View from Moscow: Russia tepidly welcomes Trump’s return – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

MOSCOW– Relaxed observers perhaps expected Moscow to observe Donald Trump’s returning to the White House amid perceptions he was pro-Russia, or at least Russia-friendly, during his first expression.

These perceptions were reinforced by the Russiagate controversy and related claims in recent months that Moscow once more meddled in a US vote with Trump’s support, including through fake news websites and also funding the original liberal media band Tenet. However, those who anticipate that Trump did treat Russia with kid gloves will likely be disappointed.

When asked whether President Vladimir Putin would applaud Trump, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov immediately responded with the statement,” we are talking about an hostile land that is directly and indirectly involved in a battle against our condition.”

Peskov did leave the possibility of boosting ties if the Trump 2.0 administration had the political will to do so, but remember that before the November 5 election, Putin publicly supported Joe Biden and later Kamala Harris over Trump.

Because Putin, a consistent cautious pragmatist, preferred the proverbial devils in Biden and Harris over the unpredictableity of a second Trump term.

As for Putin’s reaction to Trump’s return, he congratulated him on his victory during his traditional Q&amp, A session at the Valdai Club’s annual meeting on Thursday ( November 7 ) evening.

I already stated that we would be collaborating with any head of state who the American people would trust. Indeed, this is going to be like this in practice”, Putin said. The leader continued,” The leader is ready to talk to Trump, improve bilateral relations, and put an end to the Ukrainian conflict.”

On that, former President Dmitry Medvedev, who’s now the deputy chairman of the Security Council, earlier tweeted that the goals of Russia’s special operation in Ukraine “remain unchanged and will be achieved”. He also made an implied suggestion in a Telegram post that Trump might halt Ukraine’s aid.

Sergey Lavrov, the head of Russian foreign policy, said on the eve of the US election that” the anti-Russian and russophobic orientation of US policy is based on internal political consensus which has a bipartisan nature. Ukraine is viewed as a crucial component of the hybrid war launched against Russia.

He later stated that Russia is open to dialogue, but he apparently does n’t anticipate any changes in the transition from Biden to Trump.

Therein lies the reason behind Russia’s tepid welcome of Trump’s return. In summary, many people here do n’t think Trump will force Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky to make the concessions that would most or all of Moscow’s earlier stated war objectives.

In essence, these demilitarize and denounce Ukraine ( both of which were never explicitly defined ), and restore the nation’s military neutrality as a result of the country’s removal of the constitution’s 2019 amendment, which makes NATO membership a strategic goal.

Putin told war correspondents in June 2023 that” If they ( the US) genuinely want to&nbsp, end today’s conflict via negotiations, they only need to&nbsp, make one decision, which is to&nbsp, stop supplying weapons and&nbsp, equipment. That’s it.

” Ukraine itself does not manufacture anything. Tomorrow, they will want to&nbsp, hold talks that are not formal, but substantive, and&nbsp, not to&nbsp, confront us with ultimatums, but to&nbsp, return to&nbsp, what was agreed upon, say, in&nbsp, Istanbul.”

This goes back to what Medvedev implied in a recent Telegram post about Russia’s hopes that Trump will stop, curtail, or at least use arms shipments to Ukraine to coerce Zelensky into making concessions that might lead to reciprocal ones from Russia for ending the conflict.

Trump might have a curveball, though, if he accepts the plan allegedly sent to him by advisors in June that would require more weapons deliveries to Ukraine if Russia does n’t quickly accept a peace deal.

The issue is that Putin has staked his reputation on delivering his previously stated objectives, including denazification and demilitarization ( which might have been done with impunity ), and gaining control over the entire administrative boundaries of its new formerly Ukrainian regions.

It’s already proven a challenge to do this in Donbass, so it’s unlikely that Russia can militarily achieve this with Kherson and Zaporizhia’s cross-Dnieper River areas.

The cession of Russian territory is not permitted by one of the constitutional amendments passed in 2020, which means that it cannot formally cede them without changing the law.

A constitutional court’s decision to cede those lands to Russia might open up a loophole, but either way would still have a negative impact on Putin. Those regions would also need to be changed since Russia already includes them on its official maps.

Russia could still agree to end the conflict along the Line of Contact ( wherever it may be at the time this occurs ), just like Ukraine could do the same.

For the reasons already stated, that is the most likely outcome, but Russia would need to portray it as a success before its own citizens at home and among its supporters abroad to deter them from becoming demoralized if the conflict does n’t reach its full territorial goals.

There’s also the issue of demilitarization and denazifiction to consider. Ukraine is still fully armed, and when the conflict is over, it wo n’t likely give its weapons to the West. Trump would n’t likely demand a return of arms because he believed it would weaken Ukraine and potentially encourage Russia to rekindle the conflict in the future.

Additionally, Ukraine wo n’t be able to pass legislation that Russia believes is in line with its condemnation objectives. Trump and his team do n’t appear to be concerned about the situation in any way.

Therefore, Russia can only reasonably anticipate that any potential peace agreement that Trump will broker will require that Ukraine formally abandon NATO.

Even that might not be the victory it appears to be because a number of security guarantee agreements signed throughout the year with the members of the security alliance represent Ukraine’s de facto membership, but without any implied Article 5-like requirement to send troops in its support.

According to popular belief, NATO members are already providing significant amounts of aid to Ukraine in accordance with Article 5, which does n’t require them to deploy troops but rather to provide whatever assistance deemed necessary to aid an ally under attack.

Thus, it would likely be a flimsy move to officially outlaw Ukraine from NATO at this point. Trump might ease the blow by establishing a demilitarized buffer zone in Ukraine along the LOC and its borders with Russia and helping to save face.

If this is extended far enough to stop Ukrainian artillery from attacking its cities and military installations, the Kremlin would likely view that as a fair compromise.

Russia’s global media machine could then start trumpeting the deal as a stunning success, despite failing to achieve its maximum objectives, while the West’s could do the same, even though the war failed to restore Ukraine’s 1991 borders.

In that event, a German- or Korean-like partition would become a fait accompli. No one of the conflict’s participants, whether they are directly involved in Russia and Ukraine or indirectly involved with a number of NATO members, would be entirely content with the outcome, despite their secretive knowledge that a maximum victory is impossible.

Contrary to their official statements, neither side wants the conflict that will arise if Trump implements the rumored plan he received over the summer to increase arms deliveries to Ukraine if Russia rejects a peace deal.

The best thing Russia can hope to achieve is a military breakthrough before Trump’s reelection, which will bring as much territory under its control as possible since Ukraine is unlikely to be forced to surrender the rest of its former regions in their entirety.

Russia’s dreadful acceptance of Trump’s return is attributed to the growing realization that its maximum war objectives probably wo n’t be met. Its media team is probably already working overtime to portray an imperfect compromise as a complete victory.

Continue Reading

Central Asia’s ripe demographics form a key geopolitical node – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, World

Western Asia is currently experiencing a geological move. The region’s leading Muslim powers of the moment, Turkey and Iran, will lose 30 % to 40 % of their working-age population during the 21st century due to plunging fertility. &nbsp,

However, the Central Asian republics—Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan—will dwarf Iran and Turkey in sheer people length.

Another Turkish state, Azerbaijan, is included with the five Central Asian nations in the table above. Except for the Tajiks, who speak a slang of Persian, the rest of Central Asia is Turkic.

Graphic: Asia Times

There has been a lot of discussion about the impact of declining birth rates on the global market, but not much has been written about the growing population in investible parts.

Africa, where the majority of the world’s population will increase this era, faces challenges in creating an educated workforce. Pakistan is also growing, but with 50 % useful poverty and political instability, its socioeconomic potential is limited.

China, which needs to import money to nations with younger communities, is of particular interest because of the growing community in Central Asia. Additionally, it provides Europe with a business with potential for long-term development.

Germany, with its 3 million native Turks, is looking East for businesses. The Organization of Turkic States ‘ annual conference meeting took place this week in Kyrgyzstan, Hungary being the only European part.

Prime Minister Viktor Orban was awarded the Supreme Order of the Turkic World, the firm’s highest respect. ” We are the northernmost people of the East”, the Hungarian prime minister commented.

The projections on the charts are straight, to be sure, and they almost certainly are because the poor Central Asian nations are likely to repeat the fertility reduction of their neighbors. The dark line in the following chart’s hill is likely to be flatter.

But the major developments are baked in the cake, so to speak.

According to my examination from August 2024, the lower reproduction rates in Turkey and Iran are the result of the cultural shock experienced by adult education. Central Asian ovulation levels will gradually decline over time.

China and Russia are also aware of the profound strategic implications of changing demographics, but the West is essentially ignorant of them.

If Afghanistan, with its reproduction rate of nearly five babies per woman, were reckoned into the Central Asian full, the amount had increase. With a fertility rate of five babies per woman, Afghanistan remains locked into pre-modern problems.

If we include the UN projections for Afghanistan’s working-age people at regular fertility, the result is impressive: The five Central Asian republics, Azerbaijan and Afghanistan up will have a people aged 20 to 64 of 280 million, dwarfing the combined total for Turkey and Afghanistan. Afghanistan stock a border with Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan.

Graphic: Asia Times

Safety issues after America’s chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021 add a sense of necessity to China’s and Russia’s emphasis on Central Asia.

Except for Kazakhstan, a middle-income state with a per capita GDP of around US$ 15, 000, the Central Asian states are bad. Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Afghanistan boundary on China’s Xinjiang province.

In addition to more than 10 million Tamils, who speak a Turkic slang, Xinjiang is home to almost 2 million Kazakhs and 200, 000 Kyrgyz. Therefore, Xinjiang experiences any volatility in Central Asia.

The Belt and Road Initiative politics in the area has been very successful. Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, the two largest states, voted against a 2022 decision at the United Nations Human Rights Council condemning China’s care of its Uyghur population.

” Xi visited both of these larger Central Asian nations in September during the SCO summit to receive their prefer,” Xi said. Xi, during his first overseas visit after Covid-19, signed a new&nbsp,$ 4.1 billion &nbsp, rail deal with Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan”, complained the Observer Research Foundation, referring to China’s leader.

The Group of 20 proposed an” India-Middle East-Europe Corridor” at its 2022 conference in New Delhi, with road lines to the Mediterranean ending in Israel. That has been put on hold for the duration due to the war in Gaza and Lebanon.

Turkey objects to IMEC because it plays a significant part in trade between Europe and Asia. The future of the Slavic peoples is more centered in northern Asia than Anatolia, so the issue extends far beyond transportation.

Graphic: Asia Times

Writing in China’s English-language paper Global Times last June, a former prime minister of Kyrgyzstan, Djoomart Otorbaev, hailed the fresh China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan Railway job as” a gigantic game-changer”. The railroad will be the most difficult architectural project of its kind always.

” The total length of bridges and tunnels will be 146.49 km, or 47 % of the entire Kyrgyzstani section.” The rail will move at altitudes above 3, 000 meters in some sections, showcasing the ambitious site’s enormous size and intricacy”, Otorbaev noted.

He added,” The new rail lines will cross in Central Asia with prepared and under-construction north-south rail lines from Russia and Central Asia, passing through Afghanistan, Pakistan, Azerbaijan, and Iran to approach the deep-sea ships of the Indian Ocean. The plan could make Central Asia a unique transportation hub for the entire Eurasian continent once it is fully implemented.

China has little to worry about Xinjiang’s unrest because it has Turkey and the Central Asian republics by its side. By constructing infrastructure throughout Central Asia, China has shaped Turkey’s future economic and demographically.

And by stabilizing what might otherwise be a belt of unrest, China has also reduced one of Russia’s greatest threats. In a region of the world where the two powers have long battled for power, this reacquaints them with China and Russia.

Follow David P Goldman on X at @davidpgoldman

Continue Reading

What Trump’s mass deportation might look like – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Donald Trump has promised to voters that he would take out a range of multiculturalism measures, including deporting thousands of illegal immigrants who are currently living in the US with the assistance of the National Guard or the military.

Some of Trump’s plans do not need the approval of the government, but they still may be challenging to carry out on the scale that Trump has described.

Jean Lantz Reisz, a professor of immigration law at the University of Southern California, explains how Trump might fulfill some of his emigration promises during his second administration and what legal and political impediments he might face along the way.

What part do states perform in any Trump immigration order?

There are 11 million people living without lawful approval in the US, and Trump would have the power, as leader, to arrest those people.

However, it may cost a lot to cover the expenses associated with hiring immigration officers, judges, confinement services, flights, and other personnel. Estimates range from US$ 88 billion to more than$ 300 billion for mass deportation.

The administration will likely have to rely on local and state governments to aid in carrying out these persecution. The president is legitimately unable to compel state and local governments to engage with immigration enforcement.

About 10 state, including New York, Massachusetts and California, have laws that prohibit assistance with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE– the national organization that oversees multiculturalism and imprisonment – under certain conditions.

For instance, in California, companies may not help ICE to provide nonpublic areas of their work without a proper permit. Additionally, various states forbid law enforcement from sharing the immigration position of some low-level criminal offenders.

A position may receive more money from the federal government to help it collaborate with federal immigration efforts, but the condition may also receive it. However, according to federal case laws, the president is not able to withhold federal funds to compel a state into assisting with immigration laws.

A white man wearing a navy suit and a red tie points at a large screen that says 'illegal immigration into the U.S.' and has charts.
Donald Trump displays multiculturalism tables during the Republican National Convention on July 18, 2024. Photo: Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images / The Talk

Was Trump just order federal immigration officers to search and detain immigrants in a state that cooperates?

States do n’t have to assist them, nor could they stop the federal government from interrogating and deporting people, which would create some obstacles. The federal government would need to have all of its own employees.

Recent legislation in Texas and Arizona requires local law enforcement to work with the Department of Homeland Security to enforce immigration legislation.

The Department of Homeland Security has the authority to represent and teach neighborhood law enforcement in enforcing immigration laws.

In some states, like Texas, local sheriffs or policeman had assist ICE in locating and deporting immigrants. In other states, like Oregon and Illinois, that want to safeguard refugees from deportation, they may refuse to cooperate with national authorities by not providing specific personal information on newcomers.

What other dangers may immigrants be concerned about?

There are about 580, 000 people who are living in the US and are part of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, system.

Some immigrants who immigrated to the US fraudulently as children have the right to operate, attend school, and reside there. According to a ruling that the judges have already heard, a president is legally cancel DACA through a specific procedure.

President Joe Biden is already challenging a Texas city court’s ruling that DACA is a prohibited program. Trump has the authority to direct the Justice Department to dismiss the appeal again in office, effectively putting an end to DACA.

Individuals who apply for DACA must status in their applications that they are in the country without authorization. So the authorities may have information on where they live and be able to demonstrate that DACA recipients may lawfully be deported.

Afghans and other nations who have charitable pardon, which is temporary legal stay in the US, are the next group of immigrants who could be targeted. Trump you finish all of the parole initiatives, including those for Ukrainians.

Trump may also repeal Temporary Protected Status, a law that allows some people to temporarily sit in the United States for up to two years due to an emergency in their home countries.

He tried to do this, but was unsuccessful, during his first administration because he did n’t follow the right legal process. About 1.2 million individuals are covered under this system, which Biden expanded.

Trump has said he would stop heritage membership, which is the appropriate for any man born in the country to acquire citizenship. He could do this officially, right?

Citizens who ca n’t demonstrate their parents ‘ citizenship to federal authorities may be required to stop receiving passports and Social Security numbers. An ensuing complaint, perhaps brought by people denied their documents, did force courts to weigh in on heritage citizen.

A man with glasses and a black shirt hugs an older white man with a blue suit. People behind them clap.
President Joe Biden greets him at the White House on June 18, 2024, during an event marking the national program’s 12th celebration. Photo: Michael A. McCoy for The Washington Post via Getty Images / The Talk

Regardless of the nationality of their families, the Fourteenth Amendment grants membership to all people who are born here.

Citizens who were born in the US may be re-examined in accordance with the Fourteenth Amendment, according to opponents of heritage membership.

The Supreme Court would have to overturn a 126-year-old law that states that anyone who was born on US ground and not a baby of a diplomat is a member of the US.

Trump has mentioned using the Alien Enemies Act as a detention facility. What does this mean?

Trump has suggested using the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to circumvent immigration authorities and judicial review, as well as deporting people like crew members and syndicate members. This legislation allows a senator, during a time of war, to apprehend and arrest citizens born in an army state.

One issue with this is that Trump wo n’t be able to deport people under the terms of this act unless there is a conflict with or an invasion by another country or government. Gangs or cartel do not have their own governments or nations.

For instance, Trump may not successfully demonstrate that the Mexican authorities is sending gang members to enter the US on behalf of the Mexican government while simultaneously acknowledging a Mexican authorities and a gang as the Mexican state.

Another drawback of Trump using the Alien Enemies Act is that it allows for legal evaluation to determine whether a person is truly an “enemy earthling.” It would probably not automatically lead to imprisonment, leading to legal action.

Jean Lantz Reisz is medical associate professor of law, co-director, USC Immigration Clinic, University of Southern California

The Conversation has republished this post under a Creative Commons license. Read the original post.

Continue Reading

Trump 2.0: a grand bargain with Putin and hard pivot to China – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Donald Trump now has a clear mission to carry out his plan, both domestically and abroad, with a resounding success in the US presidential vote.

Crucially, the outcome demonstrates that you should never place a bet against self-interest in politics or in British citizens who are willing to ignore the most imperfect of all characters in the hope that he will “fix” their issues.

The barriers to Trump’s first word have either been stifled or will probably soon be bent to his will due to a hostile Senate, Republican Party opponents, and a common service dedicated to serving the country rather than an individual.

What kind of world impact did a comfortable and unrestrained Trump 2.0 have will depend greatly on the course of his foreign policy and who he chooses to appoint for key positions.

Therefore, we need to see who is chosen to carry out his duties and who will step in to take their place when they eventually become ineligible. Among the first lists of potential officials are:

    Richard Grenell and Marco Rubio have been mentioned as probable secretary of state.

  • Kash Patel, mooted as CIA producer
  • Mike Pompeo, the former secretary of state and CIA chairman during Trump’s second term in office, who does end up at the Pentagon as defence minister.

Also Mike Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser, was mentioned in conversations about senior positions. He resigned only 22 days into his post after lying about associates with the US ambassador to Russia.

So, too, has the self-styled corporate policy analyst Elbridge Colby, a former US Defense Department official.

Trump did demand unwavering commitment from his appointed officials while claiming all the funds for their hard work. However, as he gets older, he is also possible to rely heavily on them to take the lead in proper policy direction.

In light of this, the Trump administration may choose three different paths to take on the global stage.

1 ) America First, with concessions

Trump may return the US to its isolationist and uniqueness, basically serving as both a companion and an enemy to no one, after trumpeting his credentials as a peacemaker.

That may include a complete withdrawal from NATO or a conditional release of US protection aid that makes it so that Europe is largely a slave to his will.

It could also think:

  • reducing US alliance aid in Asia and the Pacific
  • demanding ever-higher defence spending from surveillance partners
  • running a crucial attention over any package that might involve the US to undertake the lion’s share of assets, or lessen its own defense skills.

Australia, for example, may be willing to remove assurances of continued White House assistance for the AUKUS collaboration. In addition to sharing systems between the US and the UK, Australia will purchase a number of nuclear-powered boats in the early 2030s.

Despite the strong backing from Republicans in the Congress and Senate, the Trump presidency is almost certain to be looking into this matter.

But, Trump would probably have to create trade-offs to attain a more isolationist stance.

First, a great deal with Russia may be required. Trump has adulation for Vladimir Putin, which is not just due to his admiration for him, but also because he has promised to put an end to the Ukrainian conflict soon.

The Biden presidency is scrambling to get US$ 6 billion in military aid to Kyiv before the handover of energy in January, despite the joyfully crowing about Trump’s success. Hence, Trump ca n’t immediately count on Ukrainian weakness as a precursor to a peace settlement.

Next, in the moderate term, it does require a contract with China. An unlimited trade conflict based on tit-for-tat taxes will generate prices higher in the US and bit into Trump’s blue-collar, remote voting base.

2 ) A toned pivot to Asia

Repeated names by Trump’s national security hardliners for a confrontational approach to China, coupled with his anger with America’s Western friends, whom he&nbsp, believes are freeriding on US defence spending, may lead him to pivot to Asia rather.

But, this would entail an yet deeper deal with Moscow. A package to end the conflict in Ukraine as well as a more comprehensive deal would have to be included in order to lessen the US-Russian conflict.

It may free up US sources to challenge China physically and financially, but it’s not guaranteed that Putin would support this. Some China hawks, including Trump loyalist Colby, will be in Trump’s new supervision, who have long argued that Beijing poses the greatest threat to US power.

Trump must, however, commit to this path with a firm commitment ( not his willpower ). Additionally, it will require more specific US security guarantees from its supporters in the Asia-Pacific territory in exchange for their commitment to support China while also being ready to engage in a possible issue.

Yet its closest Asian partners may be interested in Trump’s commitment to their security or his capacity to manage crises in the region if he does forego America’s NATO allies.

3 ) Peace through power

Trump might use Ronald Reagan as a model for his subsequent attempts to resurrect and uphold US dominance in the world. America would take the lead, but do so in a pragmatic manner and with friends whose interests were in line with its individual.

This would be a tremendous effort, not to mention a expensive one. It may require significant military spending, expense in research and development, re‑establishing American hegemony in critical systems, and finding alternate solutions to supply chains already dominated by China.

Additionally, it would mean doubling down on Beijing’s strategic rivalry and being prepared to significantly bolster proxies ‘ capacity to put pressure on China ( as opposed to just allies ).

But even this may have limitations. Trump has consistently demonstrated that he views both personal and national objectives as essentially the same thing.

For example, his deep ties to Saudi Arabia will require a controlled effort to give Israel a full hands; however, Trump would undoubtedly support his desire to repress Iran.

Additionally, how Trump treats rulers will be scrutinized.

His available admiration for Kim Jong Un, China’s Xi Jinping, and Kim Jong Un, a despot in North Korea, has previously caused delay for America’s partners. Additionally, it has prevented Trump from achieving his goals.

Chaos and transform

Which of these options may cause America’s partners to face difficult decisions and instability.

Putin will probably merely agree to negotiate until the White House places enough pressure on Kyiv to surrender, thereby making it unlikely that Trump would ever find peace with Ukraine. Additionally, peace on Russian terms will be brittle, will require painful concessions from Ukraine, will lead to violent rebel campaigns, and will severely deteriorate Western security.

Europe today finds itself at a crossroads. It ultimately has to face the reality of being in charge of its own defense and security against a revitalized Russia. It will now have to function immediately, spend a lot more on protection, and get over its terrible administrative inertia.

This will also help to advance the newly established Western security attempt, which currently includes Poland, the Baltic, and Northern states, and the UK as the primary ally against Russia.

Concerns about America’s devotion to security guarantees will stoke regional arms conflicts and increase the likelihood of nuclear proliferation in Asia and the Pacific. Additionally, countries like Japan, South Korea, Australia, and the Philippines will need to intensify cooperation initiatives even without the US. Some people may prefer that over others.

The consequence? Trust, common beliefs and a commitment to a secure rules-based get are what have sustained and deepened America’s security alliances.

At the very least, Trump 2.0 may render most US allies watchful for the near future. The greatest horror of all would be if he continued to carry out his plan of retribution against domestic rivals, deporting millions, and using his authority to establish a Potemkin politics.

I fervently hope that does n’t happen. But then again, you should never bet against self-interest.

Matthew Sussex is Associate Professor ( Adj ), Griffith Asia Institute, and fellow, Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University

This article was republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Trump and Ukraine: what Russia wants, what Trump could do – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Reports from increasing numbers offer speculative or pro-active ideas about what the incoming Trump administration will do internally and how its policy may be applied internationally. &nbsp, There have been a number of responses, some of them coming from management wannabes, on what President-elect Trump should do about Ukraine.

Trump made the promise during the battle that once in office he had put an end to the Ukrainian conflict. He made hints that he would do this by speaking with Presidents of Russia, Putin, and Ukraine, Zelensky. &nbsp, Beyond&nbsp, that we have a thinking game.

The wannabes&nbsp, are throwing around conflicting tips. &nbsp, Some want a ceasefire&nbsp, offer. &nbsp, Another talk about a cordon sanitaire and having it enforced by the Europeans. &nbsp, Also others concede a needed to “award” Russia and let it hang onto captured country. &nbsp, And some say that piece of a bargain might be to prevent Ukrainian NATO membership for&nbsp, a period of time, maybe 20 years.

No one seems to know what the Russians want, at least not in theory. &nbsp,

Trump is a savvy&nbsp, communicator. &nbsp, He will want to know what his player wants and he will try and find ways either to accommodate&nbsp, or to utilize him.

Russia has been very clear about some of what it wants, but not everything. &nbsp, &nbsp,

What follows is my knowledge of Russia’s goals in Ukraine. I do n’t agree with them because explaining them does n’t mean that I do. Nor does it mean that all are of equal value to Russia’s officials.

Russia may rely on preserving the regions it had formerly annexed. &nbsp, Numerous solutions – a peace, a buffer area or some kind of regional freeze – does not meet Russia’s leaders. Russia may demand that these regions ‘ previous settlements be officially acknowledged and establish secure borders. This implies that any negotiations regarding the conquered provinces are primarily a matter of maps. &nbsp, &nbsp,

Not only will Ukraine but also its NATO allies need to come to a consensus regarding the conquered provinces. It is doubtful Russia may accept a deal firmly with Ukraine’s authorities, since governments may change.

There is some – but not much – space for maneuver&nbsp, about place, such as for transit of people and goods, submission of electric power and oil and gas pipes.

Another related problem involves family reunification and numerous counterclaims and claims for destroyed property that need to be resolved.

Russia did also desire security of the Russian Orthodox Church, which is being attacked by Ukraine, along with safeguards for the Russian language and culture. Russia has vehemently stated that it fought in order to safeguard the Russians who reside in Ukraine. Putin may accept a deal that leaves Russian-speakers prone and exposed, churches that are occupied by the army, or those who are subject to different kinds of official discrimination, given the significance of the Orthodox Church in Russia and its impact on Putin and others.

service in he Kyiv Pe he s Lavra Ch istian m nast ry is raided by the Uk Kyiv. The Kyiv surveillance company stated that its goal was to stop the abbey from being used for subterfuge, but the idea is to obliterate the Ukrainian Russian Orthodox Church.

Russia may prefer a more amiable Kyiv government on the political level. &nbsp, What started this disaster in the first place was turning a somewhat Russia-friendly Kyiv state into a Russia-enemy state, and replacing Russian trade and security ties with new EU and NATO plans.

It is doubtful that Russia may consent to Ukraine’s EU membership, and Moscow certainly does require that NATO get out of Ukraine. &nbsp, Russia will want Ukraine largely demilitarized, probably by limiting the number of heavy weapons such as vehicles, troops fighting machines, weaponry, drones ( which the Russians may need be removed altogether ), and heat defenses reduced or permitted only to protect certain areas.

Russia will be against any further sales of weaponry to Ukraine and it will request for all officials and all soldiers, including companies, to quit&nbsp, the land.

Beyond Ukraine, Russia will ask for lifting all sanctions. &nbsp, In exchange Russia will facilitate Ukrainian trade and commerce.

There are also issues with long-range weapons in some NATO nations and in Russia that could be addressed in a negotiation, as well as issues about the future of the Black Sea. &nbsp, The big issue is lowering the nuclear threshold. It is unclear whether this can be addressed in connection with a negotiation with Ukraine.

Russia, of course, will demand a resumption of economic cooperation and overall normalization of relations.

Trump will have to consider the Russian “wants” .&nbsp, It may be too much in one transaction, and Trump can expect serious resistance from the Zelensky government. &nbsp, Therefore, any successful deal would work better if it was accomplished in stages. &nbsp,

The main goal for Europe is to lower the likelihood of Russian-made security threats that Europeans ( and Americans ) believe Russia poses for the continent. Europe fears that Russia, now with a big and experienced army, will launch attacks in the Baltic States, or against Poland or Romania.

There is no guarantee that Europe’s long-term effort to improve its defenses will ever be successful. &nbsp, As the collapse of the German coalition appears to demonstrate, some European countries lack resources to take care of their own defense, let alone fund Ukraine’s army and government.

Therefore, if there was a Russia-Europe modus vivendi with non-intervention guarantees, Europe would be in a better position.

US objectives for the war have been unilateral: Russia has to leave Ukraine. &nbsp, That wo n’t be Trump’s position because he will understand that it is a non-starter, especially when the Russians are winning the war.

Trump, however, is aware of how to sweeten deals and that the Russians are willing to pay some attention, so perhaps he can come up with ideas that could lead to the resolution of the conflict.

One US objective that should be part of American thinking, but has not been, is to significantly reduce America’s NATO commitment. NATO has been expanding for some time, and this expansion poses a risk of going to war with Russia. Trump may be more than willing to negotiate with the Russians about NATO in exchange for less harsh demands on Ukraine.

Former US deputy undersecretary of defense Stephen Bryen is a recognized authority on security strategy and technology. This article originally appeared on his Substack, Weapons and Strategy. It is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

The recurring Trump nightmare: Can Asia manage what’s coming? – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Donald Trump has regained control of the United States, overcoming a flurry of worry and anti-incumbent desire for change. Since the Civil War, Americans have been subjected to the most rigorous examination of the political and legal order.

But for the rest of the world, it is a little less horrific time. The United States is now on the verge of disbanding its post democratic order.

What does Trump’s gain think for Asia and for British friends in Japan, South Korea and the Pacific?

Some British security experts, including would-be officials to Trump, may reassure Japanese and Korean officials with their comforting words. Everything will change in the Indo-Pacific under Trump, those authorities guidance. Just before the vote, RAND specialist on Eastern protection and former intelligence official Derek Grossman wrote in The Diplomat that” US foreign policy in this region is likely to continue constant.”

Trump, in Grossman’s giving, may be” a more interpersonal and uncertain head” but he left relationships in the region intact. No matter what happens,” the China factor will encourage the US empire network’s continued growth.”

Such views ignore the numerous evidence, mostly in Trump’s own words, of his goal at the end of the first name to leave a huge portion of those alliance commitments.

Trump planned to remove US forces from South Korea, to finish the empty deal with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, and to need large sums from Japan to cover the cost of the American security role, as his previous defense secretary Mark Esper and National Security Advisor John Bolton described in their memoirs.

The calming evaluations even go back on Trump’s repeated plans to impose large, broad-based tariffs on foreign goods, tariffs that target both allies in Europe and Asia as well as China.

More important, the idea that international legislation in Asia may be distinct and separate from what happens elsewhere, especially in Europe and the Middle East, is an idea.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has fundamentally altered the safety position in East Asia, as Japan’s personal National Security Strategy document demonstrates. It has resulted in a nearby military ties between Russia, China, and North Korea, which threatens the security of Taiwan, East Asia, and the Korean Peninsula.

Trump repeatedly stated his intentions, just like his running mate JD Vance, by cutting off military aid to Ukraine and forcing Kyiv to embrace Vladimir Putin’s surrender terms.

He even threatened to renounce his determination to NATO’s security. That would allow Putin to reclaim control of some of the Soviet empire, starting with the European state and threatening Poland.

Trump may feel like he has an democratic mandate to do these outrageous items, predicts Michael McFaul, former US ambassador to Russia and chairman of Stanford University’s Institute for International Studies.

He believes that the American people support him in saying to Putin,” Do whatever the devil you want” when it comes to things like NATO or our friends in Asia. I believe that history demonstrates that when we are robust, the United States of America, can manifest greater peace through power. When we signal failure, when we try to appease rulers, that’s when negative things can happen”.

Trump’s second term saw the release of trustworthy figures from the Democratic national security elite, as well as his own incompetence and lack of familiarity with the levers of power, in large part due to his own incompetence and lack of experience with those levers. These restrictions will no longer remain in place.

According to McFaul, “he relied on traditional Republican to complete his foreign policy team” in his first term, including those at Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Secretary of Defense James Mattis, and national security advisers HR McMaster and John Bolton.

They most undoubtedly prevented Trump from implementing some of his most outrageous proposals, including pulling out of NATO because he was at the bottom of that list. What’s going to be different this time around is that none of those folks are going to be in the Trump presidency, he’s disparaged all of them.”

What about China? And North Korea?

Despite these worries, it is assumed that Trump did at least view China as the country’s main attack, particularly in terms of trade and economic policy. Because of this, the relationships in Northeast Asia will continue to be valuable to a Trump presidency, according to Chinese politicians and, to a lesser degree, those in South Korea.

Even if that is accurate, it does not indicate that Seoul or Tokyo will have easy sailing. It may result in more pressure on both friends to spend more on defense and to join in export controls and other trade and investment restraints with China, which could have serious implications for their economy.

” The Trump presidency is going to bend a lot of arms,” says Tobias Harris, the leader of Japan Foresight, a recognized expert business, and the twistees had” better be ready for that.”

Trump’s advisors have already pushed Japan to significantly increase its defense spending beyond the target of 2 % of GDP and assume full responsibility for its own defense.

The Trump tax policy may cause an even greater issue, argues Harris:

If Trump follows through, even partially, on risks to impose off-the-board levies on US goods, plus important imports on US tariffs from China and Mexico, it will have a significant, immediate effect on Japan’s largest manufacturers, prompting them to ponder whether to switch manufacturing to the US, back to Japan or to other markets. Japanese companies may also have to navigate political and national security issues if they decide to invest in the US in response to the Trump administration’s policies. However, as Trump’s vocal opposition to Nippon Steel’s bid for US Steel suggests, they may also have to navigate these issues.

It may be premature, however, to assume that Trump will want to line up Japan and South Korea for a grand confrontation with China. Some analysts believe Trump might instead choose to strike a grand bargain with Xi Jinping, which might even include leaving Taiwan.

During the campaign, the President-elect criticized Taiwan’s companies for destroying the US semiconductor industry and questioned whether the US should defend itself.

Making China the main target or the heart of his second persona is unnecessary and possibly unthinkable, according to a former senior intelligence official and long-time China expert.

There is likely to be little for him or his minions to receive in the near future. He will bluster, threaten tariffs and brag about his relationship with Xi, but probably not come out swinging.”

Trump’s new primary backer, billionaire Tesla CEO Elon Musk, has extensive business ties in China, where over half of the company’s global car production takes place at its massive Shanghai factory.

Trump-Kim bromance

Kim Jong Un, a dictator of North Korea, may be Trump’s other love interest. Trump continues to gloat about how close he and Kim are, and he feels bad that they lacked a chance to reach a deal.

That agreement, which was almost reached at their second summit in Hanoi, was undermined by both Kim’s overly grand demands and opposition from within Trump’s own administration, which were supported by Shinzo Abe’s intervention.

There will be no such resistance within the new administration. And Japan’s current prime minister, Shigeru Ishiba, does not have any such relationship with Trump as the late Abe had, nor is he likely to be able to create one. Kim may be the most significant obstacle to a deal, which would put an end to North Korea’s nuclear arsenal and missile launchers.

Trump may claim that Kim has a warm welcome from Kim, but the North Koreans have since formed a close military ally with Russia, which has resulted in the deployment of 12, 000 troops on the Ukrainian front. A Trump-Putin embrace would likely have to follow, and Kim most likely would use his new authority to demand a much higher payoff.

A breakdown in US-South Korean ties, which include demands to renegotiate Korea’s defense cost-sharing agreements, and the start of the roughly 28,500 US troops stationed there, would be a more likely development.

Trump appears to be ready to redefine his relationship with South Korea as an ally as US forces reorient themselves toward direct confrontation with China, according to Benjamin Engel of Seoul’s Dankook University, who spoke to NK News.

Whither Japan?

The ruling Liberal Democratic Party lost its majority in last month’s election, which is shocking for Japan. Ishiba, the prime minister, has the unusual task of creating a minority government. The ability of Japan to navigate this new, extremely dangerous situation is being hindered by internal political paralysis in Tokyo, as a veteran observer of Japan put it to me.

Ishiba congratulated Trump right away and, as one might expect, expressed hope that the postwar security alliance would continue to serve as the basis for US-Japan relations.

But let’s say Trump heads head on the wrong path, undermining that alliance, or even compulsion an unnecessary confrontation with China. In that situation, Japan might feel compelled to look for alternatives, such as strengthening ties with Beijing while flattering the newly powerful American autocrat.

” Japanese are not going to end the alliance,” says Japan expert Harris”. However, they will need to develop more self-control skills.

The Oriental Economist published this article on its own. It is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

Trump 2.0 with fewer, if any, checks and balances – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

We then know that the elections once underestimated Donald Trump’s help, just like they did in 2016 and 2020, and not in the same way. However, we must also accept the reality that British voters have chosen to appoint a man who tried to rig the results of the election four years ago with violence and who will provide the White House on January 20th, 2019 with less restrictions than he did in 2017.

Beyond his own greater knowledge and preparation, the president’s ability to avoid prosecution for anything he does in his official ability is what makes the Supreme Court now have a clear conservative majority compared to his predecessors’, which court recently ruled.

We can be certain that Trump will attempt to pre-empt for a concept through his own actions, but that opportunity of that standard capacity has yet to be determined by any courtroom, as it needs to be. The primary way that he will accomplish this is by appointing hardliners to the Department of Justice. Trump often expressed his frustration when his attorneys general told him that what he wanted to do was against the law during his first term. Using his national resistance, he did now feel emboldened to reject any such pleasantries.

Trump has always been a malevolent person, so it can be expected that he seeks retribution against both his political and legal foes, including those who have tried to sue him and maybe even President Joe Biden himself. However, the resistance defense also applies to something Biden has done in his own official capacity.

Some of his critics, including Republican critics such as previous congresswoman Liz Cheney, will now be preparing for a legitimate assault. Thousands of his followers, including those who were prosecuted for the rape on Capitol Hill on January 6, &nbsp, 2021, may soon expect to receive national pardons, giving an official confirmation of acts previously considered legal and anti-democratic.

There will still be some restrictions on the recently elected Trump. He took office in 2017, and his Republican Party now holds power of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Republicans now have taken control of the Senate. The Democrats properly control the House of Representatives, but it seems unlikely that they will as of today, November 7th, that is.

If the Democrats do eventually gain power, it will at least give them some means by which to manage his wasting and tax policies, since the Congress has the authority to exercise those rights. &nbsp, If they do n’t, then during the two years until the 2026 mid-term elections, the Republicans will have a pretty free hand, constrained only by reality and the financial markets.

Despite this congressional inquiry, it is almost certain that he will proceed quickly with a policy that will hurt both Japan and Europe, specifically his proposal to impose a 10 % or 20 % tariff on all imports into the United States. Without the need for Parliamentary approval, a leader can do this under a number of emergency powers. The current US average transfer tax is just 2 %, so this will be a huge boost, one that the European Commission &nbsp, and the Japanese government, among others, will likely react against.

Trump has long been a fan of tariffs. In this campaign, he made the decision to emphasize how much he loves them, both as a way to punish nations that have surpluses in their trade with the United States and as a means of raising money. The European Union and Japan are included in that group.

Some Optimists think that Elon Musk and Stephen Schwarzman, two of the large Blackstone investment firm, will be the few billionaire businessmen who supported Trump in this international economic policy. Although that influence cannot be relied upon, for now that he has won the election, he no longer really needs those billionaires ‘ backing. And he is providing them with tax breaks and deregulation, which they may believe will reduce any harm to their global businesses as a result of the tariff policy.

How much less clear is the impact of Trump’s new freedoms on his foreign policy. A significant period of disruption can be anticipated if he fulfills his pledge to purge what he perceives to be the “deep state” of the intelligence services, the military, and the State Department, since such purges and restaffing will take a long time. For that reason, he might not do everything he has threatened.

President Volodymr Zelensky of Ukraine, who has undergone the most suffering since Russia’s brutal invasion in 2022, is undoubtedly the one who will have most devastated the election news. He deserves our full sympathy for everything he and his country have endured.

Zelensky is incredibly resilient, as he has demonstrated. He will be thinking that he still has a chance to sway Trump to withdraw support, but that he most importantly needs to persuade European governments to do the same. They will have to do exactly that if they really want to defend their own security and preserve NATO.

The collapse of the coalition government in Germany may have encouraged Zelensky, but the one piece of news on November 6 may have been heartening. He will no longer have to wait until September 2025 for a new government to be elected in Europe’s most powerful nation.

Friedrich Merz, the leader of the Christian Democratic Union, who is currently leading in polls, is likely to win the German election, but how kind of coalition he will form remains to be seen. He has shown much greater courage and determination to fight for Ukraine’s and Europe’s security. In Thursday’s papers an election date in March is forecast, but it could happen sooner than that.

Formerly editor-in-chief of The Economist, &nbsp, Bill Emmott&nbsp, is currently chairman of the&nbsp, Japan Society of the UK, the&nbsp, International Institute for Strategic Studies&nbsp, and the&nbsp, International Trade Institute.

La Stampa published an early version of this article in Italian. The Substack Bill Emmott’s Global View then published this updated English version. Asia Times is republishing it with permission.

Continue Reading

Trump’s return will change Asia’s trade game – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, World

Donald Trump’s election win is creating new financial relationships for Asia, bringing both confusion and tactical opportunities. &nbsp,

Trump’s policies, generally known for prioritizing strong British benefits, are now raising concerns across Eastern markets, where trade, investment and political stability could all be significantly affected. &nbsp,

Trump’s re-election is likely to sign a return to heightened business conflicts, particularly with China. His past leadership set a precedent by imposing severe tariffs on Chinese goods, citing trade imbalances and fears about intellectual property.

The charges, which swelled into a trade war in large numbers, disrupted global supply chains and shook up industries that depend heavily on US-China business. &nbsp,

Trump is anticipated to revise or expand this strategy. On the campaign trail, the businessman-cum-politician frequently said he would impose 60 % tariffs on all Chinese goods and 20 % on all other nations ‘ imports.

If fully implemented, this threats risks China as well as other Asian countries whose supply chains are tied together.

A new trade war, in the eyes of China, would only add to the financial strains it is already experiencing due to a lingering house crisis and a weak domestic economy, which have raised doubts about whether it will be able to meet its 5 % GDP growth target.

The past Trump administration’s taxes pressured China to reassess its business methods, pushing it to get deeper regional partnerships.

China can be expected to look to expand its industry alliances in Asia further, especially within the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP ) free trade bloc, if these taxes are increased or more stringent laws are implemented.

The shift could lessen its dependence on US markets, leading to a more cohesive and dependent Asian trade bloc, and easing the impact of revived tariffs on the country’s crucial export market.

Under Trump 2.0, smaller economies in the region that serve as intermediaries between the world’s two largest markets in terms of business are also likely to experience a more difficult setting. &nbsp,

Places like Vietnam, Thailand, and Malaysia, which benefited from various benefits from the last trade war’s producing shifts, may experience additional risks if tariffs continue to stifle supply chains.

Additionally, they run the risk of receiving tariff-sensitive items because their products are shipped from a factory elsewhere.

In response to the business tensions, these nations may be able to produce more products, but the confusion of sustained demand may restrict capital outflows, potentially putting off long-term growth and investment.

In addition, Japan and South Korea might have to make proper choices about how to deal with China and America. Both countries are important US allies and depend heavily on imports, especially in high-tech areas like automotives and semiconductors. &nbsp,

With Trump’s renewed effort to reintroduce high-value manufacturing employment to the US, Japanese and South Korean companies that export to the US may experience additional taxes or pressure to move production to fresh American companies.

Both nations will struggle to balance their ties with China, their largest trading partner, and the US, a vital safety alliance, as competition grows to keep the US as a vital business.

Tech issues

In the software industry, Trump’s plans are expected to continue restricting Chinese exposure to US high-end systems, impacting Chinese technology firms like Huawei. &nbsp,

With the result of these limitations, Chinese companies have already been forced to look for alternatives in Asia, which could lead to an increase in modern technology in the region.

China has responded by investing a lot in its domestic semiconductor sector, but the restrictions on sharing technology may cause the differences between nations to grow and make Asian countries choose to take sides in a technical battle. &nbsp,

With more powers putting pressure on nations like Taiwan, which has a strong position in the semiconductor sector, export restrictions or expansions could become more difficult. This could create an environment in which corporate industries can become battlegrounds for power and control.

Under Trump, as traders react to changes in trade relations and international capital flows, the price of the currency areas in Asia may experience significant fluctuations. &nbsp,

On the horizon, Beijing might start implementing capital controls or other measures to maintain the yuan as a result of increased tension.

In addition, emerging Asian currencies may experience uncertainty if taxes or trade restrictions cause their exports to decline, making these nations more prone to cash outflows. Having said that, the current perhaps even present an opportunity for some Asian nations to boost exports as the money rises.

As a result of Trump’s policies, funding flows into Asia may be affected. This could lead to pressure on American businesses to relocate their operations there.

Asia may initially face challenges as a result of this money duplication, especially if Washington implements tax incentives or other measures to encourage more regional growth. &nbsp,

However, if Asia’s economies continue to shift toward consumer-driven models and digital economies, they could attract a new wave of foreign investments that are unrelated to American investments.

Even with shifting US priorities, these markets may still be appealing to international investors because of the favorable demographics and growing middle class in many Asian countries and the spread of digital infrastructure.

While Trump’s second presidency may erect new hurdles and barriers for Asia’s export-geared and investment-dependent economies, the region’s adaptability and integration should allow for resilient responses.

The region could have a foundation to successfully deal with shifting policy directions from a more protectionist administration in Washington thanks to Asia’s extensive trade networks, expanding technological capabilities, and shifting alliances.

Continue Reading

US lacks the planes to win an air war with China – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

As China moves forward with advanced fighter planes and a rapidly expanding ship, the US Air Force is caught between a rock of ever-tightening costs and a hard area of rising calling for development and development.

At the Airlift Tanker Association Symposium in Grapevine, Texas, US Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall made an announcement about the funding issues that the next-generation NGAD fighter, next-generation Aerial Refueling System ( NGAS ) tanker, and collaborative combat aircraft (CCA ) had.

According to the report, Air Force leaders claim that the US needs all three star programs to be prepared for an upcoming atmosphere conflict with China. Kendall emphasized the need for” creativity” in future force structure due to budget constraints, despite these programs ‘ interconnected operational and affordability aspects.

He also made note of the US Air Force’s challenge to upgrade as a result of commitments to upgrades to nuclear weapons and the growing threat from China, especially with precision missiles that target US mobility platforms and air bases.

Kendall claimed that the Air Force has” a lot of tips to push more potential out of the same set of resources” and that this has” come at the expense of our ability to deal with our walking problem” of China.

The US Air Force secretary made mention of the need for a subtle tanker to help combat air forces in tense situations and the significance of the US Space Force’s expansion. A US Senate blue-ribbon section is reviewing NGAD needs, according to the Air and Space Forces Magazine report, with comments expected in December.

He emphasized the need for more investments to fulfill China’s need for modernization and combat military advances, particularly as Xi Jinping has ordered his military to be prepared to seize Taiwan by 2027.

In a May 2024 article for The National Interest ( TNI), Brandon Weichert contends that the US Air Force’s development of sixth-generation fighter jets is unnecessary and a waste of resources.

Weichert contends that these cutting-edge aircraft, which include AI and drones, are fanciful investments that might not considerably improve US military capabilities.

Instead, he suggests that the US emphasis should be on developing space-based arms systems and enhancing existing fifth-generation soldiers. He points out that simpler, more cost-effective autonomous techniques could be more useful.

Yet, Dan Goure claims in a Real Clear Defense article from August 2024 that the US has enhance NGAD development to keep air superiority. He highlights the need to change the F-22, a late-1990s style, and emphasizes that simply guarded platforms, not drones, have the important decision-making abilities needed in an intense electric war environment.

Drones, Goure argues, are limited, citing Israel’s April 2024 success in downing hundreds of Iranian drones and missiles, as many countries now deploy counter-unmanned aerial systems (C-UAS ).

He also notes that other nations, including the UK, Japan, Italy ( through the Global Combat Air Program ), France, Germany, and Spain (via the Future Combat Air System ), are progressing on sixth-generation fighters, with China and Russia following suit.

Goure claims that investing in NGAD may revive the US military plane manufacturing base and result in long-term technical superiority.

In contrast to the US, The War Zone reported this quarter that China had unveiled the Shenyang J-15T, an improved carrier-based warrior, at the China International Aviation &amp, Aerospace Exhibition in Zhuhai.

The War Zone says the J-15T, equipped with sophisticated avionics, Chinese-made WS-10 engines and rocket launch connectivity, represents a substantial upgrade over the initial J-15.

It notes this new variant, capable of operating from both CATOBAR and STOBAR carriers, will serve aboard all of China’s aircraft carriers, including the latest Fujian, which uses an electromagnetic aircraft launch system ( EMALS ).

The report says the J-15T’s enhancements include a strengthened nose landing gear, a new wide-angle holographic heads-up display ( HUD), and an active electronically scanned array ( AESA ) radar. These improvements increase the fighter’s operational capabilities by allowing it to get off with a heavier load of weapons and gas.

The J-15T was unveiled this month, according to The War Zone, and China has also unveiled the land-based cunning warrior Shenyang J-35A in preparation for its album at the China International Aviation &amp, Aerospace Exhibition.

The People’s Liberation Army Air Force ( PLAAF ) is now confirmed to be interested in the J-35A, which was previously only seen in unofficial images, according to The War Zone. The statement mentions that the aircraft, which has been developed for years, was originally intended for carrier-based activities with the PLA Navy and was in development for trade.

The J-35A is not a clear copy, but it does have many design elements that are similar to those on the US F-35. The differences are due to the twin-engine setup and the lack of quick launch and horizontal landing options.

The J-35A is mentioned in the report as being expected to replace the heavier Chengdu J-20 in the PLAAF, giving a more economical and quantitatively better choice.

Additionally, according to The War Zone, the development of the J-35A has the ability to open up opportunities for export to nations that are unable to purchase Western fighters.

As the US dithers in building its next-gen airpower, former US Indo-Pacific Command ( INDOPACOM) Commander Admiral John Aquilino cautioned in a March 2024 testimony before the US Senate that China, now with the world’s largest navy in terms of ships, may soon have the world’s largest air force.

That raises the question of how a potentially outnumbered US Air Force could fight China in a potential Pacific issue, necessitating important organizational and technical adjustments.

According to a report from Defense One in February 2024, the US Air Force is currentlyundergoing major restructuring to increase eagerness for potential problems with China. This was disclosed at the Air and Space Forces Association 2024 Warfare Symposium.

Kendall and US Air Force Chief of Staff General David Allvin detailed the reform, which includes deploying full arms, or “units of motion”, rather than wholesale regiments. The goal of the report is to create cohesive combat units that are fully equipped for wartime tasks, as stated in the report.

Defense One says the reorganization, part of the” Reoptimizing for Great Power Competition” initiative, introduces a new Integrated Capabilities Command to streamline modernization efforts and a renamed Airman Development Command to centralize force development.

Additionally, Timothy Walton and Mark Gunzinger point out in a March 2024 Breaking Defense article that the US Air Force faces significant challenges in the Indo-Pacific region, primarily as a result of China’s military forces ‘ potential outweigh its potential success.

Walton and Gunzinger suggest a number of options, including expanding the F-35A Lightning II’s range with an engine core upgrade, continuing with NGAD and CCA development despite the limited funding and other obstacles, and purchasing longer-range weapons like the AIM-260 and stealthy tankers for aerial refueling.

They warn, however, that the US Air Force must balance these advancements with budget constraints and the need for cost-effective solutions in order to maintain a strategic advantage.

Continue Reading

EU-China tit-for-tat tariffs aren’t really a trade war – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Business ties between Slovenia and Europe are going through a rough piece. Beijing is bringing a lawsuit against Brussels at the World Trade Organization ( WTO ) over its decision to impose severe tariffs on Chinese battery electric vehicles ( BEVs ).

Although China-EU tensions are obviously rising, examination of the conflict reveals that the two parties are moving toward a more careful business engagement than a full-fledged trade war.

The Chinese Ministry of Commerce confirmed on November 4 that it had filed a complaint against the EU for the country’s late October decision to impose tariffs on Chinese BEV imports. The new income levels on Chinese BEVs range between 18 and 45 percent, taking the foundation import tax of 10 % on all cars imported into the EU. Following an anti-subsidy research that was launched in October of last year, the EU made its decision.

China has taken a number of measures against what it perceives as “unfair deal protectionionism” in addition to confronting the Union in front of the WTO. Beijing launched its own anti-subsidy queries earlier this year against EU meat and dairy products.

China imposed tariffs on imported vodka from the Union at the beginning of October and threatened to impose taxes on gasoline-powered vehicles. The Chinese government officially asked automakers to stop mega-investment programs in the EU-member nations two weeks after the EU’s selection.

An impending trade war might be suggested by a cursory examination of the latest Sino-European tit-for-trade situation. However, a closer examination of the evolving geo-economic dynamics and the structure of EU-China’s professional relations reveals that the two countries are undergoing a process of rebalancing their financial engagement.

That is, Brussels is “de-risking, no” decoupling “vis-à-vis Beijing. In crucial industries like pharmaceuticals and alternative technology, the EU heavily relies on Chinese goods and raw materials. Brussels tries to reduce this dependent while upholding positive financial relations. This entails reducing risks in crucial areas while sustaining deal in less vulnerable regions. &nbsp, &nbsp,

Beijing is likely to be receptive to such an relationship. China’s attention is not attracted to scaling the industry debate, as it would lead to a multi-pronged trade war.

The US signed tax increases for a range of imported Chinese goods in September. In October, Canada put additional tariffs on Chinese energy vehicles, metal and metal products and” essential manufacturing sector products.”

It makes more financial sense for Beijing to perform damage control in this geo-economic culture rather than launch new trade war sides in Europe. In this environment, China’s economic defenses against the EU aim to physically target vital industries and EU member states to put strain on Brussels for a resolution.

In light of this situation, China and the Union are more likely to find resolution in the Noel trade dispute. In a 2013 solar panels business dispute, Beijing and Brussels struck a deal to avoid additional taxes.

Beijing and Brussels are moving away from detailed bilateral trade in favor of more granular engagement, according to recent dynamics in the China-EU Noel trade dispute.

The implication of this trend goes beyond institutions, impacting business areas. Chinese corporates operating in areas prioritized by the EU—biotechnology, &nbsp, essential raw materials, clean technology, among some —have to assume more restricted access to European markets, as the EU seeks to reduce dependency in the areas.

Businesses in vital sectors and member states of the EU must also be prepared to face China’s trade protection plans.

Daniel Balazs, PhD, is a Research Fellow of the China Programme at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University. His analysis focuses on Chinese foreign policy, China-India and China-Europe relationships.

Continue Reading