Taliban’s ‘gender apartheid’ could be its undoing – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Last week, the Taliban announced it was withdrawing from the International Criminal Court (ICC), rejecting the court’s authority and accusing it of political bias.

In a public statement, the Taliban claimed it had no obligation to the ICC because it was incompatible with the regime’s interpretation of Islam, and that it was being unfairly targeted after the court’s failure to address accusations of war crimes committed by United States-led forces between 2001 and 2021 in Afghanistan.

This comes after ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan applied for arrest warrants in January for Taliban Supreme Leader Haibatullah Akhundzada and Chief Justice Abdul Hakim Haqqani for crimes against humanity committed against women in Afghanistan.

Khan claimed Taliban leaders were responsible for persecuting Afghan women and girls since the group’s return to power in August 2021. This includes the severe deprivation of physical integrity and autonomy, freedom of movement and expression, education, private and family life and freedom of assembly. 

The Taliban undeniably treats Afghan women and girls abysmally, denying them an education and most jobs. According to the United Nations, 2.5 million school-age girls have been denied their right to education.

Women have even been banned from working with aid organizations, leaving many Afghan women out of work or unable to access lifesaving humanitarian assistance.

The Taliban have also instituted “vice and virtue” laws forbidding women from showing their faces in public, looking at other men or taking transport without a male chaperone.  This comes after the Taliban banned women from using beauty parlours and visiting national parks last year, completely removing women from public spaces.

The situation for women has gotten so bad that the UN declared it the “worst globally” last year, while the UN’s representative in Afghanistan – Richard Bennet – labeled the Taliban’s actions “gender apartheid.”

Khan’s request for warrants is the latest attempt to hold the Taliban accountable for its treatment of women and girls.

In January, the United Kingdom joined several other countries in referring the regime to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), alleging it had violated the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. Twenty-four countries have now threatened to refer the Taliban to the courts.

While the regime can and has easily rejected the authority of the world’s courts, it does pose a problem for the Taliban.

The Taliban needs legitimacy to remain in power over the long term and craves recognition that would validate its strict interpretation of Islam. But despite some countries informally recognizing the regime – such as China – the broad consensus has been a refusal to accept the Taliban as the official government until it treats women and girls more humanely.

The Taliban has hoped the world would run out of patience and meekly accept its hardline regime, but United States President Donald Trump’s recent aggressive rhetoric against the Taliban makes this scenario unlikely.

Indeed, if the Taliban wants to take its place in the community of nations, it needs to play by the world’s rules. This includes the ICC, which Afghanistan joined in 2003 under then President Hamid Karzai, giving the court clear jurisdiction over crimes committed in Afghanistan.

But when the Taliban accuses the court of double standards, it has a point. No American politician or soldier has been handed a warrant for war crimes against Afghan civilians. Trump’s recent sanctions against the ICC in response to arrest warrants for Israeli leaders for crimes in Gaza also highlights the unequalness of the international “rules-based order.”

But this does not absolve the regime for how it treats women, and international law is something the Taliban will need to accept if it wants to officially represent Afghanistan at the United Nations.

The warrants have also exacerbated tensions within Taliban ranks. In January, Deputy Foreign Minister Sher Abbas Stanikzai publicly demanded an end to the ban on women’s education, calling it a “personal choice” and rebuking the regime’s claim its position on women was consistent with Sharia law.

The warrants also come at a time when the Taliban is under significant pressure. Islamic State continues to carry out deadly attacks throughout Afghanistan, claiming responsibility for the assassination of Taliban minister and powerbroker Khalil Ur-Rahman Haqqani in December.

The regime’s relationship with former ally Pakistan is also fraught, leading to border skirmishes and air strikes on Afghan soil that have humiliated the regime. All in all, the Taliban looks weak and arrest warrants for its leaders have only worsened its position at home and abroad.

Stanikzai gets what many Taliban do not: that the world is not just budging on how the regime treats women and girls; rather, it is doubling down on demands for better treatment.

Oppressing 20 million Afghan people is neither sustainable, nor is it consistent with any tenets of Islam. The Taliban’s treatment of women and girls is about power, but that power is now fracturing from within. And disunity is death in Afghan politics.

Make concessions on women and girls and the Taliban will get its coveted seat at the table and the international legitimacy it craves.

This would be a boon for the regime and enable it to work with the international community to solve the myriad of problems Afghanistan faces, particularly on terrorism and the ongoing humanitarian crisis.

The alternative is isolation and a reliance on cruelty, both of which brought on the Taliban’s last downfall in 2001.

Continue Reading

China puts Philippines on hypersonic nuke alert – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Due to rumors that China is developing a new underwater capable of carrying nuclear-tipped hypersonic missiles especially to neutralize the missile threat, China’s conflict with the Philippines appears to have reached a disturbing new phase.

A semi-official military newspaper reported this month that a Chinese invasion submarine that is currently being developed at a factory in Wuhan might be used to strike Philippine medium-range weapon defense systems.

The report indicates that the People’s Liberation Army ( PLA ) has not yet confirmed if the submarine class is under development.

However, SCMP notes that a publication from Naval &amp, Merchant Ships, owned by the China State Shipbuilding Corporation ( CSSC), a PLA Navy ( PLA-N) supplier, mentions details about its design and features, thus validating its existence and reasons for its development.

The release mentions that the US Typhon missiles, which have been stationed in the Philippines since April 2024, may launch missiles from Luzon, a northern Philippine area, into island China.

The PLA can launch attacks from outside enemy lines, according to the report, and it has the option to use nuclear missiles if important. China’s most recent submarine is capable of carrying hypersonic missiles.

The YJ-21, which is used on its Type 093 nuclear attack submarines ( SSN), is likely to be used for the new submarine. The YJ-21 has also been deployed on China’s Model 055 ships, and its estimated collection is 1, 500 to 2, 000 km with an estimated velocity of Mach 10.

The underwater, first spotted in mid-2024, appears to have Vocabulary and an X-shaped tail fin for better athleticism and security, according to SCMP. Additionally, the report mentions that the submarine is anticipated to have AIP (air-independent propulsion ) technology.

Tensions between China and the US Typhon weapon system have gotten worse. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi stated in September 2024 that the Typhon’s implementation “undermines regional peace and stability,” adding that it “is not in the interests of local locations.”

But, Philippine Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro hit up at the notes, stating that China is using “reverse philosophy” to prevent the Philippines from building its security features.

Teodoro challenged China to “lead by instance”, saying that it should kill its nuclear arsenal, reduce its ballistic missile features, “get out of the West Philippine Sea”, and get out of Mischief Reef, a contested element in the South China Sea.

However, China conducted its first intercontinental ballistic missile ( ICBM ) test since 1980, flying an ICBM from Hainan to French Polynesia, just outside France’s Exclusive Economic Zone ( EEZ ) around the country, in a thinly veiled signal of displeasure the same month.

Undaunted, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr highlighted in January 2025 that China’s missile systems substantially exceeds the Philippines. In exchange for halting anger in the South China Sea, he suggested removing the US Typhon missile program.

China appears determined to take a radical stance despite the strong words from Spanish leaders. In February 2025, Chinese Foreign Minister Spokesperson Guo Jiakun emphasized that the Philippines is “placing its safety in the arms of people” and that China” does not stand idly by when its passions are threatened.

If China’s assertion that its new submarine carries hypersonic missiles is confirmed, the Philippines lacks reliable air and missile defense capabilities to counteract such a threat.

As of 2022, the SM-6 missile is the only weapon in the US arsenal that can intercept hypersonic missiles, and even that capability is described as “nascent”. The US Glide Phase Interceptor ( GPI), designed to destroy hypersonic missiles in their glide phase, is still under development.

Should the Philippines strengthen its extended deterrence strategy with the US and use the Typhon as a foundation, it may purchase military equipment that will support the Typhon missile system in its own backyard.

While the Philippines operates SPYDER surface-to-air missile ( SAM ) batteries, they are not designed to engage hypersonic threats. In addition to SPYDER, the Philippines plans to buy additional short-range SAMs, possibly India’s Akash missile system. But, as with SPYDER, Akash is not designed to engage or neutralize hypersonic threats.

Given the Philippines ‘ capability shortcomings, it may be up to the US to defend its Typhon batteries against China’s hypersonic arsenal. The US deployed Patriot missile launchers to the Philippines in May 2024, with the Patriot successfully intercepting a Russian Kinzhal hypersonic missile over Kyiv in May 2023.

However, Russia’s propaganda may have overhyped the Kinzhal’s capability, and China, having much more resources than the former, can likely afford more sophisticated hypersonic missiles.

Aside from attempting to intercept China’s hypersonics, US submarines in the South China Sea could try to track and hunt their Chinese hypersonic-armed counterparts.

In the South China Sea in 2023, 11 US SSNs and two nuclear ballistic missile submarines ( SSBN ) were discovered, according to a report from the South China Sea Strategic Situation Probing Initiative (SCSPI ) in March 2024.

China may launch a nuclear response if it believes its underwater nuclear deterrent is in danger because it may be using the South China Sea as a protected bastion for its SSBNs. The Philippines runs the risk of being caught in a nuclear conflict between the US and China because of nuclear-armed submarines from opposing sides patrolling nearby. &nbsp,

However, in a May 2024 National Bureau of Asian Research ( NBR ) report, Herman Kraft argues that the Philippines does not view China’s nuclear arsenal as a direct threat but rather as a factor in US-China competition. According to Kravit, China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea has not until recently resulted in the threat of nuclear weapons.

Manila is also developing relations with other countries, including Japan and Australia, while the Philippines acknowledges that the US might use its military installations and forces to target China. He claims that this strategy allows the Philippines to expand its defenses without being involved in US-China nuclear dynamics.

Kraft claims that while the Philippines advocates a normative, diplomatic approach to nuclear weapons, it is constrained by its longstanding dependence on the US.

Although the US Typhon missile system makes the Philippines a potential target for China in the event of a conflict over Taiwan, it is improbable whether any president of the Philippines will permit US offensive strikes from its territory, unless the Philippines ‘ main islands are attacked.

If a leader of the Philippines approves such strikes, it runs the risk of making China, which will always be present nearby, a long-standing adversary.

Continue Reading

China’s largesse was always a better deal than USAID’s – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

As part of a wider plan spearheaded by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency ( DOGE ), US President Donald Trump has shut down USAID, the country’s top international aid organization.

USAID has been harshly criticized by the Trump administration for perpetuating errors and oddities through its support to developing nations. Musk called USAID” the most crooked establishment” and declared that “it deserves to die”.

While USAID has long claimed to focus on humanitarian aid, health services and growth, Trump has said that it has rather facilitated political interference, problem, opaque governance and unwarranted interference in the inner affairs of recipient countries.

Trump and Musk’s claims would seem to corroborate accusations that recent unrest in Bangladesh and Ukraine’s 2014 “orange revolution” —an event that ultimately led to the Russia-Ukraine war in 2022—are evidence of USAID’s role in orchestrating” color revolutions”, a modern form of regime change akin to a military coup around the world.

The US international coverage framework has three columns: security, politics, and growth. By promoting international policy and expanding effect, USAID purports to support the interests of the US, but it doesn’t always address the real needs of the sender nations.

Only a small portion of the allocated budgets are used to reach the intended recipients, as a significant portion of USAID money is absorbed by administrative costs, high wages, obligations for intermediaries, and highly expensive consultants ( many former USAID senior officials ).

Studies reveal that for every 100 US dollars USAID spends, a mere 12.10 money reaches reader places. Additionally, funding from USAID has been accused of undermining local laws and regulations, causing bribery and opaque governance in host nations. Criticisms contend that the company generally benefits the country’s ruling political elite and its US-educated offspring rather than the less fortunate.

Trump’s” America First” coverage, which is apparently trying to stop the theft of US taxpayer funds domestically and internationally, includes the decision to close USAID. The disclosures of Trump-Musk information have also made the Global South countries have to consider the effects of American support and take the necessary steps to increase financial independence, sovereignty, and progress.

American foreign aid acts as a double-edged weapon for several developing countries. While it claims to bring about growth in the terms of the recipients ‘ nations, it entails dominance and undermines their economic sovereignty and independence.

Western donors first disburse sizable grants, but after recipient nations become more dependent on external aid, they switch to smaller grants.

The recipient countries ‘ economic independence is restrained by the severe economic policy conditions of Western loans ( bilateral and multilateral, such as from the World Bank and IMF), which keep them stuck in a never-ending vicious cycle of borrowing to pay off outstanding debt.

It undermines the foundation of people’s employment and sustainable development by using a more limited government budget to pay off debt and suppress home agriculture and young industries.

American support typically has a relationship to the political objectives of the donor countries, making the recipient countries have to connect their guidelines with those of their donors. In consequence, the receiving nations are unable to develop their own economic and trade techniques.

Moreover, according to Musk, American aid has been linked to promoting fraud and errors in recipient nations by shutting down USAID. Some funds are lost there or mismanaged by help administration, failing to achieve their original objectives.

While frequently well-intentioned, including initiatives to distribute gratis food, grains, and other essential services, USAID’s assistance frequently tramples local crops and companies by displacing domestic producers and deteriorating local knowledge and skills.

Instead of fostering long-term financial self-sufficiency, for investment breeds dependence symptoms, making nations centered on outdoor aid. Some academics contend that American aid fosters resentment and hopelessness rather than promoting real growth.

It is now a very good idea for developing countries to move to financial freedom and independence. Trump’s discovery on USAID calling for a conscious effort to build local business, cut down on imports and boost local production.

Investment in training, technology and equipment is crucial to developing the ability to grow effectively. Development-focused countries must collaborate with lenders who offer enhancement funds without having to meet any social or policy requirements in order to accomplish these objectives.

The Global South has a promising future ahead of geographical trade and assistance. The Global South must abandon the notion of getting rich by exporting cheap products to Western markets or relying on foreign support for national development as the US embraces protectionist policies, which are more demanding than even the Smoot-Hawley Tax Act of 1930.

Rather, it should concentrate on fostering local partnerships and business contracts. To protect themselves from raw materials and manpower exploitation, American nations can use pan-African assistance and collective bargaining.

South America may improve frameworks for local partnership, while ASEAN countries should take advantage of the opportunity to build similarly bold local initiatives. The integration of the Asian economies to produce tangible outcomes is essential under the leadership of Russia.

To implement its stalled free trade agreement (FTA ), South Asia should revive the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation ( SAARC ). These local efforts can be strengthened by a reinforced BRICS framework, which will encourage greater cooperation among the Global South countries.

More important, these nations need to regain possession of their natural sources. By regaining control over their separation, miners, utilization, and trade, developing nations had put an end to wealthy nations ‘ use of their resources. This will increase the value added from these resources by allowing nations to offer their resources fairly.

Through shared and regional discussions with China, there might be a good chance of achieving this objective. Compared to the zero-sum sport usually promoted by the West, China’s “win-win” trade and development method emphasizes common benefit. Cooperating with China may help China achieve its goals while avoiding the numerous negative effects of American support.

Under the American support model, which is defined by the conditionality of grants and loans, political and economic passions of donor countries are given precedence. American aid often comes with needs for democratization, social reforms, animal rights improvements and stress to meet alliances against rival nations.

It is a type of interference in the domestic affairs of the receiving nations, making them to adhere to American economic, political, and social norms, which are frequently incompatible with their social values and traditions.

China, in comparison, favors trade and investment over social engineering. Through procedures like the Belt and Road Initiative, China invests in large-scale infrastructure projects, including ports, railways and bridges, in recipient places. For numerous emerging countries, these activities are the foundation of long-term monetary expansion.

For example, Chinese investment has accelerated Africa’s clean energy transition and online and transport infrastructure. Interestingly, because China’s design does not impose monetary policy, social systems or cultural requirements, it permits nations to preserve financial policy-making and social autonomy. In this way, it has surpassed the need for nations to chart out their development plans.

China’s expanding monetary potential has a lot of benefits for the global south. China has a great need for resources and products from developing nations because it has the largest financial and luxury market in the world since 2020.

By engaging more closely with China’s supply chains, developing nations can gain significant new markets for their products, including for meals, fresh materials, and manufactured products. Also, China’s industrial overcapacity offers opportunities for relocating its” twilight business” and low-technology-based manufacturing industry to the Global South, fostering native modernization and job creation.

China’s critics often warn of the dangers of resource exploitation and “debt trap diplomacy”. However, many people in the Global South believe that China’s approach is a viable replacement for Western aid, which has always prioritized the needs of its recipients over those of their donors.

Where there was no alternative in the Global South ten years ago, China offers a frequently welcome alternative to Western aid. ( Though Japan has long provided foreign aid without the constraints put on by Western donors ) )

These countries can lay the foundation for self-reliance, economic sovereignty and sustainable development by embracing China’s positive-sum game model over the West’s often zero-sum approach.

To be sure, the debate over development models and foreign aid is not entirely settled. However, as the Global South grapples with the legacy of Western aid and explores new partnerships, it must prioritize its economic sovereignty, national interests and independence.

The Global South may break the cycle of dependency and lead a more just and prosperous future by utilizing regional collaboration, asserting control over natural resources, and engaging with alternative partners like China.

Bhim Bhurtel is on X at @BhimBhurtel

Continue Reading

Trump’s vision of a new US-China-Russia world order – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, World

There has been a lot of discussion about the ramifications of a potential agreement between US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin and the increasingly damaging effects it will have on Ukraine and Europe.

There is much more at play than just the potential borders of Ukraine and US relations if Trump and Putin reach a deal.

As we are nearing the fourth anniversary of Russia’s full-scale war, Ukraine’s prospect is more in question than it has ever been since February 2022. For once, comparisons to Munich in 1938 are unfortunately correct.

This is not due to a false idea that Putin may be appeased, but rather because wonderful powers once more decide the fate of weaker states without their presence.

Ukraine is now under stress from Russia on the ground and the US, both socially and economically, in the same way that Czechoslovakia was subjected to in 1938 by Germany and its alleged allies France and Britain.

Trump and his team are working fervently to get Ukraine to concede geographical rights to Russia and declare that about 20 % of the Ukrainian territories that Russia has occupied are lost. Trump also demands that Ukraine give back half of its metal and rare earth resources in exchange for its previous military support.

If allied NATO forces were deployed to Ukraine as part of a peace or peace agreement, the United States ‘ refusal to deliver substantial security guarantees sounds like the Munich comparison. No only did France and Britain at the time pressure Czechoslovakia to renounce Sudetenland, which had an ethnic German majority, to Nazi Germany.

When Poland and Hungary seized large portions of the nation, they likewise did nothing. And they failed to act when Hitler, just six months after the Munich deal, created a Czech marionette state and occupied the last of the Czech Republic.

Every evidence suggests that Putin is doubtful to step down from his position in or toward Ukraine. And it is important to keep in mind that the second world war began 11 months after Neville Chamberlain believed he had secured “peace in our day.”

The Munich comparison does not carry that much, however. Trump isn’t trying to appease Putin because he believes he has weaker tickets than Putin, as Chamberlain and Daladier did in 1938.

A more simplistic view of the world, where tremendous power carved out spheres of influence without interfering, seems to drive Trump.

ISW map showing the state of the conflict in Ukraine, February 20 2025.
The state of the fight in Ukraine, February 20, 2025. Institute for Research on War

The issue with Ukraine and Europe in a world order is that no one in Trump’s team views Ukraine as a member of an American impact area, and that Europe is at best a foreground.

Trump-eye glass on the planet

Trump’s concern isn’t really about Ukraine or Europe, but rather about re-ordering the global program in a way that fits his 19th-century perspective of the world in which the US life in splendid isolation and is almost unquestioned in the Northern hemisphere.

In this view, Ukraine is the image of what was wrong with the ancient purchase. Trump believes that the US has engaged itself in too many different international activities where none of its essential interests were at play, echoing Henry Cabot’s protectionism.

Echoing Putin’s talking items, the war against Ukraine little more is an unfair anger but was, as Trump has then declared, Kyiv’s problem. The most important test the democratic global order has to move has been Ukraine.

The conflict with Ukraine is undoubtedly a sign of the decline of the progressive global order, but it is hardly its single cause. It has become the tool that Trump and Putin use to offer it a devastating blast. But while the US and Russia, in their present political combinations, may have found it easy to destroy the existing order, they may find it substantially harder to create a new one.

Even though Ukraine and other important Western nations may appear trivial at this point, the EU and NATO have robust institutional foundations and deep pockets even without the US.

Despite the justified criticism of Europe’s largely ambitious responses thus far, the continent is built on much stronger politically and economically than Russia, and the vast majority of its citizens have no desire to live in the conditions that Putin’s want-to-be empire has.

Without China, neither Trump nor Putin will be able to rule the world. Trump does use a package to scuttle a wedge between them and drive a wedge between Moscow and Beijing, but this is unlikely to work given China’s growing ties to China and Russia’s growing conflict with the US.

All Trump would accomplish is a more US-to-West continent resurgence if he reached a deal with Xi as well, for instance regarding Chinese territorial claims in the South China Sea, allow alone over Taiwan. This may leave Putin and Xi to do their own, existing package of a no-limits relationship unimpeded by an American-led counterpoint.

From the standpoint of what remains of the progressive global order and its adherents, a Putin-Xi deal, also, has an strange parallel in past – the short-lived Hitler-Stalin alliance of 1939. Only this time, there is little to recommend that the Putin-Xi ally will break down as quickly.

Stefan Wolff is professor of global surveillance, University of Birmingham

The Conversation has republished this essay under a Creative Commons license. Read the original post.

Continue Reading

Alibaba making China tech investible again – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Alibaba Group’s headline-grabbing protest tops off what’s been an extraordinary month for Chinese tech companies.

In late January, the sudden appearance of made-in-China synthetic knowledge game DeepSeek pulled the rug out from under Wall Street’s” Trump business” group. Bettors predicted that US stocks would explode as a result of the US President Donald Trump’s plans.

Trump’s eagerness for AI, which he and his patron Elon Musk, contributed to the excitement. Trump punctuated the place on January 21, when he stood shoulder-to-shoulder with OpenAI’s Sam&nbsp, Altman, Oracle’s Larry Ellison and SoftBank’s Masayoshi Son at the White House to light a&nbsp, US$ 500 billion &nbsp, Al network project.

Weeks later, it seemed like old hat as DeepSeek’s claim caught world markets off guard. Its cost-effective AI model using less advanced chips precipitated a nearly$ 600 billion selloff in&nbsp, Nvidia’s shares&nbsp, alone — history’s biggest corporate loss in market capitalization.

Then Alibaba is again on the international scene with an passion that’s even caught global investors off-guard. It includes a large force into Al, in which Alibaba is investing confidently.

The business Jack Ma co-founded claims to have invested more than$ 53 billion in data centers and other AI system projects. Apple, nevertheless, is incorporating Alibaba’s Artificial services in handsets sold in China.

But Alibaba’s march might have arms for an even bigger purpose: Xi Jinping’s selection to, in the words of scholar Stephen Jen, “make Chinese equities investible again”, starting with software platforms.

Jen, CEO of Eurizon SLJ Asset Management, says that “in some ways, this is a call for a extended bounce-back in a long-depressed and unhappy business. However, there are now many more reasons to get good than bad about Chinese stocks and China in general.

After Trump called for greater scrutiny of international companies listed in the US, Alibaba’s wave hit a speedbump on Tuesday, along with Taiwanese technology companies in general.

But from Jen’s perspective, Chinese stocks will remain on roll for reasons including: regulation easing, signs the property sector is ultimately bottoming to support better consumer sentiment, the resilience of Chinese bonds and the yuan, a serious misjudging of China’s manufacturing and industrial prowess, low valuations, and signs the world remains thin Chinese assets.

Xi’s meeting with Ma and other mainland tech founders last week helped, too. Following Xi’s crackdowns, which started with Ma’s fintech tycoon Ant Group, China’s tech scene has been in a state of corporate limbo since late 2020.

Ostensibly, Ant’s planned$ 37 billion listing was scrapped after Ma criticized Beijing, suggesting policymakers don’t understand technology. Ma alleged that regulators were stifling innovation and that banks were having a “pawnshop mentality” in a speech delivered in Shanghai.

First, Ant’s initial public offering was pulled. At the time, it would’ve been history’s biggest. Next, Xi’s financial regulator put under a microscope a who ‘s-who of tech giants: search engine Baidu, &nbsp, ride-hailing giant&nbsp, Didi Global, e-commerce platform JD.com, &nbsp, food-delivery Meituan and gaming colossus Tencent, among others.

Ma effectively entered a political exile. Last week, when Xi invited Ma and other tech billionaires to a gathering that would put Chinese technology back in the ascendancy, that appeared to change. Ma sitting in the front row and Xi shaking his hand caused investors to sift into mainland shares with an unprecedented enthusiasm.

The scene suggested that “one of the world’s greatest living entrepreneurs” is “back into the good&nbsp, graces”, says analyst Bill&nbsp, Bishop, who writes the Sinocism newsletter. Bottom line, he says, “it’s an encouraging signal for private businesses”.

Daiwa analyst Patrick Pan notes that “from a long-term perspective, we turn more positive on the outlook for the China stock market”. China’s recent tech breakthroughs and pro-business pivot, he says, are “game changers for China stock prices”.

In March 2023, Alibaba unveiled the&nbsp, biggest restructuring &nbsp, in its 26-year history, splitting into six units and exploring fundraising or listings for most of them. At the time, Alibaba said the strategy is “designed to unlock shareholder value and foster market competitiveness”.

The six units included: domestic e-tailing, international e-commerce, cloud computing, local services, logistics and media and entertainment.

The market is the best litmus test, according to former Alabaster CEO Daniel Zhang, who remarked two years ago, and each business group and company can launch independent fundraising and IPOs when they are ready.

The enterprise was bigger than Alibaba, though. It served as a case study of sorts for China Inc. as Xi’s regulators attempted to mitigate risks and halt monopolistic tendencies among tech giants.

Given that Xi and Premier Li Qiang both claim that they want private companies to create more jobs and boost a troubled economy, the situation is quite a balance.

Ma’s Alibaba was an obvious place to start. It has long been a global representation of China’s tech goals and a symptom of Beijing’s tolerance for tech billionaires spreading their wings.

Now, after years of uncertainty, says Daniel Ives, analyst at Wedbush Securities, Alibaba just “delivered an inflection point quarter”, led by a stronger-than-expected cloud business and an expanding AI push that could represent the “next gear of growth”.

AI is” the kind of opportunity for industry transformation that only comes around only once every few decades,” as current Alibaba CEO Eddie Wu put it last week.

Wu added that” when it comes to Alibaba’s AI strategy, we aim to continue developing models that extend the boundaries of intelligence” and that AI may eventually “have a significant influence on or even replace 50 % of global GDP”

When it comes to cheap Chinese valuations, Alibaba could be Exhibit A. While some profit-taking might happen, the company is still trading between 35 % to 40 % below past highs.

However, Alibaba is under increasing pressure to act in order to validate investors ‘ bullishness.

According to HSBC Holdings analyst Charlene Liu, “fundamentals will have to be back in focus” in order to increase stock prices. Alibaba shows” a clear strategy to monetize AI and accelerate cloud revenue growth and margin improvement,” as evidenced by increasing its e-commerce market share.

The real onus, though, is on Team Xi to convince global investors broadly that China’s “uninvestable” days are over for good. &nbsp,

Over the last dozen years of Xi’s leadership, Beijing has too often slow-walked moves to strengthen capital markets, reduce opacity, scale back the role of state-owned enterprises, build a globally trusted credit rating system and increase regulatory certainty.

Clearly, the return of Hangzhou-based Alibaba to favor in Communist Party circles may be its own inflection point.

Recently,” Hangzhou’s innovation model has been lauded for fostering numerous superstar technology startups, dubbed the’ Six Little Dragons’ in markets”, says Carlos Casanova, economist at Union Bancaire Privée.

This, Casanova says,” suggests China may be preparing to adopt a Hangzhou-style model that promotes both hard technology and high value-added software and services in its upcoming 15th Five-Year Plan, expected to be unveiled this October. Although we won’t know for certain until the draft is made public, it appears that China is gearing up for a strategic turn in 2026.

However, it will be simpler to persuade global funds that the multi-year tech inquisition is over. Although handshakes and rhetoric are acceptable, it is more crucial to end the regulatory chaos that has persisted recently.

According to Jeremy Mark, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council,” this will take much more than optimistic pronouncements to restore confidence after months of undelivered promises.” Beijing has long sought out foreign institutional investors, but this uncertainty is unsettling.

The volatility of recent months, though”, has given Chinese officialdom greater incentive to pursue a tightly regulated, less volatile stock market — one in which the likes of insurance companies, pension funds, and other government-run behemoths hold sway over individual investors,” Mark says.

The order of the day, Mark adds”, will be to encourage long-term investments in large companies by offering bigger dividends, share buybacks, and — ideally—steady profit growth. ” &nbsp,

Of course, some people believe that concerns about market structure are overshadowed by the attractiveness of mainland valuations. &nbsp,

” Since January, the rally in the Chinese tech sector has been stunning, though the overall A-Shares market has not risen much,” says Jen of Eurizon SLJ.

Companies outside the tech industries are trying to do the same, just as Chinese tech companies are actively looking for ways to harness the power of rapidly advancing AI. Chinese companies are generally very eager to adopt the best technologies, especially if they are cheap.”

When the” Magic Seven” is so expensive, Jen adds,” Chinese equities ought to be in good standing if the collective’I Q’ of Chinese manufacturing can keep up with the best in the world.” ” The seven companies mentioned here are Apple, Microsoft, Google parent Alphabet, Amazon.com, Nvidia, Meta Platforms and Tesla.

The argument isn’t always clear-cut. As mainland stocks surged last week, so did Nvidia’s.

By the start of this week, the California-based company had recovered roughly 90 % of its market valuation losses. It’s a reminder that the AI boom is no particular nation’s to lose. And that Beijing’s desire to keep control might conflict with the success of disruptors like DeepSeek.

According to Bank of America analyst Vivek Arya,” The stock may be volatile following results, but we anticipate positive momentum to resume as investors look forward to Nvidia’s leading new product pipeline and total addressable market expansion into robotics and quantum technologies at the upcoming]Nvidia ] conference.”

The macroeconomic backdrop matters, of course. The upcoming Trump trade war and the high chances that they will cause inflation are still a source of uncertainty for the world.

” The upbeat mood seen among US businesses at the start of the year has evaporated, replaced with a darkening picture of heightened uncertainty, stalling business activity and rising prices,” says Chris Williamson, chief economist at S&amp, P Global Market Intelligence.

Companies, Williamson says”, report widespread concerns about the impact of federal government policies, ranging from spending cuts to tariffs and geopolitical developments. He states that the outlook for the rest of 2025 has shifted to “one of the gloomiest outlooks since the pandemic.”

Despite this, there is growing hope that Team Xi’s efforts to batten down the hatches and its exportation to global South nations will lessen its vulnerability to Trump’s bullying than many people had predicted.

China Inc. is also demonstrating that it has some serious game on playing fields Trump World takes for granted, and not just AI. Chinese biotech companies are exhibiting signs of developing drugs more quickly and affordably than their American competitors.

At the same time as Trump is empowering Tesla billionaire Musk to launch a disaster against America’s scientific research institutions, this includes cancer drugs.

In the case of Alibaba, though, investors are hoping Beijing’s multi-year battle with Chinese tech is officially over. To validate this optimism, Team Xi will need to make sure changes are being made so that the big meeting internet platform from last week is more than just a photo op.

Follow William Pesek on X at @WilliamPesek

Continue Reading

Philippines: EDSA, Marcos Jr and the risk of forgetting – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Every February 25, the Philippines commemorates the EDSA People Power Revolution—an function that toppled a dictator, restored politics and became a worldwide mark of quiet weight.

In 1986, thousands of Filipinos from all walks of life took to the streets, driven by a shared desire for shift. They came armed not with arms but with confidence, prayer and perseverance.

Clad in golden bows and carrying necklaces, they faced down tank and troops, their chants echoing through the money. The action was a testament to the resolve of regular people to free their country from autocratic rule.

This trend did more than just reduce a tyrant; it also established democratic institutions, reinstated free votes, and promised a government that was accountable to the people.

Beyond the Philippines, it sent a strong message that could help other countries fight tyranny. The uprising’s violent character established its place in history, demonstrating that a change may be achieved without using force.

However, as the centuries passed, the strong energy that again filled EDSA has waned. The roads that were once crowded with activists have become less noisy. The annual ceremonies persist, but with a visible reduction in cooperation.

Although the People Power Monument is still in use, its supporters are declining as a result. The recollection continues, but it has lost much of the fervor and intensity that were present in the period immediately following the trend.

The irony of the EDSA memorial has since become unfathomable: the state that recognizes it is now led by the deceased family.

President Ferdinand” Bongbong” Marcos Jr., the son of the late tyrant Ferdinand Marcos Sr., is in charge of a country that previously rejected his father’s rule in an unprecedented show of social power.

Since Marcos Jr. became president in 2022, his administration has veered cautiously to the EDSA memorial. The current government has chosen to follow a more subdued strategy than previous administrations, which included holding huge events, making strong statements, and yet holding wreath-laying rites at the People Power Monument.

Official claims acknowledge the time, but they lean on topics of “unity” and “moving ahead”, avoiding direct references to the republic’s value.

In fact, Marcos Jr. actually removed February 25 from the roster of national holidays in 2023.

Proclamation No. Conspicuously omitting EDSA People Power as a unique non-working trip, 368, which downgraded its significance in the regional calendar.

Despite the negative people effect, it remains the same this time, as Proclamation No. 727 declares EDSA a unique working vacation. This move farther signaled the president’s silent effort to push EDSA into the history of national consciousness.

This shift in tone is not sudden. It reflects the difficult balance of a Marcos president, which allows acknowledging EDSA without supporting its fundamental message.

After all, to fully accept the significance of EDSA would mean to forgive the Marcos family’s history mistakes, which they have consistently dismissed or blatantly denied.

A government that regards EDSA as a traditional event but does not reconfirm its aspirations is a paradox that defines the current political climate.

But is simple confirmation enough? Or does reducing EDSA to a program, depoliticized event diminish its real meaning?

Eroding EDSA’s tradition

Celebrations are more than just ceremonies, they are functions of social memory. They affirm the principles that a country maintains and serve as reminders of lost fights for its citizens. But over time, the way a nation remembers an event is change—either through continuous indifference or deliberate sophistry.

In the case of EDSA, both causes seem to be at enjoy. On one hand, there is the normal passage of time. The revolution took place roughly four decades ago, and many of those who took part in it have passed away.

For younger generations who did not experience the tyranny, EDSA is not a specific experience but a traditional account, which is extremely up in the modern era.

On the other hand, there is the effective rewriting of history. The Marcos family has spent years attempting to change consumer perception through social media, social effect, and even legal actions.

The dictatorship’s years in power, when widely regarded as a time of persecution and financial mismanagement, are then painted by some as a “golden age”. Traditional facts —such as human rights abuses, fraud, and cronyism—are dismissed as mere social problems.

The deterioration of EDSA’s tradition is most visible in public opinion. A growing number of Filipinos, especially the youth, show frustration with the revolution.

Some see it as a failed claim, pointing to frequent poverty, corruption, and injustice. People believe it was an exaggerated function, exaggerated by its recipients. This despair has made a fertile environment for reactionary narratives to emerge, allowing the Marcos family to regain control through political means.

Does it matter if the social remembrance of EDSA disappears? If Filipinos little longer see it as related, does that reduce its value?

The solution lies in what EDSA absolutely represented. It was never really about toppling a dictator—it was about restoring democratic organizations, ensuring responsibilities, and preventing the transfer of autocratic rule.

To ignore EDSA, or to decrease it to an annual note, is to undermine the pretty safeguards it fought to restore.

Politics is no self-sustaining. It requires attention, active involvement, and a devotion to truth. When background is forgotten or distorted, the same faults become easier to repeat.

Current and upcoming abuses become more simple to defend when history abuses are dismissed as misconceptions. The EDSA’s rules are being broken, but today’s failure to uphold them puts the future in danger.

What EDSA may suggest currently

A Marcos administration that oversees EDSA anniversary celebrations should not just be an unpleasant contradiction; it should also be a time for reflection. If the trend is to be related, it must be understood beyond its metaphor.

EDSA was never a perfect trend. It did never miraculously resolve the most pressing issues in Spanish society, nor did it maintain long-term reform.

However, it demonstrated that social activity has energy. It showed that ordinary individuals, when united, you hold the powerful responsible. That session may be learned over time.

Instead of being seen as a locked chapter in history, EDSA must be seen as an empty struggle. The battle for transparency, good governance and human rights did not end in 1986 —it continues today.

And in a social environment where the majority of the country’s energy is still largely in the hands of the elite, where record is constantly rewritten to fit the ruling course, and where democracy is constantly under scrutiny, EDSA serves as a reminder that the people still have the authority to determine the future of their country.

In a time when people want to ignore EDSA, remembering it is more than just marking a day on the calendar; it is also important to protect the lessons from history from intentional erasure.

The reduction of standard commemorations, the fall of reactionary narratives and the public’s growing separation from EDSA all stage to a dangerous reality: when traditional truths are left undefended, they become pliable to the whims of those in power.

As the storage of EDSA fades in the regional consciousness, we may ask—what happens when a nation chooses to ignore its own revolution? And more importantly, who benefits when we do?

The Marcos administration must do more than just acknowledge EDSA on the calendar if it truly respects it. It must uphold the democratic principles that EDSA stood for: truth, accountability and justice. Anything less would make every February 25 hollow ceremonial, one that honors a cause without actually honoring it.

Chalize Penaflor, 24, is a policy researcher, intersectional feminist and human rights advocate. She received her BA in sociology from the University of the Philippines and concentrates on legislative research, policy analysis, and program evaluation in the public sector.

Continue Reading

Kim crackdown puts a spotlight on North Korea’s drinking culture – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Kim Jong-un, the head of the North Korean Workers Party, late presided over a meeting of the Korean Worker’s Party Secretariat, which oversees the party’s policy of proper behavior and ensures that party members follow it. The group’s standard newspapers, Rodong Sinmun, reported that this meeting was convened to target several shortcomings in discipline ( tangnaegyuryurŭlranp’ok )– including binge eating by some celebration officials.

The conference was particularly concerned with two party control violations. Party officials in Onchon County ( about 60km west of the capital, Pyongyang ) were accused of making inadequate preparation for their local party meeting, which – as a result – was held in a “grossly formalistic]hyŏngshikchŏkŭro] way”.

In the early days of North Korea’s social record, there were accusations of formalism related to overly horsing foreign governments and their socialism strategies. However, when used in reference to Onchon County officers, it meant going through the motions and never displaying much genuine enthusiasm and commitment to the democratic process.

This lack of intellectual zeal was apparently reinforced when 40 of the officials engaged in a “drinking rampage,” an action that was viewed as directly in opposition to the group’s policy of upholding discipline. In the English-language edition of the Rodong Sinmun media post, these officers were branded as a” crooked group”. But in the Korean-language version, they were more colorfully condemned as a “rotten group” ( ssŏgŏppajin muri ) and an “arrogant rabble” ( pangjahan ohapchijol ).

Kim responded by saying that the actions of the party leaders were a “political and social” violence that had harmed the foundations of the Korean Workers Party. In consequence, the Onchon County group committee was disbanded, and the 40 police officers involved in the obscene merriment were designated for punishment. Although no word was given as to the kind of punishment the officials would be subject to, it is likely that they will at the very least be subject to intellectual re-education.

In North Korea, accusations of intoxication and alcohol as a means of demonizing and purging group officials are not new. In December 1955, Pak Il U ( then the minister of post and telecommunications ) was accused of leading a depraved lifestyle and being an alcoholic. This was done to tarnish his reputation, support his ejection from the Korean Worker’s Party and imprison him.

It isn’t improper to ingest in North Korea. Beer has a solid cultural presence. It is used on official events to honor ceremonies, ease grief during burial, and remember the birthdays of leaders.

The nation has actually promoted its adult products on postage stamps in recent years. The government issued a mark in 2022 showcasing three Taedonggang beer varieties, which have been produced since 2002 at a state-owned local brewery. The beverage is named after the Taedong valley, which runs through Pyongyang.

The next year, a mark depicting Pyongyang Soju was issued. Since 2009, this grain and corn-based beverage has been produced at a state-owned shop. With an alcohol content of 25 %, North Korea’s soju has a higher alcohol content than South Korea’s best-selling version, Jinro Chamisul Original ( 20.1 % ABV ).

Pyongyang Soju was named the nation’s beverage in June 2015, underscoring that both drinking and modern society have a significant place in North Korea’s cultural heritage.

That’s not to say that North Koreans are heavy drinking when compared to their southern neighbors, who, according to pre-Covidstatistics, consume about twice as many alcohol. A gallon of beer costs roughly the same as a pound of corn in North Korea, which might explain this.

vices in politics and morality

But excessive eating is regarded, as Kim stated, as a political and moral evil. Beer and another medication taking, such as meth use, is bound up with mental illness as a mark of depravity.

Drinking, smoking, and using marijuana frequently serve as coping mechanisms for people living in North Korea because the quality of mental health care that is essentially nonexistent ( mental health conditions are correlated with ideological issues ).

In recent years, North Korea has cracked down more firmly on what is seen as the “ideological and social poison” of culture. For instance, it has been reported that people have been given lengthy prison sentences or even death sentences for consuming and/or disseminating foreign press, using international slang term, or sporting unusual clothing and hairstyles.

Those caught selling hot dogs and divorcing people have apparently been the most recent instances of people engaging in anti-state behavior and serving time in prison. The communist theory of communism, which places team needs before personal desires, is opposed by division.

Thus, the government’s criticism of excessive alcohol consumption can be seen as yet another example of North Korea’s crackdown on personal behavior that is perceived as incompatible with the ideals of how people in this communist society should act.

At the University of Central Lancashire, David Hall is a PhD participant in Asian research.

The Conversation has republished this post under a Creative Commons license. Read the original content.

Continue Reading

Musk is a Trump administration outlier: a China dove among hawks – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Elon Musk holds an enormous effect in the fresh Trump presidency.

The richest man in the world has essentially unrestricted political power by cutting and redesigning the federal government as he sees fit as head of his Department of Government Productivity, or DOGE. And it has fast become apparent that he has a strong opinion of problems beyond that quick.

On one matter, while, Musk stands significantly apart from others in the circle of advisers and consultants around Trump: China. Musk is a stunning outlier in contrast to the numerous hawks calling for a tough-line policy toward China in the new Trump cupboard.

As an expert on China-US ties who has monitored Musk’s opinions on China, I don’t consider his long record of espousing pro-Chinese attitude surprising, given that he has sought throughout to get a firm hold in the country.

Given Musk’s position in the Trump presidency at a time when one of America’s biggest challenges is how to maintain its relationship with Beijing, those dilemmas are for attention.

Musk’s excursion to the East

For decades, Musk has had important business interests in China, with Tesla’s Shanghai shop, Tesla Giga Shanghai, playing a vital part in the company’s global businesses.

Importantly, Tesla was the first international manufacturer to be given the right to conduct business in China without a local partner as a result of a change in ownership rules. With the assistance of US$ 1.4 billion in funding from Chinese state-owned businesses, which were granted at suitable interest rates, the Shanghai stock was constructed.

Tesla received a lower corporate tax rate of 15 %, or 10 percentage points lower than the standard rate, between 2019 and 2023 from the Shanghai government.

The cost benefits of producing in Shanghai, which include lower manufacturing and labor costs, have more cemented Tesla’s rely on the Chinese business.

Given that Musk’s financial position is generally based on Tesla property, his financial position is significantly dependent on the bank’s fortunes in China, which may make any possible breakaway from the nation both financially and carefully difficult.

Tesla’s continuing investment in China underscores this interdependence. On February 11, 2025, the company opened its next factory in Shanghai— a$ 200 million herb that is set to make 10, 000 megapack batteries periodically. It’s the bank’s second megapack power shop outside the US..

This funding deepens Tesla’s presence in China amid a fresh wave of US-China trade tensions. China responded to Beijing’s retribution with tariffs on British fuel, liquefied natural gas, agricultural products, and crude oil on February 1, when the Trump presidency imposed a 10 % tax on Chinese exports.

A China lover

How much of Musk’s economic ties to China may actually have an impact on the Trump administration’s plan toward Beijing is still a mystery. However, Musk’s longer background of pro-China notes suggests the way the management should go.

During his visit to Beijing in April 2024, Musk praised the land, noting moreover:” I also have a lot of fans in China– also, the experience is mutual”.

His admiration may be influenced in part by his opinions of Chinese business and labor practices. In keeping with Musk’s criticism of American workers as lazy and facing US labor law disputes, while also applauding Chinese workers for “burning the 3 am oil” in a labor-heavy labor environment.

Musk has also praised China’s infrastructure and high-speed rail system in numerous posts on the social media platform X, which he owns, praised its space program, praised its leadership in global green energy initiatives, and urged his followers to visit the nation.

Despite the assertions of a sizable portion of the West that reducing US dependence on China is necessary in light of rising geopolitical tensions, Musk has also opposed US efforts to decouple from China. He has also described the nations ‘ economies as” conjoined twins.”

Musk has compared Taiwan to Hawaii, arguing that it is a fundamental part of China, and that the US Pacific Fleet has used force to thwart reunification of mainland China. This is the most dangerous flashpoint in US-China relations.

Further, Musk suggested that China could allow Taiwan to become a special administrative zone in the same way that Hong Kong would.

His remarks were shared and welcomed by China’s then-ambassador to the US, who, in a post on X, emphasized China’s so-called peaceful unification strategy and advocated for the “one country, two systems” model.

Trump’s back-channel envoy?

The big question going forward is how Musk’s financial stakes in, and stated admiration for, China will translate into attempts to influence the US administration’s China policy, particularly given Musk’s unconventional advisory role and the strong faction of anti-China hawks in Trumpworld.

Given Musk’s policy toward China, it’s difficult to see how he doesn’t try to influence the president to encourage a little more sanity in relations with Beijing.

If such counsel were heeded, it’s easy to envision Musk leveraging his deep ties to China, particularly his close personal relationship with China’s current second-ranking official, Premier Li Qiang, who was the Shanghai party chief when Tesla’s factory was built. In this scenario, Donald Trump might turn to Musk as a diplomatic backchannel to ease US-China tensions and promote bilateral cooperation when necessary.

To this point, it was, perhaps, telling that it was Musk who met with China President Xi Jinping’s envoy to Trump’s inauguration, Vice President Han Zheng, on the eve of the event.

However, it’s not at all certain whether Trump wants Musk to play that diplomatic role or whether other voices won’t win in favor of Beijing. In his first term, Trump launched an unprecedented trade war and tech blockade against China, fundamentally changing US-China relations and urging the US to adopt a “bipartisan consensus” to combat Beijing, which has existed for some time.

Trump’s tariff moves and second-term picks for key positions in trade and commerce, such as Jamieson Greer and Peter Navarro, all point to a strong commitment to decoupling from China.

Furthermore, Musk’s business interests and personal wealth tied to China could leave him vulnerable to Chinese influence. China could use Musk’s reliance on the Chinese market as a bargaining chip to pressure Trump into making concessions on issues of significant strategic importance to Beijing by tapping into his close ties with Trump.

China has a history of coercing foreign businesses into making compromises on matters important to its own national interests. For instance, Apple removed virtual private network apps from its app store in China at the government’s request.

Tesla could face comparable pressure if Beijing uses Musk as a cudgel to influence policy in the Trump administration in the future. Notably, as the head of DOGE, with access to sensitive data from multiple agencies, Musk could find himself caught between US security scrutiny and China’s strategic targeting.

It’s possible that Musk’s pro-China sentiments will turn into attempts to influence government policy if he maintains the influence he currently has with Trump. Even if this turns out to be the case, whether those efforts succeed will depend on the president and his other advisers, many of whom are pursuing an aggressive front against Beijing and are likely to see Musk as a hinder rather than ally in the fight to come.

Linggong Kong is a PhD Student at Auburn University.

The Conversation has republished this article under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Beirut hopes Hezbollah’s weakness enables ending persistent warfare – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The government of Lebanon, eagerly seeking an exit from decades of on-and-off warfare, is placing hopes in the elimination of a single word that had been included in government action programs for two decades. The word is “resistance.”

The word had been formally paired with “army” and “people” in government statements to guide foreign and domestic policy. It had camouflaged the  acceptance by chronically weak governments of frequent freelance belligerence against Israel by Hezbollah, the country’s Shiite Muslim militia.

Since its creation in the 1980s, Hezbollah evolved into a powerful component of the so-called “Axis of Resistance,” sponsored by Iran. The axis included Syria and Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic faction that ruled the Gaza Strip for two decades.

In the wake of Hamas’s October 7, 2023, invasion of southern Israel and subsequent Israeli retaliatory warfare, this militant quartet fell apart:

  • Israel’s army and air force first crushed Hamas.
  • Then the Israelis invaded south Lebanon, the Hezbollah heartland from which the militia launched missiles into Israel in support of Hamas. Among the thousands of Hezbollah dead was its leader Hassan Nasrallah, killed by a rain of bombs on his home in Beirut.
  • Iran joined the war by rocketing areas of Israel. Israeli air power struck back and wiped out Iran’s air defense systems in short order.  
  • As a bonus for Tel Aviv, Muslim rebels overthrew the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad last month in a lightning military campaign.

In short, the Axis of Resistance, which seemed to have been a perpetual threat, crumbled.

It may be too early to say that Israel’s victories spell an end to Middle East conflicts, but Lebanon has had enough.

The altered regional landscape opened the way for the Lebanese government, which sat on the sidelines of the war, to assert military control over the country’s borders. In addition, it expects to end Hezbollah’s ability to wage freelance military campaigns abroad.

“With Hezbollah having suffered a devastating defeat in its defeat in its conflict with Israel, and now having lost its strategic outpost in Syria after the fall of the Assad regime, the party’s ability to impose its will on the rest of Lebanese society has been crippled,” wrote Michael Young, editor of Diwan, a blog of the Carnegie Institute’s Middle East Center.

The current government is headed by President Joseph Aoun, who is a former army general, and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, a former judge on the International Court of Justice.

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun. Photo: Facebook

The government presents its policy statement to parliament for approval February 25. Theoretically, legislative acceptance of the roadmap would open the way to demand that Hezbollah disarm and not act independently as a military force inside Lebanon or abroad.

Will erasing a word be enough? Hezbollah loyalists say no. Hassan Fadlallah, a Hezbollah member of parliament, criticized the government for trying to “appease” the United States and other Western supporters.

Part of the government plan is to revive Lebanon’s commitment to the United Nations’ 2006 resolution 1701, in which Lebanon was to place its defense exclusively in the hands of the armed forces and Hezbollah was to both disarm and move north of the Litani River, leaving a buffer zone south to the Israeli border. The country’s Sunni Muslim and Christian militias had disbanded in 1991.

The government has canceled a parliamentary rule that permitted Hezbollah to veto legislation if it could muster only a third of opposition members to oppose a measure.

Reviving the effectiveness of the armed forces is meant to secure not only Lebanon’s border with Israel but also – in order to block weapons and drug smuggling – the east and north frontier with Syria.

Since 1982, weapons have arrived from Iran via land as well as through the airport. Weapons traffic was long under Hezbollah control.

Neither Iran nor Hezbollah appears ready to surrender the use of Lebanon as a base to confront Israel. Na’im Qassem, Hezbollah’s current exiled leader, insists that Hezbollah is recovering from the Israeli onslaught and “the resistance continues.”

In Beirut, Mahmoud Qamati, Hezbollah’s deputy political council chief, said, “If politicians choose to submit, the resistance people reject American and Israeli humiliation and will never accept it.”

On Sunday, Hezbollah organized a massive display of popular support designed to show it is alive and ready to keep fighting. Hundreds of people, many of them allies from Iran and Yemen, marched into a Beirut stadium to attend a funeral for Nasrallah.

One other cloud hangs over Lebanon’s hope to exit the Middle East morass of violence: Israel has indefinitely postponed its pullout from southern Lebanon, where clusters of soldiers man high ground.

The move is parallel with IsraeI’s decision to keep troops in the Gaza Strip and maintain forces indefinitely inside far southern Syria. In short, while the Palestinian conflict continues, for the first time in 75 years Israel faces no effective armed opposition in the north, south, east or west.

Photo: YouTube / ANI

As if to emphasize that, Israeli jets buzzed the Nasrallah funeral. Foreign minister Israel Katz, said the planes were “conveying a clear message: Whoever threatens to destroy Israel and attacks Israel – that will be the end of him. You will specialize in funerals. And we will specialize in victories.”

Continue Reading

While US builds walls, China ripping them down – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The United States is threatening to impose levies on its main trading companions. China is advancing deal with the Global South in the interim to strengthen its position as the world’s hub for manufacturing and technological innovation.

If the position of America in globalization has been to take the country’s goods and resources by building on a basis of ever-increasing debt, China has been to produce tangible goods for the global market.

China is expanding its market, particularly to those in the World South.

China eliminated all tariffs on products from the least developed nations as of December 2024. Foreign Premier Li Quang has also referred to China as a potential financial hub for international investment.

Center of Asian business

China’s trade deficit with the rest of the world is about US$ 1 trillion money. Its share of global exports was 14 % in 2023, compared to 8.5 % for the U. S.

China is collaborating with local nations to establish itself as the center of Asian trade. As Chinese firms invest abroad to avoid National tariffs and expand their markets, China’s Belt and Road Initiative is funding facilities in about 150 countries.

At the moment, China accounts for 35 % of the world’s production. The UN projects that this will increase by 45 % by 2030.

China has achieved this reputation by building effective, high-quality system.

Additionally, it fosters very inventive and technologically savvy ecosystems. The recent emergence of DeepSeek, a Chinese artificial intelligence ( AI ) startup that is dramatically disrupting the sector, illustrates this reality.

China also has authority over the world’s industrial supply stores in numerous crucial areas.

The Chinese superstar

Despite its continuing economic decline, China’s market grew by about 5 % in 2024 and has the potential to grow more as it transitions to a high-tech business.

By 2030, the state may have what’s known as a consuming course of 1.1 billion people, making it the world’s largest consumer business.

Only 7.8 % of the population has the equivalent of a bachelor’s degree, but China produces about 65 % of STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics ) graduates globally on an annual basis.

China is also the world’s most innovative companies and industries, but there is still room for improvement in equipment in smaller cities and rural areas. China will need to take the lead in managing these innovations ‘ social and economic effects because it is a worldwide leader in using technology and AI.

China has scale economies that no other nation can meet, aside from India. Its dominance in the manufacturing sector is the natural result of introducing a growing, technologically advanced nation with a large population to the contemporary world system.

The primary Donald Trump administration aimed to encourage private business and to encourage investment in the US. He thought taxes may increase the number of manufacturing tasks, reduce the federal deficit, and lower foods costs.

The following Trump administration has resumed imposing tariffs in an effort to import products from different nations into the US. Trump has threatened to impose levies on the United States, Mexico, and Europe.

He has already imposed additional 10 % tariffs on all Chinese goods and imposed 25 % tariffs on all steel and aluminum imports into the US. He’s also threatening tariffs on Taiwan, attempting to remove it of its semiconductor sector.

Trump generally demands that other nations address business imbalances by purchasing more expensive British exports in exchange for unhindered access to the US market.

He’s attempting to recreate an American business dominance that was only possible after World War II. Also, the traditional circumstances that led to China’s reduction in the 19th and 20th centuries are longer history.

To engage with China’s benefits, the US needs a competent and powerful state capable of long-term planning. Under Trump, the US is losing this already-weak potential every day.

National loan

Because both the state and Americans incur remarkable debt to finance their usage, the US is the largest consumer economy in the world.

Currently, the American national debt is more than$ 36 trillion while consumer debt was$ 17.5 trillion in 2024.

Because the US is considered the world’s reserve currency, the dollar is gather a lot of debt. However, the US has manipulated the money by putting sanctions and laws against it outside of its borders by using the currency’s reserve status to impose sanctions and laws on sovereign states.

This has created a significant force — led by the BRICS countries of Brazil, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Russia, South Africa and the United Arab Emirates — to remove the US dollars with different economic instruments.

In response, Trump has threatened 100 % taxes on any states that try to cut the US dollar.

There has been a decline in most measures of social well-being in the US, but the British economy has grown through pumping up property bubble. This coincides with increasing British social, political and economic volatility.

Taiwanese products occupy

Imports to the West are more expensive than China’s in the Global South. In Asia, Africa, and Latin America, Taiwanese businesses and products are the most popular.

To the Global South, there are obvious benefits to entering cheap, high-quality systems and commercial products from China. China’s industrial world is also gain a lot from them, but perhaps at the expense of its own established professional capacity.

A contractor checks the display screen at the hall for Chinese computer company Sugon during the World AI Conference in Shanghai in July 2023 that features a computer device and the Chinese words for “independence.” &nbsp, Photo: AP via The Conversation / Ng Han Guan

China’s increasing production dominance means that every nation will need at least some of its products to build or maintain industry, despite some states stumbling to block Chinese imports to safeguard their industries. Nearly difficult for most nations to completely stop all deal with China.

The world is entering a new era of modernization. Many states must decide how to handle the economic and political costs and advantages of engaging with China’s vast industrial potential while avoiding being financially hampered by the US.

St. Thomas University ( Canada ) professor of international relations and political science Shaun Narine.

The Conversation has republished this essay under a Creative Commons license. Read the original post.

Continue Reading