Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Altay-Hemu highway in northwest China’s Xinjiang opens
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Altay-Hemu highway in northwest China’s Xinjiang opens
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Residents get clean water from a temporary water supply station in Longshan County, central China’s Hunan province, June 20, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]
China’s Ministry of Finance on Monday announced the allocation of an additional 140 million yuan (about 19.5 million U.S. dollars) in emergency disaster relief funds for flood-hit Guizhou and Hunan provinces.
The new allocation follows an earlier disbursement of 160 million yuan on June 23, according to the ministry.
Since mid-June, both provinces have experienced heavy rainfall and severe flooding. The situation is particularly serious in areas such as Rongjiang and Congjiang in Qiandongnan Miao and Dong Autonomous Prefecture of Guizhou province, where large numbers of residents have been evacuated, and significant damage has occurred.
Rongjiang County, widely known as the birthplace of the Village Super League, or Cun Chao, is beginning post-disaster recovery after being hit by two severe floods in less than a week. Since June 24, back-to-back floods have inundated large parts of the county, with the Cun Chao stadium, which is situated in a low-lying urban area, submerged twice within five days.
The emergency funds will primarily support search and rescue operations, the relocation of affected residents, temporary living assistance, and reconstruction of damaged homes, the ministry said.
The funds aim to support the affected areas in restoring daily life and economic activity as soon as possible, the ministry added.
As China is currently in its flood season, the finance ministry said it will strengthen coordination with the Ministry of Emergency Management and other relevant departments to closely monitor developments and promptly allocate relief funds as needed to ensure disaster relief operations and protect people’s lives and property.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
This photo taken on Jan. 19, 2023 shows the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C., the United States. [Photo/Xinhua]
A marathon vote was underway Monday over U.S. President Donald Trump’s massive One Big Beautiful Bill, which highlights bitter partisan divisions in Washington.
Trump said the bill will deliver the largest tax cut for working- and middle-class Americans in history and will “unleash our economy.”
The bill contains a slew of tax cuts for businesses and families and will “turbo-charge our economy and bring back the American dream,” Trump said in a speech promoting the legislation.
However, Democrats are vehemently opposed to the mega-bill, which, if passed, will fund Trump’s agenda and stand in stark contrast to what Democrats want for the country.
Democrats blast Trump’s tax cuts as benefiting the wealthy, although Republicans maintain the cuts will help the middle class.
The bill has angered Democrats for what that party says are cuts to essential programs such as Medicaid — health care coverage for low-income people — as well as food stamps.
Democrats and a couple of Republicans also fret the bill will add trillions of U.S. dollars to the surging national debt.
Christopher Galdieri, a political science professor at Saint Anselm College in the northeastern state of New Hampshire, told Xinhua the legislation is “essentially a mega-bill combining most of Trump’s legislative ambitions into one package — tax cuts, spending cuts, massively increasing the budget for ICE, and more.”
The bill could provide additional funds for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to boost the number of agents and to provide pay bonuses.
ICE is in large part carrying out Trump’s mass deportation of millions of people who entered the United States illegally during the previous administration. But Democrats blast the deportations as heavy-handed, inhumane and unconstitutional.
Republicans argue that those funds for ICE are needed to reverse the damage they said Democrats did to the United States during the previous administration.
The GOP accuses Democrats of purposely opening the floodgates to millions of immigrants to illegally enter the United States, in what the GOP labeled an “invasion” and a result of Democrats’ “radical left” agenda during the previous administration.
The White House also argues that among those who have illegally entered are many criminals and gang members.
Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Saturday criticized the bill, accusing Republicans of trying to dupe the American people and saying “most people hate this bill.”
Some Republicans have also criticized the bill.
GOP Senator Josh Hawley has raised concerns about cuts to Medicaid, saying the reductions are “morally wrong and politically suicidal.”
But on Saturday, Hawley changed his tune and announced he would back the bill.
Republican Senator Rand Paul blasted the bill for what he said was adding to the debt, labeling it “much more of a spending bill than a bill that rectifies the debt problem.”
Paul has specifically lambasted the bill for what he said was adding to the national deficit by around 2.4 trillion U.S. dollars over a decade.
GOP Senator Thom Tillis criticized the bill on Saturday, saying: “It is inescapable this bill will betray the promise that Donald Trump made.”
The senator denounced proposed cuts to Medicaid and lambasted the “amateurs” advising Trump, who he said have “no insight into how these… Tax cuts are going to be absorbed without harming people on Medicare.”
Clay Ramsay, a researcher at the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland, told Xinhua: “The core of the partisan divisions is that Medicaid recipients, which are a quite significant portion of each legislator’s constituents, are going to either suffer cutoffs or will have to spend a lot of time and energy to avoid that happening.”
Republicans argue that the bill’s tax cuts will stimulate the economy.
Dean Baker, a senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, told Xinhua: “There will be little net effect. The biggest effect is likely to be contractionary from the (tariffs).”
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
China’s Ministry of Commerce announced Monday that it would extend anti-dumping duties aimed at stainless steel billets and hot-rolled stainless steel plates and coils imported from the European Union (EU), the United Kingdom (UK), the Republic of Korea (ROK) and Indonesia for another five years, starting Tuesday.
This decision follows an expiry review of anti-dumping measures aimed at the products initiated in July 2024 at the request of China’s domestic industry.
If these anti-dumping measures were terminated, the dumping of stainless steel billets and hot-rolled stainless steel plates and coils imported from the EU, UK, ROK and Indonesia could continue or recur, potentially causing ongoing or renewed harm to China’s domestic industry, the ministry said.
Under the extended measures, anti-dumping duties on the imported products were set at a range of 23.1 percent to 103.1 percent for the ROK, 43 percent for the EU and the UK, and 20.2 percent for Indonesia.
Stainless steel billets and hot-rolled stainless steel plates and coils are widely used in industries such as ships, containers, railways, electric power, petroleum and petrochemicals.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Photo taken on July 31, 2021 shows the statues on the square of Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited (HKEX) in south China’s Hong Kong. [Photo/Xinhua]
Hong Kong has beaten all the other capital markets in the world to raise over 105 billion Hong Kong dollars (13.38 billion U.S. dollars) through initial public offerings (IPOs) in the first half of 2025, as capital inflows into the city continues amid global market jitters.
The Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited (HKEX) data showed that 42 companies were listed in the first six months, up 40 percent from the same period last year. Total funds raised stood at the highest since 2021, crushing the 87.6 billion Hong Kong dollars annual total in 2024.
The HKEX claimed top spot worldwide in terms of total IPO proceeds in the first half of this year, well ahead of Nasdaq’s 71.3 billion Hong Kong dollars, a Deloitte report showed.
Industry insiders say Hong Kong’s securities market became a global investors’ go-to platform to add Chinese assets to their portfolios.
Capital inflow into Hong Kong has risen from 366 billion U.S. dollars at the beginning of last year to 605 billion dollars in April, the highest since 2000, data from Hang Seng Bank showed.
Many global investors first look to Hong Kong to diversify risks, and, impressed by the economic vitality of the Chinese mainland and Hong Kong, chose to increase their holdings, said Paul Chan, financial secretary of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) government.
Pro-growth policy efforts from the central government and the HKSAR’s measures to streamline listing procedures have worked together to lift Hong Kong’s stock market, said HKEX Chairman Carlson Tong.
Among this year’s new IPOs, crowd favorites are those of tech firms in artificial intelligence, 5G and smart vehicles, as well as new consumption companies, which cultivate and profit on consumer behaviors with the help of new technologies. Both are signatures of China’s economic upgrades.
Chinese electric vehicle (EV) battery maker Contemporary Amperex Technology (CATL) raised over 40 billion Hong Kong dollars in May, drawing investments from Europe, the Middle East and the United States. It is the largest IPO in Hong Kong in recent years and a shoo-in for the largest worldwide this year.
As flag bearers of new consumption trends, bubble tea makers like Mixue Bingcheng and Auntea Jenny marked memorable H1 IPOs, while Chinese fast food chain Home Original Chicken and snack brand Three Squirrels are waiting in line.
The avid investor turnout to these new consumption IPOs is a token of faith in the resilience of China’s domestic demand, as these companies have developed tried and tested business models to meet the needs of younger consumers, analysts say.
Hong Kong’s IPO market is expected to maintain steam in the second half. Edward Au, southern region managing partner of Deloitte China, said there are currently more than 170 applications in progress and estimated that a total of 80 IPOs will raise around 200 billion Hong Kong dollars this year.
As dependence on U.S. dollar-denominated assets wanes, global investors are increasingly seeking to diversify their portfolios, said Tong, adding that the HKEX is working with counterparts in the Middle East and Southeast Asia to widen access to funding for tech firms worldwide.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
China’s resilient economy, robust growth potential and improving corporate profitability are fueling more optimism and renewed interest in Chinese assets among foreign investors.
Driven by China’s advancements in technology and rising confidence in its policy support to stabilize economic growth in the second half of the year, global investors are ramping up their exposure to Chinese equities and bonds.
Major foreign financial institutions, including United States asset manager Franklin Templeton, investment bank Goldman Sachs and Swiss bank UBS have stepped up their allocations or expressed optimism about Chinese equities, citing favorable valuations, a peak in China-US trade tensions and optimism regarding China’s artificial intelligence-led transformation.
Market watchers and economists said that a combination of proactive fiscal measures, targeted industrial policies and accelerating technological innovation is reinforcing China’s appeal as a destination for global capital.
According to data released on Monday by the National Bureau of Statistics, China’s factory activity gauge improved marginally in June, as the official purchasing managers index for the manufacturing sector came in at 49.7 in June, up from 49.5 in May. Notably, the PMIs for equipment manufacturing, high-tech manufacturing and the consumer products sector came in at 51.4, 50.9 and 50.4, respectively, remaining in expansion territory for two straight months.
“The story of China now is about growth,” said Fang Dongming, head of China Global Markets at UBS.
Foreign investors will be attracted as long as companies promise growth and profit, whether it is in technology, healthcare, new energy or new types of consumption, Fang said.
Multibillion-dollar US fund manager Franklin Templeton has started edging back into Chinese stocks for the first time in years, with a group of its funds managing around $2 billion buying into Chinese stocks in recent weeks, Zehrid Osmani, head of the company’s Global Long-Term Unconstrained team, told Reuters recently.
The company believes that trade tensions with the US have peaked, and that China is expected to further support its technology giants, according to Osmani.
Economists believe that China is well-positioned to achieve its annual growth target of around 5 percent, backed by proactive fiscal policy and moderately accommodative monetary policy.
Zhang Xiaoyan, associate dean at Tsinghua University’s PBC School of Finance, said that China’s top leadership may sharpen its focus on ensuring domestic economic stability and maintaining stable relationships with its trading partners, which would further boost the confidence of domestic and foreign investors in the Chinese economy.
Liu Qiao, dean of Peking University’s Guanghua School of Management, said that new policy tools in the second half might include fiscal transfers or cash subsidies for low-income groups, and supportive policies to address pressure on enterprises, especially listed companies, which would improve corporate cash flow and strengthen investment appetite.
Driven by this favorable policy environment and long-term opportunities in sectors like technology, new energy and advanced manufacturing, global asset managers are reassessing their China allocations.
The return of global capital is reflected in broader data. According to Goldman Sachs, global active funds have increased their China equity allocations from 5 percent in late September to 6.4 percent by late April. The investment bank maintains an “increase” stance for Chinese stocks, citing improving corporate profitability, foreign capital inflows and long-term value in yuan-denominated assets.
Fu Si, China portfolio strategist at Goldman Sachs, has forecast that the CSI 300 Index — tracking 300 heavyweight stocks in Shanghai and Shenzhen — could reach 4,600 points, about 10 percent above current levels. Similarly, the MSCI China Index, widely tracked by global investors, is expected to rise another 10 percent in the coming months, supported by its current price-to-earnings ratio of just 11.5.
Goldman Sachs also identified artificial intelligence as a key growth driver. It estimated that AI proliferation could lift the overall profitability of Chinese stocks by 2.5 percent annually over the next decade. China’s AI breakthroughs may attract $200 billion in fresh capital into its equity market, potentially driving stock prices up 15 to 20 percent.
Zhang Di, chief macro analyst at China Galaxy Securities, highlighted that new policy-based financial instruments are likely to be introduced soon to support economic growth.
“That will help support the growth of infrastructure and real estate in the second half of the year. And the focus will also be placed on supporting technological innovation, consumer-related infrastructure, and key sectors such as trade-in deals for consumer goods,” he said.
According to Nomura Orient International Securities, Chinese equities could outperform global peers in the second half of 2025. Factors include expectations of more supportive policy, improving domestic liquidity, and rising global interest in Asia-Pacific markets amid a weaker US dollar.
Market performance so far reflects rising confidence. The Shanghai Composite Index has gained about 5.6 percent so far this year, while the CSI 300 is up over 3 percent. Meanwhile, the Hang Seng Index in Hong Kong has surged over 23 percent this year, second only to South Korea’s KOSPI, which saw a 28 percent increase.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yanyan Hong, PhD Candidate in Communication, Media and Film Studies, University of Adelaide
Bollywood star Aamir Khan’s return to the big screen after a three-year hiatus has been far from ordinary. Sitaare Zameen Par (2025) which translates to “stars on Earth”, is the first major Bollywood production to feature a mostly neurodivergent cast.
A remake of the 2018 Spanish film Campeones, the story follows a mouthy, knuckle-headed basketball coach, Gulshan (Aamir Khan), who is put in charge of a team of players with intellectual disabilities.
The film slowly grows into itself, much like its characters, but ultimately delivers what the trailer promises: a heartwarming, humorous and uplifting celebration of our individual differences.
In an era of blockbuster spectacles, Aamir Khan Productions brings back a kind of Bollywood storytelling we haven’t seen in a while – something sincere, gentle and quietly revolutionary.
Aamir Khan was born in Mumbai in 1965, and started his acting career as a child actor in his uncle’s film Yaadon Ki Baaraat (1973).
Khan is now one of Bollywood’s most enduring and respected figures. He is one of the iconic “three Khans”, alongside Shah Rukh Khan and Salman Khan (the three are unrelated), who have dominated Indian cinema since the 1990s.
But unlike his Khan counterparts, Aamir Khan has carved a unique career path built on both commercial success and socially-driven storytelling.
He is known for championing social causes through cinema. In one 2015 article, media studies professor Vamsee Juluri referred to him as a “national conscience figure”.
Khan’s films don’t just entertain; they challenge norms and often spark national conversations on important issues.
From producing Lagaan: Once Upon a Time in India (2001), India’s Oscar-nominated colonial-era sports epic, to his directorial debut Taare Zameen Par (2007), a moving portrait of a child with dyslexia, Khan’s work often brings underrepresented stories to the mainstream.
His film PK (2014) challenges religious dogma. Meanwhile, Dangal (2016) is a boundary-pushing film based on real-life female wrestlers from rural India, and is also Bollywood’s highest-grossing film of all time.
Beyond the box office, Khan has hosted the TV show Satyamev Jayate (2012–14), which is also the national emblem of India, meaning “truth alone triumphs”.
This show tackles various topics considered taboo in Indian societies, including female feticide, domestic violence and caste discrimination. It has reached millions of households, and even ignited parliamentary debates.
Khan is also popular in other countries, including China, where his films 3 Idiots (2009), Dangal (2016) and Secret Superstar (2017) were massive hits that resonated with audiences for their universal themes.
Sitaare Zameen Par marks his return following the commercial underperformance of Laal Singh Chaddha (2022), an Indian remake of Forrest Gump (1994).
Directed by R.S. Prasanna, Sitaare Zameen Par enjoyed a strong opening weekend at the box office.
It stars ten individuals with special needs as they prepare for a basketball tournament under the direction of their coach (Khan). This plot alone makes the film a significant entry to Indian cinema, which often ignores or misrepresents disability.
Despite early online trolling and negativity, the film depicts its neurodivergent characters not as victims, or “inspirations”, but simply as people with dreams, struggles and joy.
One line captures this beautifully: “Everyone sticks to their own normal. We each have our own normal.”
Aamir Khan, now 60, plays a key role in the film, but doesn’t dominate it. Instead, his younger co-stars shine. The result is a healing film that celebrates inclusion, while being full of joy and humanity.
No film is perfect. But it’s hard to dislike a film made with so much compassion.
Bollywood as an industry has increasingly leaned into action-packed blockbusters, as well as nationalist and Hindu-centred narratives (such as in the 2022 film Brahmāstra).
While many of these offer thrills, few deliver the kind of emotional and social depth that once defined Hindi cinema’s global appeal. Much like Taare Zameen Par – a spiritual prequel to the new release – did 18 years ago, Sitaare Zameen Par invites the audience to slow down and reflect.
It prompts neurotypical viewers to see people with Down’s syndrome as part of the same emotional universe as them – and to laugh with, not at them.
In an interview, Khan explains how the film goes further than just neurodivergent representation, to participation:
In [Taare Zameen Par], it’s the teacher, Nikumbh, a supposedly neuro-typical person, who helps the child with dyslexia. In this film, ten neuro-atypical people are helping the coach, Gulshan. I feel Sitare takes the discourse of the first film ten steps ahead, especially in our country where people need to be sensitised to the topic of neurodivergence.
Last week, India’s president, Droupadi Murmu, attended a special screening and met the cast. The visit sent a clear messsage: stories like this matter.
With Sitaare Zameen Par, Aamir Khan returns to what he does best: using film as both a mirror and message for Indian society. While it won’t change the world overnight, it will make viewers see the world, and each other, a little differently.
Yanyan Hong does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. Aamir Khan’s big screen comeback, Sitaare Zameen Par, features an all-star neurodivergent cast – a Bollywood first – https://theconversation.com/aamir-khans-big-screen-comeback-sitaare-zameen-par-features-an-all-star-neurodivergent-cast-a-bollywood-first-259673
Source: The Conversation – Africa (2) – By Donrich Thaldar, Professor, University of KwaZulu-Natal
In the digital economy, data is more than just information – it is an asset with immense economic and strategic value. Yet, despite its significance, a fundamental legal question remains unresolved: Can data be owned? While privacy laws worldwide focus on protecting individuals’ rights over their personal data, they often sidestep the issue of ownership. This has led to legal uncertainty, particularly in South Africa, where the Protection of Personal Information Act (Popia) grants data subjects various rights over their personal information but does not explicitly address ownership.
This gap in legal clarity raises pressing questions: If personal data – such as private health information – exists within a vast and ever-growing digital landscape, can it be owned? And if so, who holds the rightful claim?
Legal academic Donrich Thaldar, whose research focuses on data governance, explores these questions in a recent academic article. He unpacks his findings for The Conversation Africa.
In today’s digital economy, data is the most valuable asset – it’s often referred to as “the new oil”. Whether in commerce, research, or social interactions, the ability to generate, use and trade with data is central to economic competitiveness.
If data ownership is not clearly established, it could stifle innovation and investment. Companies require legal certainty to operate effectively in a knowledge-driven economy.
Countries have taken different legal approaches to tackling the question of who owns data. China, for instance, formally recognises the proprietary rights of data generators, meaning that businesses and individuals who generate data have legally defined rights over its use and commercialisation. This provides legal support for the country’s digital industries.
In the past, the South African Information Regulator has taken the position that personal information is automatically owned by the data subject – the person to whom the data relates – rather than by the entity generating the data. In this view, the rights created by Popia imply that data subjects themselves are the owners of their personal data, and nobody else.
I suggest that this stance is legally flawed, as it conflates two different branches of the law: privacy law and property law. Moreover, it could severely disrupt the digital economy. The digital economy depends on data as a tradeable asset – it must be capable of being sold, licensed and commercialised like any other economic object. If ownership must always be with data subjects, businesses face uncertainty in using and monetising data. Uncertainty stifles innovation, discourages investment, and undermines South Africa’s digital competitiveness.
Ownership is a concept in property law, not privacy law. Therefore, to answer the data ownership question, we need to look for answers in property law.
Property law governs the relationship between subjects (legal persons) and objects (things external to the body, whether physical or not). Ownership is about the rights that a subject has over an object. For an object to be capable of being owned, it must be valuable, useful, and – importantly – capable of human control. A bottle of water meets these criteria, but the vast oceans do not, as they are not within human control.
Personal data in the abstract is like the water in the ocean – vast, uncontained, and beyond individual control. However, a digital instance of personal data, such as a computer file, is more like a bottled version of that water – defined and subject to human control. Just like digital money and other valuable digital assets, a specific instance of personal data meets all the requirements under South African common law for private ownership. Thus, in this sense personal data can be owned.
At first glance this might seem so, but no, not necessarily. The reason that it might seem so, is because some of the privacy rights created by Popia resemble ownership rights. For example, an owner’s agreement is required before someone else can use the owned object (e.g., loan for use and rent). Similarly, a data subject’s consent is in most cases required before personal data can be processed. Furthermore, the owner of a thing has the right to destroy it; similarly, a data subject typically has the right to have personal data deleted.
Do these privacy rights mean that data subjects actually own their personal data? I suggest not. Wearing a feather in one’s hat does not make one a bird. In the same way, privacy rights that resemble ownership rights do not mean that they constitute ownership. Ownership is acquired by following the rules of property law.
Because a newly created personal data instance has no antecedent legal object – in other words, it is not created out of another legal object – it initially belongs to no one. It is res nullius. Ownership of res nullius is acquired through appropriation, which requires two elements: control and the intention to own.
This means that the entity generating the data, such as a company or university collecting and recording it, is best positioned to acquire ownership. Since it already has control over the data, the only remaining requirement is simply the intention to be the owner.
If an entity like a university generates data and intends to own it, then – provided it is in control of that data – it will legally become the owner. This in principle allows the entity to use, license and trade the data as an economic asset. Indeed, it is prudent for data-generating entities, such as universities, to explicitly assert ownership over the data they produce. This not only establishes their legal rights with clarity but also serves as a safeguard against unauthorised access and misuse by malicious actors.
No, it should not. Ownership is always limited by other legal rules. For example, while I might own a car, I cannot drive it in any way I like – I must obey the rules of the road. Similarly, ownership of personal data is subject to strict limitations, particularly the privacy rights of data subjects under Popia.
However, it is also important to understand that privacy rights apply only to personal data. If personal data is de-identified, meaning that it can no longer be linked to the data subjects, privacy rights cease to apply. What remains are the ownership rights in the data itself. It can be a fully tradeable asset.
Recognising that a digital instance of personal data can be owned – and that the rightful owner is typically the data generator – does not undermine the privacy protections of Popia. Rather, it clarifies the legal landscape, ensuring that the rights of both data subjects and data generators are recognised and protected.
Donrich Thaldar receives funding from the NIH.
– ref. Who owns digital data about you? South African legal scholar weighs up property and privacy rights – https://theconversation.com/who-owns-digital-data-about-you-south-african-legal-scholar-weighs-up-property-and-privacy-rights-249741
MIL OSI –
Source: The Conversation – Africa (2) – By Thompson Gyedu Kwarkye, Postdoctoral Researcher, University College Dublin
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasing productivity and pushing the boundaries of what’s possible. It powers self-driving cars, social media feeds, fraud detection and medical diagnoses. Touted as a game changer, it is projected to add nearly US$15.7 trillion to the global economy by the end of the decade.
Africa is positioned to use this technology in several sectors. In Ghana, Kenya and South Africa, AI-led digital tools in use include drones for farm management, X-ray screening for tuberculosis diagnosis, and real-time tracking systems for packages and shipments. All these are helping to fill gaps in accessibility, efficiency and decision-making.
However, it also introduces risks. These include biased algorithms, resource and labour exploitation, and e-waste disposal. The lack of a robust regulatory framework in many parts of the continent increases these challenges, leaving vulnerable populations exposed to exploitation. Limited public awareness and infrastructure further complicate the continent’s ability to harness AI responsibly.
What are African countries doing about it?
To answer this, my research mapped out what Ghana and Rwanda had in place as AI policies and investigated how these policies were developed. I looked for shared principles and differences in approach to governance and implementation.
The research shows that AI policy development is not a neutral or technical process but a profoundly political one. Power dynamics, institutional interests and competing visions of technological futures shape AI regulation.
I conclude from my findings that AI’s potential to bring great change in Africa is undeniable. But its benefits are not automatic. Rwanda and Ghana show that effective policy-making requires balancing innovation with equity, global standards with local needs, and state oversight with public trust.
The question is not whether Africa can harness AI, but how and on whose terms.
Rwanda’s National AI Policy emerged from consultations with local and global actors. These included the Ministry of ICT and Innovation, the Rwandan Space Agency, and NGOs like the Future Society, and the GIZ FAIR Forward. The resulting policy framework is in line with Rwanda’s goals for digital transformation, economic diversification and social development. It includes international best practices such as ethical AI, data protection, and inclusive AI adoption.
Ghana’s Ministry of Communication, Digital Technology and Innovations conducted multi-stakeholder workshops to develop a national strategy for digital transformation and innovation. Start-ups, academics, telecom companies and public-sector institutions came together and the result is Ghana’s National Artificial Intelligence Strategy 2023–2033.
Both countries have set up or plan to set up Responsible AI offices. This aligns with global best practices for ethical AI. Rwanda focuses on local capacity building and data sovereignty. This reflects the country’s post-genocide emphasis on national control and social cohesion. Similarly, Ghana’s proposed office focuses on accountability, though its structure is still under legislative review.
Ghana and Rwanda have adopted globally recognised ethical principles like privacy protection, bias mitigation and human rights safeguards. Rwanda’s policy reflects Unesco’s AI ethics recommendations and Ghana emphasises “trustworthy AI”.
Both policies frame AI as a way to reach the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. Rwanda’s policy targets applications in healthcare, agriculture, poverty reduction and rural service delivery. Similarly, Ghana’s strategy highlights the potential to advance economic growth, environmental sustainability and inclusive digital transformation.
Rwanda’s policy ties data control to national security. This is rooted in its traumatic history of identity-based violence. Ghana, by contrast, frames AI as a tool for attracting foreign investment rather than a safeguard against state fragility.
The policies also differ in how they manage foreign influence. Rwanda has a “defensive” stance towards global tech powers; Ghana’s is “accommodative”. Rwanda works with partners that allow it to follow its own policy. Ghana, on the other hand, embraces partnerships, viewing them as the start of innovation.
While Rwanda’s approach is targeted and problem-solving, Ghana’s strategy is expansive, aiming for large-scale modernisation and private-sector growth. Through state-led efforts, Rwanda focuses on using AI to solve immediate challenges such as rural healthcare access and food security. In contrast, Ghana looks at using AI more widely – in finance, transport, education and governance – to become a regional tech hub.
The effectiveness of these AI policies is held back by broader systemic challenges. The US and China dominate in setting global standards, so local priorities get sidelined. For example, while Rwanda and Ghana advocate for ethical AI, it’s hard for them to hold multinational corporations accountable for breaches.
Energy shortages further complicate large-scale AI adoption. Training models require reliable electricity – a scarce resource in many parts of the continent.
To address these gaps, I propose the following:
Investments in digital infrastructure, education and local start-ups to reduce dependency on foreign tech giants.
African countries must shape international AI governance forums. They must ensure policies reflect continental realities, not just western or Chinese ones. This will include using collective bargaining power through the African Union to bring Africa’s development needs to the fore. It could also help with digital sovereignty issues and equitable access to AI technologies.
Finally, AI policies must embed African ethical principles. These should include communal rights and post-colonial sensitivities.
Thompson Gyedu Kwarkye does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. AI policies in Africa: lessons from Ghana and Rwanda – https://theconversation.com/ai-policies-in-africa-lessons-from-ghana-and-rwanda-253642
MIL OSI –
Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ali Mamouri, Research Fellow, Middle East Studies, Deakin University
After 12 days of war, US President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire between Israel and Iran that would bring to an end the most dramatic, direct conflict between the two nations in decades.
Israel and Iran both agreed to adhere to the ceasefire, though they said they would respond with force to any breach.
If the ceasefire holds – a big if – the key question will be whether this signals the start of lasting peace, or merely a brief pause before renewed conflict.
As contemporary war studies show, peace tends to endure under one of two conditions: either the total defeat of one side, or the establishment of mutual deterrence. This means both parties refrain from aggression because the expected costs of retaliation far outweigh any potential gains.
The war has marked a turning point for Israel in its decades-long confrontation with Iran. For the first time, Israel successfully brought a prolonged battle to Iranian soil, shifting the conflict from confrontations with Iranian-backed proxy militant groups to direct strikes on Iran itself.
This was made possible largely due to Israel’s success over the past two years in weakening Iran’s regional proxy network, particularly Hezbollah in Lebanon and Shiite militias in Syria.
Over the past two weeks, Israel has inflicted significant damage on Iran’s military and scientific elite, killing several high-ranking commanders and nuclear scientists. The civilian toll was also high.
Additionally, Israel achieved a major strategic objective by pulling the United States directly into the conflict. In coordination with Israel, the US launched strikes on three of Iran’s primary nuclear facilities: Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan.
Despite these gains, Israel has not accomplished all of its stated goals. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had voiced support for regime change, urging Iranians to rise up against Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s government, but the senior leadership in Iran remains intact.
Additionally, Israel has not fully eliminated Iran’s missile program. (Iran continued striking to the last minute before the ceasefire.) And Tehran did not acquiesce to Trump’s pre-war demand to end uranium enrichment.
Although Iran was caught off-guard by Israel’s attacks — particularly as it was engaged in nuclear negotiations with the US — it responded by launching hundreds of missiles towards Israel.
While many were intercepted, a significant number penetrated Israeli air defences, causing widespread destruction in major cities, dozens of fatalities and hundreds of injuries.
Iran has demonstrated its capacity to strike back, though Israel has succeeded in destroying many of its air defence systems, some ballistic missile assets (including missile launchers) and multiple energy facilities.
Since the beginning of the assault, Iranian officials have repeatedly called for a halt to resume negotiations. Under such intense pressure, Iran has realised it would not benefit from a prolonged war of attrition with Israel — especially as both nations face mounting costs and the risk of depleting their military stockpiles if the war continues.
As theories of victory suggest, success in war is defined not only by the damage inflicted, but by achieving core strategic goals and weakening the enemy’s will and capacity to resist.
While Israel claims to have achieved the bulk of its objectives, the extent of the damage to Iran’s nuclear program is not fully known, nor is its capacity to continue enriching uranium.
Both sides could remain locked in a volatile standoff over Iran’s nuclear program, with the conflict potentially reigniting whenever either side perceives a strategic opportunity.
Iran faces even greater challenges when it emerges from the war. With a heavy toll on its leadership and nuclear infrastructure, Tehran will likely prioritise rebuilding its deterrence capability.
That includes acquiring new advanced air defence systems — potentially from China — and restoring key components of its missile and nuclear programs. (Some experts say Iran has not used some of its most powerful missiles to maintain this deterrence.)
Iranian officials have claimed they safeguarded more than 400 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium before the attacks. This stockpile could theoretically be converted into nine to ten nuclear warheads if further enriched to 90%.
Trump declared Iran’s nuclear capacity had been “totally obliterated”, whereas Rafael Grossi, the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog chief, said damage to Iran’s facilities was “very significant”.
However, analysts have argued Iran will still have a depth of technical knowledge accumulated over decades. Depending on the extent of the damage to its underground facilities, Iran could be capable of restoring and even accelerating its program in a relatively short time frame.
And the chances of reviving negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program appear slimmer than ever.
The war has fundamentally reshaped how both Iran and Israel perceive deterrence — and how they plan to secure it going forward.
For Iran, the conflict has reinforced the belief that its survival is at stake. With regime change openly discussed during the war, Iran’s leaders appear more convinced than ever that true deterrence requires two key pillars: nuclear weapons capability, and deeper strategic alignment with China and Russia.
As a result, Iran is expected to move rapidly to restore and advance its nuclear program, potentially moving towards actual weaponisation — a step it had long avoided, officially.
At the same time, Tehran is likely to accelerate military and economic cooperation with Beijing and Moscow to hedge against isolation. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi emphasised this close engagement with Russia during a visit to Moscow this week, particularly on nuclear matters.
Israel, meanwhile, sees deterrence as requiring constant vigilance and a credible threat of overwhelming retaliation. In the absence of diplomatic breakthroughs, Israel may adopt a policy of immediate preemptive strikes on Iranian facilities or leadership figures if it detects any new escalation — particularly related to Iran’s nuclear program.
In this context, the current ceasefire already appears fragile. Without comprehensive negotiations that address the core issues — namely, Iran’s nuclear capabilities — the pause in hostilities may prove temporary.
Mutual deterrence may prevent a more protracted war for now, but the balance remains precarious and could collapse with little warning.
Ali Mamouri does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. Will the fragile ceasefire between Iran and Israel hold? One factor could be crucial to it sticking – https://theconversation.com/will-the-fragile-ceasefire-between-iran-and-israel-hold-one-factor-could-be-crucial-to-it-sticking-259669
MIL OSI –
Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ismail Albayrak, Professor of Islam and Catholic Muslim Relations, Australian Catholic University
In our guides to the classics, experts explain key literary works.
Ibn Battuta, was born in Tangier, Morocco, on February 24, 1304. From a statement in his celebrated travel book the Rihla (“legal affairs are my ancestral profession,”) he evidently came from an intellectually distinguished family.
According to the Rihla (travelogue), Ibn Battuta embarked on his travels from Tangier at the age of 22 with the intention of performing the Hajj (the sacred pilgrimage to Mecca) in 1325. Although he returned to Fez (his adopted home-town) around the end of 1349, he continued to visit various regions, including Granada and Sudan, in subsequent years.
Over the course of his almost 30 years of travel, Ibn Battuta covered an astonishing distance of approximately 73,000 miles (117,000 kilometres), visiting a region that today encompasses more than 50 countries. His journeys covered much of the medieval Islamic world and beyond, excluding Northern Europe.
In 1355, he returned to Morocco for the last time and remained there for the rest of his life. Upon his return he dictated his experiences, observations and anecdotes to the Andalusian scholar Ibn Juzayy, with a compilation of his travels completed in 1355 or 1356.
The work, formally titled A Gift to Researchers on the Curiosities of Cities and the Marvels of Journeys, is more commonly referred to as Rihlat Ibn Battuta or simply Rihla.
More than a travelogue or geographical record, this book provides rich insights into 14th-century social and political life, capturing cultural diversity across nations. Ibn Battuta details local lifestyles, linguistic traits, beliefs, clothing, cuisines, holidays, artistic traditions and gender relations, as well as commercial activities and currencies.
His observations also include geographical features such as mountains, rivers and agricultural products. Notably, the work highlights his encounters with over 60 sultans and more than 2,000 prominent figures, making it a valuable historical resource.
His travels began after a dream. According to Ibn Battuta, one night, while in Fuwwa, a town near Alexandria in Egypt, he dreamed of flying on a massive bird across various lands, landing in a dark, greenish country.
To test the local sheikh’s mystical knowledge, he decided if the sheikh knew of his dream, he was truly extraordinary. The next morning, after leading the dawn prayer, he saw the sheikh bid farewell to visitors. Later, the sheikh astonishingly revealed knowledge of Ibn Battuta’s dream and prophesied his pilgrimage through Yemen, Iraq, Turkey and India.
At the time, the Middle East was under the rule of the Mamluk sultanate, Anatolia was divided among principalities and the Mongol Ilkhanate state controlled Iran, Central Asia, and the Indian subcontinent.
Ibn Battuta initially travelled through North Africa, Egypt, Palestine and Syria, completing his first Hajj in 1326.
He then visited Iraq and Iran, returning to Mecca. In 1328, he explored East Africa, reaching Mogadishu, Mombasa, Sudan and Kilwa (modern Tanzania), as well as Yemen, Oman and Anatolia, where he documented cities like Alanya, Konya, Erzurum, Nicaea and Bursa.
His descriptions are vivid. Describing the city of Dimyat, on the bank of the Nile, he says:
Many of the houses have steps leading down to the Nile. Banana trees are especially abundant there, and their fruit is carried to Cairo in boats. Its sheep and goats are allowed to pasture at liberty day and night, and for this reason the saying goes of Dimyat, ‘Its wall is a sweetmeat and its dogs are sheep’. No one who enters the city may afterwards leave it except by the governor’s seal […]
When it comes to Anatolia (in modern-day Turkey), he declares:
This country, known as the Land of Rum, is the most beautiful in the world. While Allah Almighty has distributed beauty to other lands separately, He has gathered them all here. The most beautiful and well-dressed people live in this land, and the most delicious food is prepared here […] From the moment we arrived, our neighbors — both men and women — showed great concern for our wellbeing. Here, women do not shy away from men; when we departed, they bid us farewell as if we were family, expressing their sadness through tears.
Since Ibn Battuta dictated his work, it’s difficult to assess the extent of the scribe’s influence in recording his narratives. Despite being an educated man, he occasionally narrates like a commoner and sometimes exceeds the bounds of polite language. At times, he provides excessive detail, giving the impression he may be quoting from sources beyond his own observations.
Nevertheless, the Rihla stands out for its engaging style and captivating anecdotes, drawing readers in.
Ibn Battuta later journeyed through Crimea, Central Asia, Khwarezm (a large oasis region in the territories of present-day Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan), Bukhara (a city in Uzbekistan), and the Hindu Kush Mountains. In 1332, he met Byzantine Emperor Andronikos III Palaiologos and travelled to Istanbul with the caravan of Uzbek Khan’s third wife. He mentions a caravan that even has a market:
Whenever the caravan halted, food was cooked in great brass cauldrons, called dasts, and supplied from them to the poorer pilgrims and those who had no provisions. […] This caravan contained also animated bazaars and great supplies of luxuries and all kinds of food and fruit. They used to march during the night and light torches in front of the file of camels and litters, so that you saw the countryside gleaming with light and the darkness turned into radiant day.
Ibn Battuta arrived in Delhi in 1333, where he served as a judge under Sultan Muhammad bin Tughluq for seven years. He married or was married to local women in many of the places he stayed. Among his wives were ordinary people as well as the daughters of the administrative class.
The Sultan’s generosity, intelligence and unconventional ruling style both impressed and surprised Ibn Battuta. However, Muhammad bin Tughluq was known for making excessively harsh and abrupt decisions at times, which led Ibn Battuta to approach him with caution. Nevertheless, with the Sultan’s support, he remained in India for a long time and was eventually chosen as an ambassador to China in 1341.
In 1345 his mission was disrupted when his ship capsized off the coast of Calcutta (then known as Sadqawan) in the Indian Ocean. Though he survived, he lost most of his possessions.
After the incident, he remained in India for a while before continuing his journey by other means. During this period, he travelled through India, Sri Lanka and the Maldives. He served as a judge in the latter for one and a half years. In 1345, he journeyed to China via Bengal, Burma and Sumatra, reaching the city of Guangzhou but limiting his exploration to the southern coast.
He was among the first Arab travellers to record Islam’s spread in the Malay Archipelago, noting interactions between Muslims and Hindu-Buddhist communities. Visiting Java and Sumatra, he praised Sultan Malik al-Zahir of Sumatra as a generous, pious and scholarly ruler and highlighted his rare practice of walking to Friday prayers.
On his return, Ibn Battuta explored regions such as Iran, Iraq, North Africa, Spain and the Kingdom of Mali, documenting the vast Islamic world.
Back in his homeland, Ibn Battuta served as a judge in several locations. He died around 1368-9 while serving as a judge in Morocco and was buried in his birthplace, Tangier.
Ibn Battuta’s travels revealed intriguing insights into the status of women across regions. In inner West Africa, he observed matriarchal practices where lineage and inheritance were determined by the mother’s family.
Among Turks, women rode horses like raiders, traded actively and did not veil their faces.
In the Maldives, husbands leaving the region had to abandon their wives. He noted that Muslim women there, including the ruling woman, did not cover their heads. Despite attempting to enforce the hijab as a judge, he failed.
He offers fascinating insights into food cultures. In Siberia, sled dogs were fed before humans. He described 15-day wedding feasts in India.
He tried local produce such as mango in the Indian subcontinent, which he compared to an apple, and sun-dried, sliced fish in Oman.
Ibn Battuta’s accounts of the Hajj (pilgrimage) rituals he performed six times provide a unique perspective. He references a fatwa by Ibn Taymiyyah, prominent Islamic scholar and theologian known for his opposition to theological innovations and critiques of Sufism and philosophy, advising against shortening prayers for those travelling to Medina.
Ibn Battuta’s accounts, particularly regarding the Iranian region, offer important perspectives into religious sects during a period when Iran started shifting from Sunnism to Shiism. He describes societies with diverse demographics, including Persians, Azeris, Kurds, Arabs and Baluchis. His observations on religious practices are especially significant.
Inclined toward Sufism, Ibn Battuta often dressed like a dervish during his travels. He offers a compelling view of Islamic mysticism. He considered regions like Damascus as places of abundance and Anatolia as a land of compassion, interpreting them with a spiritual perspective.
His accounts of Sufi education, dervish lodges, zawiyas (similar to monasteries), and tombs, along with the special invocations of Sufi masters, are important historical records. He also observed and documented unique practices, such as the followers of the Persian Sufi saint Sheikh Qutb al-Din Haydar wearing iron rings on their hands, necks, ears, and even private parts to avoid sexual intercourse.
While Ibn Battuta primarily visited Muslim lands, he also travelled to non-Muslim territories, offering key understandings into different religious cultures, for instance interactions between Crimean Muslims and Christian Armenians in the Golden Horde region.
He also documented churches, icons and monasteries, such as the tomb of the Virgin Mary in Jerusalem. His observation of Muslims openly reciting the call to prayer (adhan) in China is significant.
Other anecdotes include the division of the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus into a mosque and Christian church. Most importantly, his encounters with Hindus and Buddhists in the Indian subcontinent and Malay Islands provide rich historical context.
His accounts of death rituals reveal diverse practices. In Sinop (a city in Turkey), 40 days of mourning were declared for a ruler’s mother, while in Iran, a funeral resembled a wedding celebration. He observed similarities in cremation practices between India and China and described a chilling custom in some regions where slaves and concubines were buried alive with the deceased.
Ibn Battuta’s Rihla, widely translated into Eastern and Western languages, has drawn some criticism for containing depictions that sometimes diverge from historical continuity or borrow from other works. Ibn Battuta himself admitted to using earlier travel books as references.
Despite limited recognition in older sources, the Rihla gained prominence in the West in the 19th century. His legacy remains vibrant today. Morocco declared 1996–1997 the “Year of Ibn Battuta,” and established a museum in Tangier to honour him. In Dubai, a mall is named after him.
Notably, Ibn Battuta travelled to more destinations than Marco Polo and shared a broader range of humane anecdotes, showcasing the depth and diversity of his experiences.
Ismail Albayrak does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. Ibn Battuta, a 14th-century judge and ambassador, travelled further than Marco Polo. The Rihla records his adventures – https://theconversation.com/ibn-battuta-a-14th-century-judge-and-ambassador-travelled-further-than-marco-polo-the-rihla-records-his-adventures-246148
MIL OSI –
Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ciprian N. Radavoi, Associate Professor in Law, University of Southern Queensland
It’s almost a decade since San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick started a worldwide trend and sparked fierce debate when he knelt during the US national anthem.
In 2016, Kaepernick refused to follow the pre-game protocol related to the national anthem and knelt instead, saying:
I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of colour.
Soon, many athletes and teams began “taking a knee” at sports events to express their solidarity with victims of racial injustice.
Now, they appear to have stopped, which prompted us to research the decline.
Following the intense public debate over the appropriateness of Kaepernick’s act, the ritual quickly spread worldwide, with athletes in major soccer leagues, cricket, rugby, Formula 1, top-tier tennis and the US’s Major League Baseball and National Basketball Association taking a knee.
Athletes didn’t always kneel during national anthems, with the majority kneeling at certain points pre-game.
Despite the occasional “defection” of a small number of players who would stand while their teammates knelt – such as Israel Folau in rugby league, Wilfried Zaha in soccer and Quinton de Kock in cricket – the ritual was widely embraced by teams and athletes and helped raise awareness of the issue.
Even major sports organisations notorious for prohibiting any type of political activism generally accepted the kneeling ritual. For example, soccer’s International Football Federation (FIFA) showcased kneeling as a “stand against discrimination” and as human rights advocacy.
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) initially stood firm by its Rule 50, which states “no kind of demonstration or political, religious, or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas”.
But just three weeks before the 2021 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Tokyo, the IOC relaxed its interpretation, and athletes were permitted to express their views in ways that included taking a knee.
Despite permission and even encouragement from sports governing bodies, our research shows the practice is disappearing from major sports competitions.
Take soccer, for example. At the FIFA World Cup 2022, England and Wales were the only national teams that knelt at their games in Qatar.
At the FIFA Women’s World Cup 2023 in Australia and New Zealand, no teams or players knelt.
The same happened at the 2024 Olympic soccer tournament in Paris.
That only a handful of teams knelt in Tokyo at the 2021 Olympics, two at the FIFA Mens’ World Cup in Qatar in 2022, none at the FIFA Womens’ World Cup in Australia and New Zealand in 2023, and again none at the Paris 2024 Olympics indicates a growing reluctance throughout the sports world.
This surely cannot mean athletes have become indifferent to racial injustice or other forms of oppression in the interval between the late 2010s and the mid-2020s.
The explanation must be sought elsewhere. A hint was provided when Crystal Palace soccer player Zaha, the first player of colour in the UK who refused to kneel, explained:
I feel like taking the knee is degrading, because growing up my parents just let me know that I should be proud to be Black no matter what and I feel like we should just stand tall.
The explanation may therefore be, at least in part, the players’ uncomfortable feelings related to the kneeling posture.
In sociology, this bothersome state of mind is called “cognitive dissonance”: the mental conflict a person experiences in the presence of contrasting beliefs.
The body posture of kneeling is not deemed, in any culture, as expressing solidarity.
Ancient Greek and the Roman societies, on whose values Western civilisation was built, rejected kneeling as improper, even when praying to gods.
Then, with the spread of Christianity in the Western world, kneeling became widely used, but only as an act of worship, confessing guilt, or praying for mercy.
When performed outside the church, kneeling meant submission to nobility or royalty.
The significance of kneeling as humility is not limited to the Western world.
In African tribal culture, the young kneel in front of elders, and everyone kneels before the king.
In China in 1949, Chairman Mao famously proclaimed at the first plenary of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference:
From now on our nation […] will no longer be a nation subject to insult and humiliation. We have stood up.
With this in mind, kneeling may be deemed unfit at sporting events, which often feature a powerful cocktail of emotions, values and social expectations.
The inconsistency between the excitement of competition and the expectation to kneel — a gesture associated with submission and humility — likely creates a bothersome state of mind for athletes.
This potentially motivates some players to reject one of the two – in this case, the kneeling – to restore cognitive harmony.
After refusing, by unanimous players’ vote, to take a knee before their October 2020 game against the All Blacks, the Australian rugby union team chose instead to wear a First Nations jersey.
The same year, several teams in German soccer’s top league chose to show their support for Black Lives Matter by wearing distinctive armbands.
So it appears wearing a distinctive jersey or at least an armband is more easily accepted by modern-day athletes. This may be challenging given the governing bodies of many sports, such as FIFA, ban athletes from wearing political symbols on their clothing.
Depending on whether sports code accept this type of activism in the future, wearing suportive clothing could replace taking a knee as symbolic communication of solidarity with oppressed minorities.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. Why have athletes stopped ‘taking a knee’? – https://theconversation.com/why-have-athletes-stopped-taking-a-knee-259047
MIL OSI –
Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Craig Mark, Adjunct Lecturer, Faculty of Economics, Hosei University
Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has sent a clear signal to the Trump administration: the Japan–US relationship is in a dire state.
After saying just days ago he would be attending this week’s NATO summit at The Hague, Ishiba abruptly pulled out at the last minute.
He joins two other leaders from the Indo-Pacific region, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and South Korean President Lee Jae-myung, in skipping the summit.
The Japanese media reported Ishiba cancelled the trip because a bilateral meeting with US President Donald Trump was unlikely, as was a meeting of the Indo-Pacific Four (IP4) NATO partners (Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Japan).
Japan will still be represented by Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya, showing its desire to strengthen its security relationship with NATO.
However, Ishiba’s no-show reveals how Japan views its relationship with the Trump administration, following the severe tariffs Washington imposed on Japan and Trump’s mixed messages on the countries’ decades-long military alliance.
Trump’s tariff policy is at the core of the divide between the US and Japan.
Ishiba attempted to get relations with the Trump administration off to a good start. He was the second world leader to visit Trump at the White House, after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
However, Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs imposed a punitive rate of 25% on Japanese cars and 24% on all other Japanese imports. They are already having an adverse impact on Japan’s economy: exports of automobiles to the US dropped in May by 25% compared to a year ago.
Six rounds of negotiations have made little progress, as Ishiba’s government insists on full tariff exemptions.
Japan has been under pressure from the Trump administration to increase its defence spending, as well. According to the Financial Times, Tokyo cancelled a summit between US and Japanese defence and foreign ministers over the demand. (A Japanese official denied the report.)
Japan also did not offer its full support to the US bombings of Iran’s nuclear facilities earlier this week. The foreign minister instead said Japan “understands” the US’s determination to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Japan has traditionally had fairly good relations with Iran, often acting as an indirect bridge with the West. Former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe even made a visit there in 2019.
Japan also remains heavily dependent on oil from the Middle East. It would have been adversely affected if the Strait of Hormuz had been blocked, as Iran was threatening to do.
Unlike the response from the UK and Australia, which both supported the strikes, the Ishiba government prioritised its commitment to upholding international law and the rules-based global order. In doing so, Japan seeks to deny China, Russia and North Korea any leeway to similarly erode global norms on the use of force and territorial aggression.
In addition, Japan is facing the same dilemma as other American allies – how to manage relations with the “America first” Trump administration, which has made the US an unreliable ally.
Earlier this year, Trump criticised the decades-old security alliance between the US and Japan, calling it “one-sided”.
“If we’re ever attacked, they don’t have to do a thing to protect us,” he said of Japan.
Lower-level security cooperation is ongoing between the two allies and their regional partners. The US, Japanese and Philippine Coast Guards conducted drills in Japanese waters this week. The US military may also assist with upgrading Japan’s counterstrike missile capabilities.
But Japan is still likely to continue expanding its security ties with partners beyond the US, such as NATO, the European Union, India, the Philippines, Vietnam and other ASEAN members, while maintaining its fragile rapprochement with South Korea.
Australia is now arguably Japan’s most reliable security partner. Canberra is considering buying Japan’s Mogami-class frigates for the Royal Australian Navy. And if the AUKUS agreement with the US and UK collapses, Japanese submarines could be a replacement.
There are also intensifying domestic political pressures on Ishiba to hold firm against Trump, who is deeply unpopular among the Japanese public.
After replacing former prime minister Fumio Kishida as leader of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) last September, the party lost its majority in the lower house of parliament in snap elections. This made it dependent on minor parties for legislative support.
Ishiba’s minority government has struggled ever since with poor opinion polling. There has been widespread discontent with inflation, the high cost of living and stagnant wages, the legacy of LDP political scandals, and ever-worsening geopolitical uncertainty.
On Sunday, the party suffered its worst-ever result in elections for the Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly, winning its lowest number of seats.
The party could face a similar drubbing in the election for half of the upper house of the Diet (Japan’s parliament) on July 20. Ishiba has pledged to maintain the LDP’s majority in the house with its junior coalition partner Komeito. But if the government falls into minority status in both houses, Ishiba will face heavy pressure to step down.
Craig Mark does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. Japanese prime minister’s abrupt no-show at NATO summit reveals a strained alliance with the US – https://theconversation.com/japanese-prime-ministers-abrupt-no-show-at-nato-summit-reveals-a-strained-alliance-with-the-us-259694
MIL OSI –
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for Hawaii Brian Schatz
WASHINGTON – During a debate on the Republican tax bill, U.S. Senator Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i) condemned the bill’s provisions to gut clean energy which will raise people’s energy bills by more than a hundred dollars starting next year and make blackouts and power outages more common across the country.
“This is the worst piece of legislation for the planet in the history of our country, and it’s not even close. Republicans are effectively codifying Big Oil’s wish list into law, without exception. They are killing clean energy. They are subsidizing coal. They are dramatically expanding oil and gas leasing. They’re purposely jacking up energy prices and creating shortages and creating shortages,” said Senator Schatz. “And for what? It’s to find enough savings to shovel tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of dollars into the pockets of individual billionaires.”
Senator Schatz continued, “This bill will kill 300,000 jobs in wind and solar per year. We’re going to lose out on $450 billion in capital as thousands of projects go under. And because of that, we’re going to generate about 500GW less energy in the next decade. We are going to have energy shortages as a result of this legislation.”
A transcript of Senator Schatz’s remarks is below. Video is available here.
There are a lot of people in this chamber and across the country who, on a non-ideological basis, want a consistent tax code so that businesses can invest with certainty and predictability. So let’s look at some of the numbers here in terms of the impact of this bill. This bill will kill 300,000 jobs in wind and solar per year. We’re going to lose out on $450 billion in capital as thousands of projects go under. And because of that, we’re going to generate about 500GW less energy in the next decade.
Now, there was a time, and I lived through it as a politician, there was a time when people who wanted to take climate action had to argue for that climate action because it is a planetary emergency and there were tradeoffs. And people on the other side said, “look, as we try to take action to deal with this planetary crisis, we can’t create shortages, we can’t increase prices, we can’t impede economic progress.” All that has flipped.
This bill will create shortages. This bill will impede economic progress. This bill will increase prices. The 500GW less energy in the next decade is pretty much exactly the amount of energy that we’re going to need to meet rising demand. We are going to have energy shortages as a result of this legislation.
And you don’t have to love clean energy or be an environmentalist. And I love clean energy, and I’m an environmentalist. But you don’t have to care about the climate. I think you should. You don’t have to care about the climate to understand that this is a basic question of supply and demand. Energy demand is soaring for the first time in decades, largely not exclusively, but largely because of AI data centers. And our best chance of meeting it in the next few years is with wind and solar, not oil and gas, even nuclear and geothermal are going to take a while.
That is not just a political talking point or a preference of mine. It’s just a fact that gas turbines are stuck in a years-long backlog. It’s also a fact that 80 percent of the new capacity on the grid last year came from solar and storage. It’s growing, it’s cheap, it works. And there are hundreds more projects that are in the pipeline waiting to be hooked up.
So the idea that we’re going to kill the only energy that can be brought online in the short run, the very same week that half the country was meeting, melting in a record heat wave which left tens of thousands without power is beyond absurd.
Let’s talk about how this bill does all of this damage. Specifically, it creates an impossible deadline for projects to be operational in order to claim the clean energy tax credits. Remember, these clean energy tax cuts are federal law. They’re on the books. So when you have a federal statute, it is not unreasonable as an investor to say, look, I got this tax credit. I’m going to get X number, X percent back for my initial investment. And you do the pro forma, you do the underwriting. And you figure out that the thing pencils out. And now what they’re saying is that you got to be operational in 60 days. If anyone has even built a deck in their front yard or tried to do an extension – nothing gets built in 60 days. Certainly not a clean energy project, and it has to be placed in service. What does placed in service mean? It means not only do you have to have the thing built, you have to have a power purchase agreement through your public service commission or public utilities commission. You have to have a deal in place in the next 60 days after enactment, or you get nothing.
So imagine you’re a company investing in a solar battery storage project. You’ve already put money down, you’ve secured land and a power purchase agreement, and you’re working on permits. And when you started the project, the tax code said you could claim a credit to cover the upfront costs. Now, unless you are fully operational, you’re out of luck. On average, a project takes four years to go through the full process. So even if you’ve already started that progress, you now have very, very little time to get it done. We are going to strand hundreds of billions of dollars in capital. And so the impact on price is going to be crazy. The impact on jobs is going to be crazy. But the impact on America as an investable proposition is the most dangerous part of this. I don’t know that we’ve ever, through federal law, made a big subsidy, made a big bet on a certain industry. And then halfway through that process, said, never mind. We didn’t mean that. You’re stuck.
According to the Edison Electric Institute. And by the way, I can guarantee you this is the first and maybe last time I will ever, ever quote the Edison Electric Institute. That’ll cost people, not companies, people, ratepayers $60 billion in this decade alone. Your electric bills are about to go up. A representative of a solar company in Hawaii put it this way. It is really unclear in the current version of the bill what the renewable energy industry even looks like, if it were passed today.
An owner of a solar company in Montana, worried that the credits disappearing would force them to lay off half of his workers. He says, “Montana is deeply red, but it’s also a very practical place. And so green energy renewables became a taboo phrase somehow. The practical energy needs are undeniable, so we can get past our disagreements and about phraseology. We realize that electrons, watts, amps, it’s all cheaper.” A representative of a wind turbine company in Colorado said, “I don’t look at what we do as green or blue or red. An electron doesn’t have a color.” And that’s the point. Electrons don’t have color. Wanting cheap, abundant energy is not woke. Wanting a livable planet for today and for future generations is not radical and wanting reliable power and to avoid blackouts and brownouts is not a leftist project. But even if you set all of that aside for a minute, the states that have benefited the most from these investments are Republican states.
According to estimates, nearly three quarters of clean energy manufacturing facilities are located in Republican states. It means that Republicans are going to pay more for energy. It means Republicans will lose jobs in clean energy because of a Republican bill. It means Republicans are going to have more blackouts in their homes and businesses. Gutting clean energy is not somehow owning the libs, and at least some Republicans in the Senate and House understand that even if their votes have not manifested to say otherwise.
Here’s a letter from 21 House Republicans earlier this year, “As our conference has long believed, and all of the above energy approach combined with a robust, advanced manufacturing sector will help support the United States position as a global energy leader. Countless American companies are utilizing sector wide energy tax credits, many of which have enjoyed broad support in Congress to make major investments in domestic energy production and infrastructure for traditional and renewable sources alike.” And it goes on, “As energy demand continues to skyrocket. Any modifications that inhibit our ability to deploy new energy production risks sparking an energy crisis risks sparking an energy crisis.” 21 House Republicans are worried about an energy crisis imposed by the Republican Congress. It goes on. “This is especially true for energy credits with direct pass through benefit to ratepayers, where such repeals would increase utility bills the very next day – would increase utility bills the very next day.”
This is not me, progressive Senator from the state of Hawai‘i, who has made a career out of fighting climate change. This is 21 House Republicans saying, like, “we’re going to create a crisis here. Maybe we shouldn’t pass this thing. A lot of this stuff benefits us. If we’re all out here talking about all of the above. Why are we cutting off our nose to spite our face?” Just because someone wants a talking point? People are literally going to lose their jobs immediately upon enactment. America is going to become a very challenging place to make major investments in, immediately upon enactment. The AI industry may move abroad immediately upon enactment, and prices will go up pretty much right away as well.
A group of 175 mayors and local leaders wrote, “For the first time, state and local governments, as well as essential nonprofit community organizations such as houses of worship, hospitals and schools, can access the same clean energy tax credits as the private sector through elective pay. This has led to major projects in our communities, like solar installations for town halls, alternative fueling infrastructure, and charging stations for local government fleets. After one year of direct pay implementation, over 1200 organizations, including 500 state and local governments are already accessing these incentives. We are excited about these projects and the benefits that they will bring to our communities. However, as local leaders, we are concerned that repealing these tax credits would create economic uncertainty in our communities as it would prevent us from accessing those important benefits.”
You know, I grew up to understand Republicans were for avoiding unintended consequences. Republicans were against radical change too quickly. Republicans wanted a solid business environment that people could rely upon. This is literally none of that. This is ideology manifesting itself as energy policy. And what’s going to happen is people are going to lose their jobs and pay tons more for electricity.
The building trades unions called this bill “the biggest job killing bill in the history of this country.” And they go on. “Simply put, it is the equivalent of terminating more than 1000 Keystone XL pipeline projects.” I’ve been here for a while. Keystone XL was a big deal to our friends in labor. I had some very tough conversations with my friends and labor about how important that project was to them, and how it was in tension with some of our climate goals.
But listen to what they say. It is the equivalent of terminating 1,000 Keystone XL pipeline projects. These guys are not me or Jeff Merkley or Eddie Markey, or Sheldon Whitehouse, or Martin Heinrich, or Rep Ocasio-Cortez, or any climate advocate. This is the building trades, and they’re saying this is the biggest job killer, perhaps, perhaps in American history. We actually don’t have to do this.
The impetus behind this bill was essentially border spending and preventing the Trump tax cuts from expiring. And then a bunch of stuff got added on because that’s what happens. And we were there for our own version of this, our own BBB, our own Build Back Better. And everybody in your party piles on with something new. And then the thing becomes a really challenging thing to pass, because everybody’s got their hobbyhorse and somebody’s hobbyhorse is not just to have an all of the above energy strategy, but to go out of your way to kill clean energy. It doesn’t matter that it’s going to raise prices. It doesn’t matter that it’s going to kill jobs.
People at all levels, in the public and private sectors across the political spectrum are all saying the same thing, which is this is a bad bill for regular people, for the economy and for the planet. One of the great things about our climate Bill was that it made what was good for the planet also good for the economy. Clean energy become became eminently profitable for businesses and widely accessible to consumers. And we made a choice there because some in our party didn’t like the basic premise. They were attached to the idea of personal political, economic sacrifice because the planet is in peril.
And I understand that instinct. I understand that instinct. But we’ve paved a new path, and we decided, look, there’s enough technology out there. There are abundant energy sources out there that we can actually solve our planetary crisis and create jobs and lower prices, and we can do it in such a way that blue states and red states, urban rural, suburban all benefit. Republicans are on the verge of undoing all of that, even though it will hurt their constituents. And in doing so, we’re virtually guaranteeing China’s dominance in clean energy for decades to come. Because if you’re a China, you cannot believe your luck. Your biggest competitor is willingly forfeiting the fight over who controls the energy technologies of the future because Donald Trump is too busy trying to get us back to the pre-industrial age.
This is the worst piece of legislation for the planet in the history of our country, and it’s not even close. Republicans are effectively codifying Big Oil’s wish list into law, without exception. They are killing clean energy. They are subsidizing coal. They are dramatically expanding oil and gas leasing. They’re purposely jacking up energy prices and creating shortages and creating shortages. And for what? Partially, it’s to find enough savings to shovel tens, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars into the pockets of individual billionaires. But even kicking more than 16 million people off of health care coverage, denying food to the poor, and adding almost $5 trillion to the national debt was not enough.
People voted for Donald Trump for all sorts of reasons, but no one voted for higher energy bills. No one voted for more frequent blackouts and brownouts and dirtier air and water. No one, whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican or independent, wants that. I want to be clear this fight is far from over. This fight over this bill is far from over.
But even if this bill passes, it will set us back. But the fight for the planet is bigger than any one bill or vote, and that includes the big climate bill that we passed in the previous administration. And as any movement that has successfully mobilized and made changes knows, progress is not linear. Progress always has setbacks and frustrations, and progress is not assured.
States like Hawai‘i will continue to do everything that they can to protect our environment, and the rest of the world will move on without us, because doing nothing in the face of this worsening crisis is simply not an option. But make no mistake, what Congress is doing today will cost all of us in the years and decades to come.
Translation. Region: Russian Federal
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
BEIJING, June 30 (Xinhua) — China expresses strong dissatisfaction and firmly opposes the Canadian government’s order to stop Chinese company Hikvision’s operations in Canada, a spokesman for China’s Ministry of Commerce said Monday.
China noted that the Canadian side forcibly stopped Hikvision’s operations in the country and prohibited Canadian government agencies from purchasing and using Hikvision products under the pretext of protecting “national security,” the official said.
According to him, the so-called national security review undertaken by the Canadian side lacked transparency and yielded uncertain results. The representative of the Chinese agency called it a typical example of the generalization of the concept of national security.
“The actions of the Canadian side not only undermine the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises, but also negatively affect the confidence of companies from both countries in cooperation, and harm normal trade and economic relations between China and Canada,” the official representative emphasized.
China, he continued, urges Canada to immediately correct its wrong actions, stop politicizing economic and trade issues and generalizing the concept of national security, and ensure an open, fair, just and non-discriminatory environment for enterprises from all countries, including China, to invest and do business in Canada.
The Chinese side will take all necessary measures to resolutely protect the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises, added the official representative of the Ministry of Commerce of the People’s Republic of China. –0–
Translation. Region: Russian Federal
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
BEIJING, June 30 (Xinhua) — The Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLA Navy) naval squadrons led by the aircraft carriers Liaoning and Shandong have safely returned to their home ports after completing combat-style training on the high seas, the PLA Navy said Monday.
The training was conducted in a coordinated and systematic manner. Two aircraft carrier formations deployed to the western Pacific Ocean, interacted with the relevant branches of the armed forces, and carried out a number of tasks simulating real combat operations, such as reconnaissance and early detection, counterattack, naval assault, air defense, and day and night tactical flights of carrier-based aircraft.
The current exercise has produced a series of research results in relevant areas of military affairs and greatly enhanced the systemic combat potential of China’s aircraft carrier formations. It is a continuation of the previous two-carrier high-sea exercise conducted jointly by the two naval formations last year.
It is noted that during the training, individual foreign warships and aircraft repeatedly carried out close reconnaissance, escort and surveillance maneuvers. The Chinese naval units maintained heightened vigilance and combat readiness for immediate response, organized numerous carrier-based aircraft sorties, and professionally and confidently dealt with the situation that arose.
The PLA Navy said that these exercises, conducted in accordance with the annual plan, have effectively tested the results of joint training of relevant troops and enhanced their capacity to protect the country’s sovereignty, security and development interests. –0–
Translation. Region: Russian Federal
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
BEIJING, June 30 (Xinhua) — State Council Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson Zhu Fenglian on Monday slammed Taiwan leader Lai Qingde’s recent remarks over the weekend as a further escalation of provocations aimed at achieving “Taiwan independence” and seriously damaging cross-Strait relations.
In response to a journalist’s question, Zhu Fenglian pointed out that in his speeches, Lai Qingde inflated the topic of “continental threat,” propagated the thesis of “Taiwan independence,” distorted the legal framework and historical facts, ignoring the prevailing public opinion on the island.
Zhu Fenglian noted that Lai Qingde’s misinterpretation of UN General Assembly Resolution 2758, a political document embodying the one-China principle, and attempts to sever the historical and legal ties between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait once again expose his fear of and resistance to closer exchanges between compatriots from both sides.
“The return of Taiwan to China after Japanese occupation is a fundamental element of the international order established after World War II and the result of the joint efforts of compatriots from both sides of the strait to safeguard national dignity. Those who act against the common interests of the Chinese nation are doomed to failure, and attempts to challenge China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity at the expense of ‘Taiwan independence’ will only lead to a dead end,” the official representative stated.
Reiterating that people on both sides of the strait share the common aspiration of peace, development, exchanges and cooperation, Zhu Fenglian said the mainland is committed to advancing the peaceful and integrated development of the two sides.
She called on compatriots in Taiwan to see through the hypocrisy and political manipulation of the Democratic Progressive Party administration and work hand in hand with compatriots on the mainland to achieve national reunification and rejuvenation. –0–
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva, Lecturer in Government – National Security College, Australian National University
Since US President Donald Trump took office this year, one theme has come up time and again: his rule is a threat to the US-led international order.
As the US political scientist John Mearsheimer famously argued, the liberal international order
was destined to fail from the start, as it contained the seeds of its own destruction.
This perspective has gained traction in recent years. And now, Trump’s actions have caused many to question whether a new world order is emerging.
Trump has expressed a desire for a new international order defined by multiple spheres of influence — one in which powers like the US, China and Russia each exert dominance over distinct regions.
This vision aligns with the idea of a “multipolar” world, where no single state holds overarching global dominance. Instead, influence is distributed among several great powers, each maintaining its own regional sphere.
This architecture contrasts sharply with earlier periods – the bipolar world of the Cold War, dominated by the US and the Soviet Union; and the unipolar period that followed, dominated by the US.
What does this mean for the world order moving forward?
We’ve seen this shift taking place in recent months. For example, Trump has backed away from his pledge to end the war between Russia and Ukraine and now appears to be leaving it to the main protagonists, and Europe, to find a solution.
Europe, which once largely spoke in a unified voice with the US, is also showing signs of policy-making which is more independent. Rather than framing its actions as protecting “Western democratic principles”, Europe is increasingly focused on defining its own security interests.
In the Middle East, the US will likely maintain its sphere of influence. It will continue its unequivocal support for Israel under Trump.
The US will also involve itself in the region’s politics when its interests are at stake, as we witnessed in its recent strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.
This, along with increasing economic ties between the US and Gulf states, suggests US allies in the region will remain the dominant voices shaping regional dynamics, particularly now with Iran weakened.
Yet it’s clear Trump is reshaping US dynamics in the region by signaling a desire for reduced military and political involvement, and criticising the nation building efforts of previous administrations.
The Trump administration now appears to want to maintain its sphere of influence primarily through strong economic ties.
Meanwhile, other poles are emerging in the Global South. Russia and China have deepened their cooperation, positioning themselves as defenders against what they frame as Western hegemonic bullying.
Trump’s trade policies and sanctions against many nations in the Global South have fuelled narratives (spread by China and Russia) that the US does not consistently adhere to the rules it imposes on others.
Trump’s decision to slash funding to USAID has also opened the door to China, in particular, to become the main development partner for nations in Africa and other parts of the world.
And on the security front, Russia has become more involved in many African and Middle Eastern countries, which have become less trustful and reliant on Western powers.
In the Indo-Pacific, much attention has been given to the rise of China and its increasingly assertive posture. Many of Washington’s traditional allies are nervous about its continued engagement in the region and ability to counter China’s rise.
Chinese leader Xi Jinping has sought to take advantage of the current environment, embarking on a Vietnam, Malaysia and Cambodia push earlier this year. But many nations continue to be wary of China’s increasing influence, in particular the Philippines, which has clashed with China over the South China Sea.
Not all countries, however, are aligning themselves neatly with one pole or another.
For small states caught between great powers, navigating this multipolar environment is both a risk and an opportunity.
Ukraine is a case in point. As a sovereign state, Ukraine should have the freedom to decide its own alignments. Yet, it finds itself ensnared in great power politics, with devastating consequences.
Other small states are playing a different game — pivoting from one power to another based on their immediate interests.
Slovakia, for instance, is both a NATO and EU member, yet its leader, Robert Fico, attended Russia’s Victory Day Parade in May and told President Vladimir Putin he wanted to maintain “normal relations” with Russia.
Then there is Central Asia, which is the centre of a renewed “great game,” with Russia, China and Europe vying for influence and economic partnerships.
Yet if any Central Asian countries were to be invaded by Putin, would other powers intervene? It’s a difficult question to answer. Major powers are reluctant to engage in direct conflict unless their core interests or borders are directly threatened.
As a result, Central Asian states are hedging their bets, seeking to maintain relations with multiple poles, despite their conflicting agendas.
While it is still early to draw definitive conclusions, the events of the past few months underscore a growing trend. Smaller countries are expressing solidarity with one power, but pragmatic cooperation with another, when it suits their national interests.
For this reason, regional power blocs seem to be of increasing interest to countries in the Global South.
For instance, the China-led Shanghai Cooperation Organisation has become a stronger and larger grouping of nations across Eurasia in recent years.
Trump’s focus on making “America Great Again,” has taken the load off the US carrying liberal order leadership. A multipolar world may not be the end of the liberal international order, but it may be a reshaped version of liberal governance.
How “liberal” it can be will likely depend on what each regional power, or pole, will make of it.
Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. Trump’s worldview is causing a global shift of alliances – what does this mean for nations in the middle? – https://theconversation.com/trumps-worldview-is-causing-a-global-shift-of-alliances-what-does-this-mean-for-nations-in-the-middle-257113
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva, Lecturer in Government – National Security College, Australian National University
Since US President Donald Trump took office this year, one theme has come up time and again: his rule is a threat to the US-led international order.
As the US political scientist John Mearsheimer famously argued, the liberal international order
was destined to fail from the start, as it contained the seeds of its own destruction.
This perspective has gained traction in recent years. And now, Trump’s actions have caused many to question whether a new world order is emerging.
Trump has expressed a desire for a new international order defined by multiple spheres of influence — one in which powers like the US, China and Russia each exert dominance over distinct regions.
This vision aligns with the idea of a “multipolar” world, where no single state holds overarching global dominance. Instead, influence is distributed among several great powers, each maintaining its own regional sphere.
This architecture contrasts sharply with earlier periods – the bipolar world of the Cold War, dominated by the US and the Soviet Union; and the unipolar period that followed, dominated by the US.
What does this mean for the world order moving forward?
We’ve seen this shift taking place in recent months. For example, Trump has backed away from his pledge to end the war between Russia and Ukraine and now appears to be leaving it to the main protagonists, and Europe, to find a solution.
Europe, which once largely spoke in a unified voice with the US, is also showing signs of policy-making which is more independent. Rather than framing its actions as protecting “Western democratic principles”, Europe is increasingly focused on defining its own security interests.
In the Middle East, the US will likely maintain its sphere of influence. It will continue its unequivocal support for Israel under Trump.
The US will also involve itself in the region’s politics when its interests are at stake, as we witnessed in its recent strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.
This, along with increasing economic ties between the US and Gulf states, suggests US allies in the region will remain the dominant voices shaping regional dynamics, particularly now with Iran weakened.
Yet it’s clear Trump is reshaping US dynamics in the region by signaling a desire for reduced military and political involvement, and criticising the nation building efforts of previous administrations.
The Trump administration now appears to want to maintain its sphere of influence primarily through strong economic ties.
Meanwhile, other poles are emerging in the Global South. Russia and China have deepened their cooperation, positioning themselves as defenders against what they frame as Western hegemonic bullying.
Trump’s trade policies and sanctions against many nations in the Global South have fuelled narratives (spread by China and Russia) that the US does not consistently adhere to the rules it imposes on others.
Trump’s decision to slash funding to USAID has also opened the door to China, in particular, to become the main development partner for nations in Africa and other parts of the world.
And on the security front, Russia has become more involved in many African and Middle Eastern countries, which have become less trustful and reliant on Western powers.
In the Indo-Pacific, much attention has been given to the rise of China and its increasingly assertive posture. Many of Washington’s traditional allies are nervous about its continued engagement in the region and ability to counter China’s rise.
Chinese leader Xi Jinping has sought to take advantage of the current environment, embarking on a Vietnam, Malaysia and Cambodia push earlier this year. But many nations continue to be wary of China’s increasing influence, in particular the Philippines, which has clashed with China over the South China Sea.
Not all countries, however, are aligning themselves neatly with one pole or another.
For small states caught between great powers, navigating this multipolar environment is both a risk and an opportunity.
Ukraine is a case in point. As a sovereign state, Ukraine should have the freedom to decide its own alignments. Yet, it finds itself ensnared in great power politics, with devastating consequences.
Other small states are playing a different game — pivoting from one power to another based on their immediate interests.
Slovakia, for instance, is both a NATO and EU member, yet its leader, Robert Fico, attended Russia’s Victory Day Parade in May and told President Vladimir Putin he wanted to maintain “normal relations” with Russia.
Then there is Central Asia, which is the centre of a renewed “great game,” with Russia, China and Europe vying for influence and economic partnerships.
Yet if any Central Asian countries were to be invaded by Putin, would other powers intervene? It’s a difficult question to answer. Major powers are reluctant to engage in direct conflict unless their core interests or borders are directly threatened.
As a result, Central Asian states are hedging their bets, seeking to maintain relations with multiple poles, despite their conflicting agendas.
While it is still early to draw definitive conclusions, the events of the past few months underscore a growing trend. Smaller countries are expressing solidarity with one power, but pragmatic cooperation with another, when it suits their national interests.
For this reason, regional power blocs seem to be of increasing interest to countries in the Global South.
For instance, the China-led Shanghai Cooperation Organisation has become a stronger and larger grouping of nations across Eurasia in recent years.
Trump’s focus on making “America Great Again,” has taken the load off the US carrying liberal order leadership. A multipolar world may not be the end of the liberal international order, but it may be a reshaped version of liberal governance.
How “liberal” it can be will likely depend on what each regional power, or pole, will make of it.
Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. Trump’s worldview is causing a global shift of alliances – what does this mean for nations in the middle? – https://theconversation.com/trumps-worldview-is-causing-a-global-shift-of-alliances-what-does-this-mean-for-nations-in-the-middle-257113
Mahamane Lamine Zeine, Prime Minister of the Republic of Niger, has joined the African Energy Week (AEW): Invest in African Energies 2025 conference as a speaker. During the event – which takes place September 29 to October 3 in Cape Town – Zeine is expected to share insight into the country’s oil and gas projects, detailing initiatives being implemented to increase production and crude exports.
As the largest event of its kind in Africa, AEW: Invest in African Energies represents a strategic platform for African countries to not only promote their respective energy opportunities but foster cross-border collaboration and regional ties. Niger has been leveraging regional relations in recent months to advance oil exports, with infrastructure projects such as the Niger-Benin pipeline. The 100,000 barrel-per-day pipeline started operations in 2024, with oil successfully reaching the town of Sémè Kraké in Benin. The pipeline spans 1,950km and connects Niger’s Agadem oilfields to the Atlantic Ocean. During AEW: Invest in African Energies 2025, Zeine is expected to highlight the impact of the pipeline and how the project will support future oil and gas developments by providing a direct route to export markets.
AEW: Invest in African Energies is the platform of choice for project operators, financiers, technology providers and government, and has emerged as the official place to sign deals in African energy. Visit www.AECWeek.com for more information about this exciting event.
With the start of operations of the Niger-Benin pipeline, Niger is well-positioned to increase crude production. The country is currently promoting new investments in exploration blocks, with several milestones achieved in several months. Algeria’s national oil company (NOC) Sonatrach – in partnership with Niger’s NOC Sonidep – announced plans to revive exploration activities in the country. The companies signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) in 2024, committing to exploring opportunities for cooperation. The agreement paves the way for the companies to form partnerships in exploration, production, refining, petrochemicals and petroleum product distribution. Sonatrach is currently engaged in the country’s Kafra block in northern Niger. The block has featured two exploration wells – KFR-1 and KFRN-1 -, with the discovery of 168 million barrels and 100 million barrels of proven and probably oil reserves, respectively.
Sonatrach is also looking at constructing a refinery and petrochemical complex in Dosso, situated in southwestern Niger. The refinery will have an initial capacity of 30,000 bpd, with potential expansion to 100,000 bpd. Following its completion, the refinery is expected to offer low-cost fuel products for the domestic market. Meanwhile, under the terms of a signed agreement, Sonatrach will provide specialized training program for Nigerien engineers and technicians at Algerian refineries, supporting skills development in Niger.
Niger currently produces approximately 20,000 bpd of crude from the Agadem Rift Basin. In 2024, China National Petroleum Corporation signed a deal worth $400 million for the sale of crude from the Agadem oilfield. This signals new opportunities for crude exports and comes as players in the country make strides towards increasing production. Notably, oil and gas company Savannah Energy is a key player in Niger’s hydrocarbon sector. The company plans to increase production to 5,000 bpd through the development of recently-discovered oil blocks. Savannah’s hydrocarbon license interests cover approximately 13,655 km² – representing 50% of the country’s main petroleum basin, the Agadem Rift Basin. The company has identified 35 million barrels of gross 2C resources across its R3 East discoveries, with an additional 90 million barrels of gross unrisked prospective resources identified from five prospects and leads within tie-in distance to the planned R3 East facilities. With five wells drilled and five discoveries to date, Savannah Energy has witnessed significant success in Niger.
“Niger has significant potential to become a major crude exporter, with projects such as the Niger-Benin pipeline poised to play an instrumental part in getting Nigerien crude to global markets. To unlock the true potential of this project, Niger requires significant investment across the upstream sector. Insights shared at AEW: Invest in African Energies 2025 will support future deal-signing and exploration,” states NJ Ayuk, Executive Chairman, African Energy Chamber.
Distributed by APO Group on behalf of African Energy Chamber.
Translation. Region: Russian Federal
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
BEIJING, June 30 (Xinhua) — The Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee held a meeting on Monday to review a set of regulations on the work of the decision-making, advisory and coordinating organs of the CPC Central Committee. General Secretary of the CPC Central Committee Xi Jinping chaired the meeting.
The meeting participants noted that the establishment of the CPC Central Committee’s decision-making, advisory and coordinating organs is an important institutional measure to strengthen the unified centralized leadership of the CPC Central Committee over key work and ensure the fulfillment of key tasks. The formulation and issuance of regulations will further standardize the establishment, definition of duties and operation of such organs. The regulations are of great significance for improving top-level planning, overall coordination, comprehensive advancement and effective implementation of key work.
The meeting stressed that the decision-making, advisory and coordinating organs of the CPC Central Committee should have a clear understanding of their duties and status. They should focus on planning, discussing and supervising the implementation of major tasks, and provide more effective overall leadership and coordination of key work. While fully fulfilling their coordinating duties, they should avoid taking on other people’s functions and exceeding the limits of their authority. At the same time, they should conduct in-depth studies to improve the quality and efficiency of decision-making and discussion, and propose practical and effective policies. At the same time, it is extremely important to avoid formalism and bureaucracy and achieve practical results.
Other issues were also discussed during the meeting. –0–
Translation. Region: Russian Federal
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Tbilisi, June 30 (Xinhua) — Georgian Minister of Economy and Sustainable Development Mariam Kvrivishvili met with International Maritime Organization (IMO) Secretary General Arsenio Dominguez, who is visiting Georgia, in Tbilisi on Monday. The issues of introducing electronic services in Georgian ports, implementing joint projects, developing maritime education and employing seafarers were discussed during the meeting, the Georgian Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development reported.
M. Kvrivishvili emphasized that the maritime sector plays an important role in the country’s economy and its development is one of the priorities for the Georgian government. According to her, Georgia fulfills all obligations stipulated by the international legal instruments of the IMO and consistently maintains high standards in the field of maritime safety, training and certification of seafarers, and environmental protection.
The parties noted the important role of maritime infrastructure in realizing Georgia’s transit potential, including in terms of further development of the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route. Particular attention was paid to the Anaklia deep-water port project, which, as M. Kvrivishvili noted, will create favorable conditions for the development of logistics services and an industrial zone in the adjacent territory.
Georgia has been a member of the IMO since 1993. In 2015, the country underwent a voluntary audit, and in 2025, a mandatory audit. –0–
Translation. Region: Russian Federal
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Tashkent, June 30 (Xinhua) — Uzbekistan exported 17.1 thousand tons of tomatoes worth $17.1 million in the first five months of this year, Uzbek media reported on Monday, citing data from the National Statistics Committee of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
It is reported that among the countries to which the export was carried out, Russia was the main buyer, with 14 thousand tons of products sent there.
After Russia, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan were the main buyers of Uzbek tomatoes, where 1.6 thousand and 1.4 thousand tons were exported, respectively. –0–
Source: WTO
Headline: Members spotlight transparency and development in discussions on standards and regulations
Daniela García of Ecuador handed over the Committee Chairperson role to Beatriz Stevens of the United Kingdom.
Transparency and notification practices
The week opened with a special meeting on transparency, featuring speakers from various regions, complemented by interactive discussions in breakout groups among all members. Representatives from TBT Enquiry Points shared their experiences on domestic institutional arrangements related to transparency, on opportunities to comment on members’ notifications and on ensuring timely preparation and submission of TBT notifications. Speakers emphasized the importance of timely consultation of all stakeholders in the regulatory process to improve the quality of regulations.
Representatives from the private sector shared how they use the ePing platform to track, in real time, the 4,000+ notifications on product requirements circulated annually. They shared examples of how members viewed technical comments positively in the development of regulations, helping to further align them with international standards and avoid unnecessary trade disruptions.
Throughout the session, members highlighted the benefits of using ePing to track information and meet transparency obligations. They welcomed the launch of a new feature in ePing where users can quickly receive translations of notified texts from non-WTO official languages into English, French and Spanish. They also made suggestions to further facilitate stakeholders’ access to ePing and keep track of developments in product regulations.
Members noted the significant progress made by the TBT Committee in strengthening transparency practices since the last special meeting in 2023. This includes the adoption of updates and improvements to the notification templates and guidelines as well as the finalization of a good practice guide for commenting . These improvements build on the work of the Transparency Working Group, reflecting continued efforts to streamline procedures and enhance access to information. The recording of the special meeting can be watched here.
Thematic session: special and differential treatment
A dedicated thematic session held on 24 June examined how developing and least-developed country members can better use flexibilities under the TBT Agreement. In particular, the session explored members’ experiences in using special and differential treatment disciplines under the Agreement, members’ engagement in the Committee’s work and the need for targeted capacity-building activities, including for developing quality infrastructure.
The session drew on the themes of the Thirteenth WTO Ministerial Conference Declaration on Special and Differential Treatment, with the participation of Ambassador Kadra Hassan of Djibouti, Chair of the Committee on Trade and Development in Special Session. The panel discussion featured speakers from Brazil, Cambodia, Ecuador, Kenya, Senegal, Uganda, Viet Nam and Zambia. The recording of the session can be watched here.
Specific trade concerns
A total of 78 trade concerns regarding members’ proposed and final TBT regulations were raised at the Committee’s regular meeting. Among these, 20 were raised for the first time. The full list is available here.
The new trade concerns addressed a wide variety of regulatory issues related to home appliances, cotton bales, industrial chemicals, energy and warehouse storage systems, electrical equipment safety, biodegradable plastic products, and vehicles, among others.
Japan reported that progress was made on the trade concerns it had raised on certain provisions of China’s standard for information security technology for office devices, noting that such provisions have now been deleted, and thanking China for its cooperation.
Side events and training: practical tools and partnerships
Two ePing training sessions, led by the WTO Secretariat, were held on 25 and 26 June.
In addition, three side events were organized. The United States hosted a workshop on international standards for food and agriculture traceability on 24 June, led by the standards organization ASTM. On 25 June, the International Trade Centre showcased how quality and sustainability standards support development, with a case study from Burundi and a demonstration of the Standards Map tool. On 26 June, the United Kingdom and the International Chamber of Commerce UK led a session on market access challenges and how tools such as ePing can support private sector engagement in members’ work on TBT and on sanitary and phytosanitary measures.
What is next?
The next TBT Committee meetings will be held from 10 to 14 November. Thematic sessions will focus on international standards for critical and emerging technologies, including AI, semiconductors and positioning systems, as well as good regulatory practices and metrology. A cross-cutting discussion on non-tariff measures under the WTO Information Technology Agreement will also be scheduled.
Share
Translation. Region: Russian Federal
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
URUMQI, June 30 (Xinhua) — Six new highways have opened to traffic in northwest China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, with a total investment of 10.7 billion yuan (about 1.5 billion U.S. dollars) and a total length of 965 km.
The routes connect diverse natural landscapes, from snow-capped mountains and steppes to forests, lakes, deserts and oases, and aim to develop Xinjiang’s “fast entry, slow travel” tourism network and expand opportunities for independent car tourism, according to the regional transportation department.
The new highways link key attractions across Xinjiang’s vast territory, where tourist sites are often relatively far apart, the department said.
In recent years, Xinjiang has stepped up efforts to build a multi-dimensional tourism transportation network. The region has opened new civil aviation routes, launched specialized railway lines such as the Taklamakan Desert Loop, and built scenic roads for car tourism. –0–
Translation. Region: Russian Federal
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
TBILISI, June 30 (Xinhua) — Givi Mikanadze has been appointed Minister of Education, Science and Youth of Georgia. The new minister was introduced by Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze at a briefing at the Georgian government administration on Monday.
G. Mikanadze replaced Alexander Tsuladze in the ministerial post, who announced his resignation on Monday.
Before his appointment, G. Mikanadze was the Chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on Education, Science and Youth Affairs.
A. Tsuladze has held the post of Minister of Education, Science and Youth since October 2024. –0–
Translation. Region: Russian Federal
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
BEIJING, June 30 (Xinhua) — China’s financial, tax and trade authorities on Monday announced a 10 percent corporate income tax rebate for foreign investors on domestic direct investment financed by dividends from Chinese enterprises’ profits.
The credit, which runs from January 1, 2025, to December 31, 2028, allows unused credit to be carried forward to a later date and allows lower rates to be applied under applicable tax treaties.
Foreign investors may reinvest dividends in increasing the share capital of resident enterprises, establishing new resident enterprises, or acquiring shares of resident enterprises from unaffiliated parties. The industry in which the investee enterprise operates must be included in the Catalogue of Industries Encouraging Foreign Investment.
Foreign investors may apply for a refund of the tax credit for reinvestments made between January 1, 2025 and the date of the announcement of the introduction of this benefit. –0–
Source: European Parliament
A delegation of seven Members of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET), led by Chair David McAllister, travelled to Uruguay and Argentina from 26 to 29 May 2025. Members engaged in high-level discussions regarding the EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement which was concluded last December in Montevideo, Uruguay. The findings from this visit will contribute to the preparatory work for the consent procedure on the political and cooperation aspects of the Agreement, for which AFET is responsible.
More broadly, this mission allowed to exchange views on bilateral, regional and multilateral cooperation, as well as geopolitical issues such as Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the situation in the Middle East, and China’s expanding influence in Latin America.
Source: European Parliament
This study offers an in-depth examination of the European Union’s (EU) trade defence instruments (TDI), focusing on their evolution, implementation and impact on industries, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). It takes stock of the European Commission’s trade defence activities and critically examines existing TDI. It highlights procedural complexities, including investigation timelines and provisional measures, alongside the unique challenges SMEs face in accessing TDI. It includes a short empirical analysis of the activity of EU trade defence measures and explores sector-specific dynamics, with examples from steel, ceramics and renewable energy industries, illustrating the protective and adaptive role of TDI against unfair global trade practices such as dumping and subsidies. Comparative insights into international practices from the USA, China and India further contextualise EU approaches.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Pat Fallon (TX-04)
Washington, June 12, 2025
“Reintroducing the ‘Safeguard American Innovation Act’ is crucial for protecting U.S. technology and countering foreign threats, especially from China. Recent cyberattacks have exposed vulnerabilities in our defense and IT systems. This legislation addresses these risks by prohibiting Department of Defense contracts with companies linked to China that could compromise national security.”
“China’s laws require companies to share sensitive technology, including software source code,” said Rep. Fallon. “By barring contracts with entities operating in China, funded by the PRC, or granting China access to critical code, this bill strengthens our IT infrastructure and keeps our technological assets secure. This legislation is vital for safeguarding American innovation, ensuring military safety, and preserving U.S. technological leadership. We must act swiftly to address these modern threats to our national security.”