While Trump dithers, US lawmakers push 100% tariff on China – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

A bill that would revoke China’s Permanent Normal Trade Relations ( PNTR ), previously known as the Most Favoured Nation ( MFN) trade status, and impose a 100 % tariff on a wide range of Chinese goods has been proposed by bipartisan US lawmakers. &nbsp,

Republican John Moolenaar, chairman of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, next November introduced the&nbsp, Restoring Trade Fairness Act, which, if enacted, would withdraw China’s PNTR. &nbsp,

He announced on January 23 that Democrat parliamentarian Tom Suozzi may contribute to its promotion by forming a bipartisan bill to the proposed Act. &nbsp,

The newly-inaugurated US President Donald Trump signed an executive order on January 20 that directed the US Trade Representative and the Secretary of Commerce to evaluate congressional ideas regarding China’s PNTR.

Trump had promised to establish a 60 % tax on all Chinese products on the campaign trail, but he has veered away from doing so since taking office on January 20.

The bipartisan compromise that both parties must acknowledge the need to restart our financial ties with China is a big success for both the Select Committee and our country, according to Moolenaar.

The Restoring Trade Fairness Act takes decisive action in line with President Trump’s authority, building on the tax measures passed by three successive governments.

According to the proposed Act, a wide range of Chinese goods will experience a 100 % price. They include pesticides, drugs, nuclear reactor and parts, gas turbine and parts, agricultural and construction equipment, industrial robots, motors and engines, unmanned aircraft, consumer electronic products and weapons. Other products may encounter a 35 % price.

Price increases may be entirely implemented in five times if the Act is passed and enacted. Two decades after the passage, 25 % of the complete work increase may apply. Four decades after the passage, 50 % of the complete duty increase may use. &nbsp,

Some Chinese analysts predicted that the removal of China’s Import standing would result in a 60 % price on all US imports from China in November.

Some Chinese experts predicted that China will be able to address these issues by diversifying its export to other nations. They claimed that China could retaliate against the US by depreciating the Taiwanese money, slashing American make payments, and stifling imports of market metal to the US.

But, Tu Xinquan, professor of the China Institute for WTO Studies, University of International Business and Economics, says in a new article that China should never overlook the negative effects of losing MFN position. &nbsp,

Rejecting Nafta standing results in the US no more granting China the same level of tariff protection, Tu claims. ” The US can then choose which taxes to impose on Chinese goods.”

” Revoking China’s Import reputation will also impact trade in services, intellectual property rights, diplomatic opportunities, engineering controls and officers markets between China and the US”, he says. ” China’s impact on losing the MFN status is much greater than tariff increases.”

Trump stated on January 21 that he is considering imposing a 10 % tariff on imports of all Chinese-made goods as soon as February 1. While it will take time for the US Congress to discuss the 100 % tariff. He defended his action in light of the claim that China is preventing the entry of its fentanyl precursors into North America. &nbsp,

The US president also has the option of imposing a 25 % tariff on Mexico and Canada beginning in February, citing the two neighbors ‘ failure to stop the flow of illegal immigrants and drugs.

AmCham concerns&nbsp,

In addition, according to a survey conducted by the American Chamber of Commerce ( AmCham ) in China, three out of ten US companies are considering moving manufacturing or sourcing to a different country as a result of rising geopolitical concerns.

The China Business Climate Survey, which covers both the week of October 21 through November 15, 2024, before and after the most recent US presidential election on November 5, was conducted. It has a total sample size of 368 member companies. &nbsp,

Only 23 % of the surveyed companies said they were considering leaving China or had already begun, according to the survey conducted in late 2023. &nbsp,

According to the survey conducted in 2024, only 14 % of the responding companies think that the bilateral US-China relationship is expected to improve. However, 51 % of the responding companies said they think the relationship may continue to deteriorate in 2025. &nbsp,

In the 2023 survey, only 24 % of companies think the Sino-US relationship will deteriorate while 30 % believe that the relationship will improve. &nbsp,

The top five issues US businesses are facing in China, according to AmCham China:

  • rising tensions in US-China relations
  • competition from state-owned and/or privately-owned Chinese companies
  • regulatory compliance
  • inconsistent legislative interpretation, ambiguous laws, and strict laws
  • rising labor costs

Understanding our members ‘ viewpoints has never been more crucial, according to Alvin Liu, chair of AmCham China,” US-China relations remain the most consequential bilateral dynamic in the world today.” A stable and constructive relationship that is based on economic and trade ties is essential for both our two countries ‘ prosperity and the stability of the world economy.

According to AmCham’s surveys, about 48 % of the responding companies listed China as one of their top three global investment destinations in 2024, up from 61 % in 2020. Additionally, from 10 % in 2020, the percentage of businesses that no longer listed China as a preferred investment destination increased to 21 % last year.

49 % of AmCham members surveyed last year said foreign companies were treated unfairly compared to domestic companies in the technology and R&amp, D sectors. The figure was 42 % in the 2023 survey.

In 2024, 46 % of respondents claimed their China businesses were profitable, and 18 % claimed to have lost money. In 2021, 59 % of responding members said they were profitable while 13 % saw a loss. &nbsp,

Commenting on American firms ‘ concerns about deteriorating US-China relations, Mao Ning, a spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said this actually reflects how important it is to pursue a steady, sound and sustainable China-US relationship.

” China always views and develops China-US ties in line with the three principles put forth by President Xi Jinping, namely mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation”, Mao said. We also anticipate that the US will cooperate with China to put China-US relations back on track for sound and steady development.

He Yadong, a spokesperson for the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, stated that the government will continue to support foreign businesses, improve the economic environment, and reduce the negative list in 2025.

Yong Jian contributes to the Asia Times. He is a Chinese journalist who specializes in Chinese technology, economy and politics. &nbsp,

Continue Reading

Trump already faltering in approach to Putin – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

President Donald Trump, on&nbsp, Truth Social&nbsp, and in interviews, is pushing the idea that Russia needs to hurry up and make a bargain on Ukraine before Trump, taking advantage of Russia’s financial problems, imposes higher taxes and additional sanctions on Russia.

To emphasize his own thinking about the absurdity of the Ukraine conflict, Trump says that Russia&nbsp, has suffered over a million casualties&nbsp, and Ukraine 800, 000.

Trump’s figures on deaths exceed also Ukraine’s wild projections of Russian deficits. The “official” range pushed by Ukraine’s Zelensky is Russia has suffered 812, 670 deaths to day, while&nbsp, Ukraine has lost 43, 000 dying, &nbsp, according to Zelensky.

It is commonly accepted that&nbsp, the ratio of maimed to dead&nbsp, in the Ukraine war is running 3 to 1, but following Zelensky’s range, Ukraine has lost 129, 000 in full.

On June 14 in the Donetsk community Storozheve, a Russian soldier’s figure was visible close to a Russian tank that had been destroyed. —RFE

Don’t think Zelensky’s figures, as Ukrainian deaths are higher than he says.

Obviously, both parties present losses in their own words. The Ukrainians greatly exaggerate Russian loss, reassure their personal populace and their NATO supporters, while the Russians do not provide any numbers at all.

The best knowledge about Russian deaths comes from a group called Mediazona. Mediazona is a Russian separate media outlet that the Russian state has tried to shut down.

It is strongly anti-Putin. &nbsp, Mediazona’s report&nbsp, on Soviet” confirmed killed” between February 24, 2022, and January 18, 2025, is 88, 726. Using the 3 to 1 amount, that may provide complete Russian deaths to 266, 178, or about one-fourth of what Trump has said.

Trump’s assessment of the Russian economy good echoes what US knowledge has told him. He appears to believe that Russia’s economy is about to decline, which prompts him to urge Putin to act quickly and negotiate a bargain or suffer the consequences.

The American media has been complete of reports that all have the same theme. Russia’s economy is in free drop and in a big issue. Following on from these” themes,” there are rumors that Putin is having domestic issues, has been angry with his financial advisors, and wants some sort of solution.

Anyone planning a costly war in a country where the value of the national currency has fallen abruptly, where interest rates are outrageously high, and where inflation is practically out of control, would normally be worried and alarmed. However, that does not imply that Putin or his ministers are in a state of panic or that the Russian state is about to fall.

The majority of these articles that appear in Eastern media reports lacking sources. Yet where they exist, they are direct. For instance, the pro-Ukraine&nbsp, Daily Mail&nbsp, reports that Oleg Vyugin, a former deputy president of the Central Bank of Russia says that” Russia, of course, is commercially engaged in negotiating a diplomatic end to the conflict”.

Zelensky’s Speech at the 2024 Borys Paton National Prize of Ukraine Award Ceremony on December 10, 2024. ( Volodymyr Zelenskyy/ Standard site )

So far the best non-government review coming out of Russia was published in&nbsp, Foreign Affairs&nbsp, by Alexandra Propenenko. She is a colleague at Berlin’s Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center. She worked at Russia’s central banks until early 2022. Putin’s claim that” Putin is not yet hungry” and that Ukraine’s economic suffering won’t reverse the course is persuasive.

She writes:” The concern for the West is timing. Democratic leaders want the conflict to stop right away. Some experts have even suggested that Putin will need to find an off-ramp in the coming weeks to stabilize the economy and keep his hold on power.

” But European aspirations sleep on a false notion. Russia’s financial difficulties are not yet so severe that they will have a significant impact on the conflict in the near future. The Kremlin should be able to prevent a full-blown problems from arising from its overheated business for at least the following year. Putin will most likely still have the resources to carry out his terrible campaign in Ukraine, as well as the motivation to hold off the West.

Russia correctly now has a labour shortage and entire career. Usually, an economy in trouble is characterized by persons out of work, small pay or no wages, and provide shortages, particularly consumer goods. Although imported goods and some local goods ( butter and eggs, for example ), are expensive but not in short supply, Russia has consumer goods.

Sanctions have opened the door for China, and Chinese goods, like cars, are less expensive than those from European countries. There is no denying that the conflict has caused the labor shortage, but it is difficult to determine how many. Wages are large and increasing.

Russia, in contrast to Europe, has no control over gasoline prices at home and is energy independent. In fact, the European markets are in worse shape than Russia in terms of employment, energy shortages, and fees due to the restrictions being imposed on Russia and the not-so-secret destruction of Soviet pipes ( as well as the arbitrary decision to not renew transit contracts for refineries through Ukraine ).

Germany is already in a crisis, but Russia is not. Some think that the German dollar, the Euro, is&nbsp, living on borrowed period. The value of the Euro may be affected by additional financial decline in Germany and France.

If Russia decides to stop providing gas, oil, and LNG, Putin could significantly worsen the energy issue in Europe than Trump or with new taxes or other financial measures.

The torrent of information about Putin’s problems and Russia’s economy is a part of a circumstance promoted by Biden and his heavy state allies because they mistakenly believe that the US could force regime change in Russia. Trump appears to be supporting that strategy. However, it is contradictory because it only strengthens Russia’s resolve to win the Ukraine war.

Worse still, it harms Trump’s trust with Moscow in getting a bargain to end the war. Trump largely exempt from any connection to the Biden heavy state plan when he took business. He appeared to understand that his attempt to overthrow Putin and Moscow was ignorant and counterproductive. His method gave him an edge, coming into business without any Trump foreign policy bag, which he is now in danger of losing.

Trump and Putin’s anticipated telephone conversation has not taken place, and the White House and NSC have never made any plans to strike up a conversation with them. The reason why is clear.

Stephen Bryen is a former US assistant secretary of defense for plan and a unique journalist for Asia Times. This article, which originally appeared on his Substack newsletter&nbsp, Weapons and Strategy, is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

First flex of Trump’s peace through strength strategy – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

With its “peace through power” method, which the new Trump administration has a muscular launch, the organization has previously impressed senior allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and India’s S. Jaishankar met briefly days into his new position to highlight the importance of Asia in Trump’s international plan.

In a phone conversation with Rubio’s rival in the Philippines, Rubio reiterated America’s “ironclad” responsibility to protect its South Asian mutual defense treaty alliance in the event of an armed conflict with China in the South China Sea.

In addition, Gilbert Teodoro Jr, the fresh US National Security Advisor, and Mike Waltz, the Philippine Defense Secretary, spoke privately to confirm the “enduring empire between the Philippines and the United States.” &nbsp,

Just days into company, the new Trump administration also convened the latest generation of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, better known as the” Quad”, which brought together top officials from Australia, Japan, India and the US.

In a shared speech, Rubio and his Triple rivals underscored their” shared commitment to strengthening a Free and Open Indo-Pacific where the rule of law, political principles, independence, and territorial integrity are upheld and defended”.

The Quad ministers&nbsp made it clear in a lightly veiled criticism of reactionary forces, most importantly China, that they” strongly resist any coercive behavior that seek to change the status quo by force or force.”

In contrast, President Trump’s second term saw a more logical approach by firing and criticizing Iran’s hawks and appointing pragmatists like Michael DiMino as the new top Middle East official for the Pentagon.

New important appointments will reinforce the message of so-called “prioritizers” led by Elbridge Colby, a candidate for under-secretary of security for policy who has emphasized the need for a more China-focused US foreign policy, in conjunction with Trump’s call for ending the “ridiculous war” in Ukraine and growing pressure on Western allies to make their own defense burdens.

The second Trump administration appears to be double down on its defense alliance and deterrence strategy in the Indo-Pacific by shifting America’s strategic focus from its old theaters in Europe and the Middle East.

Trump’s inauguration speech put his commitment to ending world wars to the test by setting the tone for his foreign policy. ” It will be my most cherished legacy to be one who makes peace and unites people.” That’s what I want to be – a peacemaker and a unifier”, he declared, directly taking credit for the newly implemented ceasefire in Gaza, which was largely negotiated by Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.

” We will build the strongest military the world has ever seen, just like in 2017,” he added. We will measure our success not only by the battles we win, but also by the wars that we end, and, perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into”, he added, echoing his administration’s “peace through strength” mantra.

Trump has signaled a more pragmatic approach to adversaries, most notably Iran. He fired former Iranian envoy Brian Hook, who opposed a “maximum pressure” campaign against the Middle Eastern power that oversaw the Department of State’s most recent transition, just hours into his second term. &nbsp,

Meanwhile, Trump also publicly attacked his former national security adviser, John Bolton, as a “warmonger” who oversaw disastrous interventions in the Middle East. Both Bolton and former secretary of state Mike Pompeo, both of whom had pushed for confrontation with Iran, were removed from their security profiles.

Trump’s Middle East strategy will therefore be influenced by more pragmatic voices. Following his successful negotiation of the Gaza ceasefire, Witkoff has been appointed as Trump’s new Iran envoy.

” He’s certainly&nbsp, someone I would use. He has done a fantastic job. . . Trump praised his new Iran envoy and prospects for a new nuclear deal with Iran, saying that Steve has a wonderful way of him. ” It would really be nice if that could be worked out without having to go that further step]of military confrontation ] …Iran, hopefully, will make a deal”.

The Pentagon’s new Middle East top official Michael DiMino, who is known for his more critical stance on Israel and support for a more “offshore balancing” strategy in the Middle East, will complement Witkoff’s regional diplomacy.

” There are no vital or existential U. S. interests in the]Middle East ] region”, DiMino&nbsp, argued last year in a webinar, underscoring the need for a major reorientation in American foreign policy. He continued,” We’re really there to fight Iran, and that’s really at the behest of the Israelis and the Saudis,” instead of advocating for a more limited American military presence in an increasingly multipolar region.

That viewpoint tracks with the Pentagon’s incoming top policy official, Elbridge Colby, an influential strategic thinker who oversaw the formulation of the first Trump administration’s National Security Strategy.

In a major conference last October, Colby argued that we must give the potential for conflict with China a priori in order to avoid it. ” It is empirically true that China is getting ready for war, and we do have the potential for a multi-front war and a World War III in the upcoming years, and we’re not prepared.”

Similar to DiMino, Colby has also drawn on his own bitter experience in dealing with the Middle East, particularly when he was a member of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq in 2003 and of the President’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission between 2004 and 2005 while serving under the George W. Bush administration. &nbsp,

Trump’s other top cabinet members have also expressed openness to a less confrontational policy in the Middle East in favor of focusing on the broader Indo-Pacific region, particularly China, while adopting more traditionally hawkish views on Iran.

Rubio made it clear during his confirmation hearing that he would support “any arrangement that allows us to have safety and stability in the region but one in which we’re clear-eyed” about threats posed by adversaries like Iran. The more pragmatic tone on Iran, coupled with a concerted push to end the conflict in Ukraine, underscores China’s centrality to the second Trump administration’s grand strategy.

Rubio has characterized China&nbsp, as” the most potent, dangerous and near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted”, thus the urgency of doubling down the Quad and existing military alliances in the Indo-Pacific. National Security Adviser Waltz, who is also known as an Iran hawk, has also emphasized the need for America to “quickly wind up the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East to free up military assets to confront and deter China.”

Trump’s defense secretary nominee, Pete Hagseth, who, similar to Waltz, also served in America’s wars in the Middle East, has argued along similar lines and has criticized the outgoing Biden administration for not sufficiently decoupling from conflicts in the Middle East in favor of a China-centered strategy.

By and large, America’s top Asian allies seem optimistic about the second Trump administration’s signaled direction. Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong referred to bilateral ties with Washington as “our most important strategic relationship” prior to her meeting with Rubio.

On the eve of the first Quad meeting, just hours into the new administration, she said,” It’s a demonstration of the collective commitment of all countries to the Quad, an ironclad commitment in this time when close cooperation in the Indo-Pacific is so important.”

Japan’s top diplomat was even more effusive about the new administration’s nuanced approach to foreign policy and sound pragmatism.

” I was very impressed that]Rubio’s ] explanation of the Quad didn’t mention China by name and antagonize it. I had thought of him as a hard-liner against China, but as we talked, I found he was a well-balanced individual”, Japan’s Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya&nbsp, said after the Quad meeting this week.

Follow Richard Javad Heydarian on X at @Rich Heydarian

Continue Reading

Move over CHIPS Act, Stargate is the future – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, Technology

The US$$ 500 billion Stargate AI system project, which was announced by US President Donald Trump, has sparked media coverage and stoked industry, deflecting attention from the less attractive details of TSMC’s initial chip factory’s opening, and suffocate the more contentious debate over the future of America’s high-tech restoration.

On January 21, the day after his inauguration, Donald Trump made an appearance with Oracle’s Larry Ellison, Softbank’s Masayoshi Son, and OpenAI’s Sam Altman to make an announcement that artificial intelligence will be the “largest AI system job by much in story… creating over 100, 000 National work about immediately,” as Trump put it. Given some of the responses it has generated, the film went “viral” – a suitable information.

In Abilene, Texas, 10 properties measuring half a million square foot are currently under construction, with additional 10 more on the drawing board, and additional ones will be constructed at locations that are being evaluated nationwide. These data locations may be full of machines equipped with Nvidia’s fresh Blackwell AI chips, which are made by Taiwan’s TSMC, the world’s top silicon manufacturer.

” I’m gonna support, a bit, through emergency pronouncements”, said Trump, “because we have an emergency, we have to get this thing built”.

” They have to make a lot of power, and we’ll make it possible for them to get that generation done pretty easily”, he added, “at their personal crops if they want”.

In other words, Trump intends to supersede power regulations that may put off the project, leading to a significant increase in power generation capacity driven by the purchase intentions of a select few big high-tech companies.

Oracle’s Ellison said,” Thank you, Mr President. We certainly couldn’t do this without you”. Altman and Son shared the sentiment. And they probably couldn’t, at least not as quickly and efficiently.

If Joe Biden or Kamala Harris had been attempting the project in the White House, it would likely have been hampered by attempts at social engineering and unionization of the workforce. For the same reason, Stargate is based in Texas, not California.

Masayoshi Son said,” We wouldn’t have decided, unless you won. Yesterday, we agreed. We signed. To achieve this, we would immediately begin deploying 100 billion dollars with the intention of making 500 billion dollars within the next four years, within your mandate.

As explained by OpenAI, the initial equity investments in Stargate will come from SoftBank, Oracle, OpenAI and MGX, the technology fund based in Abu Dhabi. The lead partners are SoftBank and OpenAI, with OpenAI acting as the company’s operational manager and SoftBank as its financial advisor. Softbank’s Son will be the project’s chairman.

Nvidia, Arm ( the British semiconductor design company owned primarily by Softbank ), Microsoft, Oracle and OpenAI are the project’s technology partners. Oracle, Nvidia and OpenAI will build and operate the computing system.

OpenAI has long-standing relationships with both Nvidia and Microsoft. In Japan, Softbank and Nvidia have partnered to set up a nationwide AI grid.

Following Trump to the podium, Ellison, Son and Altman talked about healthcare-related applications from AI-enabled cross-referencing of health records and procedures to cancer detection and treatment, including the development of mRNA cancer vaccines.

But there are other possibilities, including factory automation and national defense. The name Stargate, of course, is reminiscent of Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite company.

The stock market approves of the concept. Oracle’s share price was up 7.2 % on Tuesday and another 4.6 % in after-hours trading. The share price of Softbank Group increased by more than 10 % on Wednesday and by another 5 % on Thursday in Japan ( across the International Date Line ). The share prices of Nvidia, TSMC, Microsoft and server maker Super Micro also rose.

Stargate is pitched as a made-in-America-for-America project, but the Nvidia AI processors at the core of the data centers will be made by Taiwan’s TSMC, at first entirely in Taiwan, then partly in the US.

At its new factory in Arizona, where TSMC is most likely to manufacture integrated circuits, on January 10, TSMC began producing integrated circuits for Apple. AMD and Nvidia are likely to be its new customers. For the first time in our country’s history, our country’s leaders are producing cutting-edge four-nanometer chips on American soil, making American workers on par with Taiwan in terms of yield and quality, according to incoming commerce chief Gina Raimondo.

TSMC Chairman and CEO C C Wei, speaking to investors on the company’s 2024 earnings call on January 16, confirmed this:

” We were able to pull ahead the production schedule of our first fab in Arizona, building on the successful result of our earlier engineering wafer production. Our first fab, using N4 process technology and yield comparable to those of our fabs in Taiwan, has already entered high-volume production in 4Q ’24. We anticipate a smooth beginning of the manufacturing process because we are confident that our factories in Arizona and Taiwan will offer the same level of manufacturing quality and dependability.

Wei added that “our plans for the second fab and third fab in Arizona are also on track.” Based on the needs of our customers, these fabs will use even more advanced technologies like our N3, N2, and A16.

In plain English, this means that TSMC will be making 4nm chips in Arizona starting this year and progress to 3nm, 2nm and 1.6nm ( 16-angstrom ), probably by the end of the decade. In terms of 3nm production, TSMC is already ahead of Samsung and Intel, who are both likely to be 1 nm and smaller. TSMC currently makes Nvidia’s Blackwell AI processors using its 4nm process.

All of these process technologies were and are being developed and produced in Taiwan, close to the company’s R&amp, D, and where the procedure is well-established and the capacity is much larger. This suggests that regardless of any agreement Trump has with China, he won’t want to disrupt Stargate’s main production.

A retired Silicon Valley executive and advisor to the US government on the subject of high-tech competitiveness said,” The game with the current administration is zero-sum,” in response to the three executives ‘ praise for Trump.

And that it is given that Trump has already replaced and exceeded$ 500 billion in government funding after cutting more than$ 300 billion from the Inflation Reduction Act and Department of Energy loan programs under his administration, which were then replaced by$ 300 billion from the private sector.

A West Coast venture capitalist who is not a fan of Trump wrote in an email that” It’s all part of the mad scramble for more computing power and energy to fuel it… Remember Trump’s first term. He enjoys planning big announcements, which credit him with making investments that were already planned or that never occur. Everyone tries to ingratiate themselves with Dear Leader, but it’s all part of that. Because that’s what you have to do in an autocratic state” .&nbsp,

Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla, wrote on X,” They don’t actually have the money. SoftBank has well under$ 10 billion secured. I have that on good authority”. However, if there is one thing Son excels at, it’s raising money. In 2017, Softbank launched the Vision Fund, a technology-focused venture capital fund with more than$ 100 billion in capital – the world’s largest such fund at the time.

For Musk, whose xAI competes with OpenAI and has taken it to court, Stargate is a powerful new competitor. And perhaps worse than that, Ellison, Son and Altman – high-tech moguls like himself – now also have Trump’s ear.

If the build-out of Stargate’s data centers proceeds according to plan, Microsoft, Google and Amazon are likely to lose their first-mover advantage and oligopolistic profit margins in AI-related cloud computing. Oracle, which offers cloud computing services in 25 countries around the world, has a significant opportunity in this regard.

Another critic, physician and biochemist Robert Malone, has published an essay entitled” AI, mRNA, Cancer Vaccines and” Stargate”: Reality check. Curb your enthusiasm, and beware of grifters”.

He writes:” I can’t believe that we are being spoon-fed this hype from the likes of Oracle’s Larry Ellison… Having this guy lecture us on mRNA vaccines for cancer is over the top. &nbsp, This is so amazingly ( and dangerously ) naive that I can hardly believe I am hearing it”.

Maybe so, but Ellison, Son and Altman were delivering a pitch for AI infrastructure, not explaining the technology roadmaps of companies that will use their data centers. They may be overly optimistic, but they are genuinely interested in healthcare and think AI can contribute significantly to the analysis of sizable amounts of medical-related data.

Malone also criticizes “banking some brand-new” cancer moonshot” television programs named after science fiction TV shows.” So, is Stargate a wise use of money or a reckless boondoggle? In reality,$ 500 billion is nearly ten times the$ 52.7 billion in grants and loans provided by the CHIPS Act. Only time will tell.

Follow this writer on&nbsp, X: @ScottFo83517667

Continue Reading

Bank of Japan hikes rates with a wary eye on Trump – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Tokyo – Kazuo Ueda, the government of the Bank of Japan, is struggling to understand that a man who lives seven thousand miles away is in charge of making the decision.

US President Donald Trump ‘s&nbsp, business war&nbsp, risks are distracting the whole world market like a low-grade but prolonged pain. The throbbing wasn’t enough to derail this Friday’s ( January 24 ) rate hike in Japan, one that had been in the works for weeks.

The BOJ increased its benchmark rate by a third point to 0.5 %, its highest levels since 2008. The japanese gained as much as 0.7 % to the money to 155.01 in early day trading. Despite increasing three days in less than a month, the BOJ also maintains the lowest benchmark rate in the world, tied with the Swiss National Bank.

However, Ueda’s glass to, as his staff put it,” continue to raise the plan interest rate and adjust the degree of financial hotel” depends on its assumptions about the outlook being ruled out.

It’s the same verbiage that the BOJ used when it last tightened in July. That, nevertheless, was again when Tokyo politicians thought Trump 2.0 may never materialize.

Then, all bets are down as Trump threatens to wreck&nbsp, Asia’s 2025&nbsp, with a storm of taxes, charges that may surely bang Japan’s business.

For now, Trump is holding his flames on the 60 % income he&nbsp, threatened&nbsp, on Chinese products. No one is likely to be more amazed than Chinese leader Xi Jinping, whose country has been gearing up for Trump’s retaliation journey.

Trump is showing that his business war is still going by promising to establish 25 % taxes on American and Hispanic products on February 1.

Trump also seems to be firing a killed off Beijing’s spear. The concept, it seems, is that China can&nbsp, prevent tariffs&nbsp, if Xi’s Communist Party starts making great agreements.

As Trump told the audience in Davos this month:” All we want is justice. We simply want a level playing field. We don’t want to get benefits. We’ve been experiencing significant shortfalls with China. Joe Biden allowed it to “get out of hand.”

However, given that Trump is a Trump, Team Xi would need to win over Washington by promoting trade with China and the US to avoid tariffs, which some believe Xi would ever do.

Many investors are also worried about Trump’s imposing tariffs, which would likely stir the world’s largest trading country at the worst possible time.

The negative pressures that China carried into 2025 may get even worse if Trump’s policies walk a crucial development website: exports. Already, China ‘s&nbsp, property crisis&nbsp, and weak household demand have economists buzzing about a Japan-like “lost decade”.

It’s something&nbsp, officials in Tokyo&nbsp, know all too much about. Despite all the excitement over the BOJ’s decision to raise rates another step closer to zero, the benchmark’s previous peak of 0.5 %, 17 years ago, didn’t go so well.

Back then, Toshihiko&nbsp, Fukui was in Ueda’s chair. Fukui’s board managed to end quantitative easing in 2006 and start announcing official rates for the first time since 1999, when the BOJ initially reduced them to zero.

In 2007, he tightened further. But the recession that followed enraged the political establishment. By 2008, &nbsp, Fukui’s successor was resurrecting QE and pushing rates back to zero.

It’s an open question whether Ueda can avoid Fukui’s fate. Trump is likely to offer the solution in some way or another. As Trump begins&nbsp, tossing tariff after tariff&nbsp, at the globe, Japan’s export-reliant economy will be at the very center of the collateral-damage zone.

These are just indirect risks, to be precise. If Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba isn’t sufficiently subservient for Trump’s liking, Japan might face its own tariffs.

The 100 % taxes Trump plans for Mexico-made automobiles could easily come Japan’s way. Ishiba, for example, hasn’t even been able to secure a meeting with Trump, though&nbsp, Trump&nbsp, has made time for virtually every other world leader imaginable.

Japan could be in harm’s way even if Trump doesn’t slap huge taxes on China. &nbsp, Officially, Japanese lawmakers claim they’re ready to cooperate with the Trump 2.0 White House. In private, however, they worry Trump might strike a bilateral trade deal with Beijing that excludes Japan.

Either way, the&nbsp, BOJ’s path forward&nbsp, is a cloudy one.

” The outlook is subject to significant policy uncertainty at home and abroad — US President Trump’s promise of higher tariffs is bound to shake up global trade and supply chains”, says&nbsp, Stefan Angrick, head Japan economist at&nbsp, Moody’s Analytics.

Thing is, Japan has been here before. In 2008, the global financial crisis complicated the BOJ’s tightening plans. Today, &nbsp, US turbulence&nbsp, may again be standing in the way of the BOJ normalizing 25 years of zero rates.

Whether or not Ueda understands the yen’s and Japanese rate movements better than Trump’s.

Follow William Pesek on X at @WilliamPesek

Continue Reading

From innovation to production of new US defense systems – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

At all ranges of implementation, the US is in constant flux with global competition for significant security technologies. The US Department of Defense will implement new initiatives to increase the competitive range and level of British defence techniques.

The success of these initiatives will be evaluated by the rapid, better development that can outsmart the competition. In this regard, advanced manufacturing processes that create technology systems are of special value.

The issue is frequently delivering exceptional techniques within budget, but there is rarely a shortage of innovative ideas. Working within the restrictive technological and financial constraints of these programs calls for the skilled blending of numerous resources.

And the end result may be powerful systems that can be used in a variety of settings.

It has, of course, been done earlier. The remarkably successful NASA Apollo program, for instance, which brought the first people to the moon, is a perfect example. In response to the Soviet Union’s pioneering satellite systems, President John Kennedy launched the system.

Success came from a sizable pool of skills. And there were no buttons. Numerous cooperative programs forged a bridge between innovative research and pioneering professional development and production, which helped lead to the success of Apollo.

These well-executed cooperative programs enabled the transfer of novel ideas from facilities to practical use. These were not only ordinary goods; they had to conform to the strictest consistency requirements for spacecraft carrying astronauts.

The program’s extraordinary accomplishment was the rapid transition from ideas to space-qualified products that couldn’t fail without causing life to be lost.

I was involved in the creation and development of the solid-state microwave that served as the radio for the pilots ‘ landing on the moon to talk to the spacecraft that was orbiting the moon, and where they had to return and port once they reached the planet’s surface.

The system in the radio may not fail, and to maintain its reliability, fresh test and manufacturing techniques were developed. The sky landing vision was a flawless success for the micro television. It was all fresh, and individuals rose to the challenge.

This type of work was carried out frequently by many members. In this instance, the initial development was at a RCA&nbsp, labs where I worked, but the conversation game’s prime contractor did the full stereo design and production.

You never know where new thoughts will come from, so the purpose of this account is to emphasize the importance of including undiscovered entrepreneurs in engineering programs.

What made this example stand out as extraordinary is that my invention was the result of a conversation I had by chance with a NASA engineer to find out whether I needed a new device to remove a flawed one.

In a short period of time, NASA became aware that a trustworthy radio could be constructed, and revenue for my project almost arrived immediately. The soft transfer to a top-notch radio product manufacturer was what eventually made the new radio possible. This near connection is important.

What resources are available right now that will enable massive new defence projects? The most accomplished citizens work together, second, to put it another way. DARPA ( Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency ), which is funded by the Department of Defense, provides funding for technological studies in important areas.

The initiatives supported by DARPA have had amazing effects when supported by various organizations, including the success of artificial intelligence and the Internet.

The DARPA programs ‘ results are simply system enablers for military projects, which companies with the assets can use to fund weapons and systems production follow.

Now, there is a major concern. The number of top US defence companies has decreased from 51 to just five since the early 1990s. This means fewer assets involved in security plans, fewer entrepreneurs and less opposition.

Additionally, there are fewer business labs working for the DOD. The big corporate lab, like those of AT&amp, T, RCA and Xerox, have disappeared. Companies that once had a high level of entrepreneurs with significant innovative contributions have seen a drastic decline in number.

This issue is likely to prevent the development of significant new initiatives that require the highest level of technology. The answer is that more businesses may participate in the DoD purchasing method, while organizations like DARPA must continue to work together. And the best US skill may join.

I anticipate that new initiatives may require new businesses that value the development of high-performance technology under DoD contracts and the fact that such initiatives’ spin-offs will have significant effects on the sales of goods. This has been demonstrated over time, and it is likely to continue.

Henry Kressel is a technician, engineer, publisher and entrepreneur. He was in charge of directing the development of numerous significant, novel electronic equipment. He was the director of RCA Laboratories ‘ electronic research division and has long held private equity investments in technology businesses.

Continue Reading

Why China’s port play has Trump so up in arms – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Chinese President Xi Jinping and Colombian President Dina Boluarte met to actually inaugurate a new US$ 3.6 billion deepwater mega-port in Peru, called Chancay, on their way to the G20 conference in Rio de Janeiro in November.

China’s state-owned Cosco shipping giant had purchased a 60 % stake in the port for$ 1.6 billion, which gave the company exclusive use of the port for 60 years. Weeks later, the first fleet departed for Shanghai loaded with strawberries, bananas and materials.

China’s plan for a maritime Silk Road in the 21st century that may better join its manufacturing hubs with its global trading partners includes Chancay. The West is concerned about China’s growing influence over global transport routes because of the high investments in ships in many nations.

Donald Trump, the just re-elected US president, made clear these issues when he claimed that China was “operating” the Panama Canal and that the US intended to retake it. China does not run the river, nevertheless. Instead, a Hong Kong organization runs two ships on either side.

Port growth growth

The maritime Silk Road has a remarkable scope and scale. China has invested in 129 ships in lots of countries through its state-owned companies, mostly in the Global South. Seventeen of these ships have majority-Chinese rights.

According to one estimate, Taiwanese firms invested$ 11 billion in international port advancement from 2010–19. Leading Chinese companies today own direct stakes in stations where more than 27 % of the world’s container industry is currently conducted.

China has entered Latin America violently, becoming the country’s leading trading partner. Its interface approach has evidently signaled a long-term aim to get the exports important to its food and energy security: soybeans, corn, beef, iron ore, copper and battery-grade lithium.

Last season, for instance, Portos do Paraná, the Portuguese state-owned organization that functions as the port authority in the state of Paraná, signed a letter of intent with China Merchants Port Holdings to develop Paranaguá Container Terminal, the second-largest switch in South America. Due to the 22 stations scheduled to be auctioned before the close of 2025, China may participate in even more Portuguese ships.

In Africa, Chinese purchase grew from two ships in 2000 to 61 infrastructure in 30 countries by 2022. Additionally, the Belt and Road Initiative in Europe is led by Chinese companies that own two significant ports in Belgium and Greece, which are the so-called “dragon’s brain” of the program.

Hard-driving interface strategy

Xi’s goal of having a global economic hegemony is largely driven by its rise as a sea and delivery power.

For one, China requires steady access to important trading routes in order to continue meeting both the exports Beijing needs to keep its market strong and the need for Chinese exports abroad.

China can establish economic zones in other nations that grant terminal owners and operators unrestricted access to goods and products by controlling ports as well. Some feared that this might cause China to stifle the supply of some goods or even have an impact on the political or economic policies of various nations.

The metal and minerals needed to power China’s rise as a technology superpower are another important component of this technique. Beijing has focused its interface investments in those areas with the most important resources.

For example, China is the world’s largest supplier of copper ore, primarily from Chile, Peru and Mexico. It is also one of the country’s major lithium hydroxide manufacturers, primarily from Chile and Argentina. Additionally, its terminal agreements in Africa give it access to unique rocks and other nutrients.

Latin America’s expansion also helps to resolve China’s recent industry disputes with Europe. Additionally, it eliminates worries about potential US taxes Trump might impose on Chinese products.

Military problems

Washington is concerned about these actions because it makes sense that China is challenging US effect in its own neighborhood.

China maintains that its port geopolitics is market-oriented. However, it has established a naval base in Djibouti, a country in Africa that is carefully placed. Additionally, it is alleged that Equatorial Guinea is developing a new naval foundation.

According to a recent review by the Asia Society Policy Institute, plan experts believe China is seeking to “weaponize” the Belt and Road Initiative. One way it does this is by requiring that the business ships it invests in be able to serve as naval foundations as well.

Foreign businesses own a 23.5 % play in the west African port of Djibouti. &nbsp, Photo: Elias Messeret / AP

14 of the 17 ports where it holds a majority of the stakes have the potential to be used for marine purposes so much. These ports may then fulfill a dual purpose: they support the Taiwanese military’s logistic network and help Chinese naval vessels to travel farther away from home.

US officials worry that China might use its influence on private companies to stifle business during a time of conflict.

American response

While China’s assets are raising concerns, the West’s determination to invest in ships at this level is limited. The US International Development Finance Corporation, for example, has a little slower, comprehensive approach for its investments, which usually leads to better outcomes for both investors and host nations.

However, some Western companies are acquiring stakes in established and newly built ports in other countries, albeit not to the extent of Chinese enterprises.

The French shipping and logistics company CMA CGM’s global port development strategy, for example, includes investments in 60 terminals worldwide. In 2024, it acquired control over South America’s largest container terminal in the Port of Santos, Brazil.

Trump has threatened to impose tariffs as a means of limiting China’s position on the world stage. A member of his transition team’s advisor has suggested a 60 % tariff on any product passing through Peru’s Chancay port or any other Chinese-owned or controlled port in South America.

Rather than making nations reluctant to sign port deals with Beijing, however, this kind of action just erodes Washington’s regional influence. Additionally, China is likely to take retaliatory measures, such as outlawing the US’s export of crucial minerals.

Host nations like Peru and Brazil, meanwhile, are using the competition for port investment to their advantage. They are increasingly asserting their autonomy and adopting a strategy of using ports to “play everywhere” on the global stage, drawing attention from both the West and China.

Claudio Bozzi is lecturer in law, Deakin University

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

Continue Reading

Trump already changing tack on ending Ukraine war – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The new US president, Donald Trump, has only been in business for a few days, but he has already changed his tune on the conflict in Ukraine. Trump has huge expressed his desire to end the war, and he even announced on the campaign trail that he could put an end to it within 24 hours of taking business.

Trump did not even mention Ukraine in his opening statement, and this has not occurred. But speaking to reporters immediately afterwards, Trump stated that the battle was costing Russia’s leader, Vladimir Putin, more than he was gaining from it.

” He can’t be thrilled, he’s not doing so well”, Trump said. He therefore criticized Putin’s management. ” Russia is bigger]than Ukraine], they have more troops to gain, but that’s no way to run a state”, Trump remarked.

The following morning, in a blog on his Truth Social page, Trump went yet further. ” If we don’t create a deal]to finish the war], and shortly, I have no other choice but to put great levels of income, taxes, and sanctions on something being sold by Russia to the US, and several other participating nations”.

Anyone who has been following the war in Ukraine may be aware that Trump’s president, Joe Biden, had been doing many of these things now. His presidency slapped numerous restrictions on important Russian businesses and individuals, and prohibited the transfer of nearly all of its goods.

But, is Trump then merely suggesting a progression of Biden’s plan? Russia appears to believe that. On Thursday, January 23, in response to Trump’s risks, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told Russian press,” we do not see any particular fresh parts here”.

Trump’s peace program

Research has shown that British commitments to foreign policy vary essentially from president to president, and that domestic policy does not change as much as domestic policy does. See, for example, the progression of Barack Obama’s Middle East plan during Trump’s first word. Trump maintained a sense of community while minimizing the US presence there.

But, Trump’s view to Ukraine does seem set to go further than Biden’s in two distinct ways. Second, Trump has set a revised target of 100 days for ending the war in Ukraine. And he has installed a special minister, Keith Kellogg, to deliver Russia and Ukraine to the negotiating tables.

Trump has nominated former US military commander public Keith Kellogg for the position of particular minister to Ukraine and Russia. Kellogg was a former national security adviser. &nbsp, Photo: Sarah SIlbiger / Pool / EPA via The Talk

Trump appears to want to transcend the predetermined standards that the Kremlin has already established regarding the problems of a peace. These include giving up Ukraine’s promises to Russia over Crimea and the four eastern regions, as well as a promise that Ukraine won’t join NATO.

On the surface, Trump appears to be sticking with Biden’s strategy of putting strain on Russia and keeping it a secret. Regardless of the outcome, the Trump administration’s top priority is not to assist Ukraine in winning the war, but to put an end to it.

Trump wants to make sure there is a peace before going over the specifics. Trump may then assert that he brought Ukraine to peace while generally abstaining from the negotiations to maintain it.

Next, Trump’s most recent claims suggest that by punishing nations that Russia nevertheless trades with, he is looking more than Biden. This will include places that have continued to be big buyers of Russian oil and natural gas, such as China and India, as well as Iran and North Korea, who have both provided defense aid to Russia.

Trump made it clear throughout his plan that he views taxes as a means of redressing the some injustices that the US has endured. And he has previously warned that if China and India don’t balance trade with the US, he will impose 100 % tariffs on imports from the” BRICS” group of countries. Therefore, sanctions against these nations may not seem so unlikely given their extended industry with Russia.

Claims like China and India could play a significant role in bringing about a lasting peace between Russia and Ukraine, according to Biden. Trump, on the other hand, hopes that risks did persuade China and India to enjoy a more active part in peace agreements.

Pictures of Trump, Putin and Xi side by side on a television screen.
Trump hopes that China and India’s risks of taxes will be enough to persuade them to play a significant part in peace negotiations. Image: EQRoy / Shutterstock via The Talk

Ukraine still has a lot to gain.

Trump’s transactional approach to international relations, according to Randall Schweller, a professor of political science at Ohio State University in the US, “marks a US that is less serious in managing its long-term connections than in making profits on short-term offers… even at the expense of historic friends.”

This method of negotiation is demonstrated by Trump, a billionaire businessman, in how he views business negotiations. According to Eugene B. Kogan, president of Harvard University, Trump wants to make people” a structured choice in negotiations: accept his offer or face his unpredictable ire.” When other parties accept Trump’s offer, he frequently faces retribution and can be expected to threaten retribution if they reject it.

Ukraine may end up being under the most pressure to agree to Trump’s terms because it has the most to lose. Given the number of soldiers who have died and the country’s nearly exhausted financial reserves, should Russia withdraw its troops today, Putin would lose out politically. However, this could be managed thanks to the Russian state’s strict control over dissent and the media.

Through NATO, Ukraine, on the other hand, seeks territorial stability and security assurances. In any negotiations, Ukraine is at odds with Russia because of this. Soon, we’ll see how a coercive negotiator like Trump can alter either party’s positions.

David J. Galbreath is professor of international security, University of Bath

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

Continue Reading

China’s air-sea drone could rewrite the rules of naval warfare – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

According to researchers at Northwestern Polytechnical University ( NWPU) and the China Aerodynamics Research and Development Center ( CARDC ), which are cited in a South China Morning Post report, China has created the first drone that can launch from a submarine from the water, loop repeatedly between the sea and the sky, and eventually return to the same&nbsp, sub.

China has already developed this capability and potentially more than the Pentagon envisions for its own forces, according to the SCMP report, while the US military is considering sending submarines close to the Chinese coast to detach drones that swarm in the air and launch attacks on the People’s Liberation Army’s ( PLA ) fleet during a potential conflict over Taiwan.

The new Chinese air-to-sea aircraft, known as Feiyi, features a unique portable aircraft style that apparently enhances its concealment and life abilities. The Feiyi may manage marine quickly and do high-agility maneuvers in the air, making it suitable for sea reconnaissance, surveillance and strike missions, the SCMP report said.

Feiyi’s cutting-edge features, bolstered by China’s unparalleled aircraft production system and its growing skill in cross-media ammunition, signal a possible edge for China in future maritime conflicts involving drones with the US.

Also, the US Navy is testing the Naviator helicopter, an autonomous vehicle capable of flying and underground operations. The Naviator can seamlessly transition between air and water, which increases its deployment flexibility, and is designed for autonomous launch and recovery from unmanned underwater vehicles ( UUV).

The Naviator has more accurate GPS and physical position keep, a power-saving boat sentry mode, the ability to transport numerous sensors and payloads, and a quicker deployment than conventional underwater vehicles. The US Navy’s Orca Extra-Large Unmanned Undersea Vehicle (XLUUV) could be a member for the Naviator’s probable start system.

Its length and load volume surpass those of the majority of the current marine vehicles, making it suitable for a variety of mission types besides minelaying operations. Its diesel-electric engine system enables automatic operations for up to 30 days and 6, 000 nautical miles, although operational assessment is continuing to develop these capabilities, according to The War Zone.

These cross-media robots can destroy the enemy by launching swarm problems from a variety of domains and directions, probably overcoming the limitations of conventional and fast weapons.

Further, these developments may tie into the more prominent “dronification” of undersea tensions in the Taiwan Strait, South China Sea and Indian Ocean.

Exploring the role of UUVs in the Taiwan Strait, the Center for a New American Security ( CNAS ) mentions in a June 2024 report that UUVs play a vital role in enhancing China’s maritime surveillance and anti-access/area denial ( A2/AD ) capabilities.

These UUVs conduct covert intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance ( ISR ) operations, monitor naval activities, map the seabed and locate critical undersea infrastructure. Their independent operations also lower the risk of detection, which makes them successful in tense waters.

China is creating a multidomain surveillance network by integrating UUVs into its larger drone fleet, which increases its ability to disrupt communications and halt foreign intrusions. This action is in line with China’s plan to overcome its own shortcomings and strengthen its standing in a potential Taiwan conflict.

In the 2024 book” Navigating East Asian Maritime Conflicts: Technological Change, Environmental Challenges, Global and Regional Responses”, Henrik Hiim mentions that UUVs and Unmanned Surface Vehicles ( USV ) play a nuanced role in US-China undersea competition in the South China Sea.

In line with its efforts to make the South China Sea a protected base for its nuclear ballistic missile submarines ( SSBN), China uses UUVs to counter US nuclear attack submarines ( SSN) by raising maritime domain awareness.

The US uses Unmanned Maritime Systems ( UMS ) to support strategic anti-submarine warfare ( ASW) operations in the South China Sea, but its ability to do so is limited by China’s A2/AD environment’s endurance and vulnerability.

However, Hiim argues that while UMSs may not decisively alter the undersea power balance, they exacerbate maritime disputes, fueling US-China rivalry and intensifying the regional security dilemma.

In the Indian Ocean, the Center for Strategic and International Studies ( CSIS ) think tank mentions in a January 2024 report that China’s operations in the area are characterized by extensive dual-use research activities, blending scientific and military objectives.

The PLA leverages a vast fleet of civilian research vessels to gather critical data on water conditions, currents, and the seafloor, thereby enhancing its naval capabilities. These vessels, often owned by state-affiliated organizations with military ties, conduct surveys that support China’s strategic ambitions.

Notably, Chinese ships have engaged in active operations in the Indian Ocean, using cutting-edge underwater gliders and profiling floats to create a real-time ocean observation network. This information could be used to support the PLA Navy’s ( PLAN ) submarine operations there to counter India’s Bay of Bengal for its SSBNs.

In the wake of India’s ongoing border dispute with China in the Himalayas, analysts have suggested that the country could use its undersea nuclear deterrent as a backstop if its conventional military capabilities are undermined.

Continue Reading

Trump’s Paris Agreement withdrawal not such a bad thing – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

On his first time back in business as United States president, Donald Trump gave official notice of his nation’s return from the Paris Agreement – a crucial global treaty seeking to rein in climate change.

Before signing the attempt, Trump declared his causes to an area of cheering followers, describing the international agreement as an “unfair, one-sided Paris weather authority rip-off. ”

Of course, this is not the first day Trump has withdrawn the US from the Paris deal – he did it in 2017, during his first term in office.

On one hand, Trump’s shift is a huge punch to work to global climate action. The US is the world’s second-biggest emission of greenhouse gas waste, after China. The state is vital to the international effort to curb climate change.

But given Trump’s weather for, it ’s actually better that the US excluded itself from international climate conversations while he is in power. That means, the rest of the world can get on with the task without Trump’s caustic effect.

This is not the first day Trump has withdrawn the US from the Paris offer.   Photo: Ben Curtis / AP via The Talk

A quick recap on the Paris Agreement

Signed by 196 countries in 2015, the Paris Agreement is the first comprehensive international agreement to combat climate change.

Its overall purpose is to maintain the increase of global heat to well below 2°C above pre-industrial ranges and undertake efforts to control the raise to 1. 5°C.

Experts say meeting the more optimistic 1. 5°C goal is important because crossing that threshold risks unleashing catastrophic climate change effects, for as more frequent and severe drought and wildfires.

Under the deal, each state may produce national plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to help achieve the global temperatures goals. These programs are known as “nationally determined contributions”.

What Trump’s removal methods

Under Trump’s next administration, the US was only out of the Paris package for four weeks, due to the time it took for the surrender to take effect. President Joe Biden rejoined the contract in early 2021.

This day, the US withdrawal may be established more immediately – after a year. Finally, the US will add Iran, Libya and Yemen as the only United Nations states no party to the contract.

The US is preserve participating as a celebration to the Paris deal until January 2026. That means it does try to negotiate at the COP30 climate change event in Brazil this time.

COP30 is a big deal. It is when each region is due to current its innovative nationally determined efforts. The US removal means it is unlikely to provide a new input to the conference – if it attends at all.

If the US display up, its presence would probably destabilize negotiations. That’s why removing Trump-backed diplomats from the climate talks going forwards is a good result.

If the US stayed in the camp under Trump, its diplomats may, for example, agitate to diminish any talks struck at the conference. We saw quite techniques from Saudi Arabia at COP29 in Baku. The fuel state constantly disrupted the talks and in one example, sought to change critical text in the agreement without full consultation.

With the US out of the way, the other parties to the Paris Agreement have a better chance of progressing climate negotiations.

At this stage, it does n’t appear other countries are preparing to follow Trump out the door. This is despite controversy at the COP29 talks when Argentinian president Javier Milei ordered his negotiators to withdraw only a few days in. Milei had previously described the climate emergency as a “socialist lie. ”

At this stage, Trump has not withdrawn from the Paris Agreement’s parent convention, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. So after it withdraws from the Paris deal, the US can still attend COP meetings, but only as an observer.

With the US out of the way, other parties to the Paris agreement have a better chance of progress. Pictured: COP29 President Mukhtar Babayev, left, with an unnamed woman, listens during a closing session.   Photo: Rafiq Maqbool / AP via The Conversation

Onwards and upwards

Of course, there are downsides to the US withdrawal from the Paris deal.

Leaving the Paris Agreement means the US is no longer required to provide annual updates on its greenhouse gas emissions. This lack of transparency makes it harder to determine how the world is tracking on emissions reduction overall.

Under the Biden administration, the US contributed funding to help developing nations adopt clean energy and cope with climate change ( albeit delivering less than it promised ). Trump is expected to slash this funding. That will leave vulnerable nation-states in an even more precarious position.

While the US was technically only out of the Paris deal for a short period last time, the process was destabilizing. It weakened what was an unprecedented show of international solidarity and sent a damaging message about the importance of climate action.

Trump’s latest withdrawal is a similar blow to morale. It’s particularly galling for Americans fighting for climate action, and those struggling with its devastating effects – most recently, the unthinkable fires in Los Angeles.

But Trump’s withdrawal can easily be reversed by a new US president. And we can expect other parties to Paris, such as China and the European Union, to continue to play a leadership role, and others to fill the vacuum.

What’s more, as others have noted, Trump cannot derail global climate action. Investment in clean energy is now greater than in fossil fuels. When Trump last pulled out of Paris, many US state and local governments pressed ahead with climate policy; we can expect the same this time around.

And the vast majority of the rest of the world is still pursuing emissions reduction efforts.

So overall, the US exit from Paris is probably the best of a bunch of bad options. It mutes Trump’s capacity to destabilize international climate action, allowing others to step into the breach.

Rebekkah Markey-Towler is PhD Candidate, Melbourne Law School, and research fellow, Melbourne Climate Futures, The University of Melbourne

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

Continue Reading