Duterte’s arrest could backfire badly on Marcos Jr – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte is now in the custody of the International Criminal Court ( ICC ) in The Hague, Netherlands, to face charges of alleged crimes against humanity for his brutal war on drugs in the Philippines.

Duterte and his friends attempted to fight the imprisonment warrant and claimed his move to The Hague was an “illegal act“. However, the former bodybuilder had now become the primary Asian head of state to be tried by the ICC.

The media has left the Philippines reeling at a critical moment for the region. Some of Duterte’s supporters have rallied behind him, while another Filipinos have remembered his black reputation.

The state is also in the presence of intense campaigning for congressional elections in May that could be important for the state of the current leader, Ferdinand Marcos Jr.

Marcos had been allied with Duterte’s daughter, Sara, the government’s vice president, before they significantly fell out last year after she formally threatened to attack him. Sara Duterte was therefore impeached by the House of Representatives by Marcos ‘ allies in February.

Today, there are questions whether Marcos ‘ determination to corner his main adversary and cooperate with Interpol’s arrest of her father may fail in a country where the Dutertes also hold great sway.

Long-simmering rivalry

At stake in May’s vote are over 18, 000 national and local opportunities, including 12 votes in the 24-member Senate, 250 seats in the House of Representatives and 63 party-list staff, as well as 82 valid and other localized government jobs across the country.

The benefits will definitely have major implications for the Philippines in the short term.

In the Senate, it may determine the outcome of Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial later this month. Thus far, eight of the Marcos government’s individuals are likely to succeed, based on the latest elections. If at least two-thirds of the lawmakers vote to indict Duterte, she may be ineligible to run for president herself in 2028 – or keep any open business.

Both Marcos and Sara Duterte have seen their people trust and acceptance ratings decline in recent months. Duterte’s scores declined even further after her prosecution in the lower room, although she still enjoys great rankings in her house foundation of Mindanao.

These latest innovations, however, have never stopped her from hinting at plans to run for president in 2028. She made these opinions on a trip to Hong Kong over the weekend with her father, where they met with international Filipino followers.

It remains to be seen whether the elder Duterte’s arrest and trial at the ICC would make much public sympathy for the home kingdom to raise Sara Duterte in both her impeachment trial and any future social races.

Some of the family’s die-hard supporters still view them as “underdogs” suffering from sustained political persecution by the Marcos administration. Social media posts by supporters have denounced the haste with which the government complied with the arrest warrant.

Sara Duterte will seek to rally these supporters even further as she travels to The Hague to stand by her father’s side. She has called his arrest an “affront to national sovereignty“.

ICC’s long arm

Beyond the Marcos-Duterte rivalry, Rodrigo Duterte’s arrest and impending trial represents a sizeable moment for Filipinos at home and abroad. It shows that a former leader of the country can be held accountable for alleged crimes, no matter how popular they are or how much influence they wield.

New witnesses may surface who were reluctant to testify in trials related to Duterte-era killings in local courts. Some witnesses also refused to participate in the marathon hearings held by a House committee investigating drug-war killings.

This committee has said it would not cooperate with the ICC, as the Philippines withdrew from the court under Duterte’s rule in 2019. Nevertheless, its hearings can still be accessed by the ICC since they have all been posted online.

The ICC trial may also expose the weaknesses and inadequacies of the Philippine justice system, including the limitations of existing laws that are supposed to protect human rights, ensure the rule of law, and guarantee the accountability of government officials and law enforcers in the country.

Duterte’s trial may also persuade the Marcos administration to reconsider his predecessor’s decision to leave the ICC. ( The court says it retains jurisdiction in the case against Duterte because the alleged crimes occurred when the Philippines was still a member. )

The arrest of the former strongman may not end the” culture of impunity” that has long existed in Filipino politics. Yet, it is an important milestone in building public awareness about the importance of upholding human rights protections.

It will also no doubt provide the many families of those killed during Duterte’s time in office a measure of relief.

Noel Morada is visiting professor, Nelson Mandela Centre, Chulalongkorn University, and research fellow at the Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, The University of Queensland

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

Continue Reading

Why China won’t buckle to Trump’s trade war demands – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

China’s taxes on American farm materials came into force this year. As a reaction to Washington’s latest 10 % climb on Chinese goods, Beijing’s official information has been clear: it is ready to combat any type of battle against the US.

As a businessman-turned-politician, US President Donald Trump is using a combination of taxes, sanctions and speech to compel states into complying with his requirements.

His” Arts of the Offer” approach has worked in some cases, as seen in apartments made by countries like Canada and Mexico that have sought to discuss his tax challenges.

But China, while still leaving room for negotiation, is taking a different approach – rather than begging for Trump’s trade conflict kindness, Beijing wants to communicate with Washington on an equal footing.

Indeed, the Trump administration has chosen the wrong target if it thinks its tariff threats will work the same on China.

Divergences between the world’s two largest economies are inevitable. But Washington has made a slew of unreasonable demands on Beijing, leveraging its presumed power advantage and vast gap in comprehensive strength. But China is no longer what it was.

Data from the US-based Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank and the World Bank shows that China’s nominal GDP is the second-largest worldwide after the US, but measured at purchasing power parity, China’s GDP is now larger.

The shift in global power dynamics, where China is rising and the US is declining, is by now a widely accepted fact. China has already made it clear that the US can no longer speak from” a position of strength”.

As a result of its recent rapid growth, China has seized economic advantages over the US in many fields. Take, for instance, trade. The Australia-based think tank the Lowy Institute found that around 70 % of the world, representing 145 economies, trade more with China than they do with the US and more than half of all economies trade twice as much with China compared with the US.

China’s lead over the US in international trade relationships, as the Lowy Institute reveals, has widened since Trump initiated his last trade war with China in 2018.

Yet, China is open for talks. At the same time, it has reason to “fight any type of war” until the end and has confidence it will win over the US if Trump insists on a trade war. Trump wants to use tariffs as a card to coerce China, but the US does not have as much leverage as it seems to think it does.

Consider this: In 2024, China imported US$ 29.25 billion worth of US agricultural products, a decrease of 14 % from 2023. Meanwhile, the 2023 import volume had already declined by 20 % compared to 2022.

But this has not weakened the significance of the Chinese market for American farmers – China remains the largest market for US agricultural exports. As the US-China Business Council has stated, US agriculture and livestock exports to China support more American jobs than any other sector by a wide margin.

The China-US tariff fight, as Ole Hansen, head of commodity strategy at Saxo Bank, argues,” will continue to increase China’s dependency on Brazilian corn and soybeans while causing a great deal of stress among US farmers who are about to make their spring planting decisions in the coming weeks”.

Trump has repeatedly boasted about the “benefits” that tariffs would bring to American farmers, but in reality, Trump’s red-state voter base is bearing the brunt of China’s retaliatory tariffs ranging from corn to chicken.

Apart from farmers, blue-collar American workers who elected Trump into the White House will also suffer. ” More than 550, 000 workers at car dealerships representing international brands risk losing their jobs if the industry falters due to the tariffs”, the American International Automobile Dealers Association said in a statement.

The Peterson Institute think tank estimates that the direct cost of import taxes on goods from China, Mexico and Canada will add over$ 1, 200 annually to the typical American household’s expenses. This figure could increase further after reciprocal tariffs are implemented in April.

This is happening while the US is already struggling with stubborn inflation and rising risks of a recession. The country’s CPI rose 3 % from a year earlier, according to the latest US Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Trump’s new tariffs, as S&amp, P Global Ratings estimate, could cause a one-time 0.5 percent to 0.7 percent rise in US consumer prices, provided they remain in place throughout the year.

This means that to win over China in this tariff fight, Trump – under pressure from his voter base and rising inflation –lacks the leverage he claims to have.

His” Art of the Deal” approach of using tariffs to coerce China into complying with his demands will eventually backfire on the US. He should have carefully evaluated the strengths of his rivals, including China, and all the risks and pain his country would face before launching his tariff fight.

Jianxi Liu is a Beijing-based analyst of political and international relations and contributor to Chinese news organizations including Global Times, CGTN and others.

Continue Reading

How a US rate cut would ripple and wash through Asia – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, Finance

February’s US prices record has given the Federal Reserve the room it needs to cut rates—and it may soon taking that action. With year-on-year inflation slowing to 2.8 %, down from 3 % in January, and monthly price growth decelerating, the Fed is under increasing pressure to act. &nbsp,

If it does, the results will resound across international markets, including Asia, where shifting financial situations will alter economies, currencies, and investments. A possible charge cut from the world’s most powerful central banks had so mark a turning level. &nbsp,

For more than a year, Eastern markets have contended with a strong money, forcing central banks to tighten policy to help their economies and curb inflation. If the Fed moves, that stress may comfortable.

Politicians in India, Indonesia and South Korea—previously hesitant to reduce rates—could have room to release economic conditions to help growth.

A weaker money is one of the most immediate outcomes. As price differentials small, the greenback’s dominance may probably diminish, lifting Asian currencies. The renminbi, which has been under stress due to policy difference with the Fed, may develop.

The Chinese rmb, facing challenges from Beijing’s economic change, does stabilize. This shift may offer relief to import-heavy markets and increase trade balances.

For capital markets, the repercussions are important. A Fed hinge may revive investor hunger for emerging markets, leading to new inflows into Asiatic stocks. India and Southeast Asia, with their strong progress stories, stand to benefit, while Hong Kong—long weighed down by outflows—could see a return in attitude. &nbsp,

Lower saving fees will help businesses, especially those in engineering and consumer businesses, which have struggled under high interest rates.

However, there are complexities. A Fed move to ease policy will not resolve all of Asia’s challenges. China, the region’s largest economy, continues to grapple with weak domestic demand and real estate troubles. While a softer dollar may ease liquidity concerns, sustained recovery will depend on Beijing’s policy choices.

Trade risks remain high. The potential rate cuts come as the US shifts toward a more protectionist stance. Trump’s renewed tariff threats on China introduce fresh uncertainty. Even if monetary easing boosts demand, tighter trade conditions could offset those benefits by disrupting supply chains and raising costs.

Commodities markets will react swiftly. A weaker dollar often fuels rallies in oil and industrial metals—key imports for Asia’s manufacturing economies.

While this could raise input costs, it may also indicate stronger demand, benefiting resource-rich nations like Indonesia and Australia. China, the world’s largest commodities consumer, will be closely watching these shifts.

For corporate borrowers, financing conditions will improve. Many Asian firms carry dollar-denominated debt, and a weaker US currency, combined with lower global borrowing costs, would ease repayment burdens. &nbsp,

This could, I believe, unlock delayed investment and support expansion, particularly in real estate and infrastructure sectors.

Bond markets will adjust quickly. As US Treasury yields decline, Asian fixed-income markets will look more attractive. Investors searching for yield will turn to local bonds, potentially lowering borrowing costs for governments and corporations across the region.

The banking sector in Asia is also likely also see changes. A lower interest rate environment in the US would encourage capital flows into emerging markets, reducing pressure on Asian lenders.

Lower borrowing costs may prompt increased credit growth, particularly in economies with robust banking sectors like Singapore and South Korea. But financial institutions must remain cautious about excessive risk-taking in a low-rate environment.

The impact on consumers will be mixed. While lower interest rates could stimulate economic activity, they may also fuel asset bubbles in real estate and equities. Countries like China and South Korea, where housing affordability is already a concern, will need to manage the risk of excessive price surges. &nbsp,

In addition, higher household purchasing power due to stronger currencies could provide a boost to domestic consumption, benefiting retailers and consumer-driven industries.

Asia’s policymakers will have to navigate this shifting landscape carefully. While many economies stand to benefit from the Fed’s potential rate cuts, regional central banks must decide how aggressively to adjust their own policies. Some may choose to maintain higher rates to ensure financial stability, while others could seize the opportunity to stimulate growth.

Ultimately, if the Fed cuts rates, Asia’s economic landscape will shift. The era of aggressive tightening is, I suspect, nearing its end, and a new phase of capital flows and risk positioning is beginning. &nbsp,

The Fed’s next move isn’t guaranteed, but the signs are there. Inflation is cooling, economic momentum is slowing, and policymakers are under pressure to act. The moment the Fed pulls the trigger, Asia will, or at least should, have to respond.

Continue Reading

Trump’s Ukraine mineral deal won’t be easy to extract – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Ukraine’s material success has been a crucial factor in its negotiations with the US as the two nations work out information for a peace deal in Ukraine’s war with Russia.

After a rough stop to those conversations, representatives from the US and Ukraine announced an agreement on March 11, 2025. The US would resume support and knowledge sharing with Ukraine, with some problems, and both agreed to work toward” a detailed contract for developing Ukraine’s crucial material resources to expand Ukraine’s business and guarantee Ukraine’s long-term prosperity and security”.

The initial news from Ukraine’s authorities stated that important minerals may likewise “offset the cost of British help”, but that collection was removed from the joint statement. Getting Russia to agree to a peace would be the next phase.

There’s no question that Ukraine has an abundance of vital minerals, or that these sources will be crucial to its postwar rebuilding. But what specifically do those solutions include, and how plentiful and accessible are they?

The conflict has significantly limited access to data about Ukraine’s natural resources. Nevertheless, as a geoscientist with expertise in asset evaluation, I have been reading professional reviews, many of them behind paywalls, to know what’s at stake. Here’s what we know.

Ukraine’s vitamins energy sectors and militaries

Ukraine’s material assets are concentrated in two volcanic provinces. The larger of these, known as the Ukrainian Shield, is a broad belt running through the center of the country, from the north to the south. It consists of very ancient, tectonic and crystalline stones.

A multibillion-year story of wrong movement and volcanic action created a variety of materials concentrated in local sites and across some larger regions.

A second state, near to Ukraine’s borders with Russia in the south, includes a gap valley known as the Dnipro-Donets Depression. It is filled with sediment mountains containing coal, oil and natural gas.

A map shows critical minerals across the country, including near the Russian border.
Ukraine’s essential material sources. Ukrainian Geological Survey

Before Ukraine’s democracy in 1991, both places supplied the Soviet Union with supplies for its industrialization and defense. A substantial industrial region centered on steel grew in the southeast, where iron, iron and coal are particularly abundant.

By the 2000s, Ukraine was a major producer and exporter of these and other materials. It also mine plutonium, used for nuclear energy.

In addition, Russian and Polish geoscientists identified debris of potassium and rare earth metals that remain uninhabited.

However, technical reports suggest that assessments of these and some other essential minerals are based on outdated volcanic data, that a considerable amount of mines are dormant due to the war, and that many employ older, wasteful technology.

That suggests critical mineral production could be increased by peacetime foreign investment, and that these minerals could provide even greater value than they do today to whomever controls them.

Why the US is so interested

Critical minerals are defined as resources that are essential to economic or national security and subject to supply risks. They include minerals used in military equipment, computers, batteries and many other products.

A list of 50 critical minerals, created by the US Geological Survey, shows that more than a dozen relied upon by the US are abundant in Ukraine.

A majority of those are in the Ukrainian Shield, and roughly 20 % of Ukraine’s total possible reserves are in areas currently occupied by Russia’s military forces.

Machinery work in a deep open mine.
Graphite is mined from a quarry that is about 120 meters deep in Zavallya, Ukraine. Photo: Arsen Dzodzaiev / Anadolu via Getty Images/ The Conversation

Critical minerals Ukraine currently mines

Three critical minerals especially abundant in Ukraine are manganese, titanium and graphite. Between 80 % and 100 % of US demand for each of these currently comes from foreign imports.

Manganese is an essential element in steelmaking and batteries. Ukraine is estimated to have the largest total reserves in the world at 2.4 billion tons. However, the deposits are of fairly low grade – only about 11 % to 35 % of the rock mined is manganese. So it tends to require a lot of material and expensive processing, adding to the total cost.

This is also true for graphite, used in battery electrodes and a variety of industrial applications. Graphite occurs in ore bodies located in the south-central and northwestern portion of the Ukrainian Shield.

At least six deposits have been identified there, with an estimated total of 343 million tons of ore – 18.6 million tons of actual graphite. It’s the largest source in Europe and the fifth largest globally.

Titanium, a key metal for aerospace, ship and missile technology, is present in as many as 28 locations in Ukraine, both in hard rock and sand or gravel deposits. The size of the total reserve is confidential, but estimates are commonly in the hundreds of millions of tons.

Two people look out windows at equipment operating in a mine.
Workers operate machinery at an open-pit titanium mine in the Zhytomyr region on Feb. 28, 2025, amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Photo: Roman Pilipey / AFP via Getty Images/ The Conversation

A number of other critical minerals that are used in semiconductor and battery technologies are less plentiful in Ukraine but also valuable. Zinc occurs in deposits with other metals such as lead, gold, silver and copper.

Gallium and germanium are byproducts of other ores – zinc for gallium, lignite coal for germanium. Nickel and cobalt can be found in ultramafic rock, with nickel more abundant.

No figures for Ukraine’s reserves of these elements were available in early 2025, with the exception of zinc, whose reserves have been estimated at around 6.1 million tons, putting Ukraine among the top 10 nations for zinc.

Critical minerals that aren’t being mined – yet

Geologists have identified potentially significant volumes in Ukraine of three other types of critical minerals important for energy, military and other uses: lithium, rare earth metals and scandium.

None of these had been mined there as of early 2025, though a lithium deposit had been licensed for commercial extraction.

The largest potential lithium reserves exist at three sites in the south-central and southeastern Ukrainian Shield, where the grade of ore is considered moderate to good. How much lithium these reserves hold remains confidential, but technical reports suggest it’s on the order of 160 million tons of ore and 1.6 million to 3 million tons of lithium oxide.

If most of this could be recovered in a profitable way, it would place Ukraine among the top five nations for lithium.

Smaller volumes of tantalum and niobium, also used in steel alloys and technology, have also been identified in these reserves. Most of Ukraine’s lithium occurs as petalite, which, unlike the other main lithium mineral, spodumene, requires more expensive processing.

Rare earth elements in Ukraine are known to exist in several sites of volcanic origin and in association with uranium in the south-central portion of the Ukrainian Shield. These haven’t been developed, though sampling has indicated commercial potential in some sites, while other sites appear less viable.

Excavators work in a vast mined area.
Despite the ongoing war, many mining companies across the country have continued their operations, extracting resources such as titanium, graphite and beryllium. Photo: Kostiantyn Liberov / Libkos / Getty Images via The Conversation

Rare earth elements in high demand for superior magnets and electronics – neodymium, praseodymium, terbium and dysprosium – are all present in varying amounts in these areas. Other critical minerals are associated with these deposits, especially zirconium, tantalum and niobium, in undetermined but potentially significant amounts.

Finally, scandium, used in aluminum alloys for aerospace components, has been identified as a byproduct of processing titanium ores. Ukraine’s scandium does not appear to have been studied in enough detail to evaluate its commercial potential. However, world production, about 30 to 40 tons per year, is forecast to grow rapidly.

Ukraine’s mineral future

It’s clear that Ukraine is endowed with valuable resources. However, extracting them will require roads and railways for access, infrastructure such as electricity and mining and processing technology, investment, technical expertise, environmental considerations and, above all, cessation of military conflict.

Those are the true determinants of Ukraine’s mining future.

Scott L Montgomery is lecturer, Jackson School of International Studies, University of Washington

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

Continue Reading

Why Russia’s military has been so resilient – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Ukraine has agreed to a United States plan of a 30-day peace in its war with Russia following conversations with United States authorities in Saudi Arabia.

The plan comes with the assurance of resumed US knowledge sharing and military aid to Ukraine after both were late frozen by US President Donald Trump.

Russian authorities say they are awaiting further details before making a decision on whether to take the peace. But it’s doubtful Russia may agree to a peace without someone practical on the table in its favor first.

Some experts would say now that Ukraine is winning the war. Russia has the upper hand physically, even if that has no translated into spectacular battlefield achievement. Nevertheless, the threat of the Russian placement in the Kursk area collapsing is now very true.

Since the failed Ukrainian battle in the summer of 2023, Russian troops have crept forward in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine. The Russian advance in the Donbas has accelerated in recent months, but remains sluggish. Both factors have suffered heavy losses.

Among Ukraine’s American donors, political will to continue the war appears to be waning. Trump argues it’s occasion for Ukraine to reduce its costs and communicate an end to the war. For a deal would probably ultimately suggest acknowledging Crimea as part of Russia, and some level of acceptance of Russian power over much of the Donbas.

There has been much debate in the West on Ukrainian endurance in the battle. Very little has yet been written about Russian endurance — whether on the field or in wider Belarusian community.

In the late published” Routledge Handbook of Soviet and Russian Military Studies“, coworkers and I examine how the Soviet and Russian military forces have developed over time from the Napoleonic Wars of the 19th century to the war in Ukraine.

Russian rewards

Russia has considerable field advantages over Ukraine. Russia has more than three times the people of Ukraine, and its conflict work is being sustained by strong support from Russian world.

From fairly early in the war, Russian voting data indicated President Vladimir Putin has had help from a clear majority of the Soviet people. This aid has undoubtedly been helped by the fact that much of Russia’s community has been kept from experiencing the whole financial and mortal costs of war.

The Russian market has played a big part in sustaining Russia’s war effort. Despite eastern sanctions and higher inflation, the financial outlook remains quite strong.

According to Russia’s Federal State Statistics Service, GDP growth was reported as 4.1 % for 2024, albeit fuelled to a large extent by military spending.

Other than prices, most crucial economic indicators are good. Poverty rates reached post-Soviet highs in mid-2024, and had immediately dropped to around 2 %.

Folks walk at Red Square in Moscow, Russia, in January 2025. Russia’s community has in the major been kept from experiencing and seeing the full economic and mortal costs of war. &nbsp, Photo: AP via The Conversation / Pavel Bednyakov

Meanwhile, Ukraine has significantly struggled to maintain the strength of its military forces. It has had to galvanize lower value and less inclined soldiers than earlier in the war. It’s even trying to attract individuals younger than the recruitment age of 25 with economic opportunities.

Where Ukraine relies mostly on enlistment, Russia has been increasingly rely on participants for its armed forces. The death or injury of individuals is far less probable to have a negative effect on wider confidence than the death of soldiers.

Russia still seems to have enough participants to fight in the war in Ukraine that it doesn’t have to use its quarterly soldier share for that goal. Russia conscripts a share of men each time regardless of whether there’s an ongoing battle. Participants are offered higher salaries and important benefits for their services.

Playing to standard advantages

Russia began the conflict in Ukraine in February 2022 with an poorly measured force given its unrealistic goals. The original plan to capture Kyiv was exceedingly ambitious for the causes committed.

But, after Ukrainian attacks in the fall of 2022, not merely did Russia commit more sufficient resources to the battle, but gave them administrative aims that suited their skills.

After failing to quickly seize key targets near Kyiv in the face of persistent resistance, the Soviet military has shifted to a significantly more rigorous approach that has played to conventional strengths, mitigating weaknesses in co-ordination in a more liquid environment. One traditional strength has been in artillery.

The Russian armed forces have historically placed emphasis on the value of — and breaching of — fortified defensive positions.

These strengths have been apparent not only in blunting the Ukrainian counteroffensive in the summer of 2023, but also in the subsequent, often successful, co-ordination of small infantry storm detachments with drones to take Ukrainian defensive positions.

While the Russian army remains a relatively blunt instrument, it is not as blunt as it was in late 2022 and early 2023.

This more methodical approach certainly contrasts strongly with both the almost reckless Russian advance at the very beginning of the war on the Kyiv axis— and indeed the squandering of lives by the Wagner Group in early 2023.

Credible sources are no longer suggesting that the sort of losses suffered by troops from the Wagner Group in taking Bakhmut in May 2023 are still being suffered by Russian forces today.

The Russian military has also been making use of new technologies as the war has progressed. The Soviet and Russian armed forces have a long history of embracing new technology. While at times they have been slow to do so, when they do, they adopt that technology en masse and with enthusiasm.

During the early phases of the war, Ukraine had the advantage in terms of drone use. However, as the war progressed, Russia too made increasingly effective use of drones. The recent use of a drone to spot for a recent Iskander-M missile attack on Ukrainian troops assembled in the village of Cherkaske near the regional centre of Dnipro is a case in point.

Negotiation implication

Any lasting deal Ukraine could make with Russia in the near future is likely to be far worse for Ukraine than the sort of deal that was being discussed back in the spring of 2022. Regardless of one’s perspective on the conflict, such a situation appears inevitable given battlefield realities.

However, renewed negotiations may stand a higher chance of securing a sustainable peace in the near future. Given heavy losses on both sides, both Russia and Ukraine will be heavily invested in seeking a lasting deal.

If a deal is to last, it will have to not only foster Ukrainian security, but align with Russia’s revised demands for peace as outlined in mid-2024. Russia has already made it clear that it will not accept NATO troops in Ukraine, since part of the rationale for the war was to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO.

Alexander Hill is professor of military history, University of Calgary

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

Continue Reading

No chance Trump can catch China’s shipbuilding juggernaut – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Leveraging international contracts, dual-use system and commercial policy, China’s state-backed manufacturing juggernaut is quickly outpacing the US Navy as it struggles with declining shipyards and proper uncertainty.

This month, the Center for Strategic and International Studies ( CSIS ) released a report detailing how China has become the world’s leader in shipbuilding, threatening US naval superiority in the Asia-Pacific and beyond.

According to the report, China has leveraged industrial policy and military-civil fusion (MCF ) to integrate commercial and naval production. CSIS says the China State Shipbuilding Corporation ( CSSC), the world’s largest shipbuilder, has blurred the lines between civilian and military sectors, fueling the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s ( PLAN ) expansion while benefiting from foreign contracts and capital.

The document states China’s manufacturing network operates under a structured structure, with high-risk CSSC-owned feet producing business vessels and warships usually funded by foreign clients.

It points out that over 75 % of ships from these yards are sold to foreign buyers, indirectly subsidizing China’s naval build-up. It says that European and Asian companies, including Taiwan’s Evergreen Marine, have de facto channeled billions into CSSC’s dual-use system.

The CSIS record mentions international entanglements extend beyond send requests. It points out that Western firms have supplied critical technologies, such as marine engines, gas turbines and liquid natural gas ( LNG ) carrier designs, enabling China to overcome key military-industrial hurdles. It even says Chinese shipbuilders also entry global financial markets, securing foreign investment despite US restrictions.

Putting figures on China’s shipbuilding dominance over the US, an August 2024 US Congressional Research Service ( CRS ) report assesses that China has 230 times the shipbuilding capacity of the US, enabling it to have the world’s largest navy. China’s battle force comprises 370 ships and submarines, with more than 140 major combatants, according to the 2024 US Department of Defense ( DOD ) China Military Power report.

In contrast, US Senator Roger Wicker mentioned in a May 2024 reading before the US Senate Armed Forces Committee that the US Navy is very little and old to meet the demands of US fight officers and national security plan. As of March 2025, the US Naval Vessel Register ( NVR ) says the US has 295 ships, far smaller than the PLAN.

Outlining the PLAN’s probable fleet size development trajectory, US Senator Dan Sullivan said in the same receiving that by 2025, the PLAN will include 395 boats and will increase to 435 ships by 2030 – 141 more than the US Navy.

That places the US Navy in a perilous proper position. In a January 2023 content in Proceedings, Sam Tangredi argues that factual data from 28 marine problems shows fleet size usually outweighs modern advantages.

Tangredi points out that in 25 instances the larger ships emerged victorious, suggesting that large size usually outweighs short-lived modern advantages. He asserts that greater numbers increase scouting capacity, freedom and dramatic power, as demonstrated in the Napoleonic Wars and World War II periods.

He points out that strategies like the US Navy’s 600-ship Cold War plan reflect these principles, while smaller, tech-savvy forces typically failed to compensate for being outnumbered.

On how US naval shipbuilding declined, Peter Lee mentions in a 2024 Asan Institute for Policy Studies report that US naval shipbuilding faces chronic delays, with major programs such as the Ford-class aircraft carrier and Virginia-class submarines running years behind schedule. Lee says a dwindling labor force and inconsistent government demand have exacerbated the problem.

He also notes that US commercial shipbuilding has collapsed, currently accounting for less than 1 % of global output. Lee says it has been crippled by the century-old Jones Act, which inflates domestic shipping costs while stifling competitiveness.

He says China’s shipbuilding dominance is backed by aggressive state subsidies, a strategy the US has resisted. Lee mentions that while protectionist laws prevent outsourcing naval shipbuilding, deregulation in the 1980s decimated the private sector, forcing reliance on foreign-built vessels.

The US has three options to reverse this trend: revamping its shipbuilding industry, utilizing unmanned platforms or tapping comparatively robust allied shipyards in Japan and South Korea. Each approach has advantages and disadvantages.

The Trump administration unveiled the” Make Shipbuilding Great Again” initiative in February 2025 to rejuvenate the US shipbuilding industry at China’s expense. The program requires a comprehensive maritime action plan that a new White House maritime office will manage within six months.

Key elements of the plan include tax incentives, a Maritime Security Trust Fund and maritime opportunity zones. It also aims to reform acquisition processes and tackle workforce issues, including by raising wages for shipyard workers.

However, in a February 2025 US Senate Armed Forces Committee hearing, Wicker says that pouring money into US shipbuilding woes won’t work, as the US doesn’t have the industrial base to support a surge in shipbuilding.

Moreover, a January 2025 US Congressional Budget Office ( CBO ) report mentions that the US Navy’s 2025 shipbuilding plan faces significant challenges due to escalating costs and production delays.

The report says while the US Navy aims to expand its fleet to 390 ships by 2054, aging shipyards will struggle to meet demand. It adds that labor shortages, supply chain disruptions and rising material costs hinder progress.

Unmanned Surface Vehicles ( USVs ) provide an economical solution for fleet expansion, allowing budget-constrained navies to deploy swarms of attack drones. Their ability to scale and enhance distributed lethality complements manned vessels make them more difficult for enemies to target while improving fleet resilience.

At the same time, harsh maritime conditions lead to faster mechanical wear. The fact that these vehicles depend on external communication links also makes them vulnerable to jamming and hacking, especially in scenarios dominated by electronic warfare.

Unlike crewed warships, they do not possess the endurance, firepower and versatility necessary for extended combat operations.

In March 2024, Voice of America (VOA ) reported that the US is looking to South Korea and Japan, the world’s second and third-largest shipbuilding countries after China, to revive US shipbuilding. According to VOA, US Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro has recently visited shipyards in South Korea and Japan to meet shipbuilding executives.

Del Toro’s visit shows that the US has trouble building warships and that working closely with allies to build more warships or offload some maintenance tasks could help, the VOA report said.

However, Matthew Paxton argues in a March 2024 Defense News article that outsourcing US shipbuilding would further weaken the US industrial base, sideline US workers and undermine US sovereignty by ceding the ability to build ships to other states.

Paxton questions the usefulness of outsourcing US shipbuilding to allies when many of the shipbuilding capabilities touted by Del Toro during his visit to South Korea and Japan can be found in the US. But if the US fails to revive its shipbuilding industry, it risks ceding naval dominance to China, whose relentless expansion shows no signs of abating.

Continue Reading

The dark parallels between 1920s USA and today’s political climate – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

As promised, the second Trump administration has quickly rolled out a slew of policies and executive orders that the president says are all aimed at” Making America Great Again”. This takes on various forms, including Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency immediately laying off thousands of workers at various federal agencies, and President Donald Trump pausing all cash for Ukraine.

Trump says that, among people, there are three teams that are making America not-great: refugees, people with disabilities, and people who are committed to diversity, equity and inclusion plans.

These management work began at a time when some Americans expressed an entire rising sense of dissatisfaction with the state of the country and politicians. Only 19 % of Americans said in December 2024 that they think the country is heading in the right direction.

This view is striking not only because it is so gloomy, but because it strongly resembles how Americans felt during a pivotal generation 100 centuries ago, when people’s frustration with the state of the country led to a series of unfair, cruel plans by the federal government.

It’s a time of British story that I think offers something of a picture of the current political situation in the U. S.

The Roaring ‘ 20s?

In the 1920s, the market was good, the US had won World War I and a bad epidemic ended.

But some Americans did not see it that way.

They entered the 1920s with a growing feeling of anxiety and a sense that they had been robbed of everything. Winning World War I had come at a bad price. More than 116, 000 British soldiers died and double that number came home wounded.

As the war came to a close, the US – and the universe – was in the midst of the flu pandemic that eventually claimed tens of millions of life, including about 675, 000 in the U. S.

Another Americans were concerned about the possible rise of communism in the US, as well as the introduction of some immigrants. This led fanatics to create and implement hate-based plans at the federal and state level that targeted nonwhite refugees and handicapped individuals.

Among the most important benefits of that social time was the 1924 Johnson-Reed Act, a stringent immigration policy that, among other shifts, prohibited emigration from Asia.

Another important activity was the Supreme Court’s 1927 Buck v. Bell determination, which affirmed that the state of Virginia had the right to clean cognitively and developmentally handicapped individuals.

Discrimination against excluded parties

The Johnson-Reed Act prompted a significant change in American immigration plan, based on the fear of something that former President Theodore Roosevelt and another called “race suicide“.

The rules introduced firm limits keeping people out of the nation who were not from Northern and Western Europe. The emigration limits that it established may continue to be enforced into the 1960s.

The US politicians who lobbied for this laws were successful because they supported their efforts by presenting evidence that showed apparently medical proof that almost all people in the world were medically superior to a group they called the Nordic Race– meaning people from Northern Europe– and their British descendants, who formed a group they called the” National Race”.

By restricting emigration from all other parties, these politicians believed they were counterbalancing a crushing period where conflict and crisis had killed off what they saw as the government’s best people.

Various groups preyed on Americans ‘ pain about the conflict and crisis and directed it against minority parties.

From Maine to California, a revived Ku Klux Klan attracted millions of followers with its idea that white folks were superior to all others, and that Black people should be imprisoned. At the same time, a group of scientists, doctors and psychologists found enormous success in persuading the public that there were scientific reasons why hatred and discrimination needed to be incorporated into American government.

Their proof was something called eugenics, a pseudoscience which argued that humans had to use advanced technology and medicine to get people with good traits to reproduce while stopping those with bad traits from having the opportunity to do so.

Harry Laughlin, a eugenicist based at a research laboratory in Cold Spring Harbor, New York, was one of this movement’s most vocal representatives.

Laughlin worked for several different eugenics research organizations, and this helped him become successful at creating propaganda supporting eugenics that influenced public policy. He then gained a spot as an expert eugenics adviser to Congress in the early 1920s. With his position, Laughlin then provided the pseudoscientific data that gave the supporters of Johnson-Reed the claims they needed to justify passing the measure.

A push for sterilization

In Laughlin’s influential 1922 book Eugenic Sterilization in the United States, he detailed a road map for passing a law that would allow governments to sterilize disabled people.

After so much death during World War I and the influenza pandemic, Laughlin found fertile ground for making a case that the U. S. needed to stop people who might be considered “feeble-minded” from passing down inferior traits.

In the mid-1920s, Laughlin and his allies pressed a court case against a teenage woman whom the state of Virginia had deemed an imbecile and incarcerated at a massive Virginia institution for the feeble-minded. This woman, Carrie Buck, was incarcerated after she gave birth to a child in 1924 who was conceived as a result of rape. If Buck, who was 18 years old at the time, had any hope of being released, the officials who ran the institution demanded she be sterilized first.

Two women sit next to each other and look at the camera in a black-and-white photo.
Carrie Buck, left, pictured with her mother, Emma, was the first woman involuntarily sterilized under Virginia law in the 1920s. Photo: M. E. Grenander Special Collections and Archives, University at Albany

All across the country, states had begun legalizing forced sterilization. Now, this case of Buck v. Bell made its way to the U. S. Supreme Court. In 1927, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. issued the court’s ruling, which had only one dissent. In it, he wrote that” three generations of imbeciles is enough” and extended the scope of a previous ruling, which allowed the government to compel people to get vaccinated, to include forced sterilization of disabled people.

Buck was forcibly sterilized in October 1927, shortly after the court’s ruling.

While it is unquestionable that sterilization and other discriminatory policies found common cause with Adolf Hitler’s rising Nazi movement – which used the eugenic ideas of sterilization and mass extermination– they persisted, largely unchallenged, in the US.

Some people, including myself, argue that the spirit of these discriminatory policies still exists in the US today.

A familiar story

Following stalemated wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the 2000s and the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, the American economy has been growing.

But, sensing a grave decline, some white Americans have turned their sights on people with disabilities, immigrants, transgender and nonbinary people and people of color as the source of their problems.

Trump regularly encourages this kind of thinking. In January 2025, after an air collision that occurred over the Potomac River and killed 67 people, he blamed it on disabled Federal Aviation Administration employees – implying that they did not possess the intelligence to do their jobs.

Trump falsely said that the January 1, 2025, New Orleans terror attack was caused by illegal immigration– even though a Texas-born man drove a car into a crowd of people, killing 14.

At a policy level, Trump’s administration has made significant changes to the immigration system, including taking steps to remove legal protections for 350, 000 Venezuelan immigrants in the US. And he has launched an unprecedented challenge to birthright citizenship.

There are limits to what history can say about the current situation. But these similarities with the early 1920s suggest that, contrary to many claims about the unprecedented nature of the current times, the country has been here before.

Alex Green is a lecturer in public policy at the Harvard Kennedy School.

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

Continue Reading

Some Korean conservatives go full-MAGA in pressing election fraud claims – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Min Kyungwook, who has been participating in a” stop-the-steal”-style battle to root out alleged vote scam since he lost his parliamentary seats in South Korea’s 2020 vote, feels he has a hero and role model in Donald Trump.

Since President Yoon Suk Yeol’s issued the martial law charter on December 3 that led to his prosecution, a once-sidelined issue has resurfaced at the forefront of national argument: At the heart of Yoon’s questionable decision was a commitment to investigate vote fraud claims – allegations of irregularities that, according to the president’s supporters, have huge tilted the political scales against the traditional camp.

Some liberal South Koreans including Min have doubled down on those costs. In the process they have identified with Trump’s MAGA movement, whose focus following Trump’s personal loss in the 2020 US election was to try to undermine the election process in several US states– without managing to generate substantial evidence of significant irregularities.

” Considering that the root cause of our present turmoil is election fraud that similarly affected President Trump”, says Min ( whose current title is standing representative of the National Struggle Headquarters for the April 15th Fraudulent Election ), “it would be immensely beneficial for conservatives here if the Trump administration were to expedite the investigation into US electoral fraud, hold those responsible accountable and reform the system accordingly”.

On the night of the South Korean president’s martial law decree, around 300 troops were dispatched to the National Election Commission ( NEC ) building to secure its computerized server – evidence that proponents see as a smoking gun.

While some South Koreans have viewed and also see such statements as generally baseless conspiracy theories, public mood appears to be shifting. One recent poll shows 54.5 % of respondents demanding a formal probe into the NEC and its handling of past elections, as the institution faces mounting criticism for operating a “family-like business” ( read nepotism ) for years with minimal oversight.

Fueling this speed is an exposé video on South Korea’s political irregularities, which aired on March 2 and has drawn over 1.2 million opinions.

Former National Assembly Representative Min, 61, who was a TV prime time news anchor before he went into politics, weighed in on the controversy in an interview he gave Asia Times after his return from attending the February Conservative Political Action Conference ( CPAC ) in Maryland. There he had briefed assembled British right-wingers on South Korea’s stormy social situation.

When did you begin scrutinizing election fraud says?

Electoral fraud in South Korea second gained widespread attention during the public vote held on April 15, 2020. I was a member in the Yeonsu-gu city of Incheon, where I finished in next location. There were three primary candidates, and the ratio between me and the champion was only 2, 893 vote.

Running in a city that had long been a traditional stronghold, I was the only conservative member seeking re-election. Meanwhile, two liberal candidates were splitting the vote. Despite this, I lost. The outcome didn’t add up, so I began investigating the matter, and soon realized that results defied statistical logic. Conservative candidates in other districts were facing similar anomalies, and so the battle over electoral fraud officially commenced.

How did they defy statistical norm?

There are many examples, but I’ll highlight the most obvious one: a massive disparity between Election Day voting and early voting. In the 2020 general election, Liberal-leaning Democratic Party candidates received far more votes in early voting than on Election Day across all 253 districts nationwide, while right-leaning Unified Future Party candidates saw the exact opposite trend.

Specifically, early voting results showed that liberal candidates enjoyed an average margin of 12.5 %, while conservative candidates recorded -12.5 %. This 25 percentage-point differential indicates that liberal candidates received 25 % more early votes—a statistical anomaly that defies conventional probabilistic expectations.

In a May 2020 interview with Chosun Ilbo, Professor Emeritus Park Sung-hyun, who has devoted his life to statistical research at Seoul National University, stated that these results cannot be explained without “divine intervention” or “fraud”.

Early voters may have a different political leaning than Election Day voters.

In statistics, there is a concept called the law of large numbers. It is a mathematical principle that states the average of results obtained from a large number of independent random samples will converge to the true value. In other words, under normal circumstances, the ratio of early voting results should be similar to Election Day voting results and the overall voting ratio in a particular district.

For instance, if the total voting ratio of two candidates A and B in a district is 6: 4, it’s normal to see a similar 6: 4 ratio in their early voting and the Election Day voting. But in my district and others, the liberal Democratic candidates had an unusually high percentage in early voting.

In statistical terms, this situation constitutes a clear anomaly. Despite the numbers blatantly defying established statistical principles, South Korean media quickly branded me and others who questioned the election results as conspiracy theorists, effectively stifling our voices.

South Korea’s National Election Commission has, on several occasions, acknowledged flaws in past elections. Today, more than half of the public is calling for a thorough investigation and audit of the Commission for potential irregularities. At the very least, an objective and transparent inquiry is needed.

What is the most effective method for verifying election fraud?

A thorough investigation by the prosecutors must be conducted, the Election Commission’s servers must be verified, the recount requested in 126 election invalidation lawsuits from the 2020 general election must be reopened and the investigation into over 20 complaints and lawsuits of election fraud filed in the 2024 general election must commence. Once President Yoon is back in office, the groundwork for launching these investigations will be in place.

How do you respond to criticisms that you’re citing election fraud to contest your loss?

Before entering politics, I spent over 20 years as a journalist at South Korea’s national broadcaster KBS. My drive to fight election fraud was not rooted in personal grievances, but in my commitment to thoroughly investigate my suspicions and present the findings to the public.

Some argue that electoral fraud is inconceivable in today’s world, but they are gravely mistaken. Even in the United States, with one of the most mature democratic systems, there have been serious allegations of stolen elections and foreign interference – an issue that President Trump is now vigorously confronting.

Could you share your experience at CPAC 2025?

Given the rapidly evolving political situation in South Korea following the December 3 martial law declaration, CPAC Korea focused heavily on this topic. Intellectuals well-versed in Northeast Asian affairs, including Gordon Chang, Fred Fleitz and Steve Yates, took part in an in-depth public debate on the issues of martial law and electoral fraud in South Korea.

The US panelists, in particular, demonstrated a deep understanding of why President Yoon had no choice but to impose martial law, emphasizing that this was not merely a political battle between left and right, but a critical struggle between those defending the liberal democratic order and those seeking to overthrow it.

I was invited to attend the official dinner after the event, where I had the opportunity to speak with former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon. There I asked him,” Do you think President Trump can help South Korea and President Yoon in the crisis they are facing”?

He replied,” Serious issues are going on in East Asia right now, and the US should be a strong supporter of South Korea”. When asked if the U. S. could assist South Korea with the election issue, Bannon responded,” President Trump is likely to take appropriate action”.

What lessons can Trump learn from the political turmoil in South Korea?

I understand there is a concerted effort among American leftists to depose President Trump. Yet, given the substantial authority vested in US presidents compared with leaders in my country, impeachment while in office is highly unlikely.

That said, Trump’s team must remain vigilant for democratic crises among its allies. While Washington is said to have spent approximately$ 500 trillion on the war in Ukraine, South Korea’s strategic, economic, political, and security importance far exceeds that of Ukraine.

Kenji Yoshida is a Seoul-based correspondent for JAPAN Forward.

Continue Reading

Four Chinese firms look to shake up tech world in DeepSeek’s wake – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, Technology

The success of the Chinese AI company DeepSeek shocked economic markets and significant US tech firms in January 2025. But it shouldn’t have come as for a surprise.

For years now, lots of companies in China have been developing economical benefits that enable them to create amazing progress. This involves a strategy different from that of many big Western firms that rely on things like branding ( like Apple ) and exclusive technology ( like Nvidia ) to succeed.

Rather, these less-well-known Chinese firms have focused on delivering more creativity faster and cheaper. And our study suggests that they have been able to achieve this by being little more versatile in how they do business.

But DeepSeek may not be only as a gamechanger. Here are four more Chinese companies looking to undermine the global market in similar way.

1. DJI Innovations

DJI Innovations makes low-cost robots that produce underwater photos and video. Founded in 2006 by Frank Wang ( who became Asia’s youngest it billionaire at the age of 36), the business develops camera systems and applications as well as executive aircraft techniques used in business including crops and military. Its engineering has been used in the shooting of shows like Better Call Saul and Game of Thrones.

DJI’s cutting-edge research and development involves very sophisticated automatic assembly lines that make more for less value. This has led to rapid global growth and international collaborations, making the business a strong person that is difficult to contend against.

2. Unitree Robotics

A DJI Innovations spin-off founded in 2016, Unitree Robotics specializes in high-performance legged and human computers as well as elements such as mechanical hands. These items incorporate synthetic intelligence and have many uses in consumer and professional markets.

But in a field where progress may be slower than we might hope, Unitree’s swift development cycles – from first idea, through development and testing, to commercialization – give it an edge over rivals. This cycle speed is achieved through highly digitized processes, and large highly skilled development teams, which place it ahead of many rivals.

For example, in 2024 one of the firm’s humanoid robots ( already capable of soldering and cooking ) set a new walking speed record of 3.3 meters per second. And in early 2025 the company’s robots performed a traditional Yangko dance alongside humans.

YouTube video

]embedded content]

3. Game Science

Game Science is a Chinese video games firm founded in 2014. Its August 2024 release of Black Myth: Wukong, an advanced role-playing video game inspired by the classic Chinese novel Journey to the West, is one of the fastest-selling games of all time, with revenues of over US$ 1.1 billion and over 25 million copies sold to date.

This success demonstrates the firm’s ability to create products that incorporate Chinese cultural elements that also appeal to global tastes. This is partly down to the company’s prolific data analysis capabilities, allowing it to incorporate vast quantities of feedback from players into its design decisions.

That input gives it a big advantage over competitors, moving beyond the old Chinese export model of making cheap versions of western products. Instead, it offers innovative products that are also cheaper, contributing to China’s growing presence in the global gaming market.

4. Yonyou

Yonyou was set up in 1988 to offer business and accounting software to Chinese companies. It now dominates the market in the country and has spread to Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia. Beyond Asia is the next goal.

The firm’s success hinges on its ability to optimize its products for local customers while avoiding premium pricing. It understands that business systems vary geographically according to things like local culture, customs and consumer taste.

Yonyou’s proposition is simple but very effective: to develop software that varies to serve idiosyncratic local needs, knowing that this will work better than the one-size-fits-all products available from global competitors.

This has led it to create popular and specific software for industries including retail, education, finance and construction. The company’s expertise lies in challenging the conventional wisdom that customized products come at a high cost.

Each of these four Chinese firms clearly understands the advantages to be gained from innovative technology and good strategy, which are both within their control. What they cannot control are the geopolitical factors to do with international trade and the global economy – which makes the future uncertain.

But continuing to work to their particular strengths will make it likely that they – and plenty of others like them – go on disrupting global markets.

Naresh R. Pandit is a professor of international business at the University of East Anglia, Feng Wan is an associate professor of management at Zhejiang University, and Peter Williamson is an honorary professor of international management at Cambridge Judge Business School.

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

Continue Reading

US-Ukraine ceasefire proposal puts ball in Putin’s court – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The United States says Ukraine has agreed to its request for a 30-day peace with Russia following three years of war.

The news followed peace talks in Saudi Arabia, where Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky traveled on March 10, and is a amazing turn of events. The game is now in Russia’s courtroom in terms of whether it accepts the ceasefire plan.

Zelensky’s new shouting meet with US President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance in the White House, at a floor level, could not have gone little worse from the Ukrainian party’s view. Both Trump and Vance subjected Zelensky to withering problems before their appointment immediately ended.

The consequences from the appointment immediately seemed even worse than the meet itself. On March 3, Trump paused fabric military aid to Ukraine, and two days later, the US stopped sharing knowledge with Russians. The choice on cleverness has since been reversed following Ukraine’s deal with the peace plan.

When campaigning for president, Trump promised to end the conflict in 24 hours. After he won a second word, Trump has appeared indifferent and even hostile towards Russia at times.

The local upheaval that’s been fuelled by many of his plans, however, has evidently caused him to get a earn in foreign affairs. Enter Ukraine.

However, Trump’s increased emphasis on Ukraine in recent months, including his Oval Office assault on Zelensky, has required the Russian president to adjust. He’s so been making moves to shore up support for Ukraine in a world free of American administration.

Trump’s preoccupation

Trump’s preoccupation with Ukraine stems from several aspects of his world view.

Second, while principles of Trump being a Russian broker may be overblown, he does appear fixated on Russian President Vladimir Putin. This preoccupation likely stems from the fact that Putin, many like Trump, views the world in a transactional way. Putin is someone with whom Trump, who broadcasts himself as a deal-maker, is reach an agreement.

Next, the Russia-Ukraine issue coincides with Trump’s world see that the US provides too much and the rest of the world too little to safe global security. This view is especially the case with Europe, which Trump opinions as “free-loading” via American security offers.

Third, Trump opinions Ukraine as having the potential to help British industry and army, only not in a military fashion. The rare earth minerals that Ukraine possesses have significant economic and military implications, and the market is dominated by the state Trump and many others view as America’s chief rival: China.

Fourth and finally, Trump correctly views the US as having leverage over Ukraine. American military aid has largely allowed Ukraine to fight a protracted war against a much larger enemy. While the degradation of Russia’s military and economy benefits the US, Trump’s focus on short-term objectives largely overlooks this point.

Did Zelensky outplay Trump?

Trump, however, did not account for Zelensky’s strength of character. While Trump is seeking to use Ukraine for his own advantage, Zelensky remains focused on Ukraine’s interests— and not on America first. The emerging personality conflict between both men made the chaotic Oval Office meeting almost inevitable.

Given Trump’s rhetoric towards Zelenskyy in the lead-up to that meeting, it’s curious the Ukrainian leader agreed to the meeting at all. But Zelenskyy himself reportedly pushed for the meeting, and even had French President Emmanuel Macron intervene on his behalf.

American support for Ukraine was disappearing before the tumultuous meeting. There has been no new aid for Ukraine since Trump assumed the presidency. For Ukraine to survive, it needs a new patron.

Zelensky has taken risks during the conflict, not all of which have worked in his or Ukraine’s favor. Those risks, however, have always been calculated. His attempt to bolster support for Ukraine among its non-American allies following the contentious White House meeting might be an example of this type of calculation.

Europe rallies around Ukraine

In the aftermath of the meeting, the international community has rallied around Ukraine. Most important, however, has been the European response.

For all the problems in Trump’s approach, he is correct that the European response to Russia’s invasion has left a lot to be desired from Ukraine’s perspective. While Europe has provided more financial assistance to Ukraine than the US, it has largely occurred in spurts and only after American leadership on the issue.

France and the United Kingdom have emerged as Ukraine’s biggest backers in Europe. This is not new, as both countries have been among Ukraine’s most vocal supporters over the last few years. What Ukraine needs, however, is for that vocal support to turn into action.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced an 800 billion euro program for European Union members to bolster their defence capabilities soon after Zelenskyy met with European leaders in London in early March. In explaining her rationale, von der Leyen stated:

” With this equipment, member states can massively step up their support to Ukraine… This approach of joint procurement will also reduce costs, reduce fragmentation, increase interoperability and strengthen our defence industrial base”.

EU is critical

Though not perfect, the renewed support from the EU and the UK may allow Ukraine to continue fighting as Russia’s declining economy hinders Putin’s war effort.

In the aftermath of the Oval Office showdown with Trump and Vance, Zelensky has done what he can to repair Ukraine’s relationship with the US and satiate Trump’s ego, but tension remains.

From Ukraine’s perspective, it needs a new partner in its war against Russia, and the EU can serve that purpose. The US may be the country pushing for a ceasefire in Ukraine, but it’s Europe that will play the most vital role in Ukraine’s ability to fight the war if it endures.

James Horncastle is assistant professor and Edward and Emily McWhinney professor in international relations, Simon Fraser University

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

Continue Reading