Chinese trade negotiators suddenly canceled a visit to meet U.S. farmers after they wrapped up trade talks in Washington this week.Marketsread more
Blackstone Executive Vice Chairman Tony James says he's less optimistic now than before that the U.S.-China trade war could be resolved, but even a smaller deal could help...World Economyread more
The Pentagon will deploy U.S. forces to the Middle East on the heels of the attack on Saudi Arabian oil facilities, United States Secretary of Defense Mark Esper announced...Defenseread more
President Trump also said he is "not looking for a partial deal" with Beijing, moving away from his suggestion last week that he would consider an "interim deal."Politicsread more
Progress on trade talks will determine how far market will move above new highs.Trader Talk with Bob Pisaniread more
"Sure, the trade war's taking its toll on business ... it's just not taking its toll where it was supposed to," Jim Cramer says.Mad Money with Jim Cramerread more
Joe Biden called on President Donald Trump Friday to release the transcript of a call with a foreign leader that is the subject of a whistleblower complaint. Biden described...Politicsread more
For investors taking a breather from the chaos in August, buckle up as the market is about go crazy again, Goldman Sachs warned.Marketsread more
Palantir Technologies is targeting a valuation of at least $26 billion in a private fundraising round, the first for the Peter Thiel-backed data analytics startup in four...Wall Streetread more
Michael Pack, a conservative filmmaker linked to Steve Bannon, saw at least $1.6 million in donations from his nonprofit sent into the coffers of his independent production...Politicsread more
The New England Patriots released Antonio Brown just 11 days after signing the wide receiver. The NFL Super Bowl champion team initially had kept him in the face of a rape...Sportsread more
President Donald Trump's choice to tap John Bolton as national security advisor is widely expected to produce more hawkish U.S. foreign policy on rogue states such as North Korea and Iran. Pakistan, a country that's long been a thorn in Washington's side, could also be affected.
Islamabad was a crucial U.S. ally during Washington's war on terror following the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, but bilateral relations have worsened in recent years as the U.S. demands the country do more to fight Taliban-affiliated militants known as the Haqqani network.
Earlier this year, the Trump administration suspended military and security assistance to the South Asian nation. Many believe the president could follow-up by rescinding Pakistan's non-NATO ally status or declaring Islamabad a state sponsor of terrorism.
"Bolton's hardline views may translate into an even more aggressive rhetoric against Pakistan," said Uzair Younus, director of consultancy Albright Stonebridge's South Asia practice.
A hostile policy approach in the form of increased drone strikes, financial sanctions, or diplomatic isolation "would only harden Pakistan's position and bring it closer to other regional powers," such as Beijing, Moscow and Tehran, Younus cautioned.
The three countries, which are currently experiencing frosty ties with Washington, have steadily increased their influence in Pakistan in recent months.
Moscow and Islamabad have been ramping up military and energy cooperation while Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif led a politico-economic delegation to the Pakistani capital last month to discuss strengthened ties. The South Asian nation also enjoys a strategic relationship with the world's second-largest economy, reflected by joint infrastructure projects such as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.
That all comes as the White House plans fresh sanctions on Moscow, proposes harsh tariffs on Chinese goods and is considering scrapping a nuclear deal that may increase the likelihood of U.S. military action against Tehran.
Further signs of U.S. hostility could certainly push Pakistan into the arms of Beijing, Moscow and Tehran, agreed Sahar Khan, visiting research fellow at the Cato Institute, a libertarian research group.
"Bolton risks creating more tensions within the U.S.-Pakistan relationship, which is already at an all-time low," Khan said. "Bolton's understanding of Pakistan is based on a binary notion that there are only two kinds of actors operating in Pakistan: Islamists and non-Islamists."
"The reality on the ground is a lot more complicated," she added.
Bolton, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, was quoted in February as saying that, if Pakistan's nuclear arsenal fell into the hands of radicals, "you would have Iran on steroids right now."
Islamabad is also a crucial player when it comes to U.S. efforts in Afghanistan, where around 15,000 American troops remain more than 16 years following the U.S. invasion. So, tough measures on Pakistan may be a double-edged sword for Washington.
"Pakistan has some leverage over the U.S. and could ultimately respond by disrupting U.S. supplies into Afghanistan, thereby undercutting U.S. military objectives in Afghanistan," said Younus.
But not everybody agrees that Bolton will turn up the pressure on Islamabad.
Jonah Blank, senior political scientist at nonprofit think tank RAND Corporation, noted that Bolton served in President George W. Bush's administration as undersecretary of state for arms control, but was silent on Pakistan at that time.
Back then, nuclear proliferation was Bolton's job and Pakistan was the world's foremost nuclear proliferator on his watch [but] he simply "looked the other way while Pakistan engaged in nuclear proliferation," according to Blank, who said Bolton's attention was instead fixated on states hostile to the U.S., namely Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea and even Cuba.
"Unless Bolton has had a very sudden change in heart, there is no reason to expect him to be any tougher on Pakistan now than he was when he served as Undersecretary of State for Arms Control," Blank continued.