Kris Jenner is opening up about her health. The reality star shared plans to have her ovaries surgically removed after she was diagnosed with a tumor on one of the organs. “I went to the doctor and I had my scan," she tearfully told daughters Kim Kardashian, Khloe Kardashian and Kendall Jenner on the July 4 episode of The Kardashians. "They found a cyst.” Kris continued, "They said I gotta have my ovaries taken out." While the 68-year-old—who is also mom to kids Kourtney Kardashian, Rob Kardashian and Kylie Jenner—wasn't nervous about the procedure, she did feel very emotional over having to part with her ovaries because, as she put it, "that’s where all my kids were conceived." "It’s also a thing about getting older," Kris noted. "It’s a sign of 'we’re done with this part of your life.' It’s a whole chapter that’s just closed.” She added in a separate confessional, “People often ask me what is the best job you’ve ever had, and I always say mom. The biggest blessing in my life was being able to give birth to six beautiful kids.” And in true Kardashian fashion, Kris' family quickly rallied behind her. After Kourtney called in to check on Kris, the Poosh founder said in a confessional, "I totally understand how my mom is feeling because I would feel the same way." "It’s your womanly power," Kourtney continued. "It doesn’t mean it’s taking away who she is or what she’s experienced, but I would feel this sentimental feeling of what it’s created.” Likewise, Kim empathized with Kris, saying that she feels "really sad for her." "To have a surgery and remove your ovaries is a really big deal," the SKIMS mogul shared. "I couldn’t even imagine being in that situation.” Kris' longtime boyfriend Corey Gamble also showed his support, surprising the momager with a special gift to “help your energy."

The U.S. Navy's Pacific Fleet announced on Wednesday (May 22) that the 2024 Rim of the Pacific Exercise (RIMPAC 2024) is expected to take place on June 26, with 29 countries participating in and around the Hawaiian Islands, a larger lineup than the previous exercise in 2022. The Philippines, which has had multiple maritime conflicts with China recently, and Japan, which has tense diplomatic relations with China, will send troops to participate. China has been excluded from participating in the international military exercise since 2018, and its aggressive actions and reactions are causing tensions in the Pacific region to continue to rise. The biennial Rim of the Pacific military exercise is the world's largest international maritime exercise. The U.S. Navy said that the exercise will last until August 2, and it is expected to involve 29 countries, 40 surface ships, 3 submarines, 14 countries' army forces, more than 150 aircraft and more than 25,000 personnel. The U.S. Navy said that the theme of the 29th RIMPAC 2024 is "Partners: Integrated and Ready", emphasizing inclusiveness as the core, promoting multinational cooperation and trust, and using military interoperability to achieve their respective national goals to strengthen integrated and ready alliance partners. Its goal is to "enhance collective strength and promote a free and open Indo-Pacific region" through joint training and operations. The 29 countries participating in the exercise this year include Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Denmark, Ecuador, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Peru, South Korea, the Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tonga, the United Kingdom and the United States. Compared with the 28th RIMPAC held in 2022, which involved 26 countries, 38 surface ships, 4 submarines, 9 countries' army forces, more than 170 aircraft, and about 25,000 officers and soldiers, the number of countries, ships and army forces participating in this exercise has increased. The countries participating in this year's RIMPAC military exercise include all members of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) between the United States, Japan, India and Australia, and the Australia-UK-US Trilateral Security Partnership (AUKUS), as in the previous exercise. In addition, countries surrounding the South China Sea and the South Pacific island nation of Tonga are also participating. Many analysts believe that the military exercise itself is sending a message to China: China's expansion in the Western Pacific region will be blocked and defeated. The United States invited China to participate in the RIMPAC military exercise twice in 2014 and 2016. In 2018, due to China's expansion in the South China Sea, the United States withdrew its invitation to China. In addition, despite Taiwan's repeated willingness to participate, Taiwan is still not included in the 29 countries participating in this year's RIMPAC military exercise. Analysts pointed out that the US-led RIMPAC military exercise is intended to unite allies to militarily intimidate China. If Taiwan is invited to join, it will be too provocative to China, which will not only aggravate the tension between the United States and China, but also embarrass some allies. The U.S. Navy said the commander of the U.S. Third Fleet will serve as the commander of the joint task force for the exercise, while Chilean Navy Commodore Alberto Guerrero will serve as deputy commander of the joint task force, which is a first in the history of the RIMPAC military exercise. In addition, Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force Rear Admiral Kazushi Yokota will also serve as deputy commander. Other key leaders of the multinational force exercise include Canadian Commodore Kristjan Monaghan, who will command the maritime forces, and Australian Air Force Commodore Louise Desjardins, who will command the air forces. According to the U.S. Stars and Stripes, Vice Admiral Michael Boyle is currently the commander of the U.S. Third Fleet. Vice Admiral John Wade has been nominated to replace Boyle. The U.S. Navy press release said the exercise will enhance the ability of international joint forces to "deter and defeat aggression by major powers in all domains and conflict levels," but did not provide specific information on which exercises will be held this summer. Previous RIMPAC training exercises have included sinking ships at sea with missiles, amphibious landings and the first landing of a Marine Corps Osprey aircraft on an Australian ship.

US politicians are advocating for steep tariffs, echoing the protectionist Fordney-McCumber Tariff of 1922. Despite potential international retaliation, risks to global economic rules and a shift from post-World War II principles, US politicians have promised to increase trade barriers against China, causing concerns for the sustainability of global economic harmony. A century ago, the Republican Congress passed the Fordney-McCumber Tariff of 1922. This post-World War-I effort to protect the US from German competition and rescue America's own businesses from falling prices sparked a global wave of tariff hikes. While long forgotten, echoes of Fordney-McCumber now reverberate across the US political landscape. Once again, politicians are grasping the tariff as a magic talisman against its own economic ills and to contain the rise of China. The Democratic Party of the 1920s opposed tariffs, because duties are harmful to consumers and farmers, but today both President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump favor national delivery through protectionism. Trump promised that his second term, if elected, would impose 60-percent tariffs on everything arriving from China and 10-percent tariffs on imports from the rest of the world, apparently including the imports covered by 14 free trade agreements with America's 20 partners. He initially promised 100-percent tariffs on electric vehicles (EVs), but when Biden declared that he was hiking tariffs on EVs from China to 100-percent, Trump raised the ante to 200-percent. On May 14, 2024, the White House imposed tariffs ranging from 25 percent (on items such as steel, aluminum and lithium batteries) to 50 percent (semiconductors, solar cells, syringes and needles) and 100 percent (electric vehicles) on Chinese imports. US government officials offer "national security" and "supply chain vulnerability" as the justification for levying high tariffs. To deflect worries about inflation, US Trade Representative Katherine Tai declared, "first of all, I think that that link, in terms of tariffs to prices, has been largely debunked." Contrary findings by the United States International Trade Commission and a number of distinguished economists, as well as Biden's own 2019 statement criticizing Trump's tariffs - "Trump doesn't get the basics. He thinks tariffs are being paid by China… [but] the American people are paying his tariffs" - forced Tai's office to wind back her declaration. The fact that prohibitive barriers to imports of solar cells, batteries and EVs will delay the green economy carries zero political weight with Trump and little with Biden. Nor does either of them worry about the prospects of Chinese retaliation and damage to the fabric of global economic rules. Historical lessons - unanticipated consequences of the foolish Fordney-McCumber Tariff of 1922 and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff of 1930 - are seen as irrelevant by the candidates and their advisers. The US' lurch from its post-World War II free trade principles offers China a golden opportunity. On the world stage, China will espouse open free trade and investment. China will encourage EV and battery firms to establish plants in Europe, Brazil, Mexico and elsewhere, essentially daring the US to damage its own alliances by restricting third country imports containing Chinese components. Whether the fabric of global economic rules that has delivered astounding prosperity to the world will survive through the 21st century remains to be seen. Much will depend on the decisions of other large economic powers, not only China but also the European Union and Japan, as well as middle powers, such as Australia, Brazil, Chile, ASEAN and South Korea. Their actions and reactions will reshape the rules of the 21st century. If others follow America down this costly path, the world will become less prosperous and vastly more unpredictable. If they resist, the US risks being diminished and more isolated. The author is a non-resident Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute of International Economics. bizopinion@globaltimes.com.cn

HONG KONG, July 9 (Reuters) - Nornickel (GMKN.MM), opens new tab is in talks with China Copper to form a joint venture that would allow the Russian mining giant to move its entire copper smelting base to China, four sources with knowledge of the matter told Reuters. If the move goes ahead, it would mark Russia's first uprooting of a domestic plant since the U.S. and Britain banned metal exchanges from accepting new aluminium, copper and nickel produced by Russia. It also means Nornickel's copper will be produced within the country where it is most consumed. Nornickel said in April it planned to close its Arctic facility and build a new plant in China with an unnamed partner. Executives at China Copper, owned by the world's largest aluminium producer Chinalco (601600.SS), opens new tab, flew to Moscow in June to discuss a possible joint venture, one of the sources said, adding that details of the structure and investment are still under discussion. Nornickel declined to comment. Chinalco and China Copper did not respond to requests for comment via email and phone. Sites being considered in China include Fangchenggang and Qinzhou in the Guangxi region, the two sources said, with another source saying Qingdao in Shandong province was also possible. A decision on a joint venture will be made over the next few months, a fifth source said, adding that Nornickel's Chinese output is likely to be consumed domestically. The new facility will have capacity to produce 450,000 tonnes of copper annually, two of the sources said, amounting to around 2% of global mined supplies estimated at around 22 million metric tons this year. Nornickel, which according to its annual report produced 425,400 tonnes of refined copper last year, processed all of its concentrates in 2023 at the Arctic plant, its only operation producing finished copper suitable for delivery to exchanges.

LONDON, July 9 (Reuters) - U.S.-based hedge fund Elliott Associates on Tuesday urged a London court to overturn a verdict supporting the London Metal Exchange's (LME) cancellation of nickel trades partly because the exchange failed to disclose documents. The LME annulled $12 billion in nickel trades in March 2022 when prices shot to records above $100,000 a metric ton in a few hours of chaotic trade. Elliott and market maker Jane Street Global Trading brought a case demanding a combined $472 million in compensation, alleging at a trial in June last year that the 146-year-old exchange had acted unlawfully. London's High Court ruled last November that the LME had the right to cancel the trades because of exceptional circumstances, and was not obligated to consult market players prior to its decision. Lawyers for Elliott told London's Court of Appeal that the LME belatedly released documents in May detailing its "Kill Switch" and "Trade Halt" internal procedures. It also newly disclosed an internal report that Elliott said detailed potential conflicts of interest at the exchange. "It was troubling that one gets disclosure out of the blue in the Court of Appeal for the first time," Elliott lawyer Monica Carss-Frisk told the court. Jane Street Global did not appeal the ruling. "If we had had them (documents) in the proceedings before the divisional court, we may well have sought permission to cross examine." LME lawyers said the new documents were not relevant. "The disclosed documents do not affect the reasoning of the divisional court or the merits of the arguments on appeal," the exchange said in documents prepared for the appeal hearing. "Elliott's appeal is largely a repetition of the arguments which were advanced, and rightly rejected." The LME said it had both the power and a duty to unwind the trades because a record $20 billion in margin calls could have led to at least seven clearing members defaulting, systemic risk and a potential "death spiral". Elliott said the ruling diluted protection provided by the Human Rights Act and also wrongly concluded the LME had the power to cancel the trades.