Latest News

See the latest news and get GPT analysis of articles

Thames Water has six weeks to agree survival plan with Ofwat 2024-04-14 16:00:00+00:00 - Thames Water has just six weeks to convince its regulator that it has a viable survival plan for its business, the Guardian can reveal. While the company believes it has enough cash to survive for about 15 months, insiders and investors fear that it must move quickly to strike a deal with its watchdog to stave off insolvency. The UK’s largest water monopoly must present a new turnaround strategy and business plan before 23 May – Ofwat’s final board meeting before it issues a verdict on how much water companies will be allowed to charge consumers. Thames, which has 16 million customers across London and the Thames valley, has been thrown into crisis after its shareholders last month reneged on a promise to inject £500m into the business, amid a deepening battle with the watchdog. This has forced Thames’s holding company, Kemble Water Finance, to admit it will not be able to repay a £190m loan due by the end of April. Thames holds cash reserves which should fund its operations for 15 months without a substantial increase in bills, but investors, including bondholders in the operating company, are understood to believe it may struggle to meet debt obligations if a deal is not struck by May. Ofwat is understood to be sceptical that Thames’s current business plan for the next two years or its longer turnaround plan – aimed at revamping its management and infrastructure – are viable or fair on consumers. Raising bills without a clear strategy to overhaul how the business is managed risks pushing the burden of poor business decisions on to customers, something Ofwat is not prepared to do, sources said. Thames’s operating company, which is ringfenced by the regulator so it can continue even if Kemble collapses, is labouring under debts of almost £15bn, making it Britain’s most indebted water company. It was privatised in 1989 with no debt. Investors in Thames backed out of providing £500m of emergency funding in March, after the regulator refused the company’s demands for a 40% increase in bills. Investors, which include UK university pension scheme USS, Canadian investor Omers and China’s sovereign wealth fund, said Ofwat’s current position – to limit bill increases, levy fines and restrict payment of dividends – rendered the company “uninvestible”. Ofwat reviews water companies’ business plans and holds a price review in order to set the amount the utility firms can raise their bills over the next five-year period. Despite its rejection of Thames’s plan, it is understood that bills are still expected to rise by as much as 35%, on average, over the next five years. skip past newsletter promotion Sign up to Business Today Free daily newsletter Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning Enter your email address Sign up Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy . We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. after newsletter promotion Thames’s owners are running out of time because the regulator must issue its so-called draft determination on bill increases for each regional monopoly company in June. Those plans will govern how much water investors can earn and how much they must invest over the next five years. If Thames and Ofwat cannot agree on a new financial plan and a fresh strategy for how to run the company by then, it will ramp up the likelihood of nationalisation. Bondholders in the operating company have said they may be forced to write down their investment. A likely knock-on effect would be to increase borrowing costs for Thames, and bring forward nationalisation of the company via a so-called special administration. Lenders to Thames argue that forcing them to incur losses on their debts would also drive up the cost of borrowing for all UK water companies, and potentially other utilities such as gas and electricity. An Ofwat spokesperson said: “We do not comment on speculation. Ofwat is continuing to work on draft determinations that will be published in June. “We will continue to monitor Thames Water as it seeks to turn around its performance for customers and the environment.” Thames Water declined to comment on the record. Its board in March agreed a turnaround plan that it believes is “well under way”.

Thames Water is everyone’s problem and time is running out to fix it 2024-04-14 15:34:00+00:00 - A problem like Thames Water is everyone’s problem. People with only a passing interest in finance will still feel the ripple effects should it become insolvent. It won’t be because the water stops coming out of the tap or the cleanliness of Britain’s rivers – so clearly scarred by the effects of creaking infrastructure and raw sewage – worsens. It will be due to the rising cost of investment, a burden borne by the private sector, and, by extension, households and businesses. If the company collapses, a slice will be trimmed from many British pensioners’ pots, managed by mega funds that are owners of Britain’s water companies. Whether or not the crisis triggers a full-blown nationalisation and pulls a water company on to the government’s balance sheet is uncertain. But the odds are clearly going in that direction. Ofwat, the water industry watchdog, has “far less time to find a solution than it thinks”, one major bond investor in Thames told the Guardian. Another lender to the operating company said “there are six weeks left to save it”. So grim is the outlook for bondholders at Thames’ operating company that the Investment Association, the trade body for fund managers, has already issued a rallying call to Thames’ lenders, laying the groundwork for intensive lobbying of the government and, ultimately, potential legal action. This work is only preliminary for now but it indicates the potential fightback against Ofwat and the Treasury by investors should Thames’ entire operation run aground. A light was shone on Thames’ notoriously complex ownership structure when a holding company – Kemble – defaulted on a debt repayment. It is widely expected to go bust, collapsing one storey of a fragile house of cards. What matters now is whether or not the supposedly ringfenced operating company, the part that is regulated by Ofwat, stays solvent. Many different groups hope it staves off insolvency. Chief among them are Ofwat, the Treasury, and lenders to Thames’ operating company. But it is also laden with about £15bn debt, which is increasingly expensive to service. Appetite to pump more money into the part that keeps the taps on is going to depend on two things: whether or not bills can rise by enough to make a return attractive enough for investors to put in fresh money, and whether Thames can convince Ofwat that its efforts to reform itself – with a new and improved turnaround plan – can justify that bill hike. How much Thames’s 16 million customers have to pay for their water depends on this negotiation. Thames’s owners want to raise bills by 40% and it would probably not be the only company in England to push through bill increases of that scale if it can persuade Ofwat it has changed its ways. On average bills are already expected to rise by 35%. Thames can only hope to raise its bills if there is enough heft in its plans to change how it manages its assets and governs the business. It must convince Ofwat that those Victorian pipes it claims to be mending are really getting replaced, and that shiny efforts to build super sewers really do lead to a new and effective wastewater system that does not spill sewage into rivers and streams each time the rain comes down. What is unclear is just who might come forward with the necessary cash even if the bills and governance can be straightened out. Ofwat and the Treasury are desperate to keep attracting the kind of patient cash that pension funds and long-term investors offer. Thames’s travails will be watched closely by the nimble, global mega funds that Britain needs to overhaul and upgrade its infrastructure, from power lines to new windfarms. A plausible turnaround plan could sway Ofwat’s thinking on whether or not a bill hike will actually achieve results. And Ofwat wants those investors committed for the long haul – a 25-year, rather than five-year, horizon. skip past newsletter promotion Sign up to Business Today Free daily newsletter Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning Enter your email address Sign up Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy . We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. after newsletter promotion There is no single, universal view about how to press ahead among the shareholders of Kemble, the holding company of Thames’ operating arm. Many of the investors in Kemble’s debt and equity are also creditors to the operating company. Some investors are more amenable to finding a way through than others. Quiet words in quiet corners are under way. Time is short, however. One of the major indications that bondholders in the operating company are waiting for is Ofwat’s decision on Thames’ bill increases, expected in June. That verdict must be taken by the regulator’s 23 May board meeting. In the view of some major bondholders, that leaves only six weeks to save their investment in the water operating company. Ofwat declined to comment on “speculation” but said it was working on its draft decisions, due in June. “We will continue to monitor Thames Water as it seeks to turn around its performance for customers and the environment,” a spokesperson said. According to the company’s internal estimates, Thames believes it can operate for 15 months based on its current spending plans, even without fresh investment. But Thames’ problems will come home to roost well before then.

For U.S. Cuban claims holders, spy Manuel Rocha's plea deal raises fresh questions 2024-04-14 15:16:00+00:00 - The Miami Herald profiled former Ambassador V. Manuel Rocha in 2003 when he joined the firm of Steel Hector & Davis to help open doors in Latin America. Raul Rubiera | Miami Herald | Getty Images When Carolyn Lamb saw news of Cuban spy Victor Manuel Rocha's arrest on the news last December, she recognized him immediately. It was the same man who had sat in her Omaha living room 17 years ago, trying to make a deal. On Friday, Rocha, 73, was sentenced to 15 years in prison for acting as a foreign agent on behalf of the Cuban government, pleading guilty to two counts of conspiracy. On top of his prison sentence, Rocha faces three years of supervised release, a $500,000 fine, and several other conditions. Rocha's arrest last year stunned the diplomatic community, in part because of his longevity as an agent—more than 40 years, much of it spent working for the US State Department, including a stint as US ambassador to Bolivia and another at the National Security Council. In exchange for a reduced sentence, Rocha's agreement requires him to cooperate with prosecutors and reveal what clandestine activities he performed for Cuba. Carolyn Lamb hopes that process will reveal what Rocha was up to in her living room nearly 20 years. The claims Lamb describes how Rocha traveled across the country in 2007, and offered to purchase the paper claims to an 80-acre farm, a 1959 Buick, and thousands of shares in the Cuban Telephone Company that belonged to Lamb's father before they were seized by the Castro regime. The former Coca-Cola building in Havana, ironically painted the company colors. The Building now houses the headquarters of the state-owned "Beverage Company of Havana". Justin Solomon | CNBC Castro didn't nationalize just American property; he seized all private property. Every home and every business became the property of the government, and none of the owners were paid for them. With few exceptions, that is still true today. In 1970, the US government valued Lamb's claim at $489,208, and set an annual interest rate of 6% from the date of loss to the date of settlement. Under that formula, the Cubans owe $1.9 million on the claim today. That number gets bigger every day that goes by without a settlement. "They told me my claim was crap," Lamb says of Rocha and a business partner with him that day in Omaha. They offered her $114,000 for the claim. Lamb said she was insulted and suspicious of what she saw as such a low-ball offer. There are nearly 6,000 American claims to property and land in Cuba, all of it seized by Fidel Castro's government after his 1959 coup d'etat. The value of the claims totals more than $7 billion, and many are held by major U.S. brands like Pepsi, General Electric, and Twentieth Century Fox. A former Woolworth's store which is now used as a "10 Cent Store", the equivalent of a dollar store in the United States. Justin Solomon | CNBC This wide scale confiscation of Americans' property was one of the chief reasons the United States imposed an embargo on Cuba more than 60 years ago. Before the embargo can be lifted, the claims for those properties must be settled. "It's still one of the biggest impediments to normalization of relations with Cuba," says Jason Poblete, Lamb's attorney. "Was [Rocha] part of a scheme to help depress the value of these claims, to give an escape clause to the Cuban government?" Poblete wondered aloud. The lower the value of the claims, the less the Cuban government would have to pay in any future negotiated settlement. Poblete also wondered if Rocha was thwarting the process. "Did he make it harder to settle the claims issue?" he said in an interview with CNBC. It would be helpful to the Cubans to have information from Rocha because in a negotiation on the claims "any intelligence you could get would be useful," said John Kavulich, head of the US-Cuba Trade and Economic Council. The former Sears Roebuck and Co. in Havana is now a computer center for Cubans to use the internet. Justin Solomon | CNBC But if Rocha's participation in the claims buying business was indeed part of his covert work, that would come as news to his business partner. Timothy Ashby says he was "astonished" by Rocha's arrest because "He was almost too right wing to be believed," and Ashby couldn't imagine Rocha working for a communist government. But looking back on it, Ashby says there were signs. "He had a chip on his shoulder about rich people." And that's not all. "Once a week he would have the offices swept for bugs because he said he was concerned about the FBI listening to them," Ashby told CNBC in a recent interview. Ashby assumed Rocha's paranoia about eavesdropping was in response to the George W. Bush administration's opposition to the Cuba claims buying business. But according to the Justice Department, by that point Rocha was already in his third decade as a Cuban agent. Ashby says that buying up the claims was his idea, and he brought Rocha in because of his connections in the US government. The company they formed ultimately raised $10.5 million and bought nine claims including large pieces of land and some hotels. But they were forced to shutter the operation, says Ashby, when the Bush administration deemed their activities a violation of the embargo. Timothy Ashby now writes spy novels. Little did he know he'd be a character in a real-life case. Covert career Born in Columbia in 1950, Rocha became a naturalized US Citizen in 1978, and a State Department employee in 1981. During his long diplomatic career, he served in US embassies in the Dominican Republic, Honduras, Mexico, Argentina, and finally Bolivia where he was ambassador. In the mid-90s he did a 1-year stint on the National Security Council, where he had special responsibility for Cuba and he subsequently served in the US Interest Section in Havana. Throughout his career, the DOJ says he had unique access to nonpublic US government information. Rocha was caught when an undercover FBI agent, impersonating a Cuban spy, recorded him on camera during 3 separate meetings in Miami in 2022 and 2023. According to the Justice Department's complaint, throughout the meetings Rocha behaved as a Cuban agent, consistently referred to the United States as "the enemy," and used the term "we" to describe himself and Cuba. "What we have done ... it's enormous . . . More than a grand slam," he bragged at one point. The recordings suggest Rocha was recruited by the Cubans in Chile in the 70s and may have become a State Department employee expressly to become a covert agent. In the FBI recordings, he says his well-known right-wing persona was part of his cover. File photo of former US ambassador to Bolivia, Manuel Rocha, talking to the press on the 11th of July 2001. Gonzalo Espinoza | AFP | Getty Images

88% of workers have sent an email they regret—this 4-step trick will help you avoid it 2024-04-14 14:56:00+00:00 - Ever wanted to retract an email right after you've sent it? A majority of workers know the feeling, and the youngest professionals are the most likely to feel email regret. Some 88% of people say they've regretted the contents of a work email right after hitting send, and 28% even believe an email they've sent directly hurt their careers, according to a survey of 2,000 U.S. office workers from Babbel, the language learning platform. And just around 1 in 5 Gen Z office workers between 18 and 24 years old say they "very often regret" the emails they send. Two big mistakes that can lead to email regret is having typos and unclear messaging, says Esteban Touma, a cultural and linguistics expert at Babbel. To avoid those missteps, take time to "pause and review the email carefully, ensuring the tone is appropriate and the content is clear and concise," Touma tells CNBC Make It. "Look for any ambiguities or potential misunderstandings that could arise from the wording. Consider whether all necessary information has been included and whether the message effectively conveys your intended meaning."

The American dollar store has fallen on hard times 2024-04-14 14:53:00+00:00 - A Family Dollar Stores Inc. store in Hyattsville, Maryland, US, on Wednesday, March 13, 2024. Dollar Tree Inc. expects to close about 600 Family Dollar stores in the first half of fiscal 2024 and shut down an additional 370 Family Dollar and 30 Dollar Tree locations as their leases expire. Ruth Colvin-Graves, 76, of Columbus, Ohio, used to make Family Dollar her go-to destination for snacks, paper towels, and cleaning products. "These were all things that I wouldn't have to choose between feeding me and my son or keeping a roof over our heads," Graves said. Like many customers, the discounts and convenience enticed her. But now, she says, she stays away from all dollar stores. "They lost their focus on who exactly their customer base was," Colvin-Graves said. She says prices have increased, expired goods are on shelves, there are chronic staff shortages, and an unpleasant shopping experience. "On any given day, you had to maneuver around boxes in aisles, and items were not placed where they should be," Colvin-Graves says. She isn't alone in her shift in attitude about dollar stores. Ellen Forroux of Medford, Oregon, finds herself running into Walmart, which is sprawling in size and less conveniently located, instead of the smaller format neighborhood dollar stores she used to frequent. Forroux is disabled and lives off her Social Security income, so stretching dollars and avoiding big box stores is important to her. "I really depend on Dollar Tree," Forroux says. And dollar stores like Dollar Tree depend on customers like Forroux. However, Family Dollar recently announced that it shuttered 1,000 stores, and the Los Angeles-based 99-cent Only chain filed for bankruptcy — though there is an investor-led attempt to save the store brand underway. These events point to problems in the sector that have been turning off customers like Graves and Forroux. Even Dollar General is not immune to problems. It's growing sales, but slower than previous projections, and over the past year, its shares are down over 30%. What's causing store closures A convergence of competition and customer factors are causing turbulence in the sector, according to William & Mary business professor John Strong, who studies dollar stores. The 99 Cents Only chain, with 371 stores primarily in the West, needed — but lacked — the scale and capability to counter far larger rival Dollar General, which began rapidly expanding into its core market. Meanwhile, the Family Dollar closures represent the continuing fallout from Dollar Tree's purchase of the discount chain a decade ago. Strong said that Dollar Tree and Family Dollar are two very different stores with vastly different customer bases, and trying to merge them has proven challenging. "Dollar General and Family Dollar are neighborhood consumable stores, while Dollar Tree is a modern version of the old-fashioned variety stores," Strong said. Dollar General and Family Dollar have an 80 percent consumable merchandise mix: food, cleaning supplies, and healthcare. Dollar Tree sells more seasonal and impulse buys in more affluent suburban strip malls: wrapping paper, gift items, and toys. While Dollar General caters to a primarily rural clientele, Family Dollar stores are generally in urban areas. Family Dollar, Strong said, has never been able to gain the following of its larger rival. "Family Dollar was never as good a business as Dollar General," Strong said, citing revenue numbers. Family Dollar is roughly $15 billion in annual revenue, while Dollar General is $39 billion. Dollar General generates $275 per square foot compared to $225 at Family Dollar. Dollar Tree — which itself does close to $17 billion in revenue — has invested hundreds of millions in Family Dollar since purchasing it, trying to counter the effects of its worse locations and more unkempt stores, but it has not been enough. "Family Dollar has always been the weak child of the sector," Strong said, and closing stores is an attempt by Dollar Tree to strengthen it. While 1,000 stores are shuttering, Dollar Tree is also opening 219 new stores this year, a blend of Dollar Tree and Family Dollar, so there is still at least some room for growth, he added. The weakness, however, is being increasingly exploited by competitors, adding that a reinvigorated Walmart has been closing the vise on dollar stores with its supermarket growth. Aldi has also become a serious player in small towns, and the value retailing space in general is much more competitive now than it was a decade ago. Strong says that Dollar General has been conducting many experiments and trials. There are larger-format Dollar General stores, food-focus stores branded as Dollar General Market, and a Popshelf, a new concept store focusing on items that rival Dollar Tree is better known for (think wrapping paper and party favors). Some stores even sell gas.

News Outlets Urge Trump and Biden to Commit to Presidential Debates 2024-04-14 14:48:47+00:00 - A group of major news organizations — including The Associated Press and the five big broadcast and cable networks — issued an unusual joint statement on Sunday urging President Biden and former President Donald J. Trump to commit to participating in televised debates before Election Day. “General election debates have a rich tradition in our American democracy,” the group wrote. “There is simply no substitute for the candidates debating with each other, and before the American people, their visions for the future of our nation.” Media organizations rarely weigh in so explicitly on the campaign plans of presidential candidates. The statement underscores just how much uncertainty surrounds whether this year’s debates will occur. Mr. Biden has declined to commit to the three debates scheduled for September and October. His allies have expressed concerns about the Commission on Presidential Debates, the nonpartisan group that has organized the events since 1988, and its ability to enforce its rules when Mr. Trump participates.

Divisive? Not for moviegoers. ‘Civil War’ declares victory at box office. 2024-04-14 14:34:00+00:00 - Alex Garland’s provocative “ Civil War ” didn’t only ignite the discourse. The film also inspired audiences to go to the cinemas this weekend where it surpassed expectations and earned $25.7 million in ticket sales in North America, according to studio estimates Sunday. It’s the biggest R-rated opening of the year to date and a record for A24, the studio behind films like “Everything Everywhere All At Once” and “The Iron Claw.” “Civil War” also unseated “ Godzilla x Kong ” from its perch atop the box office. The titan movie from Warner Bros. had held the No. 1 spot for the past two weekends. “Civil War,” starring Kirsten Dunst, Wagner Moura and Cailee Spaeny as front-line journalists in the near future covering a devastating conflict in the U.S. and trying to make their way to Washington, D.C. The story, written by Garland, who is also the mind behind “Ex Machina” and “Annihilation,” imagines a U.S. in which California and Texas have united against a president who has disbanded the FBI and given himself a third term. Though entirely fictional, “Civil War” has been inspiring debates since the first trailer that have extended beyond the musings of film critics and traditional reviews. This weekend, The New York Times ran two opinion pieces related to the movie, one by Stephen Marche and another by Michelle Goldberg. There were also pieces on CNN and Politico. Going into the weekend, projections pegged the film to debut in the $15 to $24 million range. The studio said “Civil War” overperformed in markets “from LA to El Paso.” The data analytics company EntTelligence reported that the film has attracted over 1.7 million patrons this weekend and that the top three markets were Los Angeles, New York and Dallas. “The title alone is enough to spark a conversation in a year where the political discourse is top of mind,” said Paul Dergarabedian, the senior media analyst for Comscore. “And they couldn’t have picked a better date. This movie is perfectly timed in a month that is very quiet.” The film opened on 3,838 screens in the U.S. and Canada, including IMAX. It’s the most expensive movie that the studio has ever made, with a production budget of $50 million, which does not account for millions spent on marketing and promotion. IMAX showings of “Civil War,” which was playing on 400 of the large format screens, accounted for $4.2 million, or 16.5% of the domestic total. Reviews have been largely positive. It’s currently at 83% on Rotten Tomatoes, with a 77% audience score. Its CinemaScore was a B-, which has sometimes indicated that word of mouth might not be strong going forward. But that might not be the case with “Civil War,” which doesn’t have a tremendous amount of competition over the next few weeks until “The Fall Guy” opens on May 3. “You have to take all the metrics together, including the competitive landscape,” Dergarabedian said. But it is a notable win for the studio, which doesn’t always open films nationwide out of the gates. Before “Civil War,” A24’s biggest debut was the Ari Aster horror “Hereditary,” which opened to $13.6 million in 2018. “This isn’t destined to be a $200 million global blockbuster. But it’s a very high-profile win for A24,” Dergarabedian said. “They’re a studio that pushes the envelope. They’re a brand associated with a certain level of quality and filmmaking expertise, pushing boundaries and taking risks. It’s well-earned over the years.” Second place went to “Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire,” which earned $15.5 million in its third weekend to bring its running domestic total to nearly $158 million. Another “Empire” movie, Sony’s “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire,” took third place in its fourth weekend with $5.8 million. It’s now at $160 million worldwide. Rounding out the top five was Universal and DreamWorks’ “Kung Fu Panda 4,” in fourth with $5.5 million in weekend six, and “Dune: Part Two” with $4.3 million in its seventh weekend. “Dune 2” has now earned $272 million domestically. This weekend also saw the box office year-to-date comparisons take a big hit. Last year, “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” brought in over $92 million in its second weekend in theaters. On the same weekend in 2023, the top 10 accounted for over $142 million, compared to this year’s $68.4 million. The year to date is back down to 16% after seeing some recovery with the success of “Dune: Part Two.” “The box office has been a seesaw,” Dergarabedian said. “But we all knew this was going to be a rough month for comps because of ‘Mario.’” Estimated ticket sales for Friday through Sunday at U.S. and Canadian theaters, according to Comscore. Final domestic figures will be released Monday. 1. “Civil War,” $25.7 million. 2. “Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire,” $15.5 million. 3. “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire,” $5.8 million. 4. “Kung Fu Panda 4,” $5.5 million. 5. “Dune: Part Two,” $4.3 million. 6. “Monkey Man,” $4.1 million. 7. “The First Omen,” $3.8 million. 8. “The Long Game,” $1.4 million. 9. “Shrek 2,” $1.4 million. 10. “SUGA - Agust D Tour ‘D-DAY’ The Movie,” $990,881.

Biden ‘doesn’t believe’ that Iran attack ‘needs’ to escalate into wider war, White House official says 2024-04-14 14:18:00+00:00 - National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby on Sunday said President Joe Biden doesn’t “believe” that Iran’s overnight attacks against Israel need to escalate into a wider war in the Middle East. “The President doesn’t believe that it needs to move in that direction whatsoever,” Kirby said in an interview on NBC News’ “Meet the Press.” His remarks came hours after Iran launched an attack on Israel with more than 300 missiles and drones. The U.S. helped Israel defend against the attack, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said in a statement late Saturday, and just a “few” of the ballistic missiles fired from Iran landed inside Israel, an Israeli Defense Forces spokesman said. Most of the cruise missiles launched by Iran were intercepted by Israeli fighter jets, the spokesperson said. It was the first time Iran had launched a direct military attack against Israel. Kirby also declined to “get into hypotheticals” about whether the U.S. would back an Israeli counterattack against Iran. “Israel hasn’t made any decisions that I’m aware of about what the next step is,” Kirby told moderator Kristen Welker. Asked about whether the Biden administration has a “red line” for getting directly involved in a conflict against Iran, Kirby declined to identify one, saying, “I mean ... we could sit here all day talking about what is and what isn’t a red line. I’m not going to do that.” House Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Turner, R-Ohio, criticized Kirby’s comments by saying, “There should be a red line.” He called on the Biden administration to “take seriously that this attack has happened. It’s unprecedented and certainly, it needs to be viewed as an escalation.” Still, Turner agreed, “I don’t think at this point that the United States should be engaged in a military action directly at Iran.” Both Turner and Kirby hailed the joint effort between Israel and the U.S. to use missile defense systems to guard against almost all of the incoming Iranian attacks.Kirby said that the effort was, “an incredible military achievement by Israel” and “quite frankly the United States and other partners that helped Israel defend itself against more than 300 drones and missiles. I mean, it’s just an extraordinary example of military superiority.” Turner added, “The United States and Israel jointly developed missile defense technology that went to work last night and it was proven to be successful.”

How big is the Masters purse, and how much prize money does the winner get? 2024-04-14 14:09:00+00:00 - A low score at the Masters at Augusta means a high payout for professional golfers. The total purse for the 2024 Masters is $20 million, a record high, and up $2 million from last year. The eventual tournament champion will take home a record $3.6 million — $360,000 more than last year's winner earned. Last year, tournament winner John Rahm took home a $3.24 million payout in prize money, a nice chunk of that year's tournament's total $18 million purse. The remainder of the purse was split among 50 golfers, with the tournament's two runners-up taking home $1.6 million each in prize money. Only three golfers earned seven figures, based on how they placed. In 2022, the tournament's purse totaled $15 million, with winner Scottie Scheffler taking home $2.7 million. The purse for the 2024 competition at Augusta was announced Saturday. Following tradition, it is announced during, as opposed to in advance of the tournament. The 2024 Masters purse payout breakdown is as follows, with the top 50 golfers receiving cash prizes ranging from $3.6 million to $50,400. The remaining professionals, who do not place in the top 50, will receive cash prices ranging downward from $49,200, based on their scores. Notably, amateurs do not earn money to compete. The first year the masters was played, in 1934, the purse was $5,000 and the winner took home $1,500. Purse: $20 million Winner: $3.6 million Second Place: $2.16 million Third Place: $1.36 million Fourth Place: $960,000 Fifth Place: $800,000 Sixth Place: $720,000 Seventh Place: $670,000 Eighth Place: $620,000 Ninth Place: $580,000 Tenth Place: $540,000

Biden officials worry Israel’s response to Iran strikes may trigger wider war 2024-04-14 14:08:00+00:00 - Iran’s retaliatory attack Saturday — which swarmed Israeli airspace with hundreds of drones and missiles while causing relatively limited damage — was unprecedented but calibrated to show deterrence without provoking an all-out war, according to experts who spoke to NBC News. Within hours of the strike, Maj. Gen. Mohammad Bagheri, the chief of staff of the Iranian armed forces, issued a statement saying the attack had “concluded and we are not willing to continue it.” An Israeli official in the prime minister’s office told NBC News on Sunday that “Israel is going to consult with all its partners, but ultimately it’s Israel’s decision as to what the response will be.” “Israel can’t allow such a large attack over Israel without some kind of response, be it small or large,” the official said. “It’s up to the war Cabinet to decide now.” U.S. officials had expected a response from Iran since Israel’s April 1 bombing of an Iranian diplomatic compound in Damascus. They raised questions about not just the severity of the threat but also how Israel would respond given an overall military strategy that a senior administration official and a senior defense official, referring to internal conversations, have characterized in interviews as poorly considered and “frenetic” and with the potential to be “catastrophically escalatory.” Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, second from right, during a war Cabinet meeting Sunday. Israeli Ministry of Defense / Anadolu via Getty Images “I don’t think they had a strategy,” the senior administration official said about Israel’s bombing of Iran’s diplomatic compound in Damascus. “The Israelis don’t always make the best strategic decisions.” Israel views Iran as an existential threat and has clashed with previous U.S. administrations over how to handle the regime, which doesn’t officially recognize it. Most notably, Netanyahu openly lobbied against President Barack Obama’s landmark 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, which his successor, Donald Trump, pulled out of. Iran has been on the receiving end of a concerted U.S. and Israeli campaign to degrade its military capabilities, with attacks killing senior commanders who were working with proxy forces throughout the region and nuclear scientists at home. ‘Sleepwalking’ into war? While the White House believes the Israelis aren’t looking for a wider conflict or a direct war with Iran, particularly given the resources they have fighting in Gaza, U.S. officials can’t be certain, the senior administration official said. “There’s this urgency to act, and that’s what happened in Damascus,” the official said, referring to the April 1 strike on the consular building, which killed two generals and five officers in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. The official said it’s the same frustration U.S. officials have with the way Israel is operating in Gaza. Fawaz Gerges, a professor of international relations and Middle Eastern politics at the London School of Economics, criticized Biden’s ability to translate his concerns into influence over Israel’s military decision-making. “The strategy of the Biden administration has failed miserably. Biden is sleepwalking the U.S. into another catastrophic war in the Middle East. His overarching goal of preventing the war in Gaza from escalating into neighboring countries has failed,” Gerges said. “Biden has failed to influence Netanyahu’s decisions either in Gaza or towards Iran.” President Joe Biden and members of his national security team Saturday. Adam Schultz / AP Benjamin Friedman, policy director of the think tank Defense Priorities, said in a statement that “the Israeli government has courted a fight with Iran, perhaps encouraged by the prospect of U.S. help in going after Iran.” “Instead of talking about ‘ironclad’ support for Israel, the president should have made clear the U.S. support is limited and does not extend to all circumstances,” Friedman said. “War with Iran would imperil U.S. security for no obvious pay off.” Defense Priorities, based in Washington, advocates restraint in U.S. foreign policy. Regardless of the relative caution U.S. officials were advocating, a U.S. military official told NBC News that U.S. forces in the region continue to shoot down Iranian-launched drones targeting Israel. “Our forces remain postured to provide additional defensive support and to protect U.S. forces operating in the region,” the official said. Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant warned in a statement Sunday that the confrontation between Iran and Israel “is not over yet. … We must be prepared for every scenario.” He called Iran “a terrorist state.” As for Iran, Amal Saad, a lecturer at Cardiff University’s School of Law and Politics who specializes in the Iran-backed Lebanese political movement and militia Hezbollah, warned against interpreting the limited destruction caused by Iran’s strikes as reason to dismiss its intentions or willingness to enter into a conflict with Israel if provoked. The strikes, which closed down schools and sent thousands of Israelis into bunkers as sirens sounded, rockets streaked overhead and fighter jets roared, was deeply disruptive in Israel, and its scale showed that “Iran’s strategic patience was exhausted,” Saad said, referring to Iran’s tactic of military restraint and deterrence. A man holds a model artillery shell during a celebration in Tehran on Sunday in support of Iran's attack against Israel. Morteza Nikoubazl / NurPhoto via Getty Images Iran, Saad said, was humiliated by Israel’s bombing of its diplomatic compound, and national dignity is “one of Iran’s foundational values.” It would have been impossible for Iran “to absorb that type of humiliation,” she said. It “would mean Iran is no longer Iran.” Further strikes from Israel could inflame an Iran already at its limit. That willingness was clearly underlined by Bagheri, Iran’s military chief of staff, whose statement said that “if Israel attacks our interests we will respond with force and our next operation will be much bigger.” Gerges of the London School of Economics said: “The bottom line is the Middle East appears to be descending into a wider regional war. For now, the ball is in Israel’s court. Israel’s next move will determine if the region descends into further military escalation or de-escalation.”

Shooting at Baltimore mall sends girl, 7, to hospital 2024-04-14 13:07:40+00:00 - BALTIMORE (AP) — A 7-year-old girl was hospitalized Saturday after she was shot at a Baltimore shopping mall. Baltimore police say the girl was shot Saturday afternoon at Mondawmin Mall. According to police, two groups at the mall got into an altercation, and an unidentified male fired a shot as he was running away that struck the girl in the upper body. The girl, who was at the mall with her mother, was not the intended victim, officials said. Police said she was taken to the hospital with multiple gunshot wounds and was in critical but stable condition Saturday evening. Authorities were searching for the suspect Sunday. In December, a man delivering packages at the mall was shot in the ankle at the mall’s parking lot when he became caught between two groups of boys who were shooting at each other.

AI-generated fashion models could bring more diversity to the industry - or leave it with less 2024-04-14 13:00:06+00:00 - CHICAGO (AP) — London-based model Alexsandrah has a twin, but not in the way you’d expect: Her counterpart is made of pixels instead of flesh and blood. The virtual twin was generated by artificial intelligence and has already appeared as a stand-in for the real-life Alexsandrah in a photo shoot. Alexsandrah, who goes by her first name professionally, in turn receives credit and compensation whenever the AI version of herself gets used — just like a human model. Alexsandrah says she and her alter-ego mirror each other “even down to the baby hairs.” And it is yet another example of how AI is transforming creative industries — and the way humans may or may not be compensated. Proponents say the growing use of AI in fashion modeling showcases diversity in all shapes and sizes, allowing consumers to make more tailored purchase decisions that in turn reduces fashion waste from product returns. And digital modeling saves money for companies and creates opportunities for people who want to work with the technology. But critics raise concerns that digital models may push human models — and other professionals like makeup artists and photographers — out of a job. Unsuspecting consumers could also be fooled into thinking AI models are real, and companies could claim credit for fulfilling diversity commitments without employing actual humans. “Fashion is exclusive, with limited opportunities for people of color to break in,” said Sara Ziff, a former fashion model and founder of the Model Alliance, a nonprofit aiming to advance workers’ rights in the fashion industry. “I think the use of AI to distort racial representation and marginalize actual models of color reveals this troubling gap between the industry’s declared intentions and their real actions.” Women of color in particular have long faced higher barriers to entry in modeling and AI could upend some of the gains they’ve made. Data suggests that women are more likely to work in occupations in which the technology could be applied, and are more at risk of displacement than men. In March 2023, iconic denim brand Levi Strauss & Co. announced that it would be testing AI-generated models produced by Amsterdam-based company Lalaland.ai to add a wider range of body types and underrepresented demographics on its website. But after receiving widespread backlash, Levi clarified that it was not pulling back on its plans for live photo shoots, the use of live models or its commitment to working with diverse models. “We do not see this (AI) pilot as a means to advance diversity or as a substitute for the real action that must be taken to deliver on our diversity, equity and inclusion goals and it should not have been portrayed as such,” Levi said in its statement at the time. The company last month said that it has no plans to scale the AI program. The Associated Press reached out to several other retailers to ask whether they use AI fashion models. Target, Kohl’s and fast-fashion giant Shein declined to comment; Temu did not respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, spokespeople for Nieman Marcus, H&M, Walmart and Macy’s said their respective companies do not use AI models, although Walmart clarified that “suppliers may have a different approach to photography they provide for their products but we don’t have that information.” Nonetheless, companies that generate AI models are finding a demand for the technology, including Lalaland.ai, which was co-founded by Michael Musandu after he was feeling frustrated by the absence of clothing models who looked like him. “One model does not represent everyone that’s actually shopping and buying a product,” he said. “As a person of color, I felt this painfully myself.” Musandu says his product is meant to supplement traditional photo shoots, not replace them. Instead of seeing one model, shoppers could see nine to 12 models using different size filters, which would enrich their shopping experience and help reduce product returns and fashion waste. The technology is actually creating new jobs, since Lalaland.ai pays humans to train its algorithms, Musandu said. And if brands “are serious about inclusion efforts, they will continue to hire these models of color,” he added. London-based model Alexsandrah, who is Black, says her digital counterpart has helped her distinguish herself in the fashion industry. In fact, the real-life Alexsandrah has even stood in for a Black computer-generated model named Shudu, created by Cameron Wilson, a former fashion photographer turned CEO of The Diigitals, a U.K.-based digital modeling agency. Wilson, who is white and uses they/them pronouns, designed Shudu in 2017, described on Instagram as the “The World’s First Digital Supermodel.” But critics at the time accused Wilson of cultural appropriation and digital Blackface. Wilson took the experience as a lesson and transformed The Diigitals to make sure Shudu — who has been booked by Louis Vuitton and BMW — didn’t take away opportunities but instead opened possibilities for women of color. Alexsandrah, for instance, has modeled in-person as Shudu for Vogue Australia, and writer Ama Badu came up with Shudu’s backstory and portrays her voice for interviews. Alexsandrah said she is “extremely proud” of her work with The Diigitals, which created her own AI twin: “It’s something that even when we are no longer here, the future generations can look back at and be like, ‘These are the pioneers.’” But for Yve Edmond, a New York City area-based model who works with major retailers to check the fit of clothing before it’s sold to consumers, the rise of AI in fashion modeling feels more insidious. Edmond worries modeling agencies and companies are taking advantage of models, who are generally independent contractors afforded few labor protections in the U.S., by using their photos to train AI systems without their consent or compensation. She described one incident in which a client asked to photograph Edmond moving her arms, squatting and walking for “research” purposes. Edmond refused and later felt swindled — her modeling agency had told her she was being booked for a fitting, not to build an avatar. “This is a complete violation,” she said. “It was really disappointing for me.” But absent AI regulations, it’s up to companies to be transparent and ethical about deploying AI technology. And Ziff, the founder of the Model Alliance, likens the current lack of legal protections for fashion workers to “the Wild West.” That’s why the Model Alliance is pushing for legislation like the one being considered in New York state, in which a provision of the Fashion Workers Act would require management companies and brands to obtain models’ clear written consent to create or use a model’s digital replica; specify the amount and duration of compensation, and prohibit altering or manipulating models’ digital replica without consent. Alexsandrah says that with ethical use and the right legal regulations, AI might open up doors for more models of color like herself. She has let her clients know that she has an AI replica, and she funnels any inquires for its use through Wilson, who she describes as “somebody that I know, love, trust and is my friend.” Wilson says they make sure any compensation for Alexsandrah’s AI is comparable to what she would make in-person. Edmond, however, is more of a purist: “We have this amazing Earth that we’re living on. And you have a person of every shade, every height, every size. Why not find that person and compensate that person?” ____ Associated Press Writers Anne D’Innocenzio and Haleluya Hadero contributed to this story from New York. ____ The Associated Press’ women in the workforce and state government coverage receives financial support from Pivotal Ventures. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

At last G20 is showing how to finance an assault on poverty | Larry Elliott 2024-04-14 11:44:00+00:00 - All things considered, the world’s richest countries have emerged from the global pandemic in better shape than they could have imagined when Covid-19 first appeared just over four years ago. To be sure, the impact of lockdown and its aftermath has been painful, but the effects on poor countries have been far more severe. Rich countries were able to rack up budget deficits to pay for furloughs and prevent mass unemployment. Rich countries could print money through quantitative easing schemes without the risk that the financial markets would punish them. Rich-country governments could subsidise energy bills after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Poor countries could do none of these things. In 2015, the international community set itself targets – the sustainable development goals (SDGs) – to be hit by 2030. The first two goals were the elimination of extreme poverty and achieving a world with zero hunger. On current trends, both are going to be spectacularly missed. About 600 million people will be living under the extreme poverty threshold of $2.15 a day – twice the target level envisaged under the SDGs. Unless progress is accelerated, undernutrition will be around the same in 2030 as it was in 2015. Things were looking grim even before the start of the pandemic. They look a lot bleaker now. The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, which hold their spring meetings in Washington this week, are well aware of the problems poor countries face. The Bank warned earlier this year of a wasted decade for low-income nations. Its president, Ajay Banga, said last week: “Many of the world’s poorest countries are facing an intense debt crisis. No one can dispute the seriousness of that.” Banga, who has been running the Bank for less than a year, wants his organisation to be faster, less bureaucratic, more effective and more efficient – all laudatory aims. More questionable is whether he can use the Bank’s power and financial clout to persuade private capital to provide the trillions of dollars needed to reduce combat and equip poor countries meet the challenge of global heating. One thing is clear: the private sector will not invest without some pump-priming by the public sector first. Poor-country governments need to spend more on schemes to boost food production, infrastructure, health, education and clean energy programmes, and they will require help from bilateral donors and multilateral organisations in order to do so. Here there is both bad and good news. The bad news is that we’ve been here before many times, with promises of new money for development made and quickly broken. When the SDGs were established it was obvious that they would not be met without financial support from bilateral and multilateral donors. The 2015 Addis Ababa action agenda was supposed to provide a blueprint for financing the SDGs, acting as a new global partnership that would be good for people and good for the planet. Sadly, but all too predictably, the commitments have not been met, and the large funding gaps help explain why targets are set to be missed. More recently the G20 was supposed to have put in place a comprehensive and speedy mechanism – the Common Framework – to relieve poor countries of their unsustainable debts. The scheme has not delivered on either count: only a handful of countries have participated and progress has been at a glacial pace. Meanwhile, the most heavily indebted countries are spending more on debt payments than they are on poverty and hunger programmes. Doubtless there will be much talk in Washington this week about the various initiatives western governments are supporting. There will be talk of how not just billions but trillions of dollars of private-sector cash is waiting out there ready to be mobilised and that all that is needed is the catalyst. But it is a time for action not words. The good news is that Banga has given the Bank a new sense of urgency. He will find a willing partner in Brazil, which holds the presidency of the G20 group of leading developed and developing nations and is pushing for collective action on poverty and hunger. A forthcoming report* prepared for Brazil by the ODI, a UK-based development thinktank, supports President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s plans for a global alliance to tackle poverty and hunger, and highlights ways that new sources of finance could be found. One idea is to make better use of the multilateral banks, and to cut down on the high transaction costs that accompany small amounts of aid. A second would link debt relief to anti-poverty programmes. Debt swaps have been used to support marine conservation in several countries, and Brazil wants to extend this approach to hunger and malnutrition. Countries would agree to spend savings granted by creditors for these specific purposes. A third idea would draw on the experience of the Just Energy Transition Partnerships – intergovernmental partnerships that coordinate financial resources and technical assistance from developed countries to help donor countries phase out fossil fuels – to create similar mechanisms for poverty and hunger. In 2021 the IMF issued £650bn of special drawing rights – a form of money creation – and divided them up between its member states. The SDRs were not needed by rich nations but would make a real difference to the financial wellbeing of poor countries. The reallocation of SDRs should be accelerated. All power to Lula. For the first time since Gordon Brown used the 2009 London summit to boost global financial firepower following the near meltdown of the banks, there is the possibility of the G20 actually delivering. He deserves support. *Financing the fight against poverty and hunger – mobilising resources for a Sustainable Development Goal reset.

Political ads could be heading to UK TV screens due to legal loophole 2024-04-14 11:31:00+00:00 - Some viewers are already irritated by the adverts interrupting shows on the ITV catchup service. But they could soon yearn for the halcyon days of shampoo or insurance commercials after being presented with the faces of Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer. ITV is considering taking paid ads from political parties for the first time during the upcoming general election thanks to a loophole in broadcasting law. The broadcaster told the Guardian it was considering whether to allow political parties to buy space on its ITVX streaming platform. This could leave viewers having Love Island or Saturday Night Takeaway broken up by a lecture on the economy. Ever since commercial television began in 1955, British political parties have been banned by law from buying television adverts. The idea was that this improved the quality of public debate and stopped wealthy political parties buying their way into voters’ homes – ensuring the UK has avoided the political attack ads that are prevalent during American elections. But the ban – last updated in 2003 – only applies to traditional television channels and not to streaming television delivered over the internet. With audiences increasingly switching off traditional broadcast channels, the UK’s big political parties are preparing to take advantage of the loophole and pay millions of pounds to insert themselves into living rooms. Tom Edmonds, who ran digital advertising campaigns for the Conservatives in the 2010s, said politicians were desperate to pay to access screens. He said if British broadcasters did not run such ads, US tech companies would happily take the money. “You are going to see political ads on your TV. A lot of it will go on YouTube because you can get it in HD on your TV,” he added. In the past, British political parties did not have enough money to buy campaign adverts. But Labour and the Conservatives are set to take advantage of a little-noticed rule change announced last year by Michael Gove, which will increase the amount national political parties can spend on a general election campaign from £19.5m in 2019 to £35m for the next general election. Edmonds, who now runs the digital consultancy Edmonds Elder, predicted the vast amount of this additional money would go on adverts directly targeting voters. “The spending limits have doubled and most of that extra spend is going to go on digital, as you can’t actually spend it any other way. I don’t think anyone comprehends how much is going to be spent on advertising in this election,” he said. Smaller political parties such as the Liberal Democrats, who are unlikely to raise the maximum £35m, are already concerned they could be squeezed out as voters are swamped with paid-for adverts – and left relying on the handful of free party political broadcasts that are given to all parties. The media regulator Ofcom confirmed there was no legal ban on political campaigns buying adverts on video streaming services, meaning it is up to the individual streamers and broadcasters to choose their own policies. This poses a challenge for companies such as ITV: either they take advantage of the streaming political advertising loophole and potentially earn substantial payments from parties, or they leave the cash on the table – and watch as YouTube, Instagram and Facebook take the money. ITV, which is struggling with the wider downturn in television advertisers, said it would only run adverts that were fully compliant with all rules. A spokesperson said: “Political advertising is prohibited on live television (including live simulcast channels within ITVX) but there are no such rules for streaming services such as ITVX more broadly or for video-sharing platforms such as YouTube, or social media networks such as Facebook. “It is for political parties to consider where they wish to run their campaigns. As a commercial PSB [public service broadcaster], we’re considering our position on this issue very carefully.” One consideration is the high trust that the British public still have for traditional television broadcasters – and whether that would be hurt by taking political adverts. Channel 4 continues to apply its political advert ban to its streaming service, while Sky said it would not be accepting political adverts on its Now TV streaming service. The US-owned streaming companies Netflix and Amazon Prime Video already have global bans on political adverts. The last time the UK’s political ad ban was challenged was in 2013, when the European court of human rights narrowly upheld the UK’s policy and said it did not unduly compromise freedom of expression. At the time, the then Conservative culture secretary, Maria Miller, celebrated the court’s decision, saying it “ensures the political views broadcast into our homes are not determined by those with the deepest pockets”. A decade later, rapid changes in technology and viewing habits mean this approach is increasingly impossible to maintain.

All the players in Trump's hush money trial: Judge Juan Merchan, Michael Cohen, Stormy Daniels and more 2024-04-14 11:00:00+00:00 - The trial in the New York criminal case against Donald Trump begins Monday with jury selection, the first of the four criminal cases against the former president to reach this pivotal stage. The charges against Trump stem from an investigation by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office into an alleged “catch and kill” scheme to bury negative stories about Trump before the 2016 presidential election in a bid to influence the outcome. According to prosecutors, several people participated in the scheme, which involved paying people off to buy their silence and covering up the payments in Trump’s business records. Here are the key people in the case who will come up during the trial, potentially as witnesses:

Netflix’s New Film Strategy: More About the Audience, Less About Auteurs 2024-04-14 09:02:49+00:00 - Back in, say, 2019, if a filmmaker signed a deal with Netflix, it meant that he or she would be well paid and receive complete creative freedom. Theatrical release? Not so much. Still, the paycheck and the latitude — and the potential to reach the streaming service’s huge subscriber base — helped compensate for the lack of hoopla that comes when a traditional studio opens a film in multiplexes around the world. But those days are a thing of the past. Dan Lin arrived as Netflix’s new film chief on April 1, and he has already started making changes. He laid off around 15 people in the creative film executive group, including one vice president and two directors. (Netflix’s entire film department is around 150 people.) He reorganized his film department by genre rather than budget level and has indicated that Netflix is no longer only the home of expensive action flicks featuring big movie stars, like “The Gray Man” with Ryan Gosling and Chris Evans or “Red Notice” with Ryan Reynolds, Gal Gadot and Dwayne Johnson. Rather, Mr. Lin’s mandate is to improve the quality of the movies and produce a wider spectrum of films — at different budget levels — the better to appeal to the varied interests of Netflix’s 260 million subscribers. He will also be changing the formulas for how talent is paid, meaning no more enormous upfront deals.

Dana White, Donald Trump and the Rise of Cage-Match Politics 2024-04-14 09:02:31+00:00 - Dana White’s diplomatic ambitions were clear, if complicated: Un-cancel Bud Light. He had some calls to make. As the chief executive of the Ultimate Fighting Championship, Mr. White was the arena-filling, Trump-loving, perpetually smirking public face of a multi-billion-dollar sport. But in completing a reported nine-figure deal last fall to make Bud Light the U.F.C.’s official beer sponsor, Mr. White suddenly stood accused of selling out: Much of the political right — and, not incidentally, much of the U.F.C.’s audience — had been pulverizing Bud Light for months over a promotion featuring a transgender influencer. The brand, which first worked with the U.F.C. more than 15 years earlier, was plainly hoping that a renewed affiliation might help its cause. Publicly, Mr. White appealed to friends across the conservative media, defending Bud Light’s parent company in interviews with Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson and Charlie Kirk. “The fact that Anheuser-Busch wants to be in business with me?” Mr. White said, arguing that this alone demonstrated the success of the backlash.

Germany’s Scholz arrives in China on a visit marked by trade tensions and Ukraine conflict 2024-04-14 07:37:04+00:00 - BEIJING (AP) — German Chancellor Olaf Scholz arrived in China on Sunday on a visit focused on the increasingly tense economic relationship between the sides and differences over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Scholz’s first destination was the industrial hub of Chongqing, where he and his delegation of ministers and business leaders were to visit a partially German-funded company and other sites in the vast city, which is a production base for China’s auto and other industries. Scholz is also scheduled to visit the financial hub of Shanghai during his three-day visit, before traveling to the capital, Beijing, to meet with Chinese leader Xi Jinping and Premier Li Qiang. German companies such as BMW and Volkswagen are highly reliant on the Chinese market, but Beijing’s support for Russia creates frictions with the West. Germany’s economy has benefited from China’s demand for investment and manufactured items from cars to chemicals, but those ties have frayed amid increasing competition from Chinese companies and tightened regulations. Political interference has also been blamed for a sharp drop in foreign investment. German companies have argued they face unfair market barriers in China and the government has pushed for a policy of “de-risking” to reduce reliance on the Chinese market and suppliers. Despite that, China remained Germany’s top trading partner for the eighth straight year in 2023, with 254.1 billion euros ($271 billion) in goods and services exchanged between the sides, slightly more than what Germany traded with the U.S. but a 15.5% contraction from the year before. German exports to China totaled 97.3 billion euros ($104 billion), according to Germany’s Federal Statistical Office, although figures have varied depending on exchange rate fluctuations and rounding of numbers. Chinese state broadcaster CCTV showed Scholz descending from his plane in Chonqing and leaving in a motorcade, but did not carry any comments made to the welcoming delegation. Prior to his arrival, Scholz posted on social platform X that he had discussed the “massive” Russian air attacks on civilian energy infrastructure with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Saturday, and declared that Berlin will “stand unbreakably by Ukraine’s side.” China has refused to criticize Russian aggression. It has maintained trade relations with President Vladimir Putin’s government and aligned its foreign policy with Moscow in opposition to the U.S.-led liberal political order, while touting its authoritarian one-party system as a superior alternative. After visiting a hydrogen motor production facility run by German firm Bosch, Scholz toured the city with young architects and was to go on a boat cruise on the famed Yangtze River, one of two mighty waterways that partly surround the city perched on overlooking cliffs. Following a visit Monday to Shanghai, Scholz will fly to Beijing and meet with Xi Tuesday at the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse before being received with military honors by Li at the Great Hall of the People, the seat of the ceremonial legislature in the heart of the Chinese capital. Further visits and meetings will follow before he departs late Wednesday night. This is Scholz’s second trip to China since he became chancellor in late 2021. His previous visit was in November 2022 and essentially was a one-day trip because of the strict COVID restrictions still in place at the time. It is his first visit since the German government last year presented its China strategy, which met with criticism from Beijing. Premier Li and a delegation of senior officials visited Berlin in June. ___ Associated Press reporter Geir Moulson contributed to this report from Berlin.

India’s Modi vows to boost social spending, make country into a manufacturing hub ahead of election 2024-04-14 07:20:41+00:00 - NEW DELHI (AP) — Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday vowed to boost social spending, develop infrastructure and make India into a global manufacturing hub as companies shift away from China, as he unveiled his Hindu nationalist party’s election strategy. Modi hopes to return to power for a third five-year term. He and other leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party unveiled their promises in the world’s largest democracy days before the start of a multi-phase general election. Modi promised to expand social programs introduced during his party’s 10-year rule, including millions of free homes for the poor, along with health care, cooking gas and free grain. His government has been paying 6,000 rupees ($73) a year to poor farmers. He said his government’s policies have pulled 250 million people out of poverty since he came to power in 2014. India is the world’s most populous country with over 1.4 billion people. The BJP’s president, J.P. Nadda, said less than 1% of Indian people now live in extreme poverty. India holds its elections on different days in different parts of the country, stretching over weeks. Voting for the country’s parliament will begin on April 19 and run until June 1, and results will be announced on June 4. Most polls have predicted a victory for Modi and the BJP. But the opposition Congress Party argues that Modi has undermined India’s democracy and favored the interests of the rich. Modi has been campaigning extensively across the country, promising to expand India’s economy to $5 trillion by 2027 from around $3.7 trillion. He also promises to put India on track to become a developed country by 2047, when the country celebrates 100 years of independence from British colonialists. On Sunday, he said his party would develop India as a hub for the pharmaceutical, energy, semiconductor and tourism industries. He also said India will modernize its infrastructure, including its railways, airways, and waterways. And he said he will seek to increase jobs for young people and access to cheap loans for young entrepreneurs. Modi is broadly popular in India, where he’s considered a champion of the country’s Hindu majority and has overseen rapid economic growth. But critics say another term for the BJP could undermine India’s status as a secular, democratic nation, saying its 10 years in power have brought attacks by Hindu nationalists against the country’s minorities, particularly Muslims, and a shrinking space for dissent and free media.

Israel is quiet on next steps against Iran -- and on which partners helped shoot down missiles 2024-04-14 06:33:11+00:00 - Follow AP’s live updates on Iran’s attack against Israel. TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) — Israeli leaders on Sunday credited an international military coalition with helping thwart a direct Iranian attack involving hundreds of drones and missiles, calling the coordinated response a starting point for a “strategic alliance” of regional opposition to Tehran. But Israel’s War Cabinet met without making a decision on next steps, an official said, as a nervous world waited for any sign of further escalation of the former shadow war. The military coalition, led by the United States, Britain and France and appearing to include a number of Middle Eastern countries, gave Israel support at a time when it finds itself isolated over its war against Hamas in Gaza. The coalition also could serve as a model for regional relations when that war ends. “This was the first time that such a coalition worked together against the threat of Iran and its proxies in the Middle East,” said the Israeli military spokesman, Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari. One unknown is which of Israel’s neighbors participated in the shooting down of the vast majority of about 350 drones and missiles Iran launched. Israeli military officials and a key War Cabinet member noted additional “partners” without naming them. When pressed, White House national security spokesman John Kirby would not name them either. But one appeared to be Jordan, which described its action as self-defense. “There was an assessment that there was a real danger of Iranian marches and missiles falling on Jordan, and the armed forces dealt with this danger. And if this danger came from Israel, Jordan would take the same action,” Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman al-Safadi said in an interview on Al-Mamlaka state television. U.S. President Joe Biden spoke with Jordan’s King Abdullah on Sunday. The U.S. has long tried to forge a regionwide alliance against Iran as a way of integrating Israel and boosting ties with the Arab world. The effort has included the 2020 Abraham Accords, which established diplomatic relations between Israel and four Arab countries, and having Israel in the U.S. military’s Central Command, which oversees operations in the Middle East and works closely with the armies of moderate Arab states. The U.S. had been working to establish full relations between Israel and regional heavyweight Saudi Arabia before the Oct. 7 Hamas attack sparked Israel’s war in Gaza. The war, which has claimed over 33,700 Palestinian lives, has frozen those efforts due to widespread outrage across the Arab world. But it appears that some behind-the-scenes cooperation has continued, and the White House has held out hopes of forging Israel-Saudi ties as part of a postwar plan. Just ahead of Iran’s attack, the commander of CENTCOM, Gen. Erik Kurilla, visited Israel to map out a strategy. Israel’s military chief, Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi, on Sunday thanked CENTCOM for the joint defensive effort. Both Jordan and Saudi Arabia are under the CENTCOM umbrella. While neither acknowledged involvement in intercepting Iran’s launches, the Israeli military released a map showing missiles traveling through the airspace of both nations. “Arab countries came to the aid of Israel in stopping the attack because they understand that regional organizing is required against Iran, otherwise they will be next in line,” Amos Yadlin, a former head of Israel’s military intelligence, wrote on X, formerly Twitter. Israel’s defense minister, Yoav Gallant, said he had spoken with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and that the cooperation “highlighted the opportunity to establish an international coalition and strategic alliance to counter the threat posed by Iran.” The White House signaled that it hopes to build on the partnerships and urged Israel to think twice before striking Iran. U.S. officials said Biden told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Washington would not participate in any offensive action against Iran. Israel’s War Cabinet met late Sunday to discuss a possible response, but an Israeli official familiar with the talks said no decisions had been made. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was discussing confidential deliberations. Asked about plans for retaliation, Hagari declined to comment directly. “We are at high readiness in all fronts,” he said. “We will build a regional coalition and collect the price from Iran, in the way and at the time that suits us,” said a key War Cabinet member, Benny Gantz. Iran launched the attack in response to a strike widely blamed on Israel that hit an Iranian consular building in Syria this month and killed two Iranian generals. By Sunday morning, Iran said the attack was over, and Israel reopened its airspace. Iran’s president, Ebrahim Raisi, claimed Iran had taught Israel a lesson and warned that “any new adventures against the interests of the Iranian nation would be met with a heavier and regretful response from the Islamic Republic of Iran.” The foes have been engaged in a shadow war for years, but Sunday’s assault was the first time Iran launched a direct military assault on Israel, despite decades of enmity dating back to the country’s 1979 Islamic Revolution. Iran said it targeted Israeli facilities involved in the Damascus strike, and that it told the White House early Sunday that the operation would be “minimalistic.” But U.S. officials said Iran’s intent was to “destroy and cause casualties” and that if successful, the strikes would have caused an “uncontrollable” escalation. At one point, at least 100 ballistic missiles were in the air with just minutes of flight time to Israel, the officials said. Israel said more than 99% of what Iran fired was intercepted, with just a few missiles getting through. An Israeli airbase sustained minor damage. Israel has over the years established — often with the help of the U.S. — a multilayered air-defense network that includes systems capable of intercepting a variety of threats, including long-range missiles, cruise missiles, drones and short-range rockets. That system, along with collaboration with the U.S. and others, helped thwart what could have been a far more devastating assault at a time when Israel is already deeply engaged in Gaza as well as low-level fighting on its northern border with Lebanon’s Hezbollah militia. Both Hamas and Hezbollah are backed by Iran. While thwarting the Iranian onslaught could help restore Israel’s image after the Hamas attack in October, what the Middle East’s best-equipped army does next will be closely watched in the region and in Western capitals — especially as Israel seeks to develop the coalition it praised Sunday. In Washington, Biden pledged to convene allies to develop a unified response. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the U.S. would hold talks with allies. After an urgent meeting, the Group of Seven countries unanimously condemned Iran’s attack and said they stood ready to take “further measures.” Israel and Iran have been on a collision course throughout Israel’s war in Gaza. In the Oct. 7 attack, militants from Hamas and Islamic Jihad, also backed by Iran, killed 1,200 people in Israel and kidnapped 250 others. Israel’s offensive in Gaza has killed over 33,000 people, according to local health officials. Hamas welcomed Iran’s attack, saying it was “a natural right and a deserved response” to the strike in Syria. It urged the Iran-backed groups in the region to continue to support Hamas in the war. Hezbollah also welcomed the attack. Almost immediately after the war in Gaza erupted, Hezbollah began attacking Israel’s northern border. The two sides have been involved in daily exchanges of fire, while Iranian-backed groups in Iraq, Syria and Yemen have launched rockets and missiles toward Israel. ___ Federman reported from Jerusalem. Associated Press writers Zeke Miller and Michelle L. Price in Washington; Amir Vahdat in Tehran, Iran; Samy Magdy in Cairo; Omar Akour in Amman, Jordan; and Giada Zampano in Rome contributed to this report.