The Jim Bakker Show

U.S. Muslim school curriculum: English, math and political activism

muslim school teaching kids political activism

By Scott Malone

MANSFIELD, Mass. (Reuters) – The students at Al-Noor Academy, a Muslim school outside Boston, bombarded their government class speaker with questions: How do you start a political discussion? How do you use social media in politics? And how do you influence elected leaders?

The group of mostly 16-year-olds was too young to vote but seemed eager to find ways to counter the rhetoric of President Donald Trump who last week issued travel restrictions to the United States by citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries.

“Before this election happened, I really didn’t know much about politics at all,” said Sarah Sendian, a sophomore student at the school in Mansfield, Massachusetts. “With the new president and all of the things that are happening, it sparked a lot of interest in a lot of young people.”

The class is one of the first actions of newly formed Muslim political organization Jetpac – standing for Justice, Education, Technology, Policy Advocacy Center – to encourage political activism among the 3.3 million Muslims who make up about 1 percent of the U.S. population.

“This is the time when Muslims should step forward,” said Nadeem Mazen, the group’s founder and a city councilor in Cambridge, Massachusetts. “What’s going on at the national level only emphasizes what we’ve known prior to Trump being elected, and it’s that we need really good leaders.”

Thursday’s lesson at the 116-student junior and senior high school was heavy on how to build networks of like-minded people and turn them out at public meetings, rallies and elections to amplify the voices of U.S. Muslims.

About 824,000 of them were registered to vote as of 2016, a figure that had risen by about 60 percent over the past four years, according to national Muslim advocacy group the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

‘KNOW WHAT YOU’RE DOING’

The class’s teacher, Joe Florencio, reminded his students that generations of immigrant populations have gone through the same process of becoming politically active.

“To be effective politically, you have to know what you’re doing,” said Florencio, the sole non-Muslim faculty member in a building that once housed the Roman Catholic church where his parents were married.

Students at the school, founded in 2000, study both standard U.S. academic subjects including science and math as well as Arabic and the Koran, a model similar to the many parochial schools in the northeastern United States.

Jetpac, which hopes to eventually offer versions of the class to private and public schools across the United States, faces an uphill climb. The number of anti-Muslim attacks reported to the FBI last year spiked to their highest level since 2001, the year that al Qaeda-backed hijackers destroyed New York’s World Trade Center.

While the group acknowledged that it will take time for political newcomers to win elections, even the act of campaigning could help Muslims, simply by making people more familiar with politics, said Faiza Patel, of the NYU School of Law’s Brennan Center for Justice.

“It allows them to meet lots of people, people that they might not otherwise meet and that has the effect of reducing prejudice,” said Patel, who studies interactions between Muslims and the U.S. justice system. “You start to see people as human beings.”

Almost half of respondents to a 2016 Pew Research Center poll said they believed that at least some U.S. Muslims harbored anti-American views, but respondents who knew a Muslim personally were less likely to believe that than ones who did not.

Yousef Abouallaban, a member of the Al-Noor school committee whose two eldest sons have attended the school, said he hoped the class would help the children of Muslim immigrants overcome a bias held by some of their parents against getting involved with politics.

“We were raised in a different culture where our belief is that people who get involved in government are corrupt people. At all levels. So if you are a decent person, you should never get involved in politics,” said Abouallaban, who immigrated from Syria in 1989. “That’s not the case in the United States and this mentality has to be changed.”

(Reporting by Scott Malone; Editing by Bill Rigby)

Businesses growing in face of upcoming risks

waiter carries food at British restaurant

By Jonathan Cable

LONDON (Reuters) – Business started 2017 on a solid footing, surveys showed on Friday, thriving ahead of a myriad of political risks in the coming year.

Fears of a growing protectionist agenda in the United States, whether national elections across Europe upset the status quo and just how fractious Britain’s divorce proceedings from the European Union become, are all expected to weigh in the months ahead.

Yet so far those risks seem to have been mostly ignored with firms from Asia to Europe increasing or at least largely maintaining activity. Similar upbeat results are expected later from the United States..

Euro zone businesses started 2017 by increasing activity at the same multi-year record pace they set in December.

China’s factory activity grew for a seventh month and while India’s services business contracted for a third month as firms struggled to recover from a government crackdown on currency in circulation, the pace slowed.

“The outlook for this year is reasonably bright despite all the risks. The numbers for January have generally been quite positive,” said Andrew Kenningham, chief global economist at Capital Economics.

Growth in Britain’s services sector slowed for the first time in four months in January, dipping just below its long-run average, as businesses battled the sharpest rise in costs in more than five years.

But on Thursday the Bank of England sharply revised up its growth forecast for 2017 to 2.0 percent, a view held by only the most optimistic forecaster in a Reuters poll of 50 economists taken last month.

Britain’s economy unexpectedly outpaced all its major peers last year, wrongfooting those who expected an immediate hit from June’s Brexit vote.

The Markit/CIPS British services Purchasing Managers’ Index dropped to a three-month low of 54.5 last month from December’s 15-month high, at the bottom end of a range of forecasts in a Reuters poll of economists, but Markit said the PMIs still point to first quarter growth of 0.5 percent.

IHS Markit’s final composite PMI for the euro zone, seen as a good guide to growth, held at 54.4. It has not been higher since May 2011 and has remained above the 50 mark dividing growth from contraction since mid-2013.

That points to first quarter expansion of 0.4 percent, Markit said, matching the median prediction in a Reuters poll.

“Despite the slightly disappointing outcome this remains a very strong report,” said James Knightley, senior economist at ING.

China’s factory activity expanded for the seventh straight month in January, giving Beijing more room to tackle chronic imbalances in the economy. The Caixin/Markit Manufacturing PMI fell to 51.0.

The world’s second largest economy has seen a broad-based pickup in recent months, with fourth-quarter GDP beating expectations due largely to a strong housing market and higher government spending on infrastructure projects.

A recovery in the country’s “smokestack” industries has also been supported by government mandates to close down outdated production capacity in the coal and steel sectors, as well as a rebound in investment in the property sector that came amid a record flood of credit.

India’s Nikkei/IHS Markit Services PMI remained below 50 registering 48.7 in January as firms still reel from Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s decision in November to abolish high-value bank notes.

Modi’s policy removed 86 percent of the currency in circulation, hitting consumption and capital investments, and shattered traditional cash-reliant supply chains.

(Editing by Jeremy Gaunt)

Israel interprets U.S. settlements statement as green light

By Luke Baker

JERUSALEM (Reuters) – Israeli officials welcomed on Friday what they took as U.S. consent to expand existing settlements, after the White House reversed a long-standing policy of condemning building on occupied land.

In its first substantive announcement on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Trump administration said it did not see existing settlements hampering peace with the Palestinians, although it recognized that “expansion of existing settlements beyond their current borders may not be helpful in achieving that goal.”

At one level, that appeared to be an attempt to rein in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has announced wide-ranging settlement expansion plans since the Jan. 20 inauguration, including around 6,000 new homes.

But on closer reading, the statement was a softening of policy from the Obama administration and even that of George W. Bush, because it does not view settlements as an obstacle to peace or rule out their expansion within existing blocs.

“Netanyahu will be happy,” a senior Israeli diplomat said in a text message. “Pretty much carte blanche to build as much as we want in existing settlements as long as we don’t enlarge their physical acreage. No problem there.”

Israel’s deputy foreign minister, Tzipi Hotovely from the right-wing of Netanyahu’s Likud party, interpreted it in a similar way, saying construction in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, which the Palestinians want for their own state together with Gaza, would go on unhindered.

“It is also the opinion of the White House that settlements are not an obstacle to peace and, indeed, they have never been an obstacle to peace,” she said. “Therefore, the conclusion is that more building is not the problem.”

Israel seized the West Bank and East Jerusalem in the 1967 Middle East war. The 50th anniversary of the occupation, which Israel marks as a reunification of Jerusalem, is in June.

There was no immediate comment from the Palestinians.

DOUBLE BENEFITS

Since taking office, President Trump has largely kept quiet on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, making no comment in response to Netanyahu’s announcements for thousands more settler homes, a silence interpreted as endorsement. During the campaign, Trump said he would not interfere or push Israel to negotiate on a two-state solution to the conflict.

He has nominated David Friedman as ambassador to Israel, a religious Jew who has raised money for the settlements and supports moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Trump supported that idea during the election campaign, but it has been put on the back-burner in recent weeks.

Under Barack Obama, the White House maintained a firm anti-settlements line, calling them illegitimate and an obstacle to peace. Most of the world considers settlements illegal under international law, a position Israel rejects.

The European Union and Britain issued statements this week criticizing Netanyahu’s settlement plans, which they see as further breaking up the West Bank and undermining the possibility of a contiguous Palestinian state ever emerging.

Netanyahu, who will visit Trump in Washington on Feb. 15, may see the White House statement as doubly beneficial.

As well as not ruling out building within existing blocs, which Israel hopes to retain in any final agreement with the Palestinians, it may allow him to silence far-right voices in his own coalition calling for much greater settlement growth and annexation of parts of the West Bank.

Trump has effectively set a limit on how far-ranging settlement-building can be, so Netanyahu will be able to tell the far-right their ambitions are out of the question.

At the same time, Netanyahu may have to curtail some of the plans he himself has announced in recent days.

While most of the 6,000 settler homes he has promised are in existing blocs, many are not and may have to be scrapped if he wants to adhere to the White House line. He may also have to rethink a pledge this week to build the first new West Bank settlement since the 1990s.

(Additional reporting by Ori Lewis; Editing by Tom Heneghan and Robin Pomeroy)

U.S. job growth beats expectations in January, wages soft

By Lucia Mutikani

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. job growth surged more than expected in January as construction firms and retailers ramped up hiring, which likely gives the Trump administration a head start as it seeks to boost the economy and employment.

Nonfarm payrolls increased by 227,000 jobs last month, the largest gain in four months, the Labor Department said on Friday. But the unemployment rate rose one-tenth of a percentage point to 4.8 percent and wages increased modestly, suggesting that there was still some slack in the labor market.

Revisions to November and December showed the economy created 39,000 fewer jobs than previously reported. Still, the labor market continues to tighten, which could soon spur a faster pace of wage growth. Federal Reserve officials view the labor market as being at or near full employment.

Economists polled by Reuters had forecast payrolls rising 175,000 last month and the unemployment rate unchanged at 4.7 percent.

President Donald Trump vowed during last year’s election campaign to deliver 4 percent annual gross domestic product growth, largely on the back of a plan to cut taxes, reduce regulations, increase infrastructure spending and renegotiate trade deals in the United States’ favor.

Although details on the policy proposals remain sketchy, consumer and business confidence have surged in the wake of Trump’s election victory last November. But with the economy near full employment, some economists are skeptical of the 4 percent growth pledge. Annual GDP growth has not exceeded 2.6 percent since the 2007-08 recession.

DISAPPOINTING WAGE GROWTH

Average hourly earnings increased only three cents or 0.1 percent last month. December’s wage gain was revised down to 0.2 percent from the previously reported 0.4 percent increase.

January’s small rise in average hourly earnings is a surprise given that the minimum wage took effect in more than a dozen states last month. The small gain lowered the year-on-year increase in earnings to 2.5 percent from 2.8 percent in December.

Sluggish wage growth, if it persists, would suggest only a gradual pace of rate increases by the Fed. The U.S. central bank, which hiked rates in December, has forecast three rate increases this year.

On Wednesday, the Fed kept its benchmark overnight interest rate unchanged in a range of 0.50 percent to 0.75 percent. It said it expected labor market conditions would strengthen “somewhat further.”

With its January employment report, the government published its annual “benchmark” revisions and updated the formulas it uses to smooth the data for regular seasonal fluctuations. It also incorporated new population estimates.

The government said the level of employment in March of last year was 60,000 lower than it had reported. As the labor market nears full employment, the pool of workers is shrinking, which is slowing job growth.

The shift in population controls mean figures on the labor force or number of employed or unemployed in January are not directly comparable with December.

The labor force participation rate, or the share of working-age Americans who are employed or at least looking for a job, was at 62.9 percent in January, the highest level since September.

All sectors of the economy added jobs in January.

Manufacturing payrolls increased by 5,000 jobs, rising for a second straight month as the oil-related drag on the sector eases. Construction employment jumped 36,000, the largest increase since March, likely boosted by warm weather, after December’s paltry 2,000 gain.

Retail payrolls, surprisingly surged 45,900, the biggest rise since February. Retailers, including Macy’s <M.N>, Sears <SHLD.O>, American Apparel and Abercrombie & Fitch <ANF.N> announced job cuts in January amid store closures. Department store sales are being undercut by online retailers, led by Amazon.com <AMZN.O>.

Government employment fell for a fourth straight month in January. Further declines are likely after the Trump administration enforced a hiring freeze on civilian federal government workers on Jan. 22.

(Reporting by Lucia Mutikani; Editing by Andrea Ricci)

U.S. warns North Korea of ‘overwhelming’ response if nuclear arms used

US Defense Scretary shakes hands with South Korean government official

By Phil Stewart

SEOUL (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump’s defense secretary warned North Korea on Friday of an “effective and overwhelming” response if it chose to use nuclear weapons, as he reassured South Korea of steadfast U.S. support.

“Any attack on the United States, or our allies, will be defeated, and any use of nuclear weapons would be met with a response that would be effective and overwhelming,” Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said at South Korea’s defense ministry, at the end of a two-day visit.

Mattis’ remarks come amid concern that North Korea could be readying to test a new ballistic missile, in what could be an early challenge for Trump’s administration.

North Korea, which regularly threatens to destroy South Korea and its main ally, the United States, conducted more than 20 missile tests last year, as well as two nuclear tests, in defiance of U.N. resolutions and sanctions.

The North also appears to have also restarted operation of a reactor at its main Yongbyon nuclear facility that produces plutonium that can be used for its nuclear weapons program, according to the U.S. think-tank 38 North.

“North Korea continues to launch missiles, develop its nuclear weapons program and engage in threatening rhetoric and behavior,” Mattis said.

North Korea’s actions have prompted the United States and South Korea to respond by bolstering defenses, including the expected deployment of a U.S. missile defense system, known as Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), in South Korea later this year.

The two sides reconfirmed that commitment on Friday.

China, however, has objected to THAAD, saying it is a direct threat to China’s own security and will do nothing to bring North Korea back to the negotiating table, leading to calls from some South Korean opposition leaders to delay or cancel it.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang reiterated China’s opposition, which he said would never change.

“We do not believe this move will be conducive to resolving the Korean peninsula nuclear issue or to maintaining peace and stability on the peninsula,” Lu told a daily news briefing in Beijing.

South Korean Defense Minister Han Min-koo said Mattis’ visit to Seoul – his first trip abroad as defense secretary – sent a clear message of strong U.S. support.

“Faced with a current severe security situation, Secretary Mattis’ visit to Korea … also communicates the strongest warning to North Korea,” Han said.

Once fully developed, a North Korean intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) could threaten the continental United States, which is about 9,000 km (5,500 miles) from North Korea. ICBMs have a minimum range of about 5,500 km (3,400 miles), but some are designed to travel 10,000 km (6,200 miles) or more.

Former U.S. officials and other experts have said the United States essentially has two options when it comes to trying to curb North Korea’s fast-expanding nuclear and missile programs – negotiate or take military action.

Neither path offers certain success and the military option is fraught with huge dangers, especially for Japan and South Korea, U.S. allies in close proximity to North Korea.

Mattis is due in Japan later on Friday.

(Additional reporting by Ben Blanchard in Beijing; Editing by Nick Macfie, Robert Birsel)

Trump says his travel ban needed to ensure U.S. religious freedom

DAY 9 / JANUARY 28: Russian President Vladimir Putin and President Trump agreed to try to rebuild U.S.-Russia ties and to cooperate in Syria, the Kremlin said, after the two men spoke for the first time since Trump's inauguration.

By Jeff Mason and Roberta Rampton

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump defended his order to temporarily bar entry to people from seven majority-Muslim nations, which has come under intense criticism at home and abroad, saying on Thursday it was crucial to ensuring religious freedom and tolerance in America.

Trump, speaking at a prayer breakfast attended by politicians, faith leaders and guests including Jordan’s King Abdullah, said he wanted to prevent a “beachhead of intolerance” from spreading in the United States.

“The world is in trouble, but we’re going to straighten it out, OK? That’s what I do – I fix things,” Trump said in his speech.

Trump’s executive order a week ago put a 120-day halt on the U.S. refugee program, barred Syrian refugees indefinitely and imposed a 90-day suspension on people from seven predominantly Muslim countries – Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. The measure, which Trump says is aimed at protecting the country from terrorist attacks, has drawn protests and legal challenges.

Trump, a wealthy businessman and former reality TV star who had never previously held public office when he was sworn in on Jan. 20, also sought to reassure the large crowd about the nature of his phone calls with world leaders.

The Washington Post said Trump had a tense call with Australia’s Prime Minister about his immigration order.

“Believe me, when you hear about the tough phone calls I’m having – don’t worry about it. Just don’t worry about it,” Trump said. He did not specify which calls he was referring to.

“We’re taken advantage of by every nation in the world virtually. It’s not going to happen anymore,” said Trump, who campaigned on a stance of “America first” that he said would ensure the country was not taken advantage of in its trade or other foreign relations.

Trump said violence against religious minorities must end. “All nations have a moral obligation to speak out against such violence. All nations have a duty to work together to confront it, and to confront it viciously, if we have to,” he said.

Trump said the United States has taken “necessary action” in recent days to protect religious liberty in the United States, referring to his immigration action.

Critics of the measure have accused him of violating the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom, because the designated countries are majority-Muslim, and of slamming the door shut to refugees.

Trump has said the move was necessary to ensure a more thorough vetting of people coming into the United States.

“Our nation has the most generous immigration system in the world. There are those who would exploit that generosity to undermine the values that we hold so dear,” Trump said.

“There are those who would seek to enter our country for the purpose of spreading violence, or oppressing other people based upon their faith or their lifestyle – not right. We will not allow a beachhead of intolerance to spread in our nation,” he said.

Trump said his administration’s new system would ensure that people entering the United States embrace U.S. values including religious liberty.

He also pledged to get rid of the “Johnson Amendment,” a tax provision that prevents tax-exempt charities like churches from being involved in political campaigns.

The White House said on Wednesday it has issued updated guidance on the travel order clarifying that legal permanent residents, or green card holders, from the designated countries require no waiver to enter the United States.

(Writing by Roberta Rampton; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama and Frances Kerry)

Challenges to Trump’s immigration orders spread to more U.S. states

Massachusetts attorney with several people who don't like trump's immigration ban

(In this Jan. 31 story, in 11th paragraph corrects to show two Iranian plaintiffs are a man and a woman, not two men)

By Scott Malone and Dan Levine

BOSTON/SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – Legal challenges to President Donald Trump’s first moves on immigration spread on Tuesday, with three states suing over his executive order banning travel into the United States by citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries.

Massachusetts, New York, Virginia and Washington state joined the legal battle against the travel ban, which the White House deems necessary to improve national security.

The challenges contend the order violated the U.S. Constitution’s guarantees of religious freedom.

San Francisco became the first U.S. city to sue to challenge a Trump directive to withhold federal money from U.S. cities that have adopted sanctuary policies toward undocumented immigrants, which local officials argue help local police by making those immigrants more willing to report crimes.

The legal maneuvers were the latest acts of defiance against executive orders signed by Trump last week that sparked a wave of protests in major U.S. cities, where thousands of people decried the new president’s actions as discriminatory.

Both policies are in line with campaign promises by Republican businessman-turned-politician Trump, who vowed to build a wall on the Mexican border to stop illegal immigration and to take hard-line steps to prevent terrorist attacks in the United States.

The restrictions on the seven Muslim-majority countries and new limits on refugees have won the support of many Americans, with 49 percent of respondents to a Reuters poll conducted Monday and Tuesday saying they agreed with the order, while 41 percent disagreed.

Massachusetts contended the restrictions run afoul of the establishment clause of the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits religious preference.

“At bottom, what this is about is a violation of the Constitution,” Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey said of the order halting travel by people with passports from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days. The order also barred resettlement of refugees for 120 days and indefinitely banned Syrian refugees.

“It discriminates against people because of their religion, it discriminates against people because of their country of origin,” Healey said at a Boston press conference, flanked by leaders from the tech, healthcare and education sectors who said that the order could limit their ability to attract and retain highly educated workers.

Massachusetts will be backing a lawsuit filed over the weekend in Boston federal court by two Iranian men who teach at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth. A federal judge blocked the government from expelling those men from the country and halted enforcement of the order for seven days, following similar but more limited moves in four other states.

The attorneys general of New York and Virginia also said their states were joining similar lawsuits filed in their respective federal courts challenging the ban.

“As we speak, there are students at our colleges and universities who are unable to return to Virginia,” Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring told reporters. “This is not an action I take lightly, but it is one I take with confidence in our legal analysis.”

On Monday, liberal-leaning Washington state became the first U.S. state to have its attorney general initiate a lawsuit against Trump to challenge the travel ban.

Multiple foreign nationals have also filed lawsuits challenging the ban. They included one filed in Colorado on Tuesday by a Libyan college student and two filed in Chicago, including one on behalf of an Iranian father of three children all living in Illinois.

Protests against Trump’s executive action continued on Tuesday in several cities.

A crowd of several thousand demonstrators gathered at the federal courthouse in Minneapolis, chanting “Hey, hey, ho, ho Muslim ban has got to go!” Dozens of protesters chanted the same slogan at Los Angeles International Airport, and more than 400 demonstrators gathered in downtown Miami to protest both the travel ban and Trump’s crackdown on sanctuary cities.

SANCTUARY CHALLENGE

San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera filed suit over Trump’s order threatening to cut funds to cities with sanctuary policies, a move that could stop the flow of billions of dollars to major U.S. population centers including New York, Los Angeles and Chicago.

“If allowed to be implemented, this executive order would make our communities less safe. It would make our residents less prosperous, and it would split families apart,” Herrera said.

Sanctuary cities adopt policies that limit cooperation, such as refusing to comply with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer requests. Advocates of the policies say that, beyond helping police with crime reporting, they make undocumented immigrants more willing to serve as witnesses if they do not fear that contact with law enforcement will lead to their deportation.

Both the San Francisco and Massachusetts actions contend that Trump’s orders in question violate the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that powers not granted to the federal government should fall to the states.

Michael Hethmon, senior counsel with the conservative Immigration Reform Law Institute in Washington, called the San Francisco lawsuit a “silly political gesture,” noting that prior federal court decisions make clear that the U.S. government “can prohibit a policy that essentially impedes legitimate federal programs.”

(Additional reporting by Mica Rosenberg, Curtis Skinner, Adam Bettcher, Olga Grigoryants, Zachary Fagenson, Alex Dobuzinskis, Timothy McLaughlin, Ian Simpson and Keith Coffman; Editing by Tom Brown and Cynthia Osterman)

The Art of the Deal: Why Putin needs one more than Trump

woman passes billboard of Trump and Putin together

By Andrew Osborn

MOSCOW (Reuters) – In his book, ‘Art of the Deal,’ Donald Trump said the best deals were ones where both sides got something they wanted. His credo, applied to a potential U.S.-Russia deal, flags an awkward truth for Vladimir Putin: He wants more from Trump than vice versa.

As aides try to set up a first meeting between the two presidents, the mismatched nature of their respective wish lists gives Trump the edge, and means that a deal, if one is done, may be more limited and longer in the making than the Kremlin hopes.

“What the two countries can offer each another is strikingly different,” said Konstantin von Eggert, a commentator for TV Rain, a Moscow TV station sometimes critical of the Kremlin.

“The U.S. has a stronger hand. In biblical terms, the U.S. is the three kings bearing gold, while Russia is the shepherds with little apart from their good faith.”

Appetite for a deal in Moscow, where parliament applauded Trump’s election win, is palpable. The Kremlin blames Barack Obama for wrecking U.S.-Russia ties, which slid to a post-Cold War low on his watch, and with the economy struggling to emerge from two years of recession, craves a new start.

Trump’s intentions toward Moscow are harder to discern, but seem to be more about what he does not want — having Russia as a time-consuming geopolitical foe — than his so far vague desire to team up with the Kremlin to fight Islamic State.

Trump has hinted he may also push for a nuclear arms deal.

Putin’s wish list, by contrast, is detailed, long and the items on it, such as getting U.S. sanctions imposed over Moscow’s actions in Ukraine eased, are potentially significant for his own political future.

He is looking to be given a free hand in the post-Soviet space, which he regards as Russia’s back yard.

Specifically, he would like Trump to formally or tacitly recognize Crimea, annexed from Ukraine in 2014, as Russian territory, and pressure Kiev into implementing a deal over eastern Ukraine which many Ukrainians view as unpalatable.

The icing on the cake for him would be for Trump to back a Moscow-brokered Syrian peace deal allowing President Bashar al-Assad, a staunch Moscow ally, to stay in power for now, while crushing Islamic State and delivering regional autonomy.

For Putin, described in leaked U.S. diplomatic cables as an “alpha-dog,” the wider prize would be respect. In his eyes, a deal would confer legitimacy and show Russia was a great power.

But, like a couple where one side is more interested than the other, the expectational imbalance is starting to show.

Trump spoke by phone to five world leaders before talking to Putin on Jan. 28 as part of a bundle of calls. The White House readout of the Putin call was vague and four sentences long; the Kremlin’s was effusive and fifteen sentences long.

Nor does Trump seem to be in a rush to meet. Dmitry Peskov, Putin’s spokesman, said the two might only meet before a G20 summit due to take place in July.

Trump has good reason not to rush.

‘A HUGE BONUS’

With U.S. intelligence agencies accusing Moscow of having sponsored computer hacking to help Trump win office, a deal would hand fresh political ammunition to Trump’s opponents, who say he has long been too complimentary to the Russian leader.

A delay would have the added advantage of postponing a chorus of disapproval from foreign allies and Congress, where there is bipartisan determination to block sanctions relief.

For Putin though, in his 17th year of dominating the Russian political landscape, a deal, or even an early symbolic concession such as easing minor sanctions, matters.

Expected to contest a presidential election next year that could extend his time in the Kremlin to 2024, he needs sanctions relief to help lift the economy out of recession.

U.S. and EU financial sector sanctions have cut Russia’s access to Western capital markets and know-how, scared off foreign investors, and — coupled with low global oil prices — have exacerbated an economic crisis that has cut real incomes and fueled inflation, making life harder for millions.

Since Putin’s 2012 election, consumer prices have risen by 50 percent, while a fall in the value of the rouble against the dollar after the annexation of Crimea means average salaries fell by 36 percent from 2012-2016 in dollar terms.

Official data puts inflation at 5.4 percent, but consumers say the real figure is much higher, and fear of inflation regularly ranks among Russians’ greatest worries in surveys.

An easing of U.S. sanctions could spur more foreign investment, helping create a feel-good factor.

“It would be a huge bonus if it happened,” said Chris Weafer, senior partner at economic and political consultancy Macro-Advisory Ltd, who said he thought Putin wanted to put rebuilding the economy at the heart of his next term.

The economy matters to Putin because, in the absence of any more land grabs like Crimea, greater prosperity is one of the few levers he has to get voters to come out and support him.

With state TV affording him blanket and favorable coverage and with the liberal opposition still weak, few doubt Putin would genuinely win another presidential term if, as expected, he decided to run.

But for the win to be politically durable and for Putin to be able to confidently contemplate serving out another full six-year term, he would need to win big on a respectable turnout.

That, an election showed last year, is not a given.

Around 4 million fewer Russians voted for the pro-Putin United Russia party in a September parliamentary vote compared to 2011, the last time a similar election was held.

Although the economic benefits of a Trump deal might take a while to trickle down to voters, its symbolism could boost turnout, helping Putin prolong a system based on himself.

“It would be presented to the Russian people as a huge victory by Putin,” said von Eggert. “It would be described as a validation of his strategy to go to war in Ukraine regardless of the consequences and to turn the country into Fortress Russia.”

(Additional reporting by Andrey Ostroukh; Editing by Peter Graff)

Trump’s defense chief heads to Asia, eying China, North Korea threat

President Trump with Defense Secretary Mattis

By Phil Stewart and Nobuhiro Kubo

WASHINGTON/TOKYO (Reuters) – President Donald Trump’s defense secretary is expected to underscore U.S. security commitments to key allies South Korea and Japan on his debut trip to Asia this week as concerns mount over North Korea’s missile program and tensions with China.

The trip is the first for retired Marine General James Mattis since becoming Trump’s Pentagon chief and is also the first foreign trip by any of Trump’s cabinet secretaries.

Officials say the fact that Mattis is first heading to Asia – as opposed to perhaps visiting troops in Iraq or Afghanistan – is meant to reaffirm ties with two Asian allies hosting nearly 80,000 American troops and the importance of the region overall.

That U.S. reaffirmation could be critical after Trump appeared to question the cost of such U.S. alliances during the election campaign. He also jolted the region by pulling Washington out of an Asia-Pacific trade deal that Japan had championed.

“It’s a reassurance message,” said one Trump administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

“This is for all of the people who were concerned during the campaign that then-candidate, now-president, Trump was skeptical of our alliances and was somehow going to retreat from our traditional leadership role in the region.”

Trump himself has spoken with the leaders of both Japan and South Korea in recent days and will host Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in Washington on Feb. 10.

Mattis leaves the United States on Feb. 1, heading first to Seoul before continuing to Tokyo on Feb. 3.

DEFENSE SPENDING

Trump singled out both South Korea and Japan on the campaign trail, suggesting they were benefiting from the U.S. security umbrella without sharing enough of the costs.

In one 2016 television interview, Trump said of the 28,500 U.S. troops deployed to South Korea: “We get practically nothing compared to the cost of this. Why are we doing this?”

Mattis, in his confirmation hearing, appeared to play down those remarks, noting that there was a long history of U.S. presidents and even defense secretaries calling on allies to pay their fair share of defense costs.

But his visit to the region comes amid concerns North Korea may be readying to test a new ballistic missile, in what could be an early challenge for Trump’s administration.

Speaking with South Korean Defense Minister Han Min-koo ahead of his trip, Mattis reaffirmed a U.S. commitment to defend the country and “provide extended deterrence using the full range of U.S. capabilities.”

Analysts expect Mattis to seek an update on South Korea’s early moves to host a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, which, once in place sometime in 2017, would defend against North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic capabilities.

Still, a South Korean military official played down expectations of any big announcements during the trip, saying Mattis’ first visit would likely be “an ice-breaking session” for both countries.

In Tokyo, Mattis is to meet Defense Minister Tomomi Inada, who has repeatedly said Japan is bearing its fair share of the costs for U.S. troops stationed there and has stressed that the alliance is good for both nations.

Japan’s defense spending remains around 1 percent of GDP, far behind China, which is locked in a dispute with Japan over a group of East China Sea islets 220 km (140 miles) northeast of Taiwan known as the Senkakus in Tokyo and the Diaoyus in Beijing.

The trip also comes amid growing concern about China’s military moves in the South China Sea. Tension with Beijing escalated last week when Trump’s White House vowed to defend “international territories” there.

China responded by saying it had “irrefutable” sovereignty over disputed islands in the strategic waterway.

“What U.S. military people say is that considering the pace of China’s military build-up such as anti-ship missiles and fighters, there are worries about Japan’s capabilities,” said a senior Japanese defense ministry official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

(Reporting by Phil Stewart; Additional reporting by Linda Sieg in Tokyo, Matt Spetalnick and David Brunnstrom in Washington, and Ju-min Park in Seoul; Editing by Dan Grebler)

Bomb threats target U.S. Jewish centers for third time in a month

NEW YORK (Reuters) – More than a dozen Jewish community centers around the United States and one in Canada received bomb threats on Tuesday, the third wave of threatened attacks against them this month.

A total of 14 centers across 10 states, along with one in Canada, received the threats, according to David Posner, a director at the JCC Association of North America who advises centers on security.

He said most of the centers had received the all-clear from law enforcement officials and had resumed regular operations, though security was heightened.

“We are concerned about the anti-Semitism behind these threats,” Posner said in an emailed statement. He added that the previous threats phoned in this month were deemed to be hoaxes and that no one has been injured.

Jewish community centers in California, Colorado, Illinois, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Massachusetts, Ohio, Utah, Wisconsin and Ontario, Canada received the threats, according to the statement.

Telephoned threats on Jan. 9 were made against 16 Jewish community centers in nine U.S. states, and a second wave on Jan. 18 targeted 27 centers in 17 states.

Some of the calls were made using an automated “robocall” system, while others were made by individuals, security officials have said.

After the second round of threats, the FBI said that it and the Justice Department were investigating possible civil rights violations in connection with threats. No arrests have been made.

(Reporting by David Ingram; additional reporting by Curtis Skinner; Editing by Sandra Maler and Dan Grebler)

Sign up for Jim Bakker Show