ReportWire

Tag: China

  • Chips Held Hostage in Trade War Start Flowing Again to Auto Suppliers

    [ad_1]

    Nexperia microchips are leaving China again, easing a shortage of simple but ubiquitous parts that threatened to paralyze the auto industry.

    German automotive supplier Aumovio, which was recently spun out of tire giant Continental, said Friday that the Sino-Dutch company’s semiconductors and components containing them were on their way from China to Aumovio’s distribution hub in Hungary.

    Copyright ©2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

    [ad_2]

    Stephen Wilmot

    Source link

  • November 7 as Victims of Communism Day – 2025

    [ad_1]

    Bones of tortured prisoners. Kolyma Gulag, USSR (Nikolai Nikitin, Tass). (NA)

     

    NOTE: The following post is largely adapted from last year’s November 7 post on the same subject.

    Since 2007, I have advocated designating May 1 as an international Victims of Communism Day. The May 1 date was not my original idea. But I have probably devoted more time and effort to it than any other commentator. In my view, May 1 is the best possible date for this purpose because it is the day that communists themselves used to celebrate their ideology, and because it is associated with communism as a global phenomenon, not with any particular communist regime. However, I have also long recognized that it might make sense to adapt another date for Victims of Communism Day, if it turns out that some other date can attract a broader consensus behind it. The best should not be the enemy of the good.

    As detailed in my May 1 post from 2019, November 7 is probably the best such alternative, and over time it has begun to attract considerable support. Unlike May 1, this choice is unlikely to be contested by trade unionists and other devotees of the pre-Communist May 1 holiday. While I remain unpersuaded by their objections on substantive grounds, pragmatic considerations suggest that an alternative date is worth considering, if it can avoi such objections, and thereby attract broader support.

    The November 7 option is not without its own downsides. From an American standpoint, one obvious one is that it will sometimes fall close to election day, as is the case this year. On such occasions, a November 7 Victims of Communism Day might not attract as much attention as it deserves, because many will – understandably – be focused on electoral politics instead. Nonetheless, November 7 remains the best available alternative to May 1; or at least the best I am aware of.

    For that reason, I am – once again – doing a Victims of Communism Day post on November 7, in addition to the one I do on May 1. If November 7 continues to attract more support, I may eventually switch to that date exclusively. But, for now, I reserve the options of returning to an exclusive focus on May 1, doing annual posts on both days, or switching to some third option should a good one arise.

    In addition to its growing popularity, November 7 is a worthy alternative because it is the anniversary of the day that the very first communist regime was established in Russia. All subsequent communist regimes were at least in large part inspired by it, and based many of their institutions and policies on the Soviet model.

    The Soviet Union did not have the highest death toll of any communist regime. That dubious distinction belongs to the People’s Republic of China. North Korea has probably surpassed the USSR in the sheer extent of totalitarian control over everyday life. Pol Pot’s Cambodia may have surpassed it in terms of the degree of sadistic cruelty and torture practiced by the regime, though this is admittedly very difficult to measure. But all of these tyrannies – and more – were at least to a large extent variations on the Soviet original.

    Having explained why November 7 is worthy of consideration as an alternative date, it only remains to remind readers of the more general case for having a Victims of Communism Day. The following is adopted from this year’s May 1 Victims of Communism Day post, and some of its predecessors:

    The Black Book of Communism estimates the total number of victims of communist regimes at 80 to 100 million dead, greater than that caused by all other twentieth century tyrannies combined. We appropriately have a Holocaust Memorial Day. It is equally appropriate to commemorate the victims of the twentieth century’s other great totalitarian tyranny.

    Our comparative neglect of communist crimes has serious costs. Victims of Communism Day can serve the dual purpose of appropriately commemorating the millions of victims, and diminishing the likelihood that such atrocities will recur. Just as Holocaust Memorial Day and other similar events promote awareness of the dangers of racism, anti-Semitism, and radical nationalism, so Victims of Communism Day can increase awareness of the dangers of left-wing forms of totalitarianism, and government domination of the economy and civil society.

    While communism is most closely associated with Russia, where the first communist regime was established, it had equally horrendous effects in other nations around the world. The highest death toll for a communist regime was not in Russia, but in China. Mao Zedong’s Great Leap Forward was likely the biggest episode of mass murder in the entire history of the world.

    November 7, 2017 was the 100th anniversary of the Bolshevik seizure of power in Russia, which led to the establishment of the first-ever communist regime. On that day, I put up a post outlining some of the lessons to be learned from a century of experience with communism.  The post explains why most of the horrors perpetrated by communist regimes were intrinsic elements of the system. For the most part, they cannot be ascribed to circumstantial factors, such as flawed individual leaders, peculiarities of Russian and Chinese culture, or the absence of democracy. The latter probably did make the situation worse than it might have been otherwise. But, for reasons I explained in the same post, some form of dictatorship or oligarchy is probably inevitable in a socialist economic system in which the government controls all or nearly all of the economy.

    While the influence of communist ideology has declined greatly since its mid-twentieth century peak, it is far from dead. Largely unreformed communist regimes remain in power in Cuba and North Korea. In Venezuela, the Marxist government’s socialist policies have resulted in severe repression, the starvation of children, and a massive refugee crisis—the biggest in the history of the Western hemisphere. Recent events in Venezuela also highlight the dangers of “democratic socialism.” While most communist regimes have taken power by force, ignorance about the history of communism and socialism could enable such movements to take power by democratic means and then eventually shut down democracy, as has actually happened in Venezuela. “Democratic socialism” – which has many of the same flaws as the authoritarian version is gaining in popularity on the political left in the US, as shown by the recent election of a prominent member of the movement as mayor of New York.  Most of his supporters likely have little understanding of the  dangers of his ideology. Victims of Communism Day can help combat such ignorance.

    In Russia, the authoritarian regime of former KGB Colonel Vladimir Putin has embarked on a wholesale whitewashing of communism’s historical record. Putin’s brutal war on Ukraine is primarily based on Russian nationalist ideology, rather than that of the Soviet Union. Nonetheless, the failure of post-Soviet Russia to fully reckon with its oppressive Soviet past is likely one of the reasons why Putin’s regime came to power, and engaged in its own atrocities.

    In China, the Communist Party remains in power (albeit after having abandoned many of its previous socialist economic policies), and has become less and less tolerant of criticism of the mass murders of the Mao era (part of a more general turn towards greater repression). The government’s brutal repression of the Uighur minority, and escalating suppression of dissent, even among Han Chinese, are just two aspects in which it seems bent on repeating some of its previous atrocities. Under the rule of Xi Jinping, the government has also increasingly reinstated socialist state control of the economy.

    Here in the West, some socialists and others have attempted to whitewash the history of communism, and a few even attribute major accomplishments to the Soviet regime. Cathy Young had an excellent critique of such Soviet “nostalgia” in a 2021 Reason article.

    Victims of Communism Day is also a good time to remember our duty to help those victims, or at least avoid impeding their escape from oppression.  Among other things, it is unjust to deport migrants fleeing oppressive Marxist dictatorships, like those Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela, as the Trump Administration seeks to do to hundreds of thousands who entered the US legally under the CHNV program. If some on the left tend to ignore the evils of socialism, many on the  nationalist right have been exacerbating the plight of its victims.

    In sum, we need Victims of Communism Day because we have never given sufficient recognition to the victims of the modern world’s most murderous ideology or come close to fully appreciating the lessons of this awful era in world history. In addition, that ideology, and variants thereof, still have a substantial number of adherents in many parts of the world, and still retains considerable intellectual respectability even among many who do not actually endorse it. Just as Holocaust Memorial Day serves as a bulwark against the reemergence of fascism, so this day of observance can help guard against the return to favor of the only ideology with an even greater number of victims.

    [ad_2]

    Ilya Somin

    Source link

  • China’s Bid for Tech Prowess to Keep Lid on Consumption Boost

    [ad_1]

    China’s leaders have again pledged to give consumption a bigger role in driving growth, but economists remain unconvinced.

    The emphasis given to technological self-sufficiency and advanced manufacturing has raised doubt over how high consumption is on policymakers’ To Do list.

    Copyright ©2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • New Aircraft Carrier Advances China’s Naval Power

    [ad_1]

    Leader Xi Jinping marked a step in his mission to modernize the nation’s military.

    [ad_2]

    Chun Han Wong

    Source link

  • China’s Exports Unexpectedly Contract

    [ad_1]

    Exports contracted in October from a year earlier, dragged by a high base of comparison and cooling overseas demand after months of front-loading.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Meet the Chinese Startup Using AI—and a Team of Human Workers—to Train Robots

    [ad_1]

    The real question is how effectively AgiBot’s algorithms can teach its robots new tricks. Using reinforcement learning to teach a robot tasks that require improvisation generally requires a lot of training data, and studies show it cannot be perfected entirely inside a simulation.

    AgiBot speeds up the learning process by having a human worker guide the robot through a task, which provides a foundation for it to then learn by itself. Before cofounding AgiBot, chief scientist Jianlan Luo did cutting-edge research at UC Berkeley, including a project that involved robots acquiring skills through reinforcement learning with a human in the loop. That system was shown doing tasks including placing components on a motherboard.

    Feng says that AgiBot’s learning software, called Real-World Reinforcement Learning, only needs about ten minutes to train a robot to do a new task. Rapid learning is important because production lines often change from one week to the next, or even during the same production run, and robots that can master a new step quickly can adapt alongside human workers.

    Training robots this way requires a lot of human effort. AgiBot has a robotic learning center where it pays people to teleoperate robots to help AI models learn new skills. Demand for this kind of robot training data is growing, with some US companies paying workers in places like India to do manual work that serves as training data.

    Jeff Schneider, a roboticist at Carnegie Mellon University who works on reinforcement learning, says that AgiBot is using cutting-edge techniques, and should be able to automate tasks with high reliability. Schneider adds that other robotics companies are likely dabbling with using reinforcement learning for manufacturing tasks.

    AgiBot is something of a rising star within China, where interest in combining AI and robotics is soaring. The company is developing AI models for various kinds of robots, including humanoids that walk around and robot arms that stay rooted in one place.

    [ad_2]

    Will Knight

    Source link

  • European Union welcomes suspension of China’s rare earth controls

    [ad_1]

    BRUSSELS (AP) — The European Union has agreed with China on stabilizing the flow of rare earth materials and products from China that are critical elements for many high-tech and military products, an official said Tuesday. EU trade commissioner Maroš Šefčovič met with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao in Brussels on Friday to discuss Beijing’s export controls on rare earths issued in April and October, and European regulations on semiconductor sales, said Olof Gill, a spokesperson for the European Commission, the 27-nation bloc’s executive arm. Like the U.S., Europe runs a huge trade deficit with China — around 300 billion euros ($345 billion) last year. It relies heavily on China for rare earth material and products, which are also used to make magnets used in cars and appliances.

    Gill said that the EU welcomed China’s recent 12-month suspension of rare earths export controls, and called for a new and stable system of trade in the critical materials. The EU is working with China on an export licensing system to ensure a more stable flow of rare earth minerals to the bloc, he said.

    “This is an appropriate and responsible step in the context of ensuring stable global trade flows in a critically important area,” Gill said.

    Šefčovič said that that Brussels and Beijing were continuing to speak about further trade measures.

    Stay up to date with the news and the best of AP by following our WhatsApp channel.


    Follow on

    “Both sides reaffirmed commitment to continue engagement on improving the implementation of export control policies,” he said in an X post.

    China is the EU’s second-largest trading partner in goods, after the United States. Bilateral trade is estimated at 2.3 billion euros ($2.7 billion) per day.

    Both China and the EU believe it’s in their interest to keep their trade ties stable for the sake of the global economy, and they share certain climate goals.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How China’s Chokehold on Drugs, Chips and More Threatens the U.S.

    [ad_1]

    BEIJING—China has demonstrated it can weaponize its control over global supply chains by constricting the flow of critical rare-earth minerals. President Trump went to the negotiating table when the lack of Chinese materials threatened American production, and he reached a truce last week with Chinese leader Xi Jinping that both sides say will ease the flow of rare earths.

    But Beijing’s tools go beyond these critical minerals. Three other industries where China has a chokehold—lithium-ion batteries, mature chips and pharmaceutical ingredients—give an idea of what the U.S. would need to do to free itself fully from vulnerability. 

    Copyright ©2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

    [ad_2]

    Yoko Kubota

    Source link

  • Starbucks sells 60% of China unit to Boyu at $4 billion value | Fortune

    [ad_1]

    Starbucks Corp. agreed to sell a majority stake in its China business to private equity firm Boyu Capital at a $4 billion enterprise value in a bid to improve the coffee chain’s flagging fortunes in the country. 

    Boyu Capital will hold up to a 60% interest in Starbucks’ retail operations in China through a new joint venture with the coffee seller, the companies said in a statement. Starbucks will hold the remaining 40% and continue to license the brand and intellectual property to the joint venture.

    The agreement marks the end of a search for a partner to help chart Starbucks’ next chapter in China, where it has about 8,000 stores after opening its first outlet in Beijing in 1999. However, Starbucks has struggled in recent years, along with other Western companies that have lost ground to local rivals amid rising nationalism and reluctance to pay premiums for foreign brands. 

    Xiamen-based Luckin Coffee Inc. dethroned Starbucks as China’s biggest coffee chain two years ago by selling coffee at one-third of its price. And while Starbucks’ store format is expensive to upkeep, customers have become less willing to pay higher prices for its drinks since the COVID pandemic and ongoing economic downturn.

    “Starbucks’ store expansion has been restrained amid fierce competition from local rivals, and the deal is expected to accelerate growth with sufficient funds and Boyu’s retail experience,” said Jason Yu, Shanghai-based managing director of CTR Market Research. “Boyu needs to balance Starbucks’ brand positioning and its participation in price competition, otherwise it will harm its long-term profitability in China.”

    Bloomberg previously reported that Boyu had emerged as the front-runner, and that others including internet companies could join as limited partners to help co-finance a deal.

    The private equity firm is also in talks with banks for a loan of around $1.4 billion-equivalent to support its investment in Starbucks’ China business, according to people familiar with the matter. 

    Real estate expertise

    Starbucks is the latest foreign retail business to enlist a local partner to turn around their ailing fortunes in China as a persistent property slump sours consumer appetite for everything from premium luxury goods to ice creams. General Mills, which owns Häagen-Dazs, is also working on a potential sale of its more than 250 stores in China. Restaurant Brands International Inc. is also said to be mulling a sale of a controlling stake in Burger King’s China business to local private equity firms. 

    McDonald’s Corp. and Yum! Brands Inc.’s KFC, have brought in local investors for their China businesses years ago, helping the fast food chains become successful in staying competitive over the years.

    Boyu’s links in China is likely to have been a winning factor in Starbucks’s view. Its expertise in commercial real estate and property management—it recently bought a controlling stake in an operator of China’s top luxury malls SKP and also controls property management services provider Jinke Smart Services Group—could help the coffee chain refine and expand its store network. 

    “We see a path to grow from today’s 8,000 Starbucks coffeehouses to more than 20,000 over time,” Starbucks Chief Executive Officer Brian Niccol said in a blog post.  

    China turnaround

    As part of its efforts to lure back customers in China, Starbucks earlier this year opened free “study rooms” in some of its stores there. Under new China chief Molly Liu, the chain has also expanded its drinks menu to include more sugar-free options and teas catering to local tastes, slashed prices on a slew of beverages and upped its options for customizing orders. That’s in contrast to recent moves in the US, where the menu has been simplified to boost operational efficiency. 

    These incremental steps have helped the coffee chain stem a sales decline in China since earlier this year, with comparable sales returning to growth in the past two quarters. Niccol expressed confidence in the brand’s long term growth potential during an earnings call last month and expected the business to enter next year “on stronger footing.”

    Starbucks expects the total value of its China retail business to exceed $13 billion, including the value of licenses, according to the statement.

    The coffee seller’s shares rose less than 1% at 6:17 p.m. in after-hours trading in New York. The stock has declined about 11% this year, trailing a nearly 17% advance by the S&P 500 Index. 

    [ad_2]

    Bloomberg

    Source link

  • Opinion | Trump’s New World Order

    [ad_1]

    Walter Russell Mead is the Ravenel B. Curry III Distinguished Fellow in Strategy and Statesmanship at Hudson Institute, the Global View Columnist at The Wall Street Journal and the Alexander Hamilton Professor of Strategy and Statecraft with the Hamilton Center for Classical and Civic Education at the University of Florida.

     

    He is also a member of Aspen Institute Italy and board member of Aspenia. Before joining Hudson, Mr. Mead was a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations as the Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow for U.S. Foreign Policy. He has authored numerous books, including the widely-recognized Special Providence: American Foreign Policy and How It Changed the World (Alfred A. Knopf, 2004). Mr. Mead’s most recent book is entitled The Arc of A Covenant: The United States, Israel, and the Fate of the Jewish People.

    [ad_2]

    Walter Russell Mead

    Source link

  • Exclusive | Trump Officials Torpedoed Nvidia’s Push to Export AI Chips to China

    [ad_1]

    Shortly before President Trump met Chinese leader Xi Jinping in South Korea, an urgent issue emerged. Trump wanted to discuss a request by Nvidia Chief Executive Jensen Huang to allow sales of a new generation of artificial-intelligence chips to China, current and former administration officials said.

    Greenlighting the export of Nvidia’s Blackwell chips would be a seismic policy shift potentially giving China, the U.S.’s biggest geopolitical competitor, a technological accelerant. Huang—who speaks to Trump often—has lobbied relentlessly to maintain access to the Chinese market.

    Copyright ©2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

    [ad_2]

    Lingling Wei

    Source link

  • In tariff case, Trump’s attorneys can’t decide if foreign investment is good or bad for America

    [ad_1]

    When the Trump administration’s lawyers go before the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to argue a crucial case that will determine the limits of presidential tariff authority, they will be asking the justices to accept contradictory claims about the value of foreign investment in the United States.

    In a brief filed with the court ahead of this week’s oral argument, the government’s attorneys argue that foreigners buying up American “assets” is a serious enough threat to require emergency executive powers over trade.

    “By the end of 2024, foreigners owned approximately $24 trillion more of U.S. assets than Americans owned of foreign assets,” the administration argues. That imbalance has “weakened” the United States and “created an ongoing economic emergency of historic proportions.”

    In the same brief—indeed, just four pages later—those same attorneys warn that undoing Trump’s tariffs would jeopardize “trillions of dollars” in foreign investment that the president has successfully negotiated. They point to $600 billion in investments pledged by the European Union and another $1 trillion promised by the governments of Japan and South Korea. Those investments, the administration argues, will “rectify past imbalances.”

    How can it be that previous foreign investments are a threat to the United States—one so severe as to require an unprecedented expansion of executive power—while investments secured by the administration are the exact opposite?

    “In short, their argument is that the tariffs are necessary to reduce foreign ownership of American assets, but the Supreme Court must keep the tariffs in place to allow more foreign investment,” points out an amicus brief filed by the National Taxpayers Union Foundation in support of the small businesses challenging the legality of President Donald Trump’s tariffs.

    This is probably not the most critical legal issue upon which the tariff case will be resolved. But the glaring contradiction reveals a few important things.

    First, it once again demonstrates the incoherence of Trump’s tariff strategy. Does the administration want more foreign investment or less? It’s not sure! You can add that to the list alongside such questions as “Are the tariffs meant to generate revenue for the government or serve as negotiating tools for better trade deals?” It can’t be both, since tariffs meant as negotiating tools would have to be lowered or eliminated eventually, thus rendering them useless for producing revenue.

    In a similar vein, Trump has argued that higher tariffs on legal imports from Canada, Mexico, and China will be a useful tool for combating the flow of illegal drugs. This makes little sense. Taxing maple syrup and avocados seems about as likely to stop the flow of fentanyl as taxing beer would be effective at reducing the use of cocaine.

    Second, the confusion about foreign investments in the U.S. points to Trump’s ongoing misunderstanding of the trade deficit. A trade deficit is the difference between the total value of all imports and all exports, and America indeed runs a sizable trade deficit—in other words, we import more than we export.

    As economists who understand global trade would tell you, America’s trade deficit is offset by an investment surplus. In other words, “the US is able to sustain a large trade deficit because so many foreigners are eager to invest here,” as the Boston University economist Tarek Alexander Hassan wrote in April. The Trump administration sees that routine, trade-balancing foreign investment as a problem that demands a muscular executive response. It’s not.

    Finally, the fact that the administration’s attorneys take a very different view of foreign investments secured by the president’s negotiations ought to tell us something, too. The administration is not really making an argument against foreign investment here; it is making an argument for top-down, centrally planned foreign investment that meets the chief executive’s political needs.

    When the administration says that striking down these tariffs would jeopardize “trillions of dollars” in foreign deals, what it means is that America’s investment surplus would be determined by market forces rather than the whims of the president. But as the Supreme Court will hopefully soon remind it, the Constitution plainly does not give the president unilateral power to control foreign trade or to decide which foreign investments are good for America.

    [ad_2]

    Eric Boehm

    Source link

  • Can the Global Economy Be Healed?

    [ad_1]

    Now that many governments around the world are moving to protect industries they consider vital, and international institutions like the I.M.F. and the World Trade Organization are being sidelined, Rodrik believes it will be largely up to the U.S. and China, as the world’s two dominant economic powers, to define new rules of global commerce after Trump has departed. He is particularly enthused by China’s two-decades-long effort to promote renewable energy, which he says could serve as a model to apply in other countries, and in other sectors of the economy. Largely as a result of technological progress in China, solar energy is now so cheap that even a red state like Texas is rapidly expanding its solar capacity. And thanks to the growth of the electric-vehicle industry in China, which is now the world’s largest car market, cheap Chinese E.V.s are being exported to many other countries. “We’re much further ahead on this”—the green transition—“than anyone thought feasible, and it happened through a mechanism that nobody predicted,” Rodrik said.

    In his book, he argues that the key to the success of China’s green-energy initiative was the breadth of tools it employed, and the flexibility with which they were applied. The Chinese government supplied E.V. startups with venture capital, subsidies, customized infrastructure, specialized training, and preferential access to raw material. But instead of imposing a top-down production plan, it left a lot of the details up to the businesses. “The hallmark of Chinese developmentalism is an experimental approach,” Rodrik writes. “The national government sets broad objectives. Then a variety of industrial policies are deployed in different industries and locations, followed by close monitoring, iteration, and revision when called for.”

    Rodrik also saw much to like in the Biden Administration’s industrial policies, which aimed to hasten the green transition by offering subsidies, tax credits, and public support for industrial research. Trump is busy dismantling many of these policies. Rodrik would support restoring them in the future. He also advocates for allowing countries, including the U.S., to use targeted tariffs to protect specific industries that they consider vital, but he insists it’s a mistake to focus solely on manufacturing, which employs less than ten per cent of the U.S. workforce. The real challenge, he argues, is boosting wages in the vast services sector, which employs more than eighty per cent of American workers. “Whether we like it or not, services will remain the main job engine of the economy,” he writes. Some service jobs, such as managerial ones, are well paid, but many of them, particularly in areas like retail and care, are low-wage positions. “An inescapable conclusion follows: a good jobs economy hinges critically on our ability to increase the productivity and quality of jobs in such services.”

    Rodrik concedes that there is no tried and tested formula to achieve this. The approach that he advocates mimics the Chinese model in encompassing government agencies at the national and local level, as well as educational institutions, private businesses, and workers. He supports efforts to organize service workers in labor unions, and he discusses the possibility, raised by Arin Dube, an economist at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, of establishing wage boards to set minimum wages that vary across industries, occupations, and locations. Rodrik, citing the contrast between nurse practitioners, who earn a median yearly salary of a hundred and twenty-six thousand dollars, and low-wage care workers, also argues that training, technology, and regulatory reform can a play a big role—as can directed scientific research.

    He calls for the establishment of a workers’ equivalent of DARPA, the Pentagon agency that has helped finance the development of the internet, G.P.S., and the mRNA technologies used to make COVID-19 vaccines. Whereas DARPA focusses on research that potentially has military implications, Rodrik’s proposed “ARPA-W” would focus on developing “labor-friendly technologies,” including some that employ artificial intelligence. As some observers predict that A.I. could eliminate huge numbers of jobs, many of them well paid, Rodrik, echoing the M.I.T. economists David Autor, Daron Acemoglu, and Simon Johnson, argues that technological progress needs to be refocussed. Referring to his proposal for an ARPA-W, he writes, “The overarching objective would be to allow workers to do what they cannot presently do, instead of displacing them by taking over the tasks that they already do.”

    [ad_2]

    John Cassidy

    Source link

  • Trump Says Xi Will Help Fight Fentanyl. Will China Follow Through?

    [ad_1]

    For years, the U.S. and China have been locked in a pattern on the deadly issue of fentanyl. The White House pressures Beijing to stop Chinese companies from exporting chemicals used to make the drug to Mexico. Beijing takes incremental steps in exchange for Washington dialing down economic pressure—only for China to drag its feet when relations deteriorate.

    President Trump, after a summit on Thursday with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, said tariffs he had imposed on China over its role in the fentanyl trade would be lowered to 10% from 20% because of Beijing’s “very strong action” in cracking down and Xi’s commitment to do more.

    Copyright ©2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

    [ad_2]

    Brian Spegele

    Source link

  • Vietnam Is Building Islands to Challenge China’s Hold on a Vital Waterway

    [ad_1]

    In the turquoise waters of the South China Sea, one country is challenging Beijing’s grip on one of the world’s most important maritime thoroughfares.

    Over four years, Vietnam has built out a series of remote rocks, reefs and atolls to create heavily fortified artificial islands that expand its military footprint in the Spratly Islands, an archipelago where Hanoi’s claims clash not only with China’s but also with those of Taiwan, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei.

    Copyright ©2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

    [ad_2]

    Gabriele Steinhauser

    Source link

  • China Manufacturing Gauge Signals Weaker Growth Momentum

    [ad_1]

    A private gauge of China’s manufacturing activity showed Chinese factories continued to expand production in October, albeit at a slower pace, signaling weaker growth momentum heading into the fourth quarter of the year.

    The RatingDog China General Manufacturing Purchasing Managers’ Index, compiled by S&P Global, declined to 50.6 last month from 51.2 in September, according to a statement released Monday.

    Copyright ©2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • On the heels of trade war truce with China, Trump says “we’re always watching them”

    [ad_1]

    Just days after touting a trade truce with China, President Trump acknowledged that China is “always watching us.”

    American intelligence agencies say the Chinese have infiltrated parts of the U.S. power grid and water systems. China has also been accused of stealing American intellectual property and Americans’ personal information. 

    “We’re a threat to them, too. Many of the things that you say, we do to them,” Mr. Trump said. “Look, this is a very competitive world, especially when it comes to China and the U.S. And we’re always watching them, and they’re always watching us. In the meantime, I think we get along very well, and I think we can be bigger, better, and stronger by working with them as opposed to just knocking them out.”

    China’s testing nuclear weapons, Trump says, “You just don’t know about it”

    Before Mr. Trump met with China’s President Xi Jinping last week, he wrote on Truth Social that he’d instructed the Department of War “to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis” with other countries. 

    He told 60 Minutes he’d discussed doing something about denuclearization with Xi and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    “Are you saying that after more than 30 years, the United States is going to start detonating nuclear weapons for testing?” O’Donnell asked. 

    “I’m saying that we’re going to test nuclear weapons like other countries do,” Mr. Trump replied. “Russia’s testing, and China’s testing, but they don’t talk about it.” 

    Vice Adm. Richard Correll, who was nominated by Mr. Trump to lead U.S. Strategic Command, recently told Congress that neither Russia nor China was conducting nuclear explosive tests. Mr. Trump suggested otherwise. 

    “Russia’s testing, and China’s testing, but they don’t talk about it,” he said. 

    U.S.-China trade deal 

    During the meeting, Mr. Trump and Xi struck a one-year trade deal that, for now, averts the escalating tension between the two economic superpowers. Mr. Trump told us that in exchange for lower tariffs, China agreed to sell the U.S. its valuable rare earth minerals — and to start buying American agricultural products again.

    The earth minerals are needed by the U.S. for everything from smartphones to submarines. 

    “The power they have is rare earth because of the fact that they’ve been accumulating it and really taking care of it for a period of 25, 30 years. Other countries haven’t,” Mr. Trump said. “They use that against us, and we used other things against them. For instance, airplane parts. That’s a big deal. They have hundreds of Boeing airplanes. We wouldn’t give them parts. We were both acting maybe a little bit irrationally, but the big thing we had was tariffs ultimately.”

    Trump says Taiwan “never came up” in meeting with China’s Xi

    Taiwan has been an ongoing flashpoint in U.S.-China relations. The Chinese military is encroaching on Taiwan’s sea lanes, its airspace and its cyberspace.

    Mr. Trump said he and Xi didn’t broach the issue during their meeting. 

    “People were a little surprised at that. He never brought it up, because he understands it, and he understands it very well,” Mr. Trump said. 

    60 Minutes contributing correspondent Norah O’Donnell asked whether Mr. Trump would order U.S. forces to defend Taiwan should Xi move militarily on the island, something the American president has insisted China would not do as long as he is in office. Mr. Trump said he can’t give away his secrets, but that “they understand what’s going to happen.”

    “He has openly said, and his people have openly said at meetings, ‘We would never do anything while President Trump is president,’ because they know the consequences,” Mr. Trump said of China.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • President Trump on nuclear testing, the government shutdown, immigration, tariffs and U.S.-China relations

    [ad_1]

    It’s been five years since President Trump appeared for an interview on 60 Minutes. A lot has happened since then, not least of which was his political comeback and triumphant return to the White House. 

    On Friday, hours after he touched down from his whirlwind trip to Asia, Mr. Trump agreed to sit down with us for a wide-ranging conversation. It was exactly one year to the day since he sued Paramount, the parent company of CBS, alleging that 60 Minutes had deceptively edited an interview with his opponent, Kamala Harris. 

    Paramount settled that lawsuit. The settlement did not include an apology or admission of wrongdoing. 

    In our nearly 90 minute conversation this past week, we spoke with Mr. Trump about the country and the world. We met with the president at Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Florida, on the 31st day of the government shutdown.

    Norah O’Donnell: We are now approaching the longest shutdown in American history.

    President Donald Trump: Democrats’ fault.

    Norah O’Donnell: Under your presidency, we’re talking about more than a million federal workers who are not getting a paycheck, including our air traffic controllers. You see there’s traffic snarls out at the airports now. This weekend food aid for more than 42 million Americans is set to expire. What are you doing as president to end the shutdown?

    President Trump: Well, what we’re doing is we keep voting. I mean, the Republicans are voting almost unanimously to end it, and the Democrats keep voting against ending it. You know, they’ve never had this. This has happened like 18 times before. The Democrats always voted for an extension, always saying, “Give us an extension, we’ll work it out.” They’ve lost their way. They’ve become crazed lunatics. And all they have to do, Norah, is say, “Let’s vote.”

    Senate Democrats say they will vote to reopen the government if Republicans agree to extend subsidies for over 20 million Americans who use Obamacare for their health insurance.

    President Trump: Obamacare is terrible. It’s bad health care at far too high a price. We should fix that. We should fix it. And we can fix it with the Democrats. All they have to do is let the country open and we’ll fix it. 

    Norah O’Donnell: But if ending the government shutdown—

    President Trump: —they have to let the country open, and I’ll sit down with the Democrats, and we’ll fix it. But they have to let the country— and you know what they have to do—

    Norah O’Donnell: So your plan—

    President Trump: All they have to do is raise five hands. We don’t need all of  ’em.

    Norah O’Donnell: But so you’re saying your plan is to tell the Democrats to vote to end the shutdown.

    President Trump: Correct, very simple. 

    Norah O’Donnell: And that you will put forward a health care plan? 

    President Trump: No. We will work on fixing the bad health care that we have. Right now, we have terrible health care and too expensive for the people, not for the government, for the people.

    Norah O’Donnell: But Mr. President, with all due respect—

    President Trump: The people are paying—

    Norah O’Donnell: —you’ve been talking about fixing the health care since 2015—

    President Trump: Sure. And you can’t do it because of the Democrats. That’s right.

    Norah O’Donnell: Since 2015, you said you’d fix it.

    President Trump: I’ve been talking about it for a long time. We almost did it. We were one vote short. We woulda had great health care. 

    That was in 2017, when Senate Republicans failed by one vote to partially repeal Obamacare.

    President Trump: We can make it much less expensive for people and give them much better health care. And I’d be—

    Norah O’Donnell: But where is that plan?

    President Trump: —willing to work with the Democrats—

    Norah O’Donnell: But where is that plan?

    President Trump: —on it. The problem is, they want to give money to prisoners, to drug dealers, to all these millions of people that were allowed to come in with an open border from Biden. And nobody can do that. Not-

    Norah O’Donnell: Can I just—

    President Trump: —one Republican would ever do that.

    Norah O’Donnell: My understanding is, if those health care subsidies are not extended, premiums will double for many of the people that are on it. And I was looking into it. Three quarters of these people will see their health care premiums double live in states where you won in the last election. I mean, even here in Florida has the highest number of residents on Obamacare in the country. If those—

    President Trump: And I’m saying we can fix it, Norah.   

    Norah O’Donnell: You have helped end these government shutdowns in the past when it came about—

    President Trump: I did.

    Norah O’Donnell: And you did it by bringing back—

    President Trump: I’m very good at it, but I’m not going to do it by—

    Norah O’Donnell: You brought members of Congress to— 

    President Trump: —I’m not going to do it by extortion—

    Norah O’Donnell: —to the White House.

    President Trump: I’m not going to do it by being extorted by the Democrats who have lost their way. The – there’s something wrong with these people

    Norah O’Donnell: So then what happens on November 15th—

    President Trump: Schumer— Schumer is a basket case.

    Norah O’Donnell: —when the troops don’t get a paycheck?

    President Trump: Schumer is a basket case. And he has nothing to lose. He’s become— I just left Japan. He’s become a kaz— kamikaze pilot.

    Norah O’Donnell: Sounds like it’s not going to get solved, the shutdown.

    President Trump: It’s going to get solved, yeah. Oh, it’s going to get solved.

    Norah O’Donnell: How?

    President Trump: We’ll get it solved. Eventually, they’re going to have to vote.

    Norah O’Donnell: You’re saying the Democrats will capitulate? 

    President Trump: I think they have to. And if they don’t vote, that’s their problem. Now, I happen to agree to something else. I think we should do the nuclear option. This is a totally different nuclear, by the way. It’s called ending the filibuster.

    But to do that, he’d need Senate Majority Leader John Thune to change Senate rules.

    Norah O’Donnell: Did you see John Thune said today they’re not going to do that—

    President Trump: I know John doesn’t— well, John and a few others. But, you know what? The Republicans have to get tougher. If we end the filibuster, we can do exactly what we want. We’re not going to lose power. The theory is, oh, then we’ll do it, but then when they get into power someday they’ll do it. That’s true. But you know what?

    Norah O’Donnell: So you think John—

    President Trump: We’re here right now. No, I like John Thune. I think he’s terrific, but I disagree with him on this point.

    Norah O’Donnell: He j— he said today he wasn’t going to do it.

    President Trump: Well, that’s too bad.

    So far, the shutdown hasn’t spooked the stock market, which hit record highs this past week.  

    President Trump: Perfect timing for your show, just hit an all-time high. We’re doing really well

    Norah O’Donnell: Uh-huh. Can I ask you, Mr. President—

    President Trump: The smart people definitely—

    Norah O’Donnell: —on that point, though?

    President Trump: Yeah.

    Norah O’Donnell: When the stock market is doing well, that doesn’t affect everybody. Not everybody’s invested in the stock market—

    President Trump: It does. Oh, it does, it does.

    Norah O’Donnell: But there have been— grocery prices are up—

    President Trump: Look, 401(k)s. People have 401(k)s. Their 401(k)s are double what they were a year ago.

    Norah O’Donnell: But for people that don’t have 401(k)s, who are not invested in the stock market—

    President Trump: Sure. But— but—

    Norah O’Donnell:  —they’ve seen their grocery prices go up, inflation—

    President Trump: No, you’re wrong. They went up under Biden. Right now they’re going down. Other than beef, which we’re working on, which we can solve very quickly.

    Norah O’Donnell: On the economy, the signature part of your economic plan is tariffs. The Supreme Court is going to hear arguments this week on whether you have the authority to impose these sweeping tariffs without Congressional approval. The lower courts have ruled against you. That’s why it’s at—

    President Trump: Well, no.

    Norah O’Donnell: —the Supreme Court right now.

    President Trump: Very close rulings, yeah.

    Norah O’Donnell: What happens to your economic plan if the Supreme Court invalidates your tariffs?

    President Trump: I think our country will be immeasurably hurt. I think our economy will go to hell. Look, because of tariffs, we have the highest stock market we’ve ever had. Because of tariffs, 401(k)s at the highest level that — and this is millions and millions of people — that we’ve ever had 401(k)s. I think it’s the most important subject discussed by the Supreme Court in 100 years. 

    Norah O’Donnell: I know your time is limited, so I do want to make sure I get through more of these topics.

    President Trump: Sure.

    Norah O’Donnell: Immigration. You campaigned on immigration. You largely won the election on a promise to close the border—

    President Trump: Did a great job, don’t you think?

    Norah O’Donnell: —and you succeeded on that. Illegal crossings at the Southern border are at a 55-year low. More recently, Americans have been watching videos of ICE tackling a young mother, tear gas being used in a Chicago residential neighborhood, and the smashing of car windows. Have some of these raids gone too far?

    President Trump: No. I think they haven’t gone far enough because we’ve been held back by the— by the judges, by the liberal judges that were put in by Biden and by Obama. 

    Norah O’Donnell: You’re OK with those tactics?

    President Trump: Yeah, because you have to get the people out. You know, you have to look at the people. Many of them are murderers. Many of them are people that were thrown outta their countries because they were, you know, criminals. 

    Norah O’Donnell: Well, you promised in your campaign that you were going to deport the worst of the worst, violent criminals—

    President Trump: And I know we’re doin’ that—

    Norah O’Donnell: —rapists.

    President Trump: Well, that’s what we’re doing—

    Norah O’Donnell: But a lot of the people that your administration has arrested and deported aren’t violent criminals. Landscapers, nannies, construction workers—

    President Trump: Oh, no, no, landscapers who are  criminals—

    Norah O’Donnell: —farmworkers.

    President Trump: Now, look, look.

    Norah O’Donnell: The family of U.S. service members—

    President Trump: I need landscapers and I need farmers more than anybody, OK.

    Norah O’Donnell: Is it your intent to deport people who do not have a criminal record?

    President Trump: We have to start off with a policy, and the policy has to be you came into the country illegally, you’re going to go out. However, you’ve also seen, you’re going to go out. We’re going to work with you, and you’re going to come back into our country legally. 

    Norah O’Donnell: When will you declare mission accomplished on immigration?

    President Trump: Well, it takes a long time, because, you know, probably I say 25 million people were let into our country. A lotta people say it was 10 million people. But whether it was 10 or— I believe I’m much closer to the right number. Of the 25, many of them should not be here. But we’re— we’re cleaning up our cities. You know, I campaigned on crime, but I’ve done a much better job on crime than I thought. You know, the crime numbers are way down, even though we have a lot more people in our country that really shouldn’t be here. And many of them are stone-cold hard criminals.

    The president has ordered the National Guard to five cities: Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., Portland, Chicago and Memphis. 

    Norah O’Donnell: This past Tuesday, while speaking to American troops in Japan, you talked about U.S. cities that are having trouble with crime. And you said, “If we need more than the National Guard, we’ll send more than the National Guard.” What does that mean, send more than the National Guard?

    President Trump: Well, if you had to send in the Army or if you had to send in the Marines, I’d do that in a heartbeat. You know, you have a thing called the Insurrection Act. You know that, right?

    Norah O’Donnell: Uh-huh

    President Trump: Do you know that I could use that immediately and no judge can even challenge you on that. But I haven’t chosen to do it because I haven’t felt we need it. 

    Norah O’Donnell: So you’re going to send the military into American cities?

    President Trump: Well, if I wanted to I could, if I want to use the Insurrection Act. The Insurrection Act has been used routinely by presidents. And if I needed it, that would mean I could bring in the Army, the Marines, I could bring in whoever I want. But I haven’t chosen to use it. I hope you give me credit for that.

    Norah O’Donnell: I want to ask you about— another matter. James Comey, John Bolton, Letitia James were all recently indicted. There is a pattern to these names. They’re all public figures who have publicly denounced you. Is it political retribution?

    President Trump: You know what? You know who got indicted, the man you’re lookin’ at. I got indicted, and I was innocent. And here I am, because I was able to beat all of the nonsense that was thrown at me. And yet, when you go after a dirty cop like Comey or a guy like Bolton, who I hear has, I don’t know anything about it, I hear he took records all over the place, who knows. Letitia James is a terrible, dishonest person, in my opinion. 

    Norah O’Donnell: Did you instruct the Department of Justice to go after them?

    President Trump: No, and not in any way, shape or form. No. You don’t have to instruct ’em because they were so dirty, they were so crooked, they were so corrupt that the honest people we have, Pam Bondi’s doing a very good job. Kash Patel’s doing a very good job. The honest people that we have go after ’em automatically

    But in a Truth Social post from September addressed to Attorney General Pam Bondi, President Trump endorsed the idea that former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, were, quote, “guilty as hell,” and wrote, quote, ” justice must be served, now!!!.” Five days later, James Comey was indicted. He pled not guilty — and so did Letitia James and President Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton.

    Norah O’Donnell: Is this retribution on your part?

    President Trump: No, it’s the opposite. I think I’ve been very mild-mannered. You’re looking at a man who was indicted many times, and I had to beat the rap. Otherwise I couldn’t have run for president. They tried to get me not to run for president by going after me and by indicting me. 

    So far this year, the president has pardoned or shortened the sentences of more than 1,600 people. The latest pardon was for a cryptocurrency tycoon who is known as C.Z. The company C.Z. founded, Binance, helped boost the profile of the Trump family’s crypto firm World Liberty Financial.

    Norah O’Donnell: He pled guilty in 2023 to violating anti-money-laundering laws.

    President Trump: Right.

    Norah O’Donnell: The government at the time said that C.Z. had caused “significant harm to U.S. national security”, essentially by allowing terrorist groups like Hamas to move millions of dollars around. Why did you pardon him?

    President Trump: OK, are you ready? I don’t know who he is. I know he got a four-month sentence or something like that. And I heard it was a Biden witch hunt.

    Norah O’Donnell: In 2025 his crypto exchange, Binance, helped facilitate a $2 billion purchase of World Liberty Financial’s stablecoin. And then you pardoned C.Z. How do you address the appearance of pay for play?

    President Trump: Well, here’s the thing, I know nothing about it because I’m too busy doing the other—

    Norah O’Donnell: But he got a pardon—

    President Trump: I can only tell you that—

    Norah O’Donnell: He got a pardon—

    President Trump: No, I can only tell you this. My sons are into it. I’m glad they are, because it’s probably a great industry, crypto. I think it’s good. You know, they’re running a business, they’re not in government.

    World Liberty Financial has denied any involvement in the pardon.

    With state and local elections coming up Tuesday, we asked the president about the highly anticipated mayoral race that includes former NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Zohran Mamdani.

    Norah O’Donnell: Zohran Mamdani, 34-year-old democratic socialist. He’s the front runner—

    President Trump: Communist, not socialist. Communist. He’s far…

    Norah O’Donnell: Some…

    President Trump: He’s far worse than a socialist.

    Norah O’Donnell: Some people have compared him to a left-wing version of you, charismatic, breaking the old rules. What do you think about that?

    President Trump: Well, I think I’m much better looking person than him, right?

    Norah O’Donnell: What if Mamdani becomes mayor?

    President Trump: It’s going to be hard for me as the president to give a lot of money to New York. Because if you have a communist running New York, all you’re doing is wasting the money you’re sending there. So I don’t know that he’s won, and I’m not a fan of Cuomo one way or another, but if it’s going to be between a bad Democrat and a communist, I’m going to pick the bad Democrat all the time, to be honest with you.

    When we sat down with President Trump on Friday at Mar-a-Lago, he had just returned from a high-stakes meeting with China’s President Xi Jinping, which culminated with a temporary truce in the trade war between the two countries. But before the meeting even began, Mr. Trump made news — as he often does — with a social media post.

    Norah O’Donnell: Less than an hour before your meeting with President Xi, you posted on social media that you instructed the, quote, “Department of War to start testing our nuclear weapons–

    President Trump: That’s right.

    Norah O’Donnell: —immediately.”

    President Trump: Yeah—

    Norah O’Donnell: What did you mean? 

    President Trump: Well, we have more nuclear weapons than any other country. And I think we should do something about denuclearization. And I did actually discuss that with both President Putin and President Xi. We have enough nuclear weapons to blow up the world 150 times. Russia has a lot of nuclear weapons, and China will have a lot. They have some. They have quite a bit, but—

    Norah O’Donnell: So why do we need to test– our nuclear weapons?

    President Trump: Well, because you have to see how they work. You know, you do have to— and the reason I’m saying— testing is because Russia announced that they were going to be doing a test. If you notice, North Korea’s testing constantly. Other countries are testing. We’re the only country that doesn’t test, and I want to be— I don’t want to be the only country that doesn’t test. 

    Norah O’Donnell: Are you saying that after more than 30 years, the United States is going to start detonating nuclear weapons for testing—

    President Trump: I’m saying that we’re going to test nuclear weapons like other countries do, yes.

    Norah O’Donnell: But the only country that’s testing nuclear weapons is North Korea. China and Russia are not—

    President Trump: Well, Russia’s— no, no. Russia’s testing nuclear weapons—

    Norah O’Donnell: So my understanding–

    President Trump: And China’s testing ’em too. You just don’t know about it.

    Norah O’Donnell: That would be certainly very newsworthy. My understanding is what Russia did recently was test essentially the— delivery systems for nuclear weapons, essentially missiles, which we can do that but w— not with nuclear warheads—

    President Trump: Russia’s testing, and China’s testing, but they don’t talk about it. You know, we’re a open  society. We’re different. We talk about it. We have to talk about it, because otherwise you people are going to report— they don’t have reporters that going to be writing about it. We do. 

    However, this week the president’s own nominee to lead STRATCOM — the admiral who would be in charge of nuclear weapons — was asked about this very issue on Capitol Hill. He said neither China nor Russia were conducting nuclear explosive tests.

    Norah O’Donnell: One potential flash point with China, probably the potential flash point with China in the coming years, is over the issue of Taiwan. The Chinese military is encroaching on Taiwan’s sea lanes, its airspace, its cyberspace. I know you have said that Xi Jinping wouldn’t dare move militarily on Taiwan while you’re in office. But what if he does? Would you order U.S. forces to defend Taiwan?

    President Trump: You’ll find out if it happens. And he understands the answer to that.

    Norah O’Donnell: Why not say it—

    President Trump: This never even came up yesterday, as a subject. He never brought it up. People were a little surprised at that. He never brought it up, because he understands it, and he understands it very well. 

    Norah O’Donnell: Do you mind if I ask, when you say, “He understands,” why not communicate that publicly to the rest of us? What does he understand that—

    President Trump: Well—

    President Trump: —I don’t want to give away— I can’t give away my secrets. I don’t want to be one of these guys that tells you exactly what’s going to happen if something happens. The other side knows, but— I’m not somebody that tells you everything because you’re askin’ me a question. But they understand what’s going to happen. And— he has openly said, and his people have openly said at meetings, “We would never do anything while President Trump is president,” because they know the consequences.

    At the top of the agenda for President Trump and President Xi was a one-year trade deal that, for now, averts the escalating tension between the two economic superpowers. 

    Mr. Trump told us that in exchange for lower tariffs, China agreed to sell the U.S. its valuable rare earth minerals – and to resume buying American agricultural products.

    Norah O’Donnell: This trade war, though, was hurting Americans. I mean, our soybean farmers. China had stopped buying the soybeans.

    President Trump: Yeah.

    Norah O’Donnell: China was withholding these rare earth materials that you need for everything from smartphones, to build submarines.

    President Trump: Sure.

    Norah O’Donnell: What was the crucial thing? I mean, how tough of a negotiator—

    President Trump: Well, when you say hurting—

    Norah O’Donnell: —is President Xi—

    President Trump: —it was a temporary hurt. It was a hurt because— I was takin’ in a lot of money from China. We’re doing very well against China. And all of a sudden they said, “You know, we have to fight back.” And so they used their powers. The power they have is rare earth because of the fact that they’ve been accumulating it and— and really taking care of it for a period of 25, 30 years. Other countries haven’t. They use that against us, and we used other things against them. For instance, airplane parts. That’s a big deal. They have— hundreds of Boeing airplanes. We wouldn’t give them parts. We were both acting— maybe a little bit irrationally, but the big thing we had was tariffs ultimately. I said, “Look, if you don’t open up, then what we’re going to do is we’re going to impose a hundred percent tariff over and above what you’re already paying.” 

    Norah O’Donnell: Mr. President, you just negotiated this one-year trade deal with China—

    President Trump: Yep.

    Norah O’Donnell: But as you know, the Chinese, they think in a hundred years.

    President Trump: Sure.

    Norah O’Donnell: They play the long game, including on our own soil.

    President Trump: We play the long game too.

    Norah O’Donnell: Our own intelligence agencies say the Chinese have infiltrated parts of the American power grid and our water systems. They steal American intellectual property and Americans’ personal information. They bought American farmland. How big of a threat is China?

    President Trump: It’s like everybody else. We’re a threat to them too. Many of the things that you say, we do to them. Look, this is a very competitive world, especially when it comes to China and the U.S. And— we’re always watching them, and they’re always watching us. In the meantime, I think we get along very well, and I think it’s— I think we can be bigger, better, and stronger by working with them as opposed to just— knocking them out– 

    Norah O’Donnell: Who’s tougher to deal with, Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping?

    President Trump: Both tough. Both smart. Both— look, they’re both very strong leaders. These are people not to be toyed with. These are people you have to take very serious. They’re not— they’re not walking in saying, “Oh, isn’t it a beautiful day? Look how beautiful. The sun is shining, it’s so nice.” These are serious people. These are people that are tough, smart leaders.

    Norah O’Donnell: And on that note, you talk about Ukraine. In August, I mean, you rolled out the red carpet for Vladimir Putin in Alaska. But there’s been—

    President Trump: Well, I roll out the red carpet for everybody.

    Norah O’Donnell: OK. But is— but there’s been no ceasefire—

    President Trump: I think I made— yes, there isn’t—

    Norah O’Donnell: What’s— is he ignoring you?

    President Trump: —because he thinks— because I inherited a country where he thinks he’s winning. That was a war that would’ve never happened if I was president. 

    Norah O’Donnell: So why won’t Putin end this war?

    President Trump: —that was— but— but Norah, that was Joe Biden’s war, not my war. I inherited that stupid war.

    As the bloodiest land war in Europe since WWII continues…

    President Trump: But I brought, just a little list of— look at this, wars. 

    President Trump wanted to make sure we saw the list of eight international conflicts he says he’s been able to end since returning to office.

    Norah O’Donnell: I mean, you have branded yourself the peace president.

    President Trump: Well, I think I did—

    Norah O’Donnell: What—

    President Trump: —pretty good. I— I solved— those are eight of the nine wars I solved. I—

    Norah O’Donnell: When—

    President Trump: —you know how I solved ’em? I said, in many cases, in 60% I said, “If you don’t stop fighting, I’m putting tariffs on both of your countries and you’re not going to be able to do business with the United—

    Norah O’Donnell: So why isn’t that— why isn’t that working with Putin?

    President Trump: Uhh, it is working with Putin, I think. I did different with him because we don’t do very much business with Russia, for one thing, you know? He’s not, like, somebody that buys a lot from us because of— foolishness. And I think he’d like to be. I think he wants to come in and he wants to trade with us, and he wants to make a lotta money for Russia, and I think that’s great. 

    The commander-in-chief has directed the U.S. military to destroy at least nine vessels in the waters off Venezuela, killing more than three dozen alleged drug smugglers. U.S. lawmakers, including at least four Republicans, have questioned the strikes’ legality.

    In the meantime, F-35 fighter jets, roughly 10,000 U.S. servicemembers, and multiple warships are in the Caribbean.

    Norah O’Donnell: And now the U.S.S. Gerald Ford, that is the world’s largest aircraft carrier, on the way to the Caribbean. Are we going to war against Venezuela?

    President Trump: I doubt it. I don’t think so. But they’ve been treating us very badly, not only on drugs— they’ve dumped hundreds of thousands of people into our country that we didn’t want, people from prisons— they emptied their prisons into our company— country. They also— if you take a look, they emptied their mental institutions and their insane asylums— into the United States of America, ’cause Joe Biden was the worst president in the history of our country. 

    Norah O’Donnell: But I just want to talk about the scale of the military operation around Venezuela, because it has been described to “60 Minutes” as using a blowtorch to cook an egg. Is this about stopping—

    President Trump: Well, I don’t think so. Look—

    Norah O’Donnell: Is it about— let me ask you, though. Is it about stopping narcotics? Or is this about getting rid of President Maduro? 

    President Trump: No, this is about many things. This is a country that allowed their prisons to be emptied into our country. To me, that would be almost number one, because we have other countries—

    Norah O’Donnell: We don’t need to blow up boats in order to deal—

    President Trump: Look, Mexico has been very bad to us in terms of drugs, OK? Very bad. We have a closed border right now. You probably noticed that for five months in a row, they have zero— think of this, zero people coming into our country through our southern border. 

    Norah O’Donnell: On Venezuela in particular, are Maduro’s days as president numbered? 

    President Trump: I would say yeah. I think so, yeah.

    Norah O’Donnell: And this issue of potential land strikes in Venezuela, is that true?

    President Trump: I don’t tell you that. I mean— I’m not saying it’s true or untrue, but I— you know, I wouldn’t—

    Norah O’Donnell: Why would we do it?

    President Trump: —I wouldn’t be inclined to say that I would do that. But— because I don’t talk to a reporter about whether or not I’m going to strike.

    Norah O’Donnell: Let’s talk about Israel — you got the remaining Israeli hostages out of Gaza.

    President Trump: I did.

    Norah O’Donnell: You arranged a ceasefire, however fragile that may be. Those are major—

    President Trump: It’s not fragile. It’s a very solid— you know, I mean, you hear about Hamas, but Hamas could be taken out immediately if they don’t behave. They know that. If they don’t behave they’re going to be taken out immediately. They’re know that—

    Norah O’Donnell: How do you get Hamas to disarm?

    President Trump: If I want ’em to disarm, I’ll get ’em to disarm very quickly. They’ll be— they’ll be eliminated. They know that. Don’t forget, you said I got the remaining hostages. I got all the hostages out. But I always said the last 10 or 20 are going to be tough. 

    Norah O’Donnell: You pushed the Israeli Prime Minister to make this deal, to get a ceasefire, to apologize to Qatar. Can you push Bibi Netanyahu to recognize a Palestinian state?

    President Trump: Yeah, he’s— he’s fine. He’s fine. Look, he’s a wartime prime minister. I worked very well with him. Yeah, I mean, I had to push him a little bit one way or the other. I think I— I did a great job in pushing— he’s a very talented guy. He’s a guy that— has never been pushed before, actually. That’s the kind of person you needed in Israel at the time. It was very important. I don’t think they treat him very well. He’s under trial for some things, and I don’t think they treat him very well. I think it should— you know, we’ll— we’ll be involved in that to help him out a little bit, because I think it’s very unfair. Um – I did, I pushed him. I didn’t like certain things that he did, and you saw what I did about that. I also stopped— you know, I— we knocked the hell out of Iran, and then it was time to stop, and we stopped. 

    President Trump told us he expects to expand the Abraham Accords, the historic agreement struck during Mr. Trump’s first term, that normalized relations between Israel and some Arab states.

    Norah O’Donnell: I wanted to ask you about the crown prince of Saudi Arabia is coming to the White House—

    President Trump: That’s right.

    Norah O’Donnell: —this month. He has said they won’t join the Abraham Accords without a two-state solution. Do you believe that?

    President Trump: No. I think he’s going to join. I— I think— we will have a solution. I don’t know if it’s going to be two-state. That’s going to be up to Israel and other people, and me. But— look, the main thing is you could’ve never had any kind of a deal if you had a nuclear Iran. And you essentially had a nuclear Iran. And I blasted the hell out of ’em, and no president is—

    Norah O’Donnell: Are you convinced they have no nuclear capability right now in Iran—

    President Trump: Do you want to know— do you want to know— they have no nuclear capability, no. Do you want to know that— the pilots, I invited them to the White House—

    Norah O’Donnell: I saw that.

    President Trump: —’cause they were very brave. I mean, I wouldn’t have wanted to do it you know, getting in a plane, and they know you’re coming, and you’re going right into Iran airspace. And, you know, they’re very experts, and you’re flying in with machines. Personally I can think of other things I’d rather do. These guys are very brave people. I mean, they’re real American heroes. And they told me something I didn’t know. They said, “Sir for 22 years we’ve been practicing this route… three times a year every year for 22 years, and you were the only president that let us do our job.” 

    As our time with the president was winding down, we asked him whether he’ll try to stay in his job beyond 2028.

    Norah O’Donnell: There’s been a lotta talk about 2028 and who will be at the top of the—

    President Trump: Yeah.

    Norah O’Donnell: —Republican ticket. Can you set the record straight? You’re not going to try and run for a third term?

    President Trump: Well I don’t even think about it. I will tell you, a lotta people want me to run. But the difference between us and the Democrats is we really do have a strong bench. I don’t want to use names, because it’s, you know, inappropriate. But it’s too early. 3 and ¼ years –

    Norah O’Donnell: But people do like when you start talking about whether you like J.D. Vance or Secretary Rubio—

    President Trump: I do like J.D. Vance. I like—

    Norah O’Donnell: Or secretary—

    President Trump: —Marco Rubio. I like— I like so many people. We have an unbelievable bench. 

    Norah O’Donnell: Mr. President, can I also ask you, we’re now at the end of your first year.

    President Trump: Yeah. 

    Norah O’Donnell: Of this second term. What do you hope to accomplish in the next three years?

    President Trump: I hope I can have the same year that we had. Look, we have been acknowledged to have the greatest nine months. You know, it’s nine months. The greatest nine months in the history of the presidency. So if I can keep that going I’ll be very happy. 

    Produced by Andy Court and Keith Sharman. Associate producers, Roxanne Feitel, Annabelle Hanflig, Jessica Kegu, Cassidy McDonald, Arman Badrei, Georgia Rosenberg and Julie Morse. Broadcast associates, Mariah Johnson, Callie Teitelbaum and Jane Greeley. Edited by Sean Kelly, Matthew Lev and Aisha Crespo.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump says China’s Xi has assured him that he won’t take action on Taiwan during Republican’s term | Fortune

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump says that Chinese President Xi Jinping has given him assurances that Beijing would take no action toward its long-stated goal of unifying Taiwan with mainland China while the Republican leader is in office.

    Trump said that the long-contentious issue of Taiwan did not come up in his talks with Xi on Thursday in South Korea that largely focused on U.S.-China trade tensions. But the U.S. leader expressed certainty that China would not take action on Taiwan, while he’s in office.

    “He has openly said, and his people have openly said at meetings, ‘We would never do anything while President Trump is president,’ because they know the consequences,” Trump said in an excerpt of an interview with the CBS’ program “60 Minutes” that aired Sunday.

    U.S. officials have long been concerned about the possibility of China using military force against Taiwan, the self-ruled island democracy claimed by Beijing as part of its territory.

    The 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, which has governed U.S. relations with the island, does not require the U.S. to step in militarily if China invades but makes it American policy to ensure Taiwan has the resources to defend itself and to prevent any unilateral change of status by Beijing.

    Asked if he would order U.S. forces to defend Taiwan if China attacked, Trump demurred. The United States, both Republican and Democratic administrations, have maintained a policy of “strategic ambiguity” on Taiwan — trying not to tip their hands on whether the U.S. would come to the island’s aid in such a scenario.

    “You’ll find out if it happens, and he understands the answer to that,” Trump said of Xi.

    Liu Pengyu, spokesman for the Chinese embassy in Washington, did not respond directly to a query about whether Trump has received any assurances from Xi or Chinese officials about Taiwan. He insisted in a statement that China “will never allow any person or force to separate Taiwan from China in any way.”

    “The Taiwan question is China’s internal affair, and it is the core of China’s core interests. How to resolve the Taiwan question is a matter for the Chinese people ourselves, and only the Chinese people can decide it,” the statement added.

    The White House also did not provide further details about when Xi or Chinese officials have conveyed to Trump that military action on Taiwan was off-the-table for the duration of the Republican’s presidency.

    The “60 Minutes” interview was taped on Friday at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. It marked Trump’s first appearance on the show since he settled a lawsuit this summer with CBS News over the newsmagazine’s interviewwith Kamala Harris.

    The rest of the interview is scheduled to air later Sunday.

    [ad_2]

    Aamer Madhani, The Associated Press

    Source link

  • Nuclear testing update: Energy secretary clarifies Trump’s comments

    [ad_1]

    Energy Secretary Chris Wright clarified comments that were made last week by President Donald Trump on Truth Social about renewed nuclear testing during an appearance on Fox News’ The Sunday Briefing.

    Wright told Fox News’ Peter Doocy that people wouldn’t see explosions or anything similar to previous nuclear tests carried out in the United States, saying, “I think the tests we’re talking about right now are system tests. These are not nuclear explosions. These are what we call non-critical explosions.”

    Wright elaborated that such tests involve “all the other parts of a nuclear weapon to make sure they deliver the appropriate geometry and they set up the nuclear explosion,” but do not include actual atomic detonations.

    Newsweek reached out to the Pentagon and the White House regarding testing nuclear testing Sunday.

    Why It Matters

    U.S. nuclear weapons policy has global ramifications, impacting diplomatic relations and international security.

    The U.S. last conducted a nuclear weapons test in 1992 at the Nevada National Security Site underground. In 1996, the country signed onto the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, which “bans all nuclear test explosions, whether for military or civilian purposes.” However, the Senate rejected its ratification in 1999.

    With rivals like Russia, China and Iran accelerating their nuclear programs, the Trump administration’s public signals have drawn close scrutiny from lawmakers, the public, and America’s allies and adversaries.

    The clarification from Wright provides new insights on the administration’s approach to nuclear deterrence and the ongoing debate about how best to maintain the safety and reliability of the U.S. arsenal while avoiding breaches of international bans on nuclear detonations.

    What To Know

    On Truth Social last week, Trump wrote that the U.S. “has more nuclear weapons than any other country,” saying it was “accomplished, including a complete update and renovation of existing weapons” during his first term.

    The president added: “Because of the tremendous destructive power, I HATED to do it, but had no choice! Russia is second, and China is a distant third, but will be even within 5 years. Because of other countries testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis. That process will begin immediately. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

    On Wednesday, reporters aboard Air Force One asked Trump about his post, seeking details about what it would look like for the U.S. resuming such tests.

    “We’re going to do some testing,” the president said. “Other countries do it. If they’re going to do it, we’re going to.” He declined to provide further details.

    During his appearance on The Sunday Briefing, Wright was asked by Doocy if residents near the U.S. military’s nuclear testing site in Nevada “should expect to see a mushroom cloud at some point.”

    Wright responded: “No, no worries about that.”

    The Federation of American Scientists estimates that the U.S. has a nuclear stockpile of about 3,700 warheads, with about 1,700 deployed, while the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) puts the total U.S. inventory at 5,177, with Russia at 5,459. SIPRI notes that “Russia and the USA together possess around 90 percent of all nuclear weapons.” The U.S. and the Soviet Union engaged in a nuclear arms race during the Cold War.

    Only North Korea has conducted a nuclear test detonation this century—the last in 2017—though Russia and China have tested delivery systems but not warheads, according to the Associated Press.

    Beijing and Moscow have intensified their nuclear weapons programs in recent years, but neither has confirmed violation of the testing moratorium.

    Meanwhile, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Friday that the Pentagon is moving “quickly” on Trump’s directive. He said during a meeting with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) that the department will work with the Department of Energy on nuclear testing, saying that the “president was clear. We need a credible nuclear deterrent.” 

    What People Are Saying

    Senator Mark Kelly, an Arizona Democrat, wrote on X on Thursday: “New nuclear tests are unnecessary escalation by a President who doesn’t seem to be paying attention. The Chinese and the Russians HAVEN’T conducted a recent test of a nuclear warhead. It’s been decades. If we resume testing our weapons (which we have no reason to do) China will likely begin a test program. This only helps them advance their technology and start an arms race. Read your briefing materials, Mr. President.”

    Corey Hinderstein, vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for Nuclear Peace, told NPR: “I think a decision to resume nuclear testing would be extremely dangerous and would do more to benefit our adversaries than the United States.”

    Ernest Moniz, American nuclear physicist, former secretary of energy, and CEO of The Nuclear Threat Initiative, in a statement on Thursday: “If explosive testing were to resume, it would mark the end of a three-decade-long moratorium on U.S. nuclear testing. Testing nuclear weapons is unnecessary for U.S. national security, unwise because it will invite our adversaries to do the same, and unwelcome in communities close to the test site.”

    Vice Admiral Richard Correll, nominee to lead U.S. Strategic Command, said at a Senate hearing last week: “I don’t have insight into the President’s intent. I agree that could be an interpretation.”

    What Happens Next?

    The Trump administration has not announced any timetable for a resumption of explosive tests, and top officials have continued to emphasize the non-nuclear nature of planned activities.

    The situation continues to be closely monitored by lawmakers and international observers, with calls for further transparency and discussion.

    [ad_2]

    Source link