Father chops off 18-year-old son’s hand for watching porn on phone

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.

May 11: Saudi Arabia will triple its value-added tax rate and suspend a cost of living allowance for state workers, it said on Monday, seeking to shield finances hit by low oil prices and a slump in demand for its lifeline export worsened by the new coronavirus.

Historic oil output cuts agreed by Riyadh and other major producers have given only limited support to prices after they sank on oversupply caused by a war for petroleum market share between the kingdom and its fellow oil titan Russia.

Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil exporter, is also being hit hard by measures to fight the new coronavirus, which are likely to curb the pace and scale of economic reforms launched by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

"The cost of living allowance will be suspended as of June 1, and the value added tax will be increased to 15% from 5% as of July 1," Finance Minister Mohammed al-Jadaan said in a statement reported by the state news agency. "These measures are painful but necessary to maintain financial and economic stability over the medium to long term...and to overcome the unprecedented coronavirus crisis with the least damage possible."

The austerity measures come after the kingdom posted a $9 billion budget deficit in the first quarter.

The minister said non-oil revenues were affected by the suspension and decline in economic activity, while spending had risen due to unplanned strains on the healthcare sector and the initiatives taken to support the economy.

"All these challenges have cut state revenues, pressured public finances to a level that is hard to deal with going forward without affecting the overall economy in the medium to long term, which requires more spending cuts and measures to support non-oil revenues stability," he added.

The government has cancelled and put on hold some operating and capital expenditures for some government agencies, and cut allocations for some reform initiatives and projects worth a total 100 billion riyals ($26.6 billion), the statement said.

Central bank foreign reserves fell in March at their fastest rate in at least 20 years and to their lowest since 2011, while oil revenues in the first three months of the year fell 24% from a year earlier to $34 billion, pulling total revenues down 22%.

"The reforms are positive from a fiscal side as greater adjustment is essential. However, the tripling of VAT is unlikely to help that much in 2020 revenue wise with the expected fall in consumption," said Monica Malik, chief economist at Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank.

She said she kept unchanged her deficit forecast of 16.3% of GDP for this year, which already factors in a greater than previously announced spending cut.

About 1.5 million Saudis are employed in the government sector, according to official figures released in December.

In 2018, Saudi Arabia's King Salman ordered a monthly payment of 1,000 riyals ($267) to every state employee to compensate them for the rising living costs after the government hiked domestic gas prices and introduced value-added tax.

DIFFICULT TIMES

A committee has been formed to study all financial benefits paid to public sector employees and contractors, and will submit recommendations within 30 days, the statement said.

In late 2015, when oil prices fell from record highs, the kingdom slashed lavish bonuses, overtime payments and other benefits once considered routine perks in the public sector.

In a country without elections and with political legitimacy resting partly on distribution of oil revenue, the ability of citizens to adapt to such reforms is crucial for stability.

"Tripling the VAT will test the limits of the balance between revenues and consumption as the economy dives into a deep recession. The move will impact consumption and could also lower the expected revenues," said John Sfakianakis, a Gulf expert at the University of Cambridge.

"These are pro-austerity and pro-revenue moves rather than pro-growth ones," he said.

Hasnain Malik, head of equity strategy at Tellimer, said the VAT rise could bring about $24-$26.5 billion in additional non-oil fiscal revenue. The rise would hit consumer spending further but was a needed step towards fiscal sustainability, he said.

Bhopal, Mar 13: The Madhya Pradesh Economic Offences Wing (EOW) on Thursday decided to verify facts afresh in a complaint against former Union Minister Jyotiraditya Scindia and his family, in which they are accused of falsifying a property document while selling land.

The development came after Mr Scindia quit the Congress and joined the BJP on Wednesday. 22 MLAs who belong to his camp also resigned, threatening the survival of the Kamal Nath government in the state.

"Yes, an order has been given for re-verification of facts in the complaint filed by Surendra Shrivastava," an Economic Offences Wing official told PTI.

An EOW release said Mr Shrivastava on Thursday filed a new complaint against Mr Scindia and his family, alleging that by falsifying a registry document, they sold him a piece of land at Mahalgaon which was smaller by 6,000 sq feet than the original agreement in 2009.

He had lodged the complaint first on March 26, 2014. But it was investigated and closed in 2018, the EOW official said. "As he again petitioned us today, we will re-verify the facts," the officer said.

Jyotiraditya Scindia's close aide Pankaj Chaturvedi alleged that it was political vendetta.

"The case had been closed for want of evidence. Now for vengeance, it is being reopened. We have full faith in the Constitution and law. We will get justice and Kamal Nath government a befitting reply," Mr Chaturvedi said.