Search - Menendez

* Remark about Pence was ‘last straw’ * Trump cites ‘missed opportunity’ * North Korea blows up nuclear test tunnel US President Donald Trump on Thursday called off a historic summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un scheduled for next month, even after North Korea followed through on a pledge to blow up tunnels at its nuclear test site. Trump announced his abrupt withdrawal from what would have been a first-ever meeting between a serving US president and a North Korean leader in Singapore on June 12 in a letter to Kim. A White House official said a North Korean official's condemnation of US Vice President Mike Pence as a ‘political dummy’ was ‘the last straw’ that led to cancelling the summit. ‘Sadly, based on the tremendous anger and open hostility displayed in your most recent statement, I feel it would be inappropriate, at this time, to have this long-planned meeting,’ Trump wrote to Kim. ‘Please let this letter serve to represent that the Singapore summit, for the good of both parties, but to the detriment of the world, will not take place.’ Trump called it ‘a missed opportunity’ and said he still hoped to meet Kim someday. However, the chances for a quick rescheduling appear remote and cancellation of the summit will renew fears of a return to conflict on the Korean peninsula. The North Korean mission to the United Nations did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Trump’s cancellation of the summit. US stocks dropped sharply on the news, with the benchmark S&P 500 Index falling more than half a percent in about 10 minutes. Investors turned to US Treasury debt as a safe alternative, driving the yield on the 10-year note, which moves inversely to its price, down to a 10-day low and back below the psychologically important 3 percent level. The US dollar also weakened broadly, particularly against the Japanese yen, which climbed to a two-week high against the greenback. ‘You talk about your nuclear capabilities, but ours are so massive and powerful that I pray to God that they will never have to be used,’ he said. Earlier on Thursday, North Korea had repeated a threat to pull out of the summit with Trump next month and warned it was prepared for a nuclear showdown with Washington if necessary. DECADES OF TENSION North Korea's pursuit of nuclear weapons has been a source of tension on the Korean peninsula for decades, as well as antagonism with Washington, but escalated into fears of war last year after North Korea said it had tested an H-bomb and developed a missile capable of hitting the United States. The rhetoric reached war-like heights under Trump as he mocked Kim as ‘little rocket man’ and in address at the United Nations threatened to ‘totally destroy’ North Korea if necessary. Kim had called Trump mentally deranged and threatened to ‘tame’ him with fire. Kim rarely leaves North Korea and his willingness to meet and Trump's acceptance sparked hope but it had faded in recent days. Trump's letter to Kim also referred to the possibility of war. ‘You talk about your nuclear capabilities, but ours are so massive and powerful that I pray to God that they will never have to be used,’ he said. The reference to Pence that offended the White House came in a statement released by North Korean media and citing Vice Foreign Minister Choe Son Hui. She had called Pence a ‘political dummy’ for comparing North Korea - a ‘nuclear weapons state’ - to Libya, where Muammar Gaddafi gave up his unfinished nuclear development programme, only to be later killed by NATO-backed fighters. ‘Whether the US will meet us at a meeting room or encounter us at nuclear-to-nuclear showdown is entirely dependent upon the decision and behavior of the United States,’ Choe said. US national security adviser John Bolton first advocated a Libya as a model of disarmament. That incensed North Korea, which said the reason it had its nuclear arms was to ensure it did not end up like Libya and its then-leader. Gaddafi gave up his unfinished nuclear program only to be later killed by NATO-backed fighters. The White House official said back channels for discussions with North Korea remained open and there still was hope for peace but Pyongyang must first change its rhetoric. SOUTH KOREA SURPRISED South Korea's presidential Blue House appeared taken off guard by Trump's letter and an official said it was ‘trying to figure out what President Trump exactly meant.’ South Korean President Moon Jae-in had met with Trump at the White House on Tuesday to urge him to follow through on the summit and not let a rare opportunity with reclusive North Korea slip away. A few hours before Trump announced the cancellation, a small group of international media selected by North Korea witnessed the demolition of tunnels at the Punggye-ri site on Thursday, which Pyongyang said was proof of its commitment to end nuclear testing. The apparent destruction of what North Korea said was its only nuclear test site has been widely welcomed as a positive, if largely symbolic, step toward resolving tension over its weapons. Kim has declared his nuclear force complete, amid speculation the site was obsolete anyway. Cancellation of the summit denies Trump what supporters hoped could have been the biggest diplomatic achievement of his presidency, and one worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize. Senator Bob Menendez, the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said he had not had a sense that the administration had engaged in the detailed preparations necessary for a successful summit with Kim. He also suggested that recent rhetoric from top administration officials might not have been appropriate ahead of the meeting. ‘I'm not sure that constantly quoting the Libya model is the diplomatic way to try to get to the results that we try to seek in North Korea,’ Menendez said at the start of a committee hearing with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. The outlook for the Trump-Kim meeting had suffered a setback this month after North Korea angrily rejected the notion that would agree to unilateral nuclear disarmament as the United States has demanded. Trump responded by raising his own doubts as to whether the summit would go forward but seeking to placate Kim by pledging that on Thursday that Kim’s security would be guaranteed in any deal. At the same time, Trump insisted on concrete steps before any easing of sanctions and warned that failure to reach a denuclearization agreement could lead to ‘decimation’ of Kim's rule. Defense stocks got a lift from Trump's announcement, and the NYSE Arca Defense Index rose nearly 1 percent to near a record high. The advance was led by a 3 percent gain in military drone maker AeroVironment Inc, and major US defense contractors such as Raytheon Co, Lockheed Martin Corp , General Dynamics Corp and Northrop Grumman Corp all moved higher.

When New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez announced that he will oppose Mike Pompeo’s nomination to US Secretary of State, he explained that he would do so because Pompeo, currently Director of the CIA, had failed to disclose that he had travelled to North Korea over Easter weekend as President Donald Trump’s envoy. For Menendez, the audacity and secrecy of the Trump administration’s preparations for a planned summit between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un was unacceptable. “Now I don’t expect diplomacy to be negotiated out in the open,” Menendez said in a recent speech, “but I do expect for someone who is the nominee to be Secretary of State, when he speaks with committee leadership and is asked specific questions about North Korea, to share some insights about such a visit. I believe our nation’s top diplomat must be forthright.” The US constitution assigns senators the responsibility to confirm, by majority vote, the president’s cabinet nominees. America’s founders sought to ensure that individuals serving in high positions of public trust would be well qualified, not just in the judgment of a single individual, but after thoughtful review by an independently elected Senate. In exercising their constitutional duty, senators should consider carefully their criteria for providing what the constitution calls “advice and consent.” There are many good reasons why senators may decide to support or oppose Pompeo’s nomination. But Pompeo’s withholding of the fact that he was engaged in secret diplomacy is not one of them. To be sure, despite being a mainstay of US foreign policy, secret diplomacy has always had its critics. Some argue that it is a type of deception that undermines the transparency and accountability on which American democracy is based. Others do not oppose secret diplomacy per se, but they believe that maintaining a reasonable degree of democratic accountability requires that a small subset of congressional leaders be informed. In criticising Pompeo for failing to be “forthright” even with the “committee leadership,” Menendez expressed both of these concerns. Yet the history of secret diplomacy, under Republican and Democratic administrations alike, clearly illustrates its benefits. The most important diplomatic breakthrough of the Cold War, the opening to China, began with secret negotiations between Henry Kissinger, then President Richard Nixon’s national security adviser, and Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai. Kissinger’s top-secret trip to Beijing in 1971 laid the groundwork for Nixon’s historic visit the following year. And the warming of Sino-US relations helped widen divisions between China and America’s Cold War adversary, the Soviet Union. Likewise, President Barack Obama’s signature diplomatic achievement, the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, could not have been achieved without secret talks. In March 2013, Obama sent two senior State Department officials, William J Burns and Jake Sullivan, to begin secret conversations with the Iranians in Oman. Given that diplomatic relations between the two countries had been severed for more than 30 years, and that each country was radioactive in the domestic politics of the other, holding preliminary negotiations in public would have been a non-starter. Soon enough, the secret conversations led US officials to conclude that the Iranians were serious about entering into formal talks. In secret, US and Iranian negotiators worked on an outline of what would ultimately become the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. The JCPOA blocked all of Iran’s major pathways to becoming a nuclear power, by preventing the country from reprocessing plutonium or enriching uranium to weapons-grade levels. It also eliminated two-thirds of Iran’s centrifuges and 98% of its stockpile of enriched uranium; and it established the most intrusive verification and inspection regime ever negotiated. But as difficult as the talks with Iran were, negotiating with Kim’s Hermit Kingdom will be harder still. The United States and North Korea are technically still at war, because a formal peace treaty has not been concluded since the 1950-1953 Korean War, which ended with a ceasefire and an armistice. Moreover, every past denuclearisation agreement between the two countries has collapsed, and, since Trump took office, he and Kim have been lobbing insults and threats at each other. In this context, sending a secret envoy to Pyongyang to lay the groundwork for productive negotiations is precisely what the US should be doing. Even so, there is still the question of why that envoy would not inform Senate foreign-policy leaders of his work, especially when he is seeking to become America’s chief diplomat. One answer is that the Trump administration probably believes that informing Congress would make the secret negotiations no longer a secret. During the past year’s investigation of possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia ahead of the 2016 US presidential election, Congress has leaked like a sieve, and many congressional Democrats have made it clear that they will “resist” Trump at every turn. Thus, it was reasonable for Pompeo to fear that knowledge of his secret talks would be leaked in an effort to undermine the summit and deny the administration a potential political victory. Transparency and accountability are still important American norms. But the history of US diplomacy has shown that secrecy often is essential for success. And besides, the constitution gives the president wide latitude in foreign policy. That is why even some of Menendez’s Democratic colleagues, who may oppose Pompeo on policy grounds, cheered the news of his visit to North Korea. As Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy put it, “I’ll just be honest with you, I’m glad there is someone at a high level in the Trump administration talking to the North Koreans about what may be the parameters of this meeting.” Murphy is right. There are valid reasons to oppose a nominee for Secretary of State. But a failure to disclose secret preparatory talks for the most important presidential summit of the century is not one of them. – Project Syndicate *Graham Allison is professor of Government and former Director of Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. He is the author of Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap?

His Highness the Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani has met with a number of corporate executives, leaders and members of the US Congress and Senate. He discussed with them means to develop the strategic Qatari-American ties as well as other regional and international matters of mutual interest. The Emir met on Thursday afternoon with Mayor of Washington, DC Muriel Bowser. During a working lunch, the Emir and the Mayor exchanged views on ways to strengthen co-operation in various vital fields, including enhancing investment opportunities to achieve mutual interests between the two friendly countries.  The Emir also met on Thursday separately with with President and CEO of Occidental Petroleum Vicki Hollub and Chairman and CEO of Boeing Dennis Muilenburg. The meetings reviewed the relations of co-operation and means of enhancing them. Later, the Emir met West Virginia Governor Jim Justice and Senator Joe Manchin and their accompanying delegation. His Highness the Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani meets Dennis Muilenburg, Chairman and CEO of Boeing in Washington, DC on Thursday. The meeting reviewed co-operation between Qatar and the United States. They also exchanged views on a number of issues of joint interest. During the meeting with Paul Ryan, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives at the US Congress in Washington, the two leaders reviewed bilateral co-operation and the ways to enhance it. They also discussed regional and international developments, particularly Qatar and the United States' counter-terrorism efforts and cutting off its finance. The Speaker of the House expressed his thanks to the Emir for Qatar's effort in that regard through Al Udeid Air Base. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy and the Emir reviewed bilateral relations and the ways to advance them. They also discussed regional and international affairs, led by developments in the Middle East. The Emir met with Chairman of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Bob Corker, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Bob Menendez and a number of members of the committee. The meeting focused on the strategic Qatari-American ties, and the means to develop them in a way that advances the interests of the two countries and their peoples. They also exchanged views on a number of regional and international issues, particularly the developments of the GCC crisis and its implications on regional security. They also discussed the situation in Yemen and Syria. Minority Leader of the United States House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi and the Emir reviewed ties between Qatar and the US, as well as the means to enhance them. The meeting also focused on a number of issues of joint interest. His Highness the Emir and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer during their meeting discussed ways to advance bilateral relations. They also reviewed regional and international developments, particularly those pertaining to the Middle East. The meeting of the Emir with a number of members of the US Senate Committee on Armed Services reviewed bilateral relations and the means to enhance them, particularly in military, defence and security fields. They exchanged views on the latest regional and international developments, particularly those related to countering terrorism and stopping its finance. The members praised the role Qatar plays in that regard through Al Udeid Air Base. All the meetings were attended by a number of members of the official delegation accompanying the Emir. The Emir is on a visit to the United States where he has met top American leaders including President Donald Trump. 

US President Donald Trump’s son dropped a planned speech on foreign affairs in the Indian capital yesterday after ethics experts said he should avoid wading into policy issues as a private citizen. Donald Trump Jr is on a tour of India to promote real estate projects in several cities but ethics watchdog groups in the US say there is a possible conflict of interest in pushing the Trump brand name while his father is in the White House. He was billed to make a speech on the topic “Reshaping the Indo-Pacific — The New Era of Co-operation” but hours before the conference began that was changed into a “fireside chat” where he spoke about his business and stayed clear of policy issues. “I am here on business, I am not representing anyone,” he said at the conference organised by the Economic Times and Yes Bank. He spoke before Prime Minister Narendra Modi delivered a keynote speech on preparing India for the future to a gathering of business leaders from India and overseas.  US senator Bob Menendez, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, wrote to the US ambassador to India this week to ask for guarantees that the embassy and the state department will not offer any support to Trump Jr. beyond helping the US Secret Service to provide him with security. Trump Jr said he had been coming to India for more than a decade to build business for The Trump Organisation and it had reached a take-off stage but there were self-imposed curbs following the election of his father as president. “I learnt about doing business here through the school of hard knocks, we have built partnerships here,” he said. This week he was wooing buyers to book luxury apartments in Trump Towers in Gurgaon on the outskirts of New Delhi as well as in Mumbai, attending champagne receptions. Trump’s partners in India are playing up the Trump brand. In the days leading up to Trump Jr’s visit, one of its development partners in Gurgaon began an advertising campaign in newspapers offering dinner and conversation with the president’s son.

Former champions Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal battled into the US Open last 32 on Thursday while the women’s draw lost the fifth seed from its top eight. Federer recorded his 80th career win in New York but he needed five sets for the second successive match before claiming a 6-1, 6-7 (3/7), 4-6, 6-4, 6-2 triumph over Mikhail Youzhny. It was his 17th win in 17th meetings with the grizzled Russian, who, at 35, is his junior by just one year. World number one Nadal, meanwhile, saw off Japan’s world 121 Taro Daniel 4-6, 6-3, 6-2, 6-2 after being blown off court in the first set. Federer, 36, and the five-time champion at the US Open, next faces another 35-year-old, Feliciano Lopez of Spain, for a place in the last 16. His record against Lopez is just as solid — 12-0. “It was quite a lot of fun out there — I feel quite warmed up by now,” said Australian Open and Wimbledon champion Federer, who fired 63 winners and 68 unforced errors. Youzhny admitted he had cramped, which meant he could move left to right but not forward and back. “That was hard to watch,” said Federer. “But this was probably the best match we have played against each other.” Top seed Nadal, the 2010 and 2013 champion, was rocked by New York-born Daniel in the first set. But Daniel, who has never beaten a top-10 player, paid the price for his all-out assault as Nadal prevailed to book a third round date with Argentine lucky loser Leonardo Mayer. “All the matches are difficult but especially here as everyone wants to play their best and if you don’t play your best it will be very difficult,” said Nadal, who recovered from a set and break down. He saw room for improvement after converting six of 11 break points. “I didn’t play very well but I will work hard to find better feelings because I know I can do much better,” he said. Andrey Rublev became the second teenager to make the third round when he stunned Bulgarian seventh seed Grigor Dimitrov 7-5, 7-6 (7/3), 6-3. Rublev, just 19 and the world number 53, joins 18-year-old Denis Shapovalov of Canada in the last 32 at a Grand Slam event for the first time. However, 19-year-old Taylor Fritz of the United States was unable to join Rublev and Shapovalov in the next round when he lost 6-4, 6-4, 4-6, 7-5 to Austrian sixth seed Dominic Thiem. Thiem saved 16 of 18 break points he faced in a stalwart defensive display. Also going through to the last 32 was 2009 champion Juan Martín Del Potro, the 24th seeded Argentine, who saw off Spanish qualifier Adrian Menendez-Maceiras 6-2, 6-3, 7-6 (7/3). Belgian ninth seed David Goffin beat Guido Pella of Argentina 3-6, 7-6 (7/5), 6-7 (2/7), 7-6 (7/4), 6-3 in a marathon 4hr 12min match. A record was set when American Shelby Rogers and 25th-seeded Australian Daria Gavrilova played out the longest ever women’s singles match. Their 3hr 33min clash saw Rogers win 7-6 (8/6), 4-6, 7-6 (7/5). Their second-round tie went past the previous longest of the 3 hours and 23 minutes it took Johanna Konta to beat Garbine Muguruza in the second round two years ago. Russian eighth seed Svetlana Kuznetsova, the 2004 champion, saw her outside chances of taking the world number one ranking end when she lost to Japan’s Kurumi Nara 6-3, 3-6, 6-3. Kuznetsova is the fifth of the top eight seeds to lose before the third round after Simona Halep, Caroline Wozniacki, defending champion Angelique Kerber and Johanna Konta also exited. World number one Karolina Pliskova, the 2016 runner-up, downed American qualifier Nicole Gibbs 2-6, 6-3, 6-4. She was joined in the third round by fourth seed Elina Svitolina, one of the pretenders to her top ranking, and French Open champion Jelena Ostapenko. Ukraine’s Svitolina reached the last 32 for a third successive year by breezing past Russia’s Evgeniya Rodina 6-4, 6-4.

Ukraine’s fourth-seeded Elina Svitolina, fighting to become world number one, and Austrian sixth seed Dominic Thiem captured rain-interrupted matches yesterday to reach the second round of the US Open. Svitolina, seeking her sixth title of the year and first Grand Slam crown, held off 42nd-ranked Czech Katerina Siniakova 6-0, 6-7 (5/7), 6-3 while Thiem finished off Australian Alex de Minaur 6-4, 6-1, 6-1 under sunny skies. There were 87 matches scheduled yesterday in the year’s final Grand Slam event after rain washed out most of Tuesday’s agenda, 11 of them halted first-round affairs. Former world number one Maria Sharapova, who in her Grand Slam return from a 15-month doping ban upset second-ranked Simona Halep, was set to face Hungary’s 59th-ranked Timea Babos in a later second-round match at Arthur Ashe Stadium. Sharapova, a five-time Grand Slam champion, tested positive for blood booster meldonium in the 2016 Australian Open, her most recent Grand Slam appearance until this week.  She played only one hardcourt tuneup match due to a forearm injury but powered past one of seven contenders for the world number one ranking still in the field. Another of those is Svitolina, who dropped six of nine tie-breaker points when her match resumed, but survived a third set, breaking for a 4-2 edge and serving out for the victory.  Thiem, a semi-finalist at the past two French Opens, was working to adapt his skill on the Paris red clay to maximum impact on the New York hardcourts.  Canadian 18-year-old Denis Shapovalov, who faces French eighth seed Jo-Wilfried Tsonga later, can become the youngest man in the third round of a Grand Slam since Australia’s Bernard Tomic at the 2011 Australian Open and in the US Open since American Donald Young in 2007. Other later second-round matches include German fourth seed Alexander Zverev against Croatian Borna Coric and 2014 US Open winner Marin Cilic, the fifth seed from Croatia coming off a Wimbledon runner-up effort, against German Florian Mayer. Wimbledon champion Garbine Muguruza, the third seed from Spain, can reach the US Open third round for the first time by beating China’s 92nd-ranked Duan Ying-Ying. And seven-time Grand Slam champion Venus Williams, this year’s Wimbledon and Australian Open runner-up, meets France’s Oceane Dodin. The US ninth seed is the oldest woman in the field at 37. Results  Women’s: Ana Bogdan (Romania) beat Taylor Townsend (U.S.) 6-4 4-6 6-3 Tatjana Maria (Germany) beat Ashley Kratzer (U.S.) 6-1 6-1 Evgeniya Rodina (Russia) beat Eugenie Bouchard (Canada) 7-6(2) 6-1 4-Elina Svitolina (Ukraine) beat Katerina Siniakova (Czech Republic) 6-0 6-7(5) 6-3 Kaia Kanepi (Estonia) beat Francesca Schiavone (Italy) 0-6 6-4 6-2 Jennifer Brady (U.S.) beat Andrea Petkovic (Germany) 6-4 3-6 6-1 Monica Niculescu (Romania) beat 14-Kristina Mladenovic (France) 6-3 6-2 Nicole Gibbs (U.S.) beat Veronica Cepede Royg (Paraguay) 6-0 1-6 6-1 Men’s: Mikhail Youzhny (Russia) beat Blaz Kavcic (Slovenia) 6-3 5-7 6-4 6-3 Taro Daniel (Japan) beat Tommy Paul (U.S.) 6-1 4-6 4-6 6-2 6-2 7-Grigor Dimitrov (Bulgaria) beat Vaclav Safranek (Czech Republic) 6-1 6-4 6-2 Alexandr Dolgopolov (Ukraine) beat Jan-Lennard Struff (Germany) 3-6 6-3 6-2 1-6 6-3 30-Adrian Mannarino (France) beat Ricardas Berankis (Lithuania) 6-2 6-4 6-2 Guido Pella (Argentina) beat Steve Darcis (Belgium) 6-1 6-2 6-0 18-Gael Monfils (France) beat Jeremy Chardy (France) 7-6(6) 6-3 6-4 15-Tomas Berdych (Czech Republic) beat Ryan Harrison (U.S.) 6-4 6-2 7-6(4) Bjorn Fratangelo (U.S.) beat Ivo Karlovic (Croatia) 7-6(2) 6-4 3-6 7-6(4) Leonardo Mayer (Argentina) beat 26-Richard Gasquet (France) 3-6 6-2 6-4 6-2 Adrian Menendez (Spain) beat Patrick Kypson (U.S.) 6-4 7-6(9) 6-1 Donald Young (U.S.) beat Maximilian Marterer (Germany) 6-3 1-6 6-1 6-4 6-Dominic Thiem (Austria) beat Alex De Minaur (Australia) 6-4 6-1 6-1 Yuichi Sugita (Japan) beat Geoffrey Blancaneaux (France) 6-2 6-2 6-0

HE the Minister of Economy and Commerce Sheikh Ahmed bin Jassim bin Mohamed al-Thani attended the swearing-in ceremony of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in Tehran yesterday. The inauguration of the new president was attended by a number of heads of state and government representatives invited by Iran. On the sidelines of the visit, the minister reviewed  bilateral relations with Dr Ricardo Menendez, Vice-President of Venezuela for Planning and Knowledge. They also discussed ways to enhance co-operation, in particular in  the commercial, economic and investment fields, a statement issued  by the Ministry of Commerce said. 

A Thai teenager became the youngest known winner of a professional golf tournament yesterday, overcoming huge pressure to secure a two-shot victory at the Ladies European Thailand Championship in Pattaya. There were gasps from the crowd as Atthaya Thitikul — aged just 14 years and four months — calmly slotted home a must-win final putt on the 18th to see off Ana Menendez of Mexico. Her victory smashes the current record set by Canada’s Brooke Henderson who won the Canadian Women’s Tour in June 2012 aged 14 years, nine months and three days. She also beats the Ladies European Tour record held by former number one Lydia Ko who took the 2013 New Zealand Open aged 15 years, nine months and 17 days. Atthaya, who hails from Thailand’s western province of Rachaburi, turned 14 on 20 February. Local media said she first picked up a golf club aged six. The shy but seemingly always smiling teenager had a dream week at the 72-par Phoenix Gold Golf and Country Club in Pattaya. She burst into the first day with a two under 70, struck a 71 on day two and another 70 on day three. She began the final day one shot behind Menendez, 25, facing the daunting task of keeping the finish line in sight. The first nine she shot two bogeys and a birdie but was helped by a poor start from Menendez who fired four bogeys, giving the rising Thai star a cushion as the two went into the back nine. If Atthaya felt pressure, she did not show it, firing another birdie on the back nine and calmly slotting home the final par putt. “I’m so proud and so happy for my score and win this week,” she said. “I’m so excited, thank you so much.” As an amateur she does not take home any prize winnings. That means the top 45,000 euro ($51,000) prize went to runner up Menendez while 27,500 euros went to third placed pro Whitney Hillier. Final top scores  283 — Atthaya Tithikul (THA) 70-71-70-72 285 — Ana Menedez (MEX) 68-72-70-75 286 — Whitney Hillier (AUS) 74-72-69-71 287 — Leticia Ras-Anderica (GER) 73-73-74-67; Parinda Phokan (THA) 75-73-71-68; Amy Boulden (WAL) 73-74-67-73.

Small Spanish lenders Liberbank and Unicaja have become the focus of investors’ concerns after the fall of Popular this week, casting renewed doubts over the strength of some Spanish banks. Liberbank lost close to half of its stock market value last week and its shares have fallen for 10 straight days. They are now trading at €0.582 euro each, down 29% yesterday and close to their all-time low of €0.526 in July last year. Meanwhile, the initial public offering of Unicaja, a regional lender in Andalusia, flagged for before the summer, is seen suffering from both the Popular fallout and the competition of the €7bn ($7.8bn) cash call Santander will soon carry out. Liberbank, which was formed in 2011 from the merger of three regional savings banks and controls around 2% of all Spanish deposits, has been seen as one of the weakest links of Spain’s banking sector for several years despite efforts to sell bad real estate assets and improve its liquidity position. The bank has a bad loan ratio of 13%, well above most of its peers, and two thirds of its €2.1bn debt matures by the end of the year with several repayments due in the next two months. Smaller banks in Spain, including Liberbank, saw their subordinated debt sell off on Thursday in the aftermath of the Banco Popular resolution, with cash prices dropping by multiple points. In a bid to draw a line under the current selloff, Liberbank chief executive officer Manuel Menendez and Member of the Board Victor Roza bought more than 100,000 euros worth of shares in the lender yesterday, according to official registries seen by Reuters on Friday. A spokesman for Liberbank said the lender was strong both in terms of liquidity and solvency and the recent selloff was only the result of short-selling from opportunist investors. Unicaja, which also manages around 2% of Spanish deposits, enjoys a slightly more relaxed situation. Its bad debt ratio is just below 10% and a deadline to repay €600mn of subordinated debt and meet legal requirements to list is still months away but banking insiders say pressure is mounting. “It has always been a complex IPO because the banks lack an equity story,” said a senior Spanish banker. “Most of its business is formed by residential mortgages, which turn very low margins. Either it lists at a very low price or they will suffer to get it done,” the banker also said, adding that he would expect the listing to be postponed. Unicaja declined to comment.

By Cindy Casares/WashingtonCuban immigrants account for less than 1% of the US population, but they are uniquely poised by our immigration system to receive power and status that, in just one generation, can produce a candidate - or two - ready to enter the political scene on a national level. That’s why, though most Hispanics lean Democrat, though they are the largest minority population in the US, and though Donald Trump’s entire presidential campaign should be a Hispanic recruitment coup for the Democratic party, it’s not actually surprising that the two Hispanic frontrunners in the presidential race, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, are both Republicans. When pollsters say the vast majority of Hispanics lean Democrat, they’re speaking of Mexican Americans, who make up the largest group of Hispanics by a landslide. Nearly two-thirds of Hispanic Americans - 64% - are of Mexican descent. Sixty-five per cent of those, or 22.3mn, are US-born. Hispanics of Mexican origin make up 11% of the US population. But Mexican and Cuban immigrants have had vastly different experiences immigrating to this country. When Cubans are caught entering the US without documentation, they’re granted refuge if they have at least one foot on US soil. Before 1980, when both Marco Rubio’s parents and Ted Cruz’s father arrived in this country, any Cuban could receive political refuge in the US even if they were rescued at sea. A year after arriving, those Cuban immigrants could apply for permanent residency and eventually US citizenship. Think about that the next time you hear Ted Cruz’s father Rafael bragging about coming to the US legally. Immigration policy is just the beginning of the Cuban immigrant’s advantage in the US. During Fidel Castro’s Cuba, which lasted until 2008, US banks pioneered small business loans for Cuban exiles who had no credit or collateral in this country. With that startup capital, Cuban immigrants were uniquely set up by the American establishment to succeed financially. Their neighbourhoods and communities were able to develop robust economic and political systems to support the success of newer Cuban immigrants. Their descendants had a fast track to join the American elite. As a result, according to the Pew Research Center, compared with the rest of the Hispanic population in the US, Cubans have a higher level of education, higher median household income and higher rate of home ownership. Mexican Americans, on the other hand, inherit a legacy of discrimination that goes back to the founding of this country. The highly controversial Mexican American war, which secured Texas, California and the land in between for the US, is acknowledged by historians to be a land grab of dubious moral imperative. General Ulysses S Grant, who fought in it, said it was “one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation. It was an instance of a republic following the bad example of European monarchies, in not considering justice in their desire to acquire additional territory.” The war ended with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, but many of the Hispanic families that remained in the newly created American south-west had their land grants stolen by Anglo settlers. These grabs were often backed by the American states’ court systems. Thus began a grand American tradition of redlining American citizens of Mexican descent that continued openly until the 1980s, when it went largely underground. It still exists today in the form of economically depressed neighbourhoods and even whole regions, like the one from which I hail: the Rio Grande valley of Texas. The legacy of over 150 years of Mexican Americans - and later, immigrants from throughout Latin America - being segregated into the poorest communities our country has to offer has resulted in Hispanic Americans’ devastatingly low educational attainment rate and high rates of poverty, unemployment, incarceration and poor health. These circumstances hardly provide a pool brimming with high-level political talent. So Mexican Americans and other Hispanics are still not appearing in positions of national political power in proportion to their numbers - especially not within the Democratic party. In fact, a recent op-ed from NBC News points out that Bob Menendez is the only Latino Democrat in the US Senate, and he’s in danger of losing the job due to possible federal corruption charges. There are also only two Latino governors in the country, and they are both Republicans. There are exceptions to these dire numbers. I know hundreds of them. Latinos who, despite growing up in less-than-ideal circumstances, managed through great parenting, the advantages won by civil rights activists of the baby boomer generation and some God-given brains, to rise to the top of their fields. Two high-profile examples of this, and the best chance Americans have for a future Democratic presidential candidate of Hispanic descent, are the 41-year-old Castro twins of San Antonio, Texas. Joaquin is a US congressman, and Julián was the mayor of San Antonio and now serves as the US secretary of housing and urban development. Their mother, Rosie, is an activist who raised her sons on her own. She taught them to value community service and education, and they both graduated from Stanford University and Harvard Law. They have been in the national spotlight since Barack Obama ran for re-election and I believe they are, wisely, waiting until they are a little older before one of them throws his hat in the ring for the White House - though there are rumours that Julián is on the shortlist to become Hillary Clinton’s running mate should she gain the Democratic nomination. Texas Democratic party chairman Gilberto Hinojosa - the first Hispanic to hold the position - told me in a written statement that his organisation believes many issues important to Latinos, such as increasing incomes, making debt-free college a reality, ensuring paid-family leave, improving healthcare and fixing a broken immigration system, have been well represented by the current list of Democratic presidential candidates, but his organisation hopes that whoever wins the nomination will consider a Latino running mate. “Texas Democrats like Julián and Joaquin Castro have the values, government and leadership experience to be president,” Hinojosa said. For today, Hispanics have a choice between voting for a party that openly hates them and one that takes them for granted, because who else are they going to vote for? How long can Democrats hold on to Hispanics with this tactic? If the Republicans keep recruiting conservative Cubans, sooner or later they will grab a larger share of the rest of the Hispanic vote, too. - Guardian News & Media

Reuters/WashingtonUS Senator Ben Cardin said yesterday he would vote against the nuclear agreement with Iran, lessening the chances that President Barack Obama can win enough votes to avoid having to use his veto power to protect the international agreement. “This is a close call, but after a lengthy review, I will vote to disapprove the deal,” Cardin, the top Democrat on the influential Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in an opinion column to be published in The Washington Post. The Maryland lawmaker became the third Senate Democrat to announce his opposition. The others, Charles Schumer of New York and Robert Menendez of New Jersey, came out against it last month. But the “yes” list in the Senate reached 38 yesterday, as Michael Bennet of Colorado announced his support for the deal. All of the lawmakers in favour are Democrats or independents who generally vote with them. That left just five of Obama’s fellow Democrats in the chamber undecided, including Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Maria Cantwell of Washington, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Gary Peters of Michigan and Ron Wyden of Oregon. Under a law co-written by Cardin and signed by Obama in May, Congress has until September 17 to vote on a “resolution of disapproval” of the nuclear agreement, announced on July 14 between the United States, five other world powers and Tehran. If such a resolution passed Congress and lawmakers overrode Obama’s promised veto, it would weaken the nuclear deal by eliminating the president’s ability to waive many sanctions on Iran, a key component of the pact. When Cardin’s fellow Maryland Democrat, Barbara Mikulski, became the 34th senator supporting the deal on Wednesday, Obama was assured that Congress would sustain a veto. Deal opponents need two-thirds majorities in both the 100-member Senate and 435-seat House of Representatives to override a veto. Deal supporters have been hoping to muster 41 Senate votes to use the filibuster procedural rule to block a vote on a disapproval resolution in the Senate and keep Obama from having to use his veto. Cardin’s announcement makes that target a more difficult one, more so as a spokesman for Manchin said he had decided he would not support a filibuster, although he has yet to make up his mind about the nuclear agreement itself. Lawmakers will begin to consider the resolution of disapproval as soon as they return from their August recess on Tuesday. The first vote in the House of Representatives is expected next week and the Senate could also begin voting as soon as next week. With Republicans virtually united in opposition, Democrats have spent the past two months rallying support for an agreement seen as a potential legacy foreign policy achievement for the president. Bennet, like many other lawmakers who support the pact, said it is not perfect but seems like the best way to keep Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. “Our primary objectives are to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon, make sure Israel is safe and, if possible, avoid another war in the Middle East,” Bennet said in a statement. “This agreement represents a flawed, but important step to accomplish those goals.” No Republican in either the House or Senate has backed the nuclear deal. One Republican seen as a possible deal supporter, Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine, is expected to announce her position after Congress returns to Washington next week.

The deal now has 34 backers in the Senate—the number needed to uphold a certain Obama veto should Congress pass a resolution against itAFPWashingtonUS President Barack Obama yesterday earned sufficient congressional backing to ensure the Iran nuclear deal does not get blocked, when a 34th senator announced her support for the accord. Most US lawmakers are opposed to the deal, which would ease punishing economic sanctions on Tehran while preventing it from advancing its nuclear programme. Many Republicans warn that Iran will seek to cheat its way to an atomic bomb. But with Senate Democrat Barbara Mikulski announcing her support yesterday, the deal now has 34 backers in the Senate—the number needed to uphold a certain Obama veto should Congress pass a resolution that disapproves of the deal. Overcoming the veto would require a two-thirds vote in the Senate and House of Representatives. While the deal is not perfect, Mikulski said, “I have concluded that this is the best option available to block Iran from having a nuclear bomb.” Some Republicans have urged walking away from the deal and renegotiating tougher terms with Tehran, but US negotiators have warned that such a move could see the fragile international coalition that secured the agreement fall apart. “It’s unclear if the European Union, Russia, China, India and others would continue sanctions if Congress rejects this deal,” said Mikulski, the longest-serving female senator in history. “At best, sanctions would be porous, or limited to unilateral sanctions by the US.” Republicans are unified in their opposition, warning that easing sanctions will provide Iran with a windfall of up to $150bn, which they say could be funnelled toward terrorist operations. “Iran deal done. With Mikulski, Obama has all the votes he needs,” number two Senate Republican John Cornyn posted on Twitter.  Secretary of State John Kerry, delivering a major speech in Philadelphia on the Iran deal, said Iran will be required to live up to the agreement in full before it starts to benefit from sanctions relief. “Without this agreement, Iran’s so-called breakout time (to produce enough fuel for a nuclear weapon) was about two months. With this agreement it will increase by a factor of six, to at least a year, and will remain at that level for a decade or more,” Kerry said. He also reiterated arguments he has been making in the two months since the deal was signed, insisting it is not based on trusting Tehran but on its ability to police its activity. “The United States and the international community will be monitoring Iran non-stop and you can bet that, if we see something, we will do something,” he said. “The standard we will apply can be summed up in two words: ‘Zero tolerance.’” Kerry made no mention of reaching the 34-vote Senate threshold, seeking to avoid the image of a victory lap as he aims to broaden support for the deal. The White House is now eyeing another key threshold in the Senate. If it gains backing from seven of the remaining undecided Democrats to boost its numbers to 41, it could filibuster, meaning Republicans would not have the 60 votes needed to force a vote on the resolution of disapproval. That would save Obama the embarrassing step of cobbling together a minority coalition for a veto to preserve his landmark agreement, a process that would sow doubts among a sceptical American public and Washington’s international partners, which are keen to see strong US commitment to the accord. Two top Democratic senators—Chuck Schumer and Robert Menendez—are opposed to the deal, as are a handful of House Democrats, including Steve Israel, the chamber’s highest-ranking Jewish member. Congress is set to vote later this month on the accord, which was reached in July between Tehran and six world powers: Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States. Among Democrats in support, many have expressed deep concern about Iran’s adherence to the deal, and stressed it is the lesser of several evils. “The alternative, to me, is a scenario of uncertainty and isolation,” Senator Chris Coons said on Tuesday as he announced his support. Republican presidential candidates have slammed the deal as a concession to an odious regime. “When I’m president, we won’t just reverse President Obama’s dangerous Iran deal. We will increase sanctions on Iran,” Senator Marco Rubio said.