Latest news with #UStroops
New York Times
10 hours ago
- Business
- New York Times
Trump Administration Live Updates: U.S. to Examine Social Media Posts of Student Visa Applicants
A Norwegian naval commando hoisted himself onto the deck of a ship during a NATO exercise in March. Beyond projecting military strength and pledging unity, a more pressing theme has emerged for next week's NATO summit: Keep President Trump happy. As leaders prepare to meet for the annual forum starting on Tuesday, U.S. allies have watered down their public support for Ukrainian membership and drafted a policy communiqué as short as five paragraphs to keep the American leader on board. The meeting itself, in The Hague, will open and close in under two days — a timeline designed to keep it devoid of drama. 'No one wants to say no to Trump,' said Mujtaba Rahman, who analyzes Europe for the Eurasia Group. Asked on Wednesday whether the Iran-Israel war would prompt him to skip the meeting, Mr. Trump told reporters that he still planned to attend. In any case, his influence is certain to loom over the gathering. It has already driven an effort by NATO's secretary general, Mark Rutte, to increase military spending by each of the alliance's 32 members to meet a figure suggested by Mr. Trump. He has demanded it be raised to 5 percent of each country's gross domestic product, up from the current level of 2 percent. Mr. Rutte has proposed widening the definition of military spending to help meet that objective. The new benchmark would include 3.5 percent of G.D.P. on core defense spending — weapons, capabilities, troops — and the rest on what NATO calls 'defense and security-related investment, including in infrastructure and resilience.' In the weeks since Mr. Rutte's idea gained steam, its details, and shortcomings, have become clearer, according to officials and experts. The timeline to increase spending may be different for everyone, and officials are confused about the requirements. Even if countries do allocate the sums, European and even American defense industries may not be able to absorb the money or deliver in a timely fashion. And while NATO countries generally agree it is past time to spend more on security in Europe, where officials believe a militarized Russia might be tempted to test the alliance within years, some nations already struggle to reach the existing target on military spending. They are unlikely to meet Mr. Trump's demand soon, if ever. The discussion about Mr. Rutte's proposal, experts said, has devolved into a debate over spending billions of dollars to fund an ever-widening range of priorities. 'It is largely a shell game,' said Jeremy Shapiro, a former State Department official and now research director of the European Council on Foreign Relations. 'There is some reality there, because defense spending is increasing across Europe, but more because of Vladimir Putin than Donald Trump.' Image President Trump, at the White House on Wednesday, has demanded an increase in military spending by NATO's members. Credit... Doug Mills/The New York Times A NATO Numbers Game Mr. Trump first demanded the 5 percent figure two weeks before his inauguration, although his ambassador to NATO, Matthew G. Whitaker, insisted recently that the United States was not 'driving the timeline' for allies to spend more on defense. 'The threats are driving the timeline,' he said. 'Europe keeps telling us that Russia is their biggest threat and we agree, in the Euro-Atlantic it is. And so we need to make sure everybody's investing.' Initially, Mr. Trump's ambitions seemed both abstract and implausible: Only 23 NATO members were meeting their spending goals by the end of last year. But Mr. Rutte's proposal allows for some spending on what NATO calls 'military-adjacent' projects. In practical terms, that could include investments in advanced technology; rebuilding roads, bridges and other infrastructure; civic defense; education; improved health services; and aid to Ukraine. In effect, the Trump benchmark 'is both real and not real,' said Nathalie Tocci, director of Italy's Institute of International Affairs. 'The real thing is 3.5 percent, which has nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with NATO's getting what it judges it needs,' she said. 'The unreal part is the 1.5 percent, the P.R. move for Trump,' she said. 'Of course infrastructure is important, and diplomacy and education, so lump it all together for Trump. And if the magic figure of 5 percent ensures benign indifference rather than malign hostility, that's all to the good.' Image Ukrainian soldiers last month in the Donetsk region. Credit... Tyler Hicks/The New York Times Counting Aid to Ukraine The proposal may have helped Mr. Rutte balance the president's desires with those of European leaders, but it has also created complications. Defense ministers meeting at NATO headquarters in Brussels this month appeared confused over how the money should be spent, and how soon, and over whether aid to Ukraine could count. 'We have to find a realistic compromise between what is necessary and what is possible, really, to spend,' said Germany's defense minister, Boris Pistorius. Luxembourg's defense minister, Yuriko Backes, was more blunt. 'It will be the capabilities that will keep us safe, not percentages,' she said. 'This is what should be driving our investments, not the other way around.' Luxembourg will reach the current spending threshold — which was set in 2014 to be accomplished in a decade — only this year. And not until recently was it clear — even among some NATO defense ministers — that countries could include a small fraction of their military contributions to the war in Ukraine as part of their defense spending. But the rules for what qualifies are complex and decided at NATO headquarters on a case-by-case basis, to ensure that countries don't double-count what they give to Ukraine as a part of domestic military investment. 'Supporting Ukraine is really an investment into our own security,' said Sweden's defense minister, Pal Jonson. Allies are debating how to count the aid to Ukraine. The current plan is to consider it core military spending. But some of the countries nearest to Russia's borders do not want to dilute their domestic defense and want aid to Ukraine categorized as 'related investments.' Image Mark Rutte, the NATO secretary general, during a visit to the White House in April. Mr. Rutte is the architect of a plan that would allow for some spending on what the alliance calls 'military-adjacent' projects. Credit... Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times A Matter of Time There is also uncertainty about when allies would be expected to meet the higher spending threshold. Mr. Rutte initially proposed 2032, but countries on NATO's eastern flank want it to happen sooner. NATO intelligence suggests that, without a credible military deterrent, Russia could mount an effective offensive against the alliance in five years after the Ukraine war ends. 'We don't have time even for seven years,' Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur of Estonia said recently. 'We have to show that we have everything we need to defend our countries.' Britain, for example, has committed to spending only 3 percent by 2034, long after Mr. Trump is scheduled to leave office. Canada, Italy, Luxembourg and Spain will reach 2 percent, a decade-old goal, only this year. And the United States itself currently spends about 3.4 percent of its G.D.P. on defense, even though in sheer dollars it accounts for nearly half of NATO spending. The amount that Washington spends just on Europe is a much smaller percentage of the Pentagon's $997 billion budget. Like Mr. Rutte, other world leaders have sought ways to get the most out of their dealings with Mr. Trump and avoid unpredictable problems. At this week's Group of 7 summit, the newly elected prime minister of Canada and host of the event, Mark Carney, deployed a mix of flattery and discipline. Yet the president still disrupted the gathering, departing early to address the Iran-Israel war. Mr. Rutte hopes to avoid such an outcome. 'Trump is making a fake demand for more spending, and they're giving him a fake response,' Mr. Shapiro said. He called the Rutte plan 'clever, because it lets Trump get what he wants and he can brag about it.'
CBS News
a day ago
- Politics
- CBS News
Trump says no decision yet on U.S. joining Israel's attacks on Iran, after Iran warns it would risk "all-out war"
What we know about Trump's looming decision on bombing Iran's nuclear sites with Israel President Trump said Wednesday that he had not yet decided whether the U.S. military should join Israel's ongoing attacks on Iran, and he didn't believe it was too late to reach a deal with the Islamic Republic on its nuclear program, though he warned it was "very late to be talking." "I may do it, I may not do it. Nobody knows what I'm going to do," Mr. Trump told reporters when he was asked about the U.S. taking part in the strikes on Iran's nuclear and military facilities. Iran has readied missiles and equipment for strikes on U.S. bases in the region if the U.S. joins Israel's war efforts against Iran, according to a senior U.S. intelligence official and a Pentagon official briefed on the matter. Asked if he believed it was too late to negotiate a new deal to curb Iran's nuclear program — which he has made clear he wants the Iranian government to abandon completely — Mr. Trump said: "Nothing's too late." Mr. Trump said the Iranians had sought talks, and said they had even suggested sending a delegation for discussions at the White House. President Trump speaks to journalists as workers install a large flag pole on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, D.C., June 18, 2025. BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty "I said, 'it's really late. You know?' I said, 'it's very late to be talking,'" the president said, adding: "There's a big difference between now and a week ago," before Israel started hammering Iran with airstrikes. In a social media post, Iran's mission to the United Nations appeared to respond directly to Mr. Trump's remarks, saying: "No Iranian official has ever asked to grovel at the gates of the White House." "The only thing more despicable than his lies is his cowardly threat to 'take out' Iran's Supreme Leader," the post said. "Iran does NOT negotiate under duress, shall NOT accept peace under duress, and certainly NOT with a has-been warmonger clinging to relevance. Iran shall respond to any threat with a counter-threat, and to any action with reciprocal measures." An Iranian official had warned earlier Wednesday that any U.S. intervention in the conflict with Israel would risk "all-out war," as the unprecedented exchange of fire with warplanes and ballistic missiles entered a sixth day. Overnight, a fresh barrage of Israeli missiles streaked across the skies of Tehran. Most were taken out by Iran's air defenses, but the Israeli military and the United Nations' nuclear watchdog agency said another site linked to Iran's nuclear program was hit. Missiles fired from Iran are seen streaking across the skies over Hebron, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, June 18, 2025. Wisam Hashlamoun/Anadolu/Getty Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Israel Defense Forces spokesman Brigadier General Effie Defrin said the "extensive operation" overnight involved more than 50 fighter jets deployed for three waves of strikes, during which "we struck a centrifuge production site that was intended to enable the regime to continue to enhance its uranium enrichment. This complements actions from previous operations we have conducted targeting components of the nuclear program." The U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency said in a social media post that it had "information that two centrifuge production facilities in Iran, the TESA Karaj workshop and the Tehran Research Center, were hit," adding that "both sites were previously under IAEA monitoring and verification as part of the JCPOA" — the international Iran nuclear deal that Mr. Trump withdrew the U.S. from unilaterally during his first term. Iran retaliated with another wave of missiles launched at Israel by the country's Islamic Revolutionary Guard. Sirens blared in Israel to warn they were on the way, but the missiles were intercepted, with explosions seen in the skies over Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and the occupied West Bank. The steady exchange of fire has taken an escalating cost in human lives. Iranian authorities have provided no updates since saying over the weekend that more than 220 people were killed. The U.S.-based Human Rights Activists in Iran organization, which relies on a network of contacts in the country, said Tuesday that it had documented at least 452 deaths in Iran since Israel launched its attacks, including 109 confirmed military personnel, 224 civilians and 119 people it could not immediately identify. The war has also sparked an exodus from Iran's capital Tehran with video showing thousands of vehicles at a near standstill on primary exit routes. Those frantic escape bids were fueled by Mr. Trump's direct warning to Tehran's roughly 10 million inhabitants earlier this week to "evacuate immediately." While Israel has been able to inflict far greater damage on Iran, it has not been immune to the suffering. At least 24 people have been killed by Iranian missiles that slip through the country's robust air defenses. Bella Ashkinaze, 90, and her husband Chaim were asleep in their apartment building near Tel Aviv on Sunday when an Iranian missile smashed into their home. Bella died and was buried this week in an emotional farewell. Her granddaughter Shani Boana told CBS News her grandparents were both too frail to keep going to their bomb shelters every time the sirens blared. "I wish I could turn back time and to take her to the safe room," she said. "I am going to miss her a lot… but I still think that we need to do what it takes to stop that threat [from Iran]." Israel has advised its citizens to remain close to bomb shelters, and the U.S. embassy said it would be closed from Wednesday until at least Saturday. Iran warns of "all-out war" if U.S. joins Israeli strikes "I think any American intervention would be a recipe for an all-out war in the region with very, very bad consequences for the whole international community," Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei told Al Jazeera English on Wednesday, adding that he did not believe the Trump administration could dictate to Israel what it could and could not do. Ali Bahreini, Iran's ambassador in Geneva and a senior diplomat from the country, said Tehran would "respond strongly" to what he called the ongoing Israeli "aggression," and he warned that Iran would do the same against the United States if U.S. forces join the conflict. In a statement later aired on Iranian state TV, supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei said the U.S. "should know that any military intervention will undoubtedly result in irreparable damage." "Those who know Iran's history know that Iranians do not answer well to the language of threats," Khamenei said, adding that Iran "will never surrender." He also said Israel had made a "huge mistake," which the country would be "punished for." Iranian men hold the flags of Lebanon's Hezbollah and of Iran, along with a portrait of Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, during a rally to condemn Israeli attacks on Iran, in downtown Tehran, June 14, 2025. Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto/Getty The defiant messages came after President Trump issued a stern warning on Tuesday, demanding an "unconditional surrender" by Iran's clerical rulers. Asked Wednesday at the White House what he meant by those two words, Mr. Trump said: "Very simple — unconditional surrender. That means I've had it. I've had it. I give up, no more. Then we go blow up all the nuclear stuff that's all over the place there. They had bad intentions. You know, for 40 years they've been saying, death to America, death to Israel, death to anybody else that they didn't like. They were bullies. They were schoolyard bullies, and now they're not bullies anymore." Mr. Trump had threatened the country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, directly on Tuesday, saying the U.S. knew where he was but that it would not kill him, yet. He added: "Our patience is wearing thin." Khamenei, in his Wednesday address, called Mr. Trump's ultimatum "unacceptable." The Trump administration has insisted since Israel launched its first strikes on Iran that the U.S. military is not taking part directly in the attacks. But five sources familiar with the matter told CBS News on Tuesday that Mr. Trump is now considering joining the strikes, including potential attacks on Iran's secretive Fordo nuclear enrichment facility. The site is buried deep under a mountain, and Israel is thought to need U.S. warplanes to effectively strike the facility. Two sources told CBS News on Wednesday that Israel has not requested that the U.S. join its effort in Iran militarily. They said that decision was for Mr. Trump to make with his advisers, and that Israel has its own plans and feels it is able to proceed alone. There's disagreement among Mr. Trump's close advisers about taking direct action along with Israel, CBS News' sources said Tuesday, but the U.S. military has sent additional warplanes from their home bases to Europe, which analysts believe could be preparation for a greater role in the Mideast. CBS News' partner network BBC News said Tuesday that its own analysis of flight tracking data had verified at least 30 American military aircraft flying from bases in the U.S. to Europe over the previous three days - all tanker aircraft used to re-fuel fighter jets and bombers. Data from the Flightradar24 tracking website showed at least seven of the planes - all KC-135 Stratotankers - had stopped at U.S. bases in Spain, Scotland and England. Justin Bronk, a senior analyst at the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi) think tank in London, told the BBC the deployments were "highly suggestive" of U.S. military contingency plans to "support intensive combat operations" in the Middle East in the days ahead. contributed to this report.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Oil prices extend rise as Iran-Israel conflict enters sixth day
By Colleen Howe BEIJING (Reuters) -Oil prices ticked up in early trading on Wednesday after ending the previous session up more than 4% on worries that the Iran-Israel conflict could disrupt supplies. Brent crude futures rose 19 cents, or 0.25%, to $76.64 a barrel by 0029 GMT. U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude futures rose 23 cents, or 0.31%, to $75.07 per barrel. U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday called for Iran's "unconditional surrender" as the Iran-Israel air war entered a sixth day. The U.S. military is deploying more fighter aircraft to the region to bolster its forces, three officials said on Tuesday. Analysts said the market was largely worried about supply disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz, which carries a fifth of the world's seaborne oil. Two oil tankers collided near the strait and caught fire on Tuesday. The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations had warned on Monday that electronic interference is affecting ships' navigation systems. Iran is OPEC's third-largest producer extracting about 3.3 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil, but analysts say other members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries could use their spare capacity to make up for a drop in Iranian output. Markets are also looking ahead to a second day of U.S. Federal Reserve discussions on Wednesday, in which the central bank is expected to leave its benchmark overnight interest rate in the 4.25%-4.50% range. However, the conflict in the Middle East and the risk of slowing global growth could push the Fed to potentially cut rates by 25 basis points in July, sooner than the current market expectation of September, said Tony Sycamore, market analyst with IG. "The situation in the Middle East could become a catalyst for the Fed to sound more dovish, as it did following the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack," Sycamore said. Lower interest rates generally boost economic growth and demand for oil. Confounding the decision for the Fed, however, is that the Middle East conflict also creates a new source of inflation via surging oil prices. U.S. crude and gasoline stocks fell last week while distillate inventories rose, market sources said, citing American Petroleum Institute figures on Tuesday. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Washington Post
3 days ago
- Politics
- Washington Post
How else could Iran retaliate over the ongoing Israeli strikes targeting the country?
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — As Israel pounds Iran with airstrikes targeting military facilities and its nuclear sites, officials in Tehran have proposed a variety of steps the Islamic Republic could take outside of launching retaliatory missile barrages. Those proposals mirror those previously floated by Iran in confrontations with either Israel or the United States in that last few decades. They included disrupting maritime shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, potentially leaving the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and other attacks by militants. Here's a look at what those options could mean — both to Iran and the wider Middle East. The Strait of Hormuz is the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf, through which some 20% of all oil traded globally passes. The strait is in the territorial waters of Iran and Oman, which at its narrowest point is just 33 kilometers (21 miles) wide. The width of the shipping lane in either direction is only 3 kilometers (2 miles). Anything affecting it ripples through global energy markets, potentially raising the price of crude oil. That then trickles down to consumers through what they pay for gasoline and other oil products. There has been a wave of attacks on ships attributed to Iran since 2019, following President Donald Trump's decision to unilaterally withdraw the U.S. from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and re-imposing crushing sanctions on Tehran. U.S. forces routinely travel through the strait, despite sometimes-tense encounters with Iran's Revolutionary Guard, a paramilitary force answerable only to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The U.S. Navy's Bahrain-based 5th Fleet conducts those operations, known as freedom of navigation missions, to ensure the waterway remains open to business. Iran views those passages as challenging its sovereignty — as if it operated off the coast of the U.S. Since the Israeli attacks began, Iranian officials have repeatedly raised blocking the strait — which likely would draw an immediate American response. Experts fear Tehran could respond to the strike by deciding to fully end its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, abandon the the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and rush toward a bomb. As a member of the treaty, Iran is obligated to explain the any radioactive traces outside of declared sites and to provide assurances that they are not being used as part of a nuclear weapons program. Iran insists its program is peaceful, though it is the only non-nuclear-armed state to enrich uranium up to 60%, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%. U.S. intelligence agencies and the IAEA assess Iran hasn't had an organized military nuclear program since 2003. There is precedence for the concern. North Korea said it withdrew from the treaty in 2003 and tested a nuclear weapon in 2006. However, again, if Iran withdrew from the treaty, it could draw the U.S. into the fight, something Tehran so far has been seeking to avoid. Iran could encourage more asymmetric attacks, targeting Jewish tourists, synagogues or Israeli diplomatic missions as it has done in the past. However, it's been a rough few years for those forces. Iran's allies, the self-described 'Axis of Resistance,' have been severely hurt by ongoing Israeli attacks since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, particularly Lebanon's Hezbollah and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Iran has long used those groups as both an asymmetrical way to attack Israel and as a shield against a direct assault. Iraqi groups backed by Iran so far haven't gotten involved, leaving just Yemen's Houthi rebels as the only member of the axis to launch attacks on Israel since its campaign against Iran began.
CNA
3 days ago
- Business
- CNA
US dollar firms versus yen, Swiss franc as Middle East tension simmers
NEW YORK :The dollar strengthened against the safe-haven yen and Swiss franc on Monday, but weakened against most major currencies, as investors monitored the fighting between Israel and Iran for signs it could escalate into a broader regional conflict and braced for a week packed with central bank meetings. Tehran, however, has asked Gulf state leaders to press U.S. President Donald Trump to use his influence on Israel for a ceasefire in return for Iran's flexibility in nuclear talks. That has partly helped the dollar recoup losses against the yen and Swiss franc. Still, market participants mulled the prospect that Iran might seek to choke off the Strait of Hormuz - the world's most important gateway for oil shipping. This could raise broader economic risks from disruptions in the energy-rich Middle East. Meanwhile, the U.S. military moved a large number of refuelling aircraft to Europe to give Trump options as Middle East tensions rise, and the U.S. aircraft carrier Nimitz was heading to the Middle East on a pre-planned deployment. The dollar, which until recently had always been the ultimate safe haven in times of geopolitical or financial turmoil, was last up 0.38 per cent at 144.65 yen after rising nearly 0.4 per cent earlier on Monday. The euro rose 0.23 per cent to $1.1576. The U.S. currency also rose against the Swiss franc at 0.8136 franc, while an index that measures the dollar against six peers declined 0.25 per cent to 98.02. "Beyond the consolidation in U.S. dollar exchange rates, the lack of volatility in risk-sensitive currencies like the Japanese yen and Swiss franc suggest that investor confidence has been unfazed by the conflict between Iran and Israel," said David Song, senior strategist, at U.S. crude futures fell 2.5 per cent, following Friday's sharp rally in the wake of Israel's preemptive strike on Iran. "I still think that (the) surprise of the day is that oil, not gold nor the U.S. dollar has reacted positively to the turmoil," said Marc Chandler, chief market strategist at Bannockburn Global Forex. "The greenback might be losing its safe-haven status, but today is not the test." Currencies that are positively correlated to risk such as the Australian and the New Zealand dollars were 0.6 per cent and 0.9 per cent higher, respectively, while the oil-exposed Norwegian crown was flat, after hitting its highest since early 2023 earlier in the day. On Friday, investors had bought back into the dollar, which has lost more than 9 per cent in value against a basket of six other currencies this year as U.S. President Donald Trump's move to reshape the global trade order heightened economic uncertainty. But analysts were less convinced that the trend could continue until there was more clarity on the tariff front. "The 800-pound gorilla in the room is the U.S. tariff policy," Chandler said. "We've got the July 9 date that the so-called reciprocal tariffs are supposed to end. ... And so that sort of hangs over the market." The U.S. Federal Reserve gives its latest policy decision on Wednesday, with the Israel-Iran conflict adding complexity for policymakers. Investors remain nervous over Trump's deadline on trade deals due in about three weeks, while agreements with major trade partners, including the European Union and Japan, are yet to be signed. They will look for progress in any bilateral meetings with the U.S. on the sidelines of a Group of Seven leaders' meeting in Canada. CENTRAL BANK MEETINGS Top of the agenda this week is a host of central bank monetary policy decisions, with the spotlight on the Fed. The central bank is widely expected to leave borrowing costs steady, but investors will likely lap up its views on recent data that has broadly indicated softening economic activity even as risks to increasing price pressures stay high. The Bank of Japan is expected to deliver its interest rate decision at the end of its two-day meeting on Tuesday, with traders largely pricing in no change to policy. Expectations are that the central bank could also consider tapering its government bond holdings from the next fiscal year as the Japanese government pushes for more domestic ownership. Central banks in Britain, Switzerland, Sweden and Norway are also slated to unveil their policy decisions this week. Currency bid prices at 16 June 07:36 p.m. GMT Description RIC Last U.S. Close Previous Session Pct Change YTD Pct High Bid Low Bid Dollar index 98.075 98.272 -0.19 per cent -9.60 per cent 98.367 97.685 Euro/Dollar 1.1567 1.155 0.15 per cent 11.73 per cent $1.1615 $1.1524 Dollar/Yen 144.65 144.08 0.39 per cent -8.08 per cent 144.64 143.69 Euro/Yen 167.32 166.42 0.54 per cent 2.51 per cent 167.46 166.14 Dollar/Swiss 0.8138 0.8113 0.31 per cent -10.33 per cent 0.8138 0.809 Sterling/Dollar 1.3586 1.3574 0.11 per cent 8.65 per cent $1.3621 $1.3536 Dollar/Canadian 1.3567 1.3582 -0.11 per cent -5.65 per cent 1.3607 1.3539 Aussie/Dollar 0.6529 0.6489 0.64 per cent 5.54 per cent $0.6552 $0.6469 Euro/Swiss 0.9411 0.9363 0.46 per cent 0.2 per cent 0.9419 0.9358 Euro/Sterling 0.8511 0.8505 0.07 per cent 2.88 per cent 0.8531 0.8504 NZ Dollar/Dollar 0.6064 0.6014 0.86 per cent 8.41 per cent $0.6088 0.6003 Dollar/Norway 9.9081 9.8522 0.57 per cent -12.82 per cent 9.9224 9.8653 Euro/Norway 11.46 11.4268 0.29 per cent -2.63 per cent 11.495 11.4235 Dollar/Sweden 9.4811 9.4751 0.06 per cent -13.94 per cent 9.5256 9.4353 Euro/Sweden 10.9676 10.9415 0.24 per cent -4.35 per cent 10.9825 10.944
