Commentary: Parents, encourage your children to learn chess – but be clear about its benefits

By:
On:
In: South-East Asia

RESEARCHDOESN’T BACK UP OUR Values

However, it’s crucial to harbor a healthy dose of skepticism in relation to these seemingly natural values. Just as in game, one may assess positions honestly and understand also “obvious” moves and captures.

Amazingly, there are only a handful of thorough and well-designed study studies on the effects of games on children. And they suggest no consequence when it came to focus, concentrate or imagination.

The research at Monash University, led by Associate Professor Lee Wang Sheng, one of my previous Raffles Institution game teammates and one of the best people in Asia at his time, focused on primary school students in Bangladesh in 2016. The kids who learned learned to assess threats more effectively and were less risk-averse than those who did not.

There is no conclusive evidence that reading or studying game improves one’s scientific skills, despite the findings of the Monash University research and another major trial conducted on over 4, 000 children in England.

Chess, along with other games like solitaire and weiqi, are associated with better mental health in adults, lowering the risk of dementia and halting cognitive decline. The majority of the research studies published today are smaller and do not attempt to establish a causal relation.

Continue Reading

India’s K-4 missile a nuclear shot across China’s bow – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

India’s strategic nuclear arsenal took a bold leap forward with the first operational trial of a new submarine-launched ballistic missile, setting the stage for intensified rivalry with China and Pakistan in the Indian Ocean.

Last month, Indian Research Defence Wing (IDRW) reported that the INS Arihant, India’s first nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (SSBN), successfully tested the K-4 submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM).

The K-4 SLBM has a range of approximately 3,500 kilometers and represents a substantial upgrade over the K-15 missile, which has a range of only 750 kilometers. The IDRW report notes the trial marked a crucial step in integrating long-range SLBMs into India’s underwater strategic forces, enhancing the nation’s nuclear second-strike capability.

The K-4’s tests were conducted from submerged platforms, ensuring the missile’s effectiveness in realistic underwater launch scenarios, the IDRW report said. The successful trial underscores India’s commitment to maintaining a credible minimum deterrent while adhering to its no-first-use nuclear doctrine.

The K-5 SLBM, which is under development and has a range of over 5,000 kilometers, will further bolster India’s strategic capabilities.

In a September 2024 article for the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, Hans Kristensen and other writers mention that the K-4’s capabilities are similar to those of the Agni-III intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM).

Kristensen and others say that India’s Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) claims the K-4 reaches “near zero circular error probability,” although they view that statement skeptically. They assess that the K-4 can hit all of Pakistan and most of China from protected bastions in the northern Bay of Bengal.

They write India’s SSBNs have launch tubes that carry one K-4 or three K-15 SLBMs. While they note rumors and speculation that the K-4 SLBM has multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicle (MIRV) warheads, this seems unlikely, given the missile’s limited capability.

However, that may change soon. In March 2024, Asia Times reported that India had successfully conducted its first flight test of the Agni-5 missile equipped with MIRV technology, marking a significant advancement in its strategic defense capabilities.

The test, carried out on Abdul Kalam Island in the Bay of Bengal, positions India among the elite nations with MIRV technology, including the US, UK, France, China, Russia and Pakistan.

Integrating MIRV technology enhances India’s second-strike capability, complicating adversaries’ missile defense strategies and reinforcing its no-first-use nuclear policy.

Further, Kristensen and others mention that senior Indian defense officials have stated that the DRDO is planning to develop a 5,000-kilometer-range SLBM based on the land-based Agni-V. This would enable Indian submarines to strike targets across Asia as well as various regions of Africa, Europe and the Indo-Pacific area, including the South China Sea.

Debak Das mentions in an April 2024 Bulletin of Atomic Scientists article that India’s sea-based nuclear arsenal, possibly equipped with MIRV SLBMs, will be the cornerstone of its second-strike capability and could seek to nullify China’s recent advancements in missile defense. He notes that MIRV-ed SLBMs will bolster the Indian Navy’s “continuous at-sea deterrence” capability, ensuring survivable nuclear force during a first strike.

China is unlikely to ignore such developments. In June 2024, Asia Times mentioned China’s growing naval presence in the Indian Ocean.

China’s potential utilization of its economic influence to secure base access at Gwadar in Pakistan and Hambantota in Sri Lanka, thereby strengthening its sole overseas military installation in Djibouti, could contest India’s supremacy in the Indian Ocean and heighten India’s concerns regarding encirclement.

While China’s base in Djibouti can facilitate its naval operations in the Indian Ocean, it is situated at the terminus of fragile supply lines, isolated and operationally constrained due to the lack of mutual support from other Chinese military installations in the Indian Ocean.

However, China’s dual-use commercial facilities at Gwadar and Hambantota have emerged as significant nodes for its naval operations.

Due to its geographic location, military significance and the involvement of a Chinese port operator, Gwadar has the potential to serve as a long-term rest and replenishment site for China’s People’s Liberation Army – Navy (PLA-N).

Further, certain factions within the PLA perceive Chinese access to the Gwadar base as effectively secured, with one PLA officer reportedly remarking, “The food is already on the plate; we’ll eat it whenever we want to.”

Hambantota is likely to become China’s next military base in the Indian Ocean. China has direct control of the facility, constituting its most significant port investment overseas.

From a military perspective, Gwadar and Hambantota can facilitate a sustained Chinese naval presence in the Indian Ocean, potentially threatening India’s sea-based nuclear deterrent.

However, the US may also factor in this negative Indian Ocean feedback loop. In a May 2024 report for the National Bureau of Asian Research (NBR), Rajeswari Rajagopalan mentions that India’s nuclear program has been driven more by threats from Pakistan than China.

Rajagopalan says that China’s accelerated modernization of its nuclear forces—marked by the development of long-range, land-based missiles and a potential arsenal expansion to thousands of warheads—has raised alarm in India.

She states this growth threatens India’s doctrine of minimum deterrence and could pressure India to reconsider its no-first-use policy, especially as China’s nuclear strategy moves toward parity with the US as the latter modernizes its nuclear arsenal.

She mentions these implications extend to border disputes, where a more assertive Chinese nuclear posture might encourage China to escalate conventional conflicts with India, such as their ongoing border dispute in the Himalayas.

Continue Reading

Australian social media ban on under-16s approved by Senate

By:
On:
In: Asia

Australia will ban children under 16 from using social media, after its Senate approved the world’s strictest laws.

The ban – which will not take effect for at least 12 months – could see tech companies fined up to A$50m ($32.5m; £25.7m) if they don’t comply.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says the legislation is needed to protect young people from the “harms” of social media, something many parent groups have echoed.

But critics say questions over how the ban will work – and its impact on privacy and social connection – have been left unanswered.

This is not the first attempt globally to limit children’s social media use, but it involves the highest age limit set by any country, and does not include exemptions for existing users or those with parental consent.

“This is a global problem and we want young Australians essentially to have a childhood,” Albanese said when introducing the bill to the lower house last week. “We want parents to have peace of mind.”

Having passed the Senate by 34 votes to 19 late on Thursday, the bill will return to the House of Representatives – where the government has a majority meaning it is sure to pass – for it to approve amendments, before becoming law.

The legislation does not specify which platforms will be banned. Those decisions will be made later by Australia’s communications minister, who will seek advice from the eSafety Commissioner – an internet regulator that will enforce the rules.

Gaming and messaging platforms are exempt, as are sites that can be accessed without an account, meaning YouTube, for instance, is likely to be spared.

The government says will it rely on some form of age-verification technology to implement the restrictions, and options will be tested in the coming months. The onus will be on the social media platforms to add these processes themselves.

However digital researchers have warned there are no guarantees the unspecified technology – which could rely on biometrics or identity information – will work. Critics have also sought assurances that privacy will be protected.

They have also warned that restrictions could easily be circumvented through tools like a VPN – which can disguise a user’s location and make them appear to be logging on from another country.

Children who find ways to flout the rules will not face penalties, however.

Polling on the reforms, though limited, suggests it is supported by a majority of Australian parents and caregivers.

“For too long parents have had this impossible choice between giving in and getting their child an addictive device or seeing their child isolated and feeling left out,” Amy Friedlander, who was among those lobbying for the ban, recently told the BBC.

“We’ve been trapped in a norm that no one wants to be a part of.”

But many experts say the ban is “too blunt an instrument” to effectively address the risks associated with social media use, and have warned it could end up pushing children into less regulated corners of the internet.

During a short consultation period before the bill passed, Google and Snap criticised the legislation for not providing more detail, and Meta said the bill would be “ineffective” and not meet its stated aim of making kids safer.

In its submission, TikTok said the government’s definition of a social media platform was so “broad and unclear” that “almost every online service could fall within [it]”.

X questioned the “lawfulness” of the bill – saying it may not be compatible with international regulations and human rights treaties which Australia has signed.

Some youth advocates also accused the government of not fully understanding the role social media plays in their lives, and locking them out of the debate.

“We understand we are vulnerable to the risks and negative impacts of social media… but we need to be involved in developing solutions,” wrote the eSafety Youth Council, which advises the regulator.

Albanese has acknowledged the debate is complex but steadfastly defended the bill.

“We all know technology moves fast and some people will try to find ways around these new laws but that is not a reason to ignore the responsibility that we have,” he has said.

Last year, France introduced legislation to block social media access for children under 15 without parental consent, though research indicates almost half of users were able to avoid the ban using a VPN.

A law in the US state of Utah – which was similar to Australia’s – was overturned by a federal judge who found it unconstitutional.

Australia’s laws are being watched with great interest by global leaders.

Norway has recently pledged to follow in the country’s footsteps, and last week the UK’s technology secretary said a similar ban was “on the table” – though he later added “not… at the moment”.

Additional reporting by Tiffanie Turnbull in Sydney

Continue Reading

Capital Group appoints Apac MD for global financial institutions | FinanceAsia

By:
On:
In: Asia, Finance, South-East Asia

Capital Group, an active asset manager with over US$2.8 trillion in assets under management (AUM), has appointed Marketa Dvorak as managing director, global financial institutions (GFI) in Asia Pacific (Apac).

Dvorak (pictured) will continue to be based in Singapore and reports to London-based Nick Shaw, head of client group, GFI, who oversees GFI operations in both Asia and Europe.

Dvorak started earlier this month on November 11 and was previously managing director, global wealth management, Apac, at Wellington Management, according to her LinkedIn prodiles.

The aim is for Dvorak to deepen and expand Capital Group’s relationships with major financial institutions based across Apac, according to a media release. Her responsibilities will include working with local client groups, including global and regional distributors, supoporting strategic objectives and support clients in the region with value-added services beyond investing, according to the release.

Shaw said in the release: “We hear from global financial institutions that they want fewer partners and expect more from their asset manager. We’re committed to supporting our partners across the region to meet their needs and their clients’ financial goals. Apac is a key growth market for Capital Group where we have been serving investors for more than 40 years.”

Dvorak commented, “I’m excited to join Capital Group in this role, dedicated to growing and establishing strategic relationships with global financial institutions in the Apac region. I look forward to collaborating with our team around the world to further build upon the momentum with GFI partners both globally and locally, and support more investors in the region.”

For more FinanceAsia people moves click here. 


¬ Haymarket Media Limited. All rights reserved.

Continue Reading

Can Singapore and Southeast Asia learn from Europe’s interconnected power grid?

By:
On:
In: South-East Asia

” For instance, we have electricity. When we have a moist season … we can offer our deficits. When we have clean years, therefore we import from other countries. This means an effective use of all these assets”, he said.

” In southern Sweden this summer, we had very low (electricity ) prices because we could import solar power from Germany”.

Sharing power across time zones saves money because it saves money to buy energy during peak times and to export when other countries are experiencing higher consumer demand, according to Prof. Soder. &nbsp,

He argued that meeting the rising energy demand requires a integrated and versatile electricity market.

” You have to have a typical business. Charges must be in agreement between the various nations. It must be a liberalised market with frequent laws”, he said.

Would A SHARED GRID WORK FOR SINGAPORE?

In Southeast Asia, an connected network is already in use, though on a smaller scale than in Europe.

There are now diplomatic connections that involve Singapore and Malaysia, Thailand and Malaysia, and Laos and Vietnam.

A shared energy grid, according to Dr. David Broadstock, a senior research fellow at the Sustainable and Green Finance Institute at the National University of Singapore, is useful for Singapore because it has a limited amount of renewable energy available.

” Within Singapore, we’re constrained in terms of how much domestically-produced clean power we can make using existing systems. We can use the land resources and space that neighboring nations have if we move into a shared network, he told CNA.

Continue Reading

US Typhon missiles ignite a China-fueled feud in Philippines – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

The high-stakes political chess game in Southeast Asia, where local social rivalries and physical power struggles collide in a weakening battle for dominance, is clearly illustrated by China’s sharpened rebuke of Asian plans to obtain America’s Existing missile system.

Many internet retailers reported this month that China had criticized the Philippines ‘ possible acquisition of the US Mid-Range Capability Missile System, dubbed the Typhon, with the accusations that it was irresponsible and confrontational.

Gilberto Teodoro, the government’s defence minister, defended the government’s right to purchase the missile program, which would allow the Philippines to attack targets in mainland China, including conducting areas for a potential invasion of Taiwan.

In reply, Lin Jian, China’s Foreign Ministry official, warned that the shift was fuel regional tensions and inspire political confrontation. Lin urged the Philippines to evaluate its choice, emphasizing the state’s needed for “peace and prosperity”.

The Chinese executive’s speech reflects China’s often-stated worries about the role of outside powers, spelled the US, in Southeast Asia and the probable increase of an arms competition.

China may get to use the Philippines ‘ status as the weak link in the US empire in the Indo-Pacific to prevent any upcoming Spanish consolidation plans, despite the US having eternally deployed the Mod missile system in the Philippines since September 2024.

The political history of the Philippines has a long history of elite co-optation. Political elites in Philippines have strong political support regionally but weak national support, leading to their subpar regimes.

That frequently results in a weak legitimacy, which is exacerbated by internal security threats like private armies and long-running Communist and separatist insurgencies.

While most Southeast Asian regimes consolidate and sustain legitimacy through economic growth, Philippine political elites have consistently failed to deliver, leaving the country a laggard compared to its neighbors, Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Indonesia.

Philippine political elites rely on outside parties to support their fragile regimes because they are unable to deliver the economic goods. Philippine elites have been fighting it out with the US ever since the Cold War, with the latter offering economic and military support in exchange for military stipends and basing rights.

However, as Richard Heydarian in Asia Times points out, China is in a crucial position because of the ongoing political conflict between Vice President Sara Duterte and Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., which the latter has threatened to assassinate.

In April, Marcos Jr accused Rodrigo Duterte of entering a” secret agreement” with China on the South China Sea, where the two sides have various territorial disputes. Duette refuted the claim, saying Marcos Jr. was a” cry baby.”

When he and Xi Jinping met in Beijing in July 2023, the former president said he was ready to continue playing a key role in the promotion of the Philippines-China friendship, according to Chinese state media.

Heydarian claims that China’s alleged involvement in undermining Marcos, who leans toward the US, further complicates the Marcos Jr.-Duterte feud. He mentions that Philippine authorities have linked a deep-fake video that Marcos is ascribed to pro-China groups, implying that China is conducting covert operations to support the Dutertes and destabilize the current administration.

He adds that Duterte has threatened Marcos and his political clan with alarming frequency as the conflict escalates, accusing the president of betraying her through corruption investigations involving her family.

Furthermore, former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has called for military and police action to “protect the Constitution” and stabilize a “fractured government” against perceived internal threats.

The former president’s call aims to sway the Philippine National Police ( PNP ) and the Armed Forces of the Philippines ( AFP ) with dangling slender promises of political sway, privilege, and impunity.

It might also serve as a distraction from the AFP’s ongoing efforts to shift its focus away from territorial defense threats, including those posed by Dutertes ‘ potential patron, China, to the south.

Nevertheless, AFP Deputy Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Jimmy Larida assured Philippine lawmakers that there are no “grumblings” in the Philippine military and that it remains a non-partisan institution.

In a possible weaponization of Philippine history, protesters were allegedly paid US$ 9 each to stage a mass gathering at the Epifanio De Los Santos Avenue ( EDSA ) shrine, the site of the historic 1987 People Power Revolution that overthrew Ferdinand Marcos Senior, the current president’s deceased father, after nine years of martial law marked by brutality, corruption, cronyism, impunity and economic decline.

These actions may have been intended to show that the Marcos Jr. administration is losing its hold on power and that the Marcos family’s atrocities are still relevant. Marcos Jr. has faced criticism for benefiting from his father’s regime and has resisted questions about the stolen wealth his family plunders.

Given Rodrigo Duterte’s vehement opposition to US non-interference in internal Philippine affairs during his six-year rule, the Dutertes ‘ continued deployment of the US Typhon missile system in the Philippines may be in jeopardy.

Looking past recent diplomatic encounters, US President-elect Donald Trump’s previous indifference to the Philippines and preference for strategic autarky may be a bad sign for the country’s pro-US elites and military modernization, while Heydarian contends that the Philippines could benefit significantly from the new Trump administration.

Other military modernization initiatives, such as the purchase of BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles and submarines, have been hampered by a lack of funding for decades, despite the Philippines ‘ modest advances in its military modernization efforts. However, recent developments may have had little impact on deterring China.

Teodoro’s statement regarding potential Philippine purchases of the Typhon system may be more grandstanding than a sincere statement of intent. &nbsp,

For costs, each Tomahawk missile used in the system costs US$ 1.8 million while a Standard SM-6 missile is even more at$ 4.2 million. These are considerable sums given the Philippines ‘ modest$ 4.37 billion 2025 defense budget, with$ 850 million allocated for modernization.

A US Congressional Research Service ( CRS ) report from April 2024 claims the project has been funded by US$ 233 million in procurement costs without mentioning the volume of the systems that were purchased.

Moreover, the US currently restricts the sale of these missiles to upper-tier allies such as the UK, Japan and Australia, which are vastly ahead of the Philippines in terms of resources, experience, capability and US-given trust.

The Philippines might also be attempting to expand US-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty ( MDT ) coverage to potential US interests in the South China Sea disputes that are rife.

Given Trump’s known transactional approach to diplomacy, should the strategic-economic balance sheet with the Philippines not pan out in America’s favor, a second Trump administration may opt to sell out rather than bolster the Philippines vis-a-vis China.

The US has done this on numerous occasions, most recently with the 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA ) ruling favoring China over the Philippines and the US’s involvement in the 2012 Scarborough Shoal standoff versus China.

Similar things could be said about Washington’s somewhat muted response following this year’s Second Thomas Shoal’s escalating tactics by China.

Continue Reading

How chess can break barriers for children with disabilities, one game at a time

By:
On:
In: South-East Asia

ADDING TO THE Sport

Organisers hope that more children with disabilities may participate in these games and gain their self-assurance.

The goal is to have solid financial frameworks that allow us to run this game consistently and consistently, according to Mr. Goh, and to have a strong sustainable framework that allows us to continue to play the game. This might include organizations that serve children with disabilities and schools with special needs.

Mr. Goh noted that deaf and physically challenged game athletes are paired with national team at the World Chess Olympiad, which takes place every two years.

” We might associate ( chess ) with something that we can see … and we can make moves and calculate in our minds”, he said.

” How about players who do n’t get to see the chess boards? How do they estimate? How are their skills taught to look at various goes in-game? But, that’s very inspiring”.

Audelle Sim, 10, who has hearing loss in both ear, is one of the players who has benefited from playing games.

She was among 10 participants- five with disability and five able-bodied- who played against Mr Luther during the para-chess display.

” Chess has helped me focus ( and ) think better”, she said.

Continue Reading

Campaign over, Trump must make real-world foreign policy choices – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia

Donald Trump’s and his Republican Party’s overwhelming success in the US election on November 5 certainly signals a significant shift in the world’s role, at least for the next four decades but also likely for many more.

Trump’s presidency in 2017 and 2018 cannot be characterized as being inconsistent with the standard international authority pattern of the United States. We must now accept the absurdity and the fact that Trump is defining a new standard with his partial restoration of the well-known style of American management.

However, despite what it may be, acknowledging this does not provide an immediate understanding of how the new classification of American leadership will affect the country or the earth in the wake of the 2028 presidential election or elsewhere.

Let’s set aside Trump’s and his supporters ‘ potential impact on America’s judicial system and its institutions of government, though important, on a domestic level. This will have an impact on America’s reputation as a democracy and liberal society, but it wo n’t have an impact on foreign policy unless unavoidable internal conflict arises.

We are certain that the new Trump administration will approach foreign affairs with a aggressive, transactional, and based on the guiding principle of” America First” if that phrase is truly regarded as a rule. In many respects, the management will also be unstable, as it is well known that President-elect Trump is a guy who typically changes his mind, yet quite abruptly.

But beyond that, much is sure.

Two factors lie behind this confusion. One is just the distinction between regulating and fighting. To plan is to inspire and to get recognition, to manage, as the old saying goes, is to choose. Despite any significant inconsistencies in his promises, Trump’s fighting style has a crucial quality: his determination to say something that he thinks will appeal to voters or keep him in the spotlight. When governing, decisions may be avoided.

The second reason is that besides having the largest economy in the world, America also has a lot of international financial and security concerns and exposure. Due to this truth,” America First” is much more difficult to put into practice than it might have appeared on the campaign trail. The depth and breadth of America’s global safety and business interests make this a distant possibility, despite the widespread concern that many people will turn to isolationism and detachment in the 1930s.

Look only at Elon Musk, the billionaire who backed Trump’s plan most conspicuously and who since the poll has stuck close to his part: Musk’s electronic vehicle business, Tesla, builds cars and components in factories in Germany, the Netherlands, Canada and China as well as the United States, his Starlink satellite-based internet business is world, and his SpaceX business has customers worldwide too, all depend on global supply chains for their manufacturing. ” America First” means much to him, and could even pose a threat to his companies.

The fighting and the guarantees are thus riven with contradictions. Trump’s repeated demands that allies in NATO and bilateral security alliances in Asia may add more to security wasting and military capabilities, and his declarations that he plans to implement higher tariffs on American imports from Japan, Europe, and other countries, are at odds with what is most important with international affairs. Because Europe and other countries rely on them for a lot of crucial supplies, this may make it harder for those allies to add more and raise America’s personal defense procurement costs.

Another contradiction is that Trump campaigned fervently for the idea that he may seek “peace through strength” by increasing America’s unique defense spending and confronting China in every way required, but his plans threaten to erode that really strength by eroding America’s alliances in the Indo-Pacific.

The American defense sector relies heavily on co-production with allies and partners, particularly Japan and South Korea, to meet the country’s current military needs.

Even Republican Party strategists believe that convincing neighboring nations in the area to at least stay neutral or ideally lean toward America has long been a key part of America’s China strategy. Slapping high tariffs on goods from India, Vietnam, the Philippines and other” strategic partners”, in the preferred diplomatic jargon, is hardly the best way to seduce them.

Therefore, much depends on how these contradictions are resolved and what America First actually means. Trump’s campaign pledge to “end” Russia’s war in Ukraine by negotiating a peace raises a serious issue. He will also need to consider Russia’s strategic partnership with China and its use of soldiers and munitions from North Korea. He and his national security team will need to determine how to compete with China while engaging in trade wars at the same time.

Even the most zealous of America Firsters cannot deny the significance of US military installations in Japan and Japan’s own defense development, so there may be room for compromise in the case of Japan. However, many nations that do n’t have such close ties to the US will view recent moves to join China-led alliances like the BRICS as prudent bet hedging.

There is no denying that the Trump administration will face China with the same level of brutality as the Biden team. The contradictions concern the potential effectiveness of that policy, not its direction. In exchange for Taiwan’s support and protection, the Trump administration wo n’t knowingly attempt to entice a Chinese takeover. We can anticipate Trump trying to meet with Kim again despite his previous discussions with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, whose conflict with Russia is likely to be slowed down by any attempt at personal communication.

The re-election of Donald Trump spells the end, for now, of the old form of American leadership. With the world’s largest economy and military force, and with interests all around the globe, America will still, however, remain a leader. Where and how long-term it will be possible is something we have n’t yet learned.

Formerly editor-in-chief of The Economist, &nbsp, Bill Emmott&nbsp, is currently chairman of the&nbsp, Japan Society of the UK, the&nbsp, International Institute for Strategic Studies&nbsp, and the&nbsp, International Trade Institute.

The Mainichi Shimbun published an English version of an article from November 17 that was originally published in English as the original. It is republished with permission.

Continue Reading

The nations likely to win, not lose, from Trump’s tariffs – Asia Times

By:
On:
In: Asia, Business

Donald Trump’s returning to the White House brings with it the high possibility of renewed taxes, a basis of his” America First” plan.

While his critics see isolationism, others see an opportunity—an extreme method to balance global trade and defend American manufacturing. Trump’s taxes, however, are likely to have a far-reaching impact beyond US borders, opening up new opportunities for nations that are ready to step up and fill the void.

For&nbsp, Vietnam, &nbsp, India, &nbsp, Mexico, &nbsp, Malaysia and&nbsp, Thailand, Trump’s method could be a game-changer. As businesses intensify diversification efforts and change supply chains away from China, these countries stand to gain from the world realignment that may result from fresh tariffs.

These nations was experience unprecedented financial transformation if Trump builds on his earlier successes with a more sophisticated technique.

1. Vietnam: Trade battle success

Some countries capitalized on Trump’s 2018-19 trade war with China as efficiently as Vietnam. As American levies hit Chinese goods, companies scrambled to travel production, and Vietnam immediately became a major target. Its low labor costs, corporate closeness to China, and robust US trade agreements made it a good choice.

If Trump reinstates taxes, Vietnam could once again draw companies who want to avoid China’s higher costs. From technology to fabric, its import basic is well-prepared to meet British demand. Trump’s demonstrated willingness to negotiate individual business agreements may strengthen Vietnam’s standing as a preferred partner.

2. India: a proper alliance

Trump’s second term saw a strengthening of US-India relationships, driven by a shared need to counter China. His leadership improved trade and established security partnerships, giving India a significant role as a regional ally.

India’s growing producing center and focus on self-reliance—championed through its” Make in India” initiative—align completely with Trump’s focus on reducing US dependency on China. Trump’s support for bilateral agreements might help India stable trade agreements that support its emerging industries, such as medicine and electronics.

Under Trump, India may grow not just financially but carefully, more merging into US-led efforts to ensure a free and open Indo-Pacific.

3. Mexico: the descriptions superstar

Mexico was one of the biggest beneficiaries of Trump’s first-term taxes. His renewal of NAFTA into the USMCA boosted American firms ‘ ability to link their supply chains more closely while providing a stable platform for business. Mexico’s geographical closeness and cost-competitive work marketplace gave it a healthy advantage.

If Trump renews tariffs on Chinese imports, Mexico’s part as a descriptions hotspot will only increase. With streamlined logistics and lower travel costs, industries like electrical manufacturing and customer goods are likely to grow even further.

Trump’s border laws, though provocative, are unlikely to outweigh the monetary dependence between the US and Mexico.

4. Malaysia: a high-tech lover

Malaysia is truly positioned to benefit from Trump’s focus on cutting-edge business. It is a significant player in the global technical supply chain because of its expertise in manufacturing electronics and technology.

Malaysia became a focal point for businesses looking to reduce their reliance on Chinese manufacturers in delicate business both during Trump’s second word and as Biden did thereafter. If Trump reinstates taxes on Chinese tech materials, Malaysia’s advanced manufacturing industry may see a surge in demand.

Trump’s administration had more incentivize US expense in Malaysia, solidifying it as a trusted companion.

5. Thailand: the dynamic candidate

Thailand is a good winner thanks to its varied economy and robust manufacturing base. Its advantages in automotive manufacturing, technology, and agricultural exports fit well with US business needs.

Thailand benefited directly from the trade war as businesses looked for alternatives to China during Trump’s second term. A second round of tariffs may enhance its role in supply ring growth, particularly if Trump pursues diplomatic trade agreements. Thailand’s ability to balance relationships with both the US and China may be important in maximizing these options.

Why Trump’s strategy may work

Trump’s reviewers often paint his business plans as problematic, but the information suggests they have spurred long-term adjustments that benefit international business dynamics. Trump accelerated shifts that are now required for economic resilience by requiring a reevaluation of China’s centrality in supply chains.

For countries like Vietnam, India and Mexico, Trump’s unapologetic focus on tariffs created openings that might never have emerged under more conventional leadership. His potential return gives these countries a chance to strengthen ties with the US, draw investment, and secure a larger share of global trade.

The balancing act

Of course, the risks remain. Trump’s transactional style and steadfast pursuit of success may rekindle tensions, especially if tariff disputes or trade imbalances arise. But these five countries have shown they can adapt to volatility, leveraging Trump’s bold moves to their advantage.

If Trump learns from the lessons of his first term, refining his strategy to focus on sustained partnerships, his return could usher in a new era of economic collaboration. For Vietnam, India, Mexico, Malaysia and Thailand, the opportunity is immense.

As Trump reshapes global trade, these nations are well-positioned to rise alongside America’s renewed economic ambitions.

Kurt Davis Jr., a Council on Foreign Relations member, is a Millennium Fellow at the Atlantic Council. He is also an advisor to private, public and state-owned&nbsp, companies and their boards as well as creditors across the globe on a range of transactions.

Continue Reading