception for all US senators and their spouses in the White House East Room, adding he’d just ended a long phone call with Defense Secretary James Mattis before appearing at the event. Trump added that “our soldiers are fighting like never before” in Iraq, and praised what he characterized as a positive trajectory in the country. It wasn’t clear what fighting Trump was referring to in his remarks, which appeared unscripted. The US combat mission in Iraq ended in 2010 and American troops are now in the country primarily to advise and assist Iraqi forces. During the Iraq War, which began in 2003, US troops engaged in extended fighting across the country, battling an insurgency and later sectarian violence to secure areas in key cities and regions. Related video US investigates civilian deaths in Mosul airstrike President Barack Obama declared an end to the combat mission in 2010, hoping to fulfill a campaign promise to withdraw US troops. He was forced to send US troops back to Iraq to help combat the rise of ISIS, but kept their mission limited. At its peak, US troop levels in Iraq stood near 166,000; the Obama administration capped the number of troops in Iraq in their current mission at around 5,000. Though troops currently in Iraq aren’t officially carrying out a combat mission, they do face danger and limited engagement with enemy forces, particularly as they move closer to the front lines in Mosul, the northern city that Iraqi forces are working to liberate from ISIS. Trump’s remarks Tuesday came as US military officials acknowledged the US was likely behind an airstrike that killed scores of Iraqi civilians in Mosul on March 17. The incident has sparked fresh concern about civilian deaths as a result of the US-led air campaign against ISIS. US official says there’s a ‘fair chance’ airstrike killed civilians in Mosul The President didn’t acknowledge those deaths in his remarks, instead praising the work of the US military in Iraq. “The results are very, very good,” Trump said. “I just wanted to let everyone know.”


Editor’s Note: Nic Robertson is CNN’s international diplomatic editor. The opinions in this article belong to the author. It is possible, even probable, that Donald Trump will leave office smarter than when he went in – even if he still insists he is often the smartest one in the room. He’ll have learnt that Twitter is not the best forum for high-stakes diplomacy. His Twitter spat in January with the Enrique Pena Nieto, the Mexican President, over who would pay for the border wall ended with the Mexican canceling his visit to Washington. They subsequently they both resolved to talk off Twitter. Trump will also have learned why hanging up on major allies like Australia’s Prime Minister Malcolm Turbull is not a good idea, or that embarrassing guests, as he did twice with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, is counterproductive. First, during her visit in April he ignored her request for a handshake in the Oval Office. Then at their joint press conference he joked, “As far as wiretapping, I guess, by this past administration, at least we have something in common perhaps,” in reference to the Obama administration’s tapping of German phones. Related article Trump can end ISIS by learning from Saudi Arabia Merkel was left looking uncertain as others in the large room collapsed in laughter. It was awkward and cringeworthy and no way to host friends. It’s not clear if the lesson has been learned yet, but it is symptomatic of the uncertainty and lashings of chaos Trump has brought to international diplomacy. His top-tier appointees – Vice President Mike Pence, Secretary of Defense James Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson – have spent a good part of their first 100 days  traveling the world picking up after the President’s missteps. Collectively, they might be finally catching up to where previous administrations had been on day one, but their commander in chief still has a long way to go. His first 100 days have taught him some of the basics that most modern Presidents already appreciated before coming to office. On NATO for example, he came to office saying that it was “obsolete” and not doing enough on fighting terrorism. A few days into office, he greeted British Prime Minister Theresa May at the White House. She seemed to surprise him at the press conference following their meeting, telling Trump “Mr. President, I think you said, you confirmed that you’re 100 percent behind NATO.” He didn’t deny it, and sent Pence and Mattis to Europe to tell European leaders the same. However it would be another two-and-a-half months before he would bring himself to say it publicly. That finally came when hosting NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg at the White House in April: “I said it  (NATO) was obsolete, it’s no longer obsolete”. That’s what his allies really wanted to hear. Even so, Trump couldn’t bring himself to say he was wrong. He went on to claim credit for refocusing the alliance on terrorism, something it has been doing for over a decade, most notably by deploying troops to Afghanistan in 2002 to support the US take down of al Qaeda. On China, Trump has been on another a steep learning curve. In the early days in office he branded President Xi Jinping a “currency manipulator.” Yet by the time he was hosting the Chinese President at Mar-a-Largo in Florida, he’d come to realize this enemy could be a friend. And with US national security facing an even more implacable enemy, North Korea’s Kim Jong-un, Xi has gone from foe to favorite. “I have great respect for the President of China,” Trump said last week, apparently pleased that China is putting pressure on the hermit kingdom to end its nuclear weapons ambitions. It’s fluidity in thinking that Trump believes is a virtue: “I’m proud of my flexibility,” he said a few weeks ago. Yet to many watchers he seems not so much flexible as impressionable. He seems to take his lead from the last leader to whom he has spoken. Whether it’s Merkel on trade with Europe or Xi on the history of the Korean peninsular, it somewhat highlights his grasp of global detail that given a few facts, he thinks he’s fixed the knowledge deficit. In the overall arc of his first 100 days, North Korea has been one of the principle accelerants to the President’s flexibility, teaching him that an enemy will pick the worst time to act up. Kim decided to test missiles while Trump was having lunch with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at his club, Mar-a-Largo. A side lesson he may have taken on board was not to do national security on a public patio between the salad and main course. Trump was pilloried when photos emerged showing him and his national security team dealing with their first major security issue – at dinner, in public. Many of these lessons are only pulling Trump towards what many would have considered entry level for the job. Related article Donald Trump is confounding his critics On Syria, however, he seems to have caught up to the Obama administration’s position. By bombing Assad for using chemical weapons, he may have now surpassed it. But, as with Korea, he still lacks a coherent strategy on the war-ravaged nation that takes him diplomatically beyond Obama’s position. There was another significant lesson for Trump in the aftermath of his dropping bombs in Syria: friends can become enemies overnight. Until recently he touted Putin as a possible ally, early this year saying that “if Putin likes me, I consider that an asset, not a liability.” But Putin, Assad’s biggest sponsor, has fast become a foe. Where he promised so much coming in to office – “My number one priority will be to dismantle the deal with Iran” – Trump has little to show for it. Related article There's 1 big problem with Donald Trump's tax plan And on another sound bite that this time last year sounded easy to deliver – “Bomb the s**t out of them (ISIS)” – Trump has been learning the limits to his power. While he enabled MOAB, the mother of all bombs, to be dropped on ISIS in Afghanistan, it amounts to a pinprick in the over all battle and not a sea change in tactics. In his book “The Art of the Deal”, Trump defines his business style as a tough negotiator creating uncertainty. As President he has yet to finesse the tactic so only his enemies don’t know his next move.


President Donald Trump has issued an executive order banning travel to the US from seven Muslim-majority countries. The order has caused confusion at the nation’s airports as some people from those countries were detained as they arrived in the US.  The move also has been met with legal challenges and street protests across America. Here are the latest developments: Trump administration officials seemed at times to contradict themselves during appearances on Sunday news shows. On NBC, White House chief of staff Reince Priebus said the order “doesn’t affect” green card holders, then later said “of course” it affects green card holders from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Yemen and Somalia – the seven countries that Trump has banned immigration from for 90 days. Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina released a joint statement Sunday saying: “Our government has a responsibility to defend our borders, but we must do so in a way that makes us safer and upholds all that is decent and exceptional about our nation. IranIraqSyriaSudanLibyaYemenSomalia IranIraqSyriaSudanLibyaYemenSomalia “It is clear from the confusion at our airports across the nation that President Trump’s executive order was not properly vetted. We are particularly concerned by reports that this order went into effect with little to no consultation with the Departments of State, Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security,” they added. “This executive order sends a signal, intended or not, that America does not want Muslims coming into our country. That is why we fear this executive order may do more to help terrorist recruitment than improve our security.” Attorneys general from 15 states and the District of Columbia issued a joint statement condemning what they called an “unconstitutional, un-American and unlawful Executive Order.” The statement was issued by the attorneys general of New York state, California, Pennsylvania, Washington state, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Virginia, Oregon, the District of Columbia, Connecticut, Vermont, Illinois, New Mexico, Iowa, Maine and Maryland. “As the chief legal officers for over 130 million Americans and foreign residents of our states, we … will work together to ensure the federal government obeys the Constitution, respects our history as a nation of immigrants, and does not unlawfully target anyone because of their national origin or faith,” they said in the statement. “We are confident that the Executive Order will ultimately be struck down by the courts. In the meantime, we are committed to working to ensure that as few people as possible suffer from the chaotic situation that it has created.” Also, British Prime Minister Theresa May ordered the nation’s foreign secretary and home secretary to hold talks with their US counterparts “to protect the rights of British nationals.” Meanwhile, for a second consecutive day, protesters were rallying across the country against President Trump’s immigration policies. Throngs of people gathered Sunday afternoon outside the White House. Crowds also formed in Boston’s Copley Square, at Battery Park in Manhattan and at airports in Atlanta, Los Angeles, Washington and Dallas, with more planned in other cities. These follow demonstrations that erupted Saturday over Trump’s travel ban. In New York City, a large crowd gathered at JFK International Airport Saturday to protest the detention of two Iraqis who were later released.  Several New York officials showed support for the protests. Related article Protests start again over Trump's immigration policies “Mr. President, look at us,” said US Rep. Nydia Velazquez, a New York Democrat.  “This is America.  What you have done is shameful.  It’s un-American.”  The protesters gathered in Terminal 4 at JFK and carried signs reading, “We are all immigrants!” and “No ban! No wall!” Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe joined protesters Saturday at Dulles International Airport outside Washington, D.C.  “This Executive Order is antithetical to the values that make America great, and it will make our country less safe,” he said in a statement. In Portland, Oregon, one demonstrator carried a sign that read, “Portland coffee comes from Yemen,” one of the seven Muslim-majority nations on the no-travel list. On Friday, Trump signed an order banning travel from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days and suspending all refugee admission for 120 days. The countries affected are Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Yemen and Somalia, according to a White House official. It also caps the total number of refugees admitted into the United States during the 2017 fiscal year at 50,000, down more than half from the current level of 110,000. “I am establishing new vetting measures to keep radical Islamic terrorists out of the United States of America,” Trump said during the signing at the Pentagon.  “We don’t want them here.” Related video Travel ban affects citizens of 7 Muslim-majority nations As of Saturday night, 109 people had not been allowed into the United States on the basis of the executive order, according to the Department of Homeland Security.  It was unclear Sunday how many of those people were still being detained and how many had been sent back. A federal judge in New York granted an emergency stay Saturday night for citizens of the seven Muslim-majority countries who have already arrived in the United States and for those who are in transit and who hold valid visas. The judge ruled they cannot be removed from the US – a decision that halts Trump’s executive order barring citizens from those countries from entering the US for the next 90 days. “The petitioners have a strong likelihood of success in establishing that the removal of the petitioner and others similarly situated violates their due process and equal protection guaranteed by the United States Constitution,” US District Judge Ann Donnelly wrote in her decision. “There is imminent danger that, absent the stay of removal, there will be substantial and irreparable injury to refugees, visa-holders, and other individuals from nations subject to the January 27, 2017, Executive Order,” the ruling said. Related article How opponents may challenge Trump's order in court The ACLU argued Saturday evening in federal court in New York for a nationwide stay that would block the deportation of all people stranded in US airports under what the organization called “President Trump’s new Muslim Ban.” The civil rights group is representing dozens of travelers held at JFK International Airport Friday and Saturday, including two Iraqis with ties to the US military who had been granted visas to enter the United States. The ruling does not necessarily mean the people being held at airports across the US are going to be released, said Zachary Manfredi of Yale’s Worker and Immigrant Rights Advocacy Clinic, who helped draft the emergency stay motion. “The judge’s order is that they (lawful visa/green card holders) not be removed from the US – it doesn’t immediately order that they be released from detention,” he told CNN. Related video U.S. judge blocks deportations of banned travelers In addition to Donnelly’s ruling in New York: –A federal court in Washington state has issued a stay forbidding travelers being detained there from being sent back to their home country. Meanwhile a federal court in Virginia has issued a temporary restraining order saying a group of 50 to 60 permanent residents returning from trips abroad should have access to lawyers while they are being detained at Dulles International Airport and that these residents cannot be removed from the United States for seven days. –Federal judges in Boston ruled early Sunday that officials may not detain a person on the basis of President Trump’s executive order. This ruling was made after the ACLU of Massachusetts filed a lawsuit asking for the release of two associate professors at the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, both Iranian nationals who are permanent residents of the United States. The Department of Homeland Security said on Sunday it will comply with judicial orders not to deport detained travelers. President Trump insisted Sunday that the ban would protect the United States from terrorists. In an afternoon statement, Trump wrote the country would continue showing “compassion to those fleeing oppression.” “America has always been the land of the free and home of the brave,” he wrote. “We will keep it free and keep it safe, as the media knows, but refuses to say.” He pushed back on criticism suggesting his executive order amounts to the “Muslim ban” he proposed as a candidate. 134 million banned from USWhat the ban says: The full textWhat to know about the restrictionsLegal battle beginsThe ban’s Christian focusA family’s plight just got more complicatedBergen: Trump’s big mistake All of Trump’s executive orders, memos and proclamationsComparing Trump to previous presidents 134 million banned from USWhat the ban says: The full textWhat to know about the restrictionsLegal battle beginsThe ban’s Christian focusA family’s plight just got more complicatedBergen: Trump’s big mistake All of Trump’s executive orders, memos and proclamationsComparing Trump to previous presidents “To be clear, this is not a Muslim ban, as the media is falsely reporting,” he wrote. “This is not about religion – this is about terror and keeping our country safe.” Asked during a photo opportunity in the Oval Office Saturday afternoon about the rollout of the executive order, Trump said his government was “totally prepared.” “It’s working out very nicely,” Trump told reporters. “You see it at the airports. You see it all over. It’s working out very nicely and we’re going to have a very, very strict ban, and we’re going to have extreme vetting, which we should have had in this country for many years.” Related video Trump: Travel ban working out very nicely The policy team at the White House developed the executive order on refugees and visas, largely avoiding the traditional inter-agency process that would have allowed the Justice Department and Homeland Security agencies to provide operational guidance, according to numerous officials who spoke to CNN on Saturday. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly and Department of Homeland Security leadership saw the final details shortly before the order was finalized, government officials said. CNN’s Kevin Bohn, Azadeh Ansari, Laura Ly and Chip Grabow contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump's executive order banning travel from seven Muslim-majority countries


Netanyahu echoed President Trump in arguing against the Iran nuclear pact "The Iranian nuclear deal not only doesn't block Iran's path to the bomb, but actually paves it," he said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took aim at Iran in his speech to more than 190 nations in the UN General Assembly, but the Israeli leader was clearly tailoring his message for one man: President Donald Trump. With the US President hinting that he may pull out of the deal to constrain Tehran’s nuclear program against the wishes of other countries that signed onto the agreement, Netanyahu used his annual address to argue that the world should reconsider the pact and echoed Trump in calling it “an embarrassment.” Netanyahu “had an audience of one,” said David Makovsky, a distinguished fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “He sees a chance to somehow either jettison the agreement or more vigorously enforce it. And that could be where they end up.” Related video Trump, Netanyahu meeting to focus on Iran US law requires the president to certify to Congress every three months whether Iran is meeting its end of the bargain, which curbed Tehran’s nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions. Trump and US officials have said that even though the International Atomic Energy Agency has said that Iran is complying, they believe that Iran is in violation of the “spirit” of the deal. Indeed, Trump has seemed to suggest that he may not certify Iran’s compliance with the nuclear agreement in October, the next deadline, for this reason. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson fleshed out administration thinking in London on September 14 saying that the preface of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, as the deal is called, “reads that the participants, quote, ‘anticipate that full implementation of this JCPOA will positively contribute to regional and international peace and security,’ end quote.” While the preface just “anticipates” that the deal will lead to greater peace and security, it doesn’t actually require any signatory to commit to that goal. Even so, critics of the pact, including Netanyahu, have seized on Iran’s activities in the region as a reason to abrogate the agreement. They point to Iran’s support for Houthi rebels in Yemen, for the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, which has slaughtered its own citizens, as well as Tehran’s support for groups that foment violence and terror across the Middle East. The money flowing to Iran because of sanctions relief is funding these activities and more, the deal’s critics argue. Related article UN wonders if Trump's threat to 'totally destroy' North Korea is just bluster US and European officials involved in the negotiations say that if it had encompassed too many aspects of Iran’s behavior, an agreement would never have been reached. Iran’s support for terrorism and its missile development don’t go unpunished, they argue, pointing out that that Iran’s activities are targeted by numerous UN, US and other sanctions. Even so, Netanyahu drilled down on Iran’s malfeasance in his remarks to the UN and on his flattery of Trump. “I’ve listened to countless speeches in this hall, none were bolder, none were more courageous than the one delivered President Trump today,” Netanyahu said, reminding the audience that he was once Israel’s ambassador to the world body. Related article This is global Trumpism “Here at the UN we must also speak the truth about Iran as President Trump did so powerfully this morning,” he said. Netanyahu was following up on a one-on-one Monday meeting he had with the President, where he told Trump that he looked “forward to discussing with you how we can address together what you rightly call the terrible nuclear deal with Iran and how to roll back Iran’s growing aggression in the region, especially in Syria.” On Tuesday, Trump addressed the General Assembly a few hours before Netanyahu took the podium and told the audience that the 2015 international agreement is “one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into. Frankly, that deal is an embarrassment to the United States, and I don’t think you’ve heard the last of it – believe me.” Trump and US officials also echo Netanyahu in their criticism of sunset provisions in the deal, which allow Iran to resume some nuclear-related activities after a few years. “When that sunset comes, a dark shadow will be cast over the Middle East and the world because Iran will then be free to enrich uranium on an industrial scale,” Netanyahu warned Tuesday. Related article Citing North Korea, Macron calls on Trump to honor Iran nuclear deal “The Iranian nuclear deal not only doesn’t block Iran’s path to the bomb, but actually paves it,” he said. The Israeli prime minister said that Iran “vows to destroy my country every day,” but took pains to stress that the threat he sees is not just to his country. Iran is developing ballistic missiles “to threaten the entire world,” he said and in the meantime, is wreaking havoc in his region. “From the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean, Tehran to Tartus, an Iranian curtain is descending across the Middle East,” Netanyahu said.


President Barack Obama announced an executive action Wednesday that allows the Treasury Department to impose financially punitive sanctions against cyber hackers who impose a significant threat to national security. “This Executive Order authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, to impose sanctions on individuals or entities that engage in malicious cyber-enabled activities that create a significant threat to the national security, foreign policy, or economic health or financial stability of the United States,” Obama said In a statement announcing Wednesday’s executive order. The action comes after November’s cyberattack on Sony Pictures that the FBI pinned on North Korea. At the time Obama said that private companies bowing to intimidation from cyberhackers would set a problematic precedent and he questioned Sony’s decision to pull its movie “The Interview.” RELATED: CENTCOM Twitter account hacked, suspended In January the White House leveled financial sanctions against officials within the North Korean government as part of what Obama called a “proportional response” to the Sony hacking. In a call with reporters White House Cybersecurity coordinator Michael Daniel said the process of crafting these sanctions highlighted the need for more direct authority to target individuals engaged in cyber attacks. “This allows us to have an executive order that focuses directly on the activities of concern whether they arise in North Korea or another jurisdiction,” Daniel said. “Obviously cyber incidents tend to flow very easily across international boundaries, so trying to tie that to a particular location just didn’t make sense.” Instead of seeking individual sanctions programs against specific countries, this executive action allows the U.S. to target sanctions based on the specific malicious activity itself and the individuals involved. Obama cited recent threats from a variety of sources that have targeted government infrastructure, private companies and citizens in a statement Wednesday. However, Daniel told reporters that the U.S. has no new sanctions to announce at this time. The new framework will allow for a robust process in dealing with emergent threats in the future. “We will use this tool in a targeted and coordinated way against the worst of the worst, the most serious overseas malicious actors,” Daniel said. In a statement Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew added that the order allows for the department “to expose and financially isolate those who hide in the shadows of the Internet.” Lew was also cognizant of privacy concerns that can arise when it comes to cyber security, saying the Treasury Department will “use this authority carefully and judiciously against the most serious cyber-threats to protect our nation’s critical infrastructure.” Along with the ability to use sanctions, Obama said his administration will also make use of existing authorities including diplomatic engagement, trade policy tools, and law enforcement mechanisms in countering threats. Republicans have been critical of the President’s executive orders and Wednesday’s announcement drew a rebuke from House Speaker Boehner’s office. “These executive actions can only do so much,” Press Secretary Cory Fritz told CNN. “The president needs to work with Republicans to enact the types of common-sense measures that passed the House in recent years with strong, bipartisan majorities but stalled in the Democratic-controlled Senate.” White House officials told reporters that the drafting of this order included consultations with Congress and that the administration welcomes legislation that enhances cyber security and information sharing. RELATED: Obama: North Korea’s hack not war, but ‘cybervandalism’


CNN hosted a whirlwind, foodie scavenger hunt in Hong Kong last weekend The event marked season 2 of Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown Two winning teams won trips to Tokyo Event helped raise awareness of hunger in Hong Kong We’ve never seen a more rapt group of people hovering over salt-crusted sea bass. To kick off season 2 of Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown, CNN hosted a whirlwind scavenger hunt in Hong Kong last weekend, in association with Little Adventures in Hong Kong, the city’s premier private food tour company. We sent 12 teams racing through restaurants, streets and market stalls on an intense foodie-themed series of challenges, with Anthony Bourdain judging the challenge remotely via Instagram and Twitter. Chefs and judges were stationed at various locations to preside over each endeavor. Sweet odds It may have been the one in six odds of winning, but the race was hilariously intense from the beginning. With challenges ranging from eating as many “suicide wings” as possible in three minutes to wrapping dim sum to fileting fish, six local teams and six expat teams battled it out to win two grand prizes of a trip to Tokyo, and customized food tours of Hong Kong with Little Adventures for runners up. Anthony Bourdain judged the roast goose leg challenge – it’s his favorite Hong Kong food – that had teams hunting for a secret kitchen to chop up goose legs. “You really get to see why Hong Kong is Asia’s food capital,” food blogger Andy Yeo of team The Twits said of the day’s event. “It pushes you off the deep end.” Hunger in Hong Kong The tests weren’t all about taste buds. The Market Challenge had each team heading to the street market to bargain for as much choi sum (a leafy green vegetable) as possible for HK$30, the average amount people in Hong Kong living under the poverty line spend on food each day. The veggies were then donated to Feeding Hong Kong, CNN’s charity partner for the event. Social media was another important element of the contest, as contestants were required to have a Twitter and Instagram account to register. Despite rampant competitiveness, CNN Travel editor Hiufu Wong observed that contestants spent more time feeding the event to their social media networks than on the actual challenges. The winners The winners heading to Tokyo are teams HELL YEAH! and HUNGER HUNTER. “We liked the fact that the challenge covered not just local Cantonese food,” said Davis Ng, member of team HELL YEAH! “It covered different genres and we actually learned something very interesting from the chefs.” You’re welcome, Davis. Have fun in Japan! The partners You can retrace the challenge at the following Hong Kong locations: Nico’s Spuntino Bar & Restaurant, 49 Elgin St., Central DimDimSum DimSum Specialty Store, 7 Tin Lok Lane, Wan Chai Kowloon Soy Company, 9 Graham St., Central Corner Kitchen, 21 New St., Sheung Wan Chôm Chôm, 58-60 Peel St., Central The Big Bites, 196-202 Java Road, North Point Anthony Bourdain Parts Unknown Season 2 airs Mondays at 9 a.m., Fridays at 10 p.m. and Sundays at 9 a.m. HKT on CNN International. This season, traditional Chinese subtitling will be available for Hong Kong viewers.


Federal Judge Amy Berman Jackson on Tuesday rejected former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s attempt to invalidate the criminal case against him in Washington. Manafort had claimed special counsel Robert Mueller’s appointment order was too broad, and thus his investigation had overstepped its legal authority. But Berman Jackson concluded for several reasons that Mueller’s investigation and prosecution of Manafort is legal – and that the special counsel still can maintain some independence while working within the Department of Justice. Manafort has pleaded not guilty to charges related to his lobbying work for Ukrainian politicians dating back to a decade ago. “It bears emphasizing at this stage that Manafort is presumed to be innocent of these charges, and it will be the prosecution’s burden to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. But the indictment will not be dismissed, and the matter will proceed to trial,” Berman Jackson wrote in her opinion Tuesday. She added that it was appropriate for federal investigators to look into Manafort’s business connections in Russia and Ukraine while Mueller’s office investigated possible coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. “Who had connections to the Russian government? Who attended meetings on behalf of the campaign?” Berman Jackson wrote. “Given the combination of his prominence within the campaign and his ties to Ukrainian officials supported by and operating out of Russia, as well as to Russian oligarchs, Manafort was an obvious person of interest.” “The Special Counsel would have been remiss to ignore such an obvious potential link between the Trump campaign and the Russian government,” she wrote later in the opinion. Jason Maloni, a spokesman for Manafort, later responded to the ruling: “Paul Manafort maintains his innocence and looks forward to prevailing in this matter.” Manafort is scheduled for trial in DC in September. He faces a separate set of bank fraud and other financial charges in Virginia, for a trial set to begin in July. Manafort has asked a different federal judge there to dismiss his case on similar grounds. The Virginia federal judge, TS Ellis, has not yet ruled on the question. Ellis expressed his skepticism at a previous hearing that Mueller’s current investigation into Russian coordination during the 2016 campaign would connect to Manafort’s lobbying activities years before the Trump campaign existed. Berman Jackson previously dismissed a civil lawsuit Manafort had attempted to use to undercut Mueller’s authority.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation


The worker runs a charity helping children suffering from malnutrition Mali has struggled with instability and Islamist extremists for years. A French aid worker was kidnapped in the west African country of Mali, on Saturday, the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement Sunday. She was identified as Sophie Petronin and runs a charity to help children suffering from malnutrition, the statement said. The aid worker was seized in Gao. Malian authorities are fully mobilized to seek and release her as soon as possible, France said. Mali has struggled with instability and Islamist extremists for years. In the chaos following a March 2012 military coup, Islamist extremists created an enclave in the northern part of the country. French troops helped push the militants out of urban areas, but they have persisted in the nation’s desert regions, security analysts say.


Trump said another culprit aside from Russia could have been behind the US election hack "It could be somebody else. And I also know things that other people don't know," he said President-elect Donald Trump said Saturday he has information that others lack and promised to reveal his knowledge this week, reiterating again his doubts that Russia was behind cyber-meddling in the US election. Speaking to reporters ahead of an 800-person New Year’s Eve bash at his Mar-a-Lago estate, a tuxedoed Trump maintained that another culprit aside from Russia could have been behind the tampering. Related video U.S. slaps sanctions on Russia over hacking “It could be somebody else. And I also know things that other people don’t know, and so they cannot be sure of the situation,” he said. Asked to describe what undisclosed information he knew, Trump said, “You’ll find out on Tuesday or Wednesday.” Trump has scheduled an intelligence briefing midweek on the hacking, a response to President Barack Obama’s announcement of new sanctions on Moscow in retaliation for the cyber-intrusion. “I just want them to be sure, because it’s a pretty serious charge, and I want them to be sure. And if you look at the weapons of mass destruction, that was a disaster, and they were wrong,” Trump said, referencing failed intelligence in the lead-up to the Iraq War as a reason for skepticism. Related video Trump on Russia hacking: We should move on “I think it’s unfair if they don’t know,” he said. “And I know a lot about hacking. And hacking is a very hard thing to prove.” Trump has repeatedly cast aside a US intelligence assessment announced in early October that Moscow was behind the hacking, despite already receiving classified intelligence briefings on the matter. He’s also praised Russian President Vladimir Putin, calling him smart this week for withholding reciprocal sanctions on the US. Trump’s stance has put him at odds with most congressional Republicans, who have argued for a tougher stance on Russia. Sen. John McCain, the Republican chairman of the Armed Services Committee, will convene a hearing on cyber-threats Thursday. On Sunday morning, a Rossiya Airlines Special Flight Squadron plane believed to be carrying some expelled Russian government officials departed Dulles Airport just outside Washington. The US had ordered 35 officials and their families from the embassy in Washington and the consulate in San Francisco to leave the country by noon Sunday in response to charges that Russians hacked the presidential election and harassed US diplomatic personnel in Russia. Related video Putin: Russia won't expel US diplomats A State Department official told CNN early Sunday evening all of the expelled Russian diplomats have left the US. “We can confirm that the 35 Russian diplomats declared persona non grata have, along with their family members, departed the United States.,” the official said. Congressional Democrats on Sunday scoffed at Trump’s assertion that Russian involvement wasn’t clear. “It’s very solid,” said Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence committee, on ABC’s “This Week.” Schiff called Trump’s approach “dangerous,” adding, “If he’s going to have any credibility as president, he needs to stop talking this way. He needs to stop denigrating the intelligence.” community.  He’s going to rely on them. At Mar-a-Lago Saturday, Trump expressed deep misgivings about technology during his brief exchange with reporters positioned outside his Grand Ballroom. “If you have something really important, write it out and have it delivered by courier, the old-fashioned way, because I’ll tell you what, no computer is safe,” he said. “I don’t care what they say, no computer is safe.” Scheduled to return to New York Sunday after two weeks at his Palm Beach mansion, Trump told reporters his New Year’s resolution was to “Make America Great Again.” “I’ll do that one,” he said. CNN’s Kevin Bohn contributed to this report.


President Donald Trump considered firing special counsel Robert Mueller last June, but backed down after White House counsel Don McGahn threatened to quit, a person familiar with the matter told CNN. Since then, Trump and his allies have repeatedly denied that the President had ever considered firing Mueller, who is tasked with investigating Russian interference in the 2016 US elections and any possible collusion with Trump’s campaign. The President has repeatedly denied any collusion. Here’s a list of eight times since June 2017 that Trump and his team have denied that Mueller’s job is in danger: August 6, 2017 – White House adviser Kellyanne Conway says on ABC News that Trump has not discussed firing Mueller, but dodges on whether Trump has made a commitment that he won’t fire Mueller in the future. “The President has not even discussed that. The President is not discussing firing Bob Mueller,” she said when asked whether Trump would commit to not firing the special counsel. August 8, 2017 – Trump lawyer John Dowd denies that the President has ever considered firing Mueller in a report from USA Today. “That’s never been on the table, never,” Dowd said, according to USA Today. “It’s a manifestation of the media. My dealings with Bob Mueller have always been cordial, respectful – the way it should be.” August 10, 2017 – Trump himself tells reporters in Bedminster, New Jersey, that he hasn’t considered firing Mueller. “I haven’t given it any thought. I mean, I’ve been reading about it from you people. You say, oh, I’m going to dismiss him. No, I’m not dismissing anybody. I mean, I want them to get on with the task. But I also want the Senate and the House to come out with their findings. You know, judging from the people leaving the meetings – leaks – but they leave the meetings all the time, and they say, ‘No, we haven’t found any collusion.’ There’s no – there is no collusion. You know why? Because I don’t speak to Russians.” October 16, 2017 – Trump says, “No, not at all,” when asked during a news conference if he is considering firing Mueller. December 16, 2017 – White House Special Counsel Ty Cobb tells CNN “there is no consideration of firing” Mueller. “As the White House has consistently said for months, there is no consideration of firing the special counsel,” Cobb said in the statement. December 17, 2017 – Trump himself again says he is not considering firing Mueller. “No, I’m not,” the President said, but added that his “people” were “very upset” about the special counsel’s decision to obtain tens of thousands of emails from the Trump transition team. Following his return to the White House from Camp David, Trump told reporters that he thought it was “pretty sad” that the special counsel got hold of the emails, which Trump transition lawyers said Mueller’s team “unlawfully” obtained. The President reiterated that there was no collusion between Russian and his campaign. December 20, 2017 – Cobb reiterates to CNN that the President is not considering firing Mueller. “If the media is going to continue to ask for responses to every absurd and baseless rumor, attention-seeking partisans will continue to spread them,” he told CNN. “For five months or more, the White House has persistently and emphatically stated there is no consideration of firing the special counsel, and the White House willingly affirms yet again, as it has every day this week, there is no consideration being given to the termination of the special counsel.” January 26, 2018 – Following publication of the Mueller report, Trump denied the story once again to reporters in Davos, Switzerland, on Friday, dismissing it as “fake news.” “Fake news, folks. Fake news,” Trump said before he entered the World Economic Forum. “Typical New York Times,” he added. UPDATE: This story has been updated to remove a duplicate statement, and its headline has also been updated accordingly. CNN’s Liz Stark contributed to this report.


Lawmaker: Presidents Barack Obama and François Hollande to discuss spying claims "We are not targeting and will not target the communications of President Hollande," U.S. spokesman says France says it previously sought clarification from U.S. about what it calls "unacceptable facts" France has summoned the U.S. ambassador for a meeting Wednesday in the wake of reports that the United States spied on French President François Hollande and his two predecessors – despite France being a close ally. WikiLeaks has published what it said were U.S. National Security Agency reports about secret communications of the last three French presidents between 2006 and 2012. France won’t tolerate “any action jeopardizing its security and the protection of its interests,” the country’s Defense Council said in a statement Wednesday. But it suggested it was already well aware of the spying allegations. “These unacceptable facts already resulted in clarifications between France and the United States” in 2013 and 2014, the Defense Council said. “Commitments were made by the American authorities,” the council said. “They must be recalled and strictly respected.” Hollande had convened a meeting of the council after reports appeared in the French press about the information released by WikiLeaks. Amid French anger over the latest revelations, the U.S. ambassador to France, Jane Hartley, has been summoned to appear at the French Foreign Ministry at 6 p.m. local time (noon ET). Hollande and U.S. President Barack Obama also will speak by telephone about the spying claims at some point Wednesday, Claude Bartolone, president of France’s National Assembly, told CNN affiliate BFMTV. Responding to the reports late Tuesday, the White House’s National Security Council spokesman Ned Price said: “We are not targeting and will not target the communications of President Hollande. “Indeed, as we have said previously, we do not conduct any foreign intelligence surveillance activities unless there is a specific and validated national security purpose. This applies to ordinary citizens and world leaders alike. “We work closely with France on all matters of international concern, and the French are indispensable partners.” French government spokesman and Agriculture Minister Stéphane Le Foll said France was taking three immediate steps in response to the latest allegations. Besides summoning the U.S. ambassador, leading French lawmakers have been invited to a debriefing session at the Élysée, or presidential palace, he said. France’s intelligence coordinator will be sent to the United States to discuss the measures already agreed between the two nations. In addition, Prime Minister Manuel Valls will answer a question from lawmakers Wednesday afternoon at the National Assembly, Le Foll said. French newspaper Libération and online outlet Mediapart cited five NSA reports published by WikiLeaks on Tuesday and purportedly pulled from intercepted communications of former Presidents Jacques Chirac and Nicolas Sarkozy as well as Hollande and other French figures. According to a WikiLeaks news release, the cache of “top secret” documents includes “intelligence summaries of conversations between French government officials concerning some of the most pressing issues facing France and the international community.” These include “the global financial crisis, the Greek debt crisis, the leadership and future of the European Union, the relationship between the Hollande administration and the German government of Angela Merkel, French efforts to determine the make-up of the executive staff of the United Nations, French involvement in the conflict in Palestine and a dispute between the French and US governments over US spying on France.” WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said the French people “have a right to know that their elected government is subject to hostile surveillance from a supposed ally.” WikiLeaks is proud of its work with Libération and Mediapart to bring the story to light, Assange said, adding that “French readers can expect more timely and important revelations in the near future.” Responding to the reports, the party led by Sarkozy said in a statement that France was a great country that must be respected. Much as cooperation between allies’ intelligence services is crucial against a common enemy, it is “unacceptable” that such intelligence tools are turned against an ally, it said. “It is unbearable that three successive presidents, their advisers, their ministers could have been regularly spied on for a decade by at least one of the 17 American intelligence agencies,” the statement said. Sarkozy’s party, formerly the UMP, was recently renamed Les Républicains. The UMP was also the party of Chirac. France is a longstanding ally of the United States and, as a fellow permanent member of the U.N. Security Council and NATO, a key partner in international diplomacy. U.S. President Barack Obama earlier this year referred to France as “America’s oldest ally.” But these are not the first reports alleging U.S. espionage against its friends. In 2013, Le Monde reported that the NSA had monitored phone calls made in France, citing documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden to WikiLeaks. That surveillance was conducted on French citizens and carried out on a “massive scale,” as reported by Le Monde. Those particular phone intercepts took place from December 10, 2012, to January 8, 2013, Le Monde said. An NSA graph showed an average of 3 million data intercepts a day. Also in 2013, CNN reported on allegations of NSA surveillance of other world leaders, including Merkel and the presidents of Brazil and Mexico. Germany drops probe into U.S. spying on Merkel CNN’s Noisette Martel, Sandrine Amiel, Sarah Oulahna, Kevin Liptak, Margot Haddad, David Lindsay, Sara Mazloumsaki and Jennifer Z. Deaton contributed to this report.


Editor’s Note: Samantha Vinograd is a CNN national security analyst who served on President Barack Obama’s National Security Council from 2009-2013. The views expressed in this commentary are her own. Samantha Vinograd: Secretary of State Rex Tillerson's five-country tour faces a series of challenges -- largely thanks to the President Trump has weakened the US's position in the world by withdrawing from key agreements and sending bullying tweets, she writes Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s ambitious five-country trip this month will be anything but easy, largely thanks to his boss President Donald Trump, who has compromised the standing of the United States in the world. With stops in the Middle East, South Asia and Europe, Tillerson’s ability to negotiate on tough issues like Iran, North Korea and counterterrorism is crippled by both the well-known rift between him and Trump and the US’s diminished credibility as a reliable intermediary. Arbitrary withdrawals from key international agreements like the Paris climate accords, a careless and mercurial commander-in-chief who undercuts his teams’ work with bullying tweets and a stronger China also have collectively weakened Tillerson’s bargaining position even further. Given the rocky foundation that Trump has laid for the successful execution of US policy, Tillerson will struggle to advance his top priorities. If Trump wants Tillerson to succeed, he should use the week to express confidence (publicly and privately) in his secretary of state and diminish any daylight between them. Tillerson’s high-octane travel agenda, under different circumstances, could serve several important objectives. Stopping in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, India and Switzerland could have allowed Tillerson – and the administration more generally – to discuss some of the most critical national security issues facing the globe. These are some the biggest challenges Trump has created for Tillerson’s tri-continental road trip. The US-Saudi relationship, a bulwark alliance over the last few decades, should be focusing on priorities like stabilizing the conflicts in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, the dispute with Qatar and regional stability overall. But in a kingdom where power is concentrated at the top, the Saudi king, crown prince and foreign minister are deeply aware of the endless headlines about Tillerson’s rumored departure. The Saudis have typically preferred to negotiate directly with the White House on the most sensitive issues, and with the perceived undercutting of Tillerson by Trump, they can’t possibly have viewed Tillerson as an empowered negotiator when they met with him on Sunday. Related article Trump's actions are beginning to have global consequences We’ve seen this play out in Qatar as well. In June, when the Gulf dispute first broke out, Tillerson and Trump issued contradictory statements on how to handle Qatar, with Tillerson calling for negotiations and Trump chiding Qatar for not doing more to counter terrorism (a position Trump reversed shortly after). The Qataris and the Saudis have little reason to think that what they discuss with Tillerson will bear much weight with Trump, so why waste time negotiating with him when they could just call the White House? Tillerson’s credibility is further hindered by increasingly negative perceptions of the Trump administration both at home and abroad. Any intelligence agency worth its weight will provide Tillerson’s foreign counterparts with analysis showing decreasing faith in Trump. A recent CNN domestic poll put his domestic approval at 37% and a Pew poll of 37 countries indicated that just 22% expect Trump to do the right thing abroad. These numbers are even more worrisome in light of an increasingly strong China. On the heels of the 19th Party Congress, President Xi Jinping is beginning his second term with the full backing of his party and a broad mandate to pursue China’s regional and global ambitions. Countries like Pakistan, where Tillerson will stop this week, will undoubtedly be attracted to an emboldened Xi rather than a weak Trump. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor – a Chinese funded infrastructure project in Pakistan valued at tens of billions of dollars – is a shining example of two countries growing closer as Chinese investments modernize infrastructure throughout Pakistan. Related article Rex Tillerson should quit now As the United States tries to convince Pakistan to take a stronger stance on terrorists within its borders – including the Haqqani network, responsible for kidnapping several Americans in recent years – it will struggle to make the case. Pakistan did cooperate on freeing hostages recently, but any real shift in Afghanistan requires Pakistani leadership to make a strategic shift and place real resources and political capital behind stopping terrorist activity within and across its borders. Pakistan will likely be more focused on other priorities, such as Chinese business deals, which promise an immediate return. Indian officials are also unlikely to take Tillerson seriously. Tillerson will arrive in New Delhi to purportedly lay the foundation for a successful Global Entrepreneurship Summit (GES) in Hyderabad in November. According to the State Department, the GES aims to “showcase inspiring entrepreneurs and investors from around the world creating new opportunities for investment, partnership, and collaboration.” Unfortunately, Trump’s ill-conceived immigration policy sets a discordant tone with the administration’s talking points on promoting entrepreneurship, setting Tillerson up to look both ineffective and willfully naïve. Suspending the expedited H1B visa process and delaying the international entrepreneur rule, which would have lowered barriers to entry for international entrepreneurs who have a proven track record of success, is a 180-degree turn from any public statement about making it easier for international entrepreneurs to contribute to the US economy. Indians, in particular, are disproportionately impacted by the President’s tightening of H1B visa rules, which has led to friction in the relationship between the countries. In 2014, 70% of all approved H-1B petitions were from Indians, and Trump’s clamp down on these visa holders means fewer Indians with important skills can work easily in the US. This is a bilateral irritant that will likely increase in strength as Trump takes more steps to slow immigration flows into the US. Sign up for CNN Opinion’s new newsletter.Join us on Twitter and Facebook Similarly, Tillerson’s stop in Geneva to meet with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees is unlikely to accomplish much, as the US media reports on another potential clampdown on refugee admissions to the US – this time focusing on families of resettled refugees. The administration has reportedly drafted a plan that would slow admissions for refugees with families already resettled in the US until they can undergo further security checks. This follows President Trump’s ill-conceived travel bans that targeted individuals from Muslim-majority countries. The administration has made no secret of its focus on stemming refugees flows into the United States. The hubris of talking about entrepreneurship and refugees while pursuing contradictory domestic policies is not lost on many. Tillerson’s trip – while covering many miles and likely motivated by good intentions – may do little to advance US national security interests. The President and his cabinet, including Tillerson, should therefore use the days before Trump’s Asia trip in November to button up their policy objectives and messaging. That way they can start to repair some damage and convince the American public and key leaders around the globe that the United States is a credible, reliable and thoughtful world power.


The documents are in response to subpoenas the committee sent to Michael Flynn's businesses The Senate intelligence panel is also expected to call Flynn as a witness in its investigation President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn handed over more than 600 pages of documents to the Senate intelligence committee, according to a source familiar with the matter. The source says the documents are mostly business records, but they also include some personal documents “based on the narrowed requests from the committee.” The documents are in response to two subpoenas that the committee sent to Flynn businesses after the former national security adviser invoked his Fifth Amendment rights and decided not to comply with a separate subpoena asking for records about meetings and communications with Russian officials. The committee had set a Tuesday deadline for Flynn to comply with the subpoena. Related article The Russia investigation: Everything you need to know Flynn, along with former Trump adviser Michael Cohen, has also been subpoenaed by the House intelligence committee, which is conducting a separate probe into Russia’s election meddling. Flynn is expected to be at the heart of former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony before the Senate committee Thursday. Related article How the James Comey hearing is Washington's Super Bowl Comey has alleged in memos that Trump had urged him earlier this year to drop the FBI investigation into Flynn, and senators are eager to hear from Comey about what exactly Trump said to him. Trump has said that the Russia investigation played a role in his decision to fire Comey. The Senate intelligence panel is also expected to call Flynn as a witness in its investigation. Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr, a North Carolina Republican, said the committee has ruled out considering Flynn’s request for immunity to testify before the committee.