China

If we are going to make an overview of what is going on now through the lens of the so-called dangerous opportunity, we can list some challenges and opportunities that Iran and China both face through this tension. I will try to name challenges and opportunities.

Challenges

The first challenge is that the United States of America is in a big competition and rivalry against China, which is the main actor trying to compete against the Western order. The US tries to create a “burned land” within the Middle East by using the major strategy of balkanization. In this strategy, the United States attempts to create a weak, failed, chaotic space for China throughout the region to actually block any attempts to initiate the Belt and Road Initiative and land corridors from China to the western part of the world. You can see a clear idea of balkanization throughout the region, and of course, we can see this example in Syria. The main role that Israel and the United States try to duplicate in different parts of the region may be seen in Yemen, Iraq, and even Afghanistan. The challenge is that we will have a burnt land in the Middle East that actually makes it impossible to follow initiatives like the Belt and Road.

The second challenge could be an energy crisis in the Middle East. We know that China tries its best to mediate between Saudi Arabia and Iran to secure regional security and stability, and of course, energy stability within the Middle East and at the global scale. This crisis and tension, which Israel initiated through unprovoked actions, could lead to a worldwide energy crisis because Iran and Tehran have mentioned multiple times that there are different options available for Iran to affect the whole region if there is more tension or further attacks from any foreign actors, especially the United States or Israel.

The third challenge we can name is the corridor blockade or dead-end. We can name different initiatives and corridors made and created by the United States, such as I2U2, Quad, AUKUS, and of course IMEC, as initiatives to create a kind of blockade for China through maritime corridors. If the United States and Israel follow through with their goals in the current tension, there would be a kind of corridor blockade from the East to the West.

Another challenge we can name is about the Abraham Accords. China and Beijing should understand that this kind of alliance is not really just about Palestine or normalization with the Zionist regime; it is a big alliance and outsourcing of the regional order from Washington to Tel Aviv. In this regional order, which is totally supported and facilitated by Washington, the Middle East—or better said, Southwest Asia—would be a total ally of the United States. This could strongly affect the national interests of Beijing.

Last but not least, a challenge after the current tension between Iran and Israel is the possibility of initiating the next big conflict. Currently, we have two big open wounds from previous years: the Ukraine crisis and Palestine. The result and balance of power around these two hot zones will create a balance of power around a third hot zone, which is Taiwan. Therefore, the outcomes of Ukraine and Palestine will directly affect the Taiwan situation in the upcoming months and years.

Opportunities

The Chinese letter for crisis shows us that there is an opportunity in this kind of crisis. If we can name them:

The first opportunity is that supporting policy, especially for the nations of the region and the Global South, is simply being on the right side of history. Every actor who supports Palestine gains favorability within nations, especially in the Global South. As you can see, Iran has gained much soft power within the current tension with Israel in the region. This is a real comeback from the Arab Spring for Iran’s image in the eyes of the Middle Eastern people. Actually, China may understand that in the region there is a deep real desire to resist Israel. Every actor who stands against the operations of Israel will gain and has gained much favorability in the region and even the world. This is the big, big side of the resistance idea.

The second opportunity during this kind of conflict is that Iran can show and test its military capability against the Western alliances. It is not a clear and accurate vision if you consider the current situation and tension as a simple war between Tehran and Tel Aviv. Tehran, in the current 12-day war, stands and fights against Washington, the whole NATO, and some regional actors. Iran has not only avoided defeat in this situation but also tried to push the whole Israel and Western alliances to a ceasefire point.

The third opportunity is the chance and moment for almost all old actors in the region to shift their ideas towards a strong region without the US. It seems that even countries like Saudi Arabia and other regional states are thinking about a region without the presence of the United States. The good news is that if Iran and its allies can play a good role during the conflict and upcoming tension, there could be a regional order emerging from the regional actors, and there would be no vacuum of power.

The next opportunity I want to mention, after the experience of this war, is really important for Beijing nowadays and the current situation of the international order. China could not find any other strategy or reliable partner within the region with the capability of military, social soft power, enormous energy resources, and favorable geography other than Iran.

Conclusion

It seems that the fundamental strategy of the United States during the Trump administration for the Middle East, called “peace through strength,” is just a choice between two options: surrender or war. Surrender would mean a regional order controlled by Tel Aviv. Iran, as it seems, is trying to prepare itself for full-scale war. As mentioned in the early stage of this note, during the tension, this is a period of rebalancing of actors’ powers. Therefore, the ability and will of order-writers like China to play a role in this conflict will determine the upcoming role of this actor in the new world order.

KEY POINT:

–        The contemporary importance of the aerospace sector stems from its complex technological structure, its diverse applications, and balanced public and private investment, which contribute to security in competitive environments.

–        The 2001 United Nations Convention on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space illustrates the conflict between space militarization and technological security. Modern competition increasingly intertwines military and economic aspects, as demonstrated by advances in electronic warfare and communication systems.

–        As space becomes a battleground for military dominance, it is essential to ensure peaceful development in this race. The challenges lie in managing military interests while promoting civilian innovations, revealing the complexities of international law and the prospects for disarmament in an evolving geopolitical landscape.

–        In contemplating treaties, there is a risk of being seen as naive, as demonstrated by the decline of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. This highlights the need to avoid the militarization of space. Alternatives include maintaining secrecy over space defense technologies or promoting strategic alliances for technology sharing.

–        A coalition between the United States, the European Union, and Russia could counterbalance the military advances of China and India. Investment in aerospace technology is key to gaining a competitive advantage, while trade agreements could guide the distribution of dual-use technologies, ultimately influencing global power dynamics and social transformations.

Why write about investing in the space sector today? Because it is an area of intervention that has the following structural characteristics: a) it is a complex combination of technologies, as was the case with the cas and , in its early days, the laptop computer; b) it offers a wide range of multiple application to other mature non-space technologies, c) it optimizes the combination of public and private investment, as has been the case with all other investments in technology that have changed the entire production system, and finally d) it guarantees the security of technologies and, therefore, of investments, which are covered in the eyes of competitors for military or security reasons.

For “mature” technologies, this is not possible. [1]

The issue of the militarization of space is essential to understanding the applicability of new aerospace technologies to non-military production.

In 2001, the UN General Assembly approved a Convention on the prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space, signe by all major countries interested in space technologies.

But here too there is a logical contradiction between the non-militarization of space and the security of technologies, which must be covered by international competition in order to produce sufficiently attractive economic returns in a timely manner. [2]

Furthermore, there is a concept that could also be described as economy, albeit in a broad sense: if a State or alliance acquires a competitive edge in a weapons system, it also acquires maximum deterrence at minimum cost.

Competition between weapons system reduces their effectiveness and increases their structural costs, while also limiting their application cycles to civilian production, where global competitors can enter the market.

This is an application of Michael Porter’s thesis on the “global competitive advantage” [3].

It is therefore not surprising that space is the scene of competition that, in addition to being economic and application-based, is increasingly military in nature.

Just think, for example, of laser countermeasures for enemy missile systems and advanced electronic jamming and message distortion techniques that can be directed from space to Earth or, more simply, between space weapons themselves. [4]

The Chinese have already affirmed, in their theoretical and strategic models, the absolute importance of electronic warfare from space and, therefore, of incapacitating the enemy by abolishing its strategic and tactical communication networks. [5]

This is a modern reinterpretation of Sun Tsu’s concept that, in the best tradition of Chinese Zen, victory is achieved by forcing the enemy to move.

The strategic application of the esoteric Buddhist concept of wu wei, “moving without moving.”

Therefore, the more the space economy becomes central to the definition of the next models of globalized development, a technological-productive development in which many non-European and non-Western people will participate for the first time in human history, the more we should expect a “space war” perhaps managed according to the criteria of the Cold War, i.e. a conflict that never reaches the final clash but still makes it credibile and probable.[6]

But let’s see how and what the scientific and technological market of space can become.

According to a British forecast, the return on investment in space is expected to increase in 2007 to USD 140 billion [7], with a differentiation of services as follows: international direct-to-home services, 32%; radio, 6%; fixed satellites, 18%; mobile satellites, 3%; and direct-to-home in the US, 32%.

Total investment is expected to be USD 60 billion. [8]

So, first of all, telecommunications, which is not coincidentally the backbone of current and, above all, future weapons systems.

The ESA, the European Space Agency of which Italy is naturally a member, has drawn up a development plan up to 2010 in which the following are optimized for the communication sector: the size of satellite payloads, the application of military-derived Ku Band technology to civilian networks, and the development of fixed networks for Earth observation for economic, agricultural, and land traffic management purposes [9].

In other words, the aim here is to make investment in aerospace sustainable in order to optimize communication networks, according to the classic model of the “service society” developed in the mid-1980s [10].

But are we sure that the “computerization” and materialization of society and production systems are still a model capable of explaining the world and, above all, of predicting and changing it, according to Karl Marx’s old idea of ideas that “transform” rather than reflect reality?

Today’s aerospace technologies are not so clear-cut in their alignment with the “third wave” model.

Think, for example, of biology and pharmacological and therapeutic experiments or the production of new materials in the absence of gravity.

In the short term, the Great Transformation hypothesized by Karl Polanyi for old industrial capitalism is not only about communication or process innovation but also and above all about old traditional product innovation.

The US NASA has sent two flowers donated by International Flavors & Fragrances into space on the Shuttle Columbia to see whether the absence of gravity would change their scents to produce new essences.

The Russians have signed a contract with US television producer Burnett to organize a “reality show” in space.

In short, the amount of innovative non-communication technologies generated in space is increasing, according to the author’s calculations, by 36% per year for public investment and, as can be seen, private investment. [11]

Therefore, there is nothing to prevent these techologies and new materials from being used in a possible multilateral conflict for space management in the context of future space utilization, including for military purposes.

It is true that, to use a cliché and state the obvious, “space is immense,” but it is the orbits closest to Earth that are most useful both technologically and for telecommunications and, of course, for military purposes. Therefore, military and security control of these orbits will allow for the optimization of public and private investment in aerospace, both civil and military.

Here too, to paraphrase Von Clausewitz, we will be dealing with a cold war by other means.

Meanwhile, defense and security spending allows for the exclusivity of technologies, which cannot be copied or “cloned,” thus guaranteeing the predictability of expected economic returns.

Furthermore, security and defense produce maximum innovation because they are forced to find the competitive or strategic “gap” to exploit for as long as possible against potential enemies.

Finally, space investment in the security-defense area allows for the confidentiality of civilian applications when the time comes.

But when it comes to aerospace, there is more: the possibility of controlling wide areas of the Earth from above allows for an epoch-making strategic transformation: maximum deterrence combined with retaliatory power.

This is a far cry from the atomic strategy, when the aim, from Beaufre to Paul Nitze, was to inflict maximum damage to make it impossible for the enemy to respond and thus force them into classic unconditional surrender.

The development of military space allows for the immediate elimination of defenses and complete blindness to subsequent waves of attack, whether nuclear or conventional.

The new Global Space Strategic allows the fusion of direct and indirect strategy, because the communicative, political, cultural, social, and productive structures are annihilated by the same series of salvos from space that nullify the defenses and response potential of the target state [12].

So the question that arises is this: how can we avoid the strategies that fall out of the “space race” and use aerospace and its innovative technologies only in ways that guarantee peaceful, participatory, and optimal development?

The issue is more difficult than it seems. In fact, much of the public investor’s interest is military, given that the “weaponization” of space allows, with well-planned civilian spin-offs, weapon system such as the atomic weapon of the Cold war, i.e. a high potential for a winning strike, absolute brevity of military actions, and maximum success.

Furthermore, the techniques used in the 1970s to force most countries to abandon nuclear weapons through the Non-Proliferation Treaty have proved ineffective.

On the military front, the so-called “third world” countries now all have the real or short-term possibility of producing atomic weapons.

Weapons “cannot be uninvented,” as General Carlo Jean said years ago.

Furthermore, believing that signing a series of pieces of paper is enough to force a state to change its national strategy or, perhaps, to accept Manzonian proclamations against its neighbors who have instead switched to military nuclear power is a belief of absolute naivety.

There are no treaties that can prevent a state from achieving what it considers to be its national interest. Machiavelli’s saying that words do not govern states also applies to international law.

To believe in the power of treaties is to run the risk of being written, according to Guicciardini’s brutal formula in the Book of Fools.

Finally, the inglorious end of the Non-Proliferation Treaty should prevent us from repeating the path towards the militarization of space, as described by Manzoni.

Let us consider the other possibilities: a) absolute secrecy surrounding space defense technologies, leaving the competitors in this new Cold War in doubt as to what technology and doctrine are actually being used. Difficult, but it can be attempted.

Or, within the framework of a clear and strategic alliance, not simply an assembly of Hegelian “beautiful souls,” we could push for effective sharing of space technologies, including those with dual military-civilian use, within the framework of a shared defense doctrine.

Of course, this requires strategic thinking and, above all, serious identification of the enemy, without which there can be no strategy or tactics.

For example, one could think of an alliance between the Russian Federation, Europe, and the US against the strategy and military development of the China-India complex, which would quickly render many technologies obsolete and enjoy a very long “development window” before wages and prices are adjusted to Euro-American standards. [13].

Or a mixture of results that are effective in terms of cost-efficiency (in the sense that it would cost more for any state to wage space war to obtain them on its own) that could stabilize China itself, which could develop its dual-use space technologies also in accordance with a global agreement with Europe and the US to secure Western commercial expansion in Central and South Asia.

At this point, it would be a matter of finding a balance between Western and Eastern Technologies, but above all it would be necessary to verify whether our long term development programs envisage an expansion of European trade routes towards Asia, which would make this global strategy entirely reasonable.

If, on the other hand, China and India wanted to manage their “near abroad” on their own, strategy number one, that of an alliance on the militarization of space between the US, the EU, and the Russian Federation, would be more useful.

In short, we need to know and decide where we want to go and then shape our security and space warfare strategies accordingly, without hoping that other areas of the planet will do us the favor of standing still.

On the contrary, as far as we can predict, I suppose that a set of commercial and financial rules, rather than legal ones, could be defined for dual-use space technologies, based on the excellent experience of NATO’s COCOM throughout the Cold War.

From there, we can establish a division of labor in global space technology: there is no point in investing where others have done so before and better; it is better to define sharing rules (with competitive prices) to buy what is unnecessary to develop internally and perhaps resell on the global market those technologies in which a country or technological alliance has proven unbeatable.

Consider, in this case, the technologies for propellant chemistry, which Italy has developed with a high rate of innovation in recent years.

If this global market becomes optimal, then the force of circumstances will prevent the establishment of complete national technologies for the militarization of space. The global economy could become the Machiavellian reality of the situation.

In the meantime, it is absolutely necessary to invest in aerospace in order to acquire that “competitive edge” in cutting-edge technologies, which often have military and space origins, and which will allow us to continue to have: a) a highly differentiated production system, b) a high productivity margin that is competitive with our global competitors.

Reducing labor costs is a limited strategy, and, in any case, it clashes with the cost of living and therefore with a wage bill that is ultimately inelastic. The lower the wage, the worse the productivity per unit of output.

So, we need to invest immediately in advanced aerospace technologies, which will be the source of the next technological clusters that will determine who wins and who loses in the global division of labor.

In conclusion, albeit briefly, I have attempted to outline that we are closely linked to a highly complex set of developments in the technological, military, and economic sectors.

But above all, in that sector where scientific achievements produce deep transformations in the lives of individuals, which in turn change societies. This is the duty of those in science, politics, and business who have the task of questioning the future as a challenge for development and an opportunity for future progress.

Giancarlo Elia Valori

[1] V. Arms Control, Militarization of Outer Space, in www.globalissues.org, accessed on June 12, 2006

[2] V. NBER, Business Cycles Indicators, NBER, University of Chicago, Chicago 2001

[3] V. Michael Porter, Harvard University, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, On Competition, Harvard University Press, 2002

[4] Lt. Col. Bruce M. Deblois, USAF, Space Sanctuary, a Viable National Strategy, Aerospace Power Journal, Winter 1998.

[5] See defenselink.org, Report to Congress, Washington, D.C., January 2005.

[6] See The National Security Archive, The Master of the Game, Paul Nitze and US Cold War Strategy, from Truman to Reagan, Washington, D.C., October 2004.

[7] UK STRATEGY 2003-2006 AND BEYOND, British Government, 2004

[8] State of the Space Industry, 2004, International Space Business Council, March 2004

[9] BR-256, October 2005, ESA, the Telecommunications Long-Term Plan 2006-2010, Noordwijk, Holland, 2005

[10] Alvin Toffler, The Third Wave, Bantam Books, 1984

[11] Commercial Alert, NASA shifts strategy for selling outer space, Washington Post, Ariana Eunjung Cha, March 2005

[12] Stephen M. Younger, Nuclear Weapons in the Twenty-First Century, Los Alamos National Laboratory, 27 Giugno 2000

[13] See  HEARTHLAND review, Number entitled The atomic Rush, n. 1 2006

The Moroccan Sahara dispute is one of the most persistent and complex regional conflicts in North Africa, lasting over forty years. This ongoing disagreement involves the Kingdom of Morocco and the Polisario Front, which is supported by Algeria. The conflict centers on sovereignty, territorial integrity, and national identity, making it a highly sensitive and crucial issue for regional stability.

In this ongoing dispute, China’s role as an emerging global power and a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council is particularly significant. China’s involvement is strategically important due to its increasing influence in international affairs and its promotion of a multilateral approach to global stability. As a result, China’s position on the Sahara issue holds critical strategic importance, not only for Morocco but also for the broader regional and international community.

Recently, Moroccan scholars and researchers have been actively examining and questioning China’s stance on the Sahara conflict. They ask whether China recognizes the autonomy plan proposed by Morocco in 2007 as a valid political solution. There is also an ongoing debate about whether the Chinese Communist Party holds a neutral position or leans toward supporting one side. These questions are important because they influence how Morocco and its allies perceive China’s diplomatic approach.

Furthermore, experts are eager to determine China’s official stance on Morocco’s sovereignty over its southern territories. Given China’s foreign policy focus on non-interference and respect for territorial integrity, the analysis assesses whether China follows these principles in this situation or if its actions suggest a departure. Overall, China’s changing position in this dispute has significant implications for regional stability and the future diplomatic landscape of North Africa.  

First: The evolving strategic landscape of Moroccan-Chinese relations

Since the announcement of the strategic partnership between Morocco and China in May 2016, bilateral relations have experienced significant growth across various sectors. These include the economy, infrastructure development, energy projects, technological progress, and higher education initiatives. Morocco also actively participated in China’s ambitious “Belt and Road” initiative, which aims to enhance connectivity and foster economic cooperation among participating countries. Through this involvement, Morocco has established itself as a key financial partner for Beijing in North and West Africa, strengthening regional ties.

This expanding cooperation and engagement have transformed Morocco into a strategic launchpad for China’s broader strategy in Africa. The partnership has enhanced the country’s international reputation, presenting Morocco as a stable, open, and welcoming partner for foreign investment and diplomacy. Furthermore, this strengthened relationship has indirectly influenced China’s stance on the Moroccan Sahara issue, where China has adopted a more cautious, pragmatic, and balanced approach, demonstrating a deeper diplomatic understanding and respect for regional sensitivities.

Second: China’s stance on the Moroccan Sahara issue

China’s official position at the United Nations is neutral, consistent with its traditional foreign policy principles of non-interference and respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity.

During discussions on extending the MINURSO mission’s mandate, China emphasizes the need for a realistic, lasting, and mutually acceptable political solution. It advocates for the “continuation of dialogue” between the involved parties, refrains from harsh language toward Morocco, and seeks to maintain a balanced tone while not recognizing the Polisario Front as a sovereign state. Although this position seems “neutral,” it implicitly supports Morocco’s sovereignty.

Third: China’s position on the Moroccan autonomy proposal

In 2007, Morocco proposed its autonomy initiative as a practical political solution within the framework of national sovereignty for the ongoing conflict, and this initiative gained support from many major countries in Africa, as well as in the Arab and Western worlds, including France, the United States, Britain, Germany, and Spain.

Regarding China, it did not explicitly support or oppose the initiative but expressed indirect approval, noting that it “contributes positively to international efforts to find a solution to the conflict.” Since then, China has not opposed the Moroccan proposal but has shown tacit acceptance, especially when calling for “realistic and viable” solutions.

Fourth: Factors Affecting China’s Position

Many key factors and influences shape China’s stance on the Moroccan Sahara issue.

The principle of sovereignty and national territorial integrity: China rejects any efforts at secession, as it faces similar challenges within its territory, such as those in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Tibet. Therefore, it tends to support countries that uphold their territorial integrity, although it has not explicitly stated this.

Relations with Algeria: Despite the increasing closeness between China and Morocco, Algeria remains a key energy partner for China, especially in the gas sector. This leads China to carefully balance its diplomatic efforts to protect its interests with both countries. Investing in regional stability: China believes that regional stability benefits its economic interests, so it prefers peaceful and stable solutions to disputes without supporting separatist movements that could cause chaos or armed conflicts.           

Fifth: Is China’s stance shifting?

This question poses a challenge for researchers and those interested in the Moroccan Sahara conflict, as increasing signs suggest a possible gradual shift in China’s stance in the years to come.

– Growing Chinese trade and investments in Morocco, including the Mohammed VI Smart City project, the Atlantic port in Nador, and solar energy initiatives.

– Enhancing strategic visits and high-level diplomatic meetings between China and Morocco.

– China’s diplomatic language, like “realistic solution” and “viable political solution,” hints at autonomy and is a key reference for the Moroccan autonomy proposal.

– China’s ties with the West, especially the U.S., are weakening, pushing China to build and diversify its alliances in the Global South, including with Morocco.

In conclusion, it can be said that the Chinese Communist Party’s approach to the Moroccan Sahara issue is marked by a kind of “thought-out neutrality,” balancing core principles of Chinese foreign policy with increasing strategic interests in Morocco. Despite China’s public commitment to the policy of “neutrality,” its diplomatic and economic actions imply implicit support for Morocco’s sovereignty over its deserts, or at least a practical acceptance of the autonomy initiative. Therefore, in light of international geopolitical shifts, Morocco has a strategic opportunity to strengthen its ties with Beijing and convince it that supporting the autonomy proposal does not conflict with its political and diplomatic principles but aligns with its vision of global stability.  

On July 8, Indian Chief of Defence Staff Anil Chauhan delivered a pointed message at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi, raising alarms over a budding alignment of strategic interests between China, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

The general cautioned that such a trilateral convergence, if it gains traction, could have serious implications for India’s security and disrupt the regional balance of power.

His remarks came in the wake of a widely circulated photograph from Kunming, China, showing diplomats from the three nations meeting during the inaugural trilateral talks held alongside regional economic forums. While the meeting was officially billed as a diplomatic engagement, the image has sent ripples through India’s strategic community.

Bangladesh, clearly aware of the sensitivities involved, has moved swiftly to contain the narrative. Touhid Hossain, foreign affairs adviser to Dhaka’s interim government, publicly disavowed any intention of joining bloc-based or adversarial alliances. Dhaka reiterated that its foreign policy remains firmly nonaligned and anchored in sovereign autonomy.

Despite these assurances, New Delhi’s strategic calculus appears to be shifting. There is now a growing perception in New Delhi that, under the interim leadership of Muhammad Yunus, Bangladesh may be recalibrating its foreign policy, moving away from the overt closeness seen under former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. Under Hasina, India and Bangladesh enjoyed unusually warm ties characterised by deep security cooperation, cross-border connectivity projects and shared regional objectives. Dhaka took strong action against anti-India insurgents, gave India access to transit routes through Bangladeshi territory and generally aligned itself with New Delhi’s strategic priorities.

Whether real or perceived, this shift is influencing how India reads the regional landscape.

Chauhan also drew attention to a broader, troubling pattern: External powers – chiefly China – are leveraging economic fragilities across the Indian Ocean region to deepen their influence. With countries such as Sri Lanka and Pakistan increasingly beholden to Chinese investment and aid, concerns are mounting that Beijing is systematically encircling India through soft-power entrenchment.

Bangladesh’s case, however, remains somewhat unique. Its economy, though under pressure, is relatively resilient, and Dhaka continues to emphasise pragmatic, interest-driven diplomacy over ideological alignment. The Kunming meeting, while symbolically charged, does not yet represent a formal strategic realignment.

Still, the formation of a trilateral framework marks a significant development. Unlike previous bilateral engagements, this format introduces a new dimension of coordination that could evolve in unpredictable ways.

The echoes of history are hard to ignore. In the 1960s, China and Pakistan maintained a tight strategic axis that tacitly encompassed East Pakistan – what is now Bangladesh. That configuration unravelled in 1971 with Bangladesh’s independence.

Today, however, subtle signs suggest elements of that strategic triad may be resurfacing – this time in a more complex geopolitical theatre.

For Beijing, deepening ties with both Pakistan and Bangladesh serves its broader objective of consolidating influence in South Asia and the Indian Ocean region. For Islamabad, it provides a layer of diplomatic insulation and strategic leverage. For Dhaka, the relationship is more tactical – an attempt to hedge against regional volatility at a time when its once-stable ties with New Delhi appear increasingly uncertain.

Bangladesh’s cautious posture is also shaped by volatile domestic politics. Since the July protests and the installation of an interim administration, internal cohesion has frayed. Polarisation is resurging, and with national elections looming in early 2026, the government’s priority is stability, not strategy. Foreign policy in this climate is reactive – not transformative.

Dhaka understands the risks of leaning too far in any direction. Lingering historical resentments with Pakistan remain politically sensitive while an overreliance on China would strain crucial trade and diplomatic ties with the West, especially the United States, where concerns over democratic backsliding and human rights have sharpened.

In this context, any overt strategic alignment could invite unnecessary scrutiny and backlash.

The Kunming meeting, despite its symbolism, was primarily economic in focus – touching on trade, connectivity, infrastructure and cultural cooperation. However, when China and Pakistan floated the proposal to institutionalise trilateral cooperation through a joint working group, Bangladesh demurred. This was not indecision. It was a deliberate, calculated refusal.

Dhaka’s foreign policy has long been defined by “engagement without entanglement”. It maintains open channels with all major powers while avoiding the traps of bloc politics. This nonaligned posture is a core principle guiding its diplomacy. Bangladesh welcomes dialogue and economic cooperation, but it draws a firm line at military or strategic alignment.

For India, interpreting Bangladesh’s moves requires nuance. While Dhaka continues to broaden its international partnerships, it has not abandoned its critical role in India’s security calculus, particularly in the northeastern region. The challenge for New Delhi is not just to monitor emerging partnerships but to reinforce the value of its own.

Throughout the 2000s and 2010s, security cooperation between New Delhi and Dhaka under Hasina’s Awami League was pivotal in stabilising the border region. Bangladesh’s decisive crackdown on militant groups, coupled with close coordination with Indian intelligence and security agencies, played a crucial role in suppressing insurgent threats.

Today, with India’s ties to both China and Pakistan under severe strain, any perceived shift in Dhaka’s stance is scrutinised intensely in New Delhi. The fear that Beijing and Islamabad might exploit Bangladesh as a strategic lever to apply asymmetric pressure remains deeply ingrained in India’s security mindset.

Yet, Bangladesh’s explicit rejection of the proposed trilateral working group reveals a clear-eyed understanding of these sensitivities. It underscores Dhaka’s intent to steer clear of actions that could escalate regional tensions.

This evolving dynamic poses a dual challenge for India: It demands a recalibrated response that moves beyond reactive defensiveness. New Delhi must embrace a more sophisticated, forward-looking strategy – one that transcends old political loyalties and adapts to the shifting diplomatic contours of South Asia.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Japan has accused China of expanding its military reach and threatening regional stability.

For the first time, Tokyo says a Chinese military aircraft entered its airspace.

The incident is detailed in Japan’s latest defence white paper.

It warns Beijing has also ramped up naval and air operations near disputed territories.

But China has hit back, accusing Japan of stoking fear.

So, is East Asia heading for a new era of military confrontation?

Presenter: James Bays

Guests:

Tomohiko Taniguchi – Professor at the University of Tsukuba, and former special adviser to the cabinet of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

Einar Tangen – China specialist and senior fellow at the Taihe Institute

Robert Kelly – Professor of international relations at Pusan National University, specialist on international relations of Asia and US foreign policy

US president has pushed other countries to crack down on manufacturing and exportation of fentanyl.

United States President Donald Trump has said that China may start sentencing people to death for involvement in the manufacture or distribution of fentanyl, whose trafficking Trump has sought harsh measures to counteract.

Speaking as he signed anti-drug legislation on Wednesday, the US president said that the need to combat fentanyl was one of the reasons for his imposition of tariffs on countries across the world.

“I think we’re going to work it out so that China is going to end up going from that to giving the death penalty to the people that create this fentanyl and send it into our country,” Trump said. “I believe that’s going to happen soon.”

China, which has long imposed severe penalties on people involved with drug distribution, including capital punishment, has been at the centre of Trump’s ire over the opioid that helped fuel an overdose epidemic in the US.

The country raised outrage when it executed four Canadian dual citizens earlier this year for drug-related offences, despite pleas for clemency from the Canadian government.

Experts have questioned whether such penalties will help address the distribution of fentanyl, which China has said is driven largely by demand from people in the US.

Trump has previously linked his tariffs on countries such as Mexico and Canada to fentanyl, although trafficking from the latter into the US is close to nonexistent.

Drug overdoses in the US have been a subject of concern and political debate for years, with the country’s opioid epidemic beginning with the aggressive promotion of painkillers by pharmaceutical companies but later being mostly driven by synthetic opioids such as fentanyl.

Overdose deaths have started to drop in recent years, giving experts cause for optimism after years of communities being ravaged by opioids. Overdoses over a 12-month period ending in June 2024 dropped by 12 percent compared with the same period the previous year, down from 113,000 to 97,000.

SAN FRANCISCO — Nvidia is already the world’s most valuable company being one of the biggest beneficiaries of the global artificial intelligence boom.

This week, the Santa Clara-based chip maker got another windfall.

The Jensen Huang-led technology giant on Monday received approval from the U.S. government to sell some of its AI chips in China, boosting Nvidia’s stock price by 4% to $170.70 a share on Tuesday. Rival Advanced Micro Devices Inc. has received similar assurances from the government.

Nvidia’s valuation has risen dramatically over the last two years since generative artificial intelligence became a mainstream topic. Last week, the 32-year-old company became the first publicly traded firm to reach $4 trillion in market capitalization, beating tech titans including Microsoft and Apple.

Though it’s a largely symbolic moment, the milestone raised the stakes for competition in the AI space, which has attracted enormous amounts of capital from established tech players and start-up investors.

“Once you reach that level of market cap, everybody and their brother wants to be you,” said Rob Enderle, principal analyst with advisory services firm Enderle Group. “So that means that there’s going to be a huge focus on creating competitive technologies to Nvidia because it looks incredibly lucrative.”

Nvidia has become a primary force in the growth of AI technology, as many applications are built with Nvidia’s chips.

Prior to the AI boom, Nvidia was mostly known for creating premium graphics cards that were attractive to gamers in rendering high-speed visuals. Most recently, the company is known for selling powerful chips that help chatbots such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT and self-driving cars process information quickly enough to make the technology useful. Nvidia said in its 2025 annual report that it powers more than 75% of the supercomputers on the TOP500 list, which ranks the 500 most powerful computer systems in the world.

What is powering Nvidia’s rise?

Founded in 1993, Nvidia has ridden many technology waves, including the crypto frenzy.

But lately, Nvidia has seen tremendous growth thanks to worldwide investor interest — and competition for dominance — in artificial intelligence.

Companies are eager to explore how AI can make processes more efficient and figure out complex problems. But getting the computing power behind AI can be expensive if companies are building hardware on their own. That’s where Nvidia comes in.

Nvidia’s sales increased 69% to $44.1 billion in its fiscal first quarter compared to a year ago. Net income was nearly $18.8 billion, up 26% from a year ago. In its fiscal year 2025, the company’s revenue more than doubled to about $130.5 billion compared to a year earlier, and net income increased 145% to nearly $72.9 billion compared to fiscal year 2024.

In the last 12 months, Nvidia’s shares have increased more than 30%. Since five years ago, the stock has risen more than 16-fold.

“It is clear AI is going to change the world and people want to get on that train, and Nvidia is the easiest entry point,” wrote Berna Barshay, a partner at online investment platform Wall Street Beats, in an email. Over time, new winners and formidable rivals may emerge, Barshay said. “But during this foundational period of infrastructure creation, Nvidia has certainly been king.”

Other companies were slower to innovate in AI, including Apple and Intel, and underestimated how quickly AI technology would advance, analysts said.

Who is Jensen Huang?

Huang, a former microprocessor designer, discussed the idea behind Nvidia inside a Denny’s in San Jose with fellow entrepreneurs Chris Malachowsky and Curtis Priem. The company’s name is partly based on the Latin word “invidia” — which means envy, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Many businesses are certainly jealous of Nvidia’s success now, but in the 1990s, the company almost went out of business when its first chip, NV1, failed, according to media reports. Huang has said in public comments, including commencement speeches, that adversity can help people become better leaders.

Born in Tainan, Taiwan, in 1963, the onetime Denny’s dishwasher has become one of the industry’s most recognizable names, on par with Apple chief Tim Cook and Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg. Thousands of people watch Huang’s keynote at Nvidia’s developer conference, as his vision could provide a road map for companies eager to expand investments in AI. Some analysts regularly refer to him as the “godfather of AI.”

What challenges lie ahead?

The biggest challenges facing Nvidia are trade wars and competition, analysts say.

Tariffs in the semiconductor industry could hurt companies like Nvidia, which manufacture and sell countless chips abroad. The company said in its annual report that 53% of its revenue in its 2025 fiscal year came from outside the U.S.

The company said that worldwide geopolitical tensions and conflicts in countries like China, Hong Kong, Israel, Korea and Taiwan, where the manufacturing of its product components and final assembly are concentrated, could disrupt its operations, product demand and profitability.

Nvidia has worked with its production partners to increase U.S. manufacturing of its chips.

Several years ago, the U.S. restricted Nvidia’s sales of its chips in China due to concerns that its AI technology could be used to help the Chinese military. Huang has said that since the U.S. government could choose to apply restrictions, he didn’t think policymakers needed to be concerned about that and warned that allowing Nvidia to lose market share in China would cede a major advantage to Chinese tech company Huawei, according to Bloomberg.

While many analysts say Nvidia has a significant lead on competitors, it is possible over time they could catch up. OpenAI, which uses Nvidia products for ChatGPT, is developing its own chip design, according to Reuters.

There’s also the question of whether the power grid is robust enough to support the infrastructure needs of the fast-growing technology, which could slow down not just Nvidia but the larger AI ecosystem.

Despite the challenges, Thomas Monteiro, senior analyst at Investing.com, is bullish on Nvidia, saying it is possible that the company could reach $5 trillion in market cap during the next 18 months.

“The world’s still catching up and the thing is, it’s going to take years for them to catch up,” he said. “As long as we’re looking at the AI revolution as a multidecade transformation, it’s going to be really hard to take Nvidia out of that position.”

An estimated 650 companies from 60 countries have gathered at the China International Supply Chain Expo in Beijing.

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang has called China’s open-source artificial intelligence a “catalyst for global progress” and says it is “revolutionising” supply chains.

In a speech during Wednesday’s opening ceremony of the China International Supply Chain Expo in Beijing, Huang – whose firm last week became the first to touch $4 trillion in market value – hailed China’s role in pioneering AI, describing Chinese AI startup DeepSeek as “giving every country and industry a chance to join the AI revolution”.

Huang made the comments a day after Nvidia announced it will resume sales of its H20 AI chips to China after the United States government pledged to remove licensing restrictions that had halted exports.

“AI is transforming every industry from scientific research and healthcare to energy, transportation and logistics,” said Huang, who also praised China’s “super-fast” innovation, powered by its “researchers, developers and entrepreneurs”.

The California-based company produces some of the world’s most advanced semiconductors but cannot ship its most cutting-edge chips to China due to Washington’s concerns that Beijing could use them to enhance its military capabilities.

Nvidia developed the H20 – a less powerful version of its AI processing units – specifically for export to China. However, that plan stalled when US President Donald Trump’s administration tightened export licensing requirements in April.

“Huang says he’s now free to sell to the Chinese market thanks to negotiations with China on trade,” Al Jazeera’s Katrina Yu said, reporting from Beijing. “The Trump administration has confirmed that in exchange for rare earths, it will allow the chip to now be sold into China.”

“The US government has assured Nvidia that licenses will be granted, and Nvidia hopes to start deliveries soon,” the company said in a statement on Tuesday, adding that it was “filing applications to sell the Nvidia H20 GPU again”.

Nvidia has also announced it is developing a new chip for Chinese clients called the RTX Pro GPU, which would also be compliant with US export restrictions.

The announcement from Nvidia boosted tech firm stocks around the world with Wall Street’s Nasdaq Composite index rising to another record high and stocks in Hong Kong also rallying.

The tightened US export curbs were imposed as China’s economy wavers. Domestic consumers are reluctant to spend, and a prolonged property sector crisis is weighing on growth.

President Xi Jinping has called for greater self-reliance in the face of increasing external uncertainty.

“China is really fashioning itself as a champion for free trade and this global supply chain expo is about positioning China as a crucial part of that global logistic infrastructure,” Yu said. “Beijing is trying to make a statement, and that statement is unlike the Trump administration would have the world believe – China is not replaceable” as evidenced by the roughly 650 companies from 60 countries represented at the expo.

Astellas Pharma employee sentenced to three and a half years in prison, Japan’s embassy in Beijing says.

A Japanese businessman has been sentenced to three and a half years in China for espionage, Japan’s embassy in Beijing has said.

The man, described by Japan’s Kyodo News Agency as an employee of Tokyo-based Astellas Pharma Inc. in his 60s, was first detained in March 2023 and placed under formal arrest in October.

“In light of the sentence, we have once again strongly urged the Chinese side for the early release of the Japanese national concerned in this case as well as others detained,” Tokyo’s embassy in Beijing said in a statement on Wednesday.

China should also “ensure their legitimate rights and humane treatment during detention” and “improve the transparency of the judicial process”, the embassy said.

Japanese ambassador Kenji Kanasugi called the verdict “extremely regrettable” in remarks to the media after the trial at Beijing No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court.

Tokyo has protested a series of detentions of its citizens in China.

At total of 17 Japanese, including the Astellas Pharma employee, have been detained since 2014, when China introduced a counterespionage law, according to Kyodo.

Among those, five are still in China, according to the news agency.

July 15 (UPI) — A new Pew survey is suggesting that global viewpoints on China may be trending in a slightly more positive direction for the communist nation.

The Pew Research Center poll of 25 surveyed countries released Tuesday indicated that a large segment of the global population views China as the world’s undisputed top economic power.

Pew officials say the results contrast from 2023, the last time the question was posed.

It noted that shares of people with a favorite view on China jumped in the last year in 15 of the 25 countries part of the Pew survey.

The new results from spring’s survey outlined how a median 41% of polled adults spread out in the 25 countries believe the Chinese economy is the world’s greatest, while nearly the same number of 39% say it’s the United States with the greatest economy.

Pew noted that it’s the first time since 2020 that opinions on Chinese influence turned in a more positive light following historic, or near historic, lows in recorded data dating nearly 20 years.

Notably, the survey said that confidence in Chinese President Xi Jinping to do the right thing in diplomatic affairs also went up in many of the countries surveyed.

But despite the shift, Xi and overall view of China “remain broadly negative,” according to Pew Research.

It says a 36% median of surveyed adults had a favorable Chinese view, while 54% had an unfavorable view. The survey added that 25% of people had confidence in the Chinese leader versus 68% who had little or no faith in Xi.

The research center pointed out that while Xi’s numbers did improve, it spurred an opposite reaction on outlooks on the United States and President Donald Trump.

“Today, international views of the two superpowers and (Trump and Xi) are closer than they have been at any point since 2020,” the survey results read in part.

In 12 countries spanning regions and income levels, China is viewed as the top global economic powerhouse. Results showed that it was the most common opinion in most of surveyed Europe by majorities in Germany, Greece, Italy and Spain, and by roughly half of adults in France, Hungary and Poland.

By contrast, survey respondents in nine countries say the United States is the better economy. Including polled Americans in Pew’s survey, a majority of respondents in Israel, Japan and South Korea agree on U.S. economic might with split feelings in Brazil, Kenya, the Netherlands and Britain.

Pew’s survey results arrived the same day it was revealed that China ended up bucking second quarter’s economic expectations in the face of the U.S. president’s global tariffs despite a slowdown in the Chinese economy.

Jensen Huang says Trump administration has assured his company it will be granted licences to export advanced chips.

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang says the technology giant has won approval from United States President Donald Trump’s administration to sell its advanced H20 computer chips, used to develop artificial intelligence, to China.

The news came in a company blog post late on Monday, and Huang also spoke about the coup on China’s state-run CGTN television network in remarks shown on X.

“The US government has assured Nvidia that licences will be granted, and Nvidia hopes to start deliveries soon,” the post said.

“Today, I’m announcing that the US government has approved for us filing licences to start shipping H20s,” Huang told reporters in Beijing.

He noted that half of the world’s AI researchers are in China.

“It’s so innovative and dynamic here in China that it’s really important that American companies are able to compete and serve the market here in China,” he said.

Huang recently met with Trump and other US policymakers, and this week, he is in Beijing to attend a supply chain conference and speak with Chinese officials.

The broadcast showed Huang meeting with Ren Hongbin, the head of the China Council for Promotion of International Trade, which is hosting the China International Supply Chain Expo, which Huang was attending.

Nvidia is an exhibitor.

Nvidia has profited enormously from rapid adoption of AI and last week became the first company to have its market value surpass $4 trillion.

However, the trade rivalry between the US and China has been weighing heavily on the industry.

Washington has been tightening controls on exports of advanced technology to China for years, citing concerns that know-how meant for civilian use could be deployed for military purposes.

The emergence of China’s DeepSeek AI chatbot in January renewed concerns over how China might use the advanced chips to help develop its own AI capabilities.

In January before Trump began his second term in office, the administration of US President Joe Biden launched a new framework for exporting advanced computer chips used to develop artificial intelligence, an attempt to balance national security concerns about the technology with the economic interests of producers and other countries.

The White House announced in April that it would restrict sales of Nvidia’s H20 chips and AMD’s MI308 chips to China.

Nvidia had said the tighter export controls would cost the company an extra $5.5bn, and Huang and other technology leaders have been lobbying Trump to reverse the restrictions.

They have argued that such limits hinder US competition in a leading edge sector in one of the world’s largest markets for technology.

They have also warned that US export controls could end up pushing other countries towards China’s AI technology.

Nvidia’s US-traded shares slipped 0.5 percent in after-hours trading on Monday, but its shares traded in Frankfurt, Germany, jumped 3.2 percent early on Tuesday.

China’s GDP grew 1.1 percent from April to June despite US tariffs, official data shows.

China’s economy grew by more than 5 percent in the second quarter, according to official data, staying on track to meet Beijing’s annual growth target despite United States President Donald Trump’s trade war.

China’s gross domestic product (GDP) expanded by 1.1 percent from April to June, data from China’s National Bureau of Statistics showed on Tuesday.

On an annualised basis, China’s economy grew 5.3 percent in the first half of the year, keeping it in line with Beijing’s full-year target of about 5 percent growth.

“Generally speaking, with the more proactive and effective macro policies taking effects in the first half year, the national economy maintained steady growth with good momentum, showcasing strong resilience and vitality,” the statistics agency said in a statement.

Lynn Song, chief economist for Greater China at ING, said China’s economic performance was “certainly encouraging” compared with the “very downbeat expectations at the start of the year”.

“Trade data benefited from frontloading in the first quarter, but generally held up better than expected in the first half as a whole,” Song said in a note.

“As a result, industrial production has outperformed.”

Still, Song cautioned that the second half of the year could “prove to be more challenging”.

“The tariff uncertainty will remain an overhang, with the next key deadlines coming up soon in August. Though we don’t expect a return to the April peak tariffs, we wouldn’t rule out further escalations,” he said.

Despite Trump’s tariffs, exports rose by 5.8 percent year-on-year in June, customs data released on Monday showed, as shipments to non-US markets and a reprieve from the highest duties boosted trade.

After US tariffs on Chinese goods soared as high as 145 percent earlier this year, the Trump administration in May reached a deal with Beijing to scale back taxes on each other’s exports for at least 90 days.

Under the truce, Chinese imports to the US are subject to a minimum duty of 30 percent, while US exports are subject to a 10 percent rate.

The two sides have until August 12 to renew their deal or forge a new agreement to avoid the tariffs reverting to their higher rates.

Remarks by Chinese embassy spokesperson in New Delhi come ahead of Indian foreign minister’s visit to China – the first since 2020 clashes.

The succession of the Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama is a “thorn” in China-India relations, says the Chinese embassy in New Delhi.

The remarks on Sunday came ahead of the first visit by India’s foreign minister to China since the deadly border clashes between the South Asian powers in 2020.

“In reality, [the] Xizang-related issue is a thorn in China-India relations and has become a burden for India,” Yu Jing, a Chinese embassy spokesperson, posted on X, referring to “Xizang”, the Chinese name for Tibet.

Ahead of celebrations this month for his 90th birthday that were attended by senior Indian ministers, the Dalai Lama angered China again by saying it had no role in his succession.

Tibetans believe the soul of any senior Buddhist monk is reincarnated after his death, but China says the succession will also have to be approved by its leaders.

The Dalai Lama has been living in exile in India since 1959 following a failed uprising against Chinese rule in Tibet.

Indian foreign relations experts say his presence gives New Delhi leverage against China. India is also home to about 70,000 Tibetans and a Tibetan government-in-exile.

In her post, spokesperson Yu, without naming anyone, said some people from strategic and academic communities in India had made “improper remarks” on the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama.

“As professionals in foreign affairs, they should be fully cognizant of the sensitivity of issues related to Xizang,” Yu said. “The reincarnation and succession of the Dalai Lama is inherently an internal affair of China.”

🔹It has been noted some people from strategic and academic communities, including former officials, have made some improper remarks on the reincarnation of Dalai Lama, contrary to Indian government’s public stance.
🔹As professionals in foreign affairs, they should be fully… pic.twitter.com/HlG2IdvW1P

— Yu Jing (@ChinaSpox_India) July 13, 2025

Indian Parliamentary and Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju, who sat next to the Dalai Lama during his 90th birthday festivities a week ago, has said that as a practising Buddhist, he believes only the spiritual leader and his office have the authority to decide on his reincarnation.

India’s Foreign Ministry said on July 4, two days before the Dalai Lama’s birthday, that New Delhi does not take any position or speak on matters concerning beliefs and practices of faith and religion.

India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar will be attending a regional security meeting under the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in Tianjin in northern China on July 15 and hold bilateral meetings on the sidelines.

This will be one of the highest-level visits between India and China since their relations nosedived after a deadly border clash in 2020 that killed at least 20 Indian and four Chinese soldiers.

HIMARS are being used in military drills aimed at boosting the island’s ability to combat threats from China.

Taiwan has begun deploying its newest and most precise strike weapons, high calibre rockets from the United States, as part of its annual live-fire drills to increase the island’s ability to counter potential attacks from China.

On Saturday, two armoured trucks with High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) were seen manoeuvring around the city of Taichung near Taiwan’s central coast, on the fourth of 10 days of the Han Kuang exercise, its most comprehensive annual exercise, according to the Reuters news agency.

Military spokesperson Colonel Chen Lian-jia said it would be crucial to conceal the HIMARS from enemy aerial reconnaissance, satellites, “or even enemy operatives behind our lines” until the order to fire was given.

China considers Taiwan its own province and has long threatened to use force to bring it under Beijing’s control.

Over the past five years, China has increased pressure around the island, staging a string of intense war games and daily naval and air force patrols around the territory.

Earlier this week, China’s Ministry of National Defense said the Han Kuang drills were “nothing but a bluffing and self-deceiving trick”. China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs added that its opposition to US-Taiwan military ties was “consistent and very firm”.

On Thursday, Taiwanese President William Lai Ching-te said the exercises were being conducted based on “large-scale, realistic combat drills”.

Last year, Taiwan received the first 11 of the 29 HIMARS units, testing them for the first time in May.

The weapons, which have a range of about 300km (190 miles), have the potential to strike coastal targets in China’s southern province of Fujian on the other side of the Taiwan Strait.

While the United States, Taiwan’s biggest supplier of imported defensive weaponry, is bound by law to consider threats to the country as a “major concern”, it remains unclear if Washington, DC, under President Donald Trump’s administration, would deploy forces to counter a possible Chinese attack.

Reuters reported, quoting unnamed senior Taiwanese military officials, that the drills were unscripted and designed to replicate full combat conditions, starting with simulated enemy attacks and invasion scenarios.

The drills aim to show China and the international community, including the US, that Taiwan is determined to defend itself against any Chinese attack, the officials said.

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia — U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi agreed Friday to explore “areas of potential cooperation” between Washington and Beijing, and stressed the importance of managing differences, following their first in-person meeting as they wrapped up a two-day regional security forum in Malaysia.

Rubio and Wang met Friday on the sidelines of the Assn. of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, regional forum in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, as tensions between the two global powers continue to rise over trade, security, and China’s support for Russia’s war in Ukraine.

“Look, we’re two big, powerful countries, and there are always going to be issues that we disagree on,” Rubio told reporters after the meeting. “I think there’s some areas of potential cooperation. I thought it was very constructive, positive meeting and a lot of work to do.”

Both sides need to build better communications and trust, he said.

Rubio also indicated that a potential visit to China by President Trump to meet with President Xi Jinping was likely, saying: “The odds are high. I think both sides want to see it happen.”

China’s Foreign Affairs Ministry, in a statement later Friday, echoed Rubio’s sentiment, calling the meeting “positive, pragmatic and constructive.”

The statement didn’t provide details on specific topics such as tariffs or China’s position on the Russia-Ukraine war, but it said that both countries agreed to “increase communication and dialogue” and “explore expanding areas of cooperation while managing differences.”

Wang called for “jointly finding a correct way for China and the U.S. to get along in the new era,” it said.

Trade takes a back seat

While tariffs loomed in the background, Rubio said that trade wasn’t a major focus of his talks because “I’m not the trade negotiator.”

“We certainly appreciate the role trade plays in our bilateral relationships with individual countries. But the bulk of our talks here have been about all the other things that we cooperate on,” he said.

The meeting with Wang was held less than 24 hours after Rubio met in Kuala Lumpur with another rival, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, during which they discussed potential new avenues to jump-start Russia-Ukraine peace talks.

The high-level meetings took place amid regional unease over U.S. policies — especially Trump’s threats to impose sweeping new tariffs on both allies and adversaries. Southeast Asian leaders voiced concerns, but according to Rubio, many prioritized discussions on security issues, their concerns about Chinese domination and desire for cooperation with the U.S.

“Of course, it’s raised. It’s an issue,” Rubio said. “But I wouldn’t say it solely defines our relationship with many of these countries. There are a lot of other issues that we work together on, and I think there was great enthusiasm that we were here and that we’re a part of this.”

European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas warned separately that the U.S.-led trade war could backfire.

“There are no winners in trade wars,” she told reporters. “If you start a trade war with everyone, you make your partners weaker and China stronger.”

Kallas said that the EU doesn’t seek retaliation, but has tools available, if necessary.

Security issues loom large

Trump sees China as the biggest threat to the United States in multiple fields, not least technology and trade, and like previous U.S. presidents has watched the country greatly expand its influence globally while turning increasingly assertive in the Indo-Pacific, notably toward its small neighbors over the South China Sea and Taiwan.

His administration has warned of major tariffs on Chinese exports, though talks have made little progress.

Since President Biden was in office, Washington has also accused China of assisting Russia in rebuilding its military industrial sector to help it execute its war against Ukraine. Rubio said the Trump administration shares that view.

“I think the Chinese clearly have been supportive of the Russian effort,” he said. “They’ve been willing to help them as much as they can without getting caught.”

China criticizes Trump’s tariffs

Rubio and Wang had been shadowboxing during the two-day ASEAN meeting, with each touting the benefits of their partnership to Southeast Asian nations.

Rubio has played up cooperation, including signing a civil-nuclear cooperation agreement with Malaysia, while Wang has railed against Trump’s threatened tariffs and projected China as a stable counterweight in talks with ASEAN counterparts on the sidelines.

“The U.S. is abusing tariffs, wrecking the free trade system and disrupting the stability of the global supply chain,” Wang told Thai counterpart Maris Sangiampongsa, according to the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

In a meeting with Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Prak Sokhonn, Wang said that the tariffs are “an attempt to deprive all parties of their legitimate right to development.” He said that “China is willing to be Cambodia’s trustworthy and reliable friend and partner.”

Wang also met with Lavrov on Thursday, where the two offered a joint message aimed at Washington.

“Russia and China both support ASEAN’s central role in regional cooperation … and are wary of certain major powers creating divisions and instigating confrontation in the region,” Russia’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong sided with Rubio’s call for a balanced Indo-Pacific, warning that “no one country should dominate, and no country should be dominated.” But like Kallas, she said that engagement with China remains vital.

“We want to see a region where there is a balance of power … where there is no coercion or duress,” Wong said.

Lee writes for the Associated Press. Huizhong Wu in Bangkok, and Eileen Ng in Kuala Lumpur, contributed to this report.

Rubio and Lavrov ‘confirmed their mutual desire to find peaceful solutions to conflicts’, Russian Foreign Ministry says.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio have held rare face-to-face talks on the sidelines of an ASEAN meeting in Malaysia, discussing the war in Ukraine, as well as developments in Iran and Syria.

“A substantive and frank exchange of views took place on the settlement of the situation around Ukraine, the situation around Iran and Syria, as well as a number of other international issues,” Russia’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement following the meeting on Thursday in Kuala Lumpur.

Both sides reportedly expressed interest in easing tensions and resuming dialogue in areas beyond the battlefield.

Lavrov and Rubio “confirmed their mutual desire to find peaceful solutions to conflicts, restore Russian-American economic and humanitarian cooperation, and facilitate unimpeded contacts between the societies of the two countries”, the ministry added.

The Russian side described the meeting as constructive, saying dialogue between Moscow and Washington would continue.

Rubio, speaking to reporters after the 50-minute meeting, said he had delivered a clear message about the need for progress on the war in Ukraine.

“I had a frank and important conversation with Minister Lavrov,” Rubio said. “We need to see a roadmap moving forward about how this conflict can conclude.”

He said US President Donald Trump remained disappointed with what Washington, DC views as a lack of flexibility from Moscow.

Trump has been growing increasingly frustrated with Russian President Vladimir Putin, saying the Russian leader was throwing a lot of “b*******” at US efforts to end the war that started with Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Rubio also signalled that a meeting with his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi may take place during the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) gathering. “I think we’re working on that – maybe, maybe we’ll meet,” he said at a press conference.

The meeting between the top Russian and US diplomats comes at a time of heightened global polarisation, with ASEAN serving as one of the few venues where dialogue among rival powers still takes place.

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia — U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Thursday that the U.S. and Russia have exchanged new ideas for Ukraine peace talks after he met with his Russian counterpart in Malaysia Thursday.

“I think it’s a new and a different approach,” Rubio told reporters after talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. “I wouldn’t characterize it as something that guarantees a peace, but it’s a concept that, you know, that I’ll take back to the president.” He didn’t elaborate.

Rubio added that President Trump has been “disappointed and frustrated that there’s not been more flexibility on the Russian side” to bring about an end to the conflict.

“We need to see a roadmap moving forward about how this conflict can conclude. And then we shared some ideas about what that might look like,” he said of the 50-minute meeting. “We’re going to continue to stay involved where we see opportunities to make a difference.”

In a statement released shortly after Thursday’s meeting, Russia’s Foreign Ministry said that “substantive and frank exchange of views” had taken place on issues including Ukraine, Iran, Syria, and other global problems.

“Both countries reaffirmed their mutual commitment to finding peaceful solutions to conflicts, restoring Russian-American economic and humanitarian cooperation, and unimpeded contact between the societies of the two countries, something which could be facilitated by resuming direct air traffic,” the statement said. “The importance of further work to normalize bilateral diplomatic relations was also emphasized.”

The two men held talks in Kuala Lumpur on the sidelines of the annual Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regional Forum, which brings together 10 ASEAN members and their most important diplomatic partners including Russia, China, Japan, South Korea, European nations and the U.S.

The meeting was their second encounter since Rubio took office, although they have spoken by phone several times. Their first meeting took place in February in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, as the Trump administration sought to test Russia and Ukraine on their willingness to make peace.

Thursday’s meeting occurred shortly after the U.S. resumed some shipments of defensive weapons to Ukraine following a pause, ostensibly for the Pentagon to review domestic munitions stocks, that was cheered in Moscow.

The resumption comes as Russia fires escalating air attacks on Ukraine and as Trump has become increasingly frustrated with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

U.S. diplomatic push could be overshadowed by tariff threats

Rubio was also seeing other foreign ministers, including many whose countries face tariffs set to be imposed Aug. 1.

“These letters that are going out in these trade changes are happening with every country in the world,” Rubio told reporters. “Anywhere in the world I would have traveled this week they got a letter.”

Rubio sought to assuage concerns as he held group talks with ASEAN foreign ministers.

“The Indo Pacific, the region, remains a focal point of U.S. foreign policy,” he told them. “When I hear in the news that perhaps the United States or the world might be distracted by events in other parts of the planet, I would say distraction is impossible, because it is our strong view and the reality that this century and the story of next 50 years will largely be written here in this region.”

“These are relationships and partnerships that we intend to continue to build on without seeking the approval or the permission of any other actor in the region of the world,” Rubio said in an apparent reference to China.

Trump notified several countries on Monday and Wednesday that they will face higher tariffs if they don’t make trade deals with the U.S. Among them are eight of ASEAN’s 10 members.

U.S. State Department officials said tariffs and trade won’t be Rubio’s focus during the meetings, which Trump’s Republican administration hopes will prioritize maritime safety and security in the South China Sea, where China has become increasingly aggressive toward its small neighbors, as well as combating transnational crime.

But Rubio may be hard-pressed to avoid the tariff issue that has vexed some of Washington’s closest allies and partners in Asia, including Japan and South Korea and most members of ASEAN, which Trump says would face 25% tariffs if there is no deal.

Rubio met earlier Thurday with Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, who has warned global trade is being weaponized to coerce weaker nations. Anwar urged the bloc Wednesday to strengthen regional trade and reduce reliance on external powers.

Rubio’s “talking points on the China threat will not resonate with officials whose industries are being battered by 30-40% tariffs,” said Danny Russel, vice president of the Asia Society Policy Institute and a former assistant secretary of state for East Asia and the Pacific during the Obama administration.

When Anwar said “ASEAN will approach challenges ‘as a united bloc’ he wasn’t talking about Chinese coercion but about U.S. tariffs,” Russel noted.

Majority of ASEAN members face major tariff hikes

Among ASEAN states, Trump has announced tariffs on almost all of the bloc’s 10 members.

Trump sent tariff letters to two more ASEAN members Wednesday: Brunei, whose imports would be taxed at 25%, and the Philippines at 20%. Others hit this week include Cambodia at 36%, Indonesia at 32%, Laos at 40%, Malaysia at 25%, Myanmar at 40% and Thailand at 36%.

Vietnam recently agreed to a trade deal for a 20% tariffs on its imports, while Singapore still faces a 10% tariff that was imposed in April. The Trump administration has courted most Southeast Asian nations in a bid to blunt or at least temper China’s push to dominate the region.

In Kuala Lumpur, Rubio also will likely come face-to-face with China’s foreign minister during his visit.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi is a veteran of such gatherings and “fluent in ASEAN principles and conventions,” while Rubio “is a rookie trying to sell an ‘America First’ message to a deeply skeptical audience,” Russel noted.

Issues with China remain substantial, including trade, human rights, militarization of the South China Sea and China’s support for Russia in Ukraine.

U.S. officials continue to accuse China of resupplying and revamping Russia’s military industrial sector, allowing it to produce additional weapons that can be used to attack Ukraine.

Earlier on Thursday, Rubio signed a memorandum on civilian nuclear energy with Malaysia’s foreign minister, which will pave the way for negotiations on a more formal nuclear cooperation deal, known as a 123 agreement after the section of U.S. law allowing such programs.

Those agreements allow the U.S. government and U.S. companies to work with and invest in civilian energy nuclear programs in other countries under strict supervision.

Lee writes for the Associated Press. Eileen Ng contributed to this report.

China has agreed to sign a Southeast Asian treaty banning nuclear weapons, Malaysia’s and China’s foreign ministers confirmed, in a move that seeks to shield the area from rising global security tensions amid the threat of imminent United States tariffs.

The pledge from Beijing was welcomed as diplomats gathered for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) foreign ministers’ meeting, where US Secretary of State Marco Rubio is also due to meet regional counterparts and Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov.

Malaysia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Mohamad Hasan told reporters on Thursday that China had confirmed its willingness to sign the Southeast Asian Nuclear Weapon-Free Zone (SEANWFZ) treaty – an agreement in force since 1997 that restricts nuclear activity in the region to peaceful purposes such as energy generation.

“China made a commitment to ensure that they will sign the treaty without reservation,” Hasan said, adding that the formal signing will take place once all relevant documentation is completed.

ASEAN has long pushed for the world’s five recognised nuclear powers – China, the United States, Russia, France and the United Kingdom – to sign the pact and respect the region’s non-nuclear status, including within its exclusive economic zones and continental shelves.

Last week, Beijing signalled its readiness to support the treaty and lead by example among nuclear-armed states.

Rubio, who is on his first visit to Asia as secretary of state, arrived in Kuala Lumpur on Thursday amid a cloud of uncertainty caused by President Donald Trump’s aggressive tariff strategy, which includes new levies on six ASEAN nations as well as key traditional allies Japan and South Korea.

The tariffs, set to take effect on August 1, include a 25 percent duty on Malaysia, 32 percent on Indonesia, 36 percent on Cambodia and Thailand, and 40 percent on Laos and Myanmar.

Japan and South Korea have each been hit with 25 percent tariffs, while Australia – another significant Asia Pacific ally – has reacted angrily to threats of a 200 percent duty on pharmaceutical exports to the US.

Vietnam, an ASEAN nation, along with the UK, are the only two countries to have signed separate trade deals with the US, whose administration had boasted they would have 90 deals in 90 days.

The US will place a lower-than-promised 20 percent tariff on many Vietnamese exports, Trump has said, cooling tensions with its 10th-biggest trading partner days before he could raise levies on most imports. Any transshipments from third countries through Vietnam will face a 40 percent levy, Trump said, announcing the trade deal on Wednesday. Vietnam would accept US products with a zero percent tariff, he added.

Reporting from Kuala Lumpur, Al Jazeera’s Rob McBride says Southeast Asian nations are finding themselves at the centre of intensifying diplomatic competition, as global powers look to strengthen their influence in the region.

“The ASEAN countries are facing some of the highest tariffs from the Trump administration,” McBride said. “They were also among the first to receive new letters announcing yet another delay in the imposition of these tariffs, now pushed to 1 August.”

The uncertainty has pushed ASEAN states to seek alternative trade partners, most notably China. “These tariffs have provided an impetus for all of these ASEAN nations to seek out closer trade links with other parts of the world,” McBride added.

China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi has been in Kuala Lumpur for meetings with ASEAN counterparts, underscoring Beijing’s growing engagement.

Meanwhile, Russia’s top diplomat, Sergey Lavrov, has also been holding talks in Malaysia, advancing Moscow’s vision of a “multipolar world order” – a concept backed by China that challenges what they see as a Western-led global system dominated by the US.

“Lavrov might be shunned in other parts of the world,” McBride noted, “but he is here in Malaysia, meeting with ASEAN members and promoting this alternative global structure.”

At the same time, Rubio is aiming to counter that narrative and ease tensions. “Many ASEAN members are traditional allies of the United States,” McBride said. “But they are somewhat nervous about the tariffs and recent US foreign policy moves. Rubio is here to reassure them that all is well in trans-Pacific relations.”

As geopolitical rivalry intensifies, ASEAN finds itself courted from all directions, with the power to influence the future shape of international alliances.

US seeks to rebuild confidence in ASEAN

Rubio’s presence in Kuala Lumpur signals Washington, DC’s intention to revive its Asia Pacific focus following years of prioritising conflicts in Europe and the Middle East.

The last meeting between Rubio and Russia’s top diplomats took place in Saudi Arabia in February as part of the Trump administration’s effort to re-establish bilateral relations and help negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine.

Analysts say Rubio faces a difficult task of rebuilding confidence with Southeast Asian countries unnerved by the US’s trade policies. Despite the economic fallout, he is expected to try and promote the US as a more dependable alternative to China in terms of both security and long-term investment.

According to a draft communique obtained by Reuters, ASEAN foreign ministers will express “concern over rising global trade tensions and growing uncertainties in the international economic landscape, particularly the unilateral actions relating to tariffs”.

Separately, a meeting involving top diplomats from Southeast Asia, China, Russia and the United States will condemn violence against civilians in war-torn Myanmar, according to a draft statement seen Thursday by AFP.

ASEAN has led diplomatic efforts to end Myanmar’s many-sided civil war sparked by a military coup in 2021.

The BRICS bloc of developing nations aims to challenge the US-led economic order. In theory, it has the clout to push through reforms to global governance. But critics say the expanded group faces rifts among its members.

BRICS leaders have criticised US policies, including trade tariffs, during the gathering in Brazil’s Rio de Janiero, but they shied away from naming Washington directly.

President Donald Trump responded by threatening a 10% levy on any country that aligns itself with BRICS policies.

And the UN special rapporteur says global companies should be held accountable for profiting from the genocide in Gaza.