How wars end… and why Ukraine’s may drag on – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Steve Bannon, no longer in Donald Trump’s inner circle, but no less politically savvy for it, remarked recently,” If we aren’t careful, it]Ukraine ] will turn into Trump’s Vietnam. That’s what happened to Richard Nixon. He ended up owning the war and it went over as his war, no Lyndon Johnson’s”.

Bannon reacted to President Trump’s handling of his Special Envoy for Russia and Ukraine, retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, with ending the Ukraine conflict in 100 days … 99 days afterwards than candidate Trump had bragged. To Bannon, that is an ominous pause that will only increase the likelihood of the US getting sucked deeper into a conflict he believes is unwinnable and isn’t in the country’s national attention.

I agree. Failure to act swiftly on a ceasefire, and failure to make a clean break with the neocon Ukraine/Russia strategy candidate Trump promised brings back into play the tired old peace-through-strength fantasies and magical sanctions ( “ruble to rubble” ) of the Biden administration, strategies that failed for Johnson in Vietnam with the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, for George W Bush with the January 2007 surge in US forces in Iraq, and for Barack Obama with the 2010 surge in Afghanistan.

The Pentagon’s popular phrase is “escalate to de-escalate”. The issue is that de-escalation rarely occurs. You didn’t fine-tune battle. Military game theory Herman Kahn realized the tough way that you didn’t “game” it the way Robert McNamara, the defence minister of the Vietnam War, did. The monster did encircle you.

How do war stop? In particular, how will this battle close? Carl von Clausewitz, a general and military theory in Prussia, sees war as a tool of coverage and lists three main ways in which it ends:

1. One or both flanks abandon their policy goals.

If President Trump had made it clear to Vladimir Putin and the universe that the United States and its NATO partners have abandoned the east NATO expansion and that Ukraine will never become a NATO member, he might have succeeded in doing so. The shoe had

therefore have jumped on the other end, making Putin the inculpable figure for any more warfare.

2. When one or both sides reach the point where they are unable to carry out effective attacks, a stalemate forms, which leads to ceasefire negotiations.

3. Due to the fall in open and/or military confidence, one side loses the ability or ability to fight.

The Korean War is an example of a conflict that ended in response to the second incident. It started on June 25, 1950, when North Korean army crossed the 38th horizontal where Korea was divided after World War II. After significant shifts of the front lines occurred in the intervening time, a deadlock started at the 38th parallel when it all began.

On the caveat that no nuclear weapons were to be used, both parties had reached their pinnacle points. Truce negotiations broke off on July 27, 1951, but it took two more years of continuous fighting and two more years before the armistice was declared.

A new US president ( Dwight Eisenhower took office in January 1953 ) and a new Soviet leader ( Joseph Stalin died in March 1953 ) had no intention of resolving the conflict. No peace agreement between the two Koreas and the other fighting events has been signed up as of yet, despite the ceasefire being in place.

Some people believe that the conflict in Ukraine can be modeled after the results of the Korean War. I disagree. There is no standoff and no turning point for Russia, contrary to what some NATO tones would have us feel. Without the underlying political issues that initially caused war, no armistice in the heart of Europe will have any lasting impact.

A war’s finish, according to Clausewitz’s second circumstance, is appropriate to Ukraine. The traditional law, widely, is the conclusion of World War I.

The German High Command under Hindenburg and Ludendorff launched a number of massive offensives on the Western Front ( March 21 – July 18, 1918 ) aimed at breaking Allied ( French, British ) lines before the arrival of significant American reinforcements after nearly four years of attrition warfare with little movement of the frontlines after initial German territorial gains in 1914.

Troops no longer needed on the Eastern top after the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, which took Russia out of the battle, were deployed to the American insurgencies, and advances were achieved. But 70 meters apart from Paris, the attack ground to a halt. German troops ‘ potential had culminated.

An Allied counter-offensive started in August 1918 (” Hundred Days Offensive” ), reinforced by over a million fresh American troops, which pushed German forces back. Both factors had suffered over 500, 000 deaths.

But German labor deposits were now exhausted. By September, Ludendorff told the Kaiser that an truce had to be sought. On October 4, a newly appointed Chancellor Prince Max von Baden ( October 3, 1918 ) wrote to US President Woodrow Wilson asking for armistice terms based on his Fourteen Points.

By later October/early November, Baden’s desire for ceasefire conditions had de facto morphed into seeking terms for surrender. The homefront had collapsed, and continued fighting on the Western before was out of the problem now that the sailors of the High Seas Fleet’s rebellion on October 29 was joined by military ‘ revolts and fraternization with socialist and communist revolutionaries in most major European cities, including Berlin’s money.

The only thing left to do was to bring the armistice line and establish the defense will until a peaceful resolution is reached. Kaiser Wilhelm II renounced and fled to Holland on November 9. Baden resigned and handed Friedrich Ebert, the socialist head in the political chamber, the chancellorship. The Empire was no more.

The Allied delegation led by Supreme Commander Marshal Ferdinand Foch were set to impose the harshest conditions at the armistice talks in a railroad car in the Compiegne Forest: German forces would withdraw from all occupied territories ( and Alsace-Lorraine ), the Rhineland would fall under Allied military rule, and German forces would be disarmed throughout.

In Clausewitz’s words, reduction of the will to fight had subjected Germany fully to the will of the victor. The Armistice ended at 11 am on November 11 and the artillery ceased to exist.

In the ensuing Treaty of Versailles ( 1919 ), the harshest conditions were imposed on Germany. It was the bad course of action. Another world war broke out between the same functions within 20 years, with unprecedented murder.

The situation in Ukraine and the possible end of the war that have striking similarities and training from World War I. The Russian troops’ attempted summer counteroffensive of June through November 2023 reached its pinnacle way through.

Russian forces in the southern ( Zaporozhe ) and central ( Donetsk ) sections of the front line had created extensive defensive infrastructure, including ditches, trenches, artillery positions, and landmines. Russian development was painfully slow, great in fatalities, and technology was lost. And Russia, at all times, maintained weather superiority. By mid-September, progress had slowed to a turtle’s rate. By mid-November, unpleasant businesses petered out.

Since December 2023/early January 2024, Ukrainian troops, having lost some of their best modules, have been on the defense. In addition, the rigorous retention campaign waged by the Russian troops is putting a lot of strain on both people and machines. Large steamroller-style, Russian divisions at full power move forwards against Ukrainian under-strength people.

There are becoming more and more instances of fighting confidence dropping at the firm and brigade levels. As literally millions of Ukrainian men in their military service years have emigrated to points west, to Poland, and other Eastern European nations, but primarily to Germany, the unemployment rate is high ( 100, 000 since 2022 ), and fresh recruits are becoming ever more difficult to find.

While Russian “reports” see much higher Russian fatalities than Ukrainian, those reviews are most definitely fake. The Russians are not conducting highly portable difficult operations, but rely heavily on large artillery and air assault, therefore do somewhat small-unit army attacks.

Certain, they have deaths, but it’s a stretch to believe they are larger than the Ukrainians. Bottom line: By 4:1, Russian workforce reserves outnumber Russian ones.

This image does not yet reflect the European troops ‘ ability to fight in October/November 1918. However, it is moving in that direction, and any important Russian advance was quickly lead to a rout.

In these instances, Trump must first make it clear to Putin that Ukraine will never be offered NATO account. This is a prerequisite for him to get the negotiator. Putin’s main motivation is to also consider that. As Trump has suggested, threatening force through additional sanctions is a failure and was not even the Russian side’s point of view.

Over the truce collection and conditions, there is a major negotiation going on. It is incorrect to assume that the line of combat contact is the proper one, as in the case of the Asian stalemate. Putin can continue to grind it out and accomplish his social objectives. Trump and NATO could.

When martial beat is near, and in accordance with Clausewitzean theory, Ukraine will most likely cede control of the entire Donetsk and Luhansk operational regions, as well as the now under Russian rule, to the Kherson and Zaporozhe oblasts, and leave the Kursk notable in Russia.

A later peace agreement that can last will need to be embedded in a wider new European security architecture like the one that was possible at the time of the Soviet Union’s collapse, which was not executed and rather gave way to the continuous expansion of NATO eastward, the main reason for the Ukraine battle disaster.

Uwe Parpart is editor-in-chief of Asia Times.

Continue Reading

Trump’s Gaza ‘ownership’ critics wrong to tout Marshall Plan model – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Many people who oppose President Trump’s plan to renew Gaza lack a clear knowledge of what he meant by “owning”? Were the vendors involved in building roads, valves, apartments, and commercial properties instead of caves?

While numerous critics argue against the totally unimportant and ineffective subtitute idea of using the Marshall Plan to reconstruct Gaza, even though the historical original appears to have only had a passing impact upon closer inspection. &nbsp, &nbsp, &nbsp, &nbsp, &nbsp, &nbsp,

Recall that at the end of World War II, when Berlin and Dresden were in remains, the Allies&nbsp, stayed in command, &nbsp, executing Nazi officials and de-radicalizing Germany ( the way they did in Japan ), changing significantly the country’s organizations.

But, contrary to modern myths, the Marshall Plan’s influence in revitalizing Germany was trifling.

Never mind that Middle Eastern players and UN agencies then pounce on its perceived validity as a unit, with even the Jerusalem Post reporting as if money were the main issue with such a program.

They all omit some details, among people that the US and Allies “owned” Germany and Japan for a few years.

Between 1944 and 1948, Eastern and Central Europe had expelled approximately 12 million experienced Europeans whose families had resided there for a long time. The majority of those were resettled in West Germany.

In 1945-6, after the war ended, West Germany faced economic conflict, with prices raging at 19, 000 percent per month, dark industry thriving, and a tax rate at a confiscatory 95 % at relatively low wages.

Germany changed its fiscal and monetary policies considerably. Ludwig Erhard, West Germany’s new finance minister, in 1948 stabilized the coin and carried out extreme fiscal changes, considerably lowering tax rates and scrapping cost controls. According to The Deutsche Bundesbank, the changes” changed women’s lives from one day to the future.”

The Marshall Plan was simply put into effect in 1948. &nbsp, From 1948 to 1951, the US contributed$ 13.2 billion to German treatment. Of that,$ 3.2 billion went to the United Kingdom,$ 2.7 billion to France,$ 1.5 billion to Italy, and only$ 1.4 billion to the Western-occupied zones of Germany.

Additionally, decades of research have demonstrated that the Marshall Plan did not provide funding for the restoration of the city’s crumbling equipment. Instead, the reconstruction was quite little full before the strategy was executed. &nbsp, &nbsp,

Although no doubt the$ 1.4 billion offered some assistance ( and there is no point showing what percentage of the “gross national product” it reflected, since the latter was utterly mismeasured and underestimated ), what brought about the post-World War II West German miracle was Erhard’s policies combined with the&nbsp, massive arrival of skilled people.

For “miracles” happened around the world when significant numbers of people arrived in specific locations. They were unrelated to any foreign support.

The mystery of 17th-century Europe was neither Spain nor Portugal – both of which fit the “finding gold” mildew– but below-sea-level Amsterdam and Holland, whose fortunes were created despite normal hurdles.

Immigrants, some of whom were or became merchants and bankers, were drawn to the new republic because of its unprecedented openness to all religions and its laws allowing the practice of finance ( Amsterdam had the world’s first stock market ). Immigrants and Huguenots, discriminated against somewhere in Europe, were popular among them.

Many of the money flowing into Amsterdam was both owned by foreigners or by Amsterdamers of foreign descent. They transformed Amsterdam into the monetary and trading hub of the 17th-century world.

Perhaps this is what Trump, the president of another nation whose development has benefited from such immigration, is trying to convey when he uses the term “ownership” despite the absence of any indications that qualified individuals from other countries may immigrate to Gaza or that any governing body that might be established that would do any shifting policies.

Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan’s histories are similar to those of Germany after World War II and of Amsterdam in the 17th century. The state provided an umbrella of law and order, imposed relatively low taxes, and gave people stakes in what the business society was doing, which was able to draw in immigrants and businesspeople from all over the world.

At the start of the 19th century, Sir Stamford Raffles built Singapore as a port and supported it with an open-to-allracial educational system. &nbsp, Trade and security brought prosperity to the penniless immigrants from Indonesia and, in particular, China.

Immigration opportunities were provided to immigrants in China’s densely populated Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong, which were initially dominated by warlords and a status-conscious bureaucracy and later by a communist bureaucracy.

Hong Kong benefited from the waves of Chinese immigrants, particularly the inflow of Shanghai merchants and financiers when Mao Zedong “liberated” China in 1949.

Of course, the example of Israel, which decentralized and opened its financial markets from the late 1980s ( turning into the” Start-up Nation” ) and benefited from waves of skilled immigrants, fits the historical patterns of previous centuries. &nbsp, &nbsp, &nbsp,

None of these historical experiments have a chance of being compared to Gaza or, for that matter, the majority of the Middle East.

It is important to discard perhaps once and for all the” Marshall Plan” government-foreign-aid-aggrandizing mythology as a solution for failed societies. &nbsp, It is as important to use words with precision – such as just what “ownership” or” control” may mean and whether or not it is applicable to start with.

As of now Hamas, Hetzbollah and theocratic Iran are labeled as “terrorist” organizations or” axis of evil”, but with no Nuremberg trials on the horizon for their leaders. &nbsp, &nbsp,

Briefly: No matter which way one looks at Gaza, Marshall Plans,” controls” ( in the post-World War II sense ), “ownerships” and expectations of “miracles” are nonstarters. &nbsp, Nobody wants to move there although if Egypt, or Jordan with a majority-Palestinian population already, opened their borders, perhaps some Gazans would move there.

The article draws on Brenner’s books Force of Finance ( 2001 ) and Labyrinths of Prosperity ( 1994 ) and his articles” Venture Capital in Canada”, ( 2010 ), and” Venture Capital Secret Sauce” ( 2019 ).

Continue Reading

Ishiba meets Trump: A potentially volatile mixture – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The best part of high school chemistry class many years ago was mixing two combustible chemicals and getting a nice violent reaction. 

It was fun to watch.

Donald Trump …

Meet Shigeru Ishiba.

When Japanese Prime Minister Ishiba meets President Trump meet on February 7 in Washington, alliance managers will try to orchestrate an exchange of platitudes and declarations that the US-Japan relationship has never been stronger – and is destined for even greater heights.

But one still sort of hopes for the high school chemistry class explosion. Even if not likely, it’s not unthinkable.

President Trump has a businessman’s sense of things along with doubts that Japan – or any other US ally – is doing enough to defend itself.

During the first Trump firm, then-Prime Minister Shinzo Abe “tamed” the president via a mixture of flattery and well-intentioned – and somewhat successful – efforts to improve Japan’s defenses. Abe was also the driving force behind the idea of a “free and open Pacific” – intended to rally the US and other free nations against an expansionist People’s Republic of China.

But Ishiba is no Abe, who was a once-in-a-generation statesman when it came to Japan’s foreign affairs.

Oddly enough, Abe didn’t even like the United States all that much. He believed that Japan had been tricked into World War Two and that the victorious Americans had imposed an unfair constitution unsuitable for Japan and the Japanese.

But Abe understood that Japan’s deeper interests and its security, if not survival, required a solid alliance with the US. 

He kept his other thoughts to himself.

As for Ishiba …

He doesn’t have anywhere near Abe’s influence. Ishiba wasn’t elected because he was popular, but because much of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party saw supporting him as a way to stick it to the late Abe’s party faction.

Ishiba also hasn’t bothered to hide his resentments, unlike Abe.

He complains about the Japan-US relationship being unequal. 

Of course it is. The United States has agreed to sacrifice its service members’ lives to protect Japan – while Japan has made no corresponding promise to America. 

And young Japanese won’t even join the JSDF in necessary numbers. Japan’s military missed recruitment targets by 50% last year, and regularly misses them by 20%.

Ishiba also is unhappy with the US-Japan Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), believing it gives Japan third-world treatment while allowing US troops to run wild in Japan without fear of punishment. Neither is true.

Some SOFA modifications may be in order – but in both directions. US forces often have to leave Japan to train to defend Japan despite a SOFA guarantee of adequate training areas and freedom to conduct necessary training in Japan. Ishiba ought to be complaining to his own government officials about about that.

In other instances, after Trump’s election last November Ishiba spoke of doing “horse trading” with the president. 

This sort of combative approach is ill-advised – especially for a country with a modest, undersized military that is overwhelmingly dependent on the United States for protection in a very dangerous neighborhood that includes China, Russia and North Korea.

If Ishiba enters the meeting with President Trump with a chip on his shoulder, or intending to demonstrate “toughness” for a Japanese audience, it will not be well received by Trump, or by many Americans, friends of Japan included. 

We’ll know soon enough what happens when Ishiba and Trump meet.

A chemistry-class sort of conflagration would be entertaining, but there’s too much at stake. 

Resentments can destroy nation-to-nation relationships just as they do person-to-person ones.

Both sides will be better off with an uneventful meeting – where each side expresses appreciation for the other while promising to move the alliance forward.

Afterward, relevant officials and officers on both sides – hopefully the right ones, with experience – can get together and do what’s necessary for both US forces and the Japan Self Defense Force to be able to fight, both by themselves and together.

Getting this right is all that matters and there’s plenty to be done.

Without Japan, the US would be hard pressed to maintain its position in Asia. Without the US, Japan would have no chance at all.

Abe knew this. 

Does Ishiba?

Colonel Grant Newsham (US Marines – Ret.) is the author of When China Attacks: A Warning to America.

Continue Reading

Strategic action to save Korea is urgently needed: India’s moment – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

South Korea, a global economic superpower and a key player in international politics, faces an extremely intricate web of problems spanning cultural, economic, political, and political regions.

The country’s remarkable tenacity in conquering past difficulties is now seriously threatened by the country’s security, prosperity, and democratic credentials.

If urgent action is never taken, South Korea threats a possible collapse – which could have far-reaching effects, destabilizing the whole area.

Multitude of problems

South Korea’s beginning level, which is among the lowest in the world, is one of the most pressing societal issues South Korea is currently facing. The government’s total fertility rate dropped to an alarming 0.72 in 2023, far below the substitute level of 2.1. The causes for this pattern include the high cost of living, job insecurity, intensive work culture and identity disparity in childcare responsibilities.

The upward trend has not changed, threatening long-term cultural security, despite government incentives like increased parental leave and cash allowances for new born children.

South Korea continues to struggle with one of the highest suicide rates among developed countries in addition to the low birth rate. South Korea has the highest death rate among its member states, according to the OECD. Intense intellectual pressure, workplace stress, cultural isolation, and a stigmatized mental health are just a few examples of factors that contribute to this crisis.

While the government has made efforts to enhance mental health care, more extensive measures are required to address the root causes of Asian society’s stress and depression.

South Korea’s cultural crisis is compounded by its swift transition into a aging society. Nearly 40 % of the population is anticipated to be 65 or older by 2050, which will cause a shrinking workforce and put an extra strain on social security systems. The healthcare industry will need substantial changes to accommodate the growing elderly people, while the pension system is under enormous pressure.

The government has tried to overcome these obstacles by increasing multiculturalism and introducing technology in business, but they still face significant challenges. The combined effects of these socioeconomic shifts are significant, having an impact on almost every aspect of daily life in South Korea.

South Korea’s financial growth has slowed in recent years. From being one of the fastest-growing economies in the world, its GDP growth rate has declined to around 2 % yearly. Its ability to sustain long-term growth is limited by structural challenges like an overreliance on large conglomerates ( chaebols ), stagnant domestic consumption, and the aging workforce.

According to fierce competition from China and US protectionist policies, South Korea’s trade deficit, a standard strength, has been declining. China, after a major export place, is now a formidable rival in areas such as semiconductors, manufacturing and electric vehicles.

North Korean businesses have also been forced to reconsider their global supply chain methods as a result of the US Inflation Reduction Act and various protectionist measures.

Also, South Korea’s home debt-to-GDP ratio is one of the highest in the world, exceeding 100 %. Real estate speculation, fueled by low-interest levels in the past, has led to increased saving. Many families are struggling to support their debt as interest rates rise to fight inflation, which causes further financial instability in the economy. The market is rapidly nearing a crucial tipping&nbsp, point.

South Korea’s social landscape has likewise sharply divided between the traditional and the progressive sides, with razor-sharp ideological divisions. New elections have been marked by extreme political conflict, hampering efficient governance and plan implementation. This fragmentation has even resulted in numerous legislative gridlocks, making it challenging to move significant economic and social reforms.

South Korean politicians are still impacted by the social filibusters. The impeachment of President Park Geun-hye in 2017 set a precedent for democratic uncertainty. There is a constant risk of more political instability, which was diminish investor confidence and thwart economic reforms as a result of public outcry and calls for accountability.

South Korea continues to struggle with the danger from North Korea. Pyongyang has continued its missile testing and nuclear progress, heightening local conflicts. Despite political work, including previous conferences and relationship techniques, North Korea shows little interest in disarmament. South Korea, along with its allies, must manage this risk carefully to ensure regional security.

South Korea is caught between the United States and China, whose rivalries are growing more intense. China continues to be its largest trading lover despite South Korea being a significant US alliance. It has become extremely challenging to balance security interests with economic dependencies, which has made South Korea to follow a cautious political position.

Although the Yoon administration’s efforts to improve South Korea-Japan relations are also rife with traditional grievances. Issues like trade restrictions and forced labour reparations continue to cause political tensions. More cooperation between the two countries is necessary given the shared safety issues that North Korea and China face.

Growing proper principles

A never-before-seen integration of crises Korea&nbsp, is facing immediately threatens both the stability and growth of the nation and the peace and security of the entire area.

Each of these problems –economic, social, political and security-related – is fierce on its own. However, their parallel event amplifies the dangers, making it extremely difficult for South Korea to navigate them separately.

South Koreans have been working hard to overcome these difficulties for some time. But, instead of finding solutions, they have watched the troubles increase – indicating that the condition may include escalated beyond the president’s power.

If these difficulties remain unsolved, the consequences may be severe. The region’s crumbling US-led security system could lead to a perilous power vacuum, leading to territorial disputes and economic recessions, and escalating conflicts fueled by traditional grievances.

The US and China’s ongoing power struggle for dominance in the Indo-Pacific could lead to direct military attrition, which would worsen the area.

The potential for nuclear issue is one of the biggest risks. North Korea’s expanding nuclear features pose an ever-present threat, and any local volatility increases the risk of escalation. A nuclear problems would not only destroy the Korean Peninsula, but it would also pose a serious threat to international security.

Beyond the political consequences, a weakened South Korea did give shockwaves through the global market. Continuations in supply stores, financial markets, and important business was stifle global economic growth. A cultural and humanitarian crises may also arise, causing more anguish to spread throughout the area.

A social responsibility

South Korea’s state is now in charge of saving it from this crisis, which has also become a shared responsibility of regional and international partners. A firm South Korea is essential for peace, success, and protection in the Indo-Pacific. The urgency of the situation necessitates fast and decisive action to prevent the region from slipping into chaos and ensure that the hard-earned development of the North Korean people over the past 75 years is certainly lost.

Without prompt response and assistance, the crisis could spiral out of control, putting millions of lives in danger, and destabilizing the world order. South Korea’s partners must act now – before it is too late.

India: a viable partner

The South Korean political crisis is not just a one-time event, but a sign of larger social and economic issues. Addressing these fundamental issues is crucial to ensuring long-term political stability and economic growth.

South Korea maintains strong partnerships with three key nations – the United States, Japan, and India. Although the US and Japan have long-standing allies, neither have the specific resources or strategic planning South Korea so urgently needs.

India’s role as a key partner in South Korea’s efforts to overcome its current difficulties and emerge stronger is unique because it is uniquely placed to offer comprehensive support in crucial areas.

1. Young human capital: a solution to Korea’s demographic crisis

With a population that is among the lowest in the world and an aging population, South Korea is in serious need of a serious demographic crisis. In contrast, India boasts the world’s largest and youngest workforce, with a median age of just 28. By strengthening ties with India, South Korea can tap into this vast talent pool, addressing labor shortages in critical sectors such as technology, healthcare, and manufacturing.

Neither the US nor Japan, both of which struggle with aging populations, can provide this crucial resource. South Korea has a unique opportunity to maintain its economic momentum thanks to India’s young and highly skilled workforce.

2. A massive market for Korean products

South Korea’s economy is heavily reliant on exports, particularly in electronics, automobiles, and consumer goods. Although the United States and Japan remain significant trade partners, their aging populations and shifting consumption patterns preclude growth in the future.

India, with its 1.4 billion people and rapidly expanding middle class, offers an enormous and untapped market for Korean businesses. Samsung, Hyundai, and LG have already had a lot of success in India, but the potential is still great, particularly in rural and semi-urban areas.

For South Korea’s economy to remain competitive, it needs a large, growing and welcoming market – one free from political constraints. Both the US and Japan offer the same level of opportunity as India.

3. Affordable and skilled labor for Korean industries

Manufacturing is becoming more expensive as a result of rising labor costs in South Korea. China was once a preferred location for outsourcing, but tensions between the political and domestic sectors and costlier production have made it less appealing.

India, with its abundant, skilled, and cost-effective workforce, presents a viable alternative for Korean industries. Whether in IT, pharmaceuticals, or heavy manufacturing, India offers a competitive production hub that ensures quality and efficiency – something neither Japan nor the US can match.

4. A trustworthy mediator in the negotiations for a free Korea

North Korea’s long-term stability depends on maintaining peaceful relations with it. Japan and the US have strategic interests in the area, but their historically antagonistic stance toward Pyongyang makes them unreliable mediators.

India, on the other hand, maintains diplomatic ties with both North and South Korea. One of the few nations that can facilitate dialogue and economic cohesion between the two Koreas is through acting as a neutral mediator. India is the only major power that can help if South Korea genuinely seeks reconciliation, without carrying the baggage of historical conflicts.

5. A gateway to emerging markets

Emerging markets in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia are becoming crucial for future growth as the world economic landscape changes. India, with its deep ties to these regions, can serve as South Korea’s bridge to these high-potential markets.

Through trade agreements, joint ventures and technology partnerships, Korea can leverage India’s strategic position to expand its economic footprint globally. Can America and Japan accomplish this? The simple and&nbsp, obvious answer is no. The US and Japan, focused primarily on developed markets, lack the same reach and flexibility in these emerging economies.

Both Japan and the US face their own economic and demographic challenges, limiting their ability to fully address Korea’s &nbsp, current pressing needs. Moreover, their economic and &nbsp, strategic partnerships with South Korea– while strong – have reached a saturation point, leaving little room for further expansion.

Although the US and Japan may offer targeted military support and investments, they are unable to provide India with holistic solutions. South Korea requires a partner with its long-term goals in terms of both economic and geopolitical affairs. India is that partner.

At this critical moment, India stands as one of the most capable nations in addressing South Korea’s economic, demographic, and geopolitical challenges. Strengthening India-Korea ties is not just an option. It is a strategic imperative.

If South Korea seeks sustainable growth, economic resilience, and regional stability, it must look toward India as its most natural and reliable partner for the future. Likewise, Indian policymakers must recognize South Korea’s strategic importance in the Indo-Pacific. A destabilized Korea would have severe consequences, directly impacting India’s regional interests.

Expecting Japan or the US to lead the charge to protect South Korea is unfeigned, and Indian policymakers must avoid making this error. These countries ‘ ability to provide substantial support is limited by their domestic difficulties and shifting global priorities.

It is time for India to step forward&nbsp, and take the lead—not just for its own strategic interests, but for the peace and stability of the entire Indo-Pacific region. Any change in power on the Korean Peninsula might have disastrous effects for India. Indian policymakers are forewarned: The time to act is now!

As the saying goes,” A friend in need is a friend indeed”.

Continue Reading

IP protection caught in AI-fuelled geopolitical crossfire – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, Technology

Amid the military posturing, economic sanctions, and political power struggles shaping the US-China rivalry, intellectual property ( IP ) disputes remain a major battleground.

In January 2025, Chinese firm DeepSeek’s latest AI design helped sweep US$ 1 trillion off the US property market by demonstrating how open-sourced collaboration—refining officially available AI technology—can rival proprietary models without huge investment.

DeepSeek, a major US AI firm, joined the chorus of US officials and businesses that have lengthy accused China of Internet fraud across various sectors.

Despite the fact that OpenAI itself claims to be protected by the fair use doctrine, it has been accused of using another copyrighted material without authorization to create its relational AI model.

The computer and newer technologies like AI and 3D printers allow creators to make, spread, and sell their work without conventional gatekeepers. However, these exact equipment expose these works to constant copyright and diminished power.

With scattered enforcement and tensions over protecting development and public access, globalization has further exacerbated Internet protection.

Globalization and Internet Safeguards

IP has withstanded previous modern hiccups, but today’s fast innovation in a multinational environment is tearing down outdated protections more quickly than policymakers may adapt.

The World Intellectual Property Organization ( WIPO ) has positioned itself as the key mediator to address 21st-century IP disputes involving countries, corporations, and individuals, but faces growing obstacles in keeping pace with the fast-moving changes.

Solid IP laws, according to advocates, promote innovation by allowing others to use existing work, protecting creators, and encouraging collaboration in a good system. Critics counter that these laws often favor big corporations and owners over customers and developing countries, prevent engagement, create monopolies, and limit access to important goods.

Global IP protections are still a relatively recent idea. They date back to ancient Greek recipe safeguards, but they have exploded in popularity since. The printing press revolutionized content distribution in the 15th century, and the Industrial Revolution later fueled invention, mass production, and transportation advances—alongside rampant IP theft. Post-independence, US entities frequently copied British industrial designs, accelerating industrial growth.

Pivotal agreements—like the Paris Convention ( 1883 ) for industrial property, the Berne Convention ( 1886 ) for literary and artistic works, and the Madrid Agreement ( 1891 ) for international registration—laid the foundation for today’s global IP framework.

WIPO, created in 1967, and the World Trade Organization ( WTO ), created in 1995, later emerged alongside other bodies to oversee the four main types of IP—patents ( inventions ), trademarks ( brand identity ), copyrights ( creative works ), and trade secrets ( like customer data and algorithms ).

Regulating a changing digital world

In response to the accelerating globalization in the 1990s, the WTO sought to harmonize trade regulations. The Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights ( TRIPS) Agreement had a goal to standardize global IP protections, but it hasn’t succeeded in doing so.

Only WTO members can participate in the agreement, excluding some African, Middle Eastern, and Central Asian countries, and private actors. The WTO’s processes can be slow, with only a few disputes coming to an end. The majority of them are either stalled or resolved on terms agreed to by more powerful members.

TRIPS’s compulsory licensing allows third parties to produce patented inventions without the owner’s consent under specific conditions, but such measures often provoke retaliation. While pharmaceutical giant Abbott responded by withholding some of its products from the Thai market when Thailand issued a license for an HIV medication in 2007, the U.S. and the EU pressured it to backtrack.

Additionally, Free Trade Agreements (FTAs ) have sidestepped TRIPS enforcement. The North American Free Trade Agreement ( NAFTA ), for instance, curbed IP violations more effectively than WTO.

The United States’s unilateral actions, including “blocking the reappointment of Appellate Body members who were seen as not having’ served’ US interests sufficiently” ,—especially since 2019—have further weakened the system.

Domestic agencies like the US International Trade Commission ( USITC ) and the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office ( USPTO ), meanwhile, enforce their own IP standards, undermining TRIPS rules. China, with its newfound economic power, is following suit.

Perhaps TRIPS’s greatest challenge is keeping pace with emerging technologies. During WTO’s inception in 1995, the public internet was in its infancy. Today, digital piracy is widespread, with AI and 3D printing further disrupting traditional IP frameworks, causing TRIPS’s rigid structure to buckle under the weight of a rapidly evolving digital world.

Individual members have taken different approaches to their domestic legislation, from complete protection of AI-generated works to a requirement of human creativity that effectively leaves such works unprotected, as per the TRIPS agreement.

This patchwork will likely get worse as the share of cross-border intellectual property, including copyrights, is increasing, according to a 2023 article in the International Institute for Sustainable Development.

WIPO to the digital rescue?

WIPO, which became a UN-specialized agency in 1974, has positioned itself as the leading force in global IP protection. Unlike TRIPS, which enforces trade-based IP rules, WIPO oversees 27 broad IP treaties, including the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) for international patent applications and the Madrid System for trademark registration.

Rather than imposing strict enforcement, WIPO provides guidelines, training, and resources to strengthen IP laws and institutions. It collaborates with businesses and organizations like the USPTO and works with organizations like the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization to promote capacity-building in developing nations. It also adopts a cooperative approach to dispute resolution and harmonization.

Largely self-funded, WIPO derives most of its revenue from IP services and registrations, reducing reliance on member contributions and limiting external influence.

WIPO’s ability to navigate modern IP problems remains under scrutiny, with Covid-19 serving as a major test. Expanding the Access to Research for Development and Innovation ( ARDI) program, which provides developing nations with free or low-cost access to scientific journals, it also strengthened its PATENTSCOPE database for Covid-related patents. WIPO also sought to represent the WTO, which is supported by pharmaceutical companies and Western nations that favor stronger IP protections, and the WHO, which is led by India and South Africa, who are pushing for greater access to vaccines.

The 2022 waiver agreement, providing a” waiver of intellectual property ( IP ) protections for Covid-19 vaccine patents, “was widely seen as too limited and delayed, reinforcing perceptions that WIPO favored corporate and Western interests, even for generic medicines.

” Evergreening,” for example, where pharmaceutical companies make minor modifications to extend patent life and block generic competition, has been a consistent controversy within WIPO. This practice has also raised questions about how to balance IP law with human rights goals, particularly those that benefit poorer nations.

In 2013, WIPO launched its Green Marketplace to connect companies, researchers, and NGOs for green technology collaboration. This initiative followed the 2008 Eco-Patent Commons, an IBM-led effort offering free public patents that struggled due to patent limitations, narrow scope and low engagement.

WIPO’s marketplace saw greater success by more effectively building connections, tracking results, and providing funding, mediation, and other resources for long-term impact. Ongoing digitization remains a key WIPO challenge, requiring constant updates.

Online copyright issues are addressed by the 1996 WIPO Internet Copyright Treaties, and the 2009 introduction of the Digital Access Service ( DAS ) speeds up the secure exchange of documents internationally. WIPO PROOF, a 2020 digital timestamping service for IP protection, was discontinued in 2022 due to” poor demand, “reflecting WIPO’s willingness to experiment despite occasional setbacks.

WIPO has used an immutable, transparent ledger to track and verify asset ownership and changes in real-time to explore the potential for securing IP rights more than the WTO. In 2018, it launched a Blockchain Task Force, followed by a 2020 white paper outlining blockchain’s role in the entire IP lifecycle and smart contracts —self-executing agreements that enforce terms automatically when conditions are met.

The expansion of corporate and copyright control over the creation of digital IP laws has raised objections, with some critics claiming that it prioritizes profits over public benefits. The length of a copyright can be too long, which gives the user unnecessarily control over how to use it.

Although the majority of IP revenue is generated in the initial years, access can be revoked for roughly a century. For instance, Spotify, one of the fastest streaming services, generates a lot of money quickly, but long-term copyright frequently undercuts artists, as WIPO noted in its 2021 report on the expansion of Spotify’s copyright law.

However, WIPO has a limited amount of influence, and its slow progress toward more complex copyright issues has opened up room for other models promoted by organizations like Creative Commons and the Open Knowledge Foundation to develop alternative licensing strategies. These models frequently include free licensing, with the aim of allowing creators to have some control over how their work is used while allowing them to gain more access to IP-protected works.

Concerns also exist regarding 3D printing and AI. The ease of replicating physical objects with 3D printing complicates IP enforcement, and WIPO offers Alternative Dispute Resolution ( ADR) services, including mediation and arbitration, to help bring resolution. Experts concur that additional efforts are required despite the more than ten years of WIPO’s efforts to clarify and regulate 3D printing.

By obfuscating ownership and originality, AI poses a similar threat to IP. The 2020 convention of WIPO with stakeholders in AI and the 2024 Patent Landscape Report on AI aim to assist nations and businesses in developing policies for AI-related inventions. However, as with 3D printing, WIPO struggles to keep pace with technological advances.

The internet, as a global distributor, only accelerates unauthorized sharing, undermining the potential for effective oversight.

China’s tech space domination

Additionally, WIPO has trouble resolving disputes between China and the US. The rise in the number of Chinese tech companies and research institutions is revealed in its Patent Landscape Report. In 2023, global patent filings reached about 3.6 million, utility models were at 3.1 million, and industrial designs were at 1.5 million. China dominated most categories, with the US following.

However, while China submitted 1.46 million patent applications in 2022, less than 800, 000 were granted, indicating many were superficial or served limited purposes. Additionally, while China leads in patent applications, most are for domestic use. Less than a fifth of invention patents were filed in 2016 to protect novel, cutting-edge inventions, with the majority being brief-term utility or design patents that covered minor changes and were primarily intended for domestic use.

China still led in PCT ( international ) patents in 2023, filing roughly 70, 000 compared to more than 55, 000 from the US. However, with more than 242,000 filings of direct and PCT applications to foreign IP offices in 2023, China is in third place, behind Japan, with roughly 120, 000 filings.

Nonetheless, China is surging ahead in other areas. China filed 38, 000 GenAI patents between 2014 and 2023, surpassing all others combined ( the US was second at 6, 000 ). Additionally, according to WIPO data, China held more than half of all blockchain patents up to 2017.

China’s growing political influence in WIPO has become more evident. It prohibited several, largely European Wikimedia affiliates from becoming official observers at the WIPO’s Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights in 2023, likely as a result of tensions over Taiwan. These growing rivalries are made worse by WIPO’s non-binding framework and reliance on voluntary cooperation, which limits its enforcement authority.

As global powers compete over IP protections, the high costs of filing, maintaining, and enforcing IP rights can be beyond the reach of smaller, less wealthy countries. Issues such as litigation, patent trolling, and overly broad patents can further overwhelm the matter. By failing to comprehend IP rules, vulnerable businesses can miss out on opportunities while also putting themselves at risk of legal action.

The WIPO’s Development Agenda, which was introduced in 2007, has so far had a mixed success in strengthening IP frameworks in developing nations. In Liberia, little progress has been made despite decades of WIPO involvement. At the 2024 WIPO Assemblies of member states, African countries renewed calls for greater technology transfers, knowledge sharing, and capacity-building programs.

WIPO faces significant obstacles in enforcing IP rights, maneuvering rapid technological advancements, and addressing issues over the access, equity, and politicization of global IP infrastructure. These obstacles are likely to increase as a result of intensified geopolitical rivalries.

Despite this, WIPO can point to its success in expanding global IP frameworks, dispute resolution, and record-high patent filings. Despite the fact that IP theft will continue to be a problem, WIPO’s adaptability and inclusive approach have helped it maintain its relevance and effectiveness in a constantly changing environment.

Its ability to strike a balance between promoting access to knowledge, technology, and essential goods while maintaining a balance in the future of global IP governance will determine its contribution.

John P Ruehl is an Australian-American journalist living in Washington, DC, and a world affairs correspondent for the Independent Media Institute. He is a contributor to several foreign affairs publications, and his book”, Budget Superpower: How Russia Challenges the West With an Economy Smaller Than Texas ‘”, was published in December 2022.

This article was produced by Economy for All, a project of the Independent Media Institute, and is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

Dark Eagle: America’s still flightless hypersonic missile – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Is the US Army’s Black Eagle hypersonic missile a significant advance in a new wave of warfare, or is it still struggling to understand its purpose?

According to the DOD’s most recent annual report, The War Zone reported this month that the US Department of Defense ( DOD ) is still unsure about the lethality and survivability of the US Army’s Dark Eagle hypersonic missile due to limited test results.

The weapon, part of the Long Range Hypersonic Weapon ( LRHW) program, is designed to provide the US Army and US Navy, including Zumwalt-class ships and Block V Virginia-class ships.

Despite having the missile launched successfully from Cape Canaveral in December 2024, issues with previous testing, including many build cancellations and equipment failures, have prevented the rocket’s deployment at a time when China and Russia have demonstrated fast weapons in their particular arsenals.

The Office of the Director, Operational Test &amp, Evaluation ( DOT&amp, E) says that testing have not provided sufficient data to determine the missile’s operational effectiveness or whether it requires multiple cuts to destroy target, a key concern given the state’s high cost and limited army.

Also, survivability against dynamic, electronic and digital threats remains untested. The US Navy has freely tested the rocket’s weapon, but the effects are still under study.

There is little time left to make adjustments if performance issues arise because the technique is anticipated to be operational by 2027. The US prioritizes using fast weapons to combat China and Russia, but gaps in testing leave Black Eagle’s battle viability a mystery.

The US Army’s Dark Eagle hypersonic weapon is a truck-launched missile system designed to counter enemy anti-access/area denial ( A2/AD ) capabilities. Co-developed with the US Navy, it uses the Common Hypersonic Glide Body (C-HGB ) and a two-stage booster. It reaches velocity above Mach 5 and has a reported variety of 2, 776 meters.

The second Black Eagle power, assigned to the 5th Battalion, 3rd Field Artillery Regiment at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, faced several testing failures, delaying first fielding to Fiscal Time 2025.

But, questions remain regarding unsettled costs, technical issues, and reliability, which raise questions about whether the US-China missile race will absolutely change hands.

A July 2024 US Government Accountability Office ( GAO ) report examines key gaps in US hypersonic weapon testing that have delayed fielding, including inadequate infrastructure, high costs, and limited historical data, while digging deeper into why the US is trailing in developing hypersonic weapons.

Flight tests are limited by the length of the distances required and the need for extensive device protection, while testing requires specialized features like wind caves and long-range test websites. Cost estimation and test planning are hampered by a lack of experience, with unsuccessful tests resulting in significant delays.

As a result, the DOD relies on expert opinions over historical data for cost projections, while digital engineering tools remain underutilized.

A January 2025 Congressional Research Service ( CRS ) report mentions that the DOD’s FY2025 hypersonic research budget increased by US$ 6.9 billion, reflecting growing urgency, but it also notes that a lack of established programs raises questions about mission requirements and long-term funding, with delays threatening to make the capability gap for upcoming missile warfare.

Why does China develop operational systems while Russia deploys them in Ukraine while the US is lagging in hypersonic development? The answer may be more straightforward than expected —hypersonic weapons are not invincible. Traditional cruise and ballistic missiles offer comparable speed, range and effectiveness, potentially making hypersonics an expensive redundancy.

In a RealClear Defense article this month, Shawn Rostker makes the claim that hypersonic weapons, which are praised for their speed and precision, may be overhyped due to significant technical and strategic shortcomings.

Such challenges include immense thermal stress in flight, communications blackout at hypersonic speeds, highly visible launch signatures, aerodynamic drag while maneuvering, immature scramjet technology and fragile electronic components.

He contends that US defenses, such as Aegis and Patriot PAC-3, can intercept hypersonic weapons moving at Mach 10 or lower during their final descent. However, this assumption hinges on ideal engagement conditions.

Abraham Mahshie discusses the effectiveness of the current missile defenses against hypersonic threats in a January 2022 article for Air &amp, Space Forces Magazine. While the Aegis Baseline 9C capability, including the SPY-1 radar and SM-6 interceptor, can defend against some hypersonic threats, these systems primarily rely on terminal phase interception, which is less effective.

Additionally, Mahshie says the curvature of the Earth limits radar detection range, providing only brief response windows. He notes that ground-based radars can detect these threats but are often too late for effective interception, necessitating faster, more agile interceptors and enhanced tracking capabilities.

Further, Rostker mentions that while China and Russia allegedly operate their hypersonics within the Mach 10-12 range, Aegis or Patriot would have to intercept them if they had enough drag in flight. He points out that hypersonic weapons may be used over the top for propaganda and marketing despite being a part of the future US military strategy.

In line with Rostker’s reasoning, a January 2023 US Congressional Budget Office ( CBO ) report suggests hypersonic weapons ‘ value may be exaggerated due to their extreme costs, technical challenges and limited operational advantages over existing alternatives.

According to the report, developing and deploying ballistic missiles with maneuverable warheads, which have comparable speed, range, and accuracy, costs about one-third more to develop and test these missiles.

Additionally, it is mentioned that unless adversaries develop highly effective long-range interceptors, which they currently lack, hypersonic missiles do not offer significantly more survivability against missile defenses.

Ballistic missiles with maneuverable warheads and subsonic cruise missiles are seen by the CBO as viable alternatives that have comparable capabilities at lower costs and with fewer technical difficulties.

With soaring costs, unresolved technical hurdles and credible alternatives, Dark Eagle risks becoming another DOD white elephant. China and Russia continue to develop their hypersonic arsenals, which could make the US question whether or not it is competing in the right arms race.

Continue Reading

A blueprint for solving the Taiwan imbroglio – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The Taiwan matter was actually an internal Chinese issue, left from China’s Civil War. Over the years, but, it has taken on global sizes with the US offering as the self-governing region’s de facto keeper.

With China then a great energy and the nation’s second-largest business, and Washington deeming Taiwan as within the British preserve, it is obvious that If China-Taiwan relations were to crumble, the negative impact would be tremendous. Therefore, it is in the interests of the global community to support a dignified resolution to the various Taiwan-related issues at stake.

Such a conclusion can only be reached by the two Taiwanese factors themselves. However, in order for this to be realized, the functions must have the political will to find a solution that they believe is more advantageous than the status quo and all the risks it carries. There is currently no proof that the events are negotiating or that outdoor forces are encouraging for a move.

There appears to be no other option but for a personal artist, whether it be a basis or an educational institution, to move in with the aim of creating a useful framework that could lead to an honorable solution given this social vacuum and the real possibility of the issue spiraling out of control. The events would then be able to choose whether or not to continue.

However, they may have a meaningful, thorough blueprint at their disposal rather than some philosophical formulas, even if they chose not to do so. Each side would need to determine what they are not willing to compromise, as a minimum condition for such a framework. China and Taiwan haven’t yet defined their minimum criteria for a political option in depth.

One, so, must proceed on the basis of numerous educated conclusions. There is no proof that Beijing will always accept a settlement on the theory that there is only one Chinese express that exercises its independence over the entire of China’s place, and this is based on this and without taking into account a margin of error.

Nevertheless, there might be some flexibility regarding the practical application of this process. If there is a distinction between” sovereignty” and “authority,” it does not necessarily need to be exercised uniformly across the entire Chinese state’s territory. &nbsp,

This is indirectly &nbsp, as per the current Democratic tools of the People’s Republic of China, which make measures for” Autonomous Regions” exist. What is currently known as” Taiwan,” which includes both the island province of Taiwan and other islands that are part of Fujian province, could one day be created.

The pieces of a” Comprehensive Blueprint” for a negotiated solution may be based on the following guidelines:

The People’s Republic of China would have an automatic area known as the JMPT Autonomous Region. So, it would be both self-governing and a part of China. This implies in reality that it would be content to its own domestic affairs laws.

Socially, it would be represented by the PRC, but it could work its unique” Trade and Cultural Offices”, which, among other things, had been authorized to issue visas appropriate for the JMPT/AR. Diplomats could be opened in the JMPT in response to unusual diplomatic missions in the country’s capital.

A separate federal emblem could be used to represent the JMPT/AR. Additionally, it would have a” Self Defense Force” of up to 200 000 members and be able to use any amount of funding it desires.

Both parties ‘ decisions will be based on the community movements between the JMPT/AR and the rest of the nation. The JMPT/AR would also have its own economic system, money and resources as well as strategy.

A concurrent 2/3 majority in both the national and regional legislative bodies would be required to amend the law, which would serve as the JMPT/AR’s de facto constitution.

What would amount to the JMPT/AR’s Constitution would actually be a modified version of the Republic of China’s current constitution with relevant amendments. Thus, Chapter 2 Article 7, which states” All citizens of the Republic of China” would be amended to read” All permanent residents of the JMPT/AR”, etc, etc.

What would remain untouched are the institutions currently in force on Taiwan, such as the Legislative Yuan, the Executive Yuan, the Control Yuan, and others. One Chinese state that would include a self-governing autonomous region would result from this construction.

Both Chinese parties should be satisfied with a scenario like this. It would be the final chapter of the Civil War and the defense of the principle of a single Chinese state under a single central government for Beijing. And it would preserve Taiwan’s traditional custom, which has been so successful for Taiwan over the years.

The establishment in Taiwan should interpret a solution like this as a positive development, from a historical perspective. When all is said and done, there is no escaping the fact that the island’s establishment did lose the Chinese Civil War and only survives under the influence of its American supporters. How long this umbrella will endure is a moot point, but ultimately, the island is no more indispensable to America’s security than South Vietnam.

Likewise, given the asymmetry of the two Chinese sides, with one side consisting of the world’s second-largest economy with a population of 1.4 billion and the other an island with 23 million inhabitants, time is not in Taiwan’s favor. And no matter what weapons Taiwan is able to acquire, they will never be able to match Beijing’s.

A Comprehensive Blueprint would have the benefit of providing the parties with a concrete proposal for a negotiated solution. Granted, they might not like it, and some details may need to be settled, but the current vacuum would allow for a small improvement over the uncertainty of the current status quo.

Continue Reading

Trump’s Gaza takeover all about natural gas – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

US President Donald Trump has said America&nbsp,” does get over” &nbsp, the Gaza Strip, while the Palestinians who live there should be relocated to Jordan or Egypt.

Energy is one of the most important but neglected factors in making this choice. Israel and Gaza both have substantial onshore natural gas reserves. Developing these sources could help asset Gaza’s restoration.

But Trump needs to move quickly to capitalise on this once-in-a-lifetime option. Soviet natural gas is being pushed out of Europe in a desperate attempt. New vendors are being sought out. &nbsp, This is going time.

This break it down. Israel’s big offshore fuel fields—Leviathan, Tamar, and Dalit—are now in operation and/or being explored by Chevron &amp, some other midsized Jewish oil firms.

On February 4, Azerbaijan’s state power company SOCAR&nbsp, acquired a 10 % stake&nbsp, in the Tamar oil field. &nbsp, Did they know tomorrow’s Gaza news was coming?

Three months Before the October 7, 2023 attacks, &nbsp, Hamas made a US-brokered deal&nbsp, to enable growth of a possible major oil field off the coastline of Gaza.

Then three months after October 7, Israel&nbsp, controversially granted exploration rights&nbsp, to Eni ( Italy ), Dana Energy ( UK) &amp, Ratio Petroleum ( Israel ) to explore within Palestine’s maritime boundaries.

Key power developments in the area have been making significant progress while the conflict in Gaza has been raging.

Qatar-Turkey pipelines

The Qatar-Turkey pipelines was planned to transport gas from Qatar through Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria to Turkey and Europe. In 2009, Syria’s then-leader Bashar al-Assad rejected the project.

Then that Assad is gone?

Turkey’s energy minister has &nbsp, publicly stated&nbsp, the plan could be revived if” Syria achieves its territorial integrity and stability”. Qatar wants to expand its trade options beyond Crude supplies to pipelines.

And now these fast-moving innovations:

&gt, Five days ago, &nbsp, Qatar’s Emir was the first head of state to attend Syria since Assad’s drop.

&gt, Monday Syria’s president, Ahmad al-Sharaa&nbsp, was in Saudi Arabia&nbsp, for his first established overseas trip.

&gt, Now al-Sharaa&nbsp, was in Turkey&nbsp, meeting with President Erdogan.

Hmmm…

Iranian pipeline

Iran even has a program to&nbsp, create a gas pipeline to Europe&nbsp, via Iraq and Syria. Since 2016, there haven’t been any growth changes for the Persian Pipeline job. Given Syria’s fresh command and Iran’s fast-growing social isolation, that offer didn’t occur any time soon.

Since Muammar Gaddafi’s assassination in 2011 there has been a civil war or political crises in Libya.

However, things are improving. Two weeks ago a&nbsp, big oil conference&nbsp, was held in Tripoli with some Americans and Europeans in attendance. Now Libya’s Minister of Economy &amp, Trade&nbsp, went people with plans&nbsp, to maintain a restoration meeting ace.

With some of the nation’s largest reserves of oils, Libya is hoping to climb back into the game in a major way.

Why are all of these countries—Israel, Qatar, Libya, Syria and Turkey—moving swiftly to potentially grow their fuel supplies and/or network abilities?

Because Europe needs to replace Russian energy, and anyone who supplies that oil does have a significant amount of economic and political influence.

All of these people are aware of the urgency of a quick response before Russia steps in and the conflict in Ukraine is forgotten.

The US and EU want Russia out of Europe’s power supply network. The option? Many gas providers like as Israel, Qatar &amp, Libya. Now is the ideal time for all oil producers in the area to relocate.

Trump’s Gaza choice

How does moving Palestinians from Gaza to Egypt and/or Jordan aid in the fuel supply to Europe?

1 ) It removes a vital social problem. The Israeli-Palestinian issue has long been a hindrance to local economic growth.

2 ) Personally, many Arab states told the US they were in favor of hammering Hamas. This issue is resolved by totally removing the Palestinians from Gaza. Plus: no terror attacks on reconstruction crews, no acts of terrorism in Israel ( inviting yet another Israeli response ), and no chance onshore gas facilities are sabotaged.

3 ) This did fast-track oil development. With US support, Gaza’s gas fields may be immediately developed without outdoor intervention. Without constantly being threatened by violence and/or civil warfare, pipes can be constructed.

4 ) Divide and conquer. Make no mistake: if the majority of the people of Gaza stays it, anything will be almost impossible to accomplish. Any remaining kinetic energy may be sucked up as they are divided up, some going to Egypt, and the others going to Jordan, especially as the fresh Gaza is rebuilt and promises of economic development are made clear.

5 ) According to Bloomberg, rebuilding Gaza may charge more than US$ 80 billion. Someone has to give for it and it won’t be American citizens. The obvious answer is revenue from normal oil.

The death of Gaza. Image: Resource Wars

None of this will be simple. There are still huge challenges. But they are addressable:

&gt, Dangle network transit fees and/or offtake partnerships with Jordan and Egypt to help negotiate Gaza’s people …

In order to aid in the country’s rapid reconstruction, Trump leans on Qatar to give additional transport costs for Syria.

&gt, Massive infrastructure projects may offer jobs for young males in the region, reducing turmoil. Untold riches will be brought to places where there hasn’t been genuine economic growth in years thanks to gas flowing continuous to Europe.

The advantages

If this technique works, the benefits for Trump—and US international policy—could be great:

Would it be a stretch to see a Trump-brokered Saudi-Israel standardization? What about a broader Middle East authority that integrates Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, Saudi, the UAE and Qatar into a local financial alliance?

Plus, this would switch Russia out of Europe’s energy structure for a generation – an huge earn for America. Selling gas to Europe&nbsp, could&nbsp, facilitate all of this.

Trump’s decision to remove Palestinians from Gaza may seem extreme. But when viewed through the lens of energy strategy, it makes more sense.

We’ll see if his administration can pull off one of the most nuanced foreign policy decisions in US history.

This article originally appeared on Resource Wars, and it has since been republished with permission. Read the original here.

Continue Reading

The dog that didn’t bark is the Chinese stock market – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

With a one-month test for only$ 1, you can subscribe right away and then get the special discount of just$ 99.

The dog that didn’t wood is the Chinese stock market

Despite new US taxes, according to David Goldman, Chinese technology stocks are rising. As well as the possibility of Chinese AI types like DeepSeek, there is a rumor that President Trump may seek a business deal rather than a full confrontation with China.

The onset of US sanctions against China.

According to Scott Foster, new AI types from DeepSeek and Alibaba have exposed the US’s harsh sanctions against Chinese tech. US steelmaker Nvidia, however, eager to regain sales in China, hopes Trump may ease Artificial chip export controls.

How war ending … and why Ukraine’s may bring on

Uwe v. Parpart makes the case that a long-term peace deal must be incorporated into a wider European security model in light of the potential dangers of the Ukraine war becoming Donald Trump’s equal of Vietnam.

Trump’s plan of ‘ great stick’ force starts in Panama

Diego Faßnacht examines the Trump administration’s extreme revival of control in Latin America. Washington is using economic and geopolitical strength to stymie Foreign investment, which bears a lot resemblance to the “big stay” politics of the early 20th century.

Putin debates whether to talk to or strike back at Ukraine.

As units within the Kremlin appear to be growing, James Davis describes the evolving interactions of the Russia-Ukraine conflict as hardliners call for a new round of participation and a significant affect to completely devastate Ukraine’s military and business.

Continue Reading

USAid shutdown isn’t just a humanitarian issue – it’s a gift to China – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The website for the United States Agency for International Development ( USAid ), the world’s biggest aid donor, has gone dark.

The State Department will be in charge of the automatic company under Donald Trump’s new administration’s plans. The secretary of state, Marco Rubio, has today declared himself head of the agency to “align” it with Trump’s interests.

Rubio stated a few days ago, on January 26, that “every money we spend, every programme we bank, and every scheme we adopt may be justified with the response to the three straightforward issues: Does it produce America safer? Does it create America stronger? Does it produce America more profitable”?

But the choice to thaw USAid, which is part of Trump’s plan to place” America initial”, places all at hazard. Businesses that provide essential maintenance for disadvantaged people around the world are being forced to halt procedures. The manager of one for business said:” People did die”.

Elon Musk, the world’s richest person and a nearby adviser to Trump, is playing an active part in the loss of USAid. He has asserted that the organization is “beyond maintenance” without providing any supporting evidence. On X he wrote:” It needs to die”.

Musk, who is in charge of the newly established Department of Government Efficiency ( Doge ), is gearing up to reduce the US budget by trillions of dollars. Trump and Musk are appealing to an market that has a basic misunderstood US international support in general by presenting cuts to USAID as a solution.

Surveys show that Americans think that 25 % of the federal budget is used for international support. In reality, the US gives about 0.2 % of its gross national product ( GNP ), the total value of goods and services produced by a country, to foreign aid – or less than 1 % of its federal budget. This is significantly below the UN’s goal of 7 % GDP.

But, despite this, USAid provided 42 % of all humanitarian assistance globally in 2024. This included about US$ 72 billion in support in a wide range of locations, from helping people entry fresh water, sanitation, care and strength to providing crisis comfort, shelter and food.

USAid also delivered programs aimed at supporting democracy, civil society, economic development and landmine clearance in war zones, as well as working to prevent organized crime, terrorism and conflict. The demise of USAID will have a significant impact on security for people.

The Trump administration has granted a waiver from “life-saving humanitarian assistance” for the duration. This includes a program that provides access to anti-retroviral drugs for 20 million people who are HIV/Aids. But there are questions about the future of US Aids organization, the President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief ( PEPFAR ).

To date, over 43 million people worldwide have died from AIDS. However, the launch of PEPFAR in 2003 was one of the biggest successes of the George W. Bush administration. The World Health Organization says that PEPFAR, working in partnership with USAid, has saved 26 million lives.

PEPFAR employs more than 250, 000 doctors, nurses and other staff across 55 countries. One of the tasks that USAid is assigned is to order and purchase the medications used by PEPFAR to keep the millions of HIV-positive people alive. Will there be no suspension of federal funding for USAid’s locally operated partner organizations?

We are, in any case, likely to see an uptick in other infectious diseases. USAID had been working to stop the Marburg virus and mpox outbreaks from occurring in Africa right now. What the future holds for these programs is not known.

And USAid’s work with malaria, a disease that kills about 450, 000 children under the age of five each year, is facing uncertainty. From 2000 to 2021, USAid’s work helped to prevent 7.6 million deaths from malaria. Also in doubt is USAid’s effort to create and implement the malaria vaccine, which was deemed a breakthrough in the fight against the disease.

USAid also responds to an average of 65 natural disasters annually. In 2024 alone, it responded to 84 separate crises across 66 different countries. The government is removing all of the personnel necessary to carry out these kinds of programs.

Senior USAid officials have taken dozens of vacation days, and contractors have been fired from their jobs. 3,000 Washington, DC, aid workers could be laid off this week, according to reports.

The work of USAid is also crucial for preserving American interests, which Trump’s team members misunderstand. China will now have an opportunity to have more influence around the world, thanks to its more than US$ 1 trillion of assistance to infrastructure projects in Asia, Africa, Europe, and Latin America since 2013. China receives a gift from the US in the struggle for soft power.

Global aid sector in disarray

Foreign aid depends on assurance and transparency regarding the viability of aid programs. While US foreign aid programs are being reviewed, the Trump administration has provided little clarity. Due to the uncertainty, one aid organization described the situation as an “absolute dumpster fire.”

There have already been reports of total confusion in health clinics that were shut down without warning that were previously supported by USAid. Africa is most likely to be the region that suffers the most. Local workers working on continent-wide healthcare projects will lose their jobs, while nurses, doctors, and healthcare workers working in various clinics will not be able to carry on their essential responsibilities.

Trump is not able to oust a congressionally funded independent agency, according to the Democrats. They have stated that legal challenges are already being raised and that they will try to stop Trump’s state department nominations from being approved until the shutdown is overturned.

During his first term, Trump attempted to reduce US foreign aid, but Congress objected. Then, he attempted to stop the flow of aid that Congress had authorized, but ultimately failed. This time, Trump is not bothering to play by the rules.

Natasha Lindstaedt is a professor in the Department of Government, University of Essex.

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

Continue Reading