Iran speeding up work on its nukes, two new reports say – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

This month, two contradicting information about Iran’s nuclear weapons program were made public. Both studies provide valuable insight into how Tehran is accelerating its work on nuclear arms.

The initial report is from the&nbsp, New York Times&nbsp, which says US Intelligence has fresh observations on Iran’s weapons programme. The new information was further stated in the statement that President Trump’s group received it.

The second report comes from the&nbsp, National Council of Resistance of Iran&nbsp, (NCRI ). The NCRI is a pro-regime organization that runs inside Iran.

Iran is trying to develop a nuclear weapon “faster,” according to the US intelligence briefing, even though the end product will be” cruder.” US intelligence connects a disclaimer to its new knowledge, declaring that Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has certainly made a decision to build a nuclear weapons.

The New York Times does not reveal how Iran may have” cruded” a weapons despite the fact that no decision has been made regarding its progress.

The NCRI paints a unique portrait. It says that Iran has two significant nuclear facilities, one located at Sharad, which doubles as a storage start page, and the other at Semnan, that also has storage establish capabilities. Both cities are south of Tehran.

Sharad is maintained as a top-secret service, which is meant to launch contacts satellites. The majority of those activities are beneath, according to NCRI, which basically involves developing nuclear weapons. The Sharad start service features a new good fuel&nbsp, Ghaem-100, a two-stage middle range ballistic missile. NCRI says that 3 Ghaem-100 weapons have already been launched, and a newer type, Ghaem 105 is being prepared for screening.

Nuclear missiles on road-mobile rockets during a 2021 training. Photo: Farsnews

In&nbsp, October, 2024&nbsp, Israel launched a hostile attack on Iran, knocking out important Persian air defenses and the business site&nbsp, where Iran produces good rocket fuel&nbsp, for weapons such as the Ghaem. To prevent Iran from using solid-fuel rockets to strike Israel, this was a proper decision.

Sharad is under the control of the&nbsp, Egyptian Revolutionary Guard Corps&nbsp, Aerospace Force. The general scientists and current commanders at Sharad have been identified by NCRI.

The next site at Semnan formally is the&nbsp, Khomeini Space Launch Terminal. The website has just seen significant expansion. A special Geophysics Group is housed at the site under the leadership of the Organization for Advanced Defense Research ( SPND). Supposedly, the Geophysics Group is associated with Tehran University and its Earthquake Seismology section, providing a backbone for explosive component testing.

The Semnan service functions the&nbsp, Simorgh&nbsp, liquid-fueled weapon. Simorgh is similar to the North Korean&nbsp, UNHA-1, an intermediate collection ballistic missile.

Solid-fuel rockets require much less set-up time to launch, replacing the long supporting process needed for older-type nuclear weapons.

One crucial factor of weapon design and development is shared by both US intelligence and NCRI reports.

According to the US Intelligence Report, Iran has never developed a tool capable of being launched from an intermediate collection ballistic missile. Reading between the lines, that indicates Iran’s attempt to minimize the use of a little enough weapon has not yet produced any results.

Uranium, which Iranian nuclear reactor you produce, would be used to power a small-sized nuclear weapon. Uranium bombs are known for their high level of executive and unique electronics, but they also require a high degree of success.

The” cruder” approach would be to turn to a uranium atomic bomb, similar to the one used at Hiroshima, which uses highly enriched uranium and a less complicated gun-type process to create a chain reaction and an atomic fire.

The uranium answer is probably the” cruder” strategy US intellect is reporting. It is interesting to note that the Hiroshima explosive was not thoroughly tested before being used. Iran may even believe it may launch a uranium bomb without having to show it by exploding it.

The Hiroshima weapon was very large, weighing 4, 400 pounds (9, 700 m. ). The plane had to be modified to allow the weapon to be lifted into the stomach of the B-29 from a particular lift in the floor beneath the aircraft in order to fit it into a four-engine bomber. A plutonium weapon used today may be lighter than the one used at Hiroshima, but it’s still most likely too big and heavy for a weapon.

Specific loading system for Hiroshima” Small Boy” weapon on B-29 Superfortress.

Iran would likely need to place a tool like this on a military ship, as a result. Again on August 2, 1939 Albert&nbsp, Einstein sent a letter&nbsp, to President Franklin Roosevelt. Einstein noted in that email that a uranium weapons may be carried by a boat even though it probably would be too big for an aircraft. ” A second bomb”, Einstein told Roosevelt,” carried by vessel and exploded in a slot, might very well ruin the whole slot with some surrounding place”.

The NCRI report, in contrast to the US intelligence report, makes it clear that the IRGC is developing a weapon that can be delivered by missile, which would be a miniaturized plutonium bomb. It also acknowledges that Iran does not yet have a bomb it can mount on a missile.

Why doesn’t Iran have a useful warhead if it cooperates closely with North Korea on its nuclear and missile programs? Iranian ( and Syrian ) collaboration with North Korea has been ongoing for years, and the North Koreans claim they have missile-deliverable nuclear warheads.

According to the Federation of American Scientists, North Korea already has about 90 nuclear warheads, but it’s likely to have assembled closer to 50.

The US Defense Intelligence Agency ( DIA ) says that North Korea has built around 30 fissile material cores for use in nuclear weapons, including four-to-six two-stage thermonuclear weapons. While the DIA does not say the “fissile material cores” can be mounted on missiles, a Japanese report says that North Korea&nbsp, can miniaturize nuclear warheads.

In September, 2007 in an audacious operation called” Operation Outside the Box”, Israel destroyed a nuclear reactor at al-Kibar in Syria. That reactor was a carbon-copy of North Korea’s Yongbyon 5 megawatt nuclear reactor, which&nbsp, produces plutonium for North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. For the al-Kibar project, the North Koreans worked with Syria and Iran.

Had the reactor been operational, it would have been outside of the scope of the IAEA’s control and had the potential to have produced a significant amount of fuel for sophisticated plutonium bombs.

The bottom line

Iran may be attempting to produce both uranium and plutonium-fueled weapons, according to both reports. This would provide an analysis of how the US created the atomic weapons that eventually produced an entire nukes arsenal using a variety of delivery methods, including Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The US intelligence claim that Iran’s supreme leader has not decided whether to launch nuclear weapons strikes them is untrue seems absurd. The IRGC, which really controls Iran, is investing billions in the project, which has been accelerated and intensified.

Stephen Bryen is a former US deputy undersecretary of defense for policy and a special correspondent for Asia Times. This article, which originally appeared on his Substack newsletter Weapons and Strategy, is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

Trump challenges to Fed independence recall ’70s Nixon-Burns fiasco – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, Finance

Like the’ 20s of the 21st century, the ‘ 70s of the 20th century had an prices issue. The issue persisted throughout the century, however, it worsened. That was largely due to the fact that the Federal Reserve Board head initially let himself be pushed around by the US leader.

Yesterday’s Fed seat is determined not to let that happen again. He will need all the political will and bravery he may conjure to avoid it.

Fed chair Arthur Burns was telling President Richard Nixon that lowering interest rates in an inflationary business was a blunder for the majority of 1971. For a logical, if possibly mistaken, political purpose, Dixon persisted.

For the US in the 1970s had an awkwardly large 6 % poverty level, in addition to inflation. In order for Burns to loosen monetary policy in the lead up to 1972, he felt that poverty was a greater threat to his candidacy than inflation. When Nixon suddenly threatened policy to reduce the Fed’s freedom, Burns folded.

Now the Fed’s liberation is back in the sights. Not much after appointing him in 2018, President Donald Trump began to lose patience with Fed Chair Jerome Powell. The following morning, he blasted him once more.

Under President Richard Nixon, Arthur Burns, the head of the Federal Reserve Board, pressed him to lower interest rates, and inflation deteriorated. Jerome Powell, the current Fed head, is determined to reduce in response to positive information, no political demands. Image: DTN

The president declared he would require lower interest rates during a virtual conference of the new Davos forum. He claimed that the leader should be in charge of interest rates in a campaign appearance next month. Some of his officials made plans earlier this year to increase the power of the Fed to the executive branch.

Every leader wants low interest rates, as I pointed out in a blog about those ideas last May. Fearing financial-market opposition, but, most seethe in silence when the Fed doesn’t provide them what they want. Some, Nixon most notably, try to force the Fed.

Trump is in Nixon’s station.

The issue with this is that there are instances when high interest rates provide the terrible treatment the economy requires. Without them, cpi you spin out of control, as it did in the ‘ 70s. Long-term inflation may wreck an economy.

While high interest rates don’t get public favour, neither does prices, which likely cost the Liberals the next election. But the sick effects of inflation may be felt on some other voter’s view, the politician hopes. High interest rates and the economic downturn, in the politician’s opinion, could prevent winning the upcoming election.

And that’s why Congress established a relatively independent Federal Reserve Board by taking interest-rate selections out of the control of officials. If you have a 14-year name as a Fed government or are leader of a local Federal Reserve bank, it’s easier to make the controversial decision to raise rates.

Independence doesn’t ensure errors won’t be made. It only increases the likelihood that, if they are made, they will be economical judgmental mistakes rather than attempts to win voters ‘ pursuit.

The Fed’s democracy isn’t complete. Legislation was reverse it if Congress passes it. The Senate approves the rulers, and the leader appoints them. The Fed head frequently answers questions and testifies before parliamentary commissions.

However, the governors do have a good deal of freedom because they are elected just for a reason and have longer terms. Recent Fed chair Powell wants to keep things that way, just like he would any other Fed official. In his six years as head, Powell has demonstrated political astuteness in dealing with Congress.

Doing the same with this leader may prove more difficult.

The seven rulers and five Federal Reserve Bank presidents who are members of the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee held a meeting in January, but they didn’t give the president what he claimed he would require. The FOMC voted this time to keep costs intact after dropping their standard interest rate by a full percentage point since last September.

At his post-meeting press conference, Powell said the Fed wants to see more progress in reducing inflation toward the Fed’s 2 % purpose before cutting again. To queries about the government’s remark that he would require lower prices, Powell gave uncombative answers.

” The president’s statement will not cause me to respond or post in any way.” It’s not suitable for me to accomplish so”, Powell said. The people should be assured that we will continue to do our jobs as we have always, using our resources to achieve our objectives, including steady prices and highest employment.

He stated that the Fed may continue to use financial data to inform its decisions. ” Don’t seem for us to do anything more”.

Did Powell succeed in keeping his head down? That’s up for debate. It’s a good start, nevertheless.

President Trump has shown he is vulnerable to market responses. He may want to keep in mind that the financial industry will be very damaging if a pending Fed rate split is perceived as caving to his needs. An impartial Fed is desired by the industry.

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

This&nbsp, content, originally published on February 4 by the latter media business and then republished by Asia Times with authority, is © Copyright 2025 DTN/The Progressive Farmer. All rights reserved. &nbsp, Follow&nbsp, Urban Lehner&nbsp, on Twitter: @urbanize

Continue Reading

Rare earth piece in Ukraine peace deal puzzle – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Trump ‘s&nbsp, confirmed interest&nbsp, in Ukraine’s important and rare earth materials is being interpreted by some as valuable for President Volodymyr Zelensky amid uncertainty about the new US government’s dedication to Ukraine. One of the details from Zelensky’s so-called” Victory Plan” calls for letting his government’s allies to remove its nutrients.

Marco Rubio, the new secretary of state, recently warned about the proper benefits that China derives from its control of the world’s unique planet mineral supply chain, in order to potentially have an impact on Trump’s position on the Ukraine-related issue.

US Senator Lindsey Graham made headlines about Ukraine’s rare earth riches while on a trip that last June, claiming that the country was assimilated by US$ 10 trillion in like success.

Trump 2.0’s international policy concentrate on more slender containing China in all ways&nbsp, consistently predisposed&nbsp, him to understand the above point from Zelensky’s” Victory Plan”.

The problem, though, is that the volume of Ukraine’s essential material prosperity is&nbsp, under Russian control&nbsp, while Russian troops continue to flee.

At the same time, US Special Envoy for Ukraine and Russia Keith Kellogg’s suggestion that Ukraine needs to hold long-delayed elections&nbsp, was seen&nbsp, as reflecting Trump’s interest in brokering a ceasefire, after which martial law can be lifted, the elections could be held, and a new Ukrainian government can then begin peace talks.

This expectation contrasts with what Trump said a few days later about his interest in Ukraine’s ( mostly Russian-controlled ) rare earth mineral deposits and the possibility of proxy escalation of the war.

Trump might try to cut a deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin instead of halting his efforts to freeze the Ukrainian conflict by increasing military aid in the hope that Zelensky’s forces can then retake these deposits from Russian control, which could perpetuate the proxy war  and thus derail his foreign policy agenda.

Putin might be able to sell some of these rare earth and other important minerals to the US as one of the conditions Trump might create to coerce Ukraine into reversing its claim to at least some of the territory that Russia claims as its own.

Depending on how much Trump can coerce Ukraine into resuming, Putin might agree. There’s also a practical argument in favor of this arrangement, which could allow the EU to partially resume some Russian gas pipeline imports one day.

The purpose would be to restore a degree of Russia and the EU’s pre-conflict economic interdependence, albeit this time under US supervision, as a reward for Russia complying with a ceasefire.

The US may provide two rare earth deposits, one of which might involve the return of some seized Russian assets if Russians are invested in this endeavor. The first requires the return of some seized Russian assets.

If successfully implemented, then this proposal could lead to more creative diplomacy of the sort suggested at the end of this analysis&nbsp, here &nbsp, for depriving China of Russia’s enormous resource wealth, which aligns with Trump’s foreign policy goals.

Ukraine wouldn’t be left completely in the lurch, however, since other smaller rare earth mineral deposits&nbsp, still remain&nbsp, under its control. These could be given to the US in exchange for continued military aid, even if the latter is curtailed compared to its height under the Biden administration in the run-up to summer 2023 ‘s&nbsp, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/12/04/ukraine-counteroffensive-us-planning-russia-war/”>ultimately&nbsp, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/12/04/ukraine-counteroffensive-stalled-russia-war-defenses/”>doomed&nbsp, counteroffensive.

Zelensky would have no choice but to accept this deal if Trump and Putin reached an agreement regarding the deposits in Russia.

Zelensky would only end up with whatever the cost-conscious Trump administration determines is the lowest level the US believes Ukraine needs to maintain the peace, far from the full military support he anticipated to receive in order to regain those lost deposits.

This is the best outcome for those on all sides who truly want peace, but it will require significant political will from both the US and Russia, as well as the US’s coercing Ukraine into agreeing, none of which can be guaranteed at this time.

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

No, Australia isn’t immune to Trump trade war pain – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

US President Donald Trump has halted his threatening 25 % tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico in a busy 24 hours of trade diplomacy, while retaining 10 % tariffs on imports from China.

A temporary relief has been granted to American businesses operating in Canada or Mexico, like as Rio Tinto, whose American operations export billions of dollars worth of aluminum to the US. However, businesses that import to our largest buying spouse may be affected by the risk of weaker economic growth in China.

And Trump has hinted all US imports of&nbsp, aluminum and copper, including from Australia, may be his next destination. Treasurer Jim Chalmers stated on February 4 that while Australia is at risk from rising industry tensions,” we are really well-placed to explore them.”

However, even if Australia manages to stay out of Trump’s places, Australians may hope to come out of a business war unharmed. It is difficult to determine exactly how Australia would be impacted by the complexity of global supply chains, but here are a few important factors that are likely to enjoy.

About 40 % of Australia’s exports go to China, making it the biggest target by way, according to statistics for 2023 from UN Comtrade. The majority of this is used in China’s manufacturing and construction sectors, where American iron ore is used.

Trump’s tariffs will further slow China’s market, which will lessen demand for goods it purchases from Australia.

If China’s need for iron iron falls drastically, this will not only harm the Australian mining field, but it also may cause a fall in the American dollar, making the things Australians buy from overseas more expensive.

However, it’s still to be seen how much China’s most recent tariffs will have an effect. The second Trump administration’s taxes have already been absorbed by China, and his most recent enhance is much less expensive than his original proposal of 60 %.

Trade escape

The one good side of US tariffs on other nations is that they may make some American exports more economical because they raise the cost of those nations ‘ export to the US.

This is something economics call industry escape. For instance, metal produced in Australia would have benefited from the tariffs placed on French aluminium.

Because there isn’t much overlap between the goods that China and Australia export to the US, the taxes on China may largely distract industry to Australia.

But China’s punitive taxes could make a significant impact. During Trump’s first word, China reacted to US tariffs by imposing taxes on American grains and other agricultural products. This time around, a similar action might open up a gap for American farmers to fill in the gap.

But it is not all great information. In other nations, US exports that have been diverted from the Chinese market does compete with Asian products. But, while American grains may become more aggressive in China, US grains may remove Australia’s in the Philippines.

Taxes even have a tendency to increase the country’s currency because they lower the demand for goods in foreign currencies.

The American dollar, on the other hand, weakened, which dropped to a five-year small following the tariffs ‘ inauguration. The dollar has now fallen almost 10 % since November.

Repeatedly, this raises the cost of goods to Australia, which was raise inflation.

Network disturbance

The biggest impact will be the supply chain disruption that will result from the taxes on Canada and Mexico being confirmed in 30 days.

According to analyses of the levies Trump imposed on China in 2018, US companies that use imported sources accounted for the majority of the cost.

The impact of taxes on Canada and Mexico will be much more detrimental to all North American producers because North American generation networks are so tightly integrated, and they have been for decades.

The issue is not just that auto prices will rise, but that significant disruptions could result from the tariffs if essential middle suppliers, such as small but important intermediate suppliers, stop operating.

Finally, firms will create substitute supply chains, but the short-run problems could be substantial.

This could lead to higher prices and supply disruptions for Australians, not just for the goods we purchase from the US but also for anything that relies on a North American dealer at any point in the production process.

We are also experiencing the effects of Covid’s supply chain disruptions, such as the rise in inflation in 2021 and 2022 and the resulting high interest rates and world opposition to the main political parties. That includes Donald Trump’s returning to the Oval Office.

If this conflict turns into a significant global trade war, there might be other problems. Even if Trump’s promised tariffs not truly materialize, we may still see the same effects on a smaller size because the&nbsp, trade policy uncertainty&nbsp, from just the threat of a trade war has similar effects on the firm exercise as true tariffs.

Whatever happens, even if Australia can escape direct involvement in a trade war, it cannot escape the shockwaves that reverberate through the world economy. The question is whether it will be a tsunami or a ripple.

Scott French is senior lecturer in economics, UNSW Sydney

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

Continue Reading

How China is playing to win Trump’s trade war – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Some people in Tokyo anticipated Donald Trump’s self-control toward China this year.

While rival China avoided paying only 10 % of tariffs, North American allies Canada and Mexico are currently considering 25 %. Beijing politicians, who were feared the worst when Trump 2.0 hit the ground running, are no more surprising.

True, Ottawa and Mexico City managed to secure 30-day disruptions. But the taxes are coming. Trump didn’t stop the two countries from achieving their multi-decade aim of sticking it to nations he thinks mooch off of America because of their pledges to soften border security.

Xi Jinping’s more laid-back answer so much, by contrast, suggests China’s chief is keeping his hostile options available — and his flour clean.

Beijing did reveal a more restricted 15 % tax on certain kinds of fuel and liquefied natural gas, and a 10 % duty on crude oil, agricultural technology, large-displacement vehicles and pickup trucks. However, longer-lasting retaliation is still a possibility.

As the US president quickly extends his world pleasant, Xi has every reason to believe he already has the upper palm over Trump on a number of fronts.

According to Kelvin Wong, senior researcher at trading OANDA,” The Trade War 2.0 may lead to a downturn narrative because it involves not just US-China industry but also with other significant buying partners.”

Tony Sycamore, market analyst at IG Australia, thinks the chaos has only just begun.

The overnight lifting of tariffs on Mexico rekindles the cycle that has begun: calls and negotiations, declarations of victory, and then a new cycle, according to Sycamore. ” Ultimately the path leads to higher tariffs, slower growth, higher inflation and less certainty for risk takers and equities”.

For one thing, the goodwill is gone. Trump’s revenge tour is in full swing, as evidenced by his hard-hitting of Canada and Mexico.

Trump’s assault on the World Trade Organization order won’t soon be forgotten. And Trump has little faith in his actions given the speed with which he threatened to devastate Colombia’s economy with a minor diplomatic blunder.

For one, Xi is aware that, for the first time since Trump entered the White House, China is no longer dependent on the US. As Carlos&nbsp, Casanova, economist at Union Bancaire Privée, points out, the impact of Trump’s tariffs is “manageable” for China so far.

” US exports account for only 3 % of]China’s ] GDP, compared to 15 % for the rest of the world”, Casanova says. Devaluation, he adds, “wouldn’t significantly improve trade terms while potentially causing tensions with other trading partners in Europe and Asia.”

Instead, according to Casanova,” China is likely to use a combination of deflationary measures and tax exemptions to offset the impact of expected tariffs, much like what we saw during the first trade war.” China’s trade ministry announced plans to file a case with the World Trade Organization and pledged to use unnamed” corresponding countermeasures” to defend its rights and interests.

Beijing believes that Trump is giving it the moral high ground, which fuels this latter instinct.

China stepped up efforts to present itself as the more stable and predictable power back in November, following Trump’s victory in the election, the keeper of the rules-based global order that Washington had turned against.

Team Xi has consistently defended China as the protector of free trade, globalization, and multilateral institutions. On November 15, for example, Xi declared that China stands ready to protect the “interdependent world” from” severe challenges” as a “new period of turbulence and change” approaches.

Then there’s the inflationary potential of what Trump is doing, warns Mohit Kumar, an economist at Jefferies. His tariffs and counter-tariffs” will be inflationary” while leading to “weaker growth prospects” and proving “negative for equities”.

All this has Asia rethinking ties to Washington.

In Seoul, where the political system is in abject chaos, officials are viewing Beijing with renewed affection. Ditto for Japan’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party. After months of trying, the LDP only recently gets some Trump facetime for Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba.

Xi’s inner circle is clearly worried about the 60 % tariffs Trump has threatened. And odds are, taxes of that magnitude are coming, regardless of what Trump’s inner circle is signaling today. &nbsp,

The kind way of explaining what’s afoot in Trumpworld is that a deliberate, well-calibrated strategy is unfolding. The arrival of Canada and Mexico allows for yet another reboot of the North American Free Trade Agreement ( NAFTA ).

That, in theory, enables Trump to consolidate power in America’s historic sphere of economic influence, reshaping supply chains closer to home and encouraging migrants to stay at home.

While this recalibration unfolds, Team Trump can prepare to aim Washington’s full financial arsenal at China. Admittedly, this affords Trump’s team the benefit of the doubt on many levels that it hasn’t earned.

If personnel is really what matters, then Xi’s Communist Party should be concerned about the characters with whom Trump 2.0 is surrounded by.

An American government doesn’t entrust economic policy decisions to Peter&nbsp, Navarro and Robert Lighthizer acolyte&nbsp, Jamieson Greer&nbsp, if a “grand bargain” trade deal with China is a top priority.

The same goes for the anti-China foreign policy team Trump assembled. If forging a more productive China relationship is the main goal, the White House doesn’t hire Marco Rubio, Mike Waltz, John Ratcliffe, or Pete Hegseth.

Case in point: Ratcliffe’s first act as CIA director was to amplify the theory that Covid-19&nbsp, most likely&nbsp, started in a Chinese lab, not randomly in a wet market. It offers a glimpse into the mindset of Trump’s inner circle.

Even the cabinet hires are perceived as being less MAGA-ish than most people are learning their Trumpian talking points at the same time. Look no further than Scott Bessent, Trump’s Treasury secretary, accusing Beijing of flooding the globe with cheap goods to finance its military ambitions.

The hedge fund&nbsp, billionaire claims that China has” the most imbalanced economy in the history of the world” and that it might be suffering a” severe recession/depression“. If so, wouldn’t he be advising Trump not to kick a US$ 18 trillion economy&nbsp, when he supposedly thinks it’s on the verge of collapse?

Not that it would help. Trump has said that Asia is squandering American jobs and wealth, and that this should be stopped. His most consistent geopolitical position has been over the years. Back then, Japan was cast in the role of boogeymen, a nemesis that the” Tariff Man” superhero of Trump’s imagination sought to avenge.

The mid-1980s zeitgeist had Hollywood churning out films like&nbsp, Gung&nbsp, Ho. The film, which stars Michael Keaton, explored how Detroit auto workers were being abused by Japan Inc. It was a period that Michael&nbsp, Crichton immortalized in his best-selling novel” Rising Sun” .&nbsp,

That was at the height of Japan’s “bubble economy” era, a time when academics like Harvard University’s Ezra&nbsp, Vogel, author of” Japan As Number One — Lessons for America”, characterized Tokyo as an unstoppable economic force.

Washington pulled off the” Plaza Accord” currency deal to slam the dollar against a New York hotel that Trump had previously owned.

At the time, New York property mogul Trump was a regular on daytime talk shows complaining Japan had” systematically&nbsp, sucked the blood out of America&nbsp, – sucked the blood out! They have gotten away with murder. They ultimately prevailed in the war.

Today, China inhabits this role. It’s more complicated, though, given Trump’s oft-articulated affection for Xi. On January 23, for example, Trump said” I like President Xi very much. I’ve always liked him”. Trump added that he’s “always had a great relationship” with China’s strongest leader since Mao Zedong.

Yet Trump and Xi seem on a collision course, nonetheless. Xi has shown little inclination to bow before Trump after a dozen years in charge.

According to reports, China is actually developing an opening offer for trade talks. However, according to The Wall Street Journal and others, the majority of the items involve reviving the” Phase 1″ agreement Trump and Xi signed in 2020. That won’t satisfy Trump, who’s expecting big market-access wins.

China also has a greater opportunity to retaliate than it did for the first time since Trump entered the White House in 2017. Greater scope, too, than Japan had back in the 1980s.

Of course, China worries greatly about Trump’s 60 % tariff threat. According to UBS economists, taxes of that size will cut China’s annual growth by more than half, shaving 2.5 percentage points from its gross domestic product ( GDP ).

Nevertheless, Xi might edict a similar strategy from Canada and direct attacks against Trump-supporting red states. For example, China could exact great pain by altering agricultural purchases. And by taxing mainland goods sourced by Amazon, Costco, Target and Walmart.

China might levy surcharges on well-known American businesses, including Starbucks and Boeing. Or China could meddle with Apple, Microsoft, Nike and other household name companies.

Could Musk find himself in harm’s way? Musk’s Shanghai “gigafactory” is a major producer of electric vehicles going to third countries in addition to producing electric vehicles for China, which currently accounts for more than a third of Tesla sales.

For now, though, no one really knows what to expect from Trump.

According to Goldman Sachs strategist David Kostin,” These announcements have come as a shock to many investors who anticipated tariffs would only be imposed if trade negotiations failed.” Although the outlook is uncertain, our economists believe there is a good chance that the tariffs will be temporary, respectively.

The “macro-wise, we think the immediate channel where Asian equities might be impacted is is… a potentially higher US dollar,” Nomura Holdings strategists write in a note. We also think that investors are likely to consider which industries or regions in China might be more susceptible to these tariffs.

Yet only Trump and the China skeptics in his circle can be certain. &nbsp, This is leaving global markets in suspense in ways that might play into China’s hands.

Follow William Pesek on X at @WilliamPesek

Continue Reading

ERAM: US Air Force’s next-gen drone killer or big-time boondoggle? – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The US Air Force is developing a low-cost cruise missile known as the Extended Range Attack Munition ( ERAM ), which could evolve into an air-launched counter-drone weapon, The War Zone reported. In the device war time, it’s unclear whether the tool will be a master of none or a jack-of-all-trades.

The ERAM program, launched to meet the needs of the Ukrainian military, explores various modular subsystems, including the Fixed Wing Air-Launched Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems Ordnance ( FALCO ). The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center’s Armament Directorate, based at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, is overseeing the task.

The ERAM, presently in Phase 1 of creation, aims to create a 226-kilogram detail weapons with a range of up to 400 meters and the ability to work in GPS-degraded conditions.

The FALCO subsystem, intended for counter-unmanned aerial system (C-UAS ) roles, could be integrated into future ERAM variants. The US Air Force’s emphasis on more reasonably priced air-to-air capabilities comes from the need to combat drones and hypersonic cruise missiles in the modern war era. &nbsp,

The ERAM’s ability as an air-to-air fighter with a 400-kilometer range may provide a major advantage, particularly against less responsive targets. With the corresponding upgrades, it could be an ideal loitering munition for aerial anti-access/area denial ( A2/AD ) against drones and cruise missiles.

This development coincides with US military initiatives to promote faster production of new weapons and address issues about supplies of ammunition, especially given the Red Sea procedures against Houthis and keeping Ukraine engaged in Russian combat. Both war have demonstrated a pressing need for affordable, mass-produced ships to stop drone and missile concentration attacks. &nbsp,

As an air-to-air weapons with the FALCO structure, the ERAM may provide a cost-effective option for countering robots and slow-moving airborne threats. The 2023 shootdown of an alleged Chinese spy bubble over the US illustrates that have, as using a US$ 472, 000 AIM-9X Sidewinder air-to-air weapon against such goals is financially unstable.

The ERAM’s expanded selection of 400 meters also gives it an edge over traditional air-to-air weapons. For instance, the AIM-9X has a range of more than 16 kilometers while the AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile ( AMRAAM ) has an estimated maximum range of 55 kilometers.

But, as the ERAM was originally designed as an air-to-ground weapons, its success may be limited against fast-moving drones with ambiguous capabilities and cunning systems.

One such instance is China’s WZ-8 air-launched helicopter. Launched from an H-6M proper fighter, the WZ-8 may sail 48, 000 feet at Mach 6. Probably designed to track US ship battlegroups, the WZ-8 provides a tough target to hit.

Additionally, China’s GJ-11 Sharp Sword cunning aircraft is a flying-wing style similar to the US B-2 Spirit and B-21 Raider stealth bombers, enabling it to slide past air defenses and attack corporate targets with air-to-surface missiles or bright bombs.

These developments highlight the ERAM-designed drone threats’ increasing sophistication.

However, ERAM’s reliance on networked kill webs for targeting is a potential vulnerability. The War Zone report notes that these kill webs rely on a variety of outside-the-box data sources for guidance, which raises questions about interoperability and susceptibility to electronic warfare.

The US could conceivably strike various targets with a single munition type, simplifying production and logistics while reducing the need for multiple specialized weapons because the ERAM could be modified to attack air, sea, and land targets.

Seth Jones for the Center for Strategic and International Studies ( CSIS ) writes that the high cost and lengthy production times for some US missiles, such as those for the US’s two-year Tomahawk Block V and the US’s$ 3.2 million Patriot PAC-3, raise questions about the ability of the US defense industry base to support the prodigious need for precision-guided munitions in a war against a near-peer adversary. This situation makes a low-cost, mass-production solution such as ERAM necessary.

ERAM’s multi-role design may lead to trade-offs, making it a jack-of-all-trades but a master of none. A missile that is too slow to penetrate contemporary air defense systems due to the design’s lack of maneuverability to hit maneuvering targets. Its warhead may also be too small to destroy large or fortified targets, and its range may be too limited for stand-off attacks on enemy A2/AD systems.

Along with other similar projects like the US Navy’s Multi-Mission Affordable Capacity Effector ( MACE), the introduction of yet another low-cost, multipurpose weapon project like ERAM risks diverting US attention and funding from the development of more capable weapons that are essential for a conflict with a close-knit adversary.

Such weapons include the Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile ( LRASM), Maritime Strike Tomahawk ( MST ), and Naval Strike Missile ( NSM) to replace the Cold War-era Harpoon. These would be critical in a potential conflict with China, which already has the world’s largest navy in terms of ship numbers, with over 370 ships and submarines and 140 major surface combatants, as per the US Department of Defense’s 2024 China Military Power report.

Dmitry Filipoff mentions in a February 2023 article for the Center for International Maritime Security ( CIMSEC ) that the ranges of the LRASM, MST, and NSM, at 563, 1, 600, and 185 kilometers respectively, trump those of the Harpoon, at only 128 kilometers for the most common variants.

Filipoff points out that the LRASM and NSM’s low procurement rate and lack of suitable launch platforms, the NSM’s short range and small warhead in comparison to the LRASM and MST, the limited MST kits, and the slow transition to the MST configuration could hinder US firepower in a near-peer conflict with China.

Moreover, the LRASM, MST and NSM are subsonic missiles, which may be limited in effectiveness against China’s newer air defense systems, such as the HQ-9B, designed to shoot down such threats. Due to these restrictions, it is necessary for the US to expand its hypersonic weapons arsenal.

The US needs to compete with China and Russia in the field of hypersonic weapons. A hypersonic weapon has not yet been used in active service by the US. In contrast, Russia has used the Kinzhal and Tsirkon hypersonic weapons in the ongoing Ukraine war while China has fielded the DF-17 hypersonic missile to attack US carrier battlegroups and Pacific bases since 2019.

While the ERAM promises versatility and cost-effectiveness, its success hinges on whether it can deliver lethal precision or become another overextended, underwhelming multi-role missile.

Continue Reading

Japan searching for a quiet place in Trumpworld – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

In the post-apocalyptic dread film” A Quiet Place,” individuals attempt to avoid blind alien invaders who have an acute sense of hearing by remaining totally silent. Japan now, facing the return of Donald Trump to the White House, even hopes to avoid the creature’s interest.

Being proactive is the best course of action for us, says Tokyo University researcher Sahashi Ryo, a renowned authority on South Asian international politics.

A previous senior American official with extensive experience in Japan advised close friends to urge Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba to do the same, yet advising him to refrain from making a rushy visit to Washington. However, the prime minister will join Trump at the White House on February 7 after making a choice to walk on the way of harm.

Ishiba does not want to meet the growing list of American friends who have made it on to Trump’s objective record – headed by Canada and Mexico, but including Panama, Denmark and, indeed, the whole European Union.

The most recent arguing over taxes between China and Canada seems to support the notion that Trump had merely use them as a bargaining chip.

However, it is obvious from Trump’s own repeated remarks that tariffs are used as a means of rebalancing the global market and bringing manufacturing back to the United States.

Whatever Trump’s purpose, Ishiba comes bearing the common tray of gifts. It is a well-crafted bundle of services designed to calm the lion and keep his wildly swinging sensor from veering away from his well-crafted bundle of choices, which includes more buys of American defense equipment as part of Japan’s security development program.

He is likely to steer clear of the contentious issue of Nippon Steel’s choice to halt Nippon Steel’s purchase of US Steel while pointing to the success of Chinese investment in boosting US manufacturing jobs.

Ishiba has indicated that he does not foresee soft operations in Washington. Ishiba responded to reporters by asking how he might respond to requests for even more protection funding, saying it was probable that 2 % of GDP, but that Japan would have to make the decision, not the US.

Ishiba pledged to enhance the US-Japan ally in a brief statement to a worldwide speech held last week at the Foreign Ministry think container, Japan Institute for International Affairs. But he immediately added that he planned to “engage in truthful conversation” in Washington, political code thoughts for a less than nice meeting.

Ishiba is aware of how uneasy a marriage former prime minister Shinzo Abe and Trump could be. When Japan arrives, the British chief frequently refers to the late Abe, but he will quickly discover that the new Asian leader is not just another extension of Abe.

” Ishiba’s design goes counter to that of Abe– he is certainly a flatterer”, says Richard Dyck, Tokyo-based chairman of Japan Industrial Partners, who has been part of a research group attended constantly by Ishiba.

Price war have already started.

A former senior Japanese official who was actively engaged in conversations with the first Trump administration responded with the phrase “tariffs” when asked what would be the greatest effect of a Trump administration on Japan.

Japan, thus far, has not been on Trump’s tax list. The European Union is next in line, and the taxes on Mexico and Canada are only for one month. The 10 % tax imposed on China may even lead to some kind of dialogue. However, if those pauses turn out to be temporary, Japan did de facto fall prey to Trump’s growing economic war.

The cross-border taxes would essentially destroy the US-Mexico-Canada business agreement that was negotiated during Trump’s first name. In order to create a seamless offer string in North America, Chinese companies have set up lots of companies in both Mexico and Canada. Some 1, 300 Chinese companies operate in Mexico only.

The automobile industry would be the first to experience the effects of these taxes, not just Chinese companies but also US and Korean ones, all of which run factories in both Canada and Mexico to arrange vehicles for US exports and provide the essential auto parts that go to US factories. Nissan alone exported 326, 000 vehicles to the US from Mexico.

In addition to the already imposed tariffs against China, the tariffs against China will also have an impact on Japanese businesses that export from China. Of course, a growing trade war with China would have more severe effects on Chinese growth and harm Japanese companies that make products for the Chinese market.

China – is there a G2 to come?

In some circles in Tokyo, there is a hope, echoed by American policymakers, that Japan’s role as an anchor in an anti-China confrontation will ensure that it remains off the Trump list of bad actors.

In the Trump administration, traditional conservatives like Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Michael Waltz, who have hawkish views of China, are in charge.

In that framework of confrontation, the US may look to strengthen security ties with Japan and other partners in the region, Randall Schriver, a former defense official in the first Trump administration, predicted while speaking to the JIIA gathering last week.

Others are concerned that Trump might opt out of a new” G2″ with China that effectively excludes Japan and instead chooses to engage in some “grand bargain” with Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

However, most experts dismiss that worry. According to Thomas Fingar, a Stanford scholar and former senior US intelligence official,” the risk of that is pretty low.” The Chinese” will be delighted to have him there” if Trump wants to visit China to see Xi. As for Trump, he” will go because it will be a great personal triumph”.

However, the two main problems on the table are those relating to technology competition and market access. Fingar tells Toyo Keizai that the tech billionaires want access to China that is difficult for the Chinese to provide.

” Even if Trump and Xi meet, it is not the start of G2″, agrees Tokyo University expert Sahashi. ” Military-strategic competition will continue”.

Ishiba’s own China card

Prime Minister Ishiba is already making a very different move: a concerted effort to improve relations with China and the rest of Asia, particularly South Korea and important Southeast Asian nations, to lessen the negative effects of Trump’s return and the escalation of global economic conflict.

Ishiba’s approach to defense policy is more focused on the importance of strengthening Japan’s ability to defend itself than on the needs of the US alliance. His support for an Asian NATO has been misinterpreted by many as further subordination to American strategic objectives. Instead, the goal is to create a “multi-layered security system for Asia,” as Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya stated in a recent issue of the monthly Bungei Shunju.

Ishiba passionately addressed the audience at the Global Dialogue about how Japan needed to conduct a thorough investigation of the country’s decision to go to war and Japan’s defeat. &nbsp,

” It is time for us to revisit and review the war experience”, he said. He demanded that Japan comprehend “how to position itself in the world to bring about greater peace.”

There is a comparable interest in China, observes Stanford scholar Fingar, the former US deputy director of national intelligence. China has been reaching out to Japan, particularly, and to Europe and others, seeking to repair the damage done by its alliance with Russia and Vladimir Putin.

” The Chinese smile diplomacy is partly due to fear of being isolated,” Fingar told Toyo Keizai”. They have buyers ‘ regrets as a result of collaborating with Moscow,” with growing criticism within China that it has not been a good deal.” But China is also motivated by its own interests.

Because it will benefit a domestic audience, the Chinese want to boost relations. If you can divide Japan from the Americans, it may raise questions about the Americans ‘ dependability. But the big motivation is China’s economy. For strategic reasons, they don’t need friendly relations with Japan; instead, they need Japan to continue to contribute to the Chinese economy.

The upcoming months will serve as a test of how far China is prepared to go in order to truly strengthen ties with Japan. We need some action from their side, Sahashi says, including taking immediate steps to stop economic coercion, safeguard Japanese citizens and investors, and ease their military repression of the Senkaku islands and the East China Sea.

Tokyo and Beijing will likely be encouraged to go down this path by the summit in Washington this week and the newly started trade war. But in order not to openly challenge the monster, it will be done quietly.

Daniel Sneider is a former Christian Science Monitor foreign correspondent and a lecturer on international policy at Stanford University. &nbsp, This article&nbsp, was originally published by Toyo Keizai and is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

A thirst for power: China’s water grid shapes its future – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

China’s subsequent approval of a large hydropower dam has received a lot of media attention, but little has been written about the nation’s following significant water management strategy, which is the creation of a national water grid.

Will it become the long-awaited alternative to the region’s water problems, or is it another optimistic walk destined to work clean?

In many ways, China’s story is shaped by its connection with fluids. Its creek systems, geography, and hydraulic conditions have played an important role in the government’s advancement.

Assisting frequently point out that these problems were essential to the development of China, the Chinese culture, and the Chinese individuals. This long-standing relationship between China and its waters serves as the context for understanding the country’s contemporary liquid management issues.

Water is a significant tool and a symbol of strength in Chinese history. The role that water plays in maintaining political security has long been understood by Chinese leaders. Yu the Great of the Xia Dynasty, who is said to have tamed the Yellow River, is credited with over 4, 000 decades in this regard.

More recently, water leadership has remained key to China’s development objectives, as evidenced by Chinese President Xi Jinping’s “ecological society” idea and a reserve he published on ocean governance.

The design of a nationwide water network is the most recent development in China’s water management. This initiative aims to promote more equitable access to water across the nation and tackle water shortage in northern China. The national water grid system known as the sanzhong siheng is connected to the South-North Water Transfer Project ( SNWTP).

” Sanzhong” refers to the SNWTP’s three routes:

  • the northeast route, via the Beijing-Hangzhou Grand Canal,
  • the mid way, from the Danjiangkou Reservoir in Hubei to Beijing and Tianjin, and
  • the questionable northern road.

” Siheng” refers to the four eastern-flowing river: Haihe, Yellow, Huaihe and Yangtze.

Onw essential part of the three” sanzhong” – the eastern route – has not yet been built. The eastern route is still in the planning stages despite the construction of the middle and eastern routes.

The Qinghai-Tibet Plateau will serve as the eastern route’s main channel for the 17 billion cubic meters of water that will flow from the Yangtze River to the Upper Yellow River each year. However, the size and complexity of this equipment project make it unlikely that it will be completed, adding a threat to the entire strategy.

The purpose of the ocean network is to address China’s essential water challenges. Despite holding around 6 percent of the nation’s water resources, &nbsp, the country now faces major water challenges mainly due to water quality concerns, inconsistent water distribution, and a per capita water availability below world average.

These problems are worsened by competing liquid needs from industrialisation, agricultural demands and quick urbanization.

The country’s national water network has issues and implications for China. It truly reflects Beijing’s rely on large-scale infrastructure projects to resolve water issues.

This engineering-driven technique, rooted in Chairman Mao Zedong’s conviction that “man must destroy nature”, has led China to undertake on more than 100 escape jobs in the past century alone. Although these projects represent a concerted effort to address water scarcity, they also highlight the drawbacks of relying solely on engineering to solve complex environmental issues.

Concurrently, China’s national water grid aims to further secure the water supply to the northern region.

The Chinese central government’s solution to the region’s water scarcity – &nbsp, large-scale hydro-engineering projects– has reshaped water distribution, easing scarcity in northern China. But has come at a high price. The North China Plain’s water supply is dependent on the SNWTP.

For example, Beijing, which remains vulnerable to drought, sources over 70 percent of the city’s water from this inter-basin transfer project. &nbsp,

Such reliance on a single source poses risks to long-term water security, especially when climatic or infrastructure changes become unpredictable. In light of this, the national water grid can support the efforts being made to supply this rapidly industrialized and urbanized arid region with water.

Major challenges remain. Climate change impacts – in particular, severe and disruptive extreme weather events– are one of the biggest concerns. Estimates predict that China’s efforts to manage the national grid effectively will cost over US$ 47 billion annually. The national water grid’s resilience will likely need more frequent adjustments as a result of climate change.

Equally concerning is the question of financing. It’s unclear how China will finance such ambitious infrastructure projects because local governments are caught in a vicious cycle of high debt, declining revenues, and government debt projected to account for nearly 150 percent of GDP by 2030.

The continued focus on supply-side solutions, particularly via engineering projects to redistribute water, is another major concern. This approach can lead to unintended consequences, such as water shortages downstream from diversion projects.

Water in the downstream Han River has been reduced as a result of the Danjiangkou Reservoir’s transfer of water to the north. These difficulties highlight the limitations of concentrating solely on supply-side measures without considering issues relating to water efficiency or consumption.

Beijing should think about adopting a more balanced approach to ensure a resilient water management system as well as investing in demand-side initiatives to increase water efficiency and reduce consumption. By balancing supply-side solutions with demand-side measures, China can create a more sustainable and resilient water management system.

A comprehensive strategy that addresses both supply and demand issues is required in addition to the national water grid, which is a bold step toward securing China’s water future. Only then can the nation effectively conserve its water resources.

Genevieve Donnellon-May is a researcher at Oxford Global Society and a fellow at the Indo-Pacific Studies Center. She was chosen as a young leader for the 2023 Pacific Forum and serves on the Modern Diplomacy advisory board.

Continue Reading

Trump’s Project 2025 agenda caps decades-long resistance to reform – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

For much of the 20th century, efforts to remake government were driven by a progressive desire to make the government work for regular Americans, including the New Deal and the Great Society reforms.

Those efforts met a conservative backlash seeking to rein in government as a source of security for working Americans and realign it with the interests of private business. That backlash is the central thread of the Heritage Foundation’s “Project 2025” blueprint for a second Trump Administration.

Alternatively disavowed and embraced by President Donald Trump during his 2024 campaign, Project 2025 is a collection of conservative policy proposals – many written by veterans of his first administration. It echoes similar projects, both liberal and conservative, setting out a bold agenda for a new administration.

But Project 2025 does so with particular detail and urgency, hoping to galvanize dramatic change before the midterm elections in 2026. As its foreword warns: “Conservatives have just two years and one shot to get this right.”

The standard for a transformational “100 days” – a much-used reference point for evaluating an administration – belongs to the first administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

A smiling man in a light-colored suit signs papers at a table, surrounded by about a dozen people.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt signs the Social Security Bill in Washington on Aug. 14, 1935. Photo: Wikipedia

Social reforms and FDR

In 1933, in the depths of the Great Depression, Roosevelt faced a nation in which business activity had stalled, nearly a third of the workforce was unemployed, and economic misery and unrest were widespread.

But Roosevelt’s so-called “New Deal” unfolded less as a grand plan to combat the Depression than as a scramble of policy experimentation.

Roosevelt did not campaign on what would become the New Deal’s singular achievements, which included expansive relief programs, subsidies for farmers, financial reforms, the Social Security system, the minimum wage and federal protection of workers’ rights.

Those achievements came haltingly after two years of frustrated or ineffective policymaking. And those achievements rested less on Roosevelt’s political vision than on the political mobilization and demands made by American workers.

A generation later, another wave of social reforms unfolded in similar fashion. This time it was not general economic misery that spurred actions, but the persistence of inequality – especially racial inequality – in an otherwise prosperous time.

LBJ’s Great Society

President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society programs declared a war on poverty and, toward that end, introduced a raft of new federal initiatives in urban affairs, education and civil rights.

These included the provision of medical care for the poor and older people via Medicaid and Medicare, a dramatic expansion of federal aid for K-12 education, and landmark voting rights and civil rights legislation.

As with the New Deal, the substance of these policies rested less with national policy designs than with the aspirations and mobilization of the era’s social movements.

Resistance to policy change

Since the 1930s, conservative policy agendas have largely taken the form of reactions to the New Deal and the Great Society.

The central message has routinely been that “big government” has overstepped its bounds and trampled individual rights, and that the architects of those reforms are not just misguided but treasonous. Project 2025, in this respect, promises not just a political right turn but to “defeat the anti-American left.”

After the 1946 midterm elections, congressional Republicans struck back at the New Deal. Drawing on business opposition to the New Deal, popular discontent with postwar inflation, and common cause with Southern Democrats, they stemmed efforts to expand the New Deal, gutting a full employment proposal and defeating national health insurance.

They struck back at organized labor with the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act, which undercut federal law by allowing states to pass anti-union “right to work” laws. And they launched an infamous anti-communist purge of the civil service, which forced nearly 15,000 people out of government jobs.

Lewis F. Powerll, Jr., pictured as a US Supreme Court justice. Photo: Wikipedia

In 1971, the US Chamber of Commerce commissioned Lewis F. Powell, Jr. – who would be appointed by Republican President Richard Nixon to the Supreme Court the next year – to assess the political landscape. Powell’s memorandum characterized the political climate at the dawn of the 1970s – including both Great Society programs and the anti-war and Civil Rights movements of the 1960s – as nothing less than an “attack on the free enterprise system.” In a preview of then-current US politics, Powell’s memorandum disparaged a disquieting “chorus of criticism” coming from “the perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences and from politicians.”

Powell characterized the social policies of the New Deal and Great Society as “socialism or some sort of statism” and advocated the elevation of business interests and business priorities to the center of American political life.

Building a conservative infrastructure

Powell captured the conservative zeitgeist at the onset of what would become a long and decisive right turn in American politics. More importantly, it helped galvanize the creation of a conservative infrastructure – in the courts, in the policy world, in universities and in the media – to push back against that “chorus of criticism.”

This political shift would yield an array of organizations and initiatives, including the political mobilization of business, best represented by thePresident Franklin D. Roosevelt signs the Social Security Bill in Washington on Aug. 14, 1935.emergence of the Koch brothers and the powerful libertarian conservative political advocacy group they founded, known as Americans for Prosperity.

Charles and David Koch (L-R). Image: SourceWatch

The shift also yielded a new wave of conservative voices on radio and television and a raft of right-wing policy shops and think tanks – including the Heritage Foundation, creator of Project 2025. In national politics, the conservative resurgence achieved full expression in President Ronald Reagan’s 1980 campaign. The “Reagan Revolution” united economic and social conservatives around the central goal of dismantling what was left of the New Deal and Great Society.

Powell’s triumph was evident across the policy landscape. Reagan gutted social programs, declared war on organized labor, pared back economic and social regulations – or declined to enforce them – and slashed taxes on business and the wealthy.

Publicly, the Reagan administration argued that tax cuts would pay for themselves, with the lower rates offset by economic growth. Privately, it didn’t matter: Either growth would sustain revenues, or the resulting budgetary hole could be used to “starve the beast” and justify further program cuts.

Reagan’s vision, and its shaky fiscal logic, were reasserted in the “Contract with America” proposed by congressional Republicans after their gains in the 1994 midterm elections.

This declaration of principles proposed deep cuts to social programs alongside tax breaks for business. It was perhaps most notable for encouraging the Clinton administration to pass the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996, “ending welfare as we know it,” as Clinton promised.

Aiming at the ‘deep state’

The published report. Photo: Project 2025

Project 2025, the latest in this series of blueprints for dramatic change, draws most deeply on two of those plans.

As in the congressional purges of 1940s, it takes aim not just at policy but at the civil servants – Trump’s “deep state” – who administer it.

In the wake of World War II, the charge was that feckless bureaucrats served Soviet masters. Today, Project 2025 aims to “bring the Administrative State to heel, and in the process defang and defund the woke culture warriors who have infiltrated every last institution in America.”

As in the 1971 Powell memorandum, Project 2025 promises to mobilize business power; to “champion the dynamic genius of free enterprise against the grim miseries of elite-directed socialism.”

Who has the power?

Whatever their source – party platforms, congressional bomb-throwers, think tanks, private interests – the success or failure of blueprints for change has rested not on their vision or popular appeal but on the political power that accompanied them.

The New Deal and Great Society gained momentum and meaning from the social movements that shaped their agendas and held them to account.

The lineage of conservative responses has been largely an assertion of business power. Whatever populist trappings the second Trump administration may possess, the bottom line of the conservative cultural and political agenda in 2025 is to dismantle what is left of the New Deal or the Great Society, and to defend unfettered “free enterprise” against critics and alternatives.

Colin Gordon is a professor of history at the University of Iowa.

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

Continue Reading

Xi’s China guarantees Asia-Pacific another year of rough sailing – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

WASHINGTON – The time 2024 was harsh and 2025 didn’t get any smoother. Depending on Xi Jinping, how difficult points get.

No matter the economic difficulties the People’s Republic of China ( PRC ) faces, he will continue to prosper and has a strong military behind him.

What does the PRC have PLANned?

Only focusing on Northeast Asia, Taiwan is in Xi’s sights. He has stated in public that he wants it, which indicates that he is putting his popularity on the line for it.

Taiwan will continue to be subject to military force. As well as subterfuge, spy, and the criticism KMT-controlled Congressional Yuan making life – and national security – difficult for President Lai Ching-te and the DPP management.

Does Xi invade Taiwan in 2025?

Simply he knows, but Xi may strike anytime he wants. One doesn’t think he’s two centuries from being able to do so.

As the Maritime Militia, the People’s Liberation Army, and the China Coast Guard work to possess more of the country’s sea area, there will be more instances of Chinese bullying.

Meanwhile in South Korea, pro-North Korea and pro-China ( and anti-American ) leftists are aiming to establish a one-party state. This long-term aim seems within reach.

This dynamical war is promoted and supported by China, which erodes the ROK-US alliance and causes division in South Korea’s free society.

The strengthened South Korea-Japan ties that President Yoon engineered are in difficulties.

Japan is also on Xi’s list

With an intention to prevent Japan from falling prey to Taiwan when the time comes to Taiwan, the PRC may start conducting activities around the Senkaku territories and elsewhere in the Nansei Shoto, Japan’s southern territories.

Around Japan, the Russians may be accumulating. Don’t believe Putin to be good in 2025.

Kim Jong Un in North Korea is on a roll thanks to Beijing and Moscow, as Tokyo is also aware.

Xi may enjoy the pro-China parts in Japan’s ruling school, suggesting there’s a deal to be cut.

This effective passive-aggressive actions. It detracts Japan from building a correct defence, which many Japanese leaders, not the least of which is Prime Minister Ishiba, fall for.

Before discussions begin in Lima, Peru, on November 15, 2024, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba ( L ) shake hands. Photo: Pool

Beyond Northeast Asia, Beijing continues to engage in political hostility throughout the Pacific Islands, and Beijing further insinuates itself into nearly every country and place in the Pacific, also British people.

It all resembles Japan in the 1920s and 1930s, with the aim of governing and excluding the Asia-Pacific place.

Xi won’t let up and will possibly turn up the heat everyday.

The only restrictions on Xi are Donald Trump and the Americans.

What about Washington?

Nobody in the Trump government frightened China’s Women’s Republic. But now they are gone.

Beijing isn’t sure what to think of Trump, but it did not like him very much the second time.

Then he’s talking about serious tariffs on Chinese imports, for example.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz have been considerate of the danger from the PRC for years. Beijing also slapped a&nbsp, go ban&nbsp, on then-Senator Rubio for talking about the CCP’s stilettoing of animal rights in China and beyond.

Rubio also did something a few decades ago that frightened Chinese communist command: He required the US Intelligence Community to&nbsp, report&nbsp, on the outside money of CCP leaders – inclluding Xi Jinping. The statement had been scheduled weeks earlier. The new management might want to force the intellect group to follow their orders.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is also calling for “peace through power” and&nbsp, called&nbsp, out” Communist China” by name.

However, at least one senior national at DOD is talking about” assistance circles” with the Chinese socialists. The idea is that the US will make a concession, such as reducing American troops in Asia-Pacific, and the Chinese will follow suit. Leading to a love-fest as each area outdoes the another.

This is the Biden administration’s spendthrift “modern financial idea” in terms of foreign policy, and it threatens to destroy the US placement in the Asia-Pacific by doing the same to the US economy over the past four years.

This writer recently heard a supposed senior DoD official saying that the US should not stand up for Taiwan because a defeat would have disastrous consequences. Others in the Trump presidency appear half-hearted, if that, about defending Taiwan from socialist servitude.

But, retreat in progress? Devil of a plan.

And there’s Elon Musk. He and Tesla are &nbsp, in sleep with&nbsp, the Chinese. Did he prevent the Administration from relying on the PRC? Anyone knows.

Image: ABC News / Jarrod Fankhouser

What does Trump mean for Japan?

Why believe the Americans aren’t around instead of worrying about it or asking Trump to fund US troops in Japan or question Japan to do something it doesn’t want to?

And therefore consider what Japan needs to do to stand together in defense. Japan won’t be able to control whatever. However, it did advance even further if pathologic dependence on Americans is used to support refraining from doing much.

Japan is trying to build security relations with all – Australia, Indonesia, Philippines, India and Italy, among people. This is great, but it matters little in terms of painful power. Just the Americans offer that, though.

Luckily for Tokyo, the Americans aren’t going anywhere.

Or at least I hope they’re no. The so-called “restrainers” in the Trump administration really might consider that forward-deployed US troops in Japan are unwanted and even confrontational.

Tokyo needs to pay close attention to this mindset in Washington.

But also remember, the American people ( and also parts of the US federal ) are far more willing to help those who help themselves.

So Tokyo ought to act like it’s on its own – while thanking God ( and Washington ) that it isn’t (yet ).

But get available today.

Instead of preparing for a war over Taiwan, the Chinese government is focusing on&nbsp, evacuating&nbsp, individuals from the Nansei Shoto in the event of problems.

War aren’t won by emergency.

Inquire Hawaii to take some war planners to Tokyo if they need some assistance figuring out what to do.

Have the Chinese ambassador set up a meeting with the secretary of state, the defence secretary, and the national security advisor and ask,” What do you need from us?” Simply tell us”.

The time 2025 is about five times late to ask this. But it’s best to do it right away. Tokyo does get 2026 is to late.

Grant Newsham is a former US minister and former US Marine agent. He is a colleague at the Yorktown Institute and the Center for Security Policy, and he served as the first Sea liaison officer with the Japan Self Defense Force. He is the author of the book, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/When-China-Attacks-Warning-America/dp/1684513650″>When China Attacks: A Warning To America.

The Sunday Guardian Live published this article for the first time. It is republished with authority.

Continue Reading