US lawmakers seek deal on immigration, border security

President Donald Trump, flanked by Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Representative Steny Hoyer (D-MD), holds a bipartisan meeting with legislators on immigration reform at the White House in Washington on Tuesday. (Reuters)
Updated 10 January 2018
Follow

US lawmakers seek deal on immigration, border security

WASHINGTON: Bargainers seeking a bipartisan immigration accord planned talks as soon as Wednesday as President Donald Trump and leading lawmakers sought to parlay an extraordinary White House meeting into momentum for resolving a politically blistering issue.
Facing a Jan. 19 deadline for averting an election-year government shutdown, negotiators were seeking a formula for reviving protections against deportation that Trump has ended for nearly 800,000 immigrants who arrived illegally in the US as children. In exchange, Trump and Republicans want toughened border protections and tightened restrictions on others trying to migrate to this country.
“I’ll take all the heat you want,” Trump told nearly two dozen lawmakers Tuesday at the White House for a meeting that began with a startling 55 minutes in which reporters and TV cameras watched. “But you are not that far away from comprehensive immigration reform.”
Trump said an immigration deal could be reached in two phases — first by addressing young immigrants and border security with what he called a “bill of love,” then by making comprehensive changes that have long eluded Congress. That second bill would likely face long odds for passage, considering long-running disagreements over issues like how to handle all 11 million immigrants illegally in the US
Republicans will need Democratic votes to prevent a federal shutdown in 10 days, votes Democrats have threatened to withhold without an immigration agreement.
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., told reporters talks would begin as early as Wednesday, adding, “And we’ll solve this problem and find common ground.”
Negotiations over the DACA program may be more complicated in light of a federal judge’s ruling Tuesday night to block temporarily the administration’s decision to end the program. In doing so, US District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco granted a request by California and other plaintiffs to let lawsuits over the administration’s decision play out in court.
Alsup said lawyers in favor of DACA clearly demonstrated that the young immigrants “were likely to suffer serious, irreparable harm” without court action. The judge also said the lawyers had a strong chance of succeeding at trial.
After Trump and lawmakers spent time meeting privately, the White House and numerous lawmakers said there was agreement to limit the immediate bill to four areas. These were border security, family-based “chain migration,” a visa lottery that draws people from diverse countries and how to revive the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.
That Obama-era program has given hundreds of thousands — the so-called Dreamers — a shield from deportation and the right to work legally. Trump ended it last year but gave Congress until March 5 to find a fix, and Tuesday he signaled flexibility.
“I think my positions are going to be what the people in this room come up with,” Trump said during the Cabinet Room meeting.
Trump even flashed some give on his cherished plan to build a wall along the border with Mexico, perhaps his highest profiled pledge from last year’s presidential campaign. That proposal has been strongly opposed by Democrats and many Republicans as a futile waste of money.
Trump said it need not be a “2,000-mile wall. We don’t need a wall where you have rivers and mountains and everything else protecting it. But we do need a wall for a fairly good portion.” He’d made similar statements last year, but this time it was in the context of negotiations for actual legislation.
Both parties were already showing signs of divisions over how much to give in upcoming talks. But one conservative foe of giving ground acknowledged the impact of Trump’s support.
“There are scores of Republicans who have shifted their position to follow the president,” said Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa. He said while he helped head off a bipartisan immigration effort in 2013, “I don’t want to promise the result will be the same. This is more momentum than I have ever seen.”
Among Democrats, Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, who attended the White House meeting, said he was open to negotiations on the four issues bargainers will address.
But Rep. Ruben Gallego, D-Arizona, who was not there and like Cuellar is a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said he favored a narrow bill protecting Dreamers with perhaps something negotiable on border security.
“They took the hostage,” Gallego said of Trump’s action that would end Dreamers’ protections. “We’re not going to pay for it.”
One attendee, No. 2 Senate Democratic leader Dick Durbin of Illinois, said, “The sense of urgency, the commitment to DACA, the fact that the president said to me privately as well as publicly, ‘I want to get this done,’ I’m going to take him as his word.”
Underscoring the effort’s fresh momentum, the head of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Rep. Michelle Grisham Lujan, D-N.M., said late Tuesday she was “encouraged” by Trump’s words and would work “in good faith” toward a deal. Some of the group’s members have taken a hard line against surrendering too much in a compromise with Trump.
Conservatives quickly sounded alarms about a process that would lead to a comprehensive agreement on immigration, a path that has long been anathema to many rank-and-file Republicans.


China, Philippines trade barbs over disputed reef

Updated 4 sec ago
Follow

China, Philippines trade barbs over disputed reef

  • The Sandy Cay reef lies near Thitu Island, or Pag-asa, where the Philippines stations troops and maintains a coast guard monitoring base
  • Chinese state broadcaster CCTV said Saturday that the country’s coast guard had ‘implemented maritime control’ over Tiexian Reef, part of Sandy Cay
MANILA: China and the Philippines on Monday defended their claims to a disputed reef in the South China Sea, after Manila accused Beijing of seeking to “intimidate and harass” with a state media report that suggested the area had been seized.
The Sandy Cay reef lies near Thitu Island, or Pag-asa, where the Philippines stations troops and maintains a coast guard monitoring base.
Chinese state broadcaster CCTV said Saturday that the country’s coast guard had “implemented maritime control” over Tiexian Reef, part of Sandy Cay, in mid-April.
The Philippines and China have been engaged in months of confrontations over the South China Sea, which Beijing claims nearly in its entirety despite an international ruling that its assertion has no legal basis.
“There is no truth whatsoever to the claim of the China Coast Guard that the (Sandy Cay sandbanks) have been seized,” National Security Council spokesman Jonathan Malaya told a Monday press conference.
“It’s in the interest of the People’s Republic of China to use the information space to intimidate and harass,” he said, calling the Sandy Cay report a “made-up” story that had been “irresponsible” to disseminate.
CCTV on Saturday published a photograph of four coast guard officials posing with a national flag on the reef’s white surface, in what the broadcaster described as a “vow of sovereignty.”
On Monday, the Philippine Coast Guard released its own photo showing Filipino sailors holding the country’s flag over the same disputed reef during an early morning mission the day before.
There do not appear to be any signs that China has permanently occupied or built a structure on the reef, which is a group of small sandbanks in the Spratly Islands.
Beijing’s foreign ministry on Monday reiterated the reef was part of China’s territory and said its moves constituted “rights protection and law enforcement activities.”
Spokesman Guo Jiakun said the steps were “aimed at countering the Philippines’ illegal landing and other acts of infringement and provocation” as well as “firmly safeguarding national territorial sovereignty.”
In recent months, Beijing and Manila have blamed each other for causing what they describe as the ecological degradation of several disputed landforms in the South China Sea.
The US and Philippine militaries are currently conducting joint exercises that Beijing has said constitute a threat to regional stability.
Chinese warships have been spotted in Philippine waters since those bilateral “Balikatan” exercises kicked off last week, with aircraft carrier Shandong reportedly coming within 2.23 nautical miles (about four kilometers) of northern Babuyan Island.

India, Pakistan exchange small arms fire, China urges restraint

Updated 31 min 10 sec ago
Follow

India, Pakistan exchange small arms fire, China urges restraint

  • After the April 22 attack that killed 26 people, India has identified two of the three suspected militants as Pakistani
  • The attack triggered outrage and grief in Hindu-majority India, along with calls for action against Islamic Pakistan

SRINAGAR, India: India said on Monday it had responded to ‘unprovoked’ small arms firing from Pakistan along the de facto border for the fourth consecutive night, as it deepens its search for militants in the region following last week’s deadly attack on tourists in Kashmir.
After the April 22 attack that killed 26 people, India has identified two of the three suspected militants as Pakistani, although Islamabad has denied any role and called for a neutral probe.
Security officials and survivors have said the militants segregated the men at the site, a meadow in the Pahalgam area, asked their names and targeted Hindus before shooting them at close range.
The attack triggered outrage and grief in Hindu-majority India, along with calls for action against Islamic Pakistan, whom New Delhi accuses of funding and encouraging terrorism in Kashmir, a region both nations claim and have fought two wars over.
The nuclear-armed nations have unleashed a raft of measures against each other, with India putting the critical Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance and Pakistan closing its airspace to Indian airlines.
China, a key player in the region, said on Monday it hoped India and Pakistan will exercise restraint and welcomed all measures that will help cool down the situation.
The Indian Army said it had responded to “unprovoked” small arms fire from multiple Pakistan Army posts around midnight on Sunday along the 740-km de facto border separating the Indian and Pakistani areas of Kashmir. It gave no further details and reported no casualties.
The Pakistani military did not respond to a request for comment.
In a separate statement, the Pakistan army said it has killed 54 Islamist militants who were trying to enter the country from the Afghanistan border to the west in the last two days.
India’s defense forces have conducted several military exercises across the country since the attack. Some of these are routine preparedness drills, a defense official said.
Security forces have detained around 500 people for questioning after they searched nearly 1,000 houses and forests hunting for militants in Indian Kashmir, a local police official told Reuters on Monday.
At least nine houses have been demolished so far, the official added.
Political leaders in the state have called for caution to ensure the innocent are not harmed in the government’s actions against terrorism after the deadliest incident of its kind in India in nearly two decades.
“This is the first time in 26 years that I have seen people coming out in this way...to say we are not with this attack,” Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah told the legislature.
“It (militancy) will finish when people are with us, and today it seems like people are getting there,” he said.
Kashmir Resistance, also known as The Resistance Front, said in a post on X that it “unequivocally” denied involvement in last week’s attack, after an initial message that claimed responsibility.
The group, considered an offshoot of the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba by a Delhi-based think tank, blamed a ‘cyber intrusion’ for the previous social media post that claimed responsibility.


China says ‘no phone call’ recently between Xi and Trump

Updated 28 April 2025
Follow

China says ‘no phone call’ recently between Xi and Trump

  • The world’s two biggest economies are locked in an escalating tit-for-tat trade battle

BEIJING: Beijing on Monday insisted that “no phone call” took place recently between President Xi Jinping and his US counterpart, after Donald Trump said he had spoken with the Chinese leader.
The world’s two biggest economies are locked in an escalating tit-for-tat trade battle triggered by Trump’s levies on Chinese goods, which have reached 145 percent on many products.
In an interview conducted on April 22 with TIME Magazine and published Friday, Trump insisted Chinese leader Xi called him despite Beijing denying there had been any contact between the two countries over their bitter trade dispute.
The US president did not say when the call took place or specify what was discussed.
Asked about the comments Monday, foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said: “As far as I know, there has been no phone call between the two heads of state recently.”
“China and the United States are not conducting consultations or negotiations on tariff issues,” he added.


Trump’s NATO warnings jolt Europe into rethinking defense

Updated 28 April 2025
Follow

Trump’s NATO warnings jolt Europe into rethinking defense

  • Trump has accused NATO allies of spending too little on their own defense
  • Europe-wide, industry leaders and experts have pointed out challenges the continent must overcome to be a truly self-sufficient military power

MADRID: Inside a sprawling hangar in Spain, workers bolt together a fuselage for European aerospace giant Airbus, which churns out jets and other military equipment.
The multinational conglomerate is a rarity in Europe’s defense industry, backed by Spain, Germany, France and Britain. The norm for defense industries on the continent is big-name national champions and hundreds of small companies mostly working to fill orders for state governments.
That piecemeal paradigm could hinder Europe’s plan for spending more on defense, which has been given a jolt — and previously unimaginable political backing — following US President Donald Trump’s threats to not protect NATO allies in the context of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
For years, Trump has accused NATO allies of spending too little on their own defense. In recent months, the chasm in trans-Atlantic ties has grown. The Trump administration has signaled that US priorities lie beyond Europe and Ukraine and that the time has come “for Europe to stand on its own feet.”
The shortfall in defense spending is most evident is Spain.
Last year, it trailed all NATO allies in defense spending as a share of GDP, forcing the country to play catch-up this year to reach the alliance’s 2 percent spending goal. NATO leaders are expected to again increase that goal this summer.
Europe-wide, industry leaders and experts have pointed out challenges the continent must overcome to be a truly self-sufficient military power, chiefly its decades-long reliance on the US as well as its fragmented defense industry.
“Europe procures a majority of its defense material outside of Europe, and that’s really something we have to depart from,” said Jean-Brice Dumont, head of air power at Airbus Defense and Space at the aircraft maker’s factory outside Madrid. “The journey until we get full autonomy is a long journey, but it has to be started.”
Moving out of Washington’s shadow
The pro-defense shift in Europe can be seen in the stock markets, where major European arms makers such as BAE Systems (UK), Leonardo (Italy), Rheinmetall (Germany), Thales (France) and Saab (Sweden) have all been on the rise despite recent turmoil caused by Trump’s tariffs.
European companies are poised to benefit from a push by European Union policy makers to ensure that as many euros as possible end up in European companies, as opposed to flowing across the Atlantic. The challenge is daunting, but not as scary as having to face a potential military threat without American help.
One question is: How quickly can production scale up?
An EU white paper published last month bluntly stated that Europe’s defense industry is not able to produce defense systems and equipment sufficient for what member states need. It noted where much of the bloc’s spending has taken place: the US
Europe has relied on the US not just for military equipment but also intelligence, surveillance and even software updates. Supply chain complexities mean that European-made equipment often use software or other components built and even operated by US companies.
Airbus’ A330 MRTT air-to-air refueling plane, made outside Madrid, is an example of specialized equipment called enablers that Europe largely lacks.
Another example is Sweden’s Gripen fighter made by Saab, which has an engine made by American firm General Electric, noted Lorenzo Scarazzato, a researcher at the Stockholm Peace Research Institute who studies Europe’s arms industry.
According to a recent SIPRI report, more than half of Europe’s arms imports from 2020 to 2024 came from the US
Changing this paradigm will take years of sustained investment, Scarazzato said, and common vision across the bloc. “It’s going to be a massive overhaul of the whole command and control structure.”
A fragmented industry
A fragmented defense industry in Europe reduces the interoperability of equipment, experts say, and makes it harder to build economies of scale.
For example, there are at least 12 types of tanks produced across the 27-nation EU, compared to just one used by the US military, according to the European Defense Agency.
But there have been some recent positive developments in the private sector, the International Institute for Strategic Studies noted in its 2025 Military Balance report. Leonardo and Rheinmetall started a joint venture last year for combat vehicles.
Europe’s capitals have historically looked to spend on their own local industries — not neighboring ones — to ensure jobs and feed national pride ingrained in manufacturing military hardware, said Douglas Barrie, senior fellow for military aerospace at IISS.
“The fundamental economic heft is there. Partly it’s a question of political will, partly the question of national pride and national identities,” Barrie said. “While politicians can kind of advocate for consolidation, it has to be driven by individuals within industry, and it will be the industrialists who will see a logic in this.”
The urge for European governments to favor local manufacturers — instead of shopping among other European companies for better value — was evident this month when Spain announced that it will raise defense spending by an additional 10.5 billion euros ($12 billion) this year.
The government said 87 percent of that money would go to Spanish companies in the hopes of generating nearly 100,000 direct and indirect jobs and boosting Spain’s GDP by 0.4 to 0.7 percentage points.
“Every time there is a political interest in consolidation, that’s what you bump into,” Barrie said.
Hope for the future?

The European Commission is offering 150 billion euros ($170 billion) for member states and Ukraine to buy air defense systems, drones and strategic enablers like air transport, as well as to boost cybersecurity.
It’s part of a package of measures that include easing budgetary rules for defense spending and reshuffling EU funds to reflect security priorities.
Under the proposals, member states will be invited to buy at least 40 percent of defense equipment “by working together” and trade at least 35 percent of defense goods between EU countries, as opposed to outside ones, by 2030.
Airbus’ Dumont said his message for Europe’s leaders was clear.
“Europe has to fund its European industry to prepare the defense of tomorrow, for the day after tomorrow and for the years to come. And that’s what we see happening now.”


Australia’s ruling party to hike student visa fees again in pre-election pledge

Updated 28 April 2025
Follow

Australia’s ruling party to hike student visa fees again in pre-election pledge

  • The visa fee hike, from A$1,600 currently, will bring in A$760 million over the next four years
  • Almost 200,000 international students arrived in Australia in February 2025, government statistics show

SYDNEY: Australia’s ruling Labour Party said on Monday it would raise visa fees for international students to A$2,000 ($1,279) if reelected, the latest measure aimed at the lucrative education sector that has been a major source of immigration.
The visa fee hike, from A$1,600 currently, will bring in A$760 million over the next four years, Australia’s Treasurer Jim Chalmers and finance minister Katy Gallagher said in a statement on Labor’s policy costings for Saturday’s federal election.
“We think that’s a sensible measure that really prizes, I think, the value of studying here in Australia,” Gallagher told a news conference.
The government more than doubled the fee for international student visas in July last year to A$1,600 from A$710.
Australia’s conservative opposition has already pledged to raise the visa fee to a minimum of A$2,500, and A$5,000 for applicants to the country’s top universities, known as the Group of Eight.
International students are a major source of revenue for Australian universities, but are also in part responsible for a rise in net migration that has driven up housing costs.
Almost 200,000 international students arrived in Australia in February 2025, government statistics show, an increase of 12.1 percent over the previous year and 7.3 percent higher than pre-COVID levels in February 2019.
Labor has promised to cap international student commencements at 270,000 in 2025, while the opposition favors a lower figure of 240,000.
There were more than a million international students enrolled in Australia in 2024, while 572,000 students commenced their studies.
Visa fees for students in Australia are already significantly higher than similar countries such as the US and Canada, where they cost about $185 and C$150 ($108) respectively.
The government last year also tightened English language requirements for student and graduate visas, as well as introducing powers to suspend education providers from recruiting international students if they repeatedly break rules.