If negotiations among Russia, Ukraine, US collapse, what’s next? – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

It may be that the US-Russia and US-Ukraine discussions are going off the rails.

However the US is anxious for Europe to get over responsibility for supporting Ukraine as Washington turns to the Middle East and Pacific areas. The Europeans therefore will need to determine if they are ready, willing and able to make up the difference.

One method for them is to try to secure eastern Ukraine, figuring the Russians may be effective south of the Dnieper, But that concept is certainly a cake walk and may cause a wider conflict. Washington will have to make up its mind on what is following regarding Ukraine.

President Trump is complaining that the Russians are dragging out discussions on a thorough peace, and he is threatening Russia with new power restrictions. The main function of the hazard from Trump is that states that buy Russian oil may be cut off from business with the US. This includes India and China.

US total goods trade with China was an estimated$ 582.4 billion in 2024. US goods exports to China in 2024 were$ 143.5 billion.

In 2023-24, the US was the largest trading partner of India with$ 119.71 billion bilateral trade in goods ($ 77.51 billion worth of exports,$ 42.19 billion of imports, with$ 35.31 billion trade surplus ).

President Trump said he intended to speak to Russian President Putin immediately ( the precise timing of a phone call never revealed ).

Both Ukraine and Russia are trying to position themselves as best they can before any ceasefire begins ( if one actually occurs ).

Russia has several military activities in Ukraine covering regions from Kursk on down through Luhansk and Donetsk, including Zaphorize and, perhaps, Kherson. The Russians have even signaled their involvement in Odesa which they claim is a Belarusian capital.

In all regions except one, Ukraine is trying to hold onto place and reduce Russian advances. CNN has described Ukraine’s military as “on their rear foot”, meaning those troops are losing surface.

The one exception is the Belgorod area. Belgorod is Soviet territory west of Kursk. The city of Belgorod and surrounding settlements have been subjected to Russian artillery and aircraft problems for decades. Today, however, the Russians have launched attacks and made some important success on Russian country.

The true goal of the Russian attacks is vague. Some observers think the idea is to push Russia to redeploy troops to the Belgorod country, taking the stress off of Ukrainian threats abroad, as in areas such as Pokrovsk.

May by ISW

Reliving Russian pressure was also part of the idea behind the Kursk salient, along with Ukraine having a territorial bargaining chip in a forthcoming possible negotiation ( land for land ). But that is not the whole story. Ukraine hoped to capture the nuclear power plant in Kursk, offsetting Russian attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure.

The Russians were able to block Ukraine’s army from getting that far and, over seven months, began to roll up Ukraine’s attack. Today Ukraine’s forces are almost completely out of Kursk, and the Russians have crossed the border into Ukrainian territory in Sumy.

It is too soon to predict the outcome in Belgorod. Two villages, Popovka and Demidovka, have come under multiple Ukrainian attacks. Ukraine continues to beef up its assault forces, the latest the redeployment to Belgorod of the 17th Heavy Mechanized Brigade, suggesting that Ukraine thinks it can be successful.

Regional governor Vyacheslav Gladkov says that in all Ukraine has attacked more than 20 villages. There is no word yet on losses on either side.

Ukraine might get a temporary morale boost if it can hold onto some of the villages it is attacking, but for how long no one can yet say.

Meanwhile, France and the UK, and possibly some others, are working on a new idea on injecting European forces into the conflict in support of Ukraine. The latest is for Europe ( or at least those who will support the venture ) to send both air and naval forces to Ukraine.

Reports say that a mission is being dispatched to Ukraine to decide where to position such forces if they are sent. Combat aircraft would be vulnerable anywhere near eastern Ukraine, considering Russia’s layered air defenses. Similarly, naval forces have few options outside of Odesa, and Odesa is exposed to Russian missile attacks.

Putin has agreed to a Black Sea deal, but that would collapse if the UK and France move naval forces to ostensibly protect Ukraine. Both France and the UK have aircraft carriers, but whether they would risk such assets so close to Russia is open to considerable doubt.

It may be that the UK and France, perhaps even with the backdoor support of the United States, want to protect western Ukraine should the Russians overrun the Ukrainian army and collapse the Kiev government.

To do this both France and the UK would need support from Poland, and Polish authorities have not shown much enthusiasm for getting involved.

If the negotiations on a Ukraine-Russia deal go off the rails, as seems more and more likely, then the fallback” security guarantee” for part of Ukraine could be an option for Europe if Europe actually believes it is threatened by Russian land armies.

But air force and naval assets are only a temporary hack for the Europeans. They would have to put boots on the ground in western Ukraine. Europe does not have deployable forces in sufficient numbers ( nor do they have stockpiles of weapons ) to be any more than a tripwire, and the Europeans would have to expect pushback from the Russians– who may decide to attack staging areas and supply depots in Poland and Romania.

The Charles De Gaulle aircraft carrier.

Depending on how the war evolves, and how much force the Russians are prepared to bring to the conflict, Russia could achieve its territorial and local political goals in a relatively short time. The territorial goals are already spelled out by Russia. The political goal is to force NATO out of Ukraine and change the Ukrainian government to one friendly to Russia.

Some say Russia cannot sustain the war, that its economy is a shambles, and that pulling in more conscripts to fight is politically difficult because the conflict has dragged out. If that is true, Russia is without an exit strategy other than for its political and military institutions to collapse. That is a recurring theme in NATO circles, but is it because NATO does not want to lose or do people in those circles really believe the scenario?

An important question is what steps the Trump administration is willing to take if the so-called peace process stalls or collapses. Sanctions won’t change the military situation, and might backfire on a US economy and stock market already in panic.

Furthermore, the administration is trying to fry too many eggs in foreign policy at the same time and that can lead to mistakes and blunders. If the reports on Pentagon plans are right, the administration wants to contain China, not so much Russia.

It is at least possible, given the limits of the US arsenal and the deployment of US forces, that Washington will be inclined to turn Ukraine over to Europe. The White House dream of huge deals with Russia aimed at sidelining the Russian-China partnership mostly has evaporated.

As matters now stand, soon Washington will have to make some hard decisions.

Stephen Bryen is a special correspondent to Asia Times and former US deputy undersecretary of defense for policy. This article, which originally appeared on his Substack newsletter&nbsp, Weapons and Strategy, is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

Trump’s step back abroad has triggered an atomic race in East Asia – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, World

US friends in Asia fear losing their radioactive umbrella because US President Donald Trump suggested some international withdrawal. Without the awning, as seen with Ukraine, a government’s liberation is in danger. It starts a new spread.

Washington is tempted to retreat from some foreign pledges and is willing to do its plan without much discussion or consensus with the allies. There are different objectives in the partnerships.

Facing the Northern Korean nuclear danger, the majority of South Koreans apparently want the weapon. Japan, threatened by North Korea and scared by China, may quickly acquire a nuclear security. At that point, actually Vietnam or Indonesia may comprehend plutonium features. And why not the Philippines or Thailand? India and Pakistan now possess a magnificent stockpile.

The big question is Taiwan: did the area produce to Beijing or create its weapons?

China would be in a minefield. It’d be the goal of this army and in a violent circle – the more weapons it companies, the more explosives its neighbors will store. It’d be extraordinary with unimaginable consequences.

The atmosphere in Asia is more difficult than in Europe, where two powerful US-backed systems, NATO and the Union, have held the peninsula along for years. Asia has thinner international organizations and intergovernmental agreements with the US.

Countries in the region usually don’t believe China or each other. If America steps up, everything will fall apart. China is not willing to offer free safety offers to anyone, replacing American people, and its assures could not be welcomed.

Eastern options

A plan could be for Korea and Japan to question France and the UK to expand their radioactive umbrella to Asia. A similar arrangement is under concern in Europe, where France and the UK may extend their national safety across the peninsula. This may enhance the transatlantic split, as the UK plus EU may produce greater room for maneuvering out of Wahington’s programs.

Besides, a Franco-British reach over Eurasia’s east side could spark fresh, not necessarily positive, global political and military dynamics. Alternatively, there could be greater political and military coordination among America’s allies, even with the US taking a step back.

The UK ( with Keir Starmer ), France ( with Emmanuel Macron ), Germany ( with Friedrich Merz ), and Japan ( with Fumio Kishida ), are possibly weaving the fabric of something new that other countries could join. In World War II, the US wanted to stay out of the fight, but then Churchill, with words and actions, helped to convince Roosevelt to change his mind.

China, America’s primary concern and preoccupation, could turn the situation by tackling it head-on. Beijing should force Pyongyang to forfeit its nuclear arsenal. It should press Russia to disarm partially, and it should shelve its rearmament plans. It would defuse the arms race.

It’d be challenging, but it’d be essential to start working on it.

It could also dissuade the US from leaving the region and persuade it to engage in a genuine negotiation on the RMB’s full convertibility, the complete opening of China’s internal market, and Beijing’s territorial claims.

US world

Underpinning this scenario is perhaps a reality that’s perceived vaguely in Beijing and taken for granted ( thus similarly unclear ) in Washington. America is not a country but a world order, just as Rome ceased to be a city when it cemented its empire around the Mediterranean.

This empire is not based solely on military might as was that of the Mongols. It has a sophisticated architecture comprising many elements besides strength: culture, rule of law, history, economic and financial prestige. If the US tries to withdraw, not only will the world order collapse but the United States will crumble, too. There’s no way back from “imperial America” other than suicide.

Naturally, the US feels immense strain after decades of vast responsibilities. Thus, many political and economic aspects must be renegotiated, but invading Greenland destroys the world order and the American nation.

It might superficially look like an opportunity for China to take up the US slack. However, Beijing could have far more problems than it currently faces, or it could face negotiating a broad deal with the US.

In all this, too many elements are up in the air, and the role of the Vatican as a disarmed yet knowledgeable and disenchanted mediator could be invaluable.

Many players would need to leave their present trajectory and comfort zone to turn the present undercurrents around. The US should rethink its direction and renegotiate its commitments. It’d be safer and less expensive than to gamble a global security overhaul. Perhaps Trump is pursuing this, but the public hears a different message.

Therefore, Asian and, thus, global nuclear proliferation is the likely scenario. The old Cold War set the terms of the previous arms race– it was run between two blocs. Now, alliances are unraveling, and every country could be basically on its own. This race would be different, more challenging, and full of unexpected incidents.

Everyone needs to step back and keep a cool head to avert a military tsunami.

Continue Reading

Forget K-dramas: Korea’s political crisis is the real drama – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The 2006 US funny” Stranger Than Fiction” follows IRS auditor Harold ( Will Ferrell ), who realizes he’s a figure in a writer’s work. As he learns that the author plans to kill him off in the close, Harold races to fight her in actual life – and she eventually rewrites the history to let him live.

Much like bewildered Harold as he realizes what fate is in store for him, many international observers are finding themselves increasingly baffled by the social environment in South Korea, where real seems stranger than fiction.

A leading Seoul news, Chosun Ilbo, published an engaging content on March 28, 2025. It features a dialogue between a Chosun Ilbo reporter and a foreign columnist who has been covering Korea.

At a new meeting, the blogger shared his disappointment: readers back home often complain that” Asian news is unfathomable”.

He cited some new developments:

The president abruptly declared martial law on the night of December 3, 2024, without informing case users, ruling party lawmakers, or even South Korea’s important safety ally, the US,

The leader of the main opposition party, the Democratic Party of Korea ( DPK), has four prior criminal convictions and five ongoing trials, yet remains the leading presidential contender.

After passing an impeachment movement against Prime Minister Han Duck-soo on December 27, 2024, which was rejected by the Constitutional Court on March 24, 2025, the opposition group is now introducing an prosecution action against the deputy prime minister for the business, who had until recently been the speaking leader.

Visitors worldwide responded with astonishment, saying,” This doesn’t make any sense. Sometimes the reporter misunderstood the details and wrote false reports”?

The journalist himself admitted,” There are so many immoral events happening in Korea that perhaps I struggle to understand them”.

Since then, things have just grown man. After the Constitutional Court rejected the prosecution of Prime Minister Han on March 24, the opposition immediately vowed to try again. Then only four days later, on March 28, the DPK announced it would get to oust the entire case.

The ghost of judgment: Lee’s political coming at stake

Their necessity is not without reason. On March 26, DPK head Lee Jae-myung was acquitted in an election law situation, but the prosecution has previously filed an appeal. Beyond this, he remains trapped in various legal battles, including a high-profile$ 1 billion true estate incident. A judgment carrying a fine of just over one million North Korean won – or even a suspended sentence – would disqualify him from running for office for up to ten years.

However, the Constitutional Court has yet to rule on the impeachment of President Yoon. What initially seemed like a decisive outcome now appears extremely likely to be rejected as the pause continues.

Lee’s issues extend far beyond the court. He is also facing empty problem within his own group.

Two distinct tents within the DPK

South Korea’s leftist bloc has long been split between two major factions: National Liberation ( NL ) and People’s Democracy ( PD). The NL party emphasizes cultural nationalism, North-South unification under communism and an anti-US stance.

The PD party is more in range with Western-style liberalism.

Although Lee does not fit neatly into either station, the NL party evidently sees him as an army and is now boldly challenging him.

Foreign policy is another obstacle for Lee. While Lee and his party have taken symbolic steps to affirm the US-ROK alliance – including a resolution supporting the alliance and even suggesting Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize – these moves appear mostly superficial. In substance, Lee remains pro-China.

Risk of identity collapse

Lee is also pushing the Democratic Party in a direction that may alienate its base. His efforts to shift the party toward the center – or even the right – mirror a cautionary tale from Japan.

In 1994, the Japan Socialist Party shocked supporters by forming a coalition with its longtime rival, the Liberal Democratic Party. Its leader, Tomiichi Murayama, became prime minister and quickly abandoned core socialist policies, including opposition to the US-Japan Security Treaty.

The backlash was swift. By 1996, badly defeated in elections, the party had rebranded itself as the Social Democratic Party. It faded into irrelevance.

The lesson is clear: When a party abandons its ideological roots, it risks collapse. The Democratic Party of Korea, under Lee’s leadership, may now be heading down the same path.

Lee Jae-myung’s future is anything but certain. Legal jeopardy could disqualify him. Internal divisions could unseat him. And ideological drift could hollow out the movement he claims to lead.

For foreign observers, Korean politics is bewildering. But for Koreans– and their allies – it is more than just domestic turmoil. It is a test of stability in one of the world’s most volatile geopolitical regions.

Hanjin Lew is a former international spokesman for South Korean conservative parties.

Continue Reading

Turkey holds the key to solving multiple global crises – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, World

Turkey’s state is struggling to deal with widespread protests at home ( after Istanbul’s president Ekrem Imamoglu was imprisoned ), but it is extremely successful as a major power broker in negotiations with Russia, the US, and Europe.

Turkey, which is effectively significant to almost everyone and is emerging as a smart communicator, is strategically important to almost everyone at the intersection between Asia and Europe.

Turkey has relied on a international policy that placed a premium on cooperation rather than competitors since the early 2000s. Turkey continuously improved its associations with Russia, Iran, and Syria because financial relationships were a top priority.

Turkey maintains its membership in NATO and is a big trading mate with the European Union, but it also holds important ties to Russia, Ukraine, China, and Middle Eastern nations. Turkey has demonstrated that it will function with any state that serves its interests, and it has used local conflicts to act as a quick ally when necessary.

Recep Tayyip Erdoan, the president of Turkey, has no reservations about confronting both friends and foes similarly, giving it proper flexibility at the same time.

Russian-Russian marriage is rough

Russia’s second-largest buying lover is Turkey. With over US$ 60 billion in annual deal with Moscow, Armenia continues to concentrate on Soviet banking and gas networks. When Turkey stopped supporting Chechen rebels and Russia stopped supporting the Kurdish Workers Party ( PKK), the relationship between Turkey and Russia dramatically improved in 1995.

Turkey has never been compliant with Moscow, but it has kept a working relationship with Russia ever since.

Turkey criticized Russia’s plans to establish military installations in Syria, Tartus and Khmeimim, and because it controls the airport in northern Syria, it also has the authority to obstruct Russian access. In addition, Ankara has used its military presence to thwart previous Soviet control in Idlib, in northern Syria.

Turkey’s helicopter offensive in Idlib in 2020 supported the Arab opposition and resisted Russian-backed activity in the west.

The significance of the Black Sea

Turkey has a strong advantage in the Black Sea as a result of the conflict in Ukraine. Russia aimed to have complete control over the Black Sea, yet seizing some Ukrainian ships, which would have a negative impact on global grain supply in 2022.

However, Turkey negotiated the release of millions of tonnes of corn and complied with the Montreux Convention to ensure the safety of shipping roads through the Black Sea. This arrangement from 1936 gave Turkey complete control over the delivery route between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea ( through the Bosporus Strait, the Sea of Marmara, and the Dardanelles, through which hundreds of millions of tons of cargo transit each year ) through the Bosporus Strait.

Turkey also limited Russian troops into the Black Sea, which has severely limited Russian maritime power, according to the agreement.

A map of the Black Sea region.
Map provided by Shutterstock via The Talk

Turkey does not support the Russian annexation of Crimea, even though it has certainly imposed sanctions on Russia and has kept its revenue sources available. Turkey values Crimea for both corporate and historical reasons, with more than 5 million Turks claiming to be of Crimean Tatar descent.

Turkey does, however, maintain communication with Moscow ( and Erdogan and Putin are “dear friends” ). Turkey likewise supports Ukraine, providing it with Bayraktar TB2 robots, heavy machine guns, laser-guided rockets, electronic warfare techniques, armored vehicles, and safe products, complicating this “friendship.”

In the end, Turkey wants Ukraine to keep separate to prevent Russian naval presence in the Black Sea. As a result, Turkey is likely to collaborate with NATO to ensure that Ukraine is never defeated.

In order to achieve this, Turkey is willing to send troops to a post-ceasefire arrangement, provided the necessary conditions are met.

Turkey has also reduced its dependence on Russia by diversifying its power supply routes ( relying more on manufacturers from the Caucasus region and central Asia ) in the wake of the conflict in Ukraine. Turkey is in a strong position, particularly with the Black Sea and the eastern Mediterranean discovering oil reserves.

Through the Trans-Anatolian natural gas pipeline, Ankara aims to become an energy gateway that facilitates the transport of oil from the Caucasus, central Asia, and Russia to Europe.

Syria and Turkey

Turkey’s connection with Syria’s neighbor has also been wise and logical. In 2005, Bashar al-Assad became the first Arab leader to visit Turkey since Syria gained its independence in 1946, allowing Turkey to seek reconciliation with Syria.

However, Erdoan continued to work with him to stop Syria from entangling with Iran when it was no more appropriate for him. He occasionally hosted anti-Assad characters in Turkey, and he established a safe haven for Syrian refugees and armed fighters along its borders. He gave separatists the ultimatum to overthrow Assad in 2024.

Just as the conflict in Syria gave Turkey prospects, so too has the fight in Ukraine. The United States has strengthened its bargaining status and pressed for more concessions from Western friends. Turkey is leveraging the US’s withdrawal from NATO to encourage closer assistance with Europe.

Turkey is likewise leveraging Donald Trump’s more diplomatic stances toward Russia to strengthen its connection with the US. This is mainly due to a desire to enhance protection cooperation. Turkey relied on the US for supplies of arms, revenue, and equipment during the Cold War, but it was unable to use them without US permission.

After 1989, Turkey carved out new areas for its exports of arms and was subject to US sanctions for purchasing S-400 surface-to-air weapons from Russia in 2020. Turkey wants to purchase F-35 sonic fighter planes from the US and is hoping that the US will stop imposing sanctions on second nations that have engaged with Russia.

Whose important ally?

Turkey has made certain that the US does not view it as a young companion in the Middle East. For instance, the US offered no military support when Turkey launched activities in north Syria in 2019 and constantly fired close to US troops.

Despite having a number of different tactical objectives, the US views Turkey as a crucial alliance. Turkey also has US and NATO military bases at several of its bases, as well as US nuclear weapons ( B61 nuclear bombs ) stationed at its Incirlik Air Force Base.

Turkey wants to make an even bigger diplomatic and military presence. It has a lot of power as a G20 part, having one of the world’s 20 largest markets and having the second-largest and most effective military power in NATO after the US.

And in terms of geopolitical spinning, Turkey is now in the elite position of wanting to support them.

Natasha Lindstaedt is a professor at the University of Essex’s Department of Government.

This content was republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the text of the content.

Continue Reading

Great Game On: Shining light on the contest for Central Asia – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, World

The Founding Fathers advised Americans to steer clear of ensnaring relationships if they wished to keep their recently acquired Republic. This may be news to some of our legislators but not to President Donald Trump. No US senator has been leerier of the authoritarian foreign policy bequeathed to us by Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt than Trump. &nbsp,

Immune to the crony passion for “democracy tower” and “forever wars”, Trump lives in the realm of reality– no intellectual pseudo-reality. &nbsp, Trump has had enough of the “values-based” international plan that, in the matter of Ukraine, perhaps have brought us closer to thermonuclear war than at any moment since the Cuban missile crisis. &nbsp,

Unlike so many of his political opponents, Trump is not oblivious to the negative effects a misrepresented foreign policy could have on ordinary citizens, people, the nation at large and, for that matter, the earth. &nbsp, &nbsp,

With that in mind, and in view of the rising necessity of Asia, Geoff Raby’s fresh book –” Great Game On: The Battle for Central Asia and Global Supremacy” – is worth reading to get a better control on the history and current state of great power dynamics in Eurasia and Central Asia. Raby served as American Ambassador to China from 2007 to 2011.

He has done a company by focusing on Central Asia in view of its significant and growing value. The region encompasses Afghanistan, Inner Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Xinjiang ( China ), and is more than 300, 000 square miles larger than the continental United States. That’s a major part of real property which the US ignores at its risk. &nbsp, &nbsp,

Raby – a largely non-ideological international policy specialist – deftly describes not only the 19th centuries Anglo-Russian” Great Game” but the evolving 21st century” New Great Game”, i. e., the great power competition for influence over Central Asia between China, Russia and, to a lesser extent, the United States. As such, he delves into the respective geopolitical ambitions of China and Russia in Eurasia over the past 100 years with a spotlight on Central Asia. &nbsp,

” The Principal Theater of Contest”

Raby argues that” Core Eurasia” – in other words, Central Asia – is” the principal theater of contest” between the great powers and that” the key pivots on the chess board are Afghanistan and Xinjiang” .&nbsp,

He has a point, but it’s also the case that Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, with their massive reserves of natural resources, extensive trade routes – east-west and north-south – and welcoming attitude toward the outside world represent a stable setting in which the US can expand its economic ties. ( See: Time for a US pivot to Central Asia )

To his credit, Raby eschews the moralism of so many foreign policy gurus ( who rarely get around to considering morality ). Raby, from all indications, is a proponent of the realist school of politics.

He is concerned about national self-interest, security and power relationships rather than presumed ideological imperatives as the principal drivers of inter-state relations.

Raby’s treatment of the United States ‘ presence in Central Asia is skimpy – but that is telling in itself: Washington pays Central Asia scant attention, so there’s not much to write about. That should change under Trump.

Raby provides much-needed historical context without which it is impossible to understand the competition for influence in the region. He makes insightful, thought-provoking comments on the geostrategic thinking of the great powers in light of history– for example, Mackinder’s” Heartland” theory, i. e., “whoever controlled Central Asia would be the dominant world power”.

Helpfully, the author provides the reader with maps to navigate a vast region that could easily thwart even adepts at world geography. Thus, the reader can easily find Türkmenbaşy, Kashgar and the Wakhan Corridor as well as inner Mongolia, various mountain ranges and rivers and myriad other places unknown to most people. &nbsp,

And having traveled extensively in Central Asia, Raby provides a store of anecdotes that helps demystify the inscrutability and romance of these far-off lands and peoples. &nbsp, The book is extensively researched and footnoted – a sign of the author’s sober-mindedness.

Raby claims that China has emerged” as the primary Eurasian power” in the new age of multipolarity that is upon us, an increasingly recognized reality. &nbsp,

The US, though, should take this state of affairs in stride and deal with it not through any form or degree of belligerence or aggressiveness and ditch its usual moral preachments that historically have been the stock and trade of USAID, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and other mouthpieces and instruments of liberal internationalist and globalist orthodoxy.

What Vice President JD Vance told the Munich Security Conference ( see his speech ) is also good advice for US policymakers: a little introspection is advisable. &nbsp,

Raby believes that” Great Powers can find a strategic accommodation without going to war … Options for finding strategic stability … are still worth pursuing” .&nbsp,

Nicely put – a vision that Trump’s State Department and the various Central Asian states share ( see this author’s &nbsp, Central Asian School of Diplomacy ) i. e., diplomacy is the smartest, most cost-effective way to resolve conflicts, defend national interests and avoid armed conflict. &nbsp,

Raby has recently suggested that China, for the first time in its history, feels secure along its Eurasian land frontiers and is now free to project power globally, a matter of some concern for those in the neighborhood.

Having said that, one way to address China’s resurgence, Raby suggests, might be for the West to engineer a so-called “reverse Kissinger”, i. e., entice Russia to “look West” and distance itself from China. &nbsp,

Only time will tell whether that is a real possibility, meanwhile, the West would be well-advised to understand Beijing’s geopolitical mindset and history as it confronts its growing ambitions.

Platitudes vs reality

Raby reminds the reader that the West should stop framing the Great Game as a contest between “democracy” and “autocracy” or” good guys vs bad guys” .&nbsp, Stated differently, the use of preachy, moralistic, diplomatic lingo is a non-starter. Certainly, it is a money-loser when dealing with China, Central Asia or most anyone else. Trump understands that.

Raby correctly states that” Russia’s trade with Central Asia is dwarfed by China’s” and” China has replaced Russia as Central Asia’s major source of foreign direct investment”. He sheds light on contested matters such as the “debt trap”, “debt sustainability” and the Belt &amp, Road Initiative.

But he might have pointed out that Central Asian governments are selective in their partnerships. They will not accept one-way investment deals that are perceived to have few long-term benefits for the country or, worse, inadvertently lead to geoeconomic subjugation.

To be sure, Central Asia wants win-win deals as well as free and fair trade – a mindset more in tune with Trump’s than with that of much of the American foreign policy establishment.

In case anyone missed it, Central Asian governments – whether you like them or not – want investors – whether Chinese, Indian or American – to make sensible, non-ideological cross-border long-term economic commitments to develop smart infrastructure connectivity and integration and create jobs and decent wages for families and the region’s growing populations. &nbsp, This vision is in line with Trumpian economic policy at home.

Sinostan

Without explicitly saying so, Raby does not appear to be optimistic about the US’s long-term prospects in Central Asia since China’s aim to absorb Central Asia – transform it into a veritable” Sinostan” – &nbsp, “is an advanced work in progress. But Russia and China will continue to look to each other for support in their contests with the United States and this will remain a strong point of convergence in their relationship” .&nbsp,

If true, all the more reason for the US government and business community to get in on the action in Central Asia, namely, expand trade relations and, more importantly, set up joint ventures that give US companies skin in the game. Toward this end, Trump’s State Department should grease the wheels.

If Washington doesn’t deliver soon on substance, Central Asians will continue to get the best infrastructure, logistics and mining deals ( critical metals and oil &amp, gas ) that China, Russia and others have to offer. This would be only logical if the US were to remove itself de facto from the equation.

For those eager to understand the historical and present-day ins and outs of great power competition in Central Asia, they would be well advised to read” Great Game On: The Contest for Central Asia and Global Supremacy”. This would include policymakers. &nbsp,

If American ingenuity and creativity were to be introduced into the arena shorn of hidden political and/or woke agendas and offered Central Asia attractive win-win economic arrangements, the US would stand a good chance of not only staying in the ( great ) game but prevailing.

Javier M Piedra has 40 years of international banking and finance experience and was former acting assistant administrator, Bureau for Asia, USAID ( 2018 – 21 )

Alexander B Gray is former deputy assistant to the president and chief of staff, White House National Security Council ( 2019-21 )

Continue Reading

How long until America Inc revolts on Trump? – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

I don’t think Donald Trump is a quietly Russian factory that the Kremlin hired to sabotage the United States ‘ economy and influence. But incredibly, Trump’s activities are often identical from what he might do if he&nbsp, were&nbsp, a foreign agent bent on death. This review some of his most recent moves.

First, there is yet another round of tariffs, this one for the automobile industry. This time Trump is putting&nbsp, 25 % tariffs on imported cars and car parts. These taxes will disrupt the whole US auto supply chain ( the Cato Institute has &nbsp, a great explanation on how this works, if you’re curious ), because many US vehicles use foreign elements and US-made pieces are frequently assembled into full vehicles across the borders.

Prices will increase for US producers, and prices will increase for American consumers. Consistently, American automakers saw big drops in their inventory prices:

Many of Trump’s supporters, of course, think that the suffering is only temporary, that US automakers will invest more in America and finally reap the benefits of the absence of foreign competition after a adjustment.

However, stock prices are prospective because when GM and Ford experience decline, it indicates that investors anticipate that their stocks will suffer no only temporarily but also over the long run. In other words, investors are not buying the” short-term pain for long-term gain” thesis.

The supply ring may be affected by the engine taxes, which will have repercussions everywhere. The cost of automobile plan will likely increase as well. And inland industries that provide the car industry, such as British steelmakers, &nbsp, may be hurt as well:

More than 600 Iron Range workers will lose their jobs as two Minnesota operations are temporarily shut down by Cleveland-Cliffs… [N] gross taxes on imported goods from Canada, Mexico, and China are wreaking havoc in the British car market.

Trump’s taxes are harming all of the sectors that were intended to be protected.

The oil market — a long-time citadel of Republican help — may get hurt because well, because of the increased cost of cutting equipment. Tracy Alloway, from Bloomberg, is quoted as follows:

[ W]e’ve got to talk about the most recent energy survey from the Dallas Fed, whose turf covers a lot of the US oil patch. It’s definitely worth reading&nbsp, the whole thing&nbsp, but to sum it up, it’s full of private power executives complaining about how the novel Trump administration is creating enormous uncertainty for their business viz the back-and-forth on tariffs.

Oil rig counts are flat; “drill, baby, drill” is a distant memory.

Trump and his supporters simply have no idea how the industries that surround them, such as manufacturing, mining, drilling, and other ones, actually function. It’s all&nbsp, theory, no actual knowledge. Trump himself doesn’t even notice or care when reality doesn’t cooperate; instead, he simply lets the American people suffer as a result of his theory‘s failures.

Even Trump’s inner circle is beginning to feel irrational, with the exception of Peter Navarro, his economic guru. Here ‘s&nbsp, some reporting by Politico:

Even those closest to Trump have privately stated that they are unsure what the boss will do just days after his announcement of global tariffs on April 2 and have been granted anonymity because…

The issue Trump’s own advisers and Hill Republicans have is that the president doesn’t share their concern.Trump actually supports the protectionist policies being promoted by aides like Navarro, the long-term trade adviser, who Republicans almost universally despise. The president also believes that his tariffs are popular with voters…

One of the people close to Trump’s inner circle of advisers said,” The president isn’t looking at it like they are.” For him, if the economy is weak, then fine, the economy is weak because the president truly believes that it will rebound and that the nations will give in because they can’t withstand the pressure from the U.S. S”.

No 1, the president is not running for reelection, this person continued,” so where this may have been a political concern in his first term, it is no longer a political concern.” … And no 2, we’re likely to lose the House in the midterms.

The auto tariff move — which comes in advance of another huge wave of tariffs that’s expected to be&nbsp, announced on April 2&nbsp, — will only add to a growing attitude of economic pessimism. Following the announcement, the overall stock market&nbsp decreased. Sentiment is falling both among the wealthy and the poor:

Source: Heather Long

Crucially, this isn’t just “vibes”; Americans ‘ expectations for their own financial situation are now, close to the lows of 2022, when post-pandemic inflation was causing real incomes to decline:

Source: Heather Long

It’s not just that people expect tariffs to put them out of a job or put pressure on their wages. They also believe that, despite the decline of aggregate demand, the tariffs will lead to higher inflation. 5-year inflation expectations are rising, and survey-based expectations are rising:

And expectations might just be following reality here. The most recent inflation figures  appear to be quite alarming:

And here’s a table with a number of different inflation indicators, all of which increased by more than 3 % when taken only over the course of the first few months since Trump’s election:

Source: &nbsp, Jason Furman

What is Trump’s strategy for this? According to the Politico article, he basically has no plans to run for president because he is not running for president and his wacky theory and Peter Navarro, his one trusted economic advisor, are telling him that the long-term effects will be positive.

That’s one possibility. Another is that he will turn to the playbook that quasi-authoritarian leaders typically employ when threatened by inflation: price controls. It appeared that Biden might attempt to use price controls to stifle inflation on the&nbsp during the Biden administration, according to the advice of the Warrrenite progressives. But to his credit, he never did. Trump is currently making the same noises:

Trump warned the CEOs of some of the nation’s top automakers early this month that they better not raise car prices because of tariffs. Some of the executives were left rattled and worried that they would be punished if they raised prices, according to people with knowledge of the call.

Trump’s “warnings” and commands carry a lot more weight than Biden’s, because Trump is a lot more willing to use executive power to&nbsp, punish individual companies&nbsp, he doesn’t like. Real price controls would put the nation in danger of a catastrophic downward spiral of inflation, hoarding, “anti-hoarding,” and shortages.

All of this is, of course, set against a world of crass moves on a global scale. Trump continues to&nbsp, threaten to invade and conquer Greenland, with JD Vance&nbsp, especially pressing for this move. This additional piece of evidence should come as a disappointment to those who are still desperately looking for alternatives to the Mad King theory.

The country’s business community is beginning to realize that the country has elected a Mad King, despite Trump’s apparatchiks still bellowing&nbsp, that his tariffs will reindustrialize America.

They expected a replay of the laissez-faire policies of Trump’s first term — a lot of bombastic rhetoric but few real policy changes and a lot of small, quiet deregulatory moves. Instead, they received a completely different Trump this time, one who is determined to undermine the American economy in the name of ideology.

People on the Tech Right are starting to realize something similar. Here’s my friend&nbsp, Brian Chau, who is more frank and honest than most:

The American business community hasn’t yet experienced a&nbsp, preference cascade&nbsp. Anyone who speaks out against Trump is probably preventing them from sticking their neck out because of his willingness to target and punish wealthy individuals or individuals who criticize him.

And the memory of the Biden administration’s anti-business rhetoric, and the continued&nbsp, anti-business rhetoric&nbsp, emanating from both the Warrenite and Bernie wings of the Democrats, are probably still a deterrent as well.

It will take some time before the business world will turn to the Democrats when things start to get bad. What other options will businesses have if the Mad King’s madness continues to grow and things continue to get worse?

In any case, center-left Democrats who care about winning elections should be working feverishly to welcome businesses ( and rich people ) into their big tent. I hope that the recent embrace of Abundance liberalism marks the start of the era of the class-war effort.

The more quickly that change takes place, the more stable the environment will be for America. Hopefully, the damage to US prosperity can still be limited. Trump needs to be abandoned by business, and Democrats need to make more than one move to break up the coalition. However, it’s a crucial component of the puzzle.

This article was first published on Noah Smith’s Noahpinion&nbsp, Substack and is republished with kind permission. Subscriber or subscriber can sign up for Noahopinion.com.

Continue Reading

Trump tariffs re-energize stalled Japan-Korea-China FTA – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The US-Japan defense empire appears to be in good health following US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s attend to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the World War II battle of Iwo Jima.

The same cannot be said about the two allies ‘ economic relations, however, given President Donald Trump’s recent announcement of additional 25 % tariffs on imported cars, including those made in Japan.

The Chinese view this as a broken promise and a major threat to their home economy. Trump stated in his first phrase that he would not impose more tariffs on Chinese automobiles and parts when he told then-Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in 2019.

We” sorely urged the US government to remove Japan from the measure,” according to Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi, adding that US taxes could include a” significant effects on bilateral economic relationships, the global market, and the international trading system.”

Diet people were told by Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba,” We must take measures to respond properly. We have a number of possible alternatives open to us. These options are typically regarded as conventional methods, such as imposing retaliatory tariffs or filing a problem with the World Trade Organization. However, bigger buying order shifts might be coming.

In an effort to jointly promote local business in the face of Trump’s increasing taxes, Japan, South Korea, and China held their first financial speech on Sunday.

According to a statement released after the meeting that was cited by wire reports, the three business ministers of the nations agreed to” carefully cooperate for comprehensive and high-level” discussions on a South Korea-Japan-China free trade agreement.

According to South Korean Trade Minister Ahn Duk-geun, who spoke in reference to the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership trade agreement, “it is needed to improve the deployment of RCEP, in which all three nations have participated, and to establish a foundation for expanding business cooperation between the three nations through Korea-China-Japan FTA discussions.”

A trade agreement between 15 Asia-Pacific nations, which was put into effect in 2022, is known as the RCEP, and it aims to lower business restrictions. Since deals started in 2012, however, Japan, South Korea, and China have not significantly advanced toward a multilateral free trade agreement.

Earlier this month, Trump’s cabinet met back of his anticipated news to increase tariffs on April 2 in what he has referred to as “liberation day” because of his upend of Washington’s buying partnerships, according to Reuters.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, North Korean Foreign Minister Cho Tae-yul, and Japanese Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya convened on March 22 for a multilateral gathering in Tokyo. Iwaya said at the time of the meeting that” I think we may be at a turning point in history” given the extremely difficult foreign situation.

Iwaya stated in a statement that appeared in the center of Japan’s moderate daily news,” It is extremely essential for the three places to promote exchange and cooperation to guide the international community from section to harmony.”

The Mainichi itself noted that the three foreign ministers reiterated their commitment to “future-oriented” collaboration and agreed on” the importance of holding a trilateral summit at an early date” in an editorial entitled” Japan, China, and S. Korea must enhance cooperation for Asia’s stability.”

Japan, China, and South Korea FMs agree on future-oriented cooperation, the printed news arm of Japan’s national broadcaster NHK followed suit. The left-wing daily Asahi Shimbun in Japan wrote,” Unity is essential for Japan, China, and S. Korea as the world order is shattered.”

Trump’s threat to free trade brings China, Japan, and South Korea closer, according to The Nikkei, the country’s largest business daily. Beijing also qualifies this statement with” Beijing sees opportunity drive wedge into Washington-led alliance.”

However, those headlines don’t necessarily indicate that a new trilateral trading order is on the horizon.

In response to Chinese Foreign Minister Wang’s claim that “unilateralism and protectionism are pervasive,” the editorial board of Japan’s right-wing Sankei Shimbun wrote,” Wang Yi’s Words are Empty Until China Improves Its Behavior.”

But who gave Beijing the wedge? Iwaya was undoubtedly sat next to the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who, of course, said:

Ishiba, the prime minister, welcomed the two foreign ministers ‘ visits to Japan and stated that although difficulties occasionally arise, Japan wants to establish a future-oriented cooperative relationship through pragmatic diplomacy based on national interests.

Wang, a spokesperson for the Chinese state news agency Xinhua, stated that since China and Japan’s diplomatic relations have rekindled bilateral trade for 15 years running at a high level of [ US$ 300 billion ] with an accumulative bilateral investment of nearly[ US$ 140 billion ]…

The two nations should continue to promote political relations through economic cooperation, foster dialogue and exchanges across all sectors, according to China’s top envoy, adding that” to create new growth drivers, they must uphold the tradition of promoting political relations through economic cooperation.”

Japan is also looking for new markets and opportunities beyond its neighbors.

Prime Minister Ishiba and other Japanese officials welcomed a delegation led by South African Deputy President Paul Mashatile to Tokyo earlier in March for discussions aimed at promoting bilateral trade and investment.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva visited Tokyo last week to talk about a five-year plan to improve economic ties, start discussions with foreign and defense leaders, address climate change, and arrange frequent visits by the two countries ‘ leaders. During his state visit, Lula also had a meeting with Emperor Naruhito and Princess Masako.

Lula, who was accompanied by about 80 Brazilian business executives, stated to Prime Minister Ishiba that he would like to begin negotiating a trade deal with Japan “later this year.”

Brazilian aircraft manufacturer Embraer completed the sale of 20 passenger jets to All Nippon Airways during the course of the visit. With Japanese motor manufacturer Nidec, Engineer is also developing electric aircraft. The topics covered ethanol, biofuels, and hybrid vehicle technology.

Ishiba said,” I want to strengthen our relationship as partners who share the responsibility for solving problems. I want to take our economic relationship even higher.

Lula responded,” Confirming the importance of the values of democracy, multilateralism, and free trade, which are the most significant forms of governance in the world, will be a significant key to the development of both of our countries.

Tokyo is still relying on the Japan-US Security Treaty for its national defense, but it is also looking to the outside world to keep its global trade and economic growth.

Follow this writer on&nbsp, X: @ScottFo83517667

Continue Reading

Why Myanmar’s earthquake could topple its military regime – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The military government led by coup-maker Senior General Min Aung Hlaing is now in a dangerous and vulnerable place due to Myanmar’s generally disastrous disaster in the middle of an ongoing civil war. Does the natural catastrophe, which hit Mandalay, Sagaing, and the defense enclave capital of Naypyidaw particularly hard, cause a simultaneous regime collapse?

In quake-hit places, rebel groups have declared a peace to help support to reach the patients. The military government reported that 2, 928 bodies had been recovered, 3, 408 had been hurt, and 139 were still missing as of Sunday ( March 30 ). If these statistics are understated to minimize socially the effect of Friday’s temblor, which reached 7.7 on the Richter scale, is anyone’s guess.

The program reportedly continued its flying bombardments and shellings over the weekend, including an artillery strike on a doctor in Ponnagyun in an area controlled by Arakan Army rebels close to Sittwe, in spite of the announced ceasefire and the junta’s plea for foreign aid and assistance, which are now beginning to flow in from different nations.

However, those attacks in the middle of a previously unheard catastrophe should be seen as a sign of weakness rather than power. The junta’s risks have been further exposed previously when civil unrest is compounded by natural disasters like earthquakes, floods, cyclones, and landslides.

Natural disasters have in fact played significant roles in shaping social moves, especially in brittle state with illegal or tumultuous governance structures. &nbsp,

Economic catastrophes have frequently exacerbated the structural flaws of different military regimes in Myanmar, making them even more vulnerable to insurgencies, global scrutiny, and domestic unrest.

And when the post-quake scenery emerges, rebels had immediately renounce their partial ceasefire in the name of an unmatched chance to take down a weak program with the principal city of Yangon in their sights and the defense capital Naypyidaw in their sights.

Losing” Heaven’s Authority”

According to Confucian and Buddhist traditions, a leader’s legitimacy is determined by their capacity to exert effective control and guarantee the welfare of their own citizens. &nbsp,

In archaic China, hereditary lords were thought to have lost their authority when they failed to deal with natural disasters, leading to their eventual overthrow. Despite its liberal and nationalist bent, Myanmar’s military cannot escape the country’s greatly superstitious populace. &nbsp,

Natural disasters frequently expose the stupidity of autocratic regimes around the world. That has been particularly the situation in Myanmar. More than 130, 000 people were killed when Cyclone Nargis ravaged the country in 2008. A natural disaster turned into a man-made tragedy due to the then-ruling regime’s refusal to allow international humanitarian aid feared by foreign scrutiny and also a potential US invasion.

The similarities to now are eerily similar. The regime’s ineffective handling of past reduction efforts following floods, floods, and hurricanes does not look good for the victims and disrupted survivors of Friday’s devastating disaster. Yet, today’s Myanmar is much more scattered, with the government’s hold on power much weaker than it was in 2008.

The coup in Myanmar is no exception. Conservative governments thrive on transparency. Through military-owned conglomerates like Myanma Economic Holdings Limited ( MEHL ) and the Myanmar Economic Corporation ( MEC ), the military has dominated large swathes of the economy over the years. &nbsp,

But, the increasing volume of foreign aid to victims of natural disasters raises questions about monitoring and probity. As has previously happened, the distribution of aid money and resources into crooked military officers and their business associates runs the risk of further deteriorating the administration’s already fragile standing.

Authorities in Myanmar like Bertil Lintner and David Steinberg have lengthy argued that the life of different military regimes has depended on their capacity to maintain control of the economy while preventing opposition. &nbsp,

The military must sometimes cooperate with foreign relief organizations or risk alienating the country’s fragile foundations, as natural disasters do as normal disruptors. Since the disaster, the United States, the European Union, China, Russia, India, South Korea, and the UN have all pledged to deliver humanitarian assistance.

Autocratic regimes are anathema to transparency, and the risk of exposure rises as investigation rises. The regime’s authority over crucial sources may decline further if humanitarian aid turns into a social tool that deviates from military channels.

strengthening rebel arms

The political and administrative brain centers of Myanmar, Mandalay and Naypyidaw, have recently experienced severe flooding and the disaster. &nbsp,

The Arakan Army ( AA ), the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army ( MNDAA ), and theTa’ang National Liberation Army ( TNLA ), among others, benefit from this structural breakdown.

These organizations have already demonstrated their ability to launch well-planned offensives against Myanmar’s defense, as evidenced by their most recent crushing victories on the battlefield and their traditional seizing of territory that was once under the control of the regime.

Guerrilla war thrives in settings where the freedom and provide lines of standard armies are hampered, according to security expert Anthony Davis. &nbsp,

Important roads will be forced by the military to rely on air energy, but with minimal gas supplies and mounting administrative problems, air supremacy may not be viable. However, the resistance forces, deeply embedded in local populations and flexible to hard terrain, have undoubtedly gained a new foothold in numerous quake-hit areas.

When state troops are cut off from their source ranges, their ability to project power usually suffers catastrophic consequences, as evidenced by the story of uprisings in Southeast Asia. The Ho Chi Minh Trail served as a crucial artery for the Vietnam War, enabling them to outmaneuver and ultimately outlive a far superior military force. &nbsp,

Similar to Myanmar’s ethnic armed groups, which have recently experienced natural disasters to strengthen their strategic position.

illusion of stability

Even when there are cracks within, autocratic regimes frequently maintain a façade of stability. Through military parades, diplomatic missions, and economic partnerships with nations like China and Russia, Myanmar’s junta has attempted to create an image of control.

However, the influx of foreign humanitarian aid, which is frequently mediated through independent organizations, perpetuates this illusion. Humanitarian missions adhere to neutrality principles, but their presence always raises international scrutiny.

According to scholars like Mary Callahan, the influx of foreign aid workers and organizations frequently results in greater external exposure of human rights violations. &nbsp,

A new infusion of humanitarian aid and the presence of foreign aid workers in Myanmar could lead to more documented cases of military abuses, from forced labor to war crimes.

Additionally, aid that bypasses military channels and travels to affected populations through neighborhood organizations, many of which have ties to or sympathize with the armed resistance, may also serve to undermine the junta’s authority and standing on the ground.

Additionally, external actors like the United Nations and the European Union may play a more direct role in providing assistance as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations ( ASEAN ) is increasingly divided over how to address the Myanmar crisis. ( Despite the possibility of some US aid, the closure of USAID will lessen America’s influence. )

The military will struggle to maintain its control over crucial resources if non-state actors are tasked with distributing foreign aid, further reducing its influence over many already marginalized local populations.

The junta of Myanmar is becoming more and more dependent on the recurrent crises of civil war and the earthquake disaster that occurred on Friday. Min Aung Hlaing, the regime’s leader, struggles with maintaining control, and his previous inability to effectively and fairly respond to disasters may be detrimental to Myanmar’s post-quake response.

The military’s ability to control important resources will decrease as foreign aid enters the nation, exposing the regime’s severe structural deficiencies. A perfect storm could result from corruption, poverty, and infrastructural destruction, accelerating the junta’s decline and potential collapse. &nbsp,

The junta’s potential fall is still uncertain, but the picture is this: Myanmar’s military dictatorship is failing to deliver on its promises amid widespread desperation and suffering, and its armed and unarmed adversaries are becoming stronger day by day.

Phar Kim Beng, PhD, is a senior research fellow at the University of Malaya’s Asia-Europe Institute and professor of ASEAN studies at the Islamic International University Malaysia ( IIUM).

Continue Reading

Tariffs have a Laffer curve, too – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Legend has it that the supply-side revolution – Ronald Reagan’s 1981 cut in the US top income tax rate to 40 % from 70 % – began in a Washington restaurant, when economist Arthur Laffer drew his eponymous curve on a cocktail napkin for then White House Deputy Chief of Staff Dick Cheney.

At a tax rate of zero, the state has no duty income, but it also has no income at a tax rate of 100 %, because the business would shut down. Somewhere in between, there’s a revenue price that generates the utmost income.

The US didn’t continue to run trillion-dollar trade imbalances without dire consequences. The US gross foreign investment status has sunk to bad$ 25 trillion, roughly equal to the sum of US imbalances over the past 30 years. During the past decade, foreigners poured into US tech stocks. If the tech boom fades, for example, the US will have to persuade foreigners to buy bonds, and that implies higher interest rates to attract funds.

Tariffs are a tax, and Laffer’s simple illustration applies to the impact of tariffs as well, although more variables are in play. A reasonable guess is that tariffs in the 10 % to 15 % range would yield a meaningful amount of revenue without undue disruption of economic activity.

Tariffs have multiple effects: Domestic production will replace some imports, but some consumers and businesses will have to absorb higher import prices. Some exporters will build plants in the US to avoid tariffs, as US President Trump proposes.

It’s probably impossible to calculate the crosswinds at play. Supply constraints are a big factor, the United States has a skilled labor shortage, as TSMC discovered while building its Arizona chip fabrication plant. The US now imports most of its capital goods, moreover, which means that US manufacturers can’t replace imported goods with made-in-USA alternatives without first importing more machines and production imports.

The Laffer curve represents a common-sense idea, but a powerful one: Too much taxation stifles growth. The location of the maximum point on the curve isn’t self-evident by any means, but it frames the problem handily. I’m one of the original supply-siders, I have written a dozen papers over the years for Laffer’s consulting firm, and between 1988 and 1993 I was chief economist for the consulting firm of the late Jude Wanniski, the publicist who made Laffer famous.

The supply-siders argued that the economic growth generated by tax cuts would more than cover the cost of issuing new government debt to cover a transient shortfall in revenues, back when US government debt was just 30 % of GDP, compared to 125 % today, and the top marginal tax rate was 70 %, vs. 37 % today.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has called the current national debt” a disaster”, with good reason. The US needs new sources of revenue and tariffs are an important part of the policy mix.

A” Laffer curve” for tariffs might look something like the chart above. Unlike the original Laffer curve for personal income tax rates, revenues don’t fall to zero, tariffs are a levy on price, not income. The right side of the curve remains above zero, although a very high tariff is likely to lose revenue as imports disappear and economic activity shrinks.

A 10 % tariff would yield$ 300 billion on America’s$ 3 trillion of goods imports. Some part of that would be paid by foreign exporters rather than American purchasers, either through currency devaluation or lower profit margins. If foreigners pay half ( rough guess ), the price of imports would rise by just 5 %, barely a speed bump.

That$ 300 billion in revenues is real money. If spending cuts generate$ 200 billion in savings and slightly lower interest rates save$ 200 billion in interest costs, the deficit will fall by$ 700 billion, or more than half. That would leave room to extend the 2019 personal income tax cut and avoid higher marginal tax rates that would impair economic growth.

Imports would fall ( as in the red line on the chart ), so a 15 % tariff would produce a smaller increment in revenue, to$ 350 billion. As noted, foreign exporters can bear a great deal of the burden at a 10 % tariff rate. As tariff rates rise, foreigners will pay a lower share. They can only cut profit margins so far or devalue their currencies so much. Devaluation on the part of trading partners, moreover, isn’t what America wants: It makes US goods less competitive and tends to raise the trade deficit.

One study estimates that a 10 % increase in import prices would raise the Producer Price Index by 1 %. A Boston Federal Reserve report published in Feb. 2025 states,” A 25 % tariff on Canada and Mexico combined with a 10 % tariff on China could add 0.5 % to 0.8 % to core PCE inflation”.

A tariff of 15 % or higher would raise costs for US business significantly. US imports of capital goods ( not including autos ) exploded after Covid, rising by nearly 50 % during the Biden administration. The US can restore capital goods manufacturing, but it would have to import capital goods to do so, which means that imports would first have to rise in order to fall in the future.

There are arguable exceptions. The Trump Administration is proposing a 25 % tariff on autos, not because it expects American consumers to pay nearly 25 % more for new cars, but because it wants foreign auto producers to build plants in the United States. The impact of tariffs above the 10%-15 % level is terra incognita for economists. But it is a reasonable assertion that tariffs in the 10%-15 % range will generate significant amounts of new revenue without much damage to economic activity.

Continue Reading

USAID closure deepens pain of quake-hit Myanmar – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

After a century of political and economic reforms, Myanmar appeared to be suddenly letting go of decades of martial law. European funding was expanding, and living conditions were slowly improving.

But, the defense seized control of the country in a coup that removed Aung San Suu Kyi’s democratically elected government in February of that year. The result was a land that sagged for civil war and a collapsed economy.

A massive 7.7-magnitude disaster struck the country’s center on Friday, adding to the country’s long-suffering people’s everyday suffering. Its epicenter was just outside Mandalay, the second-largest town in the county.

More than 1, 000 kilometers from the core, the capital of Thailand, Bangkok, also experienced significant damage. A building that was under construction was captured in video footage crashing into top x pools, causing waterfalls to fall from high-rise condominiums.

Given that the junta has mostly banned social advertising and communication apps like Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Signal, and X, information on the extent of the damage in Myanmar was less clear.

At the time of reading, the death toll has now passed 1, 000. However, US Geological Survey modeling suggests that the country’s gross domestic product ( GDP ) could be attained by more than 10,000 deaths and economic losses.

Min Aung Hlaing, the leader of Myanmar’s separatist military juntas, immediately issued a request for foreign assistance, which was unusual for them.

In the ongoing civil war, the dictatorship controls only 21 % of the nation, with the remainder being contested or controlled by ethnically divided organizations and weight soldiers. This suggests that global support may not be available to some of the country’s hardest-hit regions.

The Trump administration’s efforts to undermine the US Agency for International Development ( USAID )’s activities in the nation have grown even more difficult. This will make it much harder to locate the areas where help is most in need and to spread it on the ground.

Myanmar is prone to natural disasters.

Myanmar has experienced frequent natural disasters in addition to its harsh and totalitarian defense rule since it gained independence in 1948.

According to estimates, at least 430 people died in the aftermath of Typhoon Yagi‘s relics in the floods in September. About 460 members of the Rohingya ethnic majority, who are largely confined to state camps in Rakhine condition in horrible conditions, were reported to have been killed by Cyclone Mocha in 2023.

But, Cyclone Nargis in 2008, which left at least 140, 000 people dead, was the worst natural crisis in living memory. The military junta resisted global guidance on that event, which is likely to have resulted in numerous pointless deaths.

It was nearly impossible to find out what was really happening on the ground in Myanmar at the time because there was no impartial advertising it.

Individuals pass crumbling structures in Mandalay, Myanmar, which was ravaged by the earthquake. Bell / EPA via The Chat

Despite the regime’s current censorship measures and web blocks, the proliferation of mobile devices over the past ten years has allowed for much greater dissemination of information.

Only about 1 % of Myanmar’s population had cellular phones when Cyclone Nargis occurred, which was the year the phone was introduced. Myanmar had a laptop penetration rate of 114 % by the time of the revolution in 2021. ( This indicates that people in the country own more smartphones than people. )

obstructed international aid

Although Min Aung Hlaing has pressed for international assistance more than his father in 2008, US President Donald Trump’s activities have resulted in significantly less effective assistance than it was two months ago.

The Trump administration announced to Congress on Friday that it would cut nearly all of the agency’s remaining employment and opened it, thereby closing all USAID operations worldwide.

The decision was described as” a total abandonment of decades of US administration in the world,” according to Jeremy Konyndyk, leader of Refugees International and former USAID official. He claimed that the layoffs would have eliminated” the last members of the team that would have facilitated a USAID disaster answer” to the earthquake.

USAID spent US$ 240 million in Myanmar in 2024, which represents roughly one-third of all international charitable aid to the nation.

However, there have been fewer USAID courses in Myanmar from 18 to only three since Trump’s opening in January. Along Myanmar’s border with Thailand, some Organizations and at least seven US-funded facilities have been shut down.

Myanmar’s expelled independent media stores, which highlight the government’s crimes, have also seen their financing reduced as a result of the Trump administration’s USAID reduces.

What follows?

At the Armed Forces Day Parade’s 80th commemoration the day before the earthquake, Min Aung Hlaing addressed the soldiers. He declared that December would see the start of regional elections, a decision that human rights organizations have now labeled a” sham.”

On March 27, 2018, Naypyidaw, Myanmar, takes part in a rally as part of the 80th Armed Forces Day. Nyein Chan Naing / EPA via The Talk

There is no plausible way for elections to be held in a country where there is no military rule or where the civil war is still raging.

In every conceivable free or fair election that has taken place in Myanmar over the past 40 years, military-backed functions have been largely rejected by the public. This includes the most recent elections that the National League of Democracy ( NLD ), led by Aung San Suu Kyi, won in 2020.

Min Aung Hlaing’s request for international aid may be welcomed and responded to by the world, but this doesn’t mean the history is forgotten. The government’s pointless and dangerous 2021 coup has resulted in thousands of innocent lives lost.

The nation would be far more equipped to deal with the effects of this disaster if the NLD had remained in power. The government’s brutal rule and Trump’s cruel help cuts, once more, will undoubtedly lead to more needless suffering and deaths.

Adam Simpson is University of South Australia’s senior lecturer in international reports.

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

Continue Reading