South Korea entangled in a sticky and politicized legal web – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

SEEOUL – With the death of dismissed President Yoon Suk Yeol weighing a pending Constitutional Court decision, there is a rise in rumors about potential new presidential primaries in South Korea.

South Koreans had cast ballots within 60 days to choose a new national leader if the judge upholds senate’s impeachment motion earlier this month and fully unseats Yoon in the weeks that come.

In that scenario, opposition Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-myung would be the apparent front-runner at 37 %, according to a Gallup Korea poll conducted between December 17-19 on “future political leader” preferences.

He’s trailed frequently by Han Dong-hoon, the lengthy displaced ruling People Power Party head, and Hong Joon-pyo, the colorful liberal mayor of Daegu, both of whom notched only 5 % on the same Gallup Korea surveys.

While South Korean politics are extremely uncertain, Yoon’s exceedingly good resignation would evidently pave the way to a new communist leader’s election.

New record items in that direction. Following Park Geun-hye’s abrupt demise, communist Moon Jae-in won a significant success in an earlier presidential election in May 2017.

But this time round, Yoon’s right-wing drop is no guarantee of Lee’s left-wing increase. Because criticism head Lee is grappling with legal issues that may pose considerable challenges for a possible presidential bid.

In November, Lee was convicted of violating election rules, a judgement that, if upheld by the Supreme Court before the next presidential election, did bar him from running.

Decisions in the second and third studies of cases of election violations must be rendered within three weeks of the past court statement, per the Public Official Election Act.

This means that the appeals court hearing Lee’s event must rule by November 15 after three months of the test judge’s ruling. The Supreme Court will have three more months to decide Lee’s ultimate fate if he chooses to charm that decision.

Although this timeframe has previously been casually observed, it is anticipated to be more strictly enforced in accordance with the Chief Supreme Court Justice’s order in September.

The Constitutional Court’s decision may cause a presidential vote to take place as early as April or May of next year if Yoon falls. As such, Lee is working to postpone his trial deliberations while maneuvering for Yoon’s court-ordered impeachment.

After two failed attempt, the appeals court eventually served Lee with a observe of receipt of the dispute information on December 18. He then has 20 days to file an appeal against his conviction for violating the election laws.

Lee moved houses, leaving his fresh tackle ambiguous, so the first shipment attempt failed. A second try was ineffective due to the patient’s presence.

Only after the judge dispatched an execution commander to hand-deliver the files to Lee’s Yeouido office, the latest effort was unsuccessful. Without the realize, the appeal process could not continue.

Lee is likewise facing a third-party corruption trial where the presidential hopeful is accused of asking North Korean underwear business Ssangbangwool Group to illegally cone US$ 8 million to North Korea in order to accomplish his planned trip to Pyongyang while serving as governor of Gyeonggi Province.

In connection with the situation, a former deputy government of Gyeonggi Province was given a nine-and-a-half year sentence. Lee was charged that same quarter, and he has since been refrained from doing so because he allegedly purposefully delayed court proceedings.

Lee’s legitimate group filed a motion to recuse courts from presiding in his case earlier this month. Lawyers have criticized the action, warning it may cause “unprecedented difficulties” to the test. An appeals court recently affirmed the ex-deputy president’s criminal conviction.

If Lee is found guilty of third-party corruption, it would severely tarnish his social standing and further tarnish his chances of winning the president, especially given that he is still tangled up in three additional criminal investigations.

While carefully prolonging his own lawful battles, Lee is bidding to quicken Yoon’s prosecution trial—and for good reason. Yoon’s resignation would open the door for him to take control of the ruling People Power Party because his communist enemy, Cho Kuk, is currently imprisoned and the People Power Party is completely disorganized.

Lee and his station are now desperate to fill three seats on the Constitutional Court that were formerly anxious. Now, the court is operating with a six-member board after three of the judges ‘ career expired in October.

With its current structure, it has decided to learn the president’s impeachment case, but Yoon will need to be removed by a majority vote. At least six of nine seats may be required for his resignation if the jury were entirely staffed. &nbsp, &nbsp,

Complicating matters for Lee is that Yoon’s appointee, Justice Cheong Hyungsik, is the presiding and commissioned justice to handle his impeachment case.

Two justices are considered liberal, three lean center-right and Cheong is firmly right-wing. If even one justice rejects parliament’s impeachment motion, Yoon, now suspended from his presidential duties, will be reinstated.

Thus, the three open seats that were put up for election by the parliament have become hot political bargaining chips. By sending two more liberal-leaning justices to the bench, the opposition hopes to boost the chances of Yoon’s removal from office.

The process, however, could take weeks and will require an acting president’s appointment.

To be fair, the opposition’s leader is also one who tactfully stifles his trial. Yoon and his legal team have also employed what critics perceive as a number of judicial “delay tactics” ( ).

Despite the president’s insistence on his innocence and public confidence in facing his legal battles head-on, he has reportedly refused to accept orders and documents from the Constitutional Court.

However, the court’s spokesperson announced on Monday that the trial would continue regardless, with the first hearing against the former public prosecutor general now scheduled for December 27.

South Korea has been jolted by a number of dramatic events in recent weeks, with likely more political shock and awe on the horizon, from Yoon’s short-lived martial law decree to his subsequent impeachment by parliament to Lee’s own colorful legal troubles.

Continue Reading

All the power in God-Emperor Elon Musk’s hands – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The US social structure was &nbsp, designed by its founders&nbsp, to have a system of checks and balances, so that no individual or organization would have total energy.

But that system was designed with only&nbsp, government&nbsp, leaders and&nbsp, government&nbsp, institutions in brain — although the founders did care about private individuals controlling the authorities, this wasn’t their primary focus, and they eventually ended up declining to throw institutions in place precisely to guard against financial power. &nbsp,

James Madison believed, for instance, that the governmental system of the US state was protection much against little cabals of rich oligarchs. In recent years, especially in the wake of the Supreme Court ‘s&nbsp, Citizens United&nbsp, choice, some have voiced concerns that the US has become an elite, where wealthy people are capable of buying power and influence — either by plan efforts, lobbying, or other means.

These issues came mostly from the liberal left, who&nbsp, generally claimed&nbsp, that the US has become an aristocracy. However, many on the right were also concerned about George Soros and other democratic entrepreneurs ‘ effect.

But the studies backing up the “oligarchy” state was &nbsp, very uneven and weak&nbsp, — in reality, most political researchers found that coverage in the US tends to connect strongly with the objectives of the center class. And common problem was vague and scattered — Americans will tell you that their financial program “unfairly favors the strong interests”, but this could mean something, and most Americans&nbsp, are no concerned&nbsp, about the prosperity of billionaires.

Yet in the past week, we have witnessed a single wealthy man making important decisions in real time regarding US national government policy. In order for the US federal government to spend money, it has to pass “appropriations” bills. There are always big fights over those bills, so sometimes they just pass a” continuing resolution” to keep spending going.

If the CR doesn’t pass, the government shuts down, and its employees— including the people in the US Military — stop getting paychecks. In a number of instances over the past three decades, the party in charge has threatened to refuse to pass a bill and impose austerity on the government, or worse, to exceed the “debt ceiling,” which prevents the government from borrowing money.

Elon Musk, president Trump’s most significant donor and political ally, and the owner of one of the largest social media networks, had a different take on the most recent CR. Musk&nbsp, launched an all-out attack&nbsp, on the resolution:

Musk, who&nbsp, spent more than US$ 250 million &nbsp, getting Trump elected, posted about his opposition to the original spending deal well over 100 times over the past two days, with threats to fund primary challenges to anyone who voted for the plan, which was six weeks in the making.

Any member of the House or Senate who supports this outrageous spending bill should be re-elected in two years! Musk was posted on X on Wednesday afternoon.

Later in the day, Trump himself&nbsp, came out against it, making it clear the bill was done.

What’s interesting about this is that&nbsp, everyone&nbsp, seems to&nbsp, agree&nbsp, that it was Musk, not Trump, who torpedoed the CR. &nbsp, Fox News reports:

After Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy allegedly engaged in congressional discussions regarding government funding, some House Republicans are privately expressing their anger.

If Elon and Vivek are freelancing and shooting off the hip without working with [President-elect Trump], according to a second GOP lawmaker, they are getting dangerously close to undermining the actual 47th President of the United States.

Overheated rhetoric is common, so we shouldn’t take this as gospel. And it’s also worth noting that Musk&nbsp, approved&nbsp, of a modified CR, but that one was torpedoed by conservatives in Congress. Also, &nbsp, Musk’s threat&nbsp, to primary anyone in Congress who voted against the approval of Matt Gaetz wasn’t enough to keep Gaetz from withdrawing. So Musk actually isn’t the all-powerful emperor he’s depicted as in the header image of this post — at least, not yet.

But it’s undeniable that Musk has influence that goes far beyond that of any typical super-rich political influencer. He’s not just the owner of X but its poster-in-chief, who manipulates the platform’s algorithm to&nbsp, show everyone his own tweets&nbsp, first and foremost.

Additionally, he is the owner of SpaceX, which the US government largely depends on for its entire space program. And he’s more or less the leader of&nbsp, a right-wing faction in the tech industry &nbsp, that has become a key Republican constituency over the last election cycle.

Therefore, Musk has a lot of extremely powerful tools for directly influencing American policies. He has the authority to threaten to primary any Republican who deviates from his personal goals ( and frequently does ). He has the power to launch right-wing instant mobs on X to attack any Republican who floutes his rules.

He can ( and does ) dump hundreds of millions into elections. He could probably use SpaceX’s government contracts as leverage as well, if he chose. And with Donald Trump, the oldest President ever elected, clearly in his final years, Elon’s energy and activity level frequently make him the ideal stand-in.

It’s clear to both foreign and domestic leaders where the power is in the incoming U.S. regime, but this isn’t just supposition on my part. House Speaker Mike Johnson&nbsp, called up both Trump and Musk&nbsp, to try to get a CR passed. And Musk now&nbsp, regularly accompanies Trump&nbsp, to his meetings with foreign heads of state. The American public as a whole is now accepting this reality after watching Musk kill the continuing resolution.

What does it mean for the nation to have so much of the government’s power firmly rooted in the hands of a single, unelected private individual? It’s hard to say.

There may be some historical precedents here, as Mark Hanna had a significant influence in the McKinley administration and William Randolph Hearst’s control of the print media terrified politicians over a century ago. Various industrial-age tycoons wielded a lot of influence in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Fox News was created by Rupert Murdoch. But Musk’s clout may eclipse them all — X is a new kind of media, Trump is a different kind of President, and so on.

Many in the tech sector I know are enthralled by Elon’s authority. But I believe that this is scary for many regular Americans because they won’t be able to trust Elon to do the right thing, as many other tech professionals do. To see this, let’s do a thought exercise: What if Elon were evil?

Imagining” Evil Elon”

In a post back in October, I wrote that America’s future could hinge on whether Elon Musk decides to play the superhero or the supervillain.

Musk’s friends and confidantes expect the former. They probably know him as a reasonable guy — a&nbsp, Reaganite&nbsp, conservative who was &nbsp, driven to the center-right&nbsp, by the excesses of wokeness, who loves&nbsp, free speech&nbsp, and free enterprise and small government and responsible fiscal and monetary policy and&nbsp, peace between nations, who wants to bring human civilization to Mars and accelerate tech progress and so on.

Let’s refer to this variation of Elon as” Real Elon.”

However, one might also think of Elon, who lives in the fervent imaginations of his foes. Let us call this” Evil Elon”. Regular people, observing Elon’s actions in the public sphere, can’t always tell the difference between Real Elon and this fantasy supervillain.

Whereas Real Elon opposed the CR because of concerns over government spending and legislative complexity, Evil Elon opposed it because it contained national security provisions that&nbsp, would have nixed&nbsp, some of Tesla ‘s&nbsp, planned investments in China:

Cynics note&nbsp that Elon supported’s shorter replacement CR would have actually spent more money than the one Elon killed, with the main difference being that the replacement CR didn’t have restrictions on US investment in China:

Real Elon is a consistent and dedicated ally of the Chinese Communist Party, despite his admiration for individual freedoms and capitalism. When Real Elon calls for Taiwan to become a” special administrative zone” of China, he does it because he likes authoritarian rule and because the Chinese Communist Party has paid him off. Evil Elon does it because he wants to avoid World War 3.

On Ukraine, similar, Real Elon&nbsp, just wants to end the conflict&nbsp, and stop more Ukrainians from dying. After all, Russia is strong and determined enough to almost certainly hold onto a piece of Ukraine at the end of the conflict. So why not just trade land for peace and be done with it?

However, Evil Elon, who shares his sympathies with authoritarian rulers in general, wants Putin to succeed. No one is aware of what Elon and Putin discussed in their frequent conversations since 2022. However, Evil Elon’s supporters believe they conspired to smuggle the Russians into the conflict.

Real Elon and Real Elon both accused Vindman of treason and threatened him with” the appropriate penalty” because we all get upset on social media and like to rippling people who criticize us. However, Vindman was right when Evil Elon did it.

When Real Elon&nbsp, declared his support&nbsp, for the German far-right party AfD, it was because he saw Germany spinning into&nbsp, industrial decline&nbsp, and suffering from an immigration policy that failed to exclude&nbsp, violent criminals. But Evil Elon did it because he likes that AfD is&nbsp, vocally pro-Putin&nbsp, and&nbsp, pro-CCP.

In fact, believers in Evil Elon suspect that his support for AfD might also be due to the whiff of&nbsp, Nazi apologia&nbsp, and&nbsp, antisemitism&nbsp, that hang around some of the party’s candidates. Real Elon is a stand-up guy — when he agreed with a tweet about Jewish communities pushing anti-White hatred, he&nbsp, publicly apologized, declaring it the worst tweet he’s ever done, and declaring himself a “philosemite”. And when Real Elon accidentally endorsed a Tucker Carlson interview with a Hitler apologist, he&nbsp, quickly deleted the endorsement&nbsp, once he realized what it actually contained.

However, those who believe in Evil Elon believe that these are just the kind of public relations stunts a supervillain would employ to cover his tracks. They worry that the massive wave of antisemitism that has swept X&nbsp since Elon took control is the result of deliberate boosting rather than just the unavoidable result of more indulgent moderation policies combined with the response to the Gaza war. 1&nbsp, They do not buy&nbsp, Real Elon’s protests&nbsp, that other platforms have even more antisemitism.

And so on. Essentially, Evil Elon is a somewhat cartoonish supervillain, who wants to set himself up as the ruler of one of three great dictatorships, ruling the world with an iron fist alongside his allies Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin — a new&nbsp, Metternich System&nbsp, to enshrine right-wing values and crack down on wokeness and progressivism and obstreperous minorities all over the world.

I had Grok draw this new Metternich System for fun, and the end result was pretty good. I feel like I have to share it:

Art by Grok

But anyway, the point here is that when normal Americans look at Elon and his words and deeds, they can’t be 100 % certain that he ‘s&nbsp, not&nbsp, Evil Elon. A few progressives will be very convinced that he&nbsp, is&nbsp, actually evil, but I think most people will simply wonder and be uneasy. Evil Elon will continue to exist in a sort of quantum superposition with Real Elon in their minds — a Schrödinger’s oligarch who will&nbsp, probably&nbsp, turn out to have been a good guy all along, but&nbsp, might&nbsp, ultimately turn out to have been very bad from day 1.

And that will scare them. In fact, all powerful people have this same property— even some of the people who voted for them didn’t entirely trust Bill Clinton, George Bush, Barack Obama, and so on. &nbsp, Powerful people are simply inherently untrustworthy, because the consequences of misplacing your trust in them are so grave.

There have been checks and balances on these leaders for the majority of modern American history, which means that if they did prove to be bad, there would be plenty of institutions and opponents in place to limit the damage.

So who or what can check Elon’s power?

One flaw of the US political system, as I mentioned at the beginning of this post, is that there are few mechanisms in place to restrict the political influence of private actors. This is why some people worry about the U. S. becoming an oligarchy, especially in the years after&nbsp, Citizens United.

Up until now, I believe those worries have been unfounded because powerful figures like the Kochs, Soros, and Murdoch have, of course, had a hand in politics and some sort of canceled out each other. But in the age of X, SpaceX, and Trump, we may be looking at a very different situation.

Musk is a singular figure because he has already demonstrated himself to be the one who can create large, successful new high-tech manufacturing companies in the United States. He might also prove himself to be the one who can successfully convert a vast fortune and a corporate empire into effective dominance of US politics.

So who or what could balance out Elon’s power? Prior to his primary threats and online assaults, Congress appears prostrate. Trump may have fired and denounced him in 2017 as he did Steve Bannon, but that Trump has long since passed away. This Trump is aging, bedeviled, and abandoned by many of his former allies. Democrats are still dealing with the collapse of 2010s-era progressivism, and in a few days they will control zero branches of the federal government.

It’s possible that a bunch of&nbsp, other super-rich people&nbsp, will unite to balance out Musk. Although the idea of needing oligarchs to stop other oligarchs is not particularly appealing, it might be preferable. So far, though, even super-rich people who have had rivalries with Musk in the past&nbsp, seem inclined to bend the knee&nbsp, and live as best they can under the new regime.

What about the press? Traditional media — newspapers, TV, and radio — has declined steeply, &nbsp, replaced by social media. Musk&nbsp, owns one of America’s main news platforms&nbsp, ( and a second one, TikTok, is&nbsp, effectively controlled by the CCP). Meanwhile, more progressive media outlets still seem to be in a state of paralysis over conflicts with their activist staffers and their subscribers over Gaza, trans issues, and general election-related recriminations.

Ultimately, of course, power resides with the American people. Musk’s power comes from his ownership of capital, but the way he exercises it is fundamentally a&nbsp, democratic&nbsp, one — if he’s able to primary Congressional Republicans, it’s because his primary challengers are able to win votes, and if he’s able to start a rage-mob on X, it’s because people like what he says.

This means that if enough people get tired of Musk’s attempts to influence American politics, he’ll lose his influence. X is somewhat influential, but even with Musk’s algorithmic changes, it’s not a mind-control device, and it’s also&nbsp, <a href="https://mashable.com/article/elon-musk-x-declining-user-base-2025″>not actually that widely used. Musk is America’s most successful and successful entrepreneur, but even the most successful of men is powerless if he is turned down by the populace. 2&nbsp,

The fracas over the CR this week have a chance of alienating Musk because the American public has never liked shutdown brinksmanship. If Elon pulls a few more stunts, Trump’s second term could be defined by a protracted backlash against his overreach.

Vox populi, vox dei, as they say.

Notes

1. In reality, I have a third theory that claims that Russian and Chinese bots are the primary culprits of antisemitism in order to wedge American society. Right after the election, I’ve noticed that antisemitism largely vanished. This could have been attributable to an Elon crackdown.

2. I wouldn’t bet on it, though, but a few techlords might one day be able to use AI to rule the world in defiance of the vast majority of humanity.

This&nbsp, article&nbsp, was first published on Noah Smith’s Noahpinion&nbsp, Substack and is republished with kind permission. Become a Noahopinion&nbsp, subscriber&nbsp, here.

Continue Reading

How much Chinese cyber sabotage will Trump tolerate? – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

US President-elect Donald Trump has named most of the people of his suggested case. But, he’s still to reveal important appointees to America’s effective cyber warfare and cleverness institutions.

These positions include those held by the National Security Council’s computer lead, the director of the CISA, and the national security council’s cyber director. These figures may be crucial to ensuring the safety of the United States ‘ computer protection at a crucial time.

For the coming leadership, we think there are three potential trouble spots:

  • how Trump does compromise his security and economic interests.
  • how his presidency can effectively stop the electric disturbance in China
  • how it will handle the suspicions that some MAGA supporters have of the intellect “deep state” powers.

Intensifying Chinese digital spy

Foreign electronic surveillance and spy actions against the US have reached an all-time large in terms of level of effort and, most importantly, success.

These spy actions have succeeded in capturing:

  • the most important intellectual property that gives the US a competitive advantage in terms of both financial and national security
  • older US government and military personnel’s private communications, as well as
  • the specific information of tens of millions of Americans.

According to recent reports, the Chinese government has targeted key state systems by utilizing flaws in the country’s aging telecommunications infrastructure.

Hackers from the” Salt Typhoon” organization were able to gain access to the personal contacts of senior officials, including Trump, and to reveal the names of US intelligence agencies both domestically and internationally.

Additionally, it appears that Salt Typhoon has allegedly extorted US telecommunication companies ‘ call data files. These provide a detailed record of all network users ‘ calls and related phone numbers.

These powerful breaches come after years of vicious cyberattacks that have harmed US patents and state secrets involving crucial technologies. These include unnatural knowledge, next-generation plane, biology and power systems.

However, according to research, the majority of Chinese spy operations against the US have been centered on the theft of proprietary information and technologies since 2000.

In addition to this, the US government thinks Beijing is trying to improve its ability to track electronic data on Americans.

A number of steps were taken by the Biden administration to protect America’s tech ecosystem from Chinese-made devices and software that might have hidden security features. The reaction included restrictions and bans on products produced by TikTok, the social media platform, and Hikvision, Dahua, and Hytera.

All of this sets the stage for confrontations between Trump and China, as well as Trump and the technology industry in America.

For instance, the Trump presidency will almost certainly have to convince communications giants AT&amp, T, Verizon, T-Mobile and others to tackle longstanding deficits in their system. This includes the frequent use of unshielded parts that date back to the 1970s and 1980s.

Together, the individual targeting of Trump, his Cabinet, and senior government officials and their solutions will require a violent reaction to deter potential businesses.

How much will the Trump presidency become willing to do in response to Chinese aggression, though?

President Joe Biden has responded to China by criticizing its semiconductor sector and restricting its ability to access another important systems. Beijing is likely to try to have these steps removed in any conversations between Trump and Taiwanese leader Xi Jinping regarding business and taxes.

If it does, Trump’s wish for a better financial “deal” with China does come into conflict with national safety issues.

Cyber damage on critical equipment

Chinese organizations have also been sabotage-infiltrating critical infrastructure in the United States and other countries ( including the cyber security facilities in the” Five Eyes” partners ).

The goal is to install powerful ransomware that can be activated to destroy and destroy necessary systems in order to pre-position themselves in the target sites. This includes in a time of conflict.

The most prominent of these initiatives has come from Volt Typhoon, a Chinese state-sponsored thief party.

These intrusive and destructive measures of destruction of essential equipment are in line with China’s long-standing policy of secret action, which states that “win without fighting”

As we get closer to 2027, these destroy initiatives are commonly anticipated to get worse. This is the most important time when the People’s Liberation Army of China is anticipated to be ready to launch an conquest of Taiwan.

A potential escalation into a military discord between the US and China poses the greatest threat to this electric damage campaign.

If Foreign malware is used to target the events for America’s 250th day in 2026 or the Los Angeles Olympics in 2028, for example, how many restraint had Trump had?

Renewing America’s computer spy law

The last point will be one that is congressional.

The US has long been the subject of heated debate about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ( FISA ). The majority of this is centered on Area 702, which is the foundation for America’s extensive selection of unusual intelligence.

This section enables US intelligence agencies to catch phone calls, letters, and other electronic communications from non-Americans outside the US.

Congress has mandated these firms to “minimize” the money collection of data on Americans. In practice, but, this has been difficult to achieve in the age of modern secrecy and international challenges.

FISA is viewed as necessary to national protection organizations that are battling to keep America and its allies protected by nonpartisan supporters. The MAGA-aligned House Freedom Caucus, nevertheless, has cast the work in a different light. They think it gives rise to an inexplicable heavy state that wants to spy on regular people.

Trump has, at times, aligned himself with this perspective. He claimed in April of this year that Congress should “kill FISA” because it was suspected of allowing spying on his political campaign for 2020.

If Congress doesn’t pass a new part 702, Section 702 will expire in April 2026. Although there will be Democratic majority in both houses of Congress, the divergent viewpoints within the party do not maintain passage.

The growing threats to national security that a second Trump administration may encounter are even more dangerous. According to intelligence officials, the need for FISA-sourced knowledge has never been greater.

However, outsiders like Tulsi Gabbard ( presumptive director of national intelligence ), Kash Patel ( presumptive FBI director ), Pam Bondi ( presumptive attorney-general ) and Kristi Noem ( presumptive secretary of homeland security ) may oppose re-authorizing the legislation.

However, America’s allies rely greatly on knowledge shared by US companies using FISA warrants.

Trump may want to compel NATO and other allies to spend more money on their own protection, just as he may require that Five Eye and other intelligence organizations also conduct more surveillance.

William A Stoltz is teacher and specialist associate, National Security College, Australian National University and Michael Rogers is older brother and alternative doctor, Kellogg Executive Leadership Institute, Northwestern University

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

Continue Reading

Zelensky retirement would be a final act of heroism – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The American diplomat Henry Kissinger, who passed away almost precisely a year ago, said he wished both sides of the Iran-Iraq battle of the 1980s was shed. As 2024 comes to an end and everyone is preparing for Donald Trump’s returning to the White House on January 20, Kissinger’s saying looks dreadfully fitting for the Russian combat in Ukraine: both sides are losing.

The previous 12 months of terrible, protracted conflict have left both flanks exhausted, and neither has gained a major advantage. Russia’s forces have gained some province in eastern Ukraine.

According to the Institute for the Study of War, by early December, Russian troops had seized 2, 700 square meters of Ukraine this year, which is a huge boost on the 465 square kilometers it seized in 2023 but represents a simple 0.4 % of Ukraine’s total land area.

Russia has seized less than half a percentage of Ukraine at an estimated value of 350, 000 deaths. Russia lost 1,500 soldiers every time, according to the UK Ministry of Defense, which is a much lower fatality rate than it experienced in 2022 or 2023, according to a report from the ministry of defense. Media critics have often predicted that in the face of this stress Ukraine’s threats were about to decline, but so far, this has not happened.

In August, Ukraine launched its own invasion of Russia by crossing the Russian frontier and capturing roughly 1,400 square kilometers of place in the Kursk region. This forced Russia to give an estimated 50, 000 soldiers, including 12, 000 Northern Korean soldiers, to try to push the Ukrainians out, which thus far they have failed to accomplish. However, the place occupied by Ukraine has shrunk to about 800 sq km.

At the same time, the two factors have been attacking deep inside each other’s land. Ukraine has focused on attacking hands shops, oil refineries, and the management of Russia’s causes, while Russia has continued to focus its missile strikes on Ukraine’s electricity grid and its cities.

In the biggest coup of the year, Ukrainian spies have recently spied on Moscow, killing a top missile designer and the head of the country’s chemical, biological, and imaging forces, as well as this week.

The battle is between Russia and Ukraine. Both parties are aware that the first few months of the year could see democratic transitions that might be beneficial for them: President Putin may become anticipating Donald Trump’s resumption of the US president, given that this makes it unlikely that the US Congress will grant any additional authorization for the use of American-provided weapons for long-range strikes inside Russia.

For whatever it may be fair, the Financial Times later reported that Trump’s” near foreign policy aides” had informed European counterparts that their employer is presently inclined to continue military aid to Ukraine.

According to polls, President Zelensky may become anticipating Germany’s February 23 general election, in which Olaf Scholz may be replaced by Friedrich Merz of the Christian Democrats, who is much more popular.

New social changes among his own allies have weakened President Putin: the decline of Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria was triggered by the failure of either of Assad’s major supporters, Iran or Russia, to engage physically.

Iran has had a bad time, as the violent groups it wings and funds have been crushed or weakened, one by one, by Israel: Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and Iran’s personal forces in Syria. Putin was unable to send planes or soldiers to Syria because Russia’s forces are so stretched out by the conflict in Ukraine.

If both sides are losing, both are now putting forward conditions for peace talks, which both must know are unrealistic. Putin made the claim at his annual press conference on December 19 that he was open to compromise, but that the end result of negotiations must be the complete reversal of Russia’s territorial claims.

Zelenskyy insisted at a meeting with EU and NATO leaders in Brussels on the same day that a peace deal could only be reached if the US received a security guarantee and Ukraine received a NATO membership in the future.

Negotiations always begin with extravagant, unrealistic claims. The most likely scenario is that if real discussions do occur next year, there will be stronger bargaining positions in Ukraine than in Russia, but that President Zelensky will have to step down in order for Ukraine to get the best possible outcome.

Trump will enter office with a Russia that has been weakened by Syria, no longer has a strong ally in Iran, and will look an easy target for a self-declared deal-maker like him to push around, which makes its position look more likely to be stronger.

If, between now and late January, Ukraine’s intelligence agencies and military forces can pull off more surprises like their Moscow assassinations, Russia will look all the weaker. Trump will be aware that he can use Putin’s authorization to launch long-range Ukrainian strikes [or continued weapons deliveries ] as a bargaining chip.

Trump will go a long way in favor of allowing Ukraine to join NATO, or even to aspire to join, because it goes against his long-held desire for America to lessen its responsibilities to defend Europe.

He won’t interfere with European NATO members ‘ offering Ukraine security guarantees, but whether Germany, France, the UK, Italy, or Poland will feel compelled to do so must be a subject for debate.

President Zelensky has played a heroic role in Ukraine’s fight for survival. Although he continues to enjoy a lot of support, the country’s martial law continues as a result of the invasion of 2022, which required the waiver of any presidential elections scheduled for April 2024. This enables Putin to assert that Zelensky’s position is unsupported, and that no peace agreement could be reached.

Which opens the door to a final act of heroism: that Zelensky could choose to announce his retirement in order to demonstrate what a resilient democracy it really is by holding presidential elections in which he would not run.

Nobody can dispute Zelensky’s and his family’s right to a holiday and a respectable retirement.

This is the English translation of an article La Stampa published in Italian that was originally published in English on Bill Emmott’s Global View. It is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

Biden’s arms dump won’t ease Taiwan’s Trump trepidation – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

China has firmly objected to US President Joe Biden’s approval of Taiwan’s$ 571.3 million in security funding and service, accusing the country of “playing with fire” with its most recent donation of military equipment and services. &nbsp, &nbsp,

Individually, the US Defense Department announced that it approved$ 295 million fair of military equipment for Taipei in response to rising regional conflicts, which many people believe could become the center of global political conflicts with the anticipated ending of the Ukraine war under the approaching Donald Trump administration.

The$ 571 million in military assistance tops up Biden’s authorization of$ 567 million for the same purposes in late September. In October, He approved$ 2 billion in arms sales to Taiwan, including the first-time distribution of an advanced surface-to-air missile defense system.

A statement from the Chinese Foreign Ministry, which was released on Sunday ( December 22 ), urged the US to stop arming Taiwan and stop making what it called “dangerous moves that undermine peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.”

China’s largest maritime drills around Taiwan since 1996 have resulted in the most recent US military package, with the People’s Liberation Army ( PLA ) stationing more than 90 warships in nearby waters stretching from the East China Sea to the Taiwan Straits and South China Sea.

The Taiwanese foreign ministry stated in a statement that “taiwan and the United States will continue to work closely together on safety issues to preserve stability, peace, and the status quo across the Taiwan Strait.”

Due to the sensitivity of the situation, Taipei declined to provide information on the” content” of the assistance “based on the tacit agreement between Taiwan and the United States.”

The stakes don’t get higher. A lately released report by the US Pentagon has warned that China has “amplified” its full-spectrum force on Taiwan over the past month, underscoring Beijing’s danger to “reunify” the area with the island.

War drum

Xi Jinping, the country’s most powerful chief, apparently instructed the Army to be prepared to launch a successful conquest of Taiwan by 2027, if needed.

If Trump follows through on his pledge to impose 60 % tariffs on all Chinese products, a move that would put pressure on China’s now troubled economy and potential ruling Communist Party, as well. &nbsp,

If something, China is determined to create a “world-class” defense that can rival America’s by 2049. With a defence resources of$ 450 billion, China is well positioned to focus its extremely powerful army features on its own garden, such as the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait.

Now in possession of the world’s largest military, with as many as 395 battleforce ships to travel on vapor next year, China is also deploying&nbsp, DF-27 anti-ship nuclear missiles that could drastically harm America’s military presence in the Western Pacific, including the proper outpost of Guam. &nbsp,

Washington has the obligation to help prevent any forcible takeover of the self-ruling island nation in accordance with the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, despite adhering to a “one China” policy that calls for Beijing to be the diplomatic representative of the so-called” Greater China.”

Even if the two parties no longer have a mutual defense pact, Biden has repeatedly pledged to come to Taiwan’s defense in the event of a conflict with China.

However, there are some concerns about the incoming Trump administration’s desire to support Taiwan’s defense and even consider entering a potential grand bargain with China at the expense of Taiwan’s self-proclaimed sovereignty and regional partners ‘ security.

By signing a Reciprocal Access Agreement (RAA ), which would increase military interoperability and strengthen a joint response to any significant emergency in the area, including over Taiwan, US allies Japan and the Philippines have accordingly doubled down on their own defense cooperation.

Key regional players are hedging their bets ahead of a potentially disruptive second Trump presidency, while hoping for continuity in America’s China policy.

Far from a passive actor, Taiwan is preparing for all eventualities. The self-governing island nation is increasing its imports of cutting-edge American weapons systems after ratifying a record$ 20 billion defense budget in August.

This month, Taiwan received the first batch of 38 M1A2T Abrams tanks, underscoring its preparation for a possible all-out of war, including attrition warfare, in the near future.

Midway through December, the new American-made tanks were delivered to the Armor Training Command in Hsinchu County, southwest of Taipei. For next year, Taiwan is planning to allocate NTD70.6 billion ($ 2.2 billion ) for the acquisition of new US-made platforms.

Atop Taiwan’s shopping list, according to a proposal submitted by Taiwan’s legislature, are 100 Harpoon land-based missile systems, 66 F-16V fighter jets, 29 HIMARS rocket systems and a total of 108 M1A2T Abrams tanks.

” Taipei has signed contracts with the US for 21 procurement projects, totaling NT$ 716.6 billion, with final payments scheduled to be made in 2031″, Taiwan’s defense ministry said last month.

” Of this total, approximately NT$ 373.1 billion has already been paid, while NT$ 343.5 billion remains unpaid and will be disbursed according to the payment schedule”, the ministry added. Next year, Taiwan is allocating up to NT$ 70.6 billion on portable short-range air defense missiles and radar system upgrades.

Taiwan has historically adopted a “porcupine strategy,” which would significantly increase the cost of any full-scale invasion by the Asian superpower given its power asymmetry with China. &nbsp,

Thanks to Taiwan’s sophisticated industries, robust defense budget and acquisition of modern weapons systems from the West, some military experts have proposed a “honey badger” strategy, which relies on a more proactive and” smart” deployment of state-of-the-art platforms to foil any Chinese invasion.

A second Trump presidency, however, introduces new uncertainties to US support for that strategy. Trump has stated abundantly that he favors allies shouldering more of their own defense expenses and paying more for US “protection.”

In fairness, Trump’s first term is fondly remembered in Taipei, a period that saw a historic phone call between then-Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen and Trump, a rapid expansion in high-level contacts and joint visits, and Taipei’s purchase of$ 18 billion worth of US weapons,$ 4 billion more than the combined two terms of the Obama administration.

Trump is expected to take a more “isolationist” stance in light of rising public outcry in the United States over the massive funding of the Ukraine war, especially since he won’t be restrained by veteran and more multilateralist generals.

Trump has gone so far as to criticize Taiwan’s alleged underspending for its own defense throughout the year and has adopted more blatantly transactional language on foreign policy. ( Taiwan spends around 2.5 % of annual GDP on defense. ) Trump has referred to as” stupid” any military action that might lead to a war with China.

Trump stated in an interview earlier this year that he would “never say” whether America would stand by Taiwan and that he would maintain a” good relationship” with Chinese President Xi. ” I never say because I have to negotiate things ]with China ], right”? Trump stated this in an interview with Kristen Welker, a Meet the Press host on NBC.

Taiwan is reportedly cautious of the influence of influential figures in Trump’s plans, including billionaire Elon Musk, who has significant business interests in China. He has parodied Beijing’s position by calling Taiwan an “integral part of China.” &nbsp,

” I think most people are anxious…Because of Trump’s unpredictability, we don’t know if Taiwan will be safer or more dangerous under his second term”, Chen Ming-chi, a former senior advisor to Taiwan’s National Security Council, told the media.

Dealing with Trump

Likely to Trump’s liking, Taiwan is reportedly mulling a$ 15 billion weapons package in the coming years. But, according to a report by the Cato Institute, a Washington-based think tank, Taiwan has yet to receive$ 20.53 billion worth of military equipment from the US due to production and delivery delays. In the past year, the Pentagon has already been stretched by significant arms transfers to Israel and Ukraine.

According to prominent Taiwanese defense expert Shu Hsiao-Huang, an associate research fellow at the Institute for National Defense and Security Research,” some new equipment encountered integration issues, which required system adjustments to meet customer demands.” This was in response to competing demands from conflicts elsewhere, making it difficult to obtain key US-made weapons like Stinger missiles.

At the same time, US regional allies are also preparing for potential contingencies. Japan has consented to reorganize US forces in Japan into a larger joint force headquarters under the US Indo-Pacific Command ( INDOPACOM) in Hawaii.

A Joint Operations Command is also being established by the Japanese Self-Defense Forces ( JSDF) to better coordinate with the consolidated INDOPACOM.

In response to growing concerns among US allies about a potential Taiwan war, Japan is expanding its cooperation with the Philippines. The Philippine Senate finally approved a visiting forces agreement-style pact after years of negotiations, which highlights growing strategic convergence between the two key US allies.

The Philippine Senate said in a statement that “ratifying the agreement further affirms the strategic partnership between the two countries and their shared goal of enhancing contributions to regional and international peace, security, and stability.

For his part, Japan’s ambassador to Manila, Kazuya Endo, emphasized how the new pact will “facilitate the implementation of cooperative activities between the forces of the two countries, further promote security and defense cooperation, and firmly support peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region”.

Trump and Taiwan were not directly mentioned by either side, but both are actively preparing for a new era of strategic uncertainty and hot great power rivalry closer to home than under Biden, as with other important US allies in the region.

Follow Richard Javad Heydarian on X at @Rich Heydarian

Continue Reading

Germany’s AfD is the key to European defense – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

You may shut down the Biden Administration’s flailing German nut gallery, President Trump, for the sake of dealing with the clutter in Ukraine. Your friends and allies in Europe want to bear the cost of their own protection, but they don’t want to waste any of the money and run the risk of World War III in Ukraine. Getting a quick peace in Ukraine, a conflict that no reasonable European would want to fight, and allow the New Right’s sovereigntist parties to uproot the globalist Left. Contrary to the Brussels progressives cowering behind the skirts of Mother America, they believe in their states and may fight for their protection.

Without an arrangement to keep Ukraine balanced and out of NATO, the conflict didn’t end. The Deep State will try to persuade you that Russia is bleeding up and prepared to slide, and that NATO cannot afford to rear down on a potential Ukraine account. The opposite is true: Europe’s capacity to defend itself depends on the restoration of populism and the rise of the right-wing sovereigntist events. Freeze the conflict and grant a political victory to European revolutionaries whose motto is” Make Europe Great Again.”

A&nbsp, new poll&nbsp, found most Germans probably doesn’t fight to defend their region, and that two-fifths doesn’t battle under any circumstances. Most impressive is the break by party involvement. The most fervent supporter of the Ukraine War was Germany’s Green Party, but only 9 % of its supporters, the lowest percentage of any group by party affiliation, said they would personally take up arms to defend their nation. Led by the foolish, malapropism-prone Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, the Greens behave like the European branch of the Biden State Department.

Supporters of the Alternative für Deutschland ( AfD ), the conservative upstart party currently polling at 20 % of the vote, made up the majority of those who were ready to fight for their country. In a&nbsp, more recent poll, 68 % of AfD members said they would defend their country” with a weapon in their hand” if Germany were attacked, compared to just 22 % of Green Party supporters.

The Washington Blob confuses the “let’s you and him fight” war celebration with the sovereigntists who are willing to stand up for their nation but don’t want to see anything wrong with the Blob’s failed attempt to invade Ukraine.

The Continental war party pledged both their life nor their sacred pride ( they don’t have any ), but rather their careers, base grants, scholarships, and consulting gigs on the Ukraine War. They began their careers with the dual goal of expanding NATO to the Soviet border and mocking Western institutions as federal organizations.

The nationalist wave that started last year with Geert Wilders ‘ unexpected victory in the Netherlands hit Western liberals hard. It continued through previous September’s state elections in Germany, the regional elections in the Czech Republic, the Freedom Party’s first-place end in Austria, and the decline of the European state. But even so, the country’s liberals may struggle to the last Ukrainian to keep their social protections.

Western liberals are aware that their symbolic heads will roll if their substitute war breaks out. They have no action other than to maintain the conflict going as long as possible. And they are doing it by attempting to discredit Americans with a focused propaganda campaign. The American Ministry of Defense and the Pentagon, for instance, allege that Russia has taken 600, 000 deaths in the Ukraine War, and is losing 1, 000 to 2, 000 men a day in the current battle. The 600,000-plus figure was also spotted in a Trump social media post next week.

The most extensive databases on Russian casualties, &nbsp, Mediazona, counts 82, 000 Russian killed, which it calculated by scraping data from death presentations and social media posts. The number may rise to 120, 000 if a quantitative analysis of excess deaths were used. Assuming three crippled for every man killed, Russian deaths are good anywhere between 246, 000 and 360, 000.

A senior US official who tracks Ukrainian battle casualties observes:

Ukrainian casualties from separate sources are not as closely monitored as Russian deaths, but anecdotal reports and works on graves suggest that the number is higher than those from Kyiv, London, or Washington, DC, according to empirical reports. Estimates run between 105, 000 and 160, 000 KIA (killed in action ). Using the same ratios for KIA to WIA, this places total Ukrainian casualties at between 105, 000 KIA, and 365, 000 WIA ( wounded in action ), or 470, 000 total casualties, to 160, 000 KIA and 640, 000 WIA, or 800, 000 total casualties.

During the course of the war, Russia experienced about 9, 000 causalities. More than 100, 000 Russian soldiers face&nbsp, formal charges of abandonment, and the real number is twice that. According to NATO knowledge sources, forty-twenty-eight thousand Ukrainians have been killed or injured while defending&nbsp, an intrusion into Russian place close to Kursk, and the nation has now lost half of the place it gained in the August 2024 attack.

The events that make up Europe’s sovereigntist celebrations are aware of this and want to end the conflict right away. The AfD supports a negotiated option and wants to stop arms sales to Ukraine. It is labeled as a neo-Nazi homage by the establishment push, and it has been quarantined by tradition parties with a small portion of its voting base. The Greens, represented by Annalena Baerbock and Economics Minister Robert Habeck, are surprisingly Germany’s most vocal war eagles. Though they didn’t battle for their own country, they want to fight the war to the last Ukrainian.

Next February, President-elect Trump told a South Carolina march, “NATO was busted until I came on,” sending ripples through the German Establishment. I said,’ Everybody’s gonna earn.’ They said,’ Well, if we don’t give, are you still going to protect us?’ I said,’ Totally never.’ They don’t believe the answer”.

Trump claimed that “one of the leaders of a large state” once inquired whether the US had also support Ukraine if Russia invaded the country, even if they “don’t pay.”

” No, I do not protect you”, Trump recalled. In truth, I would encourage them to accomplish whatever they please. You got to pay. You got to pay your payments”.

That sparked a frenzy of protests against Trump, who was accused of inviting Russia to attack Western Europe. But that’s not what he said: Trump maintained that Europe may justify itself. It used to. In 1989 Germany fielded 12 battle-ready groups, 3, 000 primary challenge tank, and a fierce soldier army that may remain off the Warsaw Pact. It doesn’t have a second battle-ready sector today. And Angela Merkel’s government eliminated recruitment in 2011 at the top of post-Cold War confidence.

The single German social group that explicitly supports reviving it is the AfD, which is in Germany. Its location papers, obtainable on the party site, says:

Military support is virtuous services. It should not be understood as a violation of a citizen’s fundamental rights initially, but as a civic duty to defend peace and security and ensure the stability of our nation’s politics. Conscription has had a significant impact on this relationship in just a few times because the federal army should be established in society.

The AfD, like the ruling parties of Hungary, Slovakia and Serbia, is never afraid of fighting. Because the Ukraine War is meaningless and insurmountable, it opposes it. Germany’s Greens, by contrast, &nbsp, oppose enlistment — in Germany, that is. They’re all for enlistment in Ukraine. However, Germany’s Social Democrats and Christian Democrats believe it might be wise to revisit the concept of conscription in the near future, but they didn’t say anything at the moment or in any important time frame.

Some Brussels hawks have floated the idea of&nbsp, German conscription&nbsp, to provide men for Ukraine, a request denounced by Hungary’s Foreign Minister, who declared,” We do not like Hungarian young folks dragged into the Ukrainian-Russian battle front. This is not our conflict”. Another issue is the regional recruitment to protect the nation’s borders.

Maligned as an extremist border party, the AfD stands to receive 20 % of the ballot in Germany’s February 23 regional elections. In three Eastern European states that held the elections in September, its candidates received about 30 % of the votes. Olaf Scholz’s Social Democrats are running at just 17 % of the vote, and the Greens, who had 20 % of the vote in Germany’s last national election, are at just 11.5 %. The AfD supports strict immigration handles, tax breaks, and the end of the Ukrainian War right away. Its perspective of Ukraine is the same as that of Hungary’s Viktor Orban, whom Trump has consulted frequently.

The AfD is the most popular gathering among Germany’s 18-24 year-olds. Its concept is that being German is acceptable. Maximilian Krah, a part of the European Parliament who is currently running for a Bundestag chair, delivered that information on TikTok. ” One in three young German gentlemen doesn’t include a girl. Are you one of them”? he asked in one picture. ” Don’t watch movie, don’t vote for the Greens, get out into the new air…. True men have principles, real people are patriots — and that’s how you find a girl”.

True gentlemen, the AfD claims, are willing to defend their land. If the United States wants companions instead of toys, it may consider them among Europe’s sovereigntist events.

Continue Reading

Waymo self-driving taxis coming to Tokyo – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, Technology

In the largest metropolitan market for autonomous driving outside China, Waymo has announced plans to introduce its self-driving vehicles to Tokyo in earlier 2025, beating Chinese manufacturers to the limit and taking Tesla’s robot ad.

This past week the Alphabet ( Google ) subsidiary revealed a partnership with Nihon Kotsu, the top taxi and limousine service company in Tokyo, and GO, Japan’s most popular taxi app. The maintenance and maintenance of Waymo cars will be handled by Nihon Kotsu. GO provides easy-to-understand guidance in English.

Second, Nihon Kotsu owners will run Waymo’s cars mechanically to chart the key areas of the city – the heavily traveled and often visited districts of Shinjuku-ku, Shibuya-ku, Minato-ku, Chiyoda-ku, Shinagawa-ku and Koto-ku.

The automatic Jaguar I-PACE autonomous cars will then take their first street excursion outside the US.

Waymo boasts. The business goes on to explains:” The Waymo vehicle is our autonomous driving tech that always gets crazy, tired or distracted”, Waymo boasts. ” We prioritize health and are wary of our footprints every time we test the Waymo Driver in locations far from where we usually operate.” The business describes its process as follows:

First, we transport a little fleet of vehicles carrying the Waymo Driver to a new town. Testing warships are limited and are not accessible to the general public. The vehicles can start driving independently after the Waymo Driver has an understanding of the landscape. People specialists give our executive teams feedback on the driving experience during these trips and highlight novelnuances that may arise from operating in new areas.

Together, our engineering team can analyze the Waymo Driver’s efficiency in a virtual replica of the new location to determine how it generalizes. Our teams continue improving the Waymo Driver’s abilities and support experience using the new insights and learnings gained during this time.

Driving in dozens of different locations over the years has helped shape the capabilities and design of our detecting technology, enhance Waymo Driver’s efficiency in the cities where we now operate, and safely transfer our technologies to new locations.

Enjoy a picture of a Waymo vehicle moving through traffic here. &nbsp,

Tokyo’s road map is quite complex and, like the British, the Chinese pull on the left-hand side of the road. This may require some adjusting. However, Waymo would be able to qualify its knowledge from Tokyo to London and other major cities, such as Delhi and Mumbai, where they drive left.

Waymo has a somewhat low injury rate, with about one incident resulting in harm per million miles of travelling, as noted by computer professor Timothy Lee.

In Waymo’s estimation, compared with the average human driver over 25 million miles of driving in Phoenix and San Francisco, the Waymo Driver had 81 % fewer airbag deployment crashes, 72 % fewer injury causing crashes and 57 % fewer police-reported crashes. So far, no fatalities have been reported.

But Waymo Driver does make mistakes. Last June, while on the way to pick up a passenger in Phoenix, a Waymo self-driving taxi crashed into a telephone pole. The company recalled all 672 autonomous vehicles it was using at the time for a software update, but no one was hurt. Additionally, 444 vehicles were earlier this year and 2 vehicles were recalled in December 2023 for software updates.

Waymo vehicles were involved in 17 crashes and five other instances of potential violations of traffic safety in the six months leading up to 2024. There were no injuries reported.

According to an analysis of US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA ) data made by Craft Law Firm, a total of&nbsp, 3, 979 accidents&nbsp, involving autonomous vehicles were reported between 2019 and June 17, 2024. After more than doubling to 1, 450 in 2022, the number dropped to 1, 353 in 2023 and was down to 473 in the first half of 2024, demonstrating that safety has improved while the number of autonomous and semi-autonomous vehicles on the road, and the number of miles driven, has greatly increased.

In October 2024, Waymo reported that its self-driving taxis were providing more than 150, 000 paid rides per week– up from about 100, 000 in August and 50, 000 last May – over a total distance of more than one million miles.

Of the 3, 979 accidents reported to the NHTSA, Tesla accounted for 2, 146, Waymo for 415, GM for 219, Cruise for 187, Honda for 155, and Subaru, Toyota, Ford, BMW, Kia, Hyundai, Mercedes-Benz and some 40 other companies for the remainder. Cruise was sold to GM in 2016 and discontinued in December 2024. This was also a setback for Honda, which had collaborated with GM to create self-driving vehicles and had invested in Cruise.

According to a report from the iSeeCars website, Tesla has the highest fatal accident rate among US automakers, according to a study by the iSeeCars website. There is even a tesladeaths .com website, which says it “is a record of Tesla accidents that involved a driver, occupant, cyclist, motorcyclist, or pedestrian death, whether or not the Tesla or its driver were at fault”, with” as much related crash data as possible”. The website, which was updated on October 20, notes 51 fatalities related to Tesla Autopilot and two related to FSD ( Full Self-Driving ).

This is important because, as The Wall Street Journal reported in August,” Since 2021, Tesla has reported over 1, 200 crashes related to its driver assistance system called Autopilot to federal regulators”, and the NHTSA has “tied at least 14 fatalities to the tech]nology ]. However, because NHTSA’s reports are heavily redacted, it’s been difficult for the public to comprehend the significance of Autopilot in crashes. Important details like the crash narrative and even the precise date are omitted from public reports because Tesla views information about Autopilot as proprietary.

In the US, Waymo’s self-driving taxis are currently operating in Phoenix, San Francisco and Los Angeles, with commercial service in Austin, Atlanta and Miami scheduled to start in 2025. In Austin, a limited test service began in October.

Tesla’s much-hyped robotaxi, which it also calls Cybercab, probably won’t be on the road until late 2026 at the earliest. Elon Musk, CEO, announced the product’s release date in October, saying it would be “before 2027.” Cybercab has been driving Tesla’s stock price higher, but not much else. Furthermore, Tesla has been in Japan since 2014, but there are very few of its vehicles on the road.

A Japanese company called Turing is also developing autonomous driving software that is “equipped with human-like knowledge and decision-making capabilities” and uses neural networks to convert camera images directly into driving commands to enable a self-driving vehicle to travel anywhere and under any circumstances.

Turing is working on generative AI that “directly issues driving instructions from camera images… without using many sensors or high-precision maps.” He believes that “what is necessary for autonomous driving is not good eyes but a good brain. Its current biggest challenge appears to be catching up with and keeping up with Waymo.

Follow this writer on&nbsp, X: @ScottFo83517667

Continue Reading

Beijing slams Pentagon’s new ‘China threat’ narrative – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

After the release of the annual China Military Power Report ( CMPR ) by the US Department of Defense, Beijing has criticized Washington for spreading a” China threat” narrative.

The People’s Liberation Army ( PLA ) is prioritizing the development of artificial intelligence ( AI ) capabilities because it thinks AI is influencing the next wave of military affairs, according to the most recent CMPR. The statement said that, by 2030, the PLA expects to subject a range of “algorithmic war” and “network-centric war” features operating at different rates of human-machine connectivity.

” Analytic war” is characterized by the use of AI-related approaches in real-world operating conditions. It intends to reduce the number of warfighters who are in danger, quicken decision-making in time-sensitive activities, and operate when and where people are unable to do so. &nbsp,

” Network-centric warfare”, which is different from the traditional platform-centric war, highlights the use of information technology in fights. The US Department of Defense was the first to adopt the phrase in the 1990s. &nbsp, &nbsp,

The CMPR report also said the Chinese defense industry and universities are developing quantum imaging, navigation and radar applications to enhance intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance ( ISR ) capabilities, including position, navigation and timing ( PNT ). &nbsp,

Judging from the buildout of China’s classical communication system, it said, the PLA does leverage integrated quantum networks and quantum important distribution to promote command, control and communications systems.

” This statement, like the ones we’ve seen before, lays much focus on facts. According to Lin Jian, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, the” China threat” narrative is filled with discrimination and intended to intensify the United States ‘ desire to maintain military dominance.

We urge the US to abandon its dominant and Cold War mentality, view China’s strategic intentions and defense development objectively and rationally, and quit issuing this kind of irresponsible reports year after year, he said. &nbsp,

He argued that Washington should ensure that what it does contributes to a stable relationship between the two forces and nations.

” The statement speculated on and smeared China’s nuclear power and hyped up the’ China risk ‘ rhetoric”, Zhang Junshe, a Taiwanese military analyst, told the Global Times in an interview. ” But at the same period, it took the trouble to share the PLA’s deficits in long-range administrative support and additional capabilities”.

He claimed that the US military was judging other people by their own standards because it believes China may use aircraft carriers in the South China Sea in a dominant manner, similar to what US aircraft carriers have been doing globally. &nbsp, &nbsp,

Energy plan

In the event of a protracted military conflict in the Western Pacific, the People’s Republic of China ( PRC ) would likely have to meet the demand for hydrocarbons from its civil and industrial populations. &nbsp,

The PRC may become cut off from a sizable portion of its oil exports if a military fight consisted of a naval blockade, according to the report. ” The PRC’s interest in ensuring trusted, cost-effective and various oil sources to support its economic growth drives its overseas power opportunities”.

According to Zhang,” This new portion of the CMPR demonstrates that the US will launch military strikes against China in the Western Pacific in the future, launch offensives against China’s electricity supply lines, and attempt to shut China’s electricity supply off.” ” This is something that deserves our attention”.

Lü Xiang, a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said China’s defense buildup is defense, not unpleasant and aggressive. He claimed that the US views the PLA as a” risk” because it can fight when it interferes with China-related matters in the region.

According to Xin Qiang, assistant director of the Center for American Studies at Fudan University, US officials and military-industrial complicated members are making fictitious foes to increase martial spending so they can profit from it. &nbsp,

Taiwan concerns

The CMPR cited fraud and a lack of real-world fight experience as some of the PLA’s flaws. &nbsp,

A senior US defence official told the media in a lecture on December 16 that while the US does not believe a war in the Taiwan Strait is immediate or unavoidable, it is not possible that the Chinese army will be able to invade Taiwan by 2027. &nbsp,

” We have punishment currently that’s true and solid. The standard noted that Chinese President Xi Jinping has reiterated his commitment to the 2027 step for modernizing the PRC’s military forces.” We’re doing a lot to keep it that way. &nbsp,

We take note of the fact that the PLA’s significant fraud issues, which are still unsolved, was” slow them down” in the development of 2027 capabilities and beyond. In terms of the probable effects of corruption on the PLA’s ability to reach those goals, I believe that’s our opinion.

Separately, the cheerful US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in an event on December 18 that Taiwan is “everyone’s company” as a crisis over Taiwan may include global repercussions.

” China says every time the word Taiwan comes up: Do not even notice it, it is no one’s business but our own”, he said. ” What we have been able to do is to open the eyes of almost the entire world to the fact that, no, fundamentally] Taiwan ] is everyone’s business.

He claimed that Taiwan supplies 70 % of the country’s semiconductors, and that the waters that surround the area account for the majority of international shipping. &nbsp,

“A Pentagon official said the PLA lacks the ability to liberate Taiwan but the official failed to prove the deficiencies of the Chinese army,” Bi Dianlong, a Chinese columnist specializing in Taiwan concerns, says in an article published on December 20. “It’s now a US report comparing the military between China and the US. In the eyes of Americans, even if the PLA cannot catch up with the US army, they are at least in a similar range.” 

The Americans don’t feel that mainland China would actually take action, according to Bi, who said that they don’t consider the PLA can occupy Taiwan. More than 100 vessels have lately been deployed as part of the PLA’s drilling in the first area network. This demonstrates that we are determined to bring Taiwan together.

It’s unclear whether the US do help Taiwan if a war breaks out in the Taiwan Strait. &nbsp,

An unknown Chinese official told AFP that Beijing sent about 60 vessels and 30 coast guard ships to the region from the southeastern islands of Japan to the South China Sea on December 11. &nbsp,

The Chinese military’s sea training, the biggest in recent years, came after Taiwan’s President Lai Ching-te had a two-day US stay in Hawaii during his Pacific journey in early December. &nbsp,

Read: Second salvo of a Russia-China trade conflict

Continue Reading

Reopening India’s Pyongyang embassy brings strategic opportunities – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

After a three-year hiatus, India just resumed its diplomatic presence in Pyongyang. This shift, occurring in the context of North Korea’s growing military features and its strengthening partnerships with Russia, China and Iran, underscores India’s expanding foreign policy objectives.

It even complies with India’s” Act East” strategy and serves as a reflection of its larger strategic goals in Northeast Asia and above. However, the decision has repercussions for India’s placement within BRICS and its growing effect in global politics.

India’s relationship with North Korea, officially known as the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea ( DPRK), has been shaped by a complex mix of historical, ideological and geopolitical factors. India maintained diplomatic relations with both North and South Korea during the Cold War, demonstrating its non-aligned approach. Although the relationship with North Korea was not particularly near, India has occasionally provided support to Pyongyang through business, primarily in the form of food and medical supplies.

Relations, however, have been strained at times according to North Korea’s nuclear development activities. North Korea’s nuclear assessments and missile launches have been constantly condemned by India, which supports international efforts to reunify the Korean Peninsula. Despite these difficulties, India has maintained a level of cooperation, acknowledging the crucial role that speech and politics play in promoting regional stability.

The Indian Embassy’s reopening in Pyongyang is a crucial step in world politics. This Hindu   move appears to have been influenced by a number of new factors. In order to boost economic and geopolitical assistance, India’s” Act East” plan emphasizes strengthening ties with countries in East and Southeast Asia. Although North Korea is not a standard companion in this context, working with Pyongyang gives India a greater role in provincial affairs. This proposal also demonstrates India’s commitment to maintaining balance in the Asian Peninsula, a crucial region in Asia.

Regional and global security are in considerable danger as a result of North Korea’s advancements in missile technology and nuclear abilities. By maintaining a diplomatic presence in Pyongyang, India may acquire valuable insights into the military developments of North Korea and the growing security cooperation between Russia, China, and Iran. This data is crucial for India’s strategic planning, especially in reducing the chance that hostile technologies will reach its hostile claims.

India is given an additional proper motivation by North Korea’s near ties with Russia and China, two key people in the BRICS, to engage in Pyongyang. India may strengthen its position within the BRICS by fostering relations with North Korea, embracing this relationship to counter Western influence, and proclaim its position as a mediator in international conflicts. This relationship is in line with the broader goals of the BRICS, which are to promote multipolarity and promote growth in the Worldwide South.

Relevance for India’s regional and global plan

India has long expressed concern about North Korea’s close ties to hostile nations, especially those that pose strategic threats to India’s regional security. India is better talk its positions on pressing issues to the North Korean authority by maintaining political presence there.

This occurrence gives people the chance to talk and offers a chance to understand India’s position on issues of shared interest and concern. Establishing these communication channels plays a significant role in developing a deeper understanding of India’s protection objectives within the political framework of North Korea.

Additionally, this proposal gives India a unique opportunity to establish personal relationships with North Korean officials, which is essential for fostering trust and reciprocity. These ties can be a powerful barrier, reducing the likelihood that North Korea may give India’s adversaries arms or highly sensitive technology.

This proper awareness supports India’s wider devotion to non-proliferation, strengthening its efforts to stop the spread of nuclear and missile technologies while advancing its dreams to take a leading position in international arms control initiatives. By establishing itself as a key player in the promotion of stability and security in the region and past, India positions itself as a more active participant in North Korea’s political landscape.

India has a greater chance of gaining more proper leverage from its interactions with other big powers and important regional players by cooperating with North Korea. India benefits from fostering discourse with Pyongyang in addition to strengthening its collaborations with South Korea and Japan, both of which are crucial allies in the Indo-Pacific, as well as positioning itself as a responsible and strategic global professional.

India’s relationship with North Korea might offer as a testament to its ability to act as a stabilizing and balancing force in the region, promoting peace and lowering conflicts. This strategy aligns with India’s larger international policy goal of inciting a unipolar world order. By maintaining communication with countries across the spectrum, including those that are perceived as isolated or adversarial by others, this engagement would even demonstrate India’s political flexibility and its ability to navigate complicated geopolitical landscapes.

Also, India’s outreach to Pyongyang may enable it establish a distinct role in bridging the different interests of local stakeholders. For example, China’s partnership with North Korea centers on maintaining balance and strategic depth while South Korea and Japan emphasize denuclearization and protection. India, by maintaining a healthy discourse with Pyongyang, was subtly affect the integration of these interests, fostering a more cooperative atmosphere in the region.

From an economic standpoint, engaging North Korea could even open pathways for low-scale economic relations, technical assistance or social exchanges, further building India’s soft energy. These initiatives would need to be carefully calibrated to ensure they don’t offend international laws but still have long-term strategic benefits.

India’s constructive dialogue with North Korea could strengthen its political arsenal, strengthen its position as a stabilizing strength, and bolster its dedication to regional peace and development, all while strengthening and complementing its strategic alliances with South Korea, Japan, and other Indo-Pacific people.

In addition, India is uniquely positioned to contribute to efforts to bolstering peace on the Korean Peninsula because of its close ties with both North and South Korea. With the possibility of renewed peace talks under a future US administration, such as a second Trump presidency, India could act as a neutral mediator, leveraging its diplomatic ties to foster dialogue and confidence-building measures between the two Koreas.

Although North Korea’s economy remains isolated and heavily sanctioned, there is potential for limited economic and humanitarian cooperation. India’s expertise in agriculture and healthcare and its previous experience with providing humanitarian aid may provide opportunities for constructive dialogue. These initiatives could also promote mutual respect and trust between the two countries.

Challenges and&nbsp, new opportunities

India’s diplomatic outreach is impacted by North Korea, which also presents significant challenges and opportunities for it. Although working with Pyongyang can increase India’s strategic leverage, it must be done with caution and precision in order to navigate the complexity of both the global and regional landscapes.

Due to its nuclear weapons program, North Korea continues to be subject to stringent international sanctions. India’s engagement must strictly adhere to these restrictions in order to prevent the global community, particularly the United States and other major powers, from repercussions. India’s actions will need to align with its commitments to upholding international law and ensuring non-proliferation.

The secretive structure of North Korea poses a significant threat to ongoing diplomatic relations. India will need to be careful to ensure that its outreach does not unintentionally conflict with its strategic goals or have unintended effects.

India’s expanding cooperation with South Korea is a key component of its wider Indo-Pacific strategy and a fundamental component of its” Act East” strategy. South Korea remains deeply concerned about Pyongyang’s actions, particularly its nuclear ambitions and military provocations. India’s ties to North Korea must be carefully balanced in order to maintain their strong and expanding ties.

As the world’s largest democracy, India has a firm commitment to democratic values and institutions. This foundation limits the scope of India’s dialogue with North Korea, a country with a vastly different political system, without jeopardizing its democratic principles or its alliances with other world-leading democracies like the United States, Japan, South Korea, and Israel.

India can use its diplomatic standing and historical non-aligned position to promote peace and dialogue on the Korean Peninsula. By engaging with both North and South Korea, India can contribute to confidence-building measures and support efforts toward denuclearization.

With strong relations with both Koreas, China, and Russia, India is uniquely positioned to build long-term strategic partnerships in Northeast Asia. This engagement promotes India’s strategy of playing a significant role in regional and global affairs, making Asia more stable and secure.

India’s foreign policy priorities have shifted significantly with the decision to reopen its embassy in Pyongyang. By engaging with North Korea, India aims to enhance its regional influence, address proliferation concerns, and navigate the complex dynamics of major power relations. Given North Korea’s strategic alignment with Russia and China, this diplomatic outreach further strengthens India’s position within the BRICS, highlighting the value of proactive engagement with Pyongyang.

India’s renewed diplomatic efforts are poised to safeguard its interests on the Korean Peninsula and strengthen its influence in the region as a result of significant political shifts in South Korea.

Continue Reading

Division and purge: South Korea’s conservatives in deep trouble – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

There’s an old saying in North Korean politicians: rightists fall from fraud, while leftists collapse from section. Recently, however, these jobs appear to possess reversed.

Lee Jae-myung, the spokesman for the left-wing Democratic Party, is the subject of five individual trials involving allegations of corruption and believe breaches. He was found guilty of breaking election laws in November, which had, if upheld, prevent him from running for president in the upcoming vote. Cho Kuk, another important leftist politician, just lost his parliamentary seats after the world’s top prosecutor upheld his two-year jail sentence for bribery. Lee’s and Cho’s ladies have been convicted, both of misusing a business credit cards and scientific fraud.

Contrastingly, the impeachment of President Yoon Sok Yeol’s story highlights how determined conservatives are to protect their leader, even at the expense of significant division within the more conventional wing.

Numerous rumors have been circulating that 12 People Power Party ( PPP ) lawmakers gathered to support the motion following the anonymous vote on December 14 to remove Yoon. Three people abstained, and eight votes were invalidated. Assuming all criticism people endorsed the prosecution, 23 ruling party politicians diverged from their group’s official position of non-impeachment.

PPP Chairman Han Dong-hoon, who reversed his first position to recommend for Yoon’s prosecution, has since resigned amid the fallout from the latest issue – or, more accurately, Han was deposed by older members of his celebration.

As if this conflict weren’t enough, the ruling party is now using such terms as” rebels” to strike the few who defied group guidelines.

Pro-Yoon liberals ‘ antipathy to Han has strong roots. The now-resigned group president, once Yoon’s closest friend, generally adopted a vital attitude toward the government’s growing list of scandals, urging the chief executive to place his house in order. This rankled Yoon’s staunchest centurions.

The ruling group’s creation launched an offensive in July when Han took over as leader with unwavering support after serving for several decades as interim leader. The group’s “aristocratic clique”, as one journalist described the party, refused to let an observer like Han direct without resistance. Forging a coherent coalition was almost impossible for the beginner party chair due to persistent uncooperativeness and inner tensions.

However, outside the political arena, pro-Yoon Influencers and supporters unleashed a barrage of unsubstantiated and malignant rumors to destroy Han’s position. Frustrated by the continuous smear campaign, Han, at one place, consulted the president about disparaging strikes against him– to no avail.

Of course, Han is partly to blame for his regular flip-flopping posts, including his management of the latest tumult. But, no matter what Han did, the pro-Yoon party was determined to oppose him. The group’s top parliamentarians quickly moved to remove their main after Yoon’s impeachment motion was passed last week, as if waiting for the right moment.

Efforts to take and pity those who voted for Yoon’s prosecution are even intensifying. One PPP senator went so far as to call them “weasels who stabbed]the leader ] in the back”. Hong Jun-pyo, Mayor of Daegu and a dominant PPP part, has boldly demanded their ejection from the group.

There hasn’t been much reflection or important work to connect the ruling party in the awake of Yoon’s frequently criticized martial law gambit. Amid the ongoing infighting, the party’s approval ratings have plunged to 25.7 %, a record low since Yoon assumed office in May 2022. Almost 8, 000 people withdrew their PPP members between December 4 and December 15, according to the paper Kyunghyang.

The Pro-Yoon party is still operating as usual despite the waning people assistance and the looming uncertainty over Yoon’s life. The ruling group’s formation looks relieved to have suddenly toppled Han, replacing him with a familiar face, Kweon Seong-dong. The party’s another crusaders appear extremely pleased, shifting their focus to removing the disloyal members.

For political purges mirror the situations during former traditional President Park Geun-hye’s prosecution, as though they’d been lifted from the same rulebook.

A swath of lawmakers from the ruling Saenuri Party ( predecessor to PPP ) supported Park’s impeachership by parliament in December 2016. What ensued was a bitter clash between pro-Park and anti-Park factions, ultimately leading to numerous party defections.

The Constitutional Court officially removed Park from office in March. In May, a crucial election for president was held, allowing Moon Jae-in to retake the presidency. Those who were” selectively” labeled anti-Park were ruthlessly attacked and marginalized from mainstream politics.

The ruling PPP is expected to elect a new interim leader and move into emergency committee mode after weeks of unrest and self-inflicted wounds. Most likely, someone from the establishment or a person who is easily controlled by it will be chosen. The party may attempt to eject the 12 or 23 “betrayers” in an effort to consolidate control behind Yoon as he prepares for a constitutional court ruling, with some senior members reportedly maneuvering in the background.

A deeper analysis of the party’s faltering state and a commitment to bridging its internal divides are glaringly absent from the mainstream right-wing discourse. It appears that conservatives in South Korea have learned little from the most recent impeachment scandal, which almost destroyed their political existence.

Unabhängig of who may succeed him, the next president will resurrect a divided country. The cycle of blame and short-term turf war will persist. But for the pro-Yoon conservatives, without meaningful introspection and readiness to prioritize unity over factionalism, the same destructive patterns will continue to shape their future.

Continue Reading