United News of Bangladesh

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has said water is the lifeblood of the world and climate change is wreaking havoc on water’s natural cycle. He said from health and nutrition, to education and infrastructure, water is vital to every aspect of human survival and wellbeing, and the economic development and prosperity of every nation. "We don’t have a moment to lose. Let’s make 2023 a year of transformation and investment for humanity’s lifeblood. Let’s take action to protect, sustainably manage and ensure equitable access to water for all," said the UN chief in a message marking World Water Day today. "But drop by drop, this precious lifeblood is being poisoned by pollution and drained by vampiric overuse, with water demand expected to exceed supply by 40 percent by decade’s end," Guterres said. Also Read: 26% of the world have no access to clean drinking water: UN He said greenhouse gas pollution continues to rise to all-time record levels, heating the world’s climate to dangerous levels. "This is worsening water-related disasters, disease outbreaks, water shortages and droughts, while inflicting damage to infrastructure, food production, and supply chains," Guterres said. The theme of this year’s World Water Day reminds all of the cost of these failures on the billions of people who lack access to safe water and sanitation. Out of every 100 people on earth, 25 fetch all their water from open streams and ponds — or pay high prices to buy water of dubious safety. Twenty-two relieve themselves outdoors or use dirty, dangerous or broken latrines. And 44 see their wastewater flow back into nature untreated, with disastrous health and environmental consequences. "In short, our world is dramatically — and dangerously — off-track to reaching our goal of safely managed water and sanitation for all by 2030," Guterres said. This year’s World Water Day reminds all of their individual and collective roles to protect and sustainably use and manage humanity’s lifeblood for present and future generations, he said. The United Nations Water Conference, which kicks off today (March 22), is a critical moment for national governments, local and regional authorities, businesses, scientists, youth, civil society organizations and communities to join forces, and co-design and invest in solutions to achieve clean water and sanitation for all, said the UN Secretary-General. Meanwhile, he said, governments, businesses and investors must take much bolder actions to limit temperature rise to 1.5 degrees, with the G20 leading the way. "We must break our addiction to fossil fuels and embrace renewable energy, while supporting developing countries every step of the way," said the UN chief.    

A new report launched Tuesday on the eve of the first major U.N. conference on water in over 45 years says 26% of the world’s population doesn’t have access to safe drinking water and 46% lack access to basic sanitation. The U.N. World Water Development Report 2023 painted a stark picture of the huge gap that needs to be filled to meet U.N. goals to ensure all people have access to clean water and sanitation by 2030. Richard Connor, editor-in-chief of the report, told a news conference that the estimated cost of meeting the goals is somewhere between $600 billion and $1 trillion a year. But equally important, Connor said, is forging partnerships with investors, financiers, governments and climate change communities to ensure that money is invested in ways to sustain the environment and provide potable water to the 2 billion people who don’t have it and sanitation to the 3.6 million in need. Also Read: UN Experts: Water is a common good not a commodity According to the report, water use has been increasing globally by roughly 1% per year over the last 40 years “and is expected to grow at a similar rate through to 2050, driven by a combination of population growth, socio-economic development and changing consumption patterns.” Connor said that actual increase in demand is happening in developing countries and emerging economies where it is driven by industrial growth and especially the rapid increase in the population of cities. It is in these urban areas “that you’re having a real big increase in demand,” he said. With agriculture using 70% of all water globally, Connor said, irrigation for crops has to be more efficient — as it is in some countries that now use drip irrigation, which saves water. “That allows water to be available to cities,” he said. Also Read: Millions lack safe water months after Pakistan floods As a result of climate change, the report said, “seasonal water scarcity will increase in regions where it is currently abundant — such as Central Africa, East Asia and parts of South America — and worsen in regions where water is already in short supply, such as the Middle East and the Sahara in Africa.” On average, “10% of the global population lives in countries with high or critical water stress” — and up to 3.5 billion people live under conditions of water stress at least one month a year, said the report issued by UNESCO, the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Since 2000, floods in the tropics have quadrupled while floods in the north mid-latitudes have increased 2.5-fold, the report said. Trends in droughts are more difficult to establish, it said, “although an increase in intensity or frequency of droughts and 'heat extremes’ can be expected in most regions as a direct result of climate change.” As for water pollution, Connor said, the biggest source of pollution is untreated wastewater. “Globally, 80 percent of wastewater is released to the environment without any treatment,” he said, “and in many developing countries it’s pretty much 99%.” These and other issues including protecting aquatic ecosystems, improving management of water resources, increasing water reuse and promoting cooperation across borders on water use will be discussed during the three-day U.N. Water Conference co-chaired by King Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands and Tajikistan’s President Emomali Rahmon opening Wednesday morning. There are 171 countries, including over 100 ministers, on the speakers list along with more than 20 organizations. The meeting will also include five “interactive dialogues” and dozens of side events.

Muslim authorities in Saudi Arabia and several other Middle Eastern countries say this year's fasting month of Ramadan will begin Thursday based on the expected sighting of the crescent moon. Clerics across the region said the moon was not visible Tuesday night, meaning it will almost certainly appear the following evening, heralding the start of the monthlong observance. During Ramadan, Muslims refrain from eating, drinking, smoking, and sexual intercourse from sunrise until sunset. Even a tiny sip of water or a puff of smoke is enough to invalidate the fast. At night, family and friends gather and feast in a festive atmosphere. The fasting is aimed at bringing the faithful closer to God and reminding them of the suffering of the poor. Muslims are expected to strictly observe daily prayers and engage in heightened religious contemplation. They are also urged to refrain from gossip, fighting or cursing during the holy month. Fasting is one of the five pillars of Islam and is required for all healthy Muslims. But there are exemptions for those who are ill, and for women who are pregnant or breastfeeding. Small children are not expected to fast. Islam follows a lunar calendar, so Ramadan begins around a week and a half earlier each year. At the end of Ramadan, Muslims celebrate the joyous Eid al-Fitr holiday, when children often receive new clothes and gifts.

Like a salesman buttering up his best customer, President Vladimir Putin gushed about China’s economic success as he welcomed Chinese leader Xi Jinping to the Kremlin. “We even feel a bit envious,” Putin said Monday as Xi grinned. That was more than idle flattery. China isn’t just Moscow’s diplomatic partner in opposing what they see as U.S. domination of global affairs. Its thriving economy is the biggest buyer of Russian oil and gas exports, pumping billions of dollars into Putin’s treasury and helping the Kremlin resist Western sanctions over its invasion of Ukraine. Putin welcomes the lifeline, but that reliance is accelerating Russia’s slide into the junior role in an uneasy relationship with Xi’s government. Beijing has ambitions that diverge from Moscow’s and sometimes conflict.“Russia may worry about increasing reliance upon China, but it has no other good options,” said Li Xin, director of the Institute of European and Asian Studies at the Shanghai University of Political Science and Law. The current Beijing-Moscow partnership dates to the 1990s, when they set aside border disputes and other strains that led to the 1961 Sino-Soviet split and forged a post-Cold War diplomatic front to push back against Washington. For both sides, the importance of that relationship increased as Washington imposed sanctions on Russia and restricted Chinese access to U.S. technology on security grounds. Xi accused the United States this month of trying to block China’s economic development. “There’s a feeling that the U.S. and American allies are out to contain the two countries,” said Li Mingjiang, an international relations expert at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University. Despite “strategic mistrust” stemming from conflicts dating back to the 19th century, they share a “common political interest” of “resisting American challenges,” Li said. Before last year’s invasion, Xi and Putin declared they had a “no limits friendship.” But Beijing already has shown there are limits. It says they aren’t allies and has avoided openly giving Russia military help in Ukraine, a step President Joe Biden and other Western leaders warn would trigger unspecified consequences for China. Beijing once called the Soviet government “Big Brother,” but Moscow’s lead in political influence eroded as China’s economy raced ahead following market-style reform in the 1980s. Russia had oil riches, but the post-Soviet economy failed to create competitive companies. Meanwhile, China launched auto, tech and other industries that are expanding into global markets. In the mid-’90s, Russia’s economy was half the size of China’s but its smaller population had four times the output per person. By 2020, China’s lead had multiplied. Its economy was 10 times the size of Russia’s and edged ahead in output per person, $10,525 to Russia’s $10,115, according to the International Monetary Fund. Russia’s $1.7 trillion economy was about three-quarters the size of that of Texas. Russia also is losing its lead in arms technology, its biggest non-oil export. China paid billions of dollars in the early 2000s for fighter jets and other weapons. But in another sign of the limits to cooperation, Russia suspended sales after 2004 due to complaints Beijing was copying its missile and other technology. Sales didn’t resume until 2014. China’s imports from Russia, mostly oil and gas, rose 49% last year to $76.4 billion, according to customs data. The Global Times newspaper reported Russia overtook Saudi Arabia as China’s biggest foreign oil supplier in January and February.China can buy Russian energy without triggering Western sanctions that prohibit or limit imports into the United States, Europe or Japan. Beijing values relations with Moscow so highly that it has avoided using that economic power as leverage, said Li Mingjiang. “We’ve seen Chinese caution not to do anything or say anything that may make the Russians upset or suspicious,” he said. Moscow is uneasy that its dominant role among former Soviet republics in Central Asia might be undermined by Xi’s multibillion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative to expand trade by building ports, railways and other infrastructure. Putin’s government shares worries with Washington, Tokyo and New Delhi that China is using Belt and Road to expand its strategic influence at their expense. Beijing tried to mollify Putin’s government by agreeing Moscow would be in charge of security affairs in Central Asia while China would focus on trade. To sweeten the deal, Beijing invested $1 billion to keep an oil project in Siberia alive after it lost access to Western financing due to sanctions imposed over Moscow’s 2014 seizure of Crimea from Ukraine. Beijing wants to keep Putin’s government as a viable diplomatic partner but has avoided doing anything that might trigger sanctions against Chinese banks or other companies or shut them out of Western export markets. The potential losses for China’s exporters if it crosses Western governments are immense. The United States bought 15% of Chinese exports last year, even after tariff hikes in a feud with Beijing over technology and security. The 27-nation European Union bought almost 13%. And Russia? It accounted for 1.3%. Less than Thailand. “To China, the importance of Russia is lower than the West in technology and economic cooperation,” said Li Xin. “But politically, the importance of Russia to China is on the rise, because of the geopolitical and military suppression of China from the United States.”

Gwyneth Paltrow is scheduled to stand trial on Tuesday in a lawsuit filed by a retired optometrist who said that the actress-turned-lifestyle influencer violently crashed into him in 2016 while skiing in Utah at one of the most upscale ski resorts in the United States. Terry Sanderson, 76, said Paltrow was cruising down the slopes so recklessly that they collided, leaving him on the ground as she and her entourage continued their descent down Deer Valley Resort, a skiers-only mountain known for its groomed runs, après-ski champagne yurts and posh clientele. "Gwyneth Paltrow skied out of control," Sanderson's attorneys claim in the lawsuit, “knocking him down hard, knocking him out, and causing a brain injury, four broken ribs and other serious injuries. Paltrow got up, turned and skied away, leaving Sanderson stunned, lying in the snow, seriously injured.” In a case that has lasted years since the 2016 incident, Sanderson is suing Paltrow for $300,000 — claiming that the accident in Park City was a result of negligence, and left him with physical injuries and emotional distress. At ski resorts, the skier who is downhill has the right of way, so a central question in the case is who was further down the beginner's run when the collision transpired. Both Paltrow and Sanderson claim in court filings that they were further downhill when the other rammed into them. Sanderson also accused Deer Valley and its employees of engaging in a “cover up” by not providing complete information on incident reports and not following resort safety policies. After his initial lawsuit seeking $3.1 million was dropped, Sanderson amended the complaint and he is now seeking $300,000. Paltrow — the Oscar-winning actress known for her roles in “Shakespeare in Love" and Marvel's “Iron Man” movies — filed a counterclaim in response, seeking attorney fees and $1 in damages. Paltrow has countered that he was actually the culprit in the collision, is overstating his injuries, and trying to exploit her celebrity and wealth. In addition to her acting career, she is also the founder and CEO of the high-end wellness company, goop. In court filings, her attorneys deny Sanderson's claims and allege that he was the one who crashed into her — a collision in which she sustained a “full body blow.” Her counterclaim alleges that members of Paltrow's group checked on Sanderson, who assured them he was fine. It casts doubt on his motive and claims of injury, noting that before the incident, he had 15 documented medical conditions. “He demanded Ms. Paltrow pay him millions. If she did not pay, she would face negative publicity resulting from his allegations,” her attorneys wrote in a 2019 court filing. The trial in Park City is slated to last longer than a week.

It seemed like a good idea at the time: Red-state Democrats facing grim reelection prospects would join forces with Republicans to slash bank regulations — demonstrating a willingness to work with President Donald Trump while bucking many in their party. That unlikely coalition voted in 2018 to roll back portions of a far-reaching 2010 law intended to prevent a future financial crisis. But those changes are now are being blamed for contributing to the recent collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank that prompted a federal rescue and stoked anxiety about a broader banking contagion. The rollback was was leveraged with a lobbying campaign that cost tens of millions of dollars and drew an army of hundreds of lobbyists into the effort. It also was seeded with ample campaign contributions. The episode offers a fresh reminder of the power that bankers wield in Washington, where the industry spends prodigiously to fight regulation and often hires former members of Congress and their staff to make the case that they are not a source of risk to the economy “The bottom line is that these banks would have faced a tougher supervisory framework under the original ... law, but Congress and the Trump regulators took an ax to it,” said Carter Dougherty, a spokesman for Americans for Financial Reform, a left-leaning financial sector watchdog group. “We can draw a direct line between the deregulation of the Trump period, driven by the bank lobby, and the chaos of the last few weeks.” President Joe Biden has asked Congress for the authority to impose tougher penalties on failed banks. The Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission have started investigations. And congressional Democrats are calling for new restrictions on financial institutions. But so far there is no indication that another bipartisan coalition will form in Congress to put tougher regulations back in place, underscoring the banking industry's continued clout. That influence was on full display when the banking lobby worked for two years to water down aspects of the 2010 Dodd-Frank law that had placed weighty regulations on banks designed to reduce consumer risk and force the institutions to adopt safer lending and investing practices. Republicans had long looked to blunt the impact of Dodd-Frank. But rather than push for sweeping deregulation, Sen. Mike Crapo, an Idaho Republican who led the Senate banking committee, hoped a narrowed focus could draw enough support from moderate Democrats to clear the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster threshold. Crapo broached the idea with Democratic Sens. Jon Tester of Montana, Joe Donnelly of Indiana and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota — all on the ballot in 2018 — as well as Mark Warner of Virginia. By the fall of that year, the bipartisan group met regularly, according to a copy of Tester’s office schedule posted to his Senate website. A lobbying strategy also emerged, with companies and trade groups that specifically mention Crapo's legislation spending more than $400 million in 2017 and 2018, according to an Associated Press analysis of the public lobbying disclosures. The bill was sold to the public as a form of regulatory relief for overburdened community banks, which serviced farmers and smaller businesses. Community bankers from across the U.S. flew in to Washington to meet repeatedly with lawmakers, including Tester, who had 32 meetings with Montana bank officials. Local bank leaders pushed members of their congressional delegation when they returned home. But the measure also included provisions sought by midsize banks that drastically curtailed oversight once the Trump Fed finished writing new regulations necessitated by the bill’s passage. Specifically, the legislation lifted the threshold for banks to be considered “too big to fail” — a designation that carries a strict regimen of oversight, including mandatory financial stress testing. That component, which effectively carved large midsize banks out of more stringent regulation, has come under new scrutiny in light of the failure of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, whose executives lobbied on behalf of the 2018 rollback. Read more: Silicon Valley Bank collapse concerns founders of color “The lobbyists were everywhere. You couldn’t throw an elbow without running into one," Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat who vehemently opposed the bill, told reporters last week. Campaign checks were written. Ads were cut. Mailers went out. As a reward for their work, Heitkamp ($357,953), Tester ($302,770) and Donnelly ($265,349) became the top Senate recipients of money from the banking industry during the 2018 campaign season, according to OpenSecrets, a nonpartisan group tracking money in politics. Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer freed members to vote for the bill, a move intended to bolster the standing of vulnerable moderate incumbents. But the move also bitterly divided the Democratic caucus, with Warren singling out the moderates as doing Wall Street's bidding. In the hours before the bill passed the Senate with 17 Democratic votes, Heitkamp took to the chamber floor to inveigh against the “diatribe,” “hyperbole” and “overstatement” from opponents of the bill. Tester, meanwhile, huddled with executives from Bank of America, Citigroup, Discover and Wells Fargo, who were there on behalf of the American Bankers Association. The American Bankers Association, which helped lead the push, later paid $125,000 for an ad campaign thanking Tester for his role in the bill’s passage, records show. Less than a month after the bill was passed out of the Senate, Tester met Greg Becker, the CEO for the now-collapsed Silicon Valley Bank, according to his schedule. Becker specifically lobbied Congress and the Federal Reserve to take a light regulatory approach with banks of his size. Lobbyists with the firm the Franklin Square Group, which had been retained by Silicon Valley Bank, donated $10,800 to Tester's campaign, record show. Heitkamp was the only member of the group invited to the bill signing ceremony, beaming alongside Trump. Later, Americans for Prosperity, the grassroots conservative group funded by the billionaire industrialist Koch brothers, ran an online ad commending Heitkamp for taking a stand against her party. In an interview, Heitkamp pushed back against suggestions that the legislation was directly responsible for the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank. She acknowledged, however, that there was an open question about whether new rules put in place by the Fed after the measure was signed into law could have played a role. “I’m willing to look at the argument that this had something to do with it,” Heitkamp said, adding: “I think you will find that (the Fed) was engaged in some level of some supervision. Why that didn’t work? That’s the question that needs to be resolved.” In a statement issued last week, Tester did not directly address his role in the legislation, but he pledged to "take on anyone in Washington to ensure that the executives at these banks and regulators are held accountable.” Cam Fine, who led the Independent Community Bankers of America trade group during the legislative push, said the overall the bill was a good piece of legislation that offered much needed relief to struggling community banks. But like any major piece of legislation that moves through Congress, final passage hinged on support from a broad coalition of interests — including those of Wall Street and midsize banks. “Was it a perfect piece of legislation? No. But there’s an old saying in Washington: You can’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good,” said Fine. Many of the moderate Democrats who supported the measure did not fare as well. Of the core group who wrote the bill, only Tester won reelection. Others from red states who supported it, including Claire McCaskill of Missouri and Bill Nelson of Florida, lost. Tester will be on the ballot again in 2024. Last week he was in Silicon Valley for a fundraiser. One of the event's sponsors was a partner at a law firm for Silicon Valley Bank.

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida was heading to Kyiv early Tuesday for talks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy that coincide with the Chinese leader’s visit to Moscow. Kishida will “show respect to the courage and patience of the Ukrainian people who are standing up to defend their homeland under President Zelenskyy’s leadership, and show solidarity and unwavering support for Ukraine as head of Japan and chairman of G-7,” during his visit to Ukraine, the Japanese Foreign Ministry said in announcing his trip to Kyiv. At the talks, Kishida will show his “absolute rejection to Russia’s one-sided change to the status quo by invasion and force, and to affirm his commitment to defend the rules-based international order,” the ministry’s statement said. Chinese leader Xi Jinping, meanwhile, is in Moscow. Russian President Vladimir Putin warmly welcomed Xi to the Kremlin on a visit both nations describe as an opportunity to deepen their “no-limits friendship.” Japan’s public television NHK showed Kishida riding a train from Poland heading to Kyiv. His surprise trip to Ukraine comes just hours after he met with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi. Kishida, who is to chair the Group of Seven summit in May, is the only G-7 leader who hasn’t visited Ukraine and was under pressure to do so at home. U.S. President Joe Biden took a similar route to visit Kyiv last month, just before the first anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Due to limitations of Japan’s pacifist constitution, his trip was arranged secretly. Kishida is Japan’s first postwar leader to enter a war zone. Kishida, invited by Zelenskyy in January to visit Kyiv, was also asked before his trip to India about a rumor of his possible trip at the end of March, denied it and said nothing concrete has been decided. Japan has joined the United States and European nations in sanctioning Russia over its invasion and providing humanitarian and economic support for Ukraine. Japan was quick to react because it fears the possible impact of a war in East Asia, where China’s military has grown increasingly assertive and has escalated tensions around self-ruled Taiwan, which Beijing claims as its territory. Kishida is expected to offer continuing support for Ukraine when he meets with Zelenskyy. Television footage on NHK showed Kishida getting on a train from the Polish station of Przemysl near the border with Ukraine, with a number of officials. Due to its pacifist principles, Japan’s support for Ukraine has also been limited to non-combative military equipment such as helmets, bulletproof vests and drones, and humanitarian supplies including generators. Japan has contributed to Ukraine more than $7 billion, and accepted more than 2,000 displaced Ukrainians and helped them with housing assistance and support for jobs and education — a rare move for a country that is known for its strict immigration policy.  

The Australian defense minister says his country has made no promises to the United States that Australia would support its ally in any future conflict over Taiwan in exchange for American nuclear-powered submarines. U.S. President Joe Biden and the leaders of Australia and the United Kingdom announced in San Diego last week that Australia would purchase nuclear-powered attack submarines from the U.S. to modernize its fleet amid growing concern about China’s influence in the Indo-Pacific. Australian critics of the deal argue that the United States would not hand over as many as five of its Virginia-class submarines without assurances that they would be made available in the event of a conflict with China over Taiwan. Beijing says the self-ruled island democracy, which split with China in 1949 after a civil war, is obliged to unite with the mainland, by force if necessary. Also Read: Chinese ships cut internet of Taiwan's outlying islands But Defense Minister Richard Marles said his government had given the United States no assurances over Taiwan. “Absolutely not, and I couldn’t be more unequivocal than that,” Marles told Australian Broadcasting Corp. ’s “Insiders” news program on Sunday. Also Read: US approves selling Taiwan munitions worth $619 million “I want to make it really clear that the moment that there is a flag on the first of those Virginia-class submarines in the early 2030s is the moment that that submarine will be under the complete control of the Australian government of the day and again, no one would have expected that to be any different. I mean, that is obviously the basis upon which this is happening,” he added. Australia, like the United States, has a policy of “strategic ambiguity" in refusing to say how it would react to a Chinese attack on Taiwan. Australia and the U.S. have also shared a bilateral defense treaty since 1951 that obliges them to consult if either comes under attack but does not commit them to the other's defense. Former Australian Prime Ministers Paul Keating and Malcolm Turnbull are among the critics who question how Australia could maintain its sovereignty with such heavy reliance on U.S. technology and military personnel under the submarine deal. The AUKUS deal — named after Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States — provoked an angry reaction from China, which accused Australia of going down a “path of error and danger." Marles said while the submarines could be used in the case of a conflict, the main intention was for them to protect vital trade routes through the South China Sea and contribute to regional stability. “Nuclear-powered submarines have obviously the capacity to operate in the context of war, but the primary intent here is to make our contribution to the stability of the region,” Marles said.

Japan’s Prime Minister Fumio Kishida on Monday invited his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi for the Group of Seven major industrial nations summit in May and was later expected to announce a new plan for a free and open Indo-Pacific aimed at countering China's growing influence in the region. On his two-day trip to India, Kishida said Modi accepted his invitation to participate in the G-7 summit, which will be held in Japan’s western city of Hiroshima. Kishida held delegation-level talks with Modi to deepen cooperation between Tokyo and New Delhi, while also addressing food security and development financing. Also Read: Hasina, Modi inaugurate ‘Indo-Bangla Friendship Pipeline’ to boost energy cooperation In his media statement, Kishida said he told Modi that at the upcoming G-7 summit he hopes to take up challenges faced by the global community from the viewpoint of upholding the rules-based international order and strengthening partnership with the international community that goes beyond G-7 and includes the Global South. The two leaders also discussed their priorities for their respective presidencies of the G-7 and G-20, Modi said in a speech. Kishida said late Sunday that he will present his new action plan for Japan’s free and open Indo-Pacific vision, a Tokyo-led initiative aimed at curbing China’s growing assertiveness in the region, during his India visit. The plan is expected to include Japan’s support for human development in maritime security, a provision of coast guard patrol boats and equipment and other infrastructure cooperation. Also Read: Bangladesh, Australia discuss Indo-Pacific, IORA, security cooperation India, which is heading this year’s Group of 20 industrial and emerging-market nations, says ties with Japan are key to stability in the region. The two nations, along with the United States and Australia, make up the Indo-Pacific alliance known as the Quad that is countering China’s rising influence in Asia. India is the only Quad member that has not condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It has refrained from taking sides and abstained from voting against Russia at the United Nations or criticizing President Vladimir Putin. Japan, meanwhile, has imposed financial sanctions to isolate Russia, including export controls on high-tech products. In an article for the Indian Express newspaper Monday, Kishida said “the foundation of order in the international community was shaken by Russia’s aggression against Ukraine” and its impact on food access and fertilizer prices were felt by the international community, including in the Indo-Pacific region. “In order to respond effectively to the various challenges that the international community is currently facing, cooperation between the G-7 and the G-20 has greater significance. Such pressing challenges include food security, climate and energy, fair and transparent development finance,” Kishida wrote. India and Japan share strong economic ties. Trade between the two was worth $20.57 billion in fiscal year 2021-2022. The Japanese investments in India touched $32 billion between 2000 and 2019. Japan has also been supporting infrastructure development in India, including a high-speed rail project.

Chinese leader Xi Jinping is due to meet Vladimir Putin in Moscow in a political boost for the isolated Russian president after the International Criminal Court charged him with war crimes in Ukraine. Xi’s government gave no details of what the Chinese leader hoped to accomplish. Xi and Putin declared they had a “no limits friendship” before last February’s attack on Ukraine, but China has tried to portray itself as neutral. Beijing called last month for a cease-fire, but Washington said that would ratify the Kremlin’s battlefield gains. The Chinese government said Xi would visit Moscow from Monday to Wednesday but gave no indication when he departed. The Russian government said Xi was due to arrive at midday and meet later with Putin. China looks to Russia as a source of oil and gas for its energy-hungry economy and a partner in opposing what both see as American domination of global affairs. The meeting gives Putin and Xi a chance to show they have “powerful partners” at a time of strained relations with Washington, said Joseph Torigian, an expert in Chinese-Russian relations at American University in Washington. “China can signal that it could even do more to help Russia, and that if relations with the United States continue to deteriorate, they could do a lot more to enable Russia and help Russia in its war against Ukraine,” Torigian said. READ: How a warrant for Putin puts new spin on Xi visit to Russia Beijing’s relations with Washington, Europe and its neighbors are strained by disputes over technology, security, human rights and the ruling Communist Party’s treatment of Hong Kong and Muslim minorities. Some commentators have point to a possible parallel between Russia’s claims to Ukraine territory and Beijing’s claim to Taiwan. The Communist Party says the self-ruled island democracy, which split with China in 1949 after a civil war, is obliged to unite with the mainland, by force if necessary. Xi’s government has been stepping up efforts to intimidate the island by flying fighter jets nearby and firing missiles into the sea. China has stepped up purchases of Russian oil and gas, helping to top up the Kremlin’s revenue in the face of Western sanctions. Beijing appears largely to have complied with U.S. warnings not to give military support. This week’s meeting follows the ICC announcement Friday of charges that Putin is personally responsible for the abductions of thousands of children from Ukraine. Governments that recognize the court’s jurisdiction would be obligated to arrest Putin if he visits. Putin has yet to comment on the announcement, but the Kremlin rejected the move as “outrageous and unacceptable.” In a show of defiance, Putin over the weekend visited Crimea and the occupied Ukrainian port city of Mariupol to mark the ninth anniversary of Russia’s seizure of the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine. Russian news reports showed him chatting with Mariupol residents and visiting an art school and a children’s center in Sevastopol in Crimea. Xi said in an article published Monday in the Russian newspaper Russian Gazette that China has “actively promoted peace talks” but announced no initiatives. “My upcoming visit to Russia will be a journey of friendship, cooperation and peace,” Xi wrote, according to text released by the official Xinhua News Agency. “A reasonable way to resolve the crisis” can be found if “all parties embrace the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security,” Xi wrote. The trip follows the surprise announcement of a diplomatic thaw between Iran and Saudi Arabia following a meeting in Beijing, a diplomatic coup for Xi’s government. Xi wants to be seen as a global statesman who is “playing a constructive role” by talking about peace but is unlikely to press Putin to end the war, said Torigian. Beijing is worried about “potential Russian losses on the battlefield” but doesn’t want to be seen to “enable Russia’s aggression,” said Torigian. “They won’t spend political capital” on pressing Moscow to make peace, “especially if they don’t think it will get them anything,” he said.