Bolen C (Page 57)

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

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

It was immediately assumed that Donald Trump’s second term as president of the United States wouldn’t augur well for Ukraine.

Trump had dubious ties to Russia during his first term in office. Additionally, his claim that he would stop the Russia-Ukraine discord in a day led many analysts to conclude that any such policy may favor the Russians given that Russia also holds most of Ukraine.

These concerns, at least so far, have certainly come to pass. In Trump’s annual target, many of the things he highlighted on the campaign trail figured prominently.

Considerably excluded, however, was Ukraine. When it comes to Trump’s” America First” idea, Ukraine and Russia have evidently lost value.

Method of diversion

Trump, with his humorous nature, dominates the advertising period. It’s hard for people to keep up with his proclamations, threats, and insults because they happen frequently on social media.

A new remark or order takes over the headlines as one reports piece comes into focus.

In many ways, this works to Trump’s benefits. People may not be interested in the most recent outrageous statement as Trump works toward his lofty local policy objectives. A move toward Russia and Ukraine has been lost in the media due to Trump’s professional orders, price threats, and heightened repatriation campaign.

Ukraine, for Trump, is a secondary priority. His interests, first and foremost, are private and aimed at remaking America.

Trump’s engagement with Ukraine and Russia may be influenced by how much he believes he can gain internally in return rather than being driven by any foreign policy objectives. His estimates, in this regard, appear to possess shifted.

Complicated marriage with Ukraine

Trump’s marriage with Ukraine during his first name was, to put it mildly, hard. His love with Soviet leader Vladimir Putin, and Russia’s open hatred for Ukraine, caused him to essentially ignore the land.

When he did research Ukraine, it was as part of a plot to defame previous president Joe Biden, who he claimed was trying to get social support for. As a result of this energy, Trump withheld support from Ukraine until it accepted his demands.

Trump’s status on Ukraine, however, has shifted over time. His adversarial relationship with Volodymyr Zelensky appears to have improved.

Trump has tempered his remarks about his Russian counterpart, even though there are also tensions, most importantly when Zelensky visited Pennsylvania during the US national election campaign. Ukraine’s order of British equipment and ammunition, however, supports Trump’s concentrate on local production.

Finally, Trump has expressed interest in accessing Ukraine’s unusual world metal. According to China’s current position in the rare earth metal marketplace, the US is at a risk because of how crucial the nutrients will be for advancing technology. That means Trump has a interest in Ukraine’s coming.

Trump is unlikely to load Ukraine, despite these developments not implying the relationship is flawless. His declining opinion of Putin is at play in this growth.

Trump/Putin connection

Some analysts had the idea that when Trump retake office, he would soon support Putin. There is a lot of speculation about why Trump and Putin sat in such a favorable position during his first term, given how well-documented and nearer they are.

Trump, nevertheless, has upped his speech against Russia since assuming the presidency. Second, he threatened Putin with more economic sanctions. Next, he stated that he would like OPEC&nbsp, to increase fuel production&nbsp, and, consequently, inhibit Russia’s war efforts by undermining its primary source of revenue.

Why the hinge? It probably goes to the core basis of Trump’s image: He likes winners. Russia and Putin have shown a lot of failure in implementation throughout the conflict, despite the final result of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The Russian army, when feared globally, has generally proven to be a document cat.

Russia also benefits from the battle, but it only benefits from maximizing its potential. According to Trump, Russia is in “big problem” in terms of its financial difficulties. Trump is not the only one with this opinion. Economists, as well as perhaps Putin himself, recognize the major obstacles facing the Soviet economy.

Russia has leveraged its coming beyond only financially. Putin has reached a deal with North Korea, which will provide troops for the battle against Ukraine, to avoid straining the Russian people.

Moreover, Russia has deepened relations with Iran in trade for Egyptian robots.

It’s unclear what compensation for these men has Putin given North Korea and Iran. However, Russia can only offer these soldiers and drones one time for any technical exchanges because the same technology cannot be included in any other arrangements once they are shared.

This real limits Russia’s effect in the decades ahead.

The new skill of the offer?

Trump, nearly surely, wants to make a peace deal on Ukraine. At no extra cost to the US, it may shine his status as a leader while also demonstrating American strength and influence around the world.

The words of that package, however, have shifted in the face of Russian failure.

That’s why it’s hardly surprising that Trump’s temperamental position on Russia has changed. Russia’s potential is unlikely to benefit them until it demonstrates the strength that Trump believed it could.

James Horncastle is the professor of global relations at Simon Fraser University as well as the assistant teacher for Edward and Emily McWhinney.

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

Continue Reading

US President Donald Trump made a remarkable announcement at a press conference in Washington that suggested that the country should “take control” of the Gaza Strip and entirely relocate the nearly two million Palestinians living it to neighboring nations.

Trump has recently requested that Egypt and Jordan absorb Palestinians from Gaza, requests that both countries vehemently rejected.

His new remarks and the possibility of a US acquisition of a sovereign country soon attracted censure and concerns about the propriety of doing so.

When questioned about the power that would permit the US to do this, Trump refused to respond. He merely noted it would be a “long-term rights place”. Additionally, he did not rule out using American soldiers.

What does worldwide laws say about this concept, then?

Is the US get over a royal territory?

The fast answer is no – Trump can’t just take over someone else’s place.

The use of power has been prohibited by international law since the Second World War’s ending in 1945. Since the founding of the United Nations, this is one of the underpinnings of international rules.

With the acceptance of the territory’s royal authority, the US could just take control of Gaza. Israel didn’t lose Gaza to the US. Gaza is an occupied place, according to the International Court of Justice, and this job is prohibited by international law.

Trump may therefore need the assent of Palestine and the Palestinians to impose themselves as rulers of Gaza for this to happen legitimately.

And what about removing a people?

According to Article 49 of the Geneva Conventions, one of an occupying power’s biggest duty is. This forbids an occupying power from imposing forcibly removing or transferring people from a place.

Additionally, all other states are required to refrain from supporting an occupying energy in a violation of international humanitarian law. But Israel couldn’t help if the US wanted to forcefully relocate the Gaza people. And, also, the US cannot support Israel in violating the guidelines.

Taking powers are permitted to replace a population for the sake of security.

Trump and his Middle East minister, who visited Gaza last year, have &nbsp, frequently referenced&nbsp, how risky it is. Trump questioned how people had “want to be” it, saying they have” no choice” but to keep.

However, removing folks for this reason has to only be transitory. When it’s good for someone to gain, they may be returned.

What if individuals deliberately left?

Transferring a people has to be sexual. However, in this particular situation, it may mean the assent of all Palestinians in Gaza. The US was unable to compel people to relocate who did not want to.

Further to this, a state, such as the Palestinian Authority, may offer this acceptance on behalf of a people. People have the right to choose their own potential, which is self-determination.

Migration is a perfect illustration of how a person can move from one state to another. It’s no movement. But firmly displacing them is no permitted.

And using what sounds like a threat would probably not be lawful, sometimes. This could be saying, for occasion,” If you stay, you’ll kill because there’s just going to be more conflict. But if you leave, there’s peacefulness”. This is the threat of force.

Do forcing people to leave get ethnic cleansing?

No treaty or agreement defines ethnic cleaning.

However, the majority of international law specialists rely on the description provided in the Commission of Specialists report to the UN Security Council in 1994 regarding the former Yugoslavian state. It defined cultural purging as:

removing people from particular groups from an area by using force or intimidation to render it culturally uniform.

Therefore, what Trump is suggesting may fall under the category of ethnic cleansing, which is the removal of the Arab people from a particular geographic area through intimidation or power.

What can be done if Trump follows through?

If Trump implements this plan, it would violate the fundamental principles that underpin international law, or just cogens, which are the fundamental principles.

And international legislation mandates that no country is permitted to work with another country to violate these rules, and all nations must make efforts to stop or prevent any potential breaches. This may include placing restrictions on a region or not providing aid to that country, for instance, by selling it weaponry.

Very few nations recognized the illegal annexe of Crimea in 2014, which is a great illustration of this. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was then followed by restrictions and the melting of Russian goods, among other activities.

If Trump used this strategy, he may also face personal liability under international legal law if he was the one to forcefully move a population.

In connection with the issue, the International Criminal Court has already issued imprisonment permits for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the former head of Israel’s security, and a Hamas captain.

The danger of this kind of speech

One of the drawbacks of this kind of speech is the ability to demean either the opposing or the opposing side.

Trump does this through statements such as,” You look over the decades, it’s all death in Gaza”, and resettling people in “nice homes where they can be happy” instead of being “knifed to death“. This speech implies the position in Gaza is due to the “uncivilized” nature of the people.

Even if Trump doesn’t follow his advice, there is a chance that the Arab people will be dehumanized by his proposal’s mere sounds. And this could also result to more human rights violations.

Actually if he doesn’t break any of these laws himself, the cheerful way in which things like moving people and taking over a country are discussed gives the impression that they can easily be broken.

Tamer Morris is older teacher, global rules, University of Sydney

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

Continue Reading

Saudi Minister of Economy and Planning Faisal Al-Ibrahim&nbsp, told&nbsp, the World Economic Forum during next month ‘s&nbsp, Davos Summit,” We’ve been invited to the BRICS, related to how we’ve been invited to many other international channels in the past previously. Before making a decision, we evaluate many different features of it, and we are currently in the middle of that.

Saudi Arabia has a good reason to postpone joining the BRICS informally.

It was posited&nbsp, these &nbsp, in January 2024 when the country second revealed that it hadn’t still accepted the group’s official membership invitation, saying this “is due to Western views about this relationship, Iran’s role in the Red Sea Crisis, and Israeli-US stress”, which still holds true.

Regarding the primary, Saudi Arabia would probably feel uneasy about having its name and regional product appear in the a slew of agenda-driven promotional materials that portray the BRICS as an anti-Western ally.

The Kingdom used to be firmly in the Western station but has taken a website from India’s reserve in recent years by&nbsp, multi-aligning&nbsp, between them and what Russia then calls the&nbsp,” World Majority“.

Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed Bin Salman ( MBS ), whose character and vision were praised by Russian President Vladimir Putin in late 2022, were the subject of this grand strategic review, which was published at the time. It is understandable that MS doesn’t want to spread the false impression that he is leaving the West.

Given Saudi Arabia’s desire to formally join an organization in which its historical rival is a member despite the recent support that the latter has given to the Kingdom’s Houthi enemies, the second reason about Iran’s involvement in the Red Sea Crisis is still relevant.

Moreover, Iran also supports Hamas, whose sneak attack on October 7, 2023 abruptly delayed work on the&nbsp, India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor&nbsp, ( IMEC ), which was supposed to make Saudi Arabia a key node in Euro-Asian trade.

The final reason builds on the aforementioned and includes joint pressure from its fellow Israeli-American IMEC investors, who were upset that Saudi Arabia should join a group of which Iran is a member as the West Asian Wars between Israel and the Iranian-led Resistance Axis were raging.

Even though the two main ones in Lebanon, Gaza, and Lebanon have since officially ended, neither would look favorable toward Saudi Arabia joining the BRICS, which could threaten its ties to both.

Due to everything that has happened since IMEC’s announcement in 2016 and the fact that it is expected to be an integral part of his” Vision 2030” grand strategic plan, MBS wants to revive it as soon as possible in order to completely transform his nation’s socio-economic systems.

That’s not possible without a large degree of US involvement and Israel’s cooperation, the latter of which requires formal Saudi recognition of the Jewish State, possibly explaining Bibi’s concessions on Gaza.

By officially joining the same organization in which their shared Iranian foe is already a member, and doing so immediately after Trump comes to power amid reports that he’ll reimpose his “maximum pressure” policy against the Islamic Republic, it might lead to both abandoning IMEC.

Saudi Arabia receives tangible economic and financial benefits from the US and Israel, but the BRICS have not, as explained above, provided any of its members with any whatsoever.

Additionally, Trump is under the&nbsp, false impression&nbsp, ( subsequently debunked&nbsp, by Indian Minister of External Affairs Dr. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar ) that BRICS is focused on de-dollarizing and wants to create a new currency to rival the dollar, so he’d predictably overreact if Saudi Arabia decides to formally join now.

That could stifle MBS ‘ ambitious IMEC plans, which are one of the centerpieces of his” Vision 2030″ grand strategic plan. He is therefore unwilling to accept such risks in exchange for utterly nothing from the BRICS.

It, therefore, makes perfect sense why Saudi Arabia is dilly-dallying on formally joining BRICS since it presently enjoys all the&nbsp, knowledge-sharing and elite-networking benefits&nbsp, brought about through its partial participation without any of the political or economic risks inherent in being a full member.

MBS can, therefore, maintain his Kingdom’s careful multi-alignment between the West ( which includes Israel in this formulation ) and the” World Majority” by indefinitely delaying a decision on this either way.

This&nbsp, article&nbsp, was first published on Andrew Korybko’s Substack and is republished with kind permission. Become an Andrew Korybko Newsletter subscriber&nbsp, here.

Continue Reading

China’s opening of a smooth, sail-less mini-submarine indicators a bold step in stealth warfare. It raises questions about the boat’s worth in a possible Taiwan siege and whether the ship’s large quantity can exceed excellent concerns in undersea combat.

A new submarine form was just unveiled at the Guangzhou Shipyard, a place untied from underwater building, according to Naval News this quarter.

The vehicle features a peculiar, ultra-modern design with big X-form thrusters and no sail. This growth, revealed through satellite pictures, underscores China’s ability to build submarines in privacy, contrasting with the clarity of American maritime jobs.

The submarine, around 45 feet long and 5 m wide, differs from the Kind 041 small nuclear submarine and the” Paralympic” mini-submarine.

Its layout suggests it could be an extra-large uncrewed underwater car (XLUUV), possibly the nation’s largest, or a crewed vehicle optimized for deep water procedures.

Although China is known to have constructed a sailless mini-submarine in 2018, the vessel’s size, which is estimated to be 50 feet long and lacks bomb tubes, suggests that it may be a test design.

Advanced cunning and fight abilities are demonstrated by the lack of a ship, the presence of torpedo tubes, and a potential towed sonar array.

The standard sail on a submarine is removed to make it less radar and sonar visible. Additionally, it lowers its report to improve its speed and operating efficiency while lowering hydraulic pull, turbulence, and noise.

Additionally, using large X-form thrusters boosts agility, providing agility and balance for navigating difficult underwater environments while supporting secrecy.

Regarding weapons, China’s new submarine has frigate tubes for launching missiles against area and land targets and for engaging enemy vessels. &nbsp, &nbsp,

It may also be capable of minelaying to disrupt enemy navigation, supply routes, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance ( ISR ) and insert special forces into Taiwan’s frontline islands of Kinmen and Matsu or on secluded beaches on the main island.

In the Taiwan Strait, which is almost 150 feet deep and 180 km across, little submarines like China’s new design may offer operating advantages.

William Toti mentions that the Taiwan Strait makes ships more vulnerable to monitoring and problems, complicating deceptive steps, and limiting the effectiveness of conventional underwater techniques in an article from December 2023 Proceedings.

Further, the strait’s narrowness positions submarines close to anti-submarine warfare ( ASW) assets, heightening detection risks amid escalating naval capabilities and military exercises.

Despite those constraints, small submarines thrive in shallow waters thanks to their stealth, agility and ability to merge with seabed clutter, says Liborio Palombella in a June 2024 Naval Review article.

According to Palombella, these submarines’ smaller size results in quieter acoustic signatures, enabling close navigation to the ocean floor and improved maneuverability in narrow waters.

He mentions that this stealth and agility give them a significant tactical advantage over larger, conventional submarines, which find operating effectively in harsh conditions like the Taiwan Strait challenging.

Additionally, smaller submarines may cost less to build than larger ones, reducing undersea threats without the expense of larger ones. The adage “quantity has a of its own” lends itself to China’s enormous shipbuilding base.

Sarah Kirchberger, in a September 2023 China Maritime Studies Institute ( CMSI) report, says that China’s submarine industrial base has significantly modernized, enabling larger-scale production of conventional submarines, particularly at the Wuchang and Jiangnan shipyards.

Kirchberger says China’s investments in modular construction, advanced shipyard expansions and integration of military-civil fusion strategies have enhanced output.

However, she notes that weaknesses in propulsion systems and submarine quieting remain, limiting China’s ability to match Western and Russian designs. She points out that closer ties with Russia might help China close these gaps.

China’s new small submarine, along with its larger conventional and nuclear-powered ones, may play a critical role in a possible blockade of Taiwan to starve the self-governing island into submission.

Bonny Lin and other authors claim that China could impose sea mines at the entrances of Taiwan’s major ports, obstructing maritime traffic, in a report from August 2024 for the Center for Strategic and International Studies ( CSIS ).

Further, Marek Jestrab mentions in an Atlantic Council paper from December 2023 that Chinese submarines could secretly attack Taiwanese-owned merchant vessels sailing through the South China Sea before denying involvement in the attack.

According to Jestrab, such a course of action could quickly sink the intended target and stoke concern for the shipping sector as a result of the risks and losses it poses.

However, China’s rapid submarine production may lack the rigorous quality assurance standards of the US Navy’s SUBSAFE program, raising concerns about reliability and survivability.

The US Department of Defense’s ( DOD ) 2024 China Military Report mentions that despite the ongoing retirement of older hulls, China’s submarine force is expected to grow by 65 units in 2025 and 80 units in 2035, thanks to a massive increase in construction capacity.

Reports of a possible pier-side sinking of a Type 041 nuclear-powered submarine in June 2024 highlighted potential design, construction, or maintenance issues.

The same concerns may extend to China’s mass production of small, conventionally powered submarines, which, though produced in large numbers, may suffer from similar oversight gaps.

Moreover, China still has to account for Taiwan’s ASW capabilities. In a report from December 2014 for Project 2049, Ian Easton and Randall Schriver mention Taiwan as having a network of seabed sonar listening points that they had developed with the US.

These posts, according to Easton and Schriver, are comparable to the US SOSUS system, which extends from Taiwan’s northeast coast to the Senkaku Islands and its southern coast to the Bashi Channel to the Philippines.

These underwater sensors are used to track ship and submarine movements through the First Island Chain, according to them, and are connected to the US Navy and the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force ( JMSDF).

Taiwan plans to add six ASW frigates and a local submarine force to its arsenal. Its first submarine, the ROCS Hai Kun, is undergoing testing and seven units will be built. &nbsp,

As China ramps up the construction of stealthy new mini-submarines, the real test isn’t just numbers—it’s whether these vessels can evade Taiwan’s defenses and the US ‘ ASW capabilities and survive the fast-evolving realities of modern undersea warfare.

Continue Reading