U.S. officials braced for Iran to respond to the killing of its most powerful general, noting heightened military readiness in the country and preparing for a possible “tit-for-tat” attempt on the life of an American military commander. They warned ships across Mideast waterways crucial to global energy supplies about the “possibility of Iranian action“ against U.S. maritime interests in the region.
President Donald Trump ordered the Jan. 2 strike against Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the head of Iran’s elite Quds Force, after the death of an American contractor in Iraq. Now, amid massive demonstrations of Iran’s public mourning period for Soleimani and a state TV report of a deadly stampede at his funeral, officials believe the next steps by America’s longtime foe will determine the ultimate course of the latest crisis.

Paratroopers assigned to 1st Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division walk as they prepare equipment and load aircraft bound for the US Central Command area of operations from Fort Bragg, Jan. 4, 2020. (US Army photo)While officials say American intelligence isn’t clear on whether Iran’s latest military moves are designed to bolster Tehran’s defenses or prepare for an offensive strike, the U.S. is continuing to reinforce its own positions in the region, including repositioning some forces. One official said the U.S. anticipated a “major” attack of some type within the next day or two.
On Monday, Defense Secretary Mark Esper said no decision had been made about withdrawing troops from Iraq. Pro-Iranian factions in the Iraqi Parliament have pushed to oust American troops  following Soleimani’s killing on Iraqi soil. Esper spoke to reporters after a letter from a U.S. Marine general circulated that seemed to suggest a withdrawal had been ordered in response to a vote by the Iraqi Parliament over the weekend. “There’s been no decision whatsoever to leave Iraq,” Esper said.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Maritime Administration put out the warning for ships, citing the rising threats after Soleimani’s killing. Oil tankers were targeted last year in mine attacks the U.S. blamed on Iran. Tehran denied being responsible though it did seize oil tankers around the crucial Strait of Hormuz, the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf through which 20% of the world’s crude oil travels.

Iranian people attend a funeral procession for Major-General Qassem Soleimani, in his hometown in Kerman, Jan. 7, 2020. (Mehdi Bolourian/Fars News Agency/WANA via Reuters)Soleimani’s death, which has sparked major protests, further nuclear development and new threats of violence, has raised the prospect of a wide and unpredictable conflict in the Middle East and escalated tensions between Iran and the U.S.
The two nations have careened from one flare-up to another since Trump began his “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran shortly after taking office. He abrogated the 2015 nuclear deal and reimposed crushing economic sanctions, both steps aimed at preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon and deterring the sort of regional aggression spearheaded by Soleimani.
Two U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss internal discussions, said targeting Soleimani was not representative of a wholesale shift in American policy toward Iran, despite Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s comments on Sunday that the U.S. was targeting Iran’s “actual decision-makers” rather than its network of proxy allies. Trump has repeatedly contended that he is not seeking “regime change” in Iran, as has been pushed by some of his more hawkish advisers.
Still, Trump’s strike against Soleimani, a revered figure in Iran whose death sparked large displays of anger and grief, was a risky decision his Republican and Democratic predecessors opted not to take out of concern it would draw the U.S. and Iran closer to conflict.
U.S. officials are also aware that Iran could try to strike a high-level American leader in a “tit-for-tat” move, potentially a military commander.
One official said some Iranian ships have spread out, and while the intent isn’t immediately clear, they could move rapidly to attack.
The U.S. military has increased protection of its forces, particularly in Iraq. Officials said a number of the recently deployed soldiers from the 1st Brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division had moved into Iraq from Kuwait in order to increase security for Americans there. The U.S. military has stopped all training of Iraqi forces to focus on force protection, officials said.
As of Monday, officials said, there had not been a broadly distributed order or recommendation to increase security at military installations worldwide. Instead, decisions were being left up to the commanders.
The U.S. military’s concern about its vulnerability to Iranian attack in the Persian Gulf region has been at a heightened state since about May, when the administration reported it was getting intelligence indications that Iran was planning attacks on U.S. interests in Iraq and elsewhere in the region. The Pentagon sent additional forces to the Gulf at that point, and in July it worked out an arrangement with the government of Saudi Arabia to send U.S. forces to a large base deep in the Saudi desert, in less obvious range of Iranian missiles.
The main hub for American military air operations throughout the Middle East is located at al-Udeid air base in Qatar — within easy range of Iranian missiles. American forces also are stationed in the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait. The Navy’s 5th Fleet, which operates throughout the region, is based at Bahrain.
Meanwhile on Capitol Hill in the U.S., Democrats prepared largely symbolic resolutions under the War Powers Act to limit the president’s military actions regarding Iran. In a letter to House Democrats, Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the airstrike on Soleimani “provocative and disproportionate” and said it had “endangered our service members, diplomats and others by risking a serious escalation of tensions with Iran.”
Congress, which has the sole power to declare war, has complained that Trump did not provide advance notice of his airstrike in Baghdad. Trump did meet the 48-hour deadline required by the War Powers Act to notify Congress after the deadly drone strike. The document was classified, and no public version was released.
Senators will receive a briefing Wednesday on the situation, according to a person familiar with the meeting. Pompeo, Esper, CIA Director Gina Haspel and Army Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, are expected to speak. The House is also expected to be briefed this week.
White House Counselor Kellyanne Conway, speaking Monday on “Fox & Friends,” dismissed complaints from Democrats about notification as a “partisan action.”
Pelosi said the notification “raises more questions than it answers. This document prompts serious and urgent questions about the timing, manner and justification of the Administration’s decision to engage in hostilities against Iran,” she said.
In remarks to reporters Monday, Gen. Milley insisted that the intelligence on which Trump based his decision to kill Soleimani called for urgent action.
“I’ll stand by the intelligence I saw,” he said, adding that details had not been made public because they are classified. He said the intelligence showed Soleimani was plotting attacks and that the U.S. would have been negligent not to act. “It was imminent,” he said, “and it was very, very clear in scale and scope. Did it exactly say who, what, when and where? No, but he was planning, coordinating and synchronizing significant operations against U.S. military forces in the region, and it was imminent.”
 
 

…

France has warned it will retaliate with the full backing of the European Union if the United States imposes tariffs on up to $2.4 billion worth of French products, including Champagne, Roquefort cheese, handbags, and lipstick.
The U.S. is considering 100% tariffs on some French goods in response to France’s decision to tax the local digital business of major tech companies like Google and Facebook. With a decision on the tariffs expected in coming days, French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire met Tuesday with EU trade chief Phil Hogan in Paris.
“We believe that the American project of sanctions against the French digital tax is unfriendly, inappropriate and illegitimate,” Le Maire said.
If U.S. tariffs were to be imposed, “we would bring the case to the World Trade Organization and we would be ready to react,” Le Maire said.
Hogan said the question of the digital tax is a “very major bone of contention with the United States.”
 “The EU commission will stand together with France,” he added.
France has since last year been imposing a 3% annual tax on revenues in France of digital companies with yearly global sales worth more than 750 million euros ($830 million) and French revenue exceeding 25 million euros. France is pushing for a global agreement on how to better tax digital operations, which are typically reported in the company’s home country instead of the place where it does business.
Asked about potential retaliation measures from France, Le Maire said the country is considering “all options.” He did not further elaborate.
The U.S. are expected to announce the potential tariffs by next week, but France called on the Trump administration to refrain from taking a decision while negotiations are ongoing at the Paris-based the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
In a phone call with U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Monday, Le Maire said the sides had agreed “to intensify efforts in the coming days to try to find a compromise.”
In talks with President Donald Trump last August, French President Emmanuel Macron vowed France would abandon its digital tax if an agreement to better tax digital businesses was found at the OECD, which comprises 134 countries.
 
 

…

A pioneering U.S. company that began before the Civil War has filed for bankruptcy after 164 years in business.
Borden Dairy said Monday it is seeking Chapter 11 protection, saying it is deeply in debt and struggling to keep up its pension payments. It blames the drop of U.S. milk consumption and dairy farmers giving up the profession for deeply hurting its business.
Borden will keep operating, making milk and cheese, while it tries to restructure. However, its future is uncertain.
Borden began in 1856 when its founder, Gail Borden, became the first to successfully can condensed milk. U.S. Civil War soldiers carried cans of Borden Eagle Brand milk in their kits.
Borden’s famed mascot Elsie the Cow — a smiling bovine wearing a necklace of daisies — is one of the world’s most recognizable trademarks. Elsie’s “husband” Elmer can still be seen on bottles of white glue.
Borden is the second major U.S. milk producer to file for bankruptcy since November when Dean Foods, the country’s largest dairy, also sought protection from its creditors.
 

…

U.S. insurers and providers spent more than $800 billion in 2017 on administration, or nearly $2,500 per person — more than four times the per-capita administrative costs in Canada’s single-payer system, a new study finds.
Over one third of all healthcare costs in the U.S. were due to insurance company overhead and provider time spent on billing, versus about 17% spent on administration in Canada, researchers reported in Annals of Internal Medicine.
Cutting U.S. administrative costs to the $550 per capita (in 2017 U.S. dollars) level in Canada could save more than $600 billion, the researchers say.
“The average American is paying more than $2,000 a year for useless bureaucracy,” said lead author Dr. David Himmelstein, a distinguished professor of public health at the City University of New York at Hunter College in New York City and a lecturer at Harvard Medical School in Boston.
“That money could be spent for care if we had a ‘Medicare for all program’,” Himmelstein said.
To calculate the difference in administrative costs between the U.S. and Canadian systems, Himmelstein and colleagues examined Medicare filings made by hospitals and nursing homes.
For physicians, the researchers used information from surveys and census data on employment and wages to estimate costs. The Canadian data came from the Canadian Institute for Health Information and an insurance trade association.
United States vs. Canada
When the researchers broke down the 2017 per-capita health administration costs in both countries, they found that insurer overhead accounted for $844 in the U.S. versus $146 in Canada; hospital administration was $933 versus $196; nursing home, home care and hospice administration was $255 versus $123; and physicians’ insurance-related costs were $465 versus $87 They also found there had been a 3.2% increase in U.S. administrative costs since 1999, most of which was ascribed to the expansion of Medicare and Medicaid managed-care plans.
Overhead of private Medicare Advantage plans, which now cover about a third of Medicare enrollees, is six-fold higher than traditional Medicare (12.3% versus 2%), they report. That 2% is comparable to the overhead in the Canadian system.
Why are administrative costs so high in the U.S.?
It’s because the insurance companies and health care providers are engaged in a tug of war, each trying in its own way to game the system, Himmelstein said. How a patient’s treatment is coded can make a huge difference in the amount insurance companies pay. For example, Hammerstein said, if a patient comes in because of heart failure and the visit is coded as an acute exacerbation of the condition, the payment is significantly higher than if the visit is simply coded as heart failure.
More and more paperwork required
This upcoding of patient visits has led insurance companies to require more and more paperwork backing up each diagnosis, Himmelstein said. The result is more hours that healthcare providers need to put in to deal with billing.
“(One study) looked at how many characters were included in an average physician’s note in the U.S. and in other countries,” Himmelstein pointed out. “Notes from U.S. physicians were four times longer to meet the bureaucratic requirements of the payment system.”
The new study is “the first analysis of administrative costs in the U.S. and Canada in almost 20 years,” said Dr. Albert Wu, an internist and professor of health policy and management at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in Baltimore. “It’s an important paper.”
‘Inefficient and wasteful’  system
“It’s clear that health costs in the U.S. have soared,” Wu said. “We’re paying for an inefficient and wasteful fee-for-services system.”
“Some folks estimate that the U.S. would save $628 billion if administrative costs were as low as they are in Canada,” said Jamie Daw, an assistant professor of health policy and management at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health in New York City.
“That’s a staggering amount,” Daw said in an email. “It’s more than enough to pay for all of Medicaid spending or nearly enough to cover all out-of-pocket and prescription drug spending by Americans.”

…

Sunday’s attack by the Somali extremist group al-Shabab on a Kenyan military base was aimed at scoring propaganda points, according to some experts, but they also say the assault shows the region needs robust cooperation to defeat the extremists. Authorities say three U.S. personnel were killed and several aircraft and military vehicles were destroyed during the attack on the base which hosts joint U.S. and Kenyan forces in the coastal region of Lamu. VOA correspondent Mariama Diallo reports.
 

…

With just weeks to go before Iowans kick off the Democratic presidential nominating contest on Feb. 3, the only certainty about the race seems to be its uncertainty.
At least four contenders — former vice president Joe Biden, U.S. Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, and Pete Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana — are seen as having a shot at winning the crucial early nominating state.
All are betting on a win or strong finish in Iowa to propel them toward the nomination to take on Republican President Donald Trump in November 2020.
With a new poll showing a virtual tie among front-runners and many voters still reluctant to commit to one candidate, all have reason to hope. After record fundraisings in the fourth quarter for several candidates, they have also money to spend.
A CBS News/YouGov poll released on Sunday showed a three-way tie between Biden, Sanders and Buttigieg, at 23% with Warren and U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar trailing behind.

Democratic U.S. presidential candidate Senator Elizabeth Warren speaks during a town hall event in Davenport, Iowa, Jan. 5, 2020.Adding to the feeling of uncertainty in Iowa is the prospect that the U.S. senators in the race could be recalled to Washington soon for Trump’s impeachment trial, which could last weeks.
The specter of greater conflict with Iran has also thrust national security into the forefront of the Democratic race, adding to the unsettled nature of the contest.
With a fresh urgency, Biden, Sanders and Warren all campaigned along the Mississippi River towns in eastern Iowa during the weekend, while Klobuchar was not far away. Of the top-tier contenders, only Buttigieg was out of the state, stumping instead in New Hampshire, another early voting state.

Democratic presidential candidate and former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg campaigns on Jan. 4, 2020, in Nashua, N.H.“There are still a surprising amount of people who are undecided,” said Steven Drahozal, chairman of the Dubuque County Democratic Party.
After a Sanders event in Muscatine, Mark Butterworth, 73, said that while he supported Sanders in 2016, he was this time also considering the more moderate Buttigieg because of his concerns over Sanders’ push for universal healthcare that would all but eliminate private health insurance.
“I don see either one of them as a bad candidate at all,” said Butterworth, a small business owner.
At a Biden event in Dubuque, Ron Vonnahne, 70, of Asbury, said he, too, had not decided. He praised Buttigieg, but concerns over whether the 37-year-old could beat Trump had him looking at Biden.
Iowa is particularly critical to lesser-known candidates Buttigieg, Klobuchar and Warren, who need to make a splash and have banked on the state’s overwhelmingly white electorate to give their presidential bids an early jolt.
Biden and Sanders, on the other hand, benefit from being better-known names with more solid and diverse bases of support in later primary states such as Nevada and South Carolina.
Either could lose Iowa and stay viable.
Biden has also seized on Trump’s recent actions toward Iran to draw attention to his foreign policy experience.
After winning a high-profile endorsement of Iowa Rep. Abby Finkenauer, a first-term congresswoman who campaigned with him over the weekend, Biden’s campaign on Sunday also announced three endorsements from moderate House Democrats in swing states, who all served in the U.S. military.
For the U.S. senators in the field, every day now matters before a possible impeachment trial later in January. Klobuchar, at one stop, urged attendees to commit to supporting her now.
“This is it. We are like, what, 30 days away? And I know you guys always like to say, ‘You’re in my top three. You’re in my top three.’” she told the crowd. “Just go for it.”

…

Iraqi forces are pushing ahead with their crackdown on Islamic State’s ongoing insurgency, despite the pause in assistance from the United States and coalition partners.
The Iraqi military’s Security Media Cell published photos Monday of a raid in Salahuddin province claiming to have destroyed three IS hideouts while recovering explosives, bomb-making materials and key documents.

بهدف إلاستمرار في ملاحقة العناصر الإرهابية والمطلوبين فضلا عن البحث والتفتيش عن اوكار الإرهاب، نفذت قيادة عمليات سامراء واجب تفتيش في منطقة شرق سامراء (الكوش)…
“Bottom line is Iraq loses the anti-ISIS fight without U.S. support,” according to Jennifer Cafarella, research director at the Washington-based Institute for the Study of War (ISW). “The question is merely how badly and how fast.”
US officials: IS threat overstated
Still, some officials have pushed back, arguing that to some extent, the threat from a resurgent IS has been overstated.
In particular, they point to the terror group’s unwillingness or inability to take advantage of the recent U.S. tensions with Iran.
“It’s surprising that they haven’t found a way,” a senior U.S. defense official told VOA. “It says something about what the SDF [Syrian Democratic Forces] and the Iraqis have done.”
 
Coalition officials also contend that Iraqi forces have not gotten the credit they deserve.
“Daesh has lost the capability to launch large-scale attacks in Iraq,” British Maj. Gen. Gerald Strickland, the coalition’s deputy commander, said in a statement Sunday, using an Arabic acronym for the terror group. “This speaks volumes to the dedication of the Iraq Security Forces and their desire to bring stability back to their country.”
Meanwhile, U.S. officials said the pause in assistance to Iraqi forces does not mean U.S. forces will hesitate to respond to IS threats.
“When and where ISIS presents a threat to our troops, we will conduct operations with our partners to eliminate the threat,” Caggins said.
 

…

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared Monday that Turkish forces would do their duty in Libya after being deployed to support the country’s besieged Government of National Accord.
On Sunday, Erdogan confirmed the start of a military deployment to Libya.
“There will be an operation center [in Libya].  There will be a Turkish lieutenant general leading, and they will be managing the situation over there. [Turkish soldiers] are gradually moving there right now,” said Erdogan. “The goal of the Turkish Armed Forces is not to fight, but to ensure a cease-fire in Libya.”
The GNA is currently under siege by forces led by Libyan General Khalif Haftar, who controls eastern Libya. Last month, the Turkish Parliament sanctioned the deployment of military forces to Libya, following Erdogan’s November signing of a military cooperation agreement with the GNA.
Ankara also agreed to a maritime agreement with Tripoli that extends Turkish control over a critical part of the eastern Mediterranean Sea.
Turkey is currently embroiled in an increasingly bitter competition with regional countries in the search for hydrocarbons across the Mediterranean Sea. The rivalry is now extending to control over the distribution of natural gas.
“It’s a very strategic move by Turkey to stop the emerging blocks by countries like Israel, Greece, Egypt against Turkey,” said international relations professor Huseyin Bagci of Ankara’s Middle East Technical University. “The deployment of Turkish troops to Libya is legitimate. Strategically speaking, it’s about survival — will Turkey be in the eastern Mediterranean or not?”
There are growing questions over the sustainability of Ankara’s Libya move.
“All these developments have been outright rejected by the international community and countries in the region without exception,” said political scientist Cengiz Aktar of Athens University. “So, Turkey is pretty alone in this venture.”
Mounting diplomatic pressure
Ankara is facing growing diplomatic pressure over its Libya plans. German Chancellor Angela Merkel discussed Libya with Erdogan by phone on Monday. Last week, U.S. President Donald Trump advised caution to the Turkish president.
Cairo, which is backing Haftar, condemned Ankara, and warned of consequences in any Turkish military cooperation. Erdogan is likely to face further pressure Wednesday when he meets Russian President Vladimir Putin in Istanbul. Russian mercenaries of the Russian paramilitary organization the Wagner Group, which has close ties to the Kremlin, are backing Haftar.
Analysts warn that Ankara’s decision to militarily back the beleaguered Tripoli regime could predicate its demise.

Libyan fighters loyal to the Government of National Accord (GNA) fire their guns during clashes with forces loyal to strongman Khalifa Haftar south of the capital Tripoli’s suburb of Ain Zara, April 20, 2019.“For sure, we can see efforts accelerate to overthrow this Tripoli government,” Aktar said. “I am afraid we are heading in this direction because the Tripoli government has hardly any ally, except a few on paper. But Haftar forces are controlling most of the country, and for the time being, it looks like they will take over, and appear to have the whole world behind them. And the only country supporting the Tripoli government is Ankara.”
Last month, Haftar declared his forces were ready to overrun Tripoli. On Saturday, a strike on a military academy in the Libyan capital killed at least 30 people and wounded 33 others.
“At the moment, the situation seems to be working on the side of Haftar. He has better weapons. He has jet fighters. He has superiority on the air and in the field,” said Bagci. “I am not sure what kind of soldiers Turkey will send there.”
Bagci added, “Erdogan has played the card.  He will not allow the Tripoli government to fall. He will defend to the last man, because Erdogan has played a big card, a big gamble. But the arrival of Turkish troops may yet change the psychology, the balance of forces in Libya.”
Negotiations?
Former Turkish ambassador Mithat Rende, who is now an energy expert, suggests Ankara may be banking that its Libya move forces regional rivals to the negotiating table.  
“What we have on the ground in the Mediterranean is unilaterally declared exclusive economic zones,” he said. “We have unilaterally declared continental shelves, and they all are overlapping, all conflicting views. So here, international law suggests that you need to negotiate to reach an agreement with a fair agreement, and equitable principle should apply here. And Turkey is prepared to negotiate.”
Aktar disagrees.
“We’ve haven’t seen any diplomatic action in months, if not years, on seeking negotiation,” he said. “The only action we’ve seen (is) aggressive deals and moves by Ankara. So, the final aims can be diplomacy and negotiation, but we’ve seen no concrete moves in this direction.”
Some analysts question how far Erdogan is prepared to provide military support to Tripoli if Turkish forces fail to deter Haftar forces, and regional rivals harden their stances.
“Turkey has no capability for these out-of-area operations,” Aktar said. “It will be extremely dangerous, costly, and deadly to go ahead with this military cooperation if more military forces are needed to sustain this deal with Tripoli.”
 

…

The Lima Group regional bloc said on Monday it backed the re-election of opposition leader Juan Guaido as head of Venezuela’s Congress after Nicolas Maduro’s socialist government forced a separate vote imposing a new leader of the legislative body.
Luis Parra was installed as the new head of Congress on Sunday after armed troops blocked opposition legislators from entering parliament, in a move condemned by dozens of nations as
an assault on democracy.
Opposition legislators responded by re-electing Guaido in a session at the headquarters of a pro-opposition newspaper.
Guaido is recognized by dozens of nations as Venezuela’s rightful leader.
The Lima Group, minus members Mexico and Argentina, said they welcomed Guaido’s re-election as the leader of Congress and as the country’s interim president, repeating a condemnation of
“force and intimidation tactics” used against lawmakers.
The re-election of Guaido “represents a rejection of the reckless actions by Nicolas Maduro’s regime that sought to prevent his appointment,” said the group, which was set up to
find a way out of the Venezuelan crisis.
The Lima Group statement was signed by Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, Peru and Bolivia, the last of which joined the bloc in December after the resignation of leftist leader Evo Morales.
Argentina’s new center-left Peronist President Alberto Fernandez has been walking a tightrope between key trade partners including Brazil and the United States and potential leftist allies including Venezuela.
The South American country has given asylum to socialist former Bolivian leader Morales and welcomed a senior official from Maduro’s government to Fernandez’s inauguration in
December, prompting criticism from the United States.
But Argentina’s foreign minister, Felipe Sola, said on Twitter that his government rejected the move in Venezuela to block the proper functioning of the legislative assembly which
would only lead to “international isolation.”
“The assembly must elect its president with full legitimacy,” he wrote.
 
 

…

Former U.S. national security adviser John Bolton said Monday he would testify at President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial if the Senate subpoenas him, potentially giving Democrats key behind-the-scenes testimony about Trump’s efforts to get Ukraine to launch investigations to benefit himself politically.
Bolton, a tough advocate for U.S. power across the globe, served for 17 months as Trump’s third top security aide until the president ousted him last September amid increasing rancorous disagreements over how the U.S. should handle its contentious relations with Iran, North Korea and Afghanistan.
In the run-up to the House of Representatives vote last month to impeach Trump, investigators decided to not subpoena Bolton, fearful of a long legal battle in U.S. courts over whether he would have to testify or could adhere to Trump’s directive banning testimony by key aides, some of whom honored the president’s edict while others did not.
A tandem case with the same issues involving the potential testimony of a Bolton aide, Charles Kupperman, was left unresolved as Democratic lawmakers advanced their case against Trump, approving two articles of impeachment.
But as Trump’s impeachment trial looms in the Senate, even though no date has been set in a congressional stalemate over the trial’s parameters, Bolton said in a statement he had to “resolve the serious competing issues as best I could, based on careful consideration and study.”
He said, “I have concluded that, if the Senate issues a subpoena for my testimony, I am prepared to testify.”

FILE – Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy speaks in Kyiv, Dec. 4, 2019.Bolton was at the center of significant White House foreign policy debates, including Trump’s efforts to press Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to open investigations of one of Trump’s top 2020 Democratic challengers, former Vice President Joe Biden, his son Hunter’s work for a Ukrainian natural gas company and a debunked conspiracy theory that Ukraine attempted to undermine Trump’s 2016 election campaign.
At one point during the House impeachment investigation, Bolton’s lawyer said that his client had “personal knowledge” of relevant Ukraine-related meetings and conversations “that have not yet been discussed in testimonies thus far.”
Bolton is one of four Trump White House aides that Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer says should be called to testify at the impeachment trial. But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who is coordinating trial strategy with Trump’s White House lawyers, has balked at calling any witnesses in hope that after the Senate hears the House arguments against Trump and the president’s defense, it would then vote quickly to acquit him.
 U.S. lawmakers have returned to Washington after their holiday recess, but they are no closer to deciding when and how Trump’s impeachment trial would be staged.
Key lawmakers remain stalemated over impeachment, now complicated by congressional debate over the merits of Trump’s approval of the drone attack that killed a key Iranian general, Qassem Soleimani, last week outside the Baghdad airport.

FILE – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., smiles as she holds the gavel as the House votes on articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump by the House of Representatives at the Capitol in Washington, Dec. 18, 2019.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, leader of the Democrat-controlled House, is refusing to send two articles of impeachment to the Senate until she believes it would conduct a fair trial. One article accuses Trump of abusing the power of his presidency to pressure Ukraine to launch an investigation into the Bidens, while the other alleges he obstructed congressional efforts to investigate his Ukraine-related actions.
As Trump and aides pressed Ukraine for the Biden investigations, Trump was temporarily withholding $391 million in military aid Ukraine wanted to help fight pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine. Trump eventually released the military assistance to Ukraine last September without Zelenskiy opening the Biden investigations. Republicans say that is proof Trump did not engage in a reciprocal quid pro quo deal with Ukraine.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) speaks to reporters in the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Jan. 3, 2020.McConnell says the Senate cannot hold an impeachment trial without receiving the impeachment allegations from the House, although some Republican senators looking to acquit Trump as quickly as possible now say the Senate should start the trial anyway.
Schumer has sparred with McConnell to try to win assurances that key Trump White House aides will be allowed to testify at the impeachment trial, which would be only the third such impeachment proceeding in U.S. history.
But McConnell, advocating Trump’s quick acquittal, has refused so far to guarantee that acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, Bolton and others would testify.
Schumer said Sunday he remains “hopeful” that four Republican senators will vote against McConnell and join with the minority bloc of 47 Democrats to vote to hear testimony from the Trump aides.
Meanwhile, Trump again ridiculed the impeachment effort on Monday, which was approved with near unanimous Democratic support in the House.
“To be spending time on this political Hoax at this moment in our history, when I am so busy, is sad!” he said on Twitter. 

“The reason they are not sending the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate is that they are so weak and so pathetic.” @LindseyGrahamSC@MariaBartiromo The great Scam continues. To be spending time on this political Hoax at this moment in our history, when I am so busy, is sad!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 6, 2020
He added, “The Impeachment Hoax, just a continuation of the Witch Hunt which started even before I won the Election, must end quickly. Read the Transcripts, see the Ukrainian President’s strong statement, NO PRESSURE – get this done. It is a con game by the Dems to help with the Election!”

The Impeachment Hoax, just a continuation of the Witch Hunt which started even before I won the Election, must end quickly. Read the Transcripts, see the Ukrainian President’s strong statement, NO PRESSURE – get this done. It is a con game by the Dems to help with the Election!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 6, 2020
“Congress & the President should not be wasting their time and energy on a continuation of the totally partisan Impeachment Hoax when we have so many important matters pending. 196 to ZERO was the Republican House vote, & we got 3 Dems. This was not what the Founders had in mind!”  

Congress & the President should not be wasting their time and energy on a continuation of the totally partisan Impeachment Hoax when we have so many important matters pending. 196 to ZERO was the Republican House vote, & we got 3 Dems. This was not what the Founders had in mind!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 6, 2020
When a trial finally occurs, the Senate will almost certainly acquit Trump.
A two-thirds majority in the 100-member Senate would be required to convict Trump to remove him from office, meaning at least 20 Republicans would have to turn against the president if all 47 Democrats also vote to convict him.
Some Republican lawmakers have voiced objections to Trump’s request to Zelenskiy for the investigation of former Vice President Biden, who leads national polls to oppose Trump in the November presidential election. But no Republican lawmakers have called for Trump’s conviction and removal from office.
 
 
 
 
 

…

As people around the world welcome the new year with wishes of peace and prosperity, many in the disputed South Asian region of Kashmir are facing the prospect of a hard year ahead. Roshan Mughal reports how tensions between nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan are costing local fruit farmers dearly. His story is narrated by Ayesha Tanzeem.

…