Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz aims to oust Trump in 2020

Howard Schultz, who grew up in a working-class neighborhood in New York City, moved to the northwestern state of Washington in the 1980s and built Starbucks into a global coffee shop behemoth. (AP)
Updated 28 January 2019

Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz aims to oust Trump in 2020

  • ‘I am seriously thinking of running for president’
  • The self-described ‘lifelong Democrat’ said he ‘will run as a centrist independent outside of the two-party system’

WASHINGTON: Billionaire former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz said in a TV interview that he is looking into running against Donald Trump in 2020 as an independent presidential candidate.
“I am seriously thinking of running for president,” Schultz told the CBS news show “60 Minutes” late Sunday.
The self-described “lifelong Democrat” said he “will run as a centrist independent outside of the two-party system.”
According to Schultz, 65, “We’re living at a most fragile time.”
Not only is Trump “not qualified to be the president,” but Republicans and Democrats “are consistently not doing what’s necessary on behalf of the American people and are engaged, every single day, in revenge politics.”
Schultz grew up in a working-class neighborhood in New York City, but made his fortune when he moved to the northwestern state of Washington in the 1980s and built Starbucks into a global coffee shop behemoth.
Schultz blamed both parties for the country’s $21.5 trillion debt, which he portrayed as “a reckless example” of the “failure of their constitutional responsibility.”
Schultz dismissed fears that his bid could split the opposition vote and result in a second term for Trump.
“I want to see the American people win. I want to see America win,” Schultz told CBS.
At least one Democratic presidential hopeful, Texan Julian Castro, told CNN that if Schultz runs “it would provide Donald Trump with his best hope of getting reelected.”
According to Castro, “I don’t think that would be in the best interest of our country.”
While third-party candidates in US politics often face insurmountable odds, they have played the role of spoilers.
In 1992 conservative billionaire Ross Perot siphoned enough votes away from George H.W. Bush to hand the presidency to Democrat Bill Clinton.
And Democrats blame consumer advocate Ralph Nader for taking votes away from Democrat Al Gore in the 2000 election, allowing Republican George W. Bush to become president. Nader rejects the accusation.


Pakistan mulls taking Kashmir dispute to ICJ

Updated 7 min 34 sec ago

Pakistan mulls taking Kashmir dispute to ICJ

  • Senate committee chairman says several options being considered

KARACHI: Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry spokesman on Wednesday said Islamabad is considering taking its dispute with India over Kashmir to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). 

“No final decision has been taken,” said Dr. Muhammad Faisal. “The media will be apprised once a decision is taken in this regard.”

Sajid Mir, chairman of the Senate committee on Kashmir, told Arab News that Pakistan is considering the ICJ as one of several options.

“Going to the ICJ is one of them, but it’s still under deliberation and no final decision has been taken,” Mir said, adding that Faisal had briefed senators about the situation in Indian-administered Kashmir.

“Around a million people are under house arrest in Kashmir, where the curfew has entered its 16th day,” Mir said.

“There are reports that around 4,000 Kashmiri people have been detained by occupation forces due to fear of a strong reaction,” he said, adding that Pakistan will “raise the issue at the (UN) Human Rights Council.”

FASTFACT

The decision to revoke Kashmir’s special status means the revocation of a bar on property purchases by people from outside the state, and government jobs and some college spots in Kashmir will no longer be reserved for its residents.

Political leaders in Kashmir had warned that repealing Article 370 of India’s constitution, and thereby changing the state’s special status, could trigger major unrest.

Indian authorities immediately launched a clampdown in Kashmir by suspending telephone and internet services and putting some leaders under house arrest.

The decision to revoke Kashmir’s special status means the revocation of a bar on property purchases by people from outside the state, and government jobs and some college spots in Kashmir will no longer be reserved for its residents.

The Muslim-majority Himalayan region has been at the heart of more than 70 years of animosity, since the partition of the British colony of India into the separate countries of Muslim-majority Pakistan and Hindu-majority India. Kashmir is divided between India, Pakistan and China.

Any decision by the ICJ would be an advisory opinion only. “Although an advisory opinion will not be binding, it will support Pakistan’s position that Kashmir is an international issue, and is likely to put pressure on India to act in accordance with the previous resolutions of the UN Security Council,” said international law expert and barrister Taimur Malik.