Deepfakes and artificial intelligence are increasingly being used in votes around the world, including in the United States, Pakistan, and Indonesia. The most recent video distribution in India highlights the difficulties faced by government. An American IT department screen has been in place for years to restrict access to contentContinue Reading
Getty ImagesLee Hsien Loong, the island nation’s long-serving prime minister, is stepping down, bringing the end of a social time for the beach state.
On Wednesday evening, Mr. Lee did fully hand over the reins to deputy prime minister Lawrence Wong and finance minister Lawrence Wong.
Only three prime ministers, all of whom are members of the People’s Action Party ( PAP ), have been in Singapore since 1965, when it first gained independence.
The first was Lee Kuan Yew, Mr. Lee’s papa, who dominated Singapore for 25 years and is widely regarded as the father of modern Singapore.
Even though Mr. Lee will be in the cabinet as a top minister, analysts believe the transition indicates a shift in Singapore’s political leadership as it leaves the Lee family’s shadow.
In his last meeting as prime minister with regional media over the weekend, he thanked Singaporeans for their assistance.
” I did n’t try to run faster than everybody else. I made an effort to get everyone to work with me,” he said. ” And I think we did include some success”.
He added that he had tried to “do ( things ) my way” in a different fashion from his father and other predecessor, Goh Chok Tong.
While his parents was still in power, Mr. Lee joined elections in 1984 as a parliamentarian. Before taking over the head in 2004, he rose up the ranks under Mr. Goh, Singapore’s next prime minister.
The beginnings of his political profession were unavoidably marred by extreme attention. The Lees ‘ family was accused of corruption and claimed that they were creating a political dynasty, which critics have consistently refuted. In secret, some Singaporeans joked about “fami- Lee politicians” and the godhead of “father, boy, and the sacred Goh”.
But over two years as president of Singapore, Mr Lee made his mark.
Under his view, Singapore’s market developed and grew, as the area transformed into an international economic powerhouse and major tourist destination. Its GDP per capita has more than doubled in the last 20 times. Mr. Lee’s administration is also credited with successfully guiding the nation through a number of recessions, the Covid crisis, and the global financial crisis.
With his social lineage and grandfatherly, formal image, Mr Lee is typically nicely- liked by Singaporeans. He has topped the most popular politicians in Singapore in surveys, and his area constantly receives the highest voting discuss in elections.
But he has not escaped censure nor discussion.
His government’s decision to let in large numbers of refugees to resolve employment shortfalls in the late 2000s triggered serious suffering. As Singapore became wealthier, social injustice increased and the money gap widened. Under Mr. Lee, the PAP received its lowest-ever voting discuss in 2011 and again in 2020.
According to Singapore leadership expert Donald Low, an educational with the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology,” Lee Hsien Loong’s major reputation would be the way he supercharged the economy.”
” But in the first half of his career, that came at the price of increasing suffering at rising injustice, the higher occurrence of foreigners, competition for jobs, overcrowding and the possible degradation of membership identity”.
Social analyst Sudhir Vadaketh claimed that Mr. Lee’s administration was” entirely ready to support the higher immigration they deemed essential for their push to become a worldwide city.”
By “failing to get a purchase- in” from Singaporeans, they seeded” a really bad form of prejudice and hatred” that persists to this day, said Mr Vadaketh who runs the impartial information magazine Jom. According to surveys, a growing number of Singaporeans believe racism is a problem and that the pandemic caused it to become more prevalent.
Some analysts also claim that Mr. Lee’s government has not adequately addressed a complex, long-term issue involving public housing, which is where the majority of Singaporeans reside. These flats are leased from the government for 99 years and will lose value as they get older. Many people’s savings are invested in these apartments.
The government has tried to address these issues by enforcing stricter immigration laws, creating new housing initiatives, and updating proposed anti-racism laws.
A simmering private family feud over the property of Mr. Lee’s father broke out in the public in 2016, one year after Lee Kuan Yew passed away. Singaporeans watched agogically as their most prominent family slugged it out as the PM was plunged into a years-long public conflict with his siblings.
At one point, Mr Lee’s siblings called him a “dishonourable son” and alleged he was capitalising on their father’s legacy to build a political dynasty. They also asserted that he was using the “organs of the state” against them and that he was abusing his power. Some members of Mr Lee’s family including his brother now live abroad in self- imposed exile, claiming persecution.
Mr Lee has denied all these accusations. Additionally, he stated that neither his children are interested in politics.
Mr. Wong, a former economist and civil servant who at one point served as his principal private secretary, is now set to take over the reins of Mr. Lee.
It is uncharted waters not only for Mr Wong but also Singapore, which has had a Lee leader for 45 of its 59 years of nationhood. ” He is the first PM without a Lee in waiting, and this allows Singapore to be a more normal democracy”, said Mr Low.
The Lees have always had such a significant impact on Singapore, and Mr. Vadaketh praised the fact that we are about to transition sociopolitically.
Mr. Wong’s appointment as his successor was telegraphed two years ago when he was appointed deputy prime minister, as is customary for the PAP.
But the 51- year- old was not the obvious choice from the start. When his political cohort, known as the “4G” or fourth-generation PAP leadership, made their debut more than ten years ago, was viewed as a dark horse.
Another minister, Heng Swee Keat, was slated to take over as PM before he bowed out citing his age and health.
It became clear that Mr. Wong would be the pandemic’s leader in Singapore. As co- chair of a government taskforce, he became a familiar face to Singaporeans, appearing in weekly press conferences calmly explaining convoluted anti- Covid measures.
His team and the local media have written about his reputation as an “everyman.” He is the first PM to study in non- elite local schools, just like most Singaporeans, and he was born in a public housing estate.
Following a nationwide consultation exercise that he launched, he has promised to build a more inclusive Singapore with more support for an ageing population and the needy. He has also promised to spread a message of unity. He stated in a recent interview with The Economist that Singaporeans would” not at all” become a minority and that immigration would continue to be regulated.
He also signalled no deviation in his approach to one of the biggest foreign policy issues for Singapore, the US- China relationship, by insisting the government sides with neither superpower- rather, he said, they are “pro- Singapore”.
Mr Low described him as an “open- minded conservative” who would be amenable to making changes but would likely introduce them “incrementally, marginally, rather than in a ‘ big bang'”.
This is why analysts believe he represents a wise choice by the PAP to emphasize continuity, which he is also eager to demonstrate.
When Mr. Wong revealed his cabinet lineup on Monday,” Continuity and stability are important considerations, especially as we are approaching the end of this term of government.”
He made mention of the requirement for the government to hold an election by November of that year. As Singaporeans decide on their future in a post-Lee era, it will be Mr. Wong’s biggest political test, having held a public vote for the first time as prime minister.
Similar movements were made by Japan in the 1960s and 1970s by China’s development program for the automotive industry. At that time, the merchandise coming from Japan was admirable but lacked the elegance, style and longevity of their European rivals. Japanese automobiles were viewed as thin, inadequate, prone to rusting, and very generic in comparison to the refined European models.
Memories of Japan’s involvement in World War II were also fresh in ( particularly American ) buyer’s minds, who were slow to forgive a nation that launched the Pearl Harbour attacks. But, by continually focusing on a reliable, relatively inexpensive and extremely fashionable product, Japan gently turned this around to become the mechanical powerhouse of the 1990s and 2000s.
Several Westerners are suspicious of China, and its automakers are also hampered by their recent tendency to produce both endorsed and illegal copies of European vehicles. However, Chinese cars are quickly improving to meet and surpass current models thanks to the lessons the Japanese can draw.
Brands like Volvo, Lotus, and MG have been strategically purchased, which has also elevated China’s already well-known and, more important, has the world’s best architectural knowledge.
However, Chinese manufacturers have proven incapable of gaining customer loyalty from brands like Ford, Porsche, Ferrari, and BMW, yet after purchasing Western brands. Chinese manufacturers, like the Japanese, will need to develop their own story of the brand in terms of known stability and perhaps success in sports.
It was Ford traders who, in the 1960s, coined the phrase:” Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday”. The proverb serves as an example of how to convince people to purchase a vehicle when they see one win a competition.
Customers have personally verified the stability of the products they are currently producing, which greatly increases brand loyalty. Add to this the absence of a well-established seller community outside of China, and you can see how Taiwanese manufacturers fight off the established rivals.
Getty ImagesAmerican President Joe Biden is imposing more stringent tariffs on imported metal, solar panels, electric vehicles, and other products.
The actions, which include a 100 % border taxes on Chinese energy vehicles, were intended to protect US work, according to the White House.
China has previously criticised the ideas, which were signalled in progress.
According to analysts, the tariffs were mostly symbolic and designed to bolster voter sentiment during a difficult election time.
They come in response to former president Donald Trump’s condemnation of Mr. Biden’s campaign for president, who has argued that his opponent’s assistance for electric vehicles would “kill” the US auto industry.
On Tuesday, Mr. Biden pledged to stop China from “unfairly controlling the market” for chargers, computer chips, and basic medical supplies for electric cars.
” If the pandemic taught us everything- we need , to have a stable supply , of essentials , around at home”, he said.
According to the White House, the taxes that were announced on Tuesday will impact exports worth an estimated$ 18 billion.
As well as a rise from 25 % to 100 % on electric vehicle tariffs, levies on solar cells will increase from 25 % to 50 %.
The tariff rate increase for some steel and aluminum products will increase from 7.5 % or less to 25 %.
Under Mr. Trump, the measures expand extensive borders fees that the US imposed on Chinese goods, citing unfair trade practices.
During the Biden administration’s assessment of the steps, the government received virtually 1, 500 remarks, the vast majority of them from business owners arguing that they were driving up prices for daily Americans, and asking them to be removed.
Yet as frequent US inflation has had an impact on his approval ratings, Mr. Biden’s decision to leave the tariffs in place and start expanding them into new areas is a testament to the dramatic change in industry views for both of the US’s long-held interests in terms of global business.
Former US business national Wendy Cutler, who is now vice chairman of the Asia Society Policy Institute, claimed that Americans were willing to accept more expensive cars in exchange for helping to protect US businesses and work.
” We’ve seen this movie before- with renewable, with steel and]aluminium], and when it comes to cars and other items the United States needs to getting ahead of the curve”, she said.
” It’s all about trade-offs, and we might see cars getting more expensive in the near future, but we want to have a competitive industry here in the long run.”
White House officials denied that the selection had been influenced by local politics during a press briefing.
They claimed that Beijing had not shown any signs of abstaining from US-friendly practices, including regulations requiring European businesses to share information in order to steal it and subsidies that have made it possible for businesses to pump out goods far beyond anticipated need.
” They’re flooding the market”, Mr Biden said. ” It’s never competing- it’s cheating”.
In contrast to how the taxes were handled by Mr. Trump, the White House claimed that they were targeted and did not anticipate that prices would result.
The former chairman, who previously called himself a “tariff man”, has campaigned on a proposed across- the- table 10 % tax on international goods, which may jump to 60 % for goods from China.
He has also criticised Mr. Biden for supporting electric vehicles, which he claims will devastate US car manufacturers and important employers in states like Michigan, which will be crucial for November election debates.
Both candidates “going down the same path” of higher trade barriers and “looking inside” rather than “examining what we can do on the plan before that would really make our sectors more aggressive,” according to Erica York, senior analyst at the Tax Foundation.
She referred to the administration’s “promotion of the tariffs as strategic” as an “euphemism for protection for sectors that are politically significant for this administration.”
Instead of choosing what makes the most sense economically or what is least expensive for US consumers, “it comes down to a political economy calculus.”
Sales of electric vehicles made in China are already at a record low due to the US’s already high tariffs on them.
However, Washington has been closely watching as Chinese companies ‘ sales in Europe and other nations rise.
According to White House officials, making the transition successful and long-lasting in the long run required making sure that green technologies were n’t dominated by one nation.
The business world is waiting to see if similar steps will be taken in Europe, according to Natasha Ebtehadj of Artemis Investment Management, despite the fact that moves aimed at electric vehicles are likely to have few real-world applications.
semiconductors- from 25 % to 50 % by 2025
certain steel and aluminium products- from 7.5 % to 25 % in 2024
electric vehicles- from 25 % to 100 % in 2024
lithium batteries and critical minerals- from 7.5 % to 25 % in 2024
solar cells- from 25 % to 50 % in 2024
ship to shore cranes- from 0 % to 25 % in 2024
rubber medical and surgical gloves- from 7.5 % to 25 % in 2026
Other than a risk of stifling their adoption, the European Union and the UK are also discussing ways to reduce imports of Chinese-made electric cars.
In the run-up to an election when both candidates are not actually pro-China, she said,” It’s not really a surprise to investors or to Chinese companies.”
It’s possible that more interesting will be what happens in Europe given the relatively small volume of imports to the US.
Since Mr. Trump imposed tariffs on roughly two thirds of Chinese imports in 2018, which was estimated to have cost the US$ 360 billion.
Beijing responded with retaliation after the measures, which reached a détente in early 2020 when Mr. Trump lowered some tariff rates while China made a pledge to increase its purchases from the US.
The tariffs have since resulted in more than$ 200 billion in new border taxes for the US government, which has resulted in a significant change in global trade patterns.
American citizens have paid more for furniture, footwear, and other items in the form of higher prices.
However, in a research note, Oxford Economics described the latest plans as “more symbolic bark than bite”.
The company called the result a “rounding error” and predicted that inflation would likely rise by a negligible 0.01 percentage point while weighing growth similarly.
World Business Report radio contributed reporting
Will Donald Trump’s re-election in the White House spark a nuclear weapons race that will start in South Korea and spread to Japan and perhaps Taiwan? This is the one that is least openly discussed in Tokyo out of all the possible effects of a Trump win. However, there is significant discussion about this gloomy prospect behind closed doors.
The Chinese language of the original president’s title is Toranpu. The number one question I had with Japanese politicians was” What if Trump” during my recent extended stay there? – the phrase used to reflect on the death of Japan if Trump is elected president.
Many problems loomed in the minds of Japan’s international policy wealthy, including:
All of those” America First” techniques are perfectly believable, even possible, given Trump’s previous actions and present assertions. To top it off, Chinese policymakers asserted that they were confident in their ability to manage Trump, following Shinzo Abe’s model: deceive him, pay him well, and bolster ties with his advisors.
If we have a great understanding in progress with the security and national security staff without Trump, as during the second Trump administration, that will help, a former top Japanese foreign ministry official told me.
The Chinese government will immediately hit the US about the significance of British bases there, believing that Trump’s rely on a fight with China will depend in part on maintaining the security alliance.
A senior foreign policy advisor to current Prime Minister Fumio Kishida said in a private conversation that he would n’t withdraw all of his forces from Japan. He might only want to do so for 30 to 40 %.
South Korean officials from across the Tsushima Strait also assert that a Trump re-election can be manipulated in some ways without putting in a dent in the empire on which their safety is a stumbling block. There are also significant concerns that Trump will immediately withdraw US forces from Korea, which have been exacerbated by Seoul’s failure to fulfill unreachable demands for payment.
Trump’s comments about his ideas for a second term in a new expanded interview with Time Magazine rekindled these doubts.
” We have 40, 000 troops]in South Korea], and in a somewhat precarious position”, Trump said, overstating the actual level of forces ( 28, 500 ) while restating his demand that the Koreans” step up and pay”.
This is not just bribery of safety money, like gangster money. ” Why do we protect anyone”? he told Time. ” We’re talking about a very powerful state”.
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, in his recent press conference following his group’s battle in the National Assembly votes, skillfully avoided comment on Trump’s notes. He expressed confidence in the alliance’s continued strength.
Trump’s second term plans for US forces were made long ago, during his first presidential experiment. In his memoir, former US president John Bolton provided detailed accounts of” Trump’s persistent desire to withdraw US military assets from the Korean Peninsula” along with details about the former president’s unquenched desire and steadfast belief that he could reach a grand peace agreement with Kim Jong Un.
In South Korea, Bolton wrote after taking office that” I feared Trump’s ultimate threat – withdrawing our troops from any country without paying what he thought was an adequate amount” was true.
Mark Esper, the former head of Trump’s defense department, details his numerous, albeit unsuccessful, attempts to thwart his troop withdrawal. As he wrote:
When Trump mentioned the need to pull all US forces out of Korea,” I became very uneasy,” Esper wrote.
The former defense secretary described how he and then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo suggested that Trump make that a top priority during his second term.
” This placated him”, Esper wrote. ” Trump responded with’ Yeah, yeah, second term,’ as a Cheshire Cat smile came across his face”.
Eldridge Colby, a former top official in the Trump defense, has been conducting interviews to demonstrate that this game plan is still in place.
In an interview that was released on May 7, Colby claimed that confronting China was a priority for the US and that South Korea was primarily responsible for resolving North Korea’s issues.
Because we do n’t have a military that can fight North Korea and then be ready to fight China, Colby said,” South Korea is going to have to take primary, essentially overwhelming responsibility for its own self-defense against North Korea.”
” North Korea is not a primary threat to the US, in fact, in my opinion. It would not be wise to simply deal with North Korea and lose several American cities. That’s a different calculation for South Korea” . ,
Colby, echoing remarks made previously by Trump, indicated that the US should accept, if not support, the nuclear option for South Korea, especially since the US would no longer offer its nuclear umbrella.
” It would be self-defeating and foolish for us to not provide South Korea with a viable defense umbrella and then threaten to sanction it when it decides with us to take measures to provide for security in the face of a massive nuclear buildup by North Korea and China,” he told Yonhap.
If Trump implements his plans, what will South Korea do? The solution is now contained in a significant study that the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank in Washington just released.
The study, which is titled” Breaking Bad: South Korea’s Nuclear Option,” was written by a former national security official and eminently regarded Korean expert Victor Cha and was based on a thorough poll of more than 1, 000 strategic elites in South Korea conducted between January and March of this year.
On the positive side of things, the poll disproves the somewhat cliched notion that more than two-thirds of Koreans favor the nuclear option, which is supported by flawed polling.
As the study shows, those polls ask a simple question, yes or no, about support for the nuclear option. If a path like that would put the US and South Korea at risk, the polls never ask if Koreans would agree to it.
Cha’s poll goes further with elites who are more knowledgeable about the effects of nuclear war, finding that two-thirds of respondents do not support nuclear war, primarily because of the potential international outcry and harm to the US alliance. The opposition to the nuclear option is non-partisan and is supported by both conservative and progressive elites.
However, the poll asked elites how they would respond to a return to the America First principle, which the US would denigrate and decouple, specifically by withdrawing American ground troops.
In that situation, more than half of those in favor of the non-nuclear option now back the development of nuclear weapons. By a two-to-one margin, they would favor an independent nuclear arsenal over the option of transferring nuclear weapons to the US.
” Any way you look at it, if Trump wins and he is decoupling, you are going to get this huge shift in elite opinion to go nuclear, and a public already in that camp”, Cha told this writer. ” It means it could happen very quickly. You would n’t have to have a national discussion and build public opinion”.
There is a historical analogy to the present day. The South Korean government of Park Chung-hee set up a secret program to develop nuclear weapons in the early 1970s in response to the US withdrawing one of its two infantry divisions from South Korea and its defeat in the Vietnam War.
Although policymakers in Washington initially questioned how serious it might be, it was discovered by American intelligence. In the end, only tough American pressure, including blocking the sale of French and Canadian nuclear technology, halted the program.
What would the nuclear transition of South Korea mean for Japan? Every Japanese foreign policy official I spoke to vehemently opposed the notion that Japan would or could develop nuclear weapons in response to Trump’s resumption of power.
The nuclear option was viewed by a senior Yomiuri Shimbun official as being both politically impossible and contrary to postwar Japanese policy.
When asked how Japan might respond if South Korea went down that path, though, that conviction weakened. ” If South Korea has nuclear weapons, Japan will surely have them”, the prime minister’s advisor, who had recently returned from a visit to Korea, told me.
Another senior foreign policy maker, who has served as an advisor to both Abe and Kishida, as well as to the Democratic Party of Japan, went even further. Japan, he told me in a private conversation, should develop nuclear weapons in a joint program with South Korea.
Given the two countries ‘ history, that is a radical idea, if not a politically impossible option. However, as he pointed out, it does have both strategic and technical logic. In a second Trump administration, both Japan and South Korea will face even more immediate threats from China, North Korea, and Russia, and they will no longer be able to rely on the US for extended deterrence.
Technically, while South Korea can move more quickly politically, Japan already has the fissile material in its H-2 and H-3 rockets in storage, including a potential long-range delivery system from the reprocessed spent fuel.
The former senior Foreign Ministry official said,” We have to face the utter reality of who is in charge of the US.” ” We cannot change that”.
The US senator runs the risk of repeating one of his counterpart’s biggest mistakes as Joe Biden attempts to beat Donald Trump.
This week, Biden will unveil plans to quadruple taxes on Chinese electric vehicle ( EV ) imports and slap , huge tariffs , on other key industries. Apparently, the new taxes on coast electric vehicles will go up to 102.5 %. Tariffs may double or triple in some of the highest-priority business.
It’s Biden’s latest campaign to out- Trump Trump, and finally a losing solution in terms of raising British living standards. Additionally, it runs the risk of provoking China into reacting negatively on US consumers and investors.
Biden’s need to revisit 1985 possibly makes feeling from a political point ahead of the November 5 vote. Taxes like those that Biden is considering and Trump used from 2017 to 2021 may have worked.
In 2024, while, Team Biden is endeavoring to defend an economic method that no longer exists. Similar to how Trump did while he was in office, when he imposed duties of at least 10 % on steel and aluminum and at least 10 % on all other domestic goods.
In a minute word, Trump has predicted that there will be 60 % tariffs on Chinese goods, so Biden’s administration is evidently trying to avoid coming across as friendly with Asia’s largest economy. Yet trying to kill China’s EV market is n’t the way to do it.
For beginners, it’s vague that Biden’s EV price plan may actually make much of a thorn. One concern, as Asia Times company editor , David Goldman argues, is that now no Chinese cars are also on present in the US right then.
Some economists are calling it “economic metaphor” that will do more to pacify Elon Musk than delayed China’s increase. The Tesla leader has warned that without major tariffs, Chinese automakers did “demolish” the international competitors.
Because of the “extremely small penetration of Taiwanese Vehicles in the US market today,” according to Evercore ISI researcher Sarah Bianchi, higher tax rates will have “minimal near-term financial impact.”
Biden’s earlier attempts to reignite US technology and boost production would be a wiser choice. With his , CHIPS and Science Act , and inflation- decrease legislation, Team Biden moved to create financial muscle at home and put the US back in the tech race for 2025 and above.
Silicon Valley has long lost its problematic zeal. The lion’s share of the “innovation” emanating from California and another US technology centers is on ways to sell more online and smartphone marketing.
The Trump administration seemed to have lost sight of the importance of improving America’s competitive spirit. Trump spent more money to revive coal and browbeat Detroit to produce less fuel-efficient vehicles than to restart growth engines. His massive tax cuts did little to encourage investments in productivity-boosting reforms and innovation.
Biden made the wrong mistakes in his attempts to criticize China more harshly than his rival. Tariffs will only increase US consumer prices, which are already very high.
Adam Tooze, an economist at Columbia University, calls Trump’s plans a “recipe” for an inflationary surge, which appeals to many. Goldman Sachs economist Ronnie Walker thinks Trump’s new , China taxes , will dent US gross domestic product ( GDP ).
According to Walker,” the direct impact of higher tariffs on GDP is likely to be moderately negative, with the decline in the trade deficit outweigh the impact on real income and consumer spending.” There are also unanticipated indirect effects, such as a downturn in business sentiment and supply-chain upheaval, that could worsen the negative impact.
According to James Singer, a spokesperson for the Biden campaign, “what Trump and his allies are proposing will cause chaos in markets, raise costs for working families, and cause inflation to rocket.” It goes beyond tariffs, too.
” Most of the major policy initiatives being suggested by Donald Trump’s campaign would be inflationary”, says economist Paul Ashworth at Capital Economics. ” Whether it’s narrowing the trade deficit via tariffs or a dollar devaluation, curbing immigration or, now we learn, compromising the , Fed’s independence”.
Enter the Biden campaign to make a November arms trade war more intense. Economist Intelligence Unit warns that whether Democrats or Republicans win, Sino-US relations will” a sustained worsening” in economic and diplomatic ties for the remainder of the decade.
” Either president will pursue policies aimed at exerting further pressure on China’s technology sector, while also justifying future trade and investment restrictions based on national security , concerns”, EIU analysts write.
Yet neither trade war policy mix, be it from Biden or Trump, is likely to halt China‘s increasing dominance – not even in EVs, says Michael , Dunne, CEO of auto industry advisory ZoZoGo. ” Imagine a world in which , China , builds every single car”, Dunne says. ” Unthinkable, right? Think again”.
China today, Dunne points out, has enough capacity to manufacture half of the world’s 80 million vehicles. By 2030, China’s capacity could climb to 75 % of the world’s volume, according to Global Data.  , This year China will export 6 million vehicles to more than 140 countries worldwide, blowing past Japan for global leadership.
Dunne notes that Chinese brands like SAIC’s MG, Chery, Geely’s Volvo and BYD are leading the way, winning in every time zone from Brazil to Thailand, from the UK to Australia.  ,” Call it the coming China car colossus”, he says.
EVs are merely a small sample of a larger dynamic. While Trump was tossing grenades at the global trade system during his first term, Beijing was investing aggressively in making China the dominant power in 5G, EVs, semiconductors, artificial intelligence, renewable energy and other dominant “future” industries.
Trump’s four more years of dragging America back to 1985 would be ideal for Xi Jinping, a Chinese leader. Trump’s domestic policies would push Xi’s” Made in China 2025” gambit even further ahead, despite the fact that they would temporarily stifle Chinese growth.
If Biden uses the economic model from 40 years ago, he faces a similar own goal.
Rewind to the mid- 1980s, Japan was cast in the villain’s role now occupied by China. The notion that Japan Inc. would rule the world economy captivated the American media. At the time, Japanese buyers were scooping up New York’s Rockefeller Center, golf courses like California’s Pebble Beach and Hollywood studios. They hoovered up any Rembrandts, Monets, Picassos and other masterworks on auction to hang in Tokyo.
Lawmakers and pundits warned of an , economic Pearl Harbor and of America becoming a commercial” colony” of Japan. In an interview at the time, Trump the businessman claimed that Japan had” systematically sucked the blood out of America — sucked the blood out!” They have gotten away with murder. They ultimately prevailed in the war.
Ronald Reagan, the then-US president, used a mercantilist strategy that still inspires Trump when he began his second term. In 1985, Reagan’s Treasury Secretary, James Baker, managed to cajole the most powerful industrialized nations to push the yen sharply higher and the dollar lower.
Trump’s former hotel, the Plaza Hotel, in New York, was the signing of the pact. Trump’s desire for a “new Plaza Accord” that would send the Chinese yuan into a soaring range was made apparent by then-Treasurer Steven Mnuchin and advisors like Peter Navarro early in his presidency.
That never materialized. A Trump 2.0 White House might attempt the strategy once more. Beijing would surely refuse. Official Chinese officials are aware of the effects of the currency deal’s influence on Japan’s asset bubble in the late 1980s, which led to decades of stagnation in the economy.
Also, Xi is determined to increase the yuan’s use in global trade and finance. Knowing this, Trump’s economic advisers and mulling steps to punish nations turning away from the , dollar. Team Trump wants to stop aggressive action among key emerging markets to lessen their exposure to the US dollar, according to a report from Bloomberg in late April.
Any nation that enters a bilateral trade agreement in currencies other than the dollar may face penalties as well. These might entail currency manipulation charges, tariffs or export controls.
All this, though, might merely slow the inevitable. Investors might be doing Xi’s work with China as the US national debt climbs to US$ 35 trillion and Congress becomes polarized. Moody’s Investors Service issues a warning that a downgrade might be forthcoming because the US only has one AAA credit rating left.
Not that Biden has taken any action to halt the de-dollarization movement. Efforts by Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, the BRICS, and others including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, gained new momentum in 2022.
When efforts to punish Russia for its invasion of Ukraine were led by Biden’s Treasury Department. Some of Vladimir Putin’s foreign exchange reserves were frozen, too.
Last month, Congress granted Biden’s White House authority to seize Russian dollar assets to aid Ukraine. The Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen’s team can transfer Russian government assets to a reconstruction fund in Ukraine thanks to this so-called REPO provision. It fueled fresh debate about the long- term costs of “weaponizing” the dollar.
” China may accelerate the process of de- dollarization”, says JPMorgan analyst Katherine Lei, noting that roughly 70 % of Chinese international trade is still held in dollars.
Quadrupling tariffs on , Chinese EVs, batteries, solar panels or other technologies might make for nice election- year headlines. But returning to 1985 wo n’t help the globe’s biggest economy find a higher gear vis- a- vis China.
Biden must think and invest more money in domestic economic and innovative muscle if he wants to capture Xi’s attention. Trump prioritized trying to trip China on the racecourse, not limbering up to beat it organically. Binding must turn the other way and prepare for a challenging upcoming decade.  ,
Follow William Pesek on X at @WilliamPesek
” I do not have a may- read list, I read frequently. It’s not just me, I believe some officials do. In response to a question about whether Mr. Wong has a list of must-read books for various groups of people because he is known to enjoy reading, he responded,” I read generally non-fiction these time.”
” A lot of it is present affairs. I had occasionally pick subjects that I wanted to read more and learn more about. So some of the more new issues, I am trying to figure out more about quantum computing, artificial intelligence, but I just read some books on that”.
He shared that he also read histories of officials from Singapore’s foundation technology, such as Lee Kuan Yew, Goh Keng Swee and S Rajaratnam, as well as international ones.
He recalled a book about former US President Dwight D. Eisenhower and how his ideas of leadership have often persisted.
” He distilled command into two points. One, knowing what to do and two, getting people to do what is the right item. It sounds pretty easy, but actually, there is a lot of wisdom in that”, said Mr Wong.
” First, you need to know what to do. There is no need for a innovator to occur if the leader is not even able to articulate and communicate this position ahead, but knowing what to do does not mean the leader has all the answers. However, the leader can certainly listen to advice and find opinions, but ultimately they may say this is the best course of action.
What is also extremely important is the president’s capacity to “engage people, motivate them and get everyone on the same page” to walk forward together, he added.
When Mr. Wong was questioned about particular policies he would follow as the next prime minister, and whether he was prepared to slaughter some” spiritual cows” after a long period of detention.
We are prepared to reevaluate anything, but not so much as attempting to kill a sacred cow for it, but we are also prepared to reevaluate our assumptions and take into account how, under various circumstances, with various societal expectations and needs, things may go. he said.
Mr. Wong cited the Forward Singapore exercise, which he launched two years ago, recent policy changes in public housing, improvements to the SkillsFuture scheme, as well as the upcoming unemployment benefit scheme, which “in the past ( we ) had stated this was not something we would do.
We believe there must be some kind of support system in place in light of the more dangerous economic environment and the more numerous job disruptions, according to Mr. Wong.
It serves as an example of how we are prepared to re-examine all of our basic beliefs and regard, finally, what is the best way to move Singapore ahead.
EXCESS Power The most recent actions have an impact on both materials that have already been subject to Trump tariffs. The charges will ensure that assets in employment, spurred by Biden’s laws, are never undercut by “underpriced imports from China”, National Economic Advisor Lael Brainard said. In addition to effortsContinue Reading
There are still questions about how the Pheu Thai-led state will implement changes to the law, despite decades of draft cannabis bills circulating.
Before a last act is chosen by the government and then presented to congress, the Ministry of Public Health has stated that more conversation is required. According to Mr. Srettha, a committee he chairs, the Narcotics Control Board did decide final information.  ,
However, the ruling coalition state itself, one of Pheu Thai’s companions, is divided over hemp, which is mainly responsible for ushering in the legalization time.
Anutin Charnvirakul, a former health minister, Bhumjaithai head, and deputy prime minister, has been vocal about a right and proper review being conducted before any limitations are re-imposed.
According to Dr. Yuttaporn Issarachai, a social scientist from Sukhothai Thammathirat Open University, gentle conversations would have taken place within the ruling coalition regarding what the limitations should really be and how to prevent the government from splintering over the problem.  ,
” I think a certain amount of discussion must have already taken place,” Bhumjaithai said.
” Despite the push to re- criminalise cannabis, I do n’t think Bhumjaithai will be so affected that it would leave the coalition. We ca n’t forget that although the cannabis policy is from Bhumjaithai, particularly when Mr Anuthin was the health minister, the re- criminalisation is wanted by quite a lot of people”, he said.  ,
Mr. Srettha’s cabinet just changed so that more proper names are now held in important portfolio positions, which would enable him to advance the political agenda of his party.
In recent months, the government has faced significant plan turbulence, including the government’s failure to fulfill important election promises, including its digital wallet initiative to boost the economy through a cash flyer program.
Obstacles have also been overcome by another populist measures, such as lowering energy prices, suspending farmer obligations, and raising the minimum wage.
Mr. Srettha may soon gain popularity in the area of cannabis and achieve favor among the electorate’s conservatives.
As cannabis use has increased, group concerns and harm have increased, according to Associate Professor Paul Chambers from the Center for ASEAN Community Research at Naresuan University.
According to the Center of Addiction Research at Chulalongkorn University, cannabis use has increased by ten times since legalization in the last two decades among young people, according to statistics. Cannabis people in 2022 reached 11.1 million, the heart found.
Professor Paisan Limstit, a writer of the decriminalisation of hemp, from the Health Laws and Ethics Center at Thammasat University, welcomed the prime minister’s strong position.
He has recently lamented the social effects of legalizing marijuana and claimed that the country’s tourism industry has suffered the most harm as a result of drug use, as well as criminal activity, and reputational harm.
The government should take great care of it, the author says. But there is still doubt in the matter of information”, he said.  ,
The state will probably also take into account important economic factors. Taxing cannabis do provide great windfalls to the president’s coffers.  ,
Assoc Prof Chambers believes that cannabis ‘ financial perks for a nation’s sector are likely to be unquestionable given that they are still recovering from COVID-19, making it unlikely that it will ever completely disappear.
Mr. Srettha is attempting to fulfill Pheu Thai’s campaign promise to impose stricter laws on cannabis sales and use. He also acknowledges that pot is a product that may benefit the Thai economy at the same time.  ,
” Income will win out. One way or another, cannabis as a commodity did be accessible to people in Thailand, maybe just a little pricier. That’s all”.
Bollywood is adored worldwide, but it has also faced criticism for being sexist and misogynistic.
Pravesh Kumar, a filmmaker and actor, wants to alter that.
Kumar, who was born in Slough but spent a decade working in Bollywood, told BBC News he is using his new music, Frankie Goes To Bollywood, as a way to shine a light on the American film industry’s lighter area.
” I think it’s important to request the really important inquiries”, he said.
Gender injustice and discrimination have a far-reaching root beyond India alone.
The# MeToo movement, which was sparked by Harvey Weinstein’s allegations in 2017, was centered in Hollywood.
” It’s not just Bollywood, we know it’s Hollywood too, this is just the account we’re telling”, American Eastern artist Laila Zaidi told BBC News.
A fresh Milton Keynes artist who relocates to India and aspires to become a star is the subject of the music.
But once there, Frankie immediately becomes disenchanted by the market. She is objectified and preyed upon by people twice her age. Older female stars are cast away, although older man stars are celebrated. Nepo-babies advance more quickly and earn prizes.
The present is based on true tales.
As an assistant director and writer, Kumar worked for a number of well-known Indian film and television manufacturing businesses.
He claimed to have always enjoyed watching movies as a child but that he started to feel more uneasy about what he was seeing on the camera.
” You frequently witness scenes where a 50 or 60-year-old person romances a woman who is not even his senior.” And if we purchase that seat, we are all responsible in that.
He described the economy as “absolutely also sexist”, adding:” Bollywood film is also run by men, and it’s for guys”.
In his music, Kumar claims he aimed to make these themes known and cause alter by bringing them to life.
He also actively portrayed a strong female character, in the character Frankie, as part of the musical’s message of sexual independence.
” I did n’t want to make a fluffy Bollywood dance show”, he said. ” All I can do, as an actor, is ask important questions. And if it is hard, when you go back home, I want you to have a talk about it because that’s how shift happens”.
Bollywood produces hundreds of movies annually and has a sizable after worldwide.
However, many of its films have received criticism for being discriminatory and portraying women in a cruel and negative way.
One new film, 2023’s Animal, faced a backlash from some critics, including in India. Controversial scenes like those that show a female character being asked to kiss a man’s boots and those that show regional and sexual abuse. Despite this, it was a field office hit.
Experts from Tiss ( Tata Institute of Social Sciences ) in Mumbai came to the conclusion that despite providing some reason for optimism, the box office visits are still discriminatory and backward, and gay picture and people continue to be dismal.
Anupama Chopra, a movie critic and Editor of Film Companion, based in Mumbai, said Bollywood is also sexist” but so is every movie industry in the world”.
She claimed that there is progress, which is fueled in part by the MeToo action, which launched in 2017.
” Absolutely there are more people in positions of power and greater knowledge. So there is shift. It’s slower but it’s certainly it”.
Nandini Ramnath, a movie writer at Scroll. in, likewise based in Mumbai, agreed that things are improving, even though there is also” a long way to go”.
” The productions behind Hindi movies, television shows and streaming set are packed with women, both in top positions as well as in important decision- creating departments”, she said.
” There has been a large transition in terms of picture. For example, there is greater consciousness that the song, which features a dancing woman surrounded by a hero and many men, is absolutely irrelevant and essentially sexist.
” The item song has n’t disappeared, but we do n’t see as much of it as before, and some filmmakers have consciously dropped it from their productions.”
Zaidi, who plays Frankie in the music, said she hoped it may help address the gender pay gap and discrimination in Bollywood.
She said it was” personal “acting the part of Frankie”. All people and all people will be able to connect. The first time we did a move through, I was in grief.”
The 30-year-old artist claimed that the issues did not only affect the Indian film industry, adding that she had had her own difficult experience in the UK.
I’ve certainly experienced power struggles, feeling like I’m being sexualized in a specific manner and feeling low.
She stated that the music wanted to savor South Asian ability and Bollywood, which it does by showcasing the stunning clothes, the songs, and dances. But it also wanted to highlight that it’s not perfect”. If we can make individuals more aware of the realities, next we’ll have played a little element.”
For Channel 4’s current affairs program Unreported World, investigative writer Sahar Zand produced the video India: Bollywood# MeToo in 2018.
Women in India spoke out when the MeToo action began, with Tanushree Dutta, a Bollywood actress, leading the charge.
Zand said that when it comes to discrimination, and sexual abuse in the industry, things are gradually changing.
You can see how more and more women are becoming conscious. MeToo brought more consciousness,” she said”. However, it is miles from where it is required to remain. Look at Hollywood, there is n’t equality, there are still sexual advances behind the scenes, but India still very much behind the curve,” she added”. What we’re seeing is a reflection of world.”
Zand said for change to occur quicker, more artists need to talk up and name offenders.
She argued that they needed to be secure in the knowledge that they would n’t risk sacrificing their lives and careers in the process.
” The rules needs to support them,” she said”. Instead of blaming them for speaking up, there needs to be a better system in place.
Watford Palace Theatre is currently hosting Frankie Goes to Bollywood, followed by a regional journey before moving to Southbank Centre in London in July.
