All the power in God-Emperor Elon Musk’s hands – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The US social structure was &nbsp, designed by its founders&nbsp, to have a system of checks and balances, so that no individual or organization would have total energy.

But that system was designed with only&nbsp, government&nbsp, leaders and&nbsp, government&nbsp, institutions in brain — although the founders did care about private individuals controlling the authorities, this wasn’t their primary focus, and they eventually ended up declining to throw institutions in place precisely to guard against financial power. &nbsp,

James Madison believed, for instance, that the governmental system of the US state was protection much against little cabals of rich oligarchs. In recent years, especially in the wake of the Supreme Court ‘s&nbsp, Citizens United&nbsp, choice, some have voiced concerns that the US has become an elite, where wealthy people are capable of buying power and influence — either by plan efforts, lobbying, or other means.

These issues came mostly from the liberal left, who&nbsp, generally claimed&nbsp, that the US has become an aristocracy. However, many on the right were also concerned about George Soros and other democratic entrepreneurs ‘ effect.

But the studies backing up the “oligarchy” state was &nbsp, very uneven and weak&nbsp, — in reality, most political researchers found that coverage in the US tends to connect strongly with the objectives of the center class. And common problem was vague and scattered — Americans will tell you that their financial program “unfairly favors the strong interests”, but this could mean something, and most Americans&nbsp, are no concerned&nbsp, about the prosperity of billionaires.

Yet in the past week, we have witnessed a single wealthy man making important decisions in real time regarding US national government policy. In order for the US federal government to spend money, it has to pass “appropriations” bills. There are always big fights over those bills, so sometimes they just pass a” continuing resolution” to keep spending going.

If the CR doesn’t pass, the government shuts down, and its employees— including the people in the US Military — stop getting paychecks. In a number of instances over the past three decades, the party in charge has threatened to refuse to pass a bill and impose austerity on the government, or worse, to exceed the “debt ceiling,” which prevents the government from borrowing money.

Elon Musk, president Trump’s most significant donor and political ally, and the owner of one of the largest social media networks, had a different take on the most recent CR. Musk&nbsp, launched an all-out attack&nbsp, on the resolution:

Musk, who&nbsp, spent more than US$ 250 million &nbsp, getting Trump elected, posted about his opposition to the original spending deal well over 100 times over the past two days, with threats to fund primary challenges to anyone who voted for the plan, which was six weeks in the making.

Any member of the House or Senate who supports this outrageous spending bill should be re-elected in two years! Musk was posted on X on Wednesday afternoon.

Later in the day, Trump himself&nbsp, came out against it, making it clear the bill was done.

What’s interesting about this is that&nbsp, everyone&nbsp, seems to&nbsp, agree&nbsp, that it was Musk, not Trump, who torpedoed the CR. &nbsp, Fox News reports:

After Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy allegedly engaged in congressional discussions regarding government funding, some House Republicans are privately expressing their anger.

If Elon and Vivek are freelancing and shooting off the hip without working with [President-elect Trump], according to a second GOP lawmaker, they are getting dangerously close to undermining the actual 47th President of the United States.

Overheated rhetoric is common, so we shouldn’t take this as gospel. And it’s also worth noting that Musk&nbsp, approved&nbsp, of a modified CR, but that one was torpedoed by conservatives in Congress. Also, &nbsp, Musk’s threat&nbsp, to primary anyone in Congress who voted against the approval of Matt Gaetz wasn’t enough to keep Gaetz from withdrawing. So Musk actually isn’t the all-powerful emperor he’s depicted as in the header image of this post — at least, not yet.

But it’s undeniable that Musk has influence that goes far beyond that of any typical super-rich political influencer. He’s not just the owner of X but its poster-in-chief, who manipulates the platform’s algorithm to&nbsp, show everyone his own tweets&nbsp, first and foremost.

Additionally, he is the owner of SpaceX, which the US government largely depends on for its entire space program. And he’s more or less the leader of&nbsp, a right-wing faction in the tech industry &nbsp, that has become a key Republican constituency over the last election cycle.

Therefore, Musk has a lot of extremely powerful tools for directly influencing American policies. He has the authority to threaten to primary any Republican who deviates from his personal goals ( and frequently does ). He has the power to launch right-wing instant mobs on X to attack any Republican who floutes his rules.

He can ( and does ) dump hundreds of millions into elections. He could probably use SpaceX’s government contracts as leverage as well, if he chose. And with Donald Trump, the oldest President ever elected, clearly in his final years, Elon’s energy and activity level frequently make him the ideal stand-in.

It’s clear to both foreign and domestic leaders where the power is in the incoming U.S. regime, but this isn’t just supposition on my part. House Speaker Mike Johnson&nbsp, called up both Trump and Musk&nbsp, to try to get a CR passed. And Musk now&nbsp, regularly accompanies Trump&nbsp, to his meetings with foreign heads of state. The American public as a whole is now accepting this reality after watching Musk kill the continuing resolution.

What does it mean for the nation to have so much of the government’s power firmly rooted in the hands of a single, unelected private individual? It’s hard to say.

There may be some historical precedents here, as Mark Hanna had a significant influence in the McKinley administration and William Randolph Hearst’s control of the print media terrified politicians over a century ago. Various industrial-age tycoons wielded a lot of influence in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Fox News was created by Rupert Murdoch. But Musk’s clout may eclipse them all — X is a new kind of media, Trump is a different kind of President, and so on.

Many in the tech sector I know are enthralled by Elon’s authority. But I believe that this is scary for many regular Americans because they won’t be able to trust Elon to do the right thing, as many other tech professionals do. To see this, let’s do a thought exercise: What if Elon were evil?

Imagining” Evil Elon”

In a post back in October, I wrote that America’s future could hinge on whether Elon Musk decides to play the superhero or the supervillain.

Musk’s friends and confidantes expect the former. They probably know him as a reasonable guy — a&nbsp, Reaganite&nbsp, conservative who was &nbsp, driven to the center-right&nbsp, by the excesses of wokeness, who loves&nbsp, free speech&nbsp, and free enterprise and small government and responsible fiscal and monetary policy and&nbsp, peace between nations, who wants to bring human civilization to Mars and accelerate tech progress and so on.

Let’s refer to this variation of Elon as” Real Elon.”

However, one might also think of Elon, who lives in the fervent imaginations of his foes. Let us call this” Evil Elon”. Regular people, observing Elon’s actions in the public sphere, can’t always tell the difference between Real Elon and this fantasy supervillain.

Whereas Real Elon opposed the CR because of concerns over government spending and legislative complexity, Evil Elon opposed it because it contained national security provisions that&nbsp, would have nixed&nbsp, some of Tesla ‘s&nbsp, planned investments in China:

Cynics note&nbsp that Elon supported’s shorter replacement CR would have actually spent more money than the one Elon killed, with the main difference being that the replacement CR didn’t have restrictions on US investment in China:

Real Elon is a consistent and dedicated ally of the Chinese Communist Party, despite his admiration for individual freedoms and capitalism. When Real Elon calls for Taiwan to become a” special administrative zone” of China, he does it because he likes authoritarian rule and because the Chinese Communist Party has paid him off. Evil Elon does it because he wants to avoid World War 3.

On Ukraine, similar, Real Elon&nbsp, just wants to end the conflict&nbsp, and stop more Ukrainians from dying. After all, Russia is strong and determined enough to almost certainly hold onto a piece of Ukraine at the end of the conflict. So why not just trade land for peace and be done with it?

However, Evil Elon, who shares his sympathies with authoritarian rulers in general, wants Putin to succeed. No one is aware of what Elon and Putin discussed in their frequent conversations since 2022. However, Evil Elon’s supporters believe they conspired to smuggle the Russians into the conflict.

Real Elon and Real Elon both accused Vindman of treason and threatened him with” the appropriate penalty” because we all get upset on social media and like to rippling people who criticize us. However, Vindman was right when Evil Elon did it.

When Real Elon&nbsp, declared his support&nbsp, for the German far-right party AfD, it was because he saw Germany spinning into&nbsp, industrial decline&nbsp, and suffering from an immigration policy that failed to exclude&nbsp, violent criminals. But Evil Elon did it because he likes that AfD is&nbsp, vocally pro-Putin&nbsp, and&nbsp, pro-CCP.

In fact, believers in Evil Elon suspect that his support for AfD might also be due to the whiff of&nbsp, Nazi apologia&nbsp, and&nbsp, antisemitism&nbsp, that hang around some of the party’s candidates. Real Elon is a stand-up guy — when he agreed with a tweet about Jewish communities pushing anti-White hatred, he&nbsp, publicly apologized, declaring it the worst tweet he’s ever done, and declaring himself a “philosemite”. And when Real Elon accidentally endorsed a Tucker Carlson interview with a Hitler apologist, he&nbsp, quickly deleted the endorsement&nbsp, once he realized what it actually contained.

However, those who believe in Evil Elon believe that these are just the kind of public relations stunts a supervillain would employ to cover his tracks. They worry that the massive wave of antisemitism that has swept X&nbsp since Elon took control is the result of deliberate boosting rather than just the unavoidable result of more indulgent moderation policies combined with the response to the Gaza war. 1&nbsp, They do not buy&nbsp, Real Elon’s protests&nbsp, that other platforms have even more antisemitism.

And so on. Essentially, Evil Elon is a somewhat cartoonish supervillain, who wants to set himself up as the ruler of one of three great dictatorships, ruling the world with an iron fist alongside his allies Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin — a new&nbsp, Metternich System&nbsp, to enshrine right-wing values and crack down on wokeness and progressivism and obstreperous minorities all over the world.

I had Grok draw this new Metternich System for fun, and the end result was pretty good. I feel like I have to share it:

Art by Grok

But anyway, the point here is that when normal Americans look at Elon and his words and deeds, they can’t be 100 % certain that he ‘s&nbsp, not&nbsp, Evil Elon. A few progressives will be very convinced that he&nbsp, is&nbsp, actually evil, but I think most people will simply wonder and be uneasy. Evil Elon will continue to exist in a sort of quantum superposition with Real Elon in their minds — a Schrödinger’s oligarch who will&nbsp, probably&nbsp, turn out to have been a good guy all along, but&nbsp, might&nbsp, ultimately turn out to have been very bad from day 1.

And that will scare them. In fact, all powerful people have this same property— even some of the people who voted for them didn’t entirely trust Bill Clinton, George Bush, Barack Obama, and so on. &nbsp, Powerful people are simply inherently untrustworthy, because the consequences of misplacing your trust in them are so grave.

There have been checks and balances on these leaders for the majority of modern American history, which means that if they did prove to be bad, there would be plenty of institutions and opponents in place to limit the damage.

So who or what can check Elon’s power?

One flaw of the US political system, as I mentioned at the beginning of this post, is that there are few mechanisms in place to restrict the political influence of private actors. This is why some people worry about the U. S. becoming an oligarchy, especially in the years after&nbsp, Citizens United.

Up until now, I believe those worries have been unfounded because powerful figures like the Kochs, Soros, and Murdoch have, of course, had a hand in politics and some sort of canceled out each other. But in the age of X, SpaceX, and Trump, we may be looking at a very different situation.

Musk is a singular figure because he has already demonstrated himself to be the one who can create large, successful new high-tech manufacturing companies in the United States. He might also prove himself to be the one who can successfully convert a vast fortune and a corporate empire into effective dominance of US politics.

So who or what could balance out Elon’s power? Prior to his primary threats and online assaults, Congress appears prostrate. Trump may have fired and denounced him in 2017 as he did Steve Bannon, but that Trump has long since passed away. This Trump is aging, bedeviled, and abandoned by many of his former allies. Democrats are still dealing with the collapse of 2010s-era progressivism, and in a few days they will control zero branches of the federal government.

It’s possible that a bunch of&nbsp, other super-rich people&nbsp, will unite to balance out Musk. Although the idea of needing oligarchs to stop other oligarchs is not particularly appealing, it might be preferable. So far, though, even super-rich people who have had rivalries with Musk in the past&nbsp, seem inclined to bend the knee&nbsp, and live as best they can under the new regime.

What about the press? Traditional media — newspapers, TV, and radio — has declined steeply, &nbsp, replaced by social media. Musk&nbsp, owns one of America’s main news platforms&nbsp, ( and a second one, TikTok, is&nbsp, effectively controlled by the CCP). Meanwhile, more progressive media outlets still seem to be in a state of paralysis over conflicts with their activist staffers and their subscribers over Gaza, trans issues, and general election-related recriminations.

Ultimately, of course, power resides with the American people. Musk’s power comes from his ownership of capital, but the way he exercises it is fundamentally a&nbsp, democratic&nbsp, one — if he’s able to primary Congressional Republicans, it’s because his primary challengers are able to win votes, and if he’s able to start a rage-mob on X, it’s because people like what he says.

This means that if enough people get tired of Musk’s attempts to influence American politics, he’ll lose his influence. X is somewhat influential, but even with Musk’s algorithmic changes, it’s not a mind-control device, and it’s also&nbsp, <a href="https://mashable.com/article/elon-musk-x-declining-user-base-2025″>not actually that widely used. Musk is America’s most successful and successful entrepreneur, but even the most successful of men is powerless if he is turned down by the populace. 2&nbsp,

The fracas over the CR this week have a chance of alienating Musk because the American public has never liked shutdown brinksmanship. If Elon pulls a few more stunts, Trump’s second term could be defined by a protracted backlash against his overreach.

Vox populi, vox dei, as they say.

Notes

1. In reality, I have a third theory that claims that Russian and Chinese bots are the primary culprits of antisemitism in order to wedge American society. Right after the election, I’ve noticed that antisemitism largely vanished. This could have been attributable to an Elon crackdown.

2. I wouldn’t bet on it, though, but a few techlords might one day be able to use AI to rule the world in defiance of the vast majority of humanity.

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

Continue Reading

Biden’s arms dump won’t ease Taiwan’s Trump trepidation – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

China has firmly objected to US President Joe Biden’s approval of Taiwan’s$ 571.3 million in security funding and service, accusing the country of “playing with fire” with its most recent donation of military equipment and services. &nbsp, &nbsp,

Individually, the US Defense Department announced that it approved$ 295 million fair of military equipment for Taipei in response to rising regional conflicts, which many people believe could become the center of global political conflicts with the anticipated ending of the Ukraine war under the approaching Donald Trump administration.

The$ 571 million in military assistance tops up Biden’s authorization of$ 567 million for the same purposes in late September. In October, He approved$ 2 billion in arms sales to Taiwan, including the first-time distribution of an advanced surface-to-air missile defense system.

A statement from the Chinese Foreign Ministry, which was released on Sunday ( December 22 ), urged the US to stop arming Taiwan and stop making what it called “dangerous moves that undermine peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.”

China’s largest maritime drills around Taiwan since 1996 have resulted in the most recent US military package, with the People’s Liberation Army ( PLA ) stationing more than 90 warships in nearby waters stretching from the East China Sea to the Taiwan Straits and South China Sea.

The Taiwanese foreign ministry stated in a statement that “taiwan and the United States will continue to work closely together on safety issues to preserve stability, peace, and the status quo across the Taiwan Strait.”

Due to the sensitivity of the situation, Taipei declined to provide information on the” content” of the assistance “based on the tacit agreement between Taiwan and the United States.”

The stakes don’t get higher. A lately released report by the US Pentagon has warned that China has “amplified” its full-spectrum force on Taiwan over the past month, underscoring Beijing’s danger to “reunify” the area with the island.

War drum

Xi Jinping, the country’s most powerful chief, apparently instructed the Army to be prepared to launch a successful conquest of Taiwan by 2027, if needed.

If Trump follows through on his pledge to impose 60 % tariffs on all Chinese products, a move that would put pressure on China’s now troubled economy and potential ruling Communist Party, as well. &nbsp,

If something, China is determined to create a “world-class” defense that can rival America’s by 2049. With a defence resources of$ 450 billion, China is well positioned to focus its extremely powerful army features on its own garden, such as the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait.

Now in possession of the world’s largest military, with as many as 395 battleforce ships to travel on vapor next year, China is also deploying&nbsp, DF-27 anti-ship nuclear missiles that could drastically harm America’s military presence in the Western Pacific, including the proper outpost of Guam. &nbsp,

Washington has the obligation to help prevent any forcible takeover of the self-ruling island nation in accordance with the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, despite adhering to a “one China” policy that calls for Beijing to be the diplomatic representative of the so-called” Greater China.”

Even if the two parties no longer have a mutual defense pact, Biden has repeatedly pledged to come to Taiwan’s defense in the event of a conflict with China.

However, there are some concerns about the incoming Trump administration’s desire to support Taiwan’s defense and even consider entering a potential grand bargain with China at the expense of Taiwan’s self-proclaimed sovereignty and regional partners ‘ security.

By signing a Reciprocal Access Agreement (RAA ), which would increase military interoperability and strengthen a joint response to any significant emergency in the area, including over Taiwan, US allies Japan and the Philippines have accordingly doubled down on their own defense cooperation.

Key regional players are hedging their bets ahead of a potentially disruptive second Trump presidency, while hoping for continuity in America’s China policy.

Far from a passive actor, Taiwan is preparing for all eventualities. The self-governing island nation is increasing its imports of cutting-edge American weapons systems after ratifying a record$ 20 billion defense budget in August.

This month, Taiwan received the first batch of 38 M1A2T Abrams tanks, underscoring its preparation for a possible all-out of war, including attrition warfare, in the near future.

Midway through December, the new American-made tanks were delivered to the Armor Training Command in Hsinchu County, southwest of Taipei. For next year, Taiwan is planning to allocate NTD70.6 billion ($ 2.2 billion ) for the acquisition of new US-made platforms.

Atop Taiwan’s shopping list, according to a proposal submitted by Taiwan’s legislature, are 100 Harpoon land-based missile systems, 66 F-16V fighter jets, 29 HIMARS rocket systems and a total of 108 M1A2T Abrams tanks.

” Taipei has signed contracts with the US for 21 procurement projects, totaling NT$ 716.6 billion, with final payments scheduled to be made in 2031″, Taiwan’s defense ministry said last month.

” Of this total, approximately NT$ 373.1 billion has already been paid, while NT$ 343.5 billion remains unpaid and will be disbursed according to the payment schedule”, the ministry added. Next year, Taiwan is allocating up to NT$ 70.6 billion on portable short-range air defense missiles and radar system upgrades.

Taiwan has historically adopted a “porcupine strategy,” which would significantly increase the cost of any full-scale invasion by the Asian superpower given its power asymmetry with China. &nbsp,

Thanks to Taiwan’s sophisticated industries, robust defense budget and acquisition of modern weapons systems from the West, some military experts have proposed a “honey badger” strategy, which relies on a more proactive and” smart” deployment of state-of-the-art platforms to foil any Chinese invasion.

A second Trump presidency, however, introduces new uncertainties to US support for that strategy. Trump has stated abundantly that he favors allies shouldering more of their own defense expenses and paying more for US “protection.”

In fairness, Trump’s first term is fondly remembered in Taipei, a period that saw a historic phone call between then-Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen and Trump, a rapid expansion in high-level contacts and joint visits, and Taipei’s purchase of$ 18 billion worth of US weapons,$ 4 billion more than the combined two terms of the Obama administration.

Trump is expected to take a more “isolationist” stance in light of rising public outcry in the United States over the massive funding of the Ukraine war, especially since he won’t be restrained by veteran and more multilateralist generals.

Trump has gone so far as to criticize Taiwan’s alleged underspending for its own defense throughout the year and has adopted more blatantly transactional language on foreign policy. ( Taiwan spends around 2.5 % of annual GDP on defense. ) Trump has referred to as” stupid” any military action that might lead to a war with China.

Trump stated in an interview earlier this year that he would “never say” whether America would stand by Taiwan and that he would maintain a” good relationship” with Chinese President Xi. ” I never say because I have to negotiate things ]with China ], right”? Trump stated this in an interview with Kristen Welker, a Meet the Press host on NBC.

Taiwan is reportedly cautious of the influence of influential figures in Trump’s plans, including billionaire Elon Musk, who has significant business interests in China. He has parodied Beijing’s position by calling Taiwan an “integral part of China.” &nbsp,

” I think most people are anxious…Because of Trump’s unpredictability, we don’t know if Taiwan will be safer or more dangerous under his second term”, Chen Ming-chi, a former senior advisor to Taiwan’s National Security Council, told the media.

Dealing with Trump

Likely to Trump’s liking, Taiwan is reportedly mulling a$ 15 billion weapons package in the coming years. But, according to a report by the Cato Institute, a Washington-based think tank, Taiwan has yet to receive$ 20.53 billion worth of military equipment from the US due to production and delivery delays. In the past year, the Pentagon has already been stretched by significant arms transfers to Israel and Ukraine.

According to prominent Taiwanese defense expert Shu Hsiao-Huang, an associate research fellow at the Institute for National Defense and Security Research,” some new equipment encountered integration issues, which required system adjustments to meet customer demands.” This was in response to competing demands from conflicts elsewhere, making it difficult to obtain key US-made weapons like Stinger missiles.

At the same time, US regional allies are also preparing for potential contingencies. Japan has consented to reorganize US forces in Japan into a larger joint force headquarters under the US Indo-Pacific Command ( INDOPACOM) in Hawaii.

A Joint Operations Command is also being established by the Japanese Self-Defense Forces ( JSDF) to better coordinate with the consolidated INDOPACOM.

In response to growing concerns among US allies about a potential Taiwan war, Japan is expanding its cooperation with the Philippines. The Philippine Senate finally approved a visiting forces agreement-style pact after years of negotiations, which highlights growing strategic convergence between the two key US allies.

The Philippine Senate said in a statement that “ratifying the agreement further affirms the strategic partnership between the two countries and their shared goal of enhancing contributions to regional and international peace, security, and stability.

For his part, Japan’s ambassador to Manila, Kazuya Endo, emphasized how the new pact will “facilitate the implementation of cooperative activities between the forces of the two countries, further promote security and defense cooperation, and firmly support peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region”.

Trump and Taiwan were not directly mentioned by either side, but both are actively preparing for a new era of strategic uncertainty and hot great power rivalry closer to home than under Biden, as with other important US allies in the region.

Follow Richard Javad Heydarian on X at @Rich Heydarian

Continue Reading

Tibet: How China cracked down on rare protests over Kamtok dam

By:
On:
In: Asia
Getty Images Treated image: An aerial photo of the Wudongde Hydropower Station, in red, superimposed on a treated image of winding Jinsha river.Getty Images

The BBC has learned from sources and verified images that hundreds of Tibetans were arrested earlier this year for their protests against a Chinese bridge. Some of the victims were beaten and seriously injured.

In Tibet, which China has strongly controlled since it annexed the area in the 1950s, demonstrations of this nature are unique. The fact that they continue to occur shows China’s contentious effort to build dams in a region that has long been sympathetic.

Soon after the activities in February, accusations of the arrests and stabbings started to surface. Authorities tightened restrictions even more in the coming weeks, making it difficult for anyone to check the report, especially for journalists who are unable to travel freely to Tibet.

However, the BBC has spent decades looking for Tibetan solutions whose friends and family members were beaten and detained. Additionally, BBC Verify has checked leaked videos and satellite pictures that show large-scale demonstrations and clergy pleading with the authorities for mercy.

The options are no associated with activist organizations and reside outside of China. However, for health reasons, they did not want to be named.

The Chinese ambassador in the UK did not confirm or refute the demonstrations or the ensuing assault in response to our inquiries.

However, it stated that” China is a nation governed by the rule of law, and completely protects people ‘ right to legitimately express their concerns and ideas or ideas.”

BBC graphic showing location of Gangtuo dam project and affected villages and monasteries

The demonstrations, followed by the assault, took position in a country house to Tibetans in Sichuan territory. For years, Chinese authorities have been planning to build the massive Gangtuo dam and hydropower plant, also known as Kamtok in Tibetan, in the valley straddling the Dege ( Derge ) and Jiangda ( Jomda ) counties.

The dam’s reservoir, which is constructed, do bury a Tibetan region rich in both cultural and religious significance and a location rich in ancient monasteries and villages.

One of them, the 700-year-old Wangdui ( Wontoe ) Monastery, has particular historical value as its walls feature rare Buddhist murals.

Taus of Tibetans would also be displaced by the Gangtuo bridge. The transfer of 4, 287 people to make way for the dam has been seen by what appears to be a common sweet document.

The BBC spoke with a government official listed on the sweet record as well as Huadian, the state-owned company rumored to be building the dam. Neither have responded.

Plans to build the dam were first approved in 2012, according to a United Nations special rapporteurs letter to the Chinese government. The letter, which is from July 2024, raised concerns about the dam’s “irreversible impact” on thousands of people and the environment.

From the start, citizens were no” consulted in a significant way” about the bridge, according to the email. For example, they were given data that was limited and not in the Tibetan vocabulary.

The government also promised to the people that the project would only proceed if 80 % of them gave their consent, the letter continues, adding that people tried to raise issues about the dam several times.

Therefore, in February, officials told them they had been evicted immediately, while giving them much information about relocation options and payment, the BBC understands from two Tibetan sources.

Despite knowing the dangers of a assault, people and Buddhist priests decided to step protests because of this.

They “didn’t know what was going to occur to them,” they said.

In Dege, the largest one saw hundreds of people gathering outside a state tower. Activists can be heard calling on the government to prevent the foreclosures and letting them sit in a video tape that was obtained and verified by the BBC.

A group of inhabitants reportedly pleaded with visiting officials to halt construction of the bridge in a separate incident. The BBC has verified that this tragedy occurred in the town of Xiba and obtained footage that appears to show it.

Red-robed priests and people are seen knelt down on a sandy road and giving a thumbs up, a customary Tibetan pleading for mercy.

In the past, the Taiwanese government has been swift to oust any resistance to authority, particularly in Tibetan country, where it is sensitive to anything that might lead to separatist attitude.

This day, it was no different. According to one of our resources, authorities quickly launched their assault, raiding homes across the river, and arresting hundreds of people at demonstrations.

In what is thought to be an arrest function, one unidentified but widely shared picture appears to show Chinese police shoving a group of priests on a street.

Our Tibetan options, whose families and friends were the targets of the onslaught, claim that many were detained for weeks and some were severely beaten.

One resource shared new details of the investigations. He claimed to the BBC that a close friend from childhood was detained and subjected to numerous interrogations over the course of several weeks.

He was questioned and treated politely at earliest. They asked him’ who asked you to attend, who is behind this’.

” Then, when he couldn’t provide them]the ] comments they wanted, he was beaten by six or seven unique surveillance officers over several times.”

His companion sustained only small wounds, and was freed within a few days. But others were not so fortunate.

A different cause informed the BBC that more than 20 of his relatives and friends were detained for participating in the demonstrations, including an old man who was older than 70.

” Some of them sustained accidents all over their system, including in their bones and liver, from being kicked and beaten… some of them were ill because of their wounds, “he said.

Similar allegations of physical abuse and whippings during the detention have come up in Tibetan media reports from abroad.

The UN notice also notes accounts of suspensions and use of pressure on hundreds of demonstrators, stating they were” seriously beaten by the Chinese authorities, resulting in injury that required hospitalisation”.

Tsering Woeser A photo showing seated red-robed monks praying inside the Wontoe Monastery in Dege county. Tsering Woeser
Tsering Woeser An ancient, fading mural inside the Wontoe Monastery shows Buddha seated, with other images surrounding him - the mural is painted in red, blue, green, yellow and white. Tsering Woeser

After the assault, Tibetans in the area encountered yet tighter restrictions, the BBC understands. There was increased security, and communication with the outside world was more hampered. According to sources, those who are still in contact have been reluctant to talk because they fear a new onslaught.

According to the first source, some released protesters were finally permitted to travel abroad in Tibetan place, but others have received orders restricting their motion.

Nomadic nomads who need to travel across pastures with their herds and those who need to go to a hospital for health care have issues as a result, he said.

When I got through, they told me not to visit any more because they would be arrested, according to the next cause, who claimed he last heard from his friends and relatives at the end of February. They were quite scared, they would stand up on me.

” We used to talk over Twitter, but now that is certainly achievable. I’m absolutely blocked from contacting all of them”, he said.

” A younger girl cousin was the last people I spoke to,” I said. She said,’ It’s very unsafe, a lot of us have been arrested, there’s a lot of problem, they have hit a lot of us’… They didn’t know what was going to happen to them next”.

The Chinese state media has been unable to provide any information about the protests and assault. But soon after the protests, a Chinese Communist Party national visited the area to “explain the need” of building the bridge and called for” security repair methods”, according to one report.

According to documents posted online, a few months later, a tender was awarded for the construction of a Dege “public security post.”

The BBC has been using satellite imagery to monitor the valley for months. For now, there is no sign of the dam’s construction nor demolition of the villages and monasteries.

The Chinese Embassy informed us that the government was still conducting geological surveys and special studies to build the dam. They added the local government is “actively and thoroughly understanding the demands and aspirations” of residents.

Development or exploitation?

China is no stranger to controversy over dams.

The Three Gorges on the Yangtze River, the government’s largest dam, was the subject of protests and criticism when it built the world’s largest dam in the 1990s.

As China has accelerated its transition from coal to clean energy sources in recent years, these moves have become particularly sensitive in Tibetan territories.

Beijing has been eyeing the steep valleys and mighty rivers here, in the rural west, to build mega-dams and hydropower stations that can sustain China’s electricity-hungry eastern metropolises. President Xi Jinping has personally pushed for this, a policy called” xidiandongsong”, or” sending western electricity eastwards”.

Getty Images An aerial photo shows Wudongde Hydropower Station on the Jinsha river, the world's seventh largest hydropower station, on the channel of the Jinsha river in Liangshan prefecture, Sichuan Province, China, December 31, 2022. Getty Images

Like Gangtuo, many of these dams are on the Jinsha ( Dri Chu ) river, which runs through Tibetan territories. It is located in the Yangtze River’s upper reaches, making it China’s largest clean energy corridor.

Gangtuo is in fact the most recent of a string of dams planned for this valley, five of which are either being built or are already operational.

These dams have been described by the Chinese government and state media as a win-win solution that reduces pollution, generates clean energy, and improves rural Tibetans.

Clean energy projects are focused on “promoting high-quality economic development” and “enhancing the sense of gain and happiness among people of all ethnic groups,” according to the Chinese embassy’s statement to the BBC.

However, Tibetans have long been accused of violating their rights by the Chinese government. The dams, according to activists, are the most recent instance of Beijing squattering Tibetans and their land.

” What we are seeing is the accelerated destruction of Tibetan religious, cultural and linguistic heritage”, said Tenzin Choekyi, a researcher with rights group Tibet Watch. The Chinese government is implementing “high-quality development” and “ecological civilisation” in Tibet.

The Tibetans are expelled from their homes in China, which creates a favorable environment for development. The same fate awaits the villagers and monks who live close to the Gangtuo dam. According to Human Rights Watch ( HRW), more than 930, 000 rural Tibetans have been relocated since 2000.

Beijing has always maintained that these relocations happen only with the consent of Tibetans, and that they are given housing, compensation and new job opportunities. State media often portrays it as an improvement in their living conditions.

Getty Images A spectacular bend in the Jinsha river as it winds all the way around mountain, is seen in an aerial photo of Garze city, Sichuan Province.Getty Images

But rights groups paint a different picture, with reports detailing evidence of coercion, complaints of inadequate compensation, cramped living conditions, and lack of jobs. They also point out that relocation severs the deep, centuries-old connection that rural Tibetans share with their land.

According to Maya Wang, interim China director at HRW,” These people will essentially lose everything they own, their livelihoods, and community heritage.”

There are also environmental concerns related to the possible dangers of building dams in a region rife with earthquake fault lines, as well as the flooding of Tibetan valleys renowned for their biodiversity.

Some Chinese academics have found the pressure from accumulated water in dam reservoirs could potentially increase the risk of quakes, including in the Jinsha river. This could cause catastrophic flooding and destruction, as seen in 2018, when rain-induced landslides occurred at a village situated between two dam construction sites on Jinsha.

The Chinese embassy informed us that any clean energy project’s implementation” will go through scientific planning and rigorous demonstration, and will be subject to relevant supervision.”

China has recently passed laws protecting the environment around the Yangtze River and the Qinghai-Tibetan plateau. The Yangtze’s upper reaches must be protected, according to President Xi.

About 424 million yuan ( £45.5m,$ 60m ) has been spent on environmental conservation along Jinsha, according to state media. Reports have also highlighted efforts to quake-proof dam projects.

Multiple Tibetan rights groups, however, argue that any large-scale development in Tibetan territory, including dams such as Gangtuo, should be halted.

They have organized demonstrations abroad and called for an international moratorium, arguing that businesses involved in these projects would “allow the Chinese government to profit from the occupation and oppression of Tibetans.”

” I really hope that this]dam-building ] stops”, one of our sources said. ” Our ancestors were here, our temples are here. We have been here for generations. It causes a lot of pain to move. What kind of existence would we have if we left?”

Additional reporting by Richard Irvine-Brown of BBC Verify

Continue Reading

Calling inequality unnatural, Thomas Piketty shows a way forward – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Book Review: Nature, Culture, and Inequality by Thomas Piketty, translated by Willard Wood ( Scribe )

Thomas Piketty’s Character, Society, and Inequality is a little guide that lists an issue of great value: Is the social injustice we observe every day normal?

Drawing on traditional economic data from all over the world, Piketty identifies a trend toward greater political and socioeconomic justice from the late 18th centuries. From 1914 to 1980, this was especially evident in Western nations. Since then, that craze has slowed significantly.

Piketty explains that injustice manifests in various ways in different cultures, as well as in various ways in the same societies throughout history. Disparity, he says, has “followed dramatically different trajectories – social, economic, cultural, civilizational, and religious”.

This shows us that people culture is more adjustable, and therefore more pliable, than some have assumed. ” It is society in the broadest feel”, he argues,” and more particularly political participation” that “provides an argument for the variety, education, and structure of the social inequalities we observe”.

There is no justification for us to maintain the 20th century episode of growth toward greater fairness in the present. In truth, without significantly addressing injustice, Piketty argues, we may wish to properly address the climate crisis.

Piketty is the co-director of the World Inequality Lab and a professor at the Paris School of Economics and the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales ( EHESS). He is best known for his landmark 2013 book Capital in the Twenty-First Century, which became a bestseller and sparked a global conversation about capitalism, injustice, and tax policy.

Piketty argued using historical data and statistics that if the return on capital exceeds the economy’s growth rate, it follows that riches will become more and more focused. This, in turn, leads to disturbing rises in inequality, which are not only harsh but undermine democratic and normative values, trust in institutions and social cohesion.

Piketty’s new guide is designed to make his thought accessible to a wider audience. It is based on his book A Brief History of Equality ( 2021 ) and his lecture on inequality from the World Inequality Database in 2022.

Verbal in tone, and accompanied by attractive colour charts, the text moves rapidly through topics including income and wealth disparity, gender inequality, the rise of the welfare state, education spending, progressive taxation of income and inheritance, the collapse of imperial assets, public debt crises and the climate crisis.

Piketty presents what he believes to be the key to a more simply and lasting world by dissing some of his key insights about the evolution of income and wealth disparity throughout history.

Income and wealth disparity

When it comes to income ( who earns what ), the bottom 50 % of earners receive 5-6 % percent of total income in the most inegalitarian countries ( e. g. South Africa ). In more egalitarian countries ( e. g. those in northern Europe ), the bottom 50 % earn 20-25 % of total income.

The distribution of wealth ( who owns what ) is even less equal. In any nation on earth, the poorest 50 % do not own more than 5 % of the world’s total wealth.

Even though they have been significant, the main issues with reducing disparity in the 20th century were the distribution of income. ” When it comes to the transmission of wealth”, Piketty argues,” things have changed quite much”.

As he points out, the “great redistribution” of property in his native France, largely between 1914 and 1980, had” a significant impact on reducing disparity between the richest 10 % and the next 40 %”, via the emergence of a “property-owning middle class”. Despite this significant development,” the poorest 50 % have hardly ever benefited from the transfer of property in the last two decades.”

Piketty argues that, like the 20th century action towards greater justice, new styles of increasing injustice are not obvious. Nor are they explainable in terms of “personal talent, native endowment or natural temperament”.

The notion that “great disparities are somehow’natural’ because ability or entrepreneurialism is unevenly distributed across individuals ( or countries, or ethnic groups ) is frequently “used to argue that efforts to reduce inequality will either be ineffective or reduce growth and prosperity, or both,” as journalist Jonathan Portes once remarked.

This claim is not supported by the historical data, says Piketty. He refutes the notion that “very large inequalities are the inevitable outcome of a well-functioning market economy,” which predominates in much contemporary economic thought and policy discussion. The key to understanding reductions in inequality, he argues, is that they are directly related to a country’s political culture and institutions. They are primarily a result of the historical function of collective political mobilization to influence change.

What works: Sweden vs. the United States

Sweden in the 20th century, Piketty writes, is an example of the power of political organization, social struggle and” the ability to build new institutional outcomes”.

Until around 1920, Sweden, like other European countries, was “extremely inegalitarian”. Its political system was elitist. Only the richest 20 % of men could vote. Votes were distributed based on individual wealth: the more votes you could cast, the wealthier you were.

The Social Democratic Party and the trade unions then “put the state capacity of Sweden in the service of a different political project” through” collective mobilization.” Instead of “using the records that had made it possible to allocate the right to vote,” they instead used them to “impose a progressive tax, with the aim of funding access to education and healthcare.”

The Swedish example, according to Piketty, is instructive on a number of fronts, according to Piketty. Firstly, it shows that” a country is never inegalitarian or egalitarian by nature”. That “depends on the government’s power and goal.” Secondly, Sweden’s social democratic policies led to it becoming both one of the most equal societies in the world, as well as one of the richest.

The United States makes an interesting comparison. In recent history, the wealth of its middle class has been shrinking. Having at one point reached wealth distribution patterns similar to Europe’s, it is now headed in the direction of” Europe’s pre-World War I levels”.

Between 1932 and 1980, inequality decreased in the United States. The nation’s prosperity and rising income levels were present during that time, which” stifled neither economic growth nor innovation.” The totemic Reagan-era reduction of high tax rates in the 1980s failed to deliver on its promises to its backers. Economic growth in the United States in the period 1990-2020 was half what it was in 1950-1990. Inequality accelerated.

Addressing inequality

Despite how imperfect the process has been, the welfare state’s creation was the most crucial factor in addressing inequality in the 20th century. Progressive taxation was used to fund increased spending on healthcare, pensions, housing, infrastructure and education. According to Piketty, the roughly tenfold rise in public spending over the past century was a significant contributor to promoting individual freedom, reducing inequality, and raising productivity and living standards.

The question of what might represent “acceptable levels” of income disparity, according to Piketty, is” clearly a question that a democratic process and public deliberation should deicide”. However, he suggests a ratio of 1 to 3 or 1 to 10 between the richest and the poorest. These levels can accommodate diversity of aspirations, while maintaining the incentives “necessary for social and economic organization”. Nothing, economically or socially, justifies ratios of 1 to 50 or 1 to 100.

Low tax rates and astronomical corporate incomes were not a key component of the United States ‘ historical advantage over its competitors in terms of productivity, especially in the industrial sector. It was its lead in education. The “near-universal” access to secondary education the United States achieved in the 1950s was not realised in Germany, France and Japan until the 1980s and 1990s.

Since then, despite the significant expansion of access to tertiary education, with its acknowledged advantages, spending on education across Western countries has stagnated.

Inequality and the climate crisis

Returning to the “nature” theme at the conclusion of his book, Piketty argues that understanding inequality makes it easier for us to comprehend the problem of climate change and what we need to do in response. He succinctly summarizes his main point in an interview with Manuela Andreoni, a reporter for the New York Times:

If we don’t address our inequality challenge at the same time, there’s no way we can preserve… planetary habitability in the long run.

This is a result of the Global North’s comparatively high carbon emissions in comparison to those of the Global South. However, it is also a result of global carbon emission disparities, particularly the large carbon footprints of the wealthiest 10 %.

According to Piketty,” It is obvious that we’re going to have to change our production and consumption regime throughout the world.” This will need to be society-wide, but with particular focus on the rich and the middle class:

If you don’t demand a lot more effort from the people at the top, there is simply no way for the middle-class and lower-income groups to accept the kind of transformation that is needed.

According to Piketty, the climate crisis “may result in a greater demand for equality than we’ve recently seen.” In the 20th century, many countries achieved the expansion of access to health care and education – and,” to a lesser extent, transport, housing and energy” – by taking these parts of the economy out of market frameworks and viewing each of them as a public good.

” A similar shift”, he suggests,” could help the world curb climate change and stop biodiversity loss”. Piketty responds to Andreoni’s question about sceptical and cynical responses to a proposal like this:

that’s what we did for education and health. We recently decided that learning about this and that was important for all children at the ages of 6 and 10, 15, and then 18, respectively. And we didn’t let the market system decide this. And now, no one wants to return to the previous circumstance.

At Deakin University, Christopher Pollard is a sessional academic in sociology and philosophy.

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

Continue Reading

Bitter Erdogan-Natanyanu rivalry is emerging over Syria’s future – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The Middle East has a new entry for political contest with the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria.

Israel and Turkey see an opportunity to improve their opposing national and regional security interests, though Iran and Russia don’t currently have the most significant influence in Syria.

Relations between the two nations have deteriorated significantly in recent years under their individual officials, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Recep Tayyip Erdoan. This sets the stage for a bloody battle over Syria.

A fresh conflict is emerging

Turkey is commonly reported to have supported the Sunni rebel group’s offensive to expel Assad from energy, backing up Syria’s standard friends, Iran and Russia.

Tehran has intimated that without Turkey’s support, Units would have been unable to reach its burning invasion.

Today, with Assad gone, Erdoğan is believed to be positioning himself as de facto leader of the Sunni Muslim world. Additionally, he wants Turkey to be a regional power with the most power.

According to Erdoan, some Arab cities, including Aleppo and Damascus, would have likely been included in contemporary Turkey if the Ottoman Empire had been divided in a different way following its battle in the First World War.

After Assad’s drop, Turkey immediately reopened its ambassador in Damascus and offered assistance to Units in creating the nation’s fresh Islamist order.

As part of this, Erdoğan has opposed any agreement by Units to the US-backed Kurdish majority in Syria’s east, which he regards as followers of the Kurdish separatists in Turkey.

In the meantime, Israel has used the power pump in Syria to expand its regional and stability goals. It has launched a land invasion into the Arab portion of the corporate Golan Heights and carried out a huge bombardment of Syria’s martial installations throughout the nation.

The destruction of these goods, which included weapons depots, fighter jet, missiles, and chemical weapons storage facilities, was necessary, according to Israel’s foreign secretary, to prevent them from being accessed by “extremists” who might present a threat to the Jewish state.

Turkey views Israel’s subsequent actions in Syria and the dominated Golan Heights as a property get. Israel’s activities have also been denounced by Muslim states, who demand Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity been respected.

Israel is undoubtedly concerned about the rise of an Islamist party to power and the formation of a jihadist position in Syria.

Despite the fact that HTS leader Ahmad al-Sharaa ( also known as Abu Mohammad al-Jolani ) has indicated that he does not want to fight Israel, this is despite the fact that the latter is known as Abu Mohammad al-Jolani. Additionally, he has pledged never to permit any organizations to launch attacks on Israel in Syria.

In addition, al-Sharaa has demanded that Israel be removed from Arab country in accordance with a 1974 agreement that came into effect after the Yom Kippur war of 1973.

Terrible enemy

Erdoğan, Turkey’s average Islamist president, has long been a follower of the Palestinian cause and a fierce critic of Israel. Since the start of the Gaza battle, however, tensions between the two sides have gotten substantially worse.

Erdoğan has called for an Arab-Islamic before to prevent what he’s called Israel’s “genocide” in Gaza. He has also criticized Israel’s earlier this year war of Lebanon.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, however, has lashed out at Erdoğan over the years. He has called him a” prank” and “dictator” whose prison are full journalists and political prisoners. He has even accused Erdoğan of committing a “genocide” of the Kurdish citizens.

Washington, which is associated with both Turkey and Israel, has intensified its political support to make sure that Proteomics steers Syria in the right direction. It is eager to see a post-Assad system of governance aligned with America’s objectives.

These goals include HTS’s support for America’s Kurdish friends in north Syria and the ongoing existence of 1, 000 American forces there. Additionally, the US wants Units to keep preventing the Islamic State from regaining power.

The US will also have to deal with Syria’s growing political conflict between Israel and Turkey.

Despite some spectators ‘ doubts, there is the possibility of an Israeli-Turkish military conflict if Israel revers its protracted activity of the demilitarized area on the Arab part of the Golan Heights into a permanent consolidation.

This does not mean there will be a battle between them soon. However, their competing goals and the depth of shared hostility have undoubtedly reached a new stage.

Iran’s loss may be expensive

For Iran, Assad’s resignation means the loss of a vital ally in its mostly Shia” shaft of weight” against Israel and the United States.

Over the past 45 years, the Iranian government had worked diligently to develop this system as a basic component of its national and international security. Since the popular uprising against Assad started in 2011, it had supported Assad’s minority Alawite dictatorship over Syria’s Sunni majority population at a cost of about US$ 30 billion ( A$ 47 billion ).

And now that Assad has left, Iran is deposed of a crucial land and air link with Lebanon’s Hezbollah, one of its main proxy.

Tehran is currently perplexed by the sudden demise of the Assad regime about the wisdom of its local strategy and whether it will play a major role in the new Syria. This seems unlikely, as al-Sharaa ( the leader of HTS ) has declared his disdain for both Iran and Hezbollah.

Al-Sharaa has prioritized Syria’s restoration and national unity over a fight with Israel, Iran’s bridge enemy, over the creation of a publicly mandated Islamic government. This will undoubtedly cause conflict with Iran’s moderates and secularists.

Only time will tell how all of this may turn out. At this stage, the future of Syria and the area hangs in the balance. Much of this will depend on Units officials ‘ efforts to connect a Balkanized Syria and establish an all-inclusive social system.

At Australian National University, Professor Amin Saikal is emeritus professor of Middle Eastern and Central Eastern reports.

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

Continue Reading

Deep Dive Podcast: What are the implications of unmasking NRIC numbers?

By:
On:
In: South-East Asia

There are a lot of options ( as to what ) people can do. Thus, this policy change, which was evidently implemented by ACRA much earlier than the rest of the government agencies, opens up a window of opportunity for computer crooks to seize the information.

In the world of computer crime, whether or not NRIC is still something that needs to be protected, whether or not it is a special identifier, or whether it is your full name, that really doesn’t matter. Basically, this information can be used and it has been used to really do evil and do harm. &nbsp,

Crispina Robert, network: &nbsp,
Allow me pick up on something you said, Aaron. I know you said that, cool this is quite surprising, but MDDI has &nbsp, said that,” Appearance, it’s kind of meaningless to face it because the algorithms are so superior”. Generally the scammers out that have become quite sophisticated…

I think what sits uncomfortably is that all this while, PDPA says don’t collect ( the ) full IC number, right? And then they’re saying, okay, the whole Circuit amount is not as resilient as we thought it was, or we first made it out to be. Is there a conflict between the scheme and the PDPA needs in any way?

Steve Tan, Rajah &amp, Tann Singapore: &nbsp,
I mean, we can’t obscure the fact that through the years we’ve been definitely conditioned to the fact that, yes, we’ve got to address national identification numbers thoroughly because it’s eternal, and it in itself, is like your master key right, to opening lots of access to various platforms, data and stuff like that. And of course, then that MDDI’s declaration has changed ( with the press release on December 13 ), you should be aware of that. Therefore, PDPC released the transfer on December 14th, right? And the judge is not up yet, best?

If you read that launch properly, they’re focusing on identification, on password entry.

Continue Reading

Why ‘Trump trade’ may cow BOJ into inaction – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The only thing falling more quickly than the renminbi are the chances that the Bank of Japan will increase interest rates this year.

BOJ authorities have made it abundantly clear in a number of press leaks that they see little need to stretch on Thursday when the main banks holds its two-day policy meeting.

One major cause is Donald Trump. When the US president-elect results to the White House on Jan. 20, he’s expected to roll out a series of growth-hobbling taxes in short order. This might include the 60 % charges that Trump has threatened to impose on China.

Though Japan isn’t being targeted — at least not still — Asia’s second-biggest market is straight in the collateral-damage area. Chinese businesses are anticipating a ton of chaos in 2025 as a result.

Additionally, it prompts BOJ Governor Kazuo Ueda to reevaluate his choices for price increases. Six months prior to a December tightening shift, it was moving at full speed. Trump’s impact vote win on November 5 thickened the story. Also, his more recent actions to telephone tariffs on Mexico and Canada have been.

All of this has caused BOJ officials to claim that standing pat will cost less this week. What politicians aren’t saying, though, is that this delay may last longer than most traders think.

For example, Japan’s economy is almost ending 2025 on strong foundation.

” With wage growth and imports sputtering and political doubt clouding the view, Japan’s business seems unable to get out of initial gear”, Stefan Angrick, mind Japan scholar at Moody’s Analytics.

Angrick adds that “headwinds facing the business are significant. Household income are straining because wages are improving but not yet strong enough to keep up with prices. Exports are being weighed down by poor physical demand and domestic car production issues.

If Trump starts to stifle international trade, these dynamics could escalate. There’s desire that Trump’s tax risks are a negotiating strategy meant to set the stage for a “grand deal” business cope with China. Some, though, think Trump won’t be able to resist a deal battle.

Trump has a variety of controversial ideas, but tariffs, particularly those aimed at China, are one of the most important areas of intellectual persistence that has existed, according to Nick Marro, an economist for the Economist Intelligence Unit. In consequence, businesses and investors may become considering how to get ready for the worst.

Or even worse than that. Managers at Toyota, Honda and Nissan live in constant fear that Trump might stretch the 100 % tariffs he plans for Mexico-made trucks to Japan, too.

Trump’s continued bash of Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has not escaped Japan Inc. Since Trump’s success, Ishiba has been lobbying hard for a conference, Shinzo Abe-style.

The late Abe was the first world president to applaud Donald Trump in New York’s Trump Tower in November 2016. Abe also defended the” America First” leader in the face of resolute opposition. ” I am convinced Mr. Trump is a leader in whom I may have great trust” and” a relationship of trust”, Abe told reporters.
 
Abe made headlines around the world by playing golf at Trump’s Florida membership. Abe was hailed as a political Trump vehicle by political observers who credited him with shielding Japan from his anger.

The truth is much more complicated. Abe’s fawning didn’t prevent Trump from abandoning the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the center of Japan’s efforts to contain China. Japan didn’t find a complete on Trump’s taxes. Trump embarrassed Japan by disclosing that Abe had nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Perhaps so, Ishiba hopes to repeat Abe’s ways. Since November, Ishiba has been angling for a Mar-a-Lago tee-time. Trump rebuffed Ishiba, claiming the 1799 Logan Act makes it unsuitable for a president-elect to join with foreign officials.

Trump and a slew of different world officials have gathered in Tokyo since then. Over the last two days, Trump spent time with Canada’s Justin Trudeau, France’s Emmanuel Macron, Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky, Hungary’s Viktor Orban, Argentina’s Javier Milei and perhaps Prince William.

Trump’s potential plans to impose levies on the market are a source of concern for Japan Inc. If you already know your laws will be affecting Japan’s 2025 in a disorganized way, why make peace with Ishiba?

South Korea has reasons to worry its business is in harm’s way, also. Yoon Suk Yeol, president of the United States, has been meeting with Trump, also removing his golf clubs for the first time in eight years.

Trump’s following trade war might have a stronger impact on Japan and Korea than the political elites in Tokyo and Seoul now believe.

A price increase this Thursday may seem like an unnecessary risk, according to Ueda’s BOJ team as Tokyo prepares for what is to come.

As for, says Takeshi Yamaguchi, general Japan economist at Morgan Stanley MUFG,” we expect the BOJ to stay on-hold on the basis of wanting some further observation of wage trends, especially wage-hike momentum toward the 2025 spring wage negotiations, and the outlook of US monetary policy”.

Yamaguchi adds that Morgan Stanley keeps its prediction for a price increase in January 2025. Another BOJ observers believe that the policy board of Ueda may decide that international trends are reducing the central bank’s ability to raise rates.

” Political threats, including US security talks and regional tensions, include fiscal and safety uncertainties” that complicate the financial viewpoint, says Marcello Estevão, an analyst at the Institute of International Finance.

The US Federal Reserve, for example, might not be cutting rates as much as markets had priced in. US inflation isn’t cooling off as quickly as anticipated.

And as Trump’s tariffs make steel and aluminum more expensive, it’ll cause a” supply shock” for the US auto industry and others, warns economist Barry Eichengreen at the University of California at Berkeley.

The BOJ might be concerned about triggering a significant yen rally that would hurt Japan Inc.

Meanwhile, retail sales in China proved markedly weaker than expected last month. That could make the People’s Bank of China‘s desire for more rate cuts more urgent. However, it serves as a reminder that Japan’s most significant market is sluggish and that the risk of deflation is rising.

” We do expect]the PBOC] to step up the pace of rate cuts next year”, says Julian Evans-Pritchard, head of China economics at Capital Economics.

In November, Chinese imports fell 3.9 % year-on-year, suggesting that stimulus efforts to date aren’t gaining the traction Beijing hoped. A stronger yen might result in even less Chinese export demand.

There’s also a chance that Trump will attempt to stifle the dollar to gain a competitive advantage. To be sure, the dollar’s relentless strength in recent years has been” stomach churning”, says strategist Kit Juckes at Societe Generale, calling it” not sustainable” over the long-term.
 
However, Trump’s devaluation of the dollar might send the yen into a sour gloom. That might lessen the BOJ’s confidence in pushing the monetary brakes.

Ishiba’s Liberal Democratic Party is retaining control by a thread as these external risks arise. There is little room to accelerate economic reforms because of this. Ishiba, for example, is pledging more than US$ 65 billion to raise Japan’s semiconductor game as part of a broader economic package. It will help push Japan Inc. “up the value chain amid growing global competition”, says Scott Bade, analyst at Eurasia Group.

However, Ishiba’s fragile hold on power may make these and other initiatives more difficult to pass, and it may also be one of the reasons why the Ueda BOJ may not be as eager to tighten as the markets had predicted.

No risk factor looms larger than Trump’s coming trade war with China and, perhaps, Japan, too. Policymakers may have fewer and fewer opportunities to raise rates above the current 0. 25 % level before Team Ueda is informed of the magnitude of the financial carnage that might dominate 2025.

Continue Reading

Moves to curb military power in Thailand will continue

By:
On:
In: South-East Asia

Pheu Thai senator Prayuth Siripanich’s attempt to push for a so-called “anti-coup costs” has been met with opposition from reviewers and is unlikely to win support from parliament, social observers say.

A Pheu Thai list MP named Mr. Prayuth said he would remove the costs to review and that it would be resubmitted to legislature once it is finished.

Mr. Prayuth argued that a better version of the bill will be re-introduced to legislature in accordance with Area 77 of the Constitution after a group meeting on Thursday.

Mr. Prayuth said he thinks there must be limits to the government’s ability to maintain stability in the nation.

Prayuth: Bill unlikely to gain House help

Prayuth: Bill unlikely to gain House help

The Defence Ministry under the direction of Sutin Klungsang created the first draft of the expenses that Mr. Prayuth intends to retreat.

The bill, which seeks to amend the Defence Ministry Administration Act, was proposed under Section 133 ( 2 ) of the charter and, as such, does not need to be endorsed by a party meeting, he said.

While the group’s support isn’t required, Pheu Thai may probably animal the plan before it is submitted to congress for further consideration.

At least two coalition parties, including the opposition Palang Pracharath Party ( PPRP ), Bhumjaithai and United Thai Nation ( UTN), both publicly criticized the bill and pledged not to back it if it is introduced in parliament.

Pheu Thai MP Linthiporn Warinwatchararoj, Pheu Thai assistant secretary-general, acknowledged that some Pheu Thai MPs also disagreed with the proposed bill, which would give the government the power to choose the appointment of generals after a committee made up of the defence secretary and the chiefs of the military forces.

Under Section 25, the invoice added requirements that must be satisfied by all candidates to be commanders, including those who are known for having undue influence or having connections to illegal drugs, human smuggling, or the destruction of natural sources and the atmosphere.

In addition, the bill attempts to alter Section 35 by enforcing a ban on the use of military force or military personnel in situations where the government’s managerial authority is seized or under control.

Additionally, it was stated that soldiers who were ordered to carry out such serves had the right to refuse to do so and could face being found guilty of violating military criminal law.

Additionally, it increases the penalties for officials who temporarily suspend them in order to conduct an investigation as directed by the prime minister.

In contrast, under the invoice, the prime minister would be the Defence Council president instead of the defence secretary.

On December 2, Parliament conducted an opinion poll about the costs on its website.

The questionnaire will close on January 1.

One of three proposals to alter the Defence Ministry Administration Act was made by the main opposition party, the Defence Ministry, while Mr. Sutin was in charge, is presented by Mr. Prayuth’s costs.

Military transformation force

Mr. Prayuth told the Bangkok Post that while he has no ill will against the defense, he is attempting to push for reform of the armed troops through the legislative process to increase their effectiveness.

” I have little specific against the military. The war has served as the government’s security gates.

” When the land is hit by natural disasters, military personnel often move in and lend a hand.

However, Mr. Prayuth said,” I want to drive for reform of the armed forces through the parliamentary method.”

Because of some shortcomings that still need to be fixed, such as giving the government more authority over general appointments, he decided to withdraw the expenses for revision.

The plan has been compared to the appointment of officers generals, which does not require the same kind of support, according to a party source.

Deterrent to dictatorships

Although there are no laws that could stop dictatorships, a political science expert who contacted the Bangkok Post claimed that the suggestion for an anti-coup legislation is a symbolic gesture that shows the government’s opposition to military coups.

” Any upcoming coups that may occur are likely to receive reaction from the government.

” An anti-coup costs represents a barrier to military dictatorships, “he said.

He even made a comparison between the PP’s proposed and Prayuth bill, saying the PP is determined to push for its own costs because it wants people and parliamentary debate on issues relating to military transformation.

The scientific said,” Pheu Thai presented a bill after the PP had proposed it, just to prevent criticism and losing popularity if it had not introduced its own bill.”

He claimed that Pheu Thai and the PP’s charges both have the same goal of giving a civilian government a higher power than the military forces.

A civil government should be established in an appropriate democracy, he said, and a civilian government should be chosen over the military.

However, Thailand’s elected government has a requirement that it share power with political party vested interests, such as officials and the military forces.

He claimed that” the notion that a state must be above the military can be applied in Thailand.”

Shield against revolt

Wanchai Sornsiri, a former legislator, echoed the view that pushing for the anti-coup payments is no solution to military coups.

According to him,” the best way to stop military dictatorships is for the government to run the land with dignity in the people’s best interests.”

” The government may remain free of corruption to gain people’s reputation.

The people will work as a weapon protect defending the state against any military dictatorships, Mr. Wanchai told the Bangkok Post.

Playing with fire

He criticised lawmakers who had proposed anti-coup legislation, claiming that such legislation was intended to elicit hostility from the military and that it was unlikely to garner widespread support.

Wanchai: MPs want to stir up trouble

Wanchai: MPs want to stir up trouble

Wanwichit Boonprong, a political science professor at Rangsit University, told&nbsp, the Bangkok Post that Pheu Thai is playing with fire.

The intention behind the decision to update the Defence Ministry Administration Act is to test the waters, he said.

Mr. Wanwichit argued that Phumtham Wechayachai’s choice to succeed Sutin Klungsang as defense secretary is an attempt to control the military.

As defence minister, Mr Sutin took a” soft approach “in dealing with the armed forces, while Mr Phumtham, a close associate of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, widely known to be the de facto leader of Pheu Thai ( and father of Prime Minister Paetongtarn ) will also try to ensure no military coups.

Lawmakers should have no trouble understanding the inner workings of the military, but the drive for the anti-coup act is obviously meant to interfere in military affairs, he said.

” Finally, the bill is expected to be rejected by partnership events as well as the Senate,” Mr Wanwichit said.

Wanwichit: ' Soft strategy' is needed

Wanwichit: ‘ Soft strategy’ is needed

Continue Reading

Moves to curb military power will carry on

By:
On:
In: South-East Asia

Pheu Thai senator Prayuth Siripanich’s attempt to push for a so-called “anti-coup costs” has been met with criticism from critics and is unlikely to win support from parliament, social observers say.

Following widespread criticism, Pheu Thai list MP Mr. Prayuth announced he would remove the bill to be revised and that it would be resubmitted to parliament once it is available.

Mr. Prayuth insisted at a group meeting on Thursday that he wasn’t backing down and that a better version of the bill would become re-introduced to legislature in accordance with Section 77 of the law.

Mr. Prayuth said he thinks the army’s influence needs to be limited in order to maintain stability in the nation.

Prayuth: Bill unlikely to gain House aid

Prayuth: Bill unlikely to gain House aid

The Defence Ministry under the direction of Sutin Klungsang was the first to create the expenses that Mr. Prayuth intends to remove.

The bill, which seeks to amend the Defence Ministry Administration Act, was proposed under Section 133 ( 2 ) of the charter and, as such, does not need to be endorsed by a party meeting, he said.

While the group’s support isn’t required, Pheu Thai may probably animal the plan before it is submitted to congress for further consideration.

At least two coalition parties, including the opposition Palang Pracharath Party ( PPRP ), Bhumjaithai and United Thai Nation ( UTN), both publicly criticized the bill and pledged not to back it if it is introduced in parliament.

Pheu Thai MP Linthiporn Warinwatchararoj, Pheu Thai assistant secretary-general, acknowledged that some Pheu Thai MPs also disagreed with the proposed bill, which would give the government the power to choose the appointment of generals after a committee made up of the defence secretary and the chiefs of the military forces.

Under Section 25, the expenses added requirements that must be satisfied for all candidates to be generals, including those who are known for having connections to illegal drugs, human smuggling, or the destruction of natural resources and the atmosphere.

In addition, the bill attempts to amend Area 35 by enforcing a ban on the use of military force or military personnel in situations where the government’s managerial authority is seized or under control.

Additionally, it was stated that soldiers who were ordered to carry out such serves had the right to refuse to do so and that they could be seen as a witness to a military-military criminal offense.

Additionally, it increases the penalties for officials who temporarily suspend them in order to conduct an investigation as directed by the prime minister.

In contrast, under the act, the prime minister would be the Defence Council president instead of the defence secretary.

On December 2, Parliament conducted an opinion poll about the costs on its website.

The study will close on January 1.

One of three proposals to alter the Defence Ministry Administration Act was made by the main opposition party, the Defence Ministry, while Mr. Sutin was in charge, with Mr. Prayuth’s act one of three.

Military transformation force

Mr. Prayuth told the Bangkok Post that while he has no ill will against the defense, he is attempting to reform the armed forces through the legislative method to improve their effectiveness.

” I have little specific against the military. The war has served as the world’s security gates.

When a nation is affected by natural disasters, “military personnel often step in and lend a hand.”

However, Mr. Prayuth said,” I want to push through the legislative process for the armed forces reformation.”

Because of some shortcomings that still need to be fixed, such as giving the government more authority over general appointments, he decided to withdraw the expenses for revision.

The plan has been compared to the appointment of officers generals, which does not demand a similar support, according to a celebration source.

Deterrent to uprisings

The request for a so-called anti-coup rules is a symbolic gesture that reflects the government’s attitude toward military coups, according to a political science expert who contacted the Bangkok Post who requested anonymity.

” Any upcoming coups that may occur are likely to encounter backlash from the general public.

” An anti-coup act represents a barrier to military dictatorships, “he said.

He even made a comparison between the PP’s proposed and Prayuth bill, saying the PP is determined to push for its own expenses because it wants people and parliamentary debate on issues relating to military transformation.

The scientific said,” Pheu Thai presented a bill after the PP had proposed it, just to prevent criticism and losing popularity if it had not introduced its own bill.”

He claimed that Pheu Thai and the PP’s charges both aim to give a civilian government a higher power than the military forces.

A civil government should be established in an appropriate democracy, he said, and a civilian government should be chosen over the armed forces, he said.

However, Thailand’s elected government has actually promote power with political party vested interests like bureaucrats and the armed forces.

He claimed that” the notion that a state must be above the military cannot be applied in Thailand.”

Shield against revolt

Wanchai Sornsiri, a former legislator, echoed the view that pushing for the anti-coup costs is no solution to military coups.

According to him,” the best way to stop military dictatorships is for the government to run the land with dignity in the people’s best interests.”

” The government may remain free of corruption to gain people’s reputation.

The people will work as a shield preventing military coups, Mr. Wanchai told the Bangkok Post.” If it can do so, the folks will work as a weapon protecting the state against any military uprisings.”

Playing with fire

He criticized officials who had proposed the anti-coup bills, claiming they were attempting to elicit hostility from the defense and are unlikely to garner widespread support.

Wanchai: MPs want to stir up trouble

Wanchai: MPs want to stir up trouble

Wanwichit Boonprong, a social science professor at Rangsit University, told&nbsp, the Bangkok Post that Pheu Thai is playing with fire.

He said,” The decision to change the Defence Ministry Administration Act is intended to test the waters.”

Mr. Wanwichit argued that Phumtham Wechayachai’s choice to replace Sutin Klungsang as defense secretary is an attempt to keep a tight grip on the military.

As defence minister, Mr Sutin took a” soft approach “in dealing with the armed forces, while Mr Phumtham, a close associate of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, widely known to be the de facto leader of Pheu Thai ( and father of Prime Minister Paetongtarn ) will also try to ensure no military coups.

There should be no issue if politicians are aware of the military’s internal workings, but the anti-coup act push is clearly intended to stifle political activity, he said.

” Finally, the bill is expected to be rejected by partnership events as well as the Senate,” Mr Wanwichit said.

Wanwichit: ' Soft method' is needed

Wanwichit: ‘ Soft method’ is needed

Continue Reading