Washington’s UN nominee supports Israeli biblical claim to West Bank

US Representative Elise Stefanik, Republican from New York, testifies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on her nomination to be Ambassador to the United Nations, on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, January 21, 2025. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 22 January 2025
Follow

Washington’s UN nominee supports Israeli biblical claim to West Bank

  • ‘It’s going to be very difficult to achieve peace if you continue to hold the view that you just expressed,’ senator tells Elise Stefanik
  • Republican congresswoman for New York accuses international body of being ‘cesspool of antisemitism’

LONDON: The new US nominee for UN ambassador has backed Israeli biblical claims to the entire West Bank.

Elise Stefanik, a Republican congresswoman for New York, was being questioned on her stance by Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen during a Senate confirmation hearing.

“You told me that, yes, you shared that view,” Van Hollen said. “Is that your view today?” Stefanik said: “Yes.”

Her stance is at odds with international law, multiple UN Security Council resolutions, and a longstanding international consensus on the issue.

“It’s going to be very difficult to achieve peace if you continue to hold the view that you just expressed,” Van Hollen said.

During the hearing, Stefanik criticized the UN for its alleged anti-Israel bias, claiming that the organization is a “cesspool of antisemitism.”

She said: “Our tax dollars should not be complicit in propping up entities that are counter to American interests, antisemitic, or engaging in fraud, corruption or terrorism.”

The US is the largest funder of the UN and houses its secretariat in New York City. Washington pays about 22 percent of the UN’s regular budget.


Trump cuts India tariffs as Modi ‘agrees’ to stop buying Russian oil

Updated 32 min 24 sec ago
Follow

Trump cuts India tariffs as Modi ‘agrees’ to stop buying Russian oil

  • US will impose an 18 percent tariff on Indian goods, down from the earlier 50 percent punitive levy
  • Withdrawal from Russian oil may affect India’s relations with BRICS, expert says

NEW DELHI: The US and India have announced reaching a trade agreement after months of friction, with President Donald Trump saying that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had “agreed” to halt purchases of Russian oil.

In August, Trump accused India, which imports most of its crude oil, of funding Moscow’s war in Ukraine and subjected it to a combined tariff rate of about 50 percent on most of the exports.

Following a call with Modi on Monday, Trump took to social media to say that he would cut with immediate effect US levies on Indian goods to 18 percent after Modi “agreed to stop buying Russian Oil, and to buy much more from the United States and, potentially, Venezuela.”

At the same time, India, Trump wrote, would “reduce their Tariffs and Non Tariff Barriers against the United States, to ZERO,” committing to buy “over $500 BILLION DOLLARS of US Energy, Technology, Agricultural, Coal, and many other products.”

Modi confirmed the agreement on social media, saying: “Made in India products will now have a reduced tariff of 18 percent,” without commenting on Russian oil or duty-free imports of American goods.

When the US announced its punitive tariffs last year, India quickly moved forward with free trade negotiations with other countries — signing a deal with Oman and finalizing negotiations with New Zealand and the EU.

While the agreements were expected to partially offset the loss of exports to the US, economists did not expect they would immediately mitigate it, as shifting supply chains takes time.

The newly announced agreement with the US will therefore offer short-term relief for Indian exporters — especially of textiles, gems, jewelry and marine products — who were facing the threat of a market exit.

“In that case, the trade deal with the US is a welcome step. It provides short-term relief, allowing India to continue exporting to the US without being forced to exit the US market and diversify with a huge transition cost,” said Anisree Suresh, geoeconomics researcher at the Takshashila Institution.

“However, one shouldn’t look at it as a comprehensive long-term trade deal like the one India signed with the EU. The unpredictability of the Trump administration remains a major concern, regardless of whether there is a trade deal with the US ... India cannot treat this deal the same as other FTAs, as it is limited in scope and subject to reversal.”

When the US imposed its punitive tariffs on India, about 66 percent of total Indian exports were subject to that rate. Overall, India recorded a negative margin of 19.5 percent, meaning its exports were taxed more heavily than those of its competitors.

“From that point of view, Indian goods will have a larger market over there. However, there’s a problem when we talk about a 0 percent tariff on the US,” said Prof. Arun Kumar, a development economist.

“The US will be able to export a lot more to India, and therefore it will affect our production within the economy. And that will be a setback, so while exports may rise, the internal economy may actually suffer because of this decrease in tariffs on American goods. And especially if it affects agriculture.”

The sudden withdrawal from India’s partnership with Russia may not have a serious economic impact but politically could affect New Delhi’s relations, also with other countries, especially those from BRICS — a grouping that besides India and Russia includes also Brazil and China, and is the most powerful geopolitical forum outside of the Western world.

“You can always substitute Russian oil with some other oil, but I think it’s more of a strategic question, because India and Russia have had long-standing relationships, and if we bend to US pressure and reduce purchases from Russia, then it will affect in future also our relationship with Russia, because we will not be seen as a stable ally,” Kumar said.

“BRICS nations will not trust India very much in the future ... and that’s what Trump wants. He wants to disrupt BRICS. That’s what he has been doing right since the beginning to divide nations and deal with them individually.”