ISIS chief Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi killed in US raid in Syria: Trump

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.

Riyadh, Mar 15: Saudi Aramco on Sunday reported a 20.6 percent drop in its net profit for 2019 due to low oil prices and production levels, the company said in a statement.

These are the first annual results to be announced by the energy giant after its historical $29.4 billion initial public offering and listing on the Saudi Tadawul market last December.

Aramco posted net profits of $88.2 billion last year compared to $111.1 billion in 2018, Monday's statement said.

"The decrease was primarily due to lower crude oil prices and production volumes, coupled with declining refining and chemical margins," it said.

The company also made $1.6 billion of impairment provisions for losses associated with Sadara Chemical Company, an Aramco subsidiary.

"2019 was an exceptional year for Saudi Aramco. Through a variety of circumstances -- some planned and some not -- the world was offered unprecedented insight into Saudi Aramco's agility and resilience," CEO Amin Nasser said.

"Our unique scale, low costs, and resilience came together to deliver both growth and world-leading returns, while also maintaining our position as one of the world's most reliable energy companies," Nasser said.

The earnings for last year are not affected by the coronavirus outbreak or the ongoing price war between Saudi Arabia and Russia that has sent oil prices crashing.

Aramco said it will distribute dividends worth $73.2 billion for 2019 but based on its commitments under the IPO, its dividends for the next five years starting this year will be at least $75 billion.

It said its capital spending last year dropped to $32.8 billion from $35.1 billion in 2018.

The company expects capital spending, which is expenditure on projects, to be between $25 billion and $30 billion this year "in light of current market conditions and recent commodity price volatility."

But it said that capital expenditure for 2021 and beyond is currently under review.

The results were announced amid a price war between Saudi Arabia and Russia after they failed to agree on additional output cuts to support prices dented by the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic.

"The recent COVID-19 outbreak and its rapid spread illustrate the importance of agility and adaptability in an ever-changing global landscape," Nasser said.

The kingdom said last week Aramco will pump 12.3 million barrels of oil per day, boosting output by at least 2.5 million bpd.

It also announced plans to raise production capacity from 12 million bpd to 13 million bpd.

Forecasts for future crude prices and demand are also bleak.

In its latest monthly report, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries lowered its forecast for global average daily demand by 0.92 million barrels to 99.73 million barrels.

Saudi Arabia is also in the midst of a royal purge that saw King Salman's brother and nephew detained after sources said they were accused of plotting a palace coup to unseat the crown prince, heir to the Saudi throne.

Aramco shares rallied immediately after the listing on December 11, rising by 19 percent to 38 riyals ($10.1) and temporarily lifting the company's valuation above the $2 trillion mark, which was sought by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia's de facto ruler.

But as oil prices tumble, Aramco shares have lost 29 percent from its highest point, slipping below the listing price.

On Thursday, Aramco's market value dropped to around $1.55 trillion, but it still remains the world's largest publicly listed company.

Jeddah, Jul 26: The city of Makkah is opening its arms again to welcome pilgrims for the annual Hajj — although only a handful compared with previous years.

Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, this year’s event is limited to about 1,000 pilgrims, all from inside Saudi Arabia, about 700 of whom are expatriates.

Abdullah Al-Kathiri, an Emirati and a recovered COVID-19 patient, postponed his pilgrimage last year because it coincided with his wedding plans. “I’ve heard from many who’ve performed the pilgrimage in past years that it was always a smooth process, even with the massive numbers,” he said. “So you could imagine how it would be with the limited number of pilgrims this year. Surely it will be a great experience.”

Khadija, a Bulgarian expatriate, was overcome with tears when she heard she would be performing Hajj this year. “I didn’t expect they’d accept,” she said. “I’m sure this year’s Hajj will be an exceptional one in all respects.”

Dr. Haifa Yousef Hamdoon, a Tunisian physician in Qassim, is another who did not expect to be accepted because of the low numbers this year. “When I received confirmation of my request, I was overjoyed and couldn’t believe it,” she said.

Mu’taz Mohamed, a Sudanese pilgrim who also lives in Qassim region, praised the preventive and precautionary health measures taken in order to ensure his safety and that of other pilgrims, to enable them to perform the rituals safely.

After completing their arrival procedures, the pilgrims were taken to their accommodation in Makkah, supervised by the Ministry of Hajj and Umrah. They will stay there for four days before beginning their pilgrimage on July 30.