Beijing: new Treasury rules amount to ‘decoupling’ – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Following Washington’s suggestion to establish a set of specific regulations that would hinder and track American investments in China for semiconductors, artificial intelligence, and classical computing, Beijing has expressed major problems. &nbsp,

The Chinese Commerce Ministry stated on Monday that, despite the US’s repeated efforts to say it has no intention of dissociating from China or preventing the country’s economic growth, Washington has insisted on preventing American firms from investing in China and preventing the government’s normal growth. &nbsp, &nbsp,

A spokesperson for the government referred to the meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Joe Biden in the US in November as” a typical broad approach to national security,” saying that this method goes against the two faces of state’s discussion at the conference in San Francisco.

He predicted that the restrictions may have a negative impact on Chinese and US businesses ‘ regular economic and trade cooperation, undermine the world’s economic and trade balance, and deteriorate global commercial and supply chains ‘ security and stability.

He added that China is entitled to take the same actions as the United States is against. He demanded that the US government prevent politicizing and stifling business.

Researchers at the Ministry of Commerce, Zhou Mi, predicted that Washington’s purchase regulations will make high-tech cooperation between the US and China more difficult. He claimed that it will also stifle global technical innovation and scientific advancement. &nbsp,

Beijing made the comments after the US Treasury Department released a notice of proposed rule-making ( NPRM ) on June 21 to implement Biden’s executive order, which was first announced in August and had the title” Addressing US investments in specific national security technologies and products in countries of concern.”

According to the Treasury, the NPRM establishes a procedure for creating a new federal security software to combat threats from foreign direct investments in China, Hong Kong, and Macau.

The proposed NPRM developments our national security by preventing, according to Paul Rosen, assistant secretary of the Treasury for Investment Security, the numerous benefits that some US opportunities offer besides only capital from supporting the development of delicate systems in nations that might use them to harm our national security.

The Treasury requests comments on the proposal through August 4 and anticipates that the regulation will be in effect by the end of this year. &nbsp,

The secretary of the Treasury must enact laws that prohibit US citizens from operating AI, chip, and quantum computing businesses in China, according to Biden’s executive order. &nbsp,

Additionally, the regulations should mandate that US citizens notify the Treasury of specific other transactions that might involve these products and technologies that could compromise US national security.

The NPRM said a” covered transaction” may be a prohibited transaction, or only a notifiable one. &nbsp,

Covered transactions include the provision of debt financing, the conversion of convertible debt, greenfield investments ( a type of foreign direct investment where a company establishes operations abroad ), joint ventures, and limited partner ( LP ) or equivalent investments.

China’s FDI

The Chinese Commerce Ministry reported on June 21 that its total foreign direct investment decreased by 31 % to US$ 57.9 billion in the first five months of this year from US$ 84.3 billion during the same time period in 2023. &nbsp,

FDI in China’s high technology manufacturing sector rose 2.7 % to US$ 6.9 billion. FDI coming from Germany and Singapore to China rose 24 % and 16 % year- on- year, respectively. However, the commerce ministry did not make the detailed FDI figures available for each country. &nbsp,

China’s high technology development certainly needs the participation of foreign funds, but it mainly relies on domestic funds and policy environment, said Xiang Ligang, director- general of the Zhongguancun Information Consumption Alliance, a Beijing- based telecom industry association.

China must now send a clear message that it needs to develop its own AI technology, according to Xiang, who stated that the proposed US investment restrictions were a result of this. He made mention of Beijing’s recent national policy to support Chinese technology startups.

On June 15, China’s State Council published a document to encourage local governments, state- owned- enterprises, banks, private equity and asset management firms and long- term fund management companies to provide loans, subsidies and funds to technology startups.

According to the statement, financial authorities should foster a favorable lending climate for technology companies to grow and raise money. China will tweak its laws in order to promote FDI, according to the statement. &nbsp,

In an article published on June 23, Guan Quan, a professor at the Renmin University of China, writes that the US has recently sent an official to Japan and the Netherlands and urged them to tighten their export controls for chip-making equipment. &nbsp,

Besides, he says, Washington also plans to add 11 Chinese chip foundries to its Entity List. He says all these moves have shown clearly&nbsp, that the Biden administration will not stop suppressing China’s chip sector.

He claims that until one day China can self-supply all the necessary chip-making tools, the only way to put an end to all these restrictions is to use technological advancements. However, Guan did not provide a roadmap or schedule for how China would go about accomplishing its objectives.

Chinese students repatriated

China can still use this opportunity to attract American investments into its high technology sectors, according to some commentators, because it may take up to six more months before the proposed US investment restrictions go into effect. &nbsp,

Meanwhile, the immediate effect of imposing a ban on Chinese students from studying or obtaining AI technology in the US is. &nbsp,

On June 22, China Daily, a state- owned publication, reported that four Chinese students who traveled to the US for academic conferences had recently suffered from the US border officers ‘ “unwarranted harassment, interrogation and repatriation” .&nbsp,

Border agents questioned the four science students, two of whom have research interests in AI, about their personal and family histories and whether they were affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party, according to the report. &nbsp, &nbsp,

It said the US has repatriated more than 30 Chinese students, mostly master’s or doctoral degree candidates in computer- related fields, in recent years.

Read: China hawk: Fix symbolic, ineffective US sanctions

Follow Jeff Pao on X: &nbsp, @jeffpao3

Continue Reading

Filipinos doubt US reliability as Marcos deescalates – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, Technology

Fears of an unnecessary increase in the disputed waterways were heightened by the near-fatal showdown between Chinese and Spanish maritime forces last week in the South China Sea.

A Filipino soldier suffered bodily injury after&nbsp, a huge contingent of Taiwanese forces&nbsp, collided with and then forcibly&nbsp, boarded and disarmed personnel aboard a Philippine resupply mission&nbsp, en&nbsp, route&nbsp, to the&nbsp, passionately- contested&nbsp, Next Thomas Shoal.

Had Filipino marine troops resisted &nbsp, China’s latest violent action, the situation truly would have turned much more violent and possibly fatal, reminiscent of&nbsp, hand- to- hand combat&nbsp, between&nbsp, Chinese&nbsp, and Indian troops at the disputed borders in the Himalayas. &nbsp,

Washington, which has a Mutual Defense Treaty ( MDT ) with the Philippines, was quick to condemn the latest incident. The US State Department reiterated its security obligations to the Philippines in the event of an armed attack on Spanish troops and common vessels in the South China Sea in a speech.

Spanish authorities formally lashed&nbsp, out&nbsp, at China ‘s&nbsp,” aggressive, violent and savage actions” – but were swift to de- escalate tensions by maintaining that the latest incident did not constitute an “armed attack” but instead was the product of a&nbsp, probable “misunderstanding or accident”.

” Well, you know this was probably a misunderstanding or an accident. We’re not yet ready to classify this as an armed attack”, said Executive Secretary Lucas&nbsp, Bersamin&nbsp, in a press conference hastily- organized last Friday. &nbsp, Bersamin, who leads the&nbsp, National Maritime Council ( NMC), &nbsp, which coordinate interagency responses to crises in the South China Sea, was quick to shut down any speculation over the possible invocation of the MDT. &nbsp,

The Filipino official reiterated its commitment to a diplomatic resolution of the conflict by also offering an olive branch to Beijing. I believe this issue can be resolved by us, Bersamin said. ” And if China wants to work with us, we can work with China” .&nbsp, The Philippine government’s muted response&nbsp, met with criticism and outrage across the country. &nbsp,

Leading Philippine experts &nbsp, have argued&nbsp, that China’s latest action could have been a basis for invocation of the MDT. According to surveys, 93 percent of Filipinos want their government to defend their country’s territories and regain control of the areas that China has occupied up to .

Many in the Philippines&nbsp, began to doubt&nbsp, the determination of the Marcos administration to stand up to China, as well as&nbsp, to question&nbsp, America’s reliability as an ally.

In a speech before Philippine&nbsp, military&nbsp, personnel at the southwestern province of Palawan, which lies near the disputed Spratly islands, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr sought to strike a balance&nbsp, by emphasizing that the Philippines has an uncompromising position as well as a commitment to diplomacy. &nbsp,

Our main goal is to make every Filipino a peaceful and prosperous place. We are not in the business of starting wars. In his” Talk to the Troops” speech, Marcos claimed that this is the drumbeat, that this is the tenet that we live by and march by.

” We reject the regulations that require us to choose our sides in a fierce power battle. No truly democratic government, he added, will inevitably cause harm to people’s lives or livelihoods, which would underscore the need for a non-aligned, independent foreign policy. Nevertheless, the Filipino president emphasized that his government will&nbsp,” stand firm” in protecting the country’s sovereign rights in the South China Sea.

The most recent incident’s precise circumstances are still unknown. Afraid intervention was a legitimate response from China’s point of view to the Philippines ‘ alleged violation of a prior agreement regarding the Second Thomas Shoal. Manila has based troops over a grounded warship,  BRP Sierra Madre, and has de facto control over the disputed feature since the late 1990s. However, China has hoped to peacefully eject its rival from the area over the past ten years given the extreme poor conditions in the de facto Philippine base.

In 2013 People’s Liberation Army&nbsp, General Zhang&nbsp, Zhaozhong&nbsp, argued, &nbsp,” Without the supply for one or two weeks, the&nbsp ,]Filipino ] &nbsp, troopers stationed there will leave the islands on their own. Once they have left, they will never be able to come back”.

Over the years, China &nbsp increased its reclamation activities in the disputed areas, leading to a number of massive artificial islands and military installations, and it also tightened the noose around Philippine-occupied land features like the Second Thomas Shoal.

Accordingly, China&nbsp, rapidly expanded&nbsp, the number of vessels, both warships and civilian, dispatched to the area in order to cut off Philippine resupply lines near the shoal. The Asian superpower raised the stakes when it began to suspect that the Philippines had been transporting construction and materials to fortify and de facto base in spite of an alleged” secret agreement” with former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte to maintain the status quo. &nbsp,

Recent reports suggest that China has already occupied the crumbling BRP Sierra Madre, which has already been sparked by outrage and aggressive countermeasures. &nbsp, Increasingly dangerous clashes between the Philippines and China, however, have raised concerns over America’s role.

The administrations of Trump and Biden both made it clear that MDT would only be effective if Filipino troops and public vessels were attacked by armed forces. But China’s deft reliance on “gray zone” tactics has undercut the utility of the Philippine- US alliance dramatically. This gap, which has been systematically exploited by China, has been clearly identified by Pentagon strategic planners.

Last year, the&nbsp, Indo- Pacific Command ( INDOPACOM) &nbsp, released an unclassified report in which its legal experts argued that the MDT&nbsp, should also apply to&nbsp, “illegal use of force]which ] &nbsp, is not limited by law to a kinetic armed attack ( e. g. the use of munitions ), but could also include non- kinetic attacks that result in death, injury, damage, or destruction of persons or objects”.

So far, however, the Biden administration has demurred from&nbsp, expanding the parameters of the MDT and, instead, insisted on a more general rhetoric of “ironclad commitment” that clearly does n’t cover&nbsp, gray zone assaults on Philippine troops. As a result, critics are beginning to question the Marcos administration’s decision to increase military support for Western allies without making specific commitments to the escalating South China Sea disputes. &nbsp,

Despite China’s lack of appetite for compromise on its expansive claims across the disputed waters, both the Marcos administration and the US have so far pressed for a diplomatic approach. Manila is likely to push for revisions of the rules governing its mutual defense obligations with America in response to growing domestic pressure.

It’s still to be seen if Washington is willing to increase its military ties to its besieged Southeast Asian ally now that the superpower is facing competing priorities around the world and the US presidential election is about to start.

Continue Reading

Japan frets over its ‘digital deficit’ – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

With exports of AI processors rising to record levels, the monthly balance of payments deficit in online services has more than doubled to about 5.5 trillion ($ 34 billion ) in Japan, which is a phrase. Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft dominate the net- based businesses, while Nvidia and other overseas companies provide Japan with superior computing- related logic ICs.

Digital services include e- commerce and online advertising, social media, conceptual AI, email, search and other digital services, bright phone and computer operating systems, application software and subscriptions, cloud computing and data storage and associated consulting services.

High business stocks are a result of new market research findings.

  • Amazon in e- commerce ( 48.6 % ) versus Japan’s Rakuten ( 32.4 % ),
  • Apple in cell phones (60.2 % ) versus Samsung ( 7.5 % ) and Sony ( 4.6 % ),
  • Microsoft Windows ( 43.3 % ) versus Apple iOS ( 23.8 % ) and Google Android ( 16.3 % ), and
  • Google Search ( 78 % ) versus Microsoft Bing ( 11 % ) and Yahoo! Search ( 10 % ).

Rakuten is the only Chinese company in these markets with a considerable presence, and Amazon has been its rival.

Japan’s complete trade deficit for goods and services was$ 6. 0 trillion in March 2024, which is almost twice as large as its electronic deficit. Due to the end of the Covid crisis and the loss of the yen, it has increased in size than outbound tourism profits, which has increased.

Japan’s Digital Agency has developed a thorough “priority policy system for realizing modern society” in an effort to address this issue. In order to improve the nation’s industrial base and reverse the decline in employee productivity, the program aims to encourage the use of data, conceptual AI, and other modern technologies.

The company would also like to increase the now lower level of satisfaction with the government’s online services, including My Number individual identification, by making them more convenient and reliable.

Digitalization is also used to address Japan’s increasing natural disasters, reduce the impact of waste disposal, and improve health care.

Japan’s declining population and persistently worsening labor shortage make all of these issues even more pressing.

In addition, as digitalization proceeds, so does the need for cyber security. By the end of the decade, the Japanese government intends to increase the number of certified information security specialists from 20 000 to 50 000. In doing so, it wants to make sure that government offices, at the regional and local levels as well as the national level, can access the specialists ‘ expertise to small and medium-sized businesses, not just large corporations.

The looming retirement of the majority of the employees in charge of keeping them running also poses a problem. It is also a problem. This is being called the” 2025 digital cliff”. Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry ( METI ) estimates potential losses at ¥12 trillion ($ 75 billion ).

Smaller businesses typically run into this risk because they lack the resources to find, train, or pay for the digital systems and services they require. Japan’s large multinational companies do not have this problem. In this regard, Hitachi and NEC stand out as two recognizable examples of businesses that are ahead of METI and the Digital Agency.

NEC, Japan’s largest provider of telecommunications equipment and social infrastructure software and services, bases its long- term growth strategy on the transition from 5G to 6G, digital government, smart cities and digital finance. It supports cloud computing from Microsoft Azure and Amazon Web Services. Additionally, NEC offers facial recognition systems for use at airports in Japan and some other countries.

Hitachi, Japan’s largest industrial conglomerate, now gets nearly 30 % of its sales from the digital transformations in national and local government, finance, telecommunications and media, energy, transport and logistics, healthcare and, of course, manufacturing.

This was largely achieved by GlobalLogic’s acquisition of US-based Digital Engineering Services for$ 9.6 billion in 2021. GlobalLogic, which is now growing at a rate of more than 15 % per year, is forecast to provide 22 % of Hitachi’s consolidated revenue this fiscal year.

These and other Japanese companies are pursuing digitalization in cooperation, not competition, with US companies, and the digital deficit is partially offset by direct foreign investment. Google and Microsoft both have data centers in Japan, while Amazon has several logistics centers.

Another example: KDDI, Japan’s second ranking mobile telecom carrier, is in discussions with US server provider Supermicro to acquire space in Japan for a large new data center using Nvidia AI processors.

Taro Kono, Japan’s minister for digital transformation, told reporters last week that the key metric is “how many of the]digital ] systems and programs that everyone uses are made in Japan”.

That may be true, but from an overall economic perspective, it is not in line with the Digital Agency’s efforts to increase productivity and address the labor shortage. In 2023, Japan’s overall trade surplus with the US ( in both goods and services ) was$ 63 billion, or more than 10 times its digital deficit, which is mostly with the US. Based on their comparative advantages, the two nations have complementary trade relationships.

In contrast, China is building its own, increasingly autonomous digital economy. Japan has no corporate equivalents of Alibaba, Baidu or Huawei, but as things stand now, it does n’t need them. Follow this writer on&nbsp, X: @ScottFo83517667

Continue Reading

US future fighter plans in freefall – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The US Air Force is in a budget dispute over the cost of replacing the F-22 Raptors and paying for fighters of the future, which has sparked debates about upcoming air dominance and strategic priorities versus near-peer adversaries.

The US Government Accountability Office ( GAO ) criticized the USAF’s proposed budget for the fiscal year 2023, according to Airforce Technology this month. According to the GAO, the USAF failed to provide enough information to Congress regarding the effects of retiring older F-22 Raptor stealth fighters, especially the Block 20 training variants.

Airforce Technology notes that &nbsp, USAF operates 32 F- 22 Block 20 soldiers, never upgraded to the potential levels of the more sophisticated Block 30/35 designs.

The USAF’s plan, according to the GAO, lacked important details, including other teaching strategies without Block 20s and possible advantages of upgrading these plane rather than retiring them.

According to Northrop Grumman, upgrading the Block 20 aircraft to the Block 30/35 standard would cost at least$ 3.3 billion and take roughly 15 years. It points out, however, that the USAF deemed this minimal data to be enough for its uses in contrast to the GAO’s suggestion for more in-depth data to support decision-making.

Additionally, the release mentions that the National Defense Authorization Act prohibits reducing the F- 22 products. That prevents Block 20 plane from retiring until the Air Force’s secretary presents a comprehensive program to Congress.

The Next Generation Air Dominance system also has a possible uncertain future because it was once touted as the future of US air superiority. The USAF is considering shifts to its NGAD programme, which aimed to create a sixth-generation fighter aircraft, according to a report released this month from Defense One. Due to budget constraints, technical difficulties, and the development of air supremacy principles, Defense One points out.

The release mentions that General David Allvin, the Air Force’s chief of staff, and Frank Kendall, the Air Force’s minister, have resisted funding the NGAD program. This time, the software was scheduled to choose a champion between Lockheed Martin and Boeing. But, the USAF’s devotion to the system is now in question, with Allvin emphasizing that no ultimate decision has been made.

Defense One takes note of the NGAD’s possible withdrawal and its significant effects on the US defense sector. Delays in Lockheed Martin’s F- 35 programme and Boeing’s disappointing security efficiency are contributing factors, along with Boeing’s management issues and Lockheed Martin’s lack of incentives for cost- successful execution.

Defense One points out that the USAF struggles with funding for the F-35, B-21 Raider, and Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile ( ICBM ) programs, which are estimated to cost USD 300 million per unit. Additionally, it claims that new developments in drones and new technologies are reevaluating air dominance strategies.

The F-22 may become obsolete upon delivery, despite the US’s efforts to upgrade it to maintain its relevance as an air superiority platform.

As part of its plan to evolve military hardware and manage potential technological risks, the USAF decided to develop more advanced and combat-ready F-22 models in May 2024 in response to Asia Times ‘ report.

Over the next ten years, the US F-22 fleet will receive a USD 22 billion upgrade, which might allow the fighter to remain operational until the 2040s.

The F- 22 aircraft will undergo significant upgrades to improve its avionics, stealth capability, and overall survivability. These upgrades will be applied to 142 F- 22s, addressing various maintenance and operational requirements.

However, putting together an F-22 upgrade will require a lot of time and resources that could be better used to create a more sophisticated fighter. By the time the upgrades are finished, there are also concerns that the F-22 might no longer be relevant for its intended purpose.

Additionally, Asia Times has noted that the US military might not make the best use of resources from the sixth generation. It might be preferable to concentrate on more affordable unmanned systems and space-based weapons platforms that are in line with future strategic requirements.

The US military’s effectiveness may be compromised by excessive investment in complex and expensive warplanes, particularly in crucial areas like space.

Despite having several options available, the US has its own set of challenges. Older aircraft are reaching the end of their upgrade potential, longer development times for new fighter jets, F-35 production issues, and cost-benefit challenges when upgrading the F-22.

Heather Penney advises the Air Force to continue extending the life of some of the older aircraft because they are essential for combat infrastructure in a paper from the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies in October 2021. Penney points out that in order to maintain combat capability, older aircraft are no longer practical in contested battlespace.

Penney makes the point that the F-15EX can provide a stopgap solution for the USAF’s fighter woes, but it lacks the resilience of stealth aircraft, and funding for it could be better used to develop fighter aircraft that is current with threats.

Penney suggests that a clean-sheet fighter design might be a viable option in a near-peer conflict, but it must also be affordable and affordable enough to allow recapitalization and high-tempo usage. She claims that the only realistic course of action is to speed up F-35A procurement given the length of any new fighter program.

But that course of action has its challenges. The F-35 stealth fighter program has been delayed, and the USAF may not be able to purchase as many F-35s as originally planned due to budget cuts, according to an article from Asia Times in March 2024. Despite this, the 2025 cuts will still allow for progress on modernization.

Penney claims that there is no other credible fifth-generation aircraft that can compete with China and Russia while the US struggles to ramp up F-35 production.

In addition, Penney notes that while the USAF determines how to advance its NGAD program, extending the service life of the F- 22 fleet is imperative, albeit taking into account previously mentioned pitfalls.

Continue Reading

Trump: Biden NATO plans provoked the Ukraine war – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Bombshell statement&nbsp, in&nbsp,’ All In’ audio ignored by key US internet

Former US President Donald Trump made a bomb statement undetected by the mainstream US news media that suggested he should join NATO in the wake of President Biden’s proposal to launch an attack on Ukraine.

” Biden was saying all the bad points”, Trump told&nbsp, opportunity capitalist&nbsp, David Sacks. &nbsp,” And one of the worst points he was saying was, not, Ukraine will go into NATO”. The Republican presidential candidate added,” When I listened to him talk, I said, this guy’s going to start a battle. As you may well know, there has never even been a hint of Russia entering Ukraine. That would have rarely happened. Russia was never going to harm Ukraine….

” Subsequently all of a sudden, they attack. I said,’ What’s going on ok?’ But if you look at the language from Biden… he’s also saying it,” Trump&nbsp, added.

The dark story of an “unprovoked” Russian invasion on Ukraine was repeated endlessly in the popular media’s echo chamber by the former leader and Republican presidential candidate for 2024. The US Establishment is then subject to the humiliation of having sparked a conflict with Russia before losing it. Worse than a violence,” Napoleon’s foreign secretary Talleyrand quipped”, it’s a blunder. ” &nbsp,

A day later, &nbsp, British Reform Party leader&nbsp, Nigel Farage, a Trump companion, &nbsp, repeated Trump’s claim”. This man was being given a cause by NATO’s and the European Union’s constant rise to give him the excuse to declare that his Russian allies are coming for us once more and declare war. &nbsp, We’ve provoked this battle,” Farage told a BBC recruiter”. Of sure it’s his wrong –&nbsp, he’s used what we’ve done as an reason.”

In contrast to the sandy quietness of their American peers, the whole of the American media excoriated Farage, the Brexit president whose Reform Party is today polling ahead of the former American Conservatives&nbsp, as the July 4 general election approaches. &nbsp, The British press ignored Trump’s earlier remarks entirely. A link to a report from the Kyiv Independent served as the only document on the Google News page.

Because no British media will write Trump’s undetected remarks, it is important to include them in this lengthy article.

” This would have never happened if I were leader, Trump continued. “Ukraine would have never happened. The Jewish invasion would have never occurred. And prices would have never happened. Those are three great stuff. Look, I&nbsp, read the other day, Ukraine is now, where they do n’t have &nbsp, the soldiers, they do n’t have the manpower, they want to use old people”.

” The typical age of their soldiers&nbsp, is 43, so they’re running out of&nbsp, people”, Sacks responded, and asked:” Mr. President, I appreciate your comment that you want to bring a peace deal to Ukraine so that people stop dying, and I fully agree with that attitude. If it were necessary for the Russians and Ukrainians to reach a peace agreement, would you be willing to abandon NATO rise? Do you have the time to complete that?”

Trump&nbsp, replied: &nbsp,” But, &nbsp, for twenty times, I heard that if Ukraine goes into NATO it’s a real concern for Russia. I’ve heard that for a long time. And I think that’s truly why this combat started…. One of the things Biden was saying was, not, Ukraine will join NATO, and he was saying all the wrong things. When I listened to&nbsp, him speak I said,’ This dude’s going to start a conflict.’ As you know, &nbsp, for four decades there&nbsp, was never&nbsp, even talk of Russia going into Ukraine. &nbsp, That would have rarely happened. &nbsp, Russia was never going to strike Ukraine”.

Sacks added,” The month before&nbsp, the Russians invaded, &nbsp ,]Secretary of State Antony ] Blinken told]Russian Foreign Minister Sergei] Lavrov that the administration &nbsp, not&nbsp, only was going to bring Ukraine into NATO, but they thought it was ok for the&nbsp, US … to&nbsp, put nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Why did the Russians explode in terror? &nbsp, You talk about offense”.

Trump replied:” This declare you were running Russia. You would n’t be too happy. That’s always been off the board. That’s a border…They do n’t want to have soldiers right on their border. &nbsp, It’s always been understood, and that ‘s&nbsp, yet before Putin. &nbsp, You can go against their wishes, and it does n’t mean it’s right when they say that, but it’s very provocative”.

Biden&nbsp, played cautious about Ukraine’s possible participation in NATO, but&nbsp, he&nbsp, told Ukraine’s President Zelensky&nbsp, in December 2021&nbsp, that it was off to Ukraine whether to add or not, a de facto support of Ukraine’s NATO account. &nbsp, There was no lack of clarity about Biden’s position. &nbsp, Sen. Josh Hawley&nbsp, ( R. MO), a Trump ally, called on the Biden Administration to drop its support for Ukraine’s NATO membership in February 2022, just before the Russian invasion. &nbsp,

In his February 23, 2022 address on the eve of the Russian invasion, Putin spelled out why Russia would n’t tolerate Ukraine’s NATO membership. It would allow the United States to fly quickly from Moscow to intercept short-range missiles. ” The Alliance, its military infrastructure, has reached Russia’s borders”, Putin said, adding:

This is one of the main reasons behind the European security crisis, which has had the worst impact on the entire international relations system and caused the loss of trust.

The&nbsp, United States is developing its all- purpose Standard Missile- 6, which can provide air and missile defense, as well as strike ground and surface targets. In other words, the allegedly defensive US missile defense system is advancing and enhancing its…

The Pentagon has been actively developing a number of land-based attack weapons, including ballistic missiles that can strike targets at distances of up to 5,500 kilometers. If deployed in Ukraine, such systems will be able to hit targets in Russia’s entire European part. Tomahawk cruise missiles will take less than 35 minutes to fly to Moscow, ballistic missiles from Kharkov will take seven to eight, and hypersonic assault weapons will take four to five.

It is like a knife to the throat. I have &nbsp, no doubt that they hope to carry out these plans, as they did many times in the past, expanding NATO eastward, moving their military infrastructure to Russian borders and fully ignoring our concerns, protests, and warnings.

The issues are the same as in the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. Russian missiles were sent to Cuba after the United States placed medium-range nuclear missiles on its Turkish border with Russia. After the US agreed to remove its missiles from Turkey, a deal that was kept secret for years for security reasons, Russia agreed to do so.

Because Russia detailed and in-depth how it would respond, members of the Washington establishment were aware of how Russia would respond. However, the establishment saw this as an opportunity to oust Russia with economic sanctions.

Biden&nbsp, tweeted&nbsp, on March 22, 2022,” As a result of our unprecedented sanctions, the ruble was almost immediately reduced to rubble. Russian GDP is expected to shrink by 50 %. Prior to this invasion, it was ranked as the 11th-largest economy in the world, and it will soon not even be in the top 20.

In 2023, Russia overtook Japan to take fourth place in world economic rankings, according to the World Bank.

The Ukraine disaster has the potential to permanently undermine American hegemony, in addition to the “forever wars” in Afghanistan and Iraq. &nbsp, America’s allies ( or soon- to- be- former allies ) have no illusions about this.

“Ukraine and the collapse of the West” was the headline June 23 of Germany’s largest- circulation daily newsletter, the&nbsp, Pioneer Briefing. “Ukraine is exhausted, the conservative camp is split and business would like to normalize relations with Russia, wrote editor&nbsp, Gabor Steingart. &nbsp, He cited six reasons why the war was lost:

  • Ukraine is an” exhausted country,”
  • the West’s strategy of isolating Russia has failed,
  • America is tired of exporting democracy,
  • Germany is reversing its support for a persistent war:
  • the conservative camp is split, with prominent Christian Democrat Armin Laschet&nbsp, endorsing the Social- Democratic government’s caution towards Ukraine, &nbsp, and
  • business is already looking ahead towards reconstruction.

Laschet, the&nbsp, 2021 Christian Democratic candidate for Chancellor, &nbsp, endorsed Olaf Scholz’s policy of” prudence and caution” with respect to Ukraine, upending the&nbsp, hawkish position of CDU leader Friedrich Merz.

In the July 9&nbsp, European Parliament elections, antiwar parties, most prominently the Alternative für Deutschland ( AfD ), gained sharply at the expense of the Social Democrats and Greens. Even more remarkably, a plurality of members of the Christian Democrats, Germany’s largest party, told Die Welt in a recent poll that they would prefer a coalition with the AfD over any other party.

According to internal AfD polling results, German voters prioritized the Ukraine war. &nbsp, Twenty- six percent of respondents said that” securing peace “was their number one concern, followed by social security ( at 23 percent ) and immigration at 17 percent. &nbsp,

Having failed to isolate, much less defeat, Russia, the establishment is calling for desperate measures, including attacks on military infrastructure with Western weapons from Ukrainian territory. &nbsp, Putin responded by offering high- tech Russian weaponry, as yet unspecified, to North Korea, a nuclear power considered a wild card by its neighbors.

Putin’s visit to North Korea last week sent a chill through the Establishment. The&nbsp, New York Times&nbsp, wrote:

Mr. Putin’s visit to Pyongyang and the announcement of a pact to provide “mutual assistance in the event of aggression” were two of the most heartfelt&nbsp, back-to-the-Crypt moments yet, underscoring that efforts by the world’s three biggest nuclear powers to halt North Korea’s nuclear proliferation had been in decline for some time.

Putin made far more of a pledge to maintain nuclear restraint than he ever did. He promised unspecified technological assistance that, if it were implemented in the few crucial technologies Mr. Kim had sought to develop, would allow the North to create a warhead that would survive re-enter space and pose a threat to its numerous adversaries, starting with the United States.

Americans play Monopoly, Russians play chess. Putin proposed a geopolitical flank that might exacerbate West relations, with the goal of making Ukraine more neutral and the result of Russian territorial gains.

Continue Reading

Putin’s high-risk North Korea gambit – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The Russian government’s excursion to North Korea affects international calculations, spreading volatility worldwide. China may now be interested in separating itself from him.

Shortly after establishing the People’s Republic of China ( PRC ) on October 1, 1949, China entered one of its most controversial historical periods. PRC leader Mao Zedong planned to attack Taiwan, where Chiang Kai- shek’s remnant nationalist forces ( Kuomintang or KMT ) had escaped. Stalin pressured Maoist to engage in the Korean War in the late 1950s, presumably because of his years of discussions with Americans. The conditions for a deadlock and peace that continue to this day were created by Chinese troops as they battled the Americans and fortified them.

Chinese treatment, but, prompted the US to build its ships in the Taiwan Strait, making the “liberation of Taiwan” difficult and turning it into the most unpleasant thorn in Beijing’s foreign legislation ever since.

There are many ideas and some ideas still floating around why Mao ordered his troops to Korea. But certainly, the Russians were acoustic in that choice. Stalin aided the Communists in their 1949 defeat of the KMT by providing Russian weapons and perhaps even Soviet forces. Stalin wanted to entice Mao and the US to ensure the success of North Korea. At a crucial time for China, Mao abandoned Taiwan in favor of the difficult North Korea.

The prominent Chinese journal Strategy and Management suggested that Chinese troops might encourage North Korea to engage in actual peace talks in the early 2000s, but many in Beijing were also looking for a way to advance. In returning, the US could offer better words to the PRC about Taiwan. The article’s author claims that North Korea reportedly demanded the publication’s closure. Beijing, fearing more escalations, complied.

Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia, appears to be trying to entice China farther away from the US using other means and implies. The days are very distinct, and Russia is significantly weaker than China, but the result may be related to 74 years ago – pushing Beijing furthest from Washington. China’s position on North Korea might once more be important.

Russia has tried to entice Beijing ever since the start of the conflict in Ukraine in February 2022. First, Beijing perhaps had believed in an easy Soviet win. When that did n’t materialize, Beijing attempted to maintain a certain distance. Even the most recent conflict with the US over Ukraine demonstrates that China’s place does not align with Russia completely. China emphasizes that it does not directly violate US requests ( for example, not giving weapons to Russia ). Yet, the US argues that China is aiding Russia’s military r- industrialization and that its bankers support Moscow’s money.

But Putin’s visit to Pyongyang shifts all indicators.

Russian and North Korean leaders claim to have signed a strong defense deal that resembles the one they did eight years ago. There is persuasive language it. Where does it keep China? Does it continue to erode relations with the West, or will it try to break free from the acknowledge and possibly join the alliance?

However, the new empire gave North Korea more flapping place from China’s widespread command, which existed before the Ukraine conflict. The empire tilted the Asian region’s energy balance against South Korea. Seoul will need to rebalance in order to cause the condition to worsen. This development is omitted from the PRC’s control.

Kim Jong-un, the president of North Korea, has his own ideas. During Putin’s attend to Pyongyang, he skipped the recently customary tribute to Kim’s father and grandfather. Moreover, Kim announced that his daughter would acquire his” throne”, breaking tradition. These details might reveal his desire to make some changes. The 74- yr- ancient truce may be in jeopardy.

It alters American and British perceptions of Putin, which is terrible news for China. Some American economists have argued that Russia should be protected in order to prevent Central Asia from bowing under the strain of China and to persuade Putin to rebel against Beijing.

But, perhaps the plan may be too convoluted. It is backfiring, giving Putin to several tools to perform.

If the Iraqi War Had Been Unique

The US was about to annex Iraq in 2003, claiming command of Afghanistan. Without resorting to excessive inner meddling, the United States would have established bases in both locations to maintain essential European communication routes if Saddam Hussein had been replaced by someone else and supported one Afghan tribe or group. By then, there could have been major changes in both places if its light-handed approach had also been combined with long-term support for improving education.

Incidentally, the American presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, by showing the area’s strategic importance, contributed to convincing China about the Belt and Road initiative ( BRI ) in the following decade.

In turn, it could have shown China, then on the gate about its coming, the USA’s strength and vision and helped shift Beijing towards transformation. The US would now be stronger with Iraq and Afghanistan and could have played a diverse game with China, gaining more global influence over time even if Beijing had continued without measures. In the years that followed, Putin may have behaved separately.

Today, the USA is in hard circumstances. The USA needs to combine hard opportunities. Putin is still a social brilliance who has spread his proper influence around the world, despite having socially lost the war in Ukraine and having been unable to militarily defeat Ukrainian opposition. He has repeatedly swayed China away from the US, reacted violently in Africa, supported Hamas and Iran, and stoked the support of politicians and businessmen in Europe. Then, he has secured North Korea’s copper- clad support, involving South Korea and Japan ( worried about an empowered Kim ) in the Russian war.

Because the US was stifled by the Ukrainian conflict, Beijing believed that China had rest for a while while it was still at war. That is no longer the case.

In this match, China is being portrayed as a slave with less breathing room. Unless China breaks Russia’s embrace, it will become an instrument in a Russian sport it ca n’t control. China is simply gaining fresh complications from its problems because it does not receive the support it needs from Russia despite its frictions and worries about the US and its relatives.

It’s like the 1950s all over again, Moscow is trapping Beijing. Mao could n’t break free. Did his successor, President Xi Jinping, handle it? Does he want to? Now more than ever, America is generally against China, making choosing a different way trying. Besides, thought processes, like physical movements, have inertia, and for China to realize it is being trapped by Russia and react accordingly would n’t be easy.

In this scenario, Putin is a wild cards, disrupting the world get to an extraordinary degree. He may get caught as soon as possible. The longer he roams freely, the more important the upheaval. More risk exists even now because of the possibility that he might make a diplomatic pact with China.

He is also dishonest, always keeps his word, and is impossible to trust. His political stance makes mid- to long-term techniques perplexed.

Cornering Putin does n’t come at no cost; it can have consequences and help pave the way for the future. It keeps China in the fray, opening up ability political and economic options. It secures Europe, wiping out Russia’s area of interest, which may mess things up in America, the Middle East, and Asia.

Francesco Sisci, an analyst and pundit on politicians with over 30 years of practice in Asia, is the director of&nbsp, Appia Institute, which actually published this article. &nbsp, It is republished with authority.

Continue Reading

Corner Putin, Agent of Chaos – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The Russian government’s excursion to North Korea affects international calculations, spreading volatility worldwide. China may now be interested in separating itself from him.

Shortly after establishing the People’s Republic of China ( PRC ) on October 1, 1949, China entered one of its most controversial historical periods. PRC leader Mao Zedong planned to attack Taiwan, where Chiang Kai- shek’s remnant nationalist forces ( Kuomintang or KMT ) had escaped. Stalin pressured Communist to engage in the Korean War in the late 1950s, presumably because of his years of discussions with Americans. The conditions for a standoff and peace that continue to this day were created by Chinese troops as they battled the Americans and fortified them.

Chinese treatment, but, prompted the US to build its ships in the Taiwan Strait, making the “liberation of Taiwan” difficult and turning it into the most unpleasant thorn in Beijing’s foreign legislation ever since.

There are many ideas and some ideas still floating around why Mao ordered his troops to Korea. But certainly, the Russians were acoustic in that choice. Stalin aided the Communists in their 1949 defeat of the KMT by providing Russian weapons and perhaps even Soviet forces. Stalin wanted to entice Mao and the US to ensure the success of North Korea. At a crucial time for China, Mao abandoned Taiwan in favor of the difficult North Korea.

The important Chinese journal Strategy and Management suggested that Chinese troops might encourage North Korea to engage in actual peace talks in the early 2000s, but many in Beijing were also looking for a way to advance. In returning, the US could offer better words to the PRC about Taiwan. The article’s author claims that North Korea reportedly demanded the publication’s closure. Beijing, fearing additional escalations, complied.

Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia, appears to be trying to entice China farther away from the US using other means and methods. The days are very distinct, and Russia is significantly weaker than China, but the result may be related to 74 years ago – pushing Beijing furthest from Washington. China’s position on North Korea might once more be critical.

Russia has tried to entice Beijing ever since the start of the conflict in Ukraine in February 2022. First, Beijing perhaps had believed in an easy Soviet win. When that did n’t materialize, Beijing attempted to maintain a certain distance. Even the most recent conflict with the US over Ukraine demonstrates that China’s place does not align with Russia completely. China emphasizes that it does not directly violate US requests ( for example, not giving weapons to Russia ). Yet, the US argues that China is aiding Russia’s military r- industrialization and that its bankers support Moscow’s money.

But Putin’s visit to Pyongyang shifts all indicators.

Russian and North Korean leaders claim to have signed a strong military deal that resembles the one they did eight years back. There is persuasive speech that. Where does it keep China? Does it continue to erode relations with the West, or will it try to break free from the acknowledge and possibly join the alliance?

However, the new empire gave North Korea more flapping place from China’s widespread command, which existed before the Ukraine conflict. The empire tilted the Asian region’s energy balance against South Korea. Seoul will need to rebalance in order to cause the condition to worsen. This creation is omitted from the PRC’s control.

Kim Jong-un, the president of North Korea, has his own ideas. During Putin’s attend to Pyongyang, he skipped the recently customary tribute to Kim’s father and grandfather. Moreover, Kim announced that his daughter would gain his” throne”, breaking tradition. These details might suggest his desire to make some changes. The 74- yr- ancient truce may be in jeopardy.

It alters European and American perceptions of Putin, which is terrible news for China. Some American economists have argued that Russia should be protected in order to prevent Central Asia from bowing under the strain of China and to persuade Putin to rebel against Beijing.

But, perhaps the plan may be too convoluted. It is backfiring, giving Putin to several tools to perform.

If the Iraqi War Had Been Various

The US was about to annex Iraq in 2003, claiming power of Afghanistan. Without resorting to excessive inside meddling, the United States would have established bases in both locations to maintain essential European communication routes if Saddam Hussein had been replaced by someone else and supported one Afghan tribe or group. By then, there could have been major changes in both areas if its light-handed approach had also been combined with long-term support for improving education.

Incidentally, the American presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, by showing the area’s strategic importance, contributed to convincing China about the Belt and Road initiative ( BRI ) in the following decade.

In turn, it could have shown China, then on the gate about its coming, the USA’s strength and vision and helped shift Beijing towards transformation. The US would now be stronger with Iraq and Afghanistan and could have played a diverse game with China, gaining more global influence over time even if Beijing had continued without changes. In the years that followed, Putin may have behaved separately.

Today, the USA is in hard circumstances. The USA needs to combine hard opportunities. Putin is still a social brilliance who has spread his proper influence around the world, despite having socially lost the war in Ukraine and having been unable to militarily defeat Ukrainian opposition. He has repeatedly swayed China away from the US, reacted violently in Africa, supported Hamas and Iran, and stoked the support of politicians and businessmen in Europe. Then, he has secured North Korea’s copper- clad support, involving South Korea and Japan ( worried about an empowered Kim ) in the Russian war.

Because the US was stifled by the Ukrainian conflict, Beijing believed that China was rest for a while while it was still at war. That is no longer the case.

In this match, China is being portrayed as a puppet with less breathing room. Unless China breaks Russia’s embrace, it will become an instrument in a Russian sport it ca n’t control. China is simply gaining fresh complications from its problems because it does not receive the support it needs from Russia despite its frictions and worries about the US and its relatives.

It’s like the 1950s all over again, Moscow is trapping Beijing. Mao could n’t break free. Does his successor, President Xi Jinping, handle it? Does he want to? Now more than ever, America is generally against China, making choosing a different way trying. Besides, thought processes, like physical movements, have inertia, and for China to realize it is being trapped by Russia and react accordingly would n’t be easy.

In this scenario, Putin is a wild cards, disrupting the world get to an extraordinary degree. He may get caught as soon as possible. The longer he roams easily, the more important the disturbance. More risk exists even now because of the possibility that he might make a diplomatic pact with China.

He is also dishonest, always keeps his word, and is impossible to trust. His political stance makes mid- to long-term techniques perplexed.

Cornering Putin does n’t come at no cost; it can have consequences and help pave the way for the future. It keeps China in the fray, opening up prospective political and economic solutions. It secures Europe, wiping out Russia’s area of interest, which may mess things up in America, the Middle East, and Asia.

Francesco Sisci, an analyst and pundit on politicians with over 30 years of practice in Asia, is the director of&nbsp, Appia Institute, which actually published this article. &nbsp, It is republished with authority.

Continue Reading

Multipolar trading strategy – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Subscribe now&nbsp, for access at a special price of only$ 99/year.

China danger continues to dissipate: Stay with Chinese technology stocks

According to David P. Goldman, the simple fact that danger is declining and that global traders who have kept their Foreign contact below their measures then believe it’s safe to retrace their steps is what gave Chinese tech shares their most vigor.

Social challenges in Europe emerging

The political challenges in Europe are becoming more and more obvious as a result of the elections in Europe, according to Diego Faßnacht. In France, this is most obvious to see. There were some incredibly disorganized things to happen after President Emmanuel Macron announced new legislative elections.

Refusal of BRICS nations impedes the peace mountain.

According to James Davis, the most recent European Peace Conference lacked significant pressure from Moscow, leading to an obvious failure. The last declaration, which had already been diluted, was rejected by all of the BRICS states present at the gathering.

” Chinese Gentleman Stand Up Satisfy”

According to Scott Foster, Bank of Japan ( BOJ) Governor Kazuo Ueda is under pressure to act as real wages decline and rising living costs continue to put pressure on consumers as inflation and inflation cause the yen’s exchange rate to the US dollar and support for Japan’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party ( LDP ) weaken.

Continue Reading

China hawk: Fix symbolic, ineffective US sanctions – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

According to a Trump-era US industry standard who was known as the” China hawk,” the Trump administration should tighten its restrictions and export controls against China, which are currently insufficient to prevent Chinese companies from exporting dual-use goods to Russia and using American technology.

Nazak Nikakhtar believes that sanctioned organizations can easily be evaded because they can conceal themselves by starting layers of shell companies or just owning a majority interest in their businesses.

Nikakhtar, who from 2018 to 2021 was assistant secretary for industry and analysis at the US Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration ( ITA ), spoke with Asia Times in an interview.

Nazak Nikakhtar, a companion in the Wiley Rein LLP’s global trade process, is shown in this photo. waller. rules

She suggested that US President Donald Trump impose” regional restrictions” on those who supported the Ukrainian military. &nbsp, &nbsp,

” Folks can establish document companies to avoid US sanctions,” the statement read. However, if we apply sector-specific sanctions to our SDN List [Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List], it will become a little challenging, according to Nikakhtar, who is now the head of the fund’s national security process and is a companion in the global business practice at the British law firm Wiley Rein LLP.

She said that targeting financial corporations would have a “broader financial impact.” The banks should be raised by the phrase “if a paper business suddenly deals with tens of millions of dollars of purchases over.”

She claimed that these crimson flags allow the US government to recognize cautious businesses.

Regional restrictions

The US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control ( OFAC ) released the Sectoral Sanctions Identifications List ( SSI List ) in July of 2014 and added prominent figures from Russia’s financial and energy sectors to it. &nbsp, &nbsp,

Since the Ukrainian War started in February 2022, the SSI List has grown tremendously. Restrictions apply to businesses whose lot bets are owned by those on the SSI List directly or indirectly. Some Russians and Chinese citizens have also discovered ways to evade US restrictions. &nbsp,

According to Nikakhtar, the current US sanctions against Russia and China were very narrow and incremental, giving them the opportunity to create systems that would withstand them. &nbsp,

Given that we do n’t usually punishment many Chinese businesses, the Biden presidency feels like it has made a major shift in this regard,” she said. ” Do these things matter? Symbolically, yes. Do they, however, have any deterrent effects when used in a manner that deters human use? No”.

According to her,” the US government really needs to consider an alternative strategy because current methods are not punishing but ultimately weaken our capacity for sanctions.”

Washington has sanctioned about 1,500 Chinese businesses since a trade war between the US and China in 2018 and accused them of supporting Moscow’s military in Ukraine, violating international human rights, providing products to the People’s Liberation Army with high-tech products, and launching cyberattacks. &nbsp, &nbsp,

These sanctions were imposed following lengthy investigations. After Russia fired 136 suicide drones at Ukrainian troops using Iranian-made Shaheds in August of this year, the Bureau of Industry and Security ( BIS ) of the US Commerce Department identified and sanctioned three Hong Kong businesses that supplied the drone parts.

Sanctioning Chinese banks

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said that if Chinese financial institutions were involved in shipments that increased Russia’s military might, the US could impose sanctions on them. &nbsp,

Four more Chinese banks recently stopped accepting payments from Russia, according to a report in the Russian newspaper Izvestia on April 12 after three of the world’s largest Chinese banks did the same in February. &nbsp,

A US official told Reuters on April 22 that the country had no immediate plans to impose sanctions on Chinese banks.

Nikakhtar claimed that China’s current de-dollarization plan has remained stalled due to its own economic issues, making the threat of sanctioning Chinese banks a real risk.

She said,” I would advise any administration to avoid using traditional methods, but instead consider combining multiple methods to achieve the best impact,” noting that the import restrictions and tariffs are two other examples. &nbsp,

She claimed that” the government has a lot of information” about how Russian and Chinese people trade. It has the authority to impose sanctions on both those who may be indirectly involved in the transactions and those who are significant and significant enough to have a significant economic impact on the Chinese economy.

For example, she said, if any Chinese automakers are found to have supported Russia’s war efforts by supplying Moscow with their armored vehicles, they should be sanctioned. &nbsp,

” By rethinking how we use sanctions and other tools, we could still proceed narrowly, but having a bigger and more significant economic impact”, she said. The US government does n’t seem to be comfortable with stepping back, I believe.

In fact, Washington has recently expanded the scope of its sanctions against Chinese businesses. &nbsp,

Gold bars. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

VPower Finance Security, a Hong Kong-based logistics service provider, was sanctioned by the US Treasury Department on June 12 for allegedly helping to transport Russian-origined gold, which had been sold to some businesses in the UAE and Hong Kong, into fiat money and cryptocurrencies. VPower’s clients include big Chinese banks, retail brands and the Hong Kong government. &nbsp,

Chip export controls

In an effort to reduce China’s chip industry, the Biden administration has tightened its export controls over the past few years. &nbsp,

However, according to reports in the media, China can still purchase expensive US chips from smugglers or third countries, and Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp ( SMIC ) used deep ultraviolet lithography last year to create 7 nanometer chips. In recent years, the nation has also updated its electronic design automation ( EDA ) software. &nbsp,

On March 29, the US revised its export control regulations to make it harder for China to import US-made artificial intelligence chips and chips.

The US government should consider where it is going if 90 % of certain chips ‘ exports were traditionally made in China but now are made there through a third nation without any industry to support that kind of volume, Nikakhtar said. &nbsp,

” Before it provides license authorizations, the US government can start looking at parties involved in the financial transactions, their banks, beneficiaries and account holders”, she said. It can initially license a very small amount of trade before sending it to the end-use-checkers to check the legitimacy of each institution before granting more licenses.”

She noted that the US government can look into a lot of red flag indicators, but regrettably, the Commerce Department’s export control unit is “very much oriented toward export promotion, rather than really regulating controls.”

She suggested that the US government should deregulate its export regulations for allies and establish a roadmap to restructure its chip supply chain at the same time. &nbsp,

” China has the majority of chip’s end users. What should we do while the US government tries to break the supply chain out of China? Can semiconductors be exported to other countries? How long will it take to build out that? What will happen to companies ‘ revenue in the meantime”?

Nikakhtar added that the US government’s evaluation of China’s technological prowess is currently a little superficial, underestimating the abilities of Chinese engineers. &nbsp,

She said,” An overestimate the other side to have a stronger policy is a country’s responsibility,” so that it can always have a stronger policy. &nbsp,

Read: Chinese EV firms can absorb EU tariffs: expert

Read more: Hong Kong exports rebound despite the Sino-US trade war

Follow Jeff Pao on X: &nbsp, @jeffpao3

Continue Reading

Hyundai Motor India’s attention-grabbing IPO – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The American company of Hyundai Motor is gearing up for an initial public offering on the Mumbai property sector in order to divert attention from the US and EU taxes on Chinese energy cars and, at the very least, the achievements of Tesla’s Elon Musk.

Maruti Suzuki is the second-most-used company of passenger cars in India after Hyundai. The North Korean manufacturer, which is away of Tata Motors and Mahindra &amp, Mahindra, has more than 20 % of the market, along with its advertising Kia. Although the ninth-ranked MG is owned by China’s SAIC, it should be noted that not one of India’s top car manufacturers is Taiwanese.

If the Securities and Exchange Board of India approves, Hyundai Motor India will become the first automaker to come open since Maruti Suzuki in 2003. In what appears to be India’s most important Offering, Hyundai Motor reportedly intends to sell up to$ 3 billion of its wholly-owned company. No new stock may be issued. The direct managers are international funding institutions Citigroup, HSBC, JP Morgan, and Morgan Stanley, and India’s Kotak Mahindra.

Resources: Statista data, Asia Times table

Founded in 1996, Hyundai Motor India is also the region’s second largest car company and a leading producer. It has two manufacturing facilities in the Tamil Nadu capital, Chennai, and one more in the area of Talegaon, south of Mumbai, in the state of Maharashtra.

Hyundai announced at the time that it would invest an additional$ 4 billion ($ 5 billion ) in India to increase production to one million units annually (up from the previous$ 5 billion ). Building an electric vehicle organization, including battery pack council and charging channels, is also on the plan.

Investors have been favorable with the proposed Offering, Hyundai Motor’s overall performance, and its proposed IPO. Its share price increased by nearly 6 % since the IPO’s announcement on June 15 and is now up nearly 40 % year-to-date. According to Asian stock industry analysts, the listing of Hyundai Motor India will increase the parent company’s valuation, which is now only 6.2 times the price/earnings various in Google Finance’s calculations, compared to 8.4 times for Toyota and 24x for BYD.

India accounts for almost twice as much of Hyundai’s financial unit sales as China, and it represents a proper growth market for the automaker. Hyundai Motor India offers more than a few models, from reduced- priced compacts to all- energy SUVs, through almost 1, 400 sales outlets and with about 1, 550 support points across the country.

Resources: Hyundai Motor product sales data, Asia Times table

India accounts for about 6 % of international passenger car sales that year, surpassing Japan in the original class in 2023. It is the third-largest national market for motor vehicles and fourth-largest for passenger vehicles globally. China is the nation’s largest national auto industry, followed by the US. The local EU market is 2.5 times as large as India’s industry.

Solutions: Data from Western Automobile Manufacturer’s Association and F&amp, I Tools USA, Asia Times table

Hyundai values India for 2.5 times more units sold than the global auto industry, according to system sales. Additionally, it appears that the gap will probably grow as Hyundai Motor India expands and modernizes its facilities, aiming for a more diverse product mixture in the private sector while also serving as a somewhat low-cost export base.

Hyundai affiliate Kia, on the other hand, plans to turn China into an export base for electric vehicles, starting with its EV5 compact SUV. The Middle East will be the next destination after the Middle East exports of the previously only model made in China to Thailand and Australia began in May. In Georgia, Kia plays both sides in the US-China trade dispute by producing electric SUVs.

In South Korea, Hyundai, Kia and their smaller domestic rival KG Mobility ( Ssangyong Motors ) had more than 80 % of the market in 2023, leaving the rest to BMW and Mercedes, the local operations of GM and Renault and more than 20 other imported models. This year, BYD plans to enter the Korean market, but it’s likely to find it difficult to do so.

Follow this writer on&nbsp, X: @ScottFo83517667

Continue Reading