Bolen C – Page 38 – Sure A Not

Behold China’s innovative golden age – Asia Times

On: March 5, 2025

In: Asia

Writing about the chaos of Trump’s evening is exhausting. I’ll get back to it later, but now I’d like to get a short break to read about a civilization that&nbsp, isn’t &nbsp, now tearing itself apart and accelerating its own drop: China.

A number of rising powers all reached their heights during the 20th century in terms of not only relative military may and economic power but also technological and cultural development.

These included the United States, Japan, Germany and Russia. Thus far, the 21st century is a little different, because just one big society is&nbsp, hitting its peak&nbsp, right today: China. India is only beginning to take off against the ancient power, and all of them are fading.

China’s top is&nbsp, really spectacular&nbsp, — a masterpiece of state capability and resource recruitment never seen before on this planet. China built more high-speed bridge in just a few years than the total number of different nations in the world. Its engine manufacturers are leapfrogging the developed earth, seizing authority in the EV market of the future.

China has produced so many solar panels and batteries that it has driven down the price to remain competitive with fossil fuels — a great blow against climate change, despite all of China’s huge fuel emissions, and a win for global electricity abundance.

China’s towns are scale-unmatched: dense forests of towering buildings adorned with LED lights, dense stores with wonderful restaurants and shops selling every modern convenience for a reasonable price, large highways and enormous train stations.

Yet China’s policy missteps and totalitarian misuses inspire awe and dread — Zero Covid failed in the end, but it demonstrated an ability to control world lower to the detailed stage that the Soviets would have envied.

However, it’s also up for debate whether China will be as inventive and cultural as the great empires of the 20th century. Many people ( including&nbsp, myself ) compare early 21st century China to&nbsp, early 20th century America. But by the start of World War 1, Americans had already invented the aircraft, the light bulb, the phone, the report person, air conditioning, the automatic transmission, the system weapons and the ball pen.

And the nation now had spawned a large number of well-known authors, Hollywood films, and jazz music. Japan’s social explosion&nbsp, came a little after, but was every bit as spectacular.

It is clear that a state that is authoritarian and oppressive inhibits creativity. I also expect China’s cultural export and control to improve as time goes on, due to increased individual wealth and leisure moment that make Taiwanese people feel more free to pursue artistic interests. But everything in the country is&nbsp, heavily censored, which means that the&nbsp, <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/ne-zha-2-chinese-animated-film-shatters-box-office-records-heads-overs-rcna191619″>movies&nbsp, and music and&nbsp, video games&nbsp, and TV and art that come out of China will usually tend to be bland, anodyne stuff. 1.

It’s much less clear whether&nbsp, scientific and technological&nbsp, creativity suffers from autocracy, though. To strengthen their nations, autocrats want to advance science and technology. They sometimes squelch private entrepreneurs out of fear that an alternative center of power would threaten their rule, but at the same time they tend to direct large amounts of resources toward research and development.

The USSR beat the US to space ( twice ), and Germany was pretty autocratic for most of its run as the world’s leading scientific and technological powerhouse.

Modern China is undoubtedly a very creative nation. Chinese scientists now publish the majority of high-impact papers in fields like chemistry, physics, computer science, materials science, and engineering:

The country’s true dominance is probably less than depicted in this chart, due to&nbsp, “home bias” in the citations&nbsp, used to measure papers ‘ impact. But even correcting for that bias, China is undeniably a scientific superpower.

China’s innovation outside of the lab is just as impressive. A vast number of&nbsp, incremental improvements&nbsp, and&nbsp, process innovations&nbsp, allow many Chinese businesses to improve product quality and decrease manufacturing cost much more effectively than their foreign rivals. Most of the manufactured goods we buy today would be either lower-quality, more expensive, or both without Chinese innovation.

In fact, Chinese companies are responsible for&nbsp, most of the nation’s research spending. As a result, Chinese companies dominate the global market for a number of high-tech products:

China is now ahead of most or all of the rest of the world in terms of&nbsp, deploying&nbsp, and utilizing those technologies so that people can use them. It has the world’s biggest high-speed rail system, one of the world’s best&nbsp, 5G cell phone networks, the world’s best mobile payments system, the world’s best&nbsp, delivery robots, some of the world ‘s&nbsp, most automated factories, and the world ‘s&nbsp, most futuristic cars.

What, however, has China produced in its golden age so far in terms of actual big scientific and technological breakthroughs and breakthroughs? The answer to this question might not be&nbsp, economically&nbsp, important — it’s hard to name an invention that came out of Singapore, and yet it’s among the richest countries on Earth. But it’s kind of an interesting question nonetheless.

Some people now contend that significant breakthroughs are no longer as prevalent as they once were. Some believe the low-hanging fruit of science has &nbsp, already been picked. It’s also possible that it’s harder for a single inventor or discoverer to stay ahead of the pack due to the much greater competitiveness of today’s global scientific enterprise and the global economy.

Nevertheless, we&nbsp, have &nbsp, seen a bunch of big breakthroughs and game-changing inventions in the last two decades — AI, generative AI, mRNA vaccines, Crispr, smartphones, reusable rockets, lab-grown meat, self-driving cars and so on. And it’s usually not too hard to identify a few researchers or a single company that made the big breakthrough for each one of these.

What significant ones have also emerged from China over the past ten and a half? First of all, I think it’s helpful to differentiate three different types of breakthrough innovation:

Prototype invention: This is when someone demonstrates some technological functionality in a lab setting.
Commercial invention: This is when a company creates a version of a technology that has sufficient functionality to achieve mass commercialization.

The distinction between 2 and 3 is the source of many debates about who invented what, though the line between 1 and 2 isn’t particularly important in my opinion. James Watt didn’t build the first working&nbsp, steam engine, nor Apple the first working&nbsp, smartphone, but they made critical improvements that made those technologies mass-marketable in forms that would be recognizable many years later.

Some people believe Watt and Apple don’t deserve credit for these inventions because of this, but I believe they’re mistaken. Successful commercial invention requires bringing together a set of features, functional improvements, cost reductions, design, marketing/branding, and a business model for selling the thing, and so it involves a different set of skills than making a prototype in a lab.

On the other hand, prototype invention is clearly important as well, because it demonstrates that something is possible to build. Even though the Wright Brothers didn’t create the type of plane that a lot of people wanted to buy and use, everyone agrees that they were the ones who invented the airplane.

So anyway, I tried to look up the answer to this question. My sources include a report from ChatGPT’s” Deep Research” AI, Google searches, and lists of Chinese&nbsp, inventions&nbsp, and&nbsp, discoveries, Google searches, and a conversation with&nbsp, Glenn Luk&nbsp ( who is very bullish on Chinese innovation ). 2

In terms of&nbsp, commercial inventions&nbsp, like the smartphone or the steam engine, there are some big things that have come out of China since the turn of the century. Among these are:

1. The quadcopter drone

When people say “drone” these days, they usually don’t mean things like America’s Reaper or Iran’s Shahed — things that run on fossil fuels. They mean battery-powered quadcopters. This kind of drone has significantly altered our physical world over the past few years, surpassing all other technological innovations since the smartphone, and has seen a lot more widespread commercial adoption.

The first electronic remote-controlled&nbsp, quadcopter drones&nbsp, were built by a Canadian company called Draganfly in the 1990s. The first commercially successful quadcopter was released by a French company called Parrot in 2010.

But it wasn’t until China’s DJI released their Phantom in 2013 that drones attained the baseline level of functionality we expect from them today, and took off as a popular global product. DJI’s drones had better control, more stability, and longer flight time than Parrot’s, as well as a number of additional features that we now see as crucial.

In the same way that Steve Jobs is generally regarded as the inventor of the iPhone, I think it’s probably acceptable to refer to DJI’s founder andnbsp, Frank Wang&nbsp, as the inventor of the contemporary quadcopter drone. 3

2.5G wireless communications

5G isn’t one thing — it’s a product standard, meaning it’s a suite of various wireless technologies and capabilities. But Chinese companies, especially Huawei and ZTE, led the world in terms of the integration of those various technologies.

They developed and expanded upon these technologies, combined them with technologies like Massive MIMO ( a technique for using multiple antennas ), beam forming ( a method for more directly and effectively transmitting wireless data ), and polar codes ( a noise reduction technique ). They then successfully distributed them to consumers.

So I think it’s fair to say that Chinese companies “invented 5G” in the same sense that Japanese companies invented 3G, or American companies invented 4G.

3. The personal air taxi

Lots of companies have been working on these, but most people agree that the Chinese company Ehang was &nbsp, the first to commercialize these. They appear pretty inventive:

Photo: Ben Smith via&nbsp, Wikimedia Commons

4. The semi-solid state battery car and the sodium-ion battery car

Chinese car companies were the first to release vehicles powered by&nbsp, semi-solid state batteries&nbsp, and&nbsp, sodium-ion batteries, two alternatives to the typical lithium-ion batteries we use in EVs.

In contrast to the typical kind of electric car, sodium-ion batteries are slightly safer and charge more quickly, while semi-solid batteries have faster charging, better safety, higher energy density, and longer lifespans.

5. Sharing of bikes without docks

Bike sharing itself was invented elsewhere, but a Chinese company is generally believed to be the first to commercialize&nbsp, dockless bike sharing, which has now&nbsp, become widespread&nbsp, in the country.

6. The smartphone that folds is

The Royole FlexPai is generally acknowledged as the world’s first commercialized foldable smartphone. It’s pretty neat!

7. Payments made using a Face-scan

China’s Alipay was the first to implement” smile to pay” systems, back in 2017.

8. The vape (e-cigarette )

This was actually&nbsp, invented back in 2003, by a Chinese pharmacist named Hon Lik.

9. The skyscraper building machine ( and various other construction machinery )

This is really awesome. A Chinese company &nbsp, created a machine&nbsp, that moves up a skyscraper as it’s constructed, building each floor as it goes:

There are also some pretty cool original machines for&nbsp, laying high speed rail track.

10. Electromagnetic car suspension

Bose long ago invented this, but BYD seems to finally be able to do so:

Those are the main commercial inventions I could find. I’m sure this isn’t a complete list, because A) there are a few things that are probably known inside of China but not well-known in English-language media yet ( I’ve heard rumors that Chinese chip companies are already mass-producing&nbsp, 3D DRAM, for instance ), and B) there are some inventions that will end up being important but whose importance people haven’t generally realized yet ( like the air conditioner in 1902 ).

Additionally, this list may soon grow. Chinese companies might soon come out with the world’s first marketable&nbsp, humanoid robots, &nbsp, solid-state car batteries, &nbsp, vacuum maglev trains&nbsp, ( “hyperloop” ), &nbsp, thorium nuclear reactors, &nbsp, perovskite solar cells, &nbsp, lab-grown organs, etc. Any one of these technologies would change the game, but it’s never been clear how far these technologies have come from widespread use. They have been in development for a while.

So if you can think of anything else that should go on this list, please let me know.

But even allowing for the incompleteness of this list, I feel like I expected it to be…a little more impressive? Although some of the other items in this list seem a little unimportant, drones are amazing and are already having an impact. Dockless bike-sharing is neat, but I’m not sure how big of a difference it makes in terms of transportation convenience relative to the docked variety.

Although folding smartphones are cool, will you actually buy one? Sodium-ion and semi-solid-state battery cars have some advantages, but seem likely to end up as niche products. Facial recognition payment doesn’t really save you much time versus swiping a phone, and it’s a little creepy. A few frequently mentioned items, like BYD’s “blade battery,” sounded so incremental that I didn’t even list them on this list.

Anyway, &nbsp, prototype inventions&nbsp, are a bit harder to identify, because unless they’re done in an academic lab, it’s hard to tell how well the prototype really works. Companies are typically secretive about what they create, especially in China, where other businesses are constantly attempting to steal their intellectual property.

And what you do see&nbsp, publicly released&nbsp, is often a marketing stunt that doesn’t really reveal how well the thing works. Then there are military inventions, which are kept under&nbsp, even tighter wraps. It’s unclear whether a Chinese company actually entered the field of humanoid robots, solid-state battery cars, vacuum vacuums, or even when you know that they do.

The Wright Brothers were sort of a special case here — everyone could see for themselves that the thing flew.

Here I’m having a&nbsp, lot&nbsp, of trouble constructing a list. As for&nbsp, scientific discoveries. The top ones I could find include:

1. The development of space-based quantum communications (useful for determining when your communications have been compromised )

2. The first&nbsp, cloned primates

3. The first&nbsp, photonic quantum computer&nbsp, to demonstrate “quantum supremacy”

4. The first human babies whose&nbsp, genes were edited&nbsp, using Crispr ( though the scientist was jailed for doing this )

Really, there isn’t much else there. Not being a scientist, I’m not really able to judge how groundbreaking a discovery in chemistry or materials science or biology is.

But AI, Wikipedia, and the lists I find online are having real trouble listing Chinese achievements in science that aren’t of the form “world’s biggest radio telescope” or “fastest supercomputer on Earth for six months” .&nbsp, Wikipedia’s list&nbsp, of modern Chinese discoveries is almost all math theorems from the mid 20th century (usually work done outside China ).

This is a little strange, don’t you think? Chinese scientists are publishing 80 % of the world’s high-impact papers in materials science, 75 % in chemistry, and almost 60 % in physics, and neither I nor the entire English-speaking internet can find more than one or two breakthrough advances coming out of China in these fields?

Chinese science cannot be the answer, so let’s say that. I mean, &nbsp, a bit of it is fake, because of citation rings and perverse incentives at Chinese universities, but most of it is very real. It’s just all incremental stuff. Although all those incremental discoveries are unquestionably significant, there haven’t been many significant breakthroughs in recent years.

The seeming paucity of Chinese invention and discovery is even stranger when we consider how much human capital the country has. The nation should be producing more Nobel-caliber scientists with 1.4 billion people, one of the best educational systems in the world ( at least in the richer regions ), and incredibly well-funded universities. The talent is there. Except when you hear about Chinese scientists making world-changing discoveries, they all seem to have &nbsp, done their work outside China, often in the US.

Now, I’m always very skeptical of the myth that Asian nations are uncreative. This stereotype got lobbed at Japan for a long time, but it was never true, &nbsp, a list of Japanese inventions and discoveries&nbsp, will run for many pages. 4&nbsp,

Yes, there were cases in which Japanese companies adopted and improved technology from the US and Europe — CNC machine tools, shipbuilding, and fuel-efficient cars come to mind — but at the same time, Japanese scientists and inventors made breakthroughs at about the same rate as their counterparts in the West.

The” Japan is uncreative” trope partly came from Japan’s slightly later industrialization, but was also a defensive coping reaction by American businesses in the 70s and 80s who were afraid of Japanese competition.

However, some smaller Asian nations do seem to fit the stereotype a little better. Singapore, especially, is notorious for having some of the world’s best scientists and engineers, but&nbsp, very few breakthrough discoveries. The same holds true for Taiwan, too.

South Korea is somewhere in between — there are &nbsp, a few standout Korean inventions, but so far no science Nobels and few game-changing products. Together, those three countries have 80 million people, or about 2/3 of Japan’s population, but they have produced far fewer breakthroughs than Japan combined.

The good news here is that a country doesn’t actually have to produce a bunch of standout inventions and Nobel-winning scientific discoveries in order to get rich. Singapore, Korea, and Taiwan all have GDPs that are higher than Japan’s. So the question of” Where are all the Chinese breakthroughs”? might ultimately not matter to China’s leaders. Being “giant Korea” or “giant Taiwan” doesn’t sound like a particularly bad fate.

Still, I do wonder why China, with its vast talent pool, its avalanche of research funding, and its huge consumer markets, hasn’t produced more game-changing inventions and discoveries yet.

I genuinely don’t believe it’s a result of autocracy; the CCP would surely reward a Chinese researcher for developing mRNA vaccines or the transformer model or Crispr. And Frank Wang wasn’t punished for inventing the modern quadcopter drone— in fact, he’s a billionaire, and seems to be escaping the negative attention that peers like Jack Ma have received.

One possibility is that China’s economic institutions reward fast-following and intense competition over breakthrough innovation. It might be economically useless to create something truly new because there isn’t enough strong intellectual property protection; it will just be copied by someone else who will get the all the credit.

That seems like it would encourage more incremental advances. In science, incentives for and the quantity of papers over quality may be to blame. These incentives, along with various industrial policies, might produce intensive overcompetition, which I believe Chinese people call “neijuan“.

Whether China can tweak its system to produce more breakthrough discoveries and inventions is an open question. Given the success of nations like Singapore, Taiwan, and Korea, whether it should even care about doing so is another open question. The country certainly does tons of innovation, and maybe the incremental kind is all you really need.

However, if the lack of breakthroughs persists, I believe there is a chance that the 21st century great powers may turn out to be a little bit more boring than their 20th century foes.

Notes:

1 There are exceptions, of course. Check out&nbsp, this list of interesting new music&nbsp, from China. The band Carsick Cars is my favorite of the bunch.

2 Deep Research is a very good product — the first AI I’ve found that’s really useful for my writing. The key is that it lists sources that you can independently verify, so you can’t put your trust in it to prevent hallucinate. One prompt is basically like getting a smart undergrad to spend a day or two writing you a research report.

3 On the other hand, most people wouldn’t call Henry Ford the inventor of the car, so there will always be arguments here.

The digital SLR camera, the hand calculator, the laptop, flash memory, the DVD, the LCD TV, quartz wristwatches, color plasma TVs, CDs, VHS, the semiconductor laser, the microprocessor, the hybrid car, the lithium-ion batteries, carbon nanotubes, pluripotent stem cells, quantum electrodynamics, the blue LED, mesons, CP violation, spontaneous symmetry breaking, neutrino detection, neutrino oscillations, MSG, high-fructo This very partial list includes all three types of breakthroughs — scientific discoveries, prototypes, and commercial inventions.

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

US eyes Euro-Japanese next-gen fighter program – Asia Times

By: Bolen C

On: March 5, 2025

In: Asia

The drive by a Trump presidency envoy for US presence in a Euro-Japanese warrior jet program has sparked fresh conflict, suspicion, and proper debate over transatlantic defense ties.

Paolo Zampolli, a close friend of US President Donald Trump and Italian special envoy, suggested US participation in the Euro-Japanese Global Combat Air Program ( GCAP ), according to Defense News this month.

In order to strengthen US-Italy protection relationships, Zampolli, who Trump just appointed, met with European leaders, including Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini.

Zampolli argued in discussions with the Italian media and Defense News for a unified maritime fighter plane program, claiming it would save the UK, Italy, and Japan from cutting costs and improving collaboration.

Zampolli even emphasized the potential of its strengthening of trade and economic ties. Zampolli was speaking in his private capacity or according to Trump’s wishes, it was unclear at the time.

European politicians were taken aback by Zampolli’s mission, which highlights the draft proposal’s infancy: US protection contractor Lockheed Martin reserved comments and directed inquiries to appropriate governments.

The abilities of GCAP might help to explain how US defence priorities correlate or diverge from this program. Trevor Taylor and Isabella Antinozzi mention that the GCAP retains significant human-machine integration, similar to the US Next-Generation Air Dominance ( NGAD ) program, in a May 2024 article for the Royal United Services Institute ( RUSI).

However, the NGAD program’s validity is questioned by rising expenses, shifting strategic priorities, and the development of satellite war.

The US Air Force has put a pause to the NGAD program, reevaluating whether the US can maintain air superiority by using a combination of the F-35, F-15EX, and F-22 along Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA ).

Price fears are of the essence with each NGAD warrior estimated to cost Us 250 million per unit. Some authorities advocate a less expensive, software-driven light warrior as an alternative.

In addition to incorporating manned-unmanned partnering, the US Navy is expanding its F/A-XX plan to replace the F/A-18 Super Hornet. Budget restrictions, however, could put an end to this endeavor, with officials from the US Department of Defense ( DOD ) warning that prioritizing submarine production might make the F/A-XX “unexecutable.”

The US Air Force’s overall airpower preparation is declining, with the organization reporting its lowest mission-capable levels in years.

Both the GCAP and NGAD are portrayed as” sixth-generation” fighters. Although there is disagreement over the definition of a sixth-generation warrior, the form may have manned-unmanned teaming capability, as well as the use of cutting-edge technologies like AI, data fusion, and advanced communication equipment.

The US and its associates may benefit from the most recent technological advancements in the US NGAD plan, which will speed up the development of sixth-generation soldiers.

For instance, Next-Generation Adaptive Propulsion ( NGAP ) engines, which were approved by the US Air Force’s Detailed Design Review in February 2025, were reportedly approved by Air & Space Forces Magazine.

According to Air & Space Forces Magazine, the XA102 and Pratt & Whitney’s XA103 engines use model-based systems engineering and modern design tools to streamline development.

The document mentions that GE continues to refine its electric motor design while Pratt &amp, Whitney begins technology purchasing for XA103 ground testing in the late 2020s.

According to the report, despite the US Air Force’s analysis of NGAD’s practicality, engines offer improved energy efficiency, strength management, and survivability over current models. It goes on to say that its future will also be impacted by budget problems and geopolitical re-evaluations.

GCAP’s supporters in the US may assist in China and Russia’s participants in getting ready for the next-generation of heat energy.

China’s entry of the J-36 and J-50 soldiers represents a significant improvement in its martial aviation skills. The Chengdu Aircraft Corporation’s J-36 plane features a large, delta-wing design with three engines, which places a premium on secrecy and high-speed performance.

Shenyang Aircraft Corporation’s J-50 has a twin-engine construction and stealth technologies, including mammal designs to minimize radar signatures. These soldiers, which are marketed as sixth-generation fighters, show how determined China is to issue US dominance and to win airspace.

In regards to Russia, Lionel Becher mentions in an April 2024 article for the US Foreign Military Studies Office ( FMSO ) that Russia is actively working toward the creation of a sixth-generation combat aircraft with an aim to have a prototype by 2050.

According to Becher, the program, which is led by Russia’s State Research Institute of Aviation Systems, involves extensive research and engagement with military experts to foresee potential conflict needs.

He claims that the organized plane incorporates advanced digital capabilities, including improved command, control, and communication capabilities, such as AI and data fusion. He states that Russia is determined to improve its surroundings combat skills despite historic difficulties caused by difficulties and cost overruns in military aircraft.

However, introducing the US into the GCAP plan might destroy the latter’s underlying principle of strategic autonomy regarding protection capabilities for its stakeholders.

Joe Coles mentions that the UK’s devotion to the system comes from a desire to maintain its independence over its security features in a January 2024 content for the Royal Aeronautical Society.

Coles points out that the UK’s procedures, modifications, and trade autonomy are restrained by relying only on international platforms like the US F-35.

He claims that global partnerships with historical counterparts like the SEPECAT Jaguar and Eurofighter Typhoon have had difficulties due to project delays and challenging upgrades, but they also draw on the collective wisdom of the participating countries.

In a December 2023 article in the peer-reviewed Contemporary Italian Politics journal, Lorenzo Cladi and Andrea Locatelli discuss Italy’s position on GCAP and how it came to choose to join the Franco-German Future Combat Air System (FCAS ) over the Franco-German Fighter Fighter Program.

Cladi and Locatelli claim that Italy prioritized maintaining its relationship with the UK, a long-standing security lover, yet after Brexit despite its previous backing for EU protection efforts. They point out that given its close ties to BAE Systems, Italian security firms, especially Leonardo, saw more major technological and economical advantages in GCAP.

They add that GCAP was preferred by the Italian Air Force because of UK-wide administrative assistance.

Japan might have thought about finding other companions because of its troubled relationship with the US regarding the development of fighter jets. Gregg Rubenstein asserts in a Carnegie Endowment for International Peace ( CEIP ) article from May that while the US seeks to align on operational standards and security, Japan prioritizes the growth and autonomy of its domestic defense sector.

Rubenstein claims that without a clear strategic advantage, the US hesitates to discuss cutting-edge warrior technologies. He recalls tensions from the 1980s ‘ FSX system, when military interests were prioritized over trade issues. He even points out that US problems may be diminished by Japan’s participation in the GCAP.

Given those concerns, including the US in GCAP might alter intercontinental security cooperation or undermine the program’s corporate autonomy.

The Arab plan for Gaza sidelines Hamas and PA, but only for six months – Asia Times

By: Bolen C

On: March 4, 2025

In: Asia

The Palestinian Authority ( PA ), an Arab peace plan for Gaza, is only allowed to remain in the shadow of the Strip’s rulers for six months, “in order to enable the PA to fully return to the Gaza Strip.” A” Gaza Administration Committee is being established in the interim” and will be” composed of technocrats and non-factional figures… to manage the affairs” of the strip during the” transitional phase.”

As Sisi welcomed Muslim leaders in Cairo for the “emergency summit” of the Arab League, which took place on Tuesday, the company of Egyptian leader Abdul-Fattah al-Sisi unveiled the program in 91 webpages divided into” the political framework” and “technical information.”

The non-factional time committee to govern Gaza for a six-month intermediate time was the heart of the plan, even though it was hidden in the language. It was so crucial that Royal regular Asharq Al-Awsat’s headline highlighted the committee’s “non-factional” nature.

The program was dissociated from fact and lacking in information, though.

In the near future, the program directed the “international group to support the attempts of Egypt, Qatar, and the US in consolidating the peace deal in Gaza, supporting the latest quiet, and releasing captives and detainees.”

Cairo’s plea for a” next phase,” which entails” a permanent end to the fighting in Gaza and the restoration of the war-ravaged enclave,” must be sustained while Hamas is still in power.

The Wall Street Journal stated in its article:” If Hamas continues to exist in Gaza, Israel isn’t willing to end the conflict, and Gulf Arab state like the United Arab Emirates aren’t willing to fund its restoration.” So, the Egyptian strategy has failed.

It is highly improbable that the Arab militia will give up control of the strip if the conflict breaks out and Hamas is permitted to remain in Gaza.

Another issue is present in the Egyptian program, which calls for a two-state answer. It postpones disarming Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and various armies until after a Arab state is established. Such a plan is difficult in and of itself.

Since 1993, all two-state peace plans have been built on the Palestinian Liberation Organization ( PLO ) and eventually the PA, who have seized control and delivered on their security commitments to Israel.

All of these plans fell apart because, in spite of the PLO’s efforts to negotiate and obtain area concessions from Israel, Hamas not gained control. In the 1990s and after the Second Intifada broke out, Hamas launched a suicide bombing campaign that tore through Jewish community and security.

The later Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who was the main proponent of the two-state option, wanted to have a conversation with Hamas with former US peace minister Dennis Ross. In 1948, the Irgun army received hands on a ship called Altalena. When the Irgun refused to fold and join the young army, the newly formed Israel Defense Forces ( IDF) sank the ship, monopolizing the use of power in the hands of the State of Israel.

In an interview with his best aide Yasser Abd-Rabbu last month, Arafat said in an earlier interview that he used its violence to utilize his demands on Israel.

Israel attempted a second bid for control of the cabinet under Arafat’s leadership, Mahmoud Abbas, but the current PA leader erred as unwilling or unable to impose itself. With Israel losing belief in entrusting its safety to any Arab party, October 7 was the nail in the coffin of the two-state option.

None of the obstacles to peace have previously been overcome by the Arab League in Cairo, which was supported by the Muslim League at its conference. It opens a window for a temporary, non-partisan Arab system to rule Gaza, and even then, it does not train Hamas to subdue while promising the same old, corrupt and incompetent Pato to retake the band.

The Arab League has been the subject of a lot of jokes among the majority of Arabs since its establishment in 1945. The firm has acted as a means for the majority of Arab governments to wash their hands of issues ( in particular the Palestinian one ), taking a few photo ops, and feeling good about having a schedule while convincing themselves that the other side, primarily Israel, was too terrible to grasp the extended Muslim hands for peace.

Similar things happened with the Beirut peace initiative in 2002, and similar things seem to have happened with the Egyptian Gaza plan. Most Arabs have learned from experience that shared Muslim action is just lip service unless Egyptian governments act unilaterally in the name of their own national interests.

This is about the US national debt but please read it anyway – Asia Times

By: Bolen C

On: March 4, 2025

In: Asia

One of those topics that Wall Street Journal writers in my day called DBIs is the national debt. It is boring but significant. Headstands were used to illustrate how complex and intangible these subjects are. This is the history of the 27th largest material manufacturer in the western world, according to one Journal article. Oh, study it nonetheless.

I’ve always resisted DBIs. A very obscure economic topic called total factor productivity was the subject of a lengthy WSJ story I once wrote. I wrote a five-part set on the World Trade Organization in my earlier years at DTN. Speak about a topic that is eye-opening.

Commentators today have no choice but to risk glazed-over eyes and address the national debt because it has grown to be so significant that it is becoming so significant.

Even the debt seems uninteresting because we’ve been conned into believing that the future will force the government to impose huge tax increases or print money to stoke runaway inflation, or both. Basically, it’s currently inflicting pain, and paying it back, or halting its growth, will result in problems of a different kind.

The national debt is higher now than it was at the end of World War II, as a percent of GDP. Americans are dealing with this issue. US Department of Treasury Graph

Certainly, the more the debt grows, as it will under Trump and as it did under Harris, the more the pain will become.

Develop it has undoubtedly. The public’s national debt has increased by 12 % to$ 28.9 trillion since 2015, according to the government. It has increased in every political leadership since this decade.

The total federal loan, which includes authorities debt held by various government agencies, is equivalent to 123 % of the gross domestic product, or$ 36.2 trillion. To put that into perspective, we haven’t been in a main battle for the past five years because the amount at the end of World War II was just 106 %.

Consider four possible ways the government may address the debt problem in order to know why the debt will keep rising and the suffering it will produce.

1 ) Allow it to grow. In the near future, this is the least painful and most likely strategy. Totaling$ 4.5 trillion over ten years, the Trump presidency and the Republican House of Representatives plan to cut taxes. No one believes that the state may reduce spending even slightly. Estimates of the debt’s addition by 2035 range from$ 4 trillion to$ 10 trillion.

Pain? Interest rates are already being pressured by the loan. Investors in long-term bonds anticipate higher risk, including having their money repaid in undervalued dollars. Their worries increase costs.

Daily interest rates are also affected by long-term relationship rates. The offer on the 10-year Treasury note is significantly higher compared to the standard rate that the Fed has cut by a full percentage point since September. In consequence, the interest charge on the typical 30-year loan is also affected. Land interest rates have hardly dropped in many areas and continue to be higher.

2 ) Reduce spending. Although the government does some of that, it falls short of maintaining a healthy finances. Only 16 % of the resources, or what is considered voluntary non-defense spending, is being attacked by Elon Musk.

The state is a big contributor because of its obligations to folks, starting with Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, as well as meals stamps and farm applications.

Medicaid and meal mark cuts are being looked at by the House. If they’re made, they’ll be a source of intense problems for many Americans.

Farmers and farmers are not the only ones. Food aid worth$ 4 billion a year was one of the foreign aid initiatives the administration has targeted.

Some producers who contracted with the authorities to improve their farming methods may not receive compensation for the money they’ve spent. Additionally, budget cuts that use food stamps may make it harder to get a new land costs.

3 ) Increase income. Because the GOP has no taste for real tax increases, this won’t happen. As previously mentioned, revenue cuts totaling$ 4.5 trillion are on the board. Although proponents claim that tax breaks promote economic growth, few have so far produced enough progress to “pay for themselves.” Nevertheless, American taxpayers would be in immediate pain if tax increases were to occur.

4 ) Hope for a rise in the performance of the economy. This may result in higher tax revenues and stronger financial growth. As more businesses adopt AI, efficiency may increase, as it did in the late 1990s during the internet boom. This is not an absurd hope.

However, the efficiency gains from the internet boom quickly vanished, just like earlier booms. If the upcoming AI growth is stronger and more persistent, it may in fact increase taxes revenue for a while. But enough to begin reducing the national loan? That puts a lot of pounds on a hope, which is not a plan.

No one is pushing for the incredibly painful changes that would be most important in programs like Social Security and Medicare, despite the fact that today’s debt-inflicted problems is broadly spread. Washington does allow the debt to grow. Long-term attention rates will continue to be subject to higher pressure.

Urban Lehner, a former long-time Asia journalist and director for the Wall Street Journal, is writer professor of DTN/The Progressive Farmer.

This post, which was originally published on March 4th, by the latter news business and is now being republished by Asia Times with authority, is titled” Copyright 2025 DTN/The Progressive Farmer.” All trademarks are reserved. Follow @urbanize, on @urbanize, and on @urbanize.

US funding cut hands more power to a dictator in North Korea – Asia Times

By: Bolen C

On: March 4, 2025

In: Asia

The UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in North Korea made an appeal to the global community this week. She expressed concern about the impact of civic culture efforts on North Korean individual rights.

The National Endowment for Democracy ( NED), a non-governmental organization in the US, is the cause of concern.

Organizations that document and assist in halting human rights abuses in North Korea are one of the main beneficiaries of funding from the NED.

The money suspension is a possibility to worsen the lives of those who live under one of the most severe authoritarian regimes in the world.

What exactly is a NED?

The US entity known as the “bastion of Republican internationalism,” the NED is a long-standing member of the NED. It was a result of a legislative action passed by President Ronald Reagan in 1983.

The NED is firmly rooted in the fundamental principles of Democratic democracy, which include global cooperation and bipartisan help. It supports humanitarian organizations ‘ activities in more than 100 nations each year.

The effects of cutting off funding miraculously are obvious, but it’s unclear why Elon Musk, in his position in the Department of Government Performance, has unexpectedly taken aim at this organization.

One outcome is likely to be the end of decades-long research into North Korean individual freedom.

How this impacts North Korea

The Citizens ‘ Alliance for North Korean Human Rights is one of the organizations that has been hardest hit by this money ice. The first single-issue North Korean human rights organization, it then intends to shut its doors.

Without NED financing, it claims it is unable to cover its operating costs, such as rent and staff wages.

Additionally, it is unable to carry on its significant labor of examining and documenting human rights violations committed by North Korean citizens.

The Citizens ‘ Alliance is just one of many organizations that rely on the NED for their work, the majority of which are based in South Korea.

North Korean human rights activists face uncertain and precarious social conditions in South Korea. There are few other alternatives despite years of efforts to extend funding sources.

Over the course of more than 20 years, I have spent considerable effort studying this issue. Because it is so greatly embedded, both politically and socially, it cannot be resolved overnight or even in the medium term.

Seoul-based organizations may look elsewhere if they are unable to obtain money in South Korea.

Yet many of the applicable international assistance programs are used to support human rights and reform initiatives.

No effective, open civil society initiatives can be properly carried out in North Korea because the totalitarian regime is so complete. The movements relies entirely on international activism, so it doesn’t neatly fit into current funding initiatives.

Additionally, South Korea is currently in a state of political unrest, which makes the revenue ice come at a particularly bad period. It is questionable what the future holds for the few remaining activities that have already been in place following President Yoon Suk-yeol’s declaration of martial law.

focusing on North Korea

The situation of those who were subject to human rights violations inside the mysterious nation was not widely known to the outside world for a long time.

Civil society organizations have organized partnerships, gathered data, created information, created databases, organized public awareness events, and lobbied on all levels for decades. The UN Commission of Inquiry into North Korea’s Human Rights was therefore established by them.

For more than ten times, this investigation, led by Australia’s Michael Kirby, has been the comprehensive report on North Vietnamese human rights.

Its conclusions of flagrant human rights violations within the nation have served as the justification for global action on North Korea. The study’s findings include some instances:

the use of social prison camps, abuse, executions, and other forms of arbitrary detention to curb actual or perceived political discord,
a nearly total disregard for the freedom of expression, faith, and connection,
the use of community command over access to food.

Non-profit North Vietnamese human rights organizations continue to be at the forefront of this endeavor. They continue to press for greater attention to the human rights situation from the global community, having successfully placed the matter firmly on the global agenda.

The organizations that are funded by NED perform a wide range of tasks. They assist North Koreans who reside in South Korea and other places overseas. Some provide help for formal human rights violations, assisting in the creation of a powerful database of survivors ‘ testimony.

Some continue to support and hold accountable many different advocacy, support, and reporting efforts, while others return in-country accounts from secret North Korean journalists.

However, all of this work may stop sooner than anyone had anticipated.

A despot has more energy, right?

All but its most serious initiatives have been put on hold by the Database Center for North Korean Human Rights, and it has launched an attractiveness for gifts. Executive Director Hannah Song characterized the circumstance as” a large and sudden cut to money that threatens the important function of those on the battlefront.”

Another nonprofit organization working in this field, led by Sokeel Park, described it as” by far the biggest problems facing Organizations working on this matter since the movement started in the 1990s.”

This is not an understatement. The international community’s knowledge and understanding of how the North Korean government upholds order and suppresses opposition has grown significantly as a result of the North Korean animal rights movements.

Who then emerges victorious in this? Kim Jong-un, the country’s most powerful leader and tyrant.

In his State of the Union address from earlier this year, US President Donald Trump focused on the human rights violations that the North Korean people have suffered from the autocratic government. Trump said he would:

To understand the nature of the potential nuclear danger, all we need to do is examine the wicked character of the Northern Korean government.

The Trump presidency appears to be allowing one of the world’s most barbarous authoritarian regimes by properly stifling the government’s most vociferous critics.

Danielle Chubb is Deakin University’s associate professor of foreign connections.

This content was republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Learn the article’s introduction.

Settling balance sheets of history or financing futures – Asia Times

By: Bolen C

On: March 4, 2025

In: Asia

The Wilson Center published” Why Russia Gave Crimea Away Sixty Years Ago” in March 2014. The author relied on initial paperwork that had been made public following the fall of the Soviet Union.

The study compared those documents to established claims the Russian authorities made in 1954 when it transferred Crimea from the Russian Soviet Federation of Socialist Republics to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. The records provided a simple, false history of events involving the two nations that date back 300 times. &nbsp, &nbsp,

The invented narratives served as a cover for power problems within the Soviet Union, and they were connected to Nikita Khrushchev’s attempts to retake control after his elevation to the position of first minister of the Communist Party in September 1953. The irony of the 1954 Crimean exchange, which Moscow undertook to improve its hold over Ukraine, was brought to the end by Wilson.

Politicians are mired in outdated strategies to sit historical balance sheets rather than to explore options to fund the future. With the Treaty of Versailles and the Munich Agreement, to name only two, Europe made this error.

Related errors are being made by President Zelensky. He insists that the economic contract that President Trump suggested have security clauses in place because he thinks this will inhibit Russia. Munich is there on September 29, 1938, though.

Germany and England’s Neville Chamberlain and France’s Edouard Daladier signed a contract that allows it to annex Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia. Hitler promised to stop imposing any new regional restrictions on Europe when he invaded. The League of Nations, the weak and careless variation of the present-day United Nations, remained motionless on the war.

In a nutshell, social contract provisions are useless. True, wars are fought with terms, but mostly with swords by well-trained and patriotic war. &nbsp, &nbsp, &nbsp,

Israel does not count on NATO or Europe as part of its written security deal with the US. It won war and deflected terrorist attacks despite being surrounded by brutal, vicious dictatorships, tens of military installations roaming neighboring failed nations with better workforce, as well as dozens of defense organizations roaming neighboring failed countries. It has been not only winning but even turning into a” start-up nation” thanks to its patriotic war, which is aided primarily by US military technology.

Take a closer look with these messages. President Zelensky is unable to alter the place of his country, as is the situation with the rulers of Israel. He was, however, alter its demography. Ukraine had the lowest fertility rate in Europe, standing at 1.16 in 2000, with 2.5 million young Russians leaving between 1991 and 2014, compared to the country’s lowest fertility level. Since the conflict, there have been approximately 6 million more people who are still alive, primarily fresh, and reproduction has dropped to 1, when the inhabitants replacement level calls for a replacement of 2.1 %. Before the conflict, Ukrainian sociologists predicted that the people had quickly drop from about 40 million to 26 million. &nbsp, &nbsp,

The usage of “fatherlands” and “motherlands” are acceptable beliefs. What does a continuing battle accomplish, however, if the younger generations cast ballots with their vaginas and feet and depart from these regions? Demography is no dream, but…

What are the alternatives then?

I’m not sure if Henry Kissinger, the former US Secretary of State, based his recommendations years ago that Kyiv settlement, ceding country to Russia, on the above data. If he thought of them, he held them close to his neck or discussed them behind closed doors, Diplomat as he was. Kissinger suggested in the press that Ukraine should greater take ceding the eastern territories to Russia.

President Trump did not recommend this as a place to start negotiations with Russia, but instead offered a purely commercial/financial commitment as a starting point. &nbsp,

Kissinger also sent a strong warning to both the Russian government and its European allies, saying that” Pursuing the war beyond that stage would not be about the freedom of Ukraine, but a fresh war against Russia itself,” which is a phrase that President Trump used in more alarming words in reference to World War III. Kissinger even mentioned the danger of pushing Russia into China’s hands.

Zelensky also made a harsh comparison to Kissinger, saying that” these “great geopolitical figures” never see ordinary people, ordinary Ukrainians, millions of people living on the territory they are proposing to exchange for an illogical peace. You must always observe people.

When someone openly speculates what others might be thinking or feeling, it never helps when that is the case in an open discussion about inhumanity in the Oval Office. &nbsp,

President Zelensky doesn’t seem to realize that despite reiterateling his desire for land and security guarantees, he is ignoring the de-populated area and giving up on the Ukrainians.

Few young Europeans are willing to fight there. They hardly have the patriotism to fight for Brussels, the EU, or Ukraine, despite yelling slogans in Western European capitals for whatever.

Despite having entrepreneurial vision and execution, Henry Ford is not a historical figure that I admire, but I do agree with his claim that “history is more or less bunk.” It is customary. We oppose tradition. The only historical context that is worth a tinker’s damn is the one we create today, and we want to live in the present. This observation does not suggest that Ukrainians who are suffering are not moved. &nbsp, &nbsp,

However, political compromisions are required for leaps into the future, and financing requires retaining and attracting critical masses of young minds.

An aging population neither climbs barricades nor has future hopes.

Kissinger did state in his Davos speech that he hoped Ukrainians would “match the heroism they have shown with wisdom”.

Perhaps the statement “matching heroism with a clearer understanding of both the country’s demography, and that the future depends on young minds with continuous access to finance – and which requires political stability more than territory – offers concrete, less emotional guidance.”

President Trump did offer this forward-thinking solution, whether you agree or disagree with the way things turned out in the Oval Office, but President Zelensky, regrettably, stuck with a few backward-looking failed ideas, believing that clauses on political papers are the keys to stabilizing solutions.

The article uses Brenner’s” How to Relink 7 billion People” and” Four of Finance.”

Five takeaways from Trump’s Ukraine military aid freeze – Asia Times

By: Bolen C

On: March 4, 2025

In: Asia

Trump reportedly announced to the media on Monday night that a senior US defense official would suspend all military aid to Ukraine until its leaders demonstrate a good-faith devotion to peace.

The announcement comes just weeks after Volodymyr Zelensky, president of Ukraine, and vice chairman JD Vance, president of the United States, met at the White House.

In such a scenario, The Wall Street Journal had previously predicted that Ukraine could simply remain fighting at its present stage until this summer. What can we take away from this significant advancement in five simple terms:

1. Trump is determined to find harmony with allies.

Zelensky made it clear that he is determined to keep fighting and is still seeking NATO membership and American forces during his fatal attend to the White House last Friday.

Trump doesn’t like those names because they, he said, would harm World War III and that continued fighting would also be a possibility. &nbsp,

Trump, therefore, probably realized that the only way to bring Zelensky to terms with Putin is to thaw all military assistance until he reformers his attitude, which he perceived as severe.

2. Trump and Putin probably have a close-knit deal.

Trump claimed last week that” a ceasefire was occur right away,” which could have unintentionally revealed a surprise deal with Putin.

The second Ukrainian presidential elections are likely to lead to lasting peace, but they can’t be held without lifting martial law, implying the need for a peace.

Putin may help a peace to support the US’s curtailed support to Ukraine and validate Russian-US agreements, but he previously conditioned&nbsp, this on Ukraine withdrawing from the contested areas.

3. However, <strong>i</strong>t <strong>i</strong>s not yet complete.

If the debate is correct, it doesn’t think that those two have reached a consensus.

Major issues like the border crossing between Russia and Ukraine and the peacekeeping issue may not be resolved until after the upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections in Ukraine.

So, it’s unnecessary to say whether the Line of Contact will become the country’s last frontier or whether American peacekeepers may be stationed along it, particularly since Russia opposes both.

<strong>4.<strong> </strong>Pol<strong>a</strong>nd<strong> </strong></strong><strong>m</strong><strong>ig<strong>h</strong>t<strong> </strong></strong>be<strong> </strong>in<strong> </strong><strong>a</strong><strong> </strong>cruci<strong>a</strong>l<strong> </strong><strong>p</strong>osition.

In exchange for post-conflict benefits, about 90 % of American military aid to Ukraine routes through Poland. Therefore, Trump does ask it to prevent the Europeans from using its place to arm Ukraine while a ceasefire is in place.

He says he doesn’t want the British, French, or Germans to encourage Ukraine to offend the peace or to inspire Russia, and he can encourage Poland to do so by promising to keep American troops there, possibly from Germany to Poland, and by transforming Poland into its most important partner in Europe.

5. Trump’s top priority is the” New Detente.”

Every significant shift that has taken place since Trump’s phone with Putin in mid-February has been based on advancing his grand strategic objective of” New Détente,” which essentially aims to improve international relationships through a game-changing complete partnership.

Trump finally made the fateful decision to stop providing any military assistance to Ukraine because of this goal.

As Trump makes strong techniques to force Zelensky into the table of peace with Putin, transatlantic relations, Russian-US connections, and the nature of British hegemony are all changing before one’s vision.

His most recent one was essentially one of the worst-case cases from the standpoint of Ukraine and Europe, but they had little else to do in order to comply with his demands.

People who believe usually risk paying the price, as Trump repeatedly reminded Zelensky last Friday.

This article, originally published on Andrew Korybko’s Substack, is republished with sort agreement. Subscribe to the Andrew Korybko Newsletter around.

Developing Asia in a Trump-tariff, China-dumping squeeze – Asia Times

By: Bolen C

On: March 4, 2025

In: Asia

Asia’s officials are at a loss for what turmoil the Trump administration might unleash following due to a barrage of tariffs, hatred for international institutions, and disdain for democratic leaders.

Last week was a striking case in point. On a revenge tour, the US president turned his back on the NATO ally, caused a common dispute with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and doubled his tariffs on China to 20 %. Just days after the 25 % tax on all imports of cars was revealed.

Tariffs on international carmakers may include Japan and South Korea, previously Washington’s two best allies in Asia. With Trump’s burn-it-all-down plan, Asia’s developing markets are in a more precarious position.

Interest rates were cut by central bankers in Indonesia, South Korea, and Thailand over the past several months. But chances are the tax storm coming from Washington has only just begun. And it could swiftly rise in ways that Asian business leaders and politicians have not even begun to exploit.

Trump is currently active pursuing the European Union. Last year, he chided the EU, complaining it “was formed to lock the United States”. He claimed that as a result, US taxes” may be applied to cars and all other products.”

Trump cited the explanation as” they’ve actually taken advantage of us in a different way.” They don’t take our automobiles. They use all kinds of arguments as to why they don’t acknowledge effectively our plantation products.

Trump’s trade war is primarily about China, a goal that will undoubtedly returning to his attention first and frequently. That includes investigating Foreign artificial intelligence businesses and supersizing president Joe Biden’s limits on exporting high-end electronics and chip-making products to the island. Trump also strongly enticing US allies to impose harsh restrictions on Chinese bits.

All of this results in Asia becoming a miniature bubble. ” To say that President Trump has hit the ground running in his next word would be an understatement”, says economist&nbsp, Priyanka&nbsp, Kishore, founder of advisory Asia Decoded.

He has moved quickly on his campaign promises thanks to an expert and dedicated team in place. Just in the first 30 days, a record number of professional commands were signed, according to Kishore.

Consequently, Asia is preparing for the worst. Administrations are putting the brakes on Trumpian tumult by lowering costs and closing the doors.

That includes imposing macro-prudential restrictions, increasing foreign trade supply reserves, and imposing crisis fiscal stimulus to halt economic growth.

Businesses everywhere are finding themselves in harm’s manner. According to Jason Draho, mind of resource allocation for the Americas at UBS Global Wealth Management, companies are “likely dangerous” until Trump’s plans become more growth-focused.

In a note, Goldman Sachs analysts warn that “tariff increases may also boost production costs for some local producers, and may probably quick international retaliation against some US exports, both of which may negatively impact local production.”

Part of the problem is the uncertainty of Trump’s challenges. He threatens to impose large taxes on various nations and businesses the next day, but he backs it.

Trump’s win in the presidential election next November has only strengthened the doubt about the direction of US monetary policy, according to analysts at Capital Economics in a note.

Trump is doing it, they add,” with threats of large punitive&nbsp, tariffs&nbsp, and the potential overturning of traditional political alliances plunging the rest of the world into a condition of heightened uncertainty also. Uncertainty could have an impact on global investment and consumer spending for an extended period, especially if Trump frequently delays his tax dates.

Additionally, it appears as though it’s just a matter of time before Trump’s deeds irreparably harm the dollar and send shockwaves of financial shockwaves that increase risks Asia hasn’t already taken into account. For all the state’s attempt to wean itself off the US dollar, Asia remains much too dollar-centric for convenience.

That is a significant risk because of Trump’s policies ‘ significant risk to the reserve currency. Trump, for instance, has threatened to end the autonomy that gives the Federal Reserve, the country’s guardian of the dollar, such global authority and influence.

Trump has also mused at times about defaulting on US government debt as a means to settle scores with rivals. Or perhaps as a plot to get the US to renounce some of its debts.

While global credit rating organizations may disagree with plans for significant tax cuts. Already, the US debt is zooming toward US$ 37 trillion. And at a time when Trump and his de facto presidential rival Elon Musk are trying to demolish the IRS and other important financial institutions.

Alarm bells have rang out as a result of news that Musk and his associates were also given access to highly sensitive US Treasury Department data.

In a New York Times op-ed last month, Robert Rubin, Lawrence Summers, Timothy Geithner, Jacob Lew and Janet Yellen warned that” no Treasury secretary in his or her first weeks in office should be put in the position where it is necessary to reassure the nation and the world of the integrity of our payments system or our commitment to make good on our financial obligations”.

Any hint of the selective suspension of congressionally authorized payments will be a breach of trust, they claimed, and it will ultimately turn out to be a default. And once lost, our credibility will be challenging to regain.

That’s not to say Asian governments aren’t overdoing efforts to protect their economies from Trump’s trade wars. or that China’s attempt to stop deflation isn’t working for many countries, especially in Southeast Asia.

Trump’s 2017-2021 presidency and the current one’s are a direct result of the fact that China switched from exporting to the West to Global South countries. And at bargain-basement prices as the overcapacity pushing Chinese consumer prices lower spills over into developing Asia.

For instance, since 2021, the number of Chinese exports to the 10 Association of Southeast Asian Nations ( ASEAN ) members has increased by roughly 25 %. And at the worst possible time, prices are severely undermining Southeast Asia’s crucial export sectors.

At the same time, China’s trade surplus with ASEAN had doubled since Trump 1.0’s tariffs. It serves as a reminder that Asia’s hopes that China would be the growth engine the US was before the Trump era are untrue.

Since 1997, China’s net exports account for roughly one-third of the global GDP ( GDP ). This bookmark is worth considering as developing Asia worries Trump’s tariffs, coupled with Chinese deflation, might restore a 1997-like vibe to Asian markets.

Economica like Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Thailand are now facing the specter of China-driven de-industrialization in ways that few people had anticipated. The Trump 2.0 tariff barrage is set to follow as a result of the avalanche of Chinese goods sweeping smaller economies at an epic scale.

Yet the answer isn’t imposing trade curbs on China’s dumping, which would merely treat the symptoms of developing Asia’s challenges, not the problems themselves.

These misguided actions toward China include enacting anti-dumping laws, targeting e-commerce platforms like Temu, imposing new import customs restrictions, and imposing levies on everything from clothing to irony.

Non-tariff barriers are most prevalent in China, India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Thailand across Asia. South Korea also raises eyebrows in Washington for regulations and testing standards that could be seen as barriers to entry.

Sonal Varma, an analyst at Nomura Holdings, says that expanding the scope of the reciprocal tax reflects both the complexity and transparency of the process.

Maybe only as a temporary defense. But it’s far more important that developing Asia accelerate efforts to move upmarket into higher-value-added industries, particularly in services, to wean economies off of cheap exports.

That would significantly increase the share of tech “uniform” startups in economies, enabling them to reform rigid economic systems and create new good-paying jobs and wealth.

Developed Asia has plenty of problems of its own. Take Japan, which is currently at risk of collateral damage from Trump’s trade war and slowing China’s economy.

According to Stefan Angrick, head Japan economist at Moody’s Analytics,” A disappointing run of data this year suggests 2025 will be difficult for Japan’s economy.”

” Manufacturing and exports have struggled against a deteriorating trade outlook, production snags, weak external demand, and increased external competition”.

Sticky inflation, according to Angrick, “is pushing real wage growth into the distance, delaying a meaningful recovery in consumption.” While uncertainty over monetary and fiscal policy is an additional drag on things,

” With external and domestic demand unlikely to offer much support in the near term, the outlook for 2025 is deteriorating fast”, Angrick notes.

The impact might be greater for Asia’s remaining regions. Many economists are concerned that the trade war’s overall effects will be much greater than the Trump 2.0 White House’s predictions.

” Macroeconomics is the kryptonite of Trump’s reciprocal tariff plan”, says Yale University’s Stephen Roach. The proposal “displays disregard for facts, disregard for history, and places blame on others for problems that America’s own creation” ( p.

Trump may be trying his luck, according to Chang Shu, an economist for Bloomberg Economics. The restraint Chinese leader Xi Jinping has exercised so far on retaliation steps, she says,” could shift to a more strident retaliatory stance — and a much more damaging trade war”.

China has undoubtedly made it abundantly clear that Trump’s trade restrictions won’t go unchallenged. China may use potentially retaliatory measures, such as reducing US agricultural and food purchases.

Indeed, Xi may use the annual&nbsp, National People’s Congress, taking place in Beijing this week, to hit back harder at Team Trump and in doing so put the rest of Asia more in harm’s way.

Follow William Pesek on X at @WilliamPesek

US takeover of Nord Stream could fuel grand Russia deal – Asia Times

By: Bolen C

On: March 4, 2025

In: Asia, World

In a statement made over the weekend by his and his, decades-long close friend, Matthias Warnig, the Financial Times (FT),” Putinally pushes a deal to resume Nord Stream 2 with US support.”

The idea is that Nord Stream’s potential ownership by the United States may prompt the return of Russian fuel exports to Germany via this megaproject’s one intact pipeline as part of a great deal. This was first marketed in soon November&nbsp with regard to US investment Stephen Lynch’s related plan.

This time, it’s apparently being advanced by Warnig through a unique US-led collaboration involving Lynch. In any case, the fact that it’s back in the news highlights how critical the conversations between the Russian–US and British governments have been since a few weeks ago in Riyadh.

Despite those two’s tariff tensions, the argument is also valid because the EU’s European leader requires less expensive gas to fend off a possible recession that could lower the price of US exports and make the bloc much less significant.

Trump vehemently opposed Nord Stream during his first term, using the pretext that it would increase Germany’s dependence on Russia and that it would also increase the odds that those two managed Central & Eastern Europe ( CEE ) independently to stifle US influence.

However, in reality, he only wanted American LNG to smuggle Russia’s vast oil industry as part of an economic authority play. These concerns persist, but they may change as they are advanced in light of the new world situation.

The” impact therapy” that the US pressured Europe to implement following the “decoupling” from Russian pipeline gas, which nevertheless remains insufficient due to its increased purchase of more expensive Russian LNG out of necessity due to an absence of different suppliers, had serious consequences.

When there could have been a gradual transition, as Trump imagined, had he remained in power and prevented the war, the real economy suffered as a result of the sudden spike in prices across the board.

Therefore, allowing the resumption of some Russian pipeline gas to Germany via the undamaged Nord Stream pipeline under US supervision upon acquiring ownership of it would be in the US’ long-term interests.

Similar to how the German-led EU would compromise its so-called “values” by adhering to this pragmatic arrangement, while Russia’s compromise would be to surrender control of the country in exchange for faster sanctions relief.

What’s being presented right now is similar to what was suggested in this early January briefing on creative energy diplomacy.

This includes the US’s approval of the EU’s partial resumption of Russian gas pipeline imports, returning some of Russia’s seized assets as compensation for the US’s control of Nord Stream, and lifting some sanctions like its SWIFT ban for facilitating the resumption of the Russian-EU energy trade.

It’s possible that none of this will actually occur, at least with regard to Nord Stream, to be sure. There are still some factors that could help to counteract this scenario, not the least of which being Trump’s unwillingness to temporarily cede some of the US’s “poached European gas market share back to Russia or the new German leader’s goal of “achieving independence” from the US.

However, the most recent reports suggest that it’s premature to rule out Nord Stream’s partial revival, which could occur sooner or later.

This article was originally published on Andrew Korybko’s Substack and is republished with kind permission. Subscribe to the Andrew Korybko Newsletter here.

With US military aid cut, Ukraine prepares to fight alone – Asia Times

By: Bolen C

On: March 4, 2025

In: Asia

In an interview with The Economist on February 12th, 2018, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated in an interview with The Economist that “if we are never invited to NATO, we must create NATO on our territory.”

His remarks were made in response to earlier indications from the Trump presidency that Ukraine would not be joining the surveillance empire. Impressive costs on Russia separate of American products is even more crucial now that the Oval Office spat has occurred and the reports that Trump is now cutting off all military aid to Ukraine.

Ukraine has gradually increased its ability to penetrate deep into Russian territory since 2022, continually improving its range and abilities. Zelensky cited these work in his New Year’s address, saying that Ukraine now produces more than a million robots yearly while expanding its missile production, and citing Ukraine’s “arguments for a really peace.”

Long-range hit capabilities have become a key component of Ukraine’s defense strategy as it enters its third year of hostilities. They play a significant role in its efforts to establish NATO within its own territories. While American military assistance is still important, Kyiv’s ability to develop its own weapons is emerging as a necessary wall of punishment and a means of increasing costs for the Kremlin.

As evidenced by Sweden’s most recent US$ 1.2 billion military and help package,$ 90 million has been designated for Ukraine’s missile and drone generation, this shift in focus is even apparent from Ukraine’s Western partners. With Trump’s end of US military support, this ability may be put to the test.

Ukraine has focused its problems on Russia’s energy system, especially oil refineries, which are the engine behind Moscow’s war effort. The Kremlin’s risk is exposed because it is still heavily dependent on oil revenues to support its war work, according to estimates that drone and missile strikes have now destroyed 10 % of Russia’s refining&nbsp capacity.

Following recent U.S. drone attacks, four big Russian oil refineries have suspended operations. Recurrent strikes over the past year have helped bring Russia’s capacity for refining and distributing crude oil to its lowest level in 12 years, while also pushing Russia’s common everyday production to a 20-year lower.

Beyond industries, Ukraine has expanded its targeting , expanding its to fuel transport centers, explosives factories, and munitions depots. &nbsp,

In an interview, Serhii Kuzan, the head of the Ukrainian Security and Cooperation Center and former assistant to the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, spoke about the larger-scale effects of these attacks, noting that” Russia’s oil market is a foundation of its business; oil and gas products account for the bulk of its export.”

Kuzan added that a decline in Russian refining capacity could lead to higher domestic fuel prices, increased financial strain, and potential public unease. &nbsp,

Kuzan noted that it has no effective deterrent against Ukraine’s evolving aircraft features despite finding ways to circumvent American sanctions. Russia’s war economy is eroded by each powerful strike, making it more difficult to maintain supply chains, maintain mobilization, and maintain home stability, he said.

The pressure is rising. Sergey Lavrov, the US’s ambassador to Russia, criticized Ukraine’s helicopter strikes on the Baltic Pipeline Consortium, saying:” This should reinforce the idea that Zelensky and his team had been restrained and have their hands tied.

As the US withdraws from its war work, Ukraine’s aircraft campaign is likely to grow. This is explained to the writer by a Ukrainian drone system chief who is leading&nbsp that his fleet’s main objectives are to destroy logistics centers, obliterate weapons warehouses, and relieve pressure on the front lines. With drones now able to travel up to 2, 000 kilometers ( 1, 240 miles ), Ukraine can now travel as far as Russia, an ability that is expanding.

Ukraine has prioritized rebuilding and domestic production in response to its limited supply of European long-range weapons, such as the ATACMS and Storm Shadow. By the end of 2025, Kyiv has set an ambitious goal of producing 3, 000 long-range rockets.

Vice-President Mykhailo Fedorov has increased his dedication by saying that” 2025 will get the year of the Ukrainian boat missile.”

Evidently, helicopter production is more complex and inherently more complex than missile production. While Ukraine has increased drone production, developing missiles requires specific production lines, precise engineering, and protected manufacturing facilities, all of which are challenging to do in a wartime setting.

However, despite the current war situation, Ukraine has made significant progress in producing its own arms. A number of internally produced systems are currently in use. For example, the Neptune, an anti-ship weapon, was converted into the land-launched cruise missile that, according to reports, sank Russia’s Moskva missile cruiser in 2022.

The Hrim-2 ballistic missile, which was reported to have passed tests in later 2024, and the Palianytsia, a missile-drone combination, which was released into serial production in December, both of which were reported to have passed testing in late 2024. &nbsp,

The Ukrainian military has also recently received its first batch of long-range munitions with a 700 km range, Peklo&nbsp, ( a Ukrainian word for “hell” ) missile drones, and a jet engine that can travel 700 km/h. They were created by Ukroboronprom in less than a year, are already in use in battle, and they reportedly cost less than Soviet cruise missiles.

In order to further expand its army, Kyiv unveiled the Trembita gentle cruise missile in February. Trembita, which is designed for long hits, is a low-cost substitute for Western weapons starting at simply$ 4, 000 per device.

Rustem Umerov, the minister of defense of Ukraine, stated that “our concern is the development of home drones and long-range weapons, including nuclear missiles,” and that domestic missile production is essential for strategic independence.

Ukraine’s strategy for developing a stronger local barrier against Russia depends on expanding its missile and drone manufacturing, with US military aid then being cut, EU help levels uncertain, and account out of reach. &nbsp,

In the decades that followed, Ukraine was also left outside NATO’s control after surrendering its nuclear arsenal under the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 ( with security assurances from Russia, the US, and the UK).

To make more money off of Moscow, Kyiv now needs to concentrate on developing a long-range strike capability. By developing its own arsenal, Ukraine can deal with external restrictions on weapons use and US military cuts to ensure it has the firepower to attack Russia on its own terms and when and where it wants to.

Ukrainian-American front-line reporter, security engineer, and activist David Kirichenko is a research associate at the Henry Jackson Society, a think tank based in London. He is <a href="https://twitter.com/dvkirichenko?lang=en” target=”_blank” rel=”noreferrer noopener”>@DVKirichenko on Twitter/X&nbsp.

Bolen C (Page 38)

What exactly is a NED?

How this impacts North Korea

focusing on North Korea

A despot has more energy, right?