China

WHO chief Tedros says ‘all hypotheses must remain on the table’ after critical information not provided to investigators.

The World Health Organization (WHO) says efforts to uncover the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic are still ongoing and incomplete, as critical information has “not been provided”.

WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said “all hypotheses must remain on the table” to determine the cause of the virus, also known as SARS-CoV-2, after an expert group investigating its origins reached an unsatisfying conclusion in its final report released on Friday.

“We continue to appeal to China and any other country that has information about the origins of COVID-19 to share that information openly, in the interests of protecting the world from future pandemics,” Tedros said.

The global pandemic, which began in 2020, killed millions worldwide, with countries enforcing lockdowns in an attempt to stop the spread of the virus. With the first cases detected in Wuhan, China, in late 2019, information from the country is seen as key to preventing future pandemics.

In 2021, Tedros launched the WHO Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel Pathogens (SAGO), a panel of 27 independent international experts.

Marietjie Venter, the group’s chair, said on Friday that most scientific data supports the hypothesis that the new coronavirus jumped to humans from animals.

But she added that after more than three years of work, SAGO was unable to get the necessary data to evaluate whether or not COVID was the result of a lab accident, despite repeated requests for detailed information made to the Chinese government.

“Therefore, this hypothesis could not be investigated or excluded,” she said, however adding, “It was deemed to be very speculative, based on political opinions and not backed up by science.”

Venter also said there was no evidence to prove that COVID had been manipulated in a lab, nor was there any indication that the virus had been spreading before December 2019 anywhere outside of China.

‘Remains inconclusive’

In 2021, a group of experts from the WHO first travelled to Wuhan to examine the origins of the virus with their Chinese counterparts.

By March of that year, their joint report found that the most likely hypothesis was from bats to humans via an intermediate animal.

They said at the time that a lab leak was “extremely unlikely”.

However, that investigation faced backlash for lacking transparency and access, and not taking the lab-leak theory seriously.

After that, SAGO was launched.

According to the SAGO report, “the weight of available evidence … suggests zoonotic [a disease spread between animals to humans] spillover … either directly from bats or through an intermediate host”.

“Until more scientific data becomes available, the origins of how SARS-CoV-2 entered human populations will remain inconclusive,” Venter said.

“Understanding the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and how it sparked a pandemic is needed to help prevent future pandemics, save lives and livelihoods, and reduce global suffering,” she added.

Tedros said it was a “moral imperative” to determine how COVID began, noting that the virus killed at least 20 million people, wiped at least $10tn from the global economy and upended the lives of billions.

Nike has said it will cut its reliance on production in China for the United States market to mitigate the impact from US tariffs on imports, and forecast a smaller-than-expected drop in first-quarter revenue.

The sportswear giant’s shares zoomed 15 percent at the opening bell on Friday morning after it announced the change in conjunction with its earnings report released on Thursday.

US President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs on imports from key trading partners could add about $1bn to Nike’s costs, company executives said on a post-earnings call after the sportswear giant topped estimates for fourth-quarter results.

China, subject to the biggest tariff increases imposed by Trump, accounts for about 16 percent of the shoes Nike imports into the US, Chief Financial Officer Matthew Friend said. However, the company aims to cut the figure to a “high single-digit percentage range” by the end of May 2026 as it reallocates Chinese production to other countries.

“We will optimise our sourcing mix and allocate production differently across countries to mitigate the new cost headwind into the United States,” he said on a call with investors.

Consumer goods are one of the most affected areas by the tariff dispute between the world’s two largest economies, but Nike’s executives said they were focused on cutting the financial pain. Nike will “evaluate” corporate cost reductions to deal with the tariff impact, Friend said. The company has already announced price increases for some products in the US.

“The tariff impact is significant. However, I expect others in the sportswear industry will also raise prices, so Nike may not lose much share in the US,” David Swartz, analyst at Morningstar Research, told the Reuters news agency.

CEO Elliott Hill’s strategy to focus product innovation and marketing around sports is beginning to show some fruit, with the running category returning to growth in the fourth quarter after several quarters of weakness.

Having lost share in the fast-growing running market, Nike has invested heavily in running shoes such as Pegasus and Vomero, while scaling back production of sneakers such as the Air Force 1.

“Running has performed especially strongly for Nike,” said Citi analyst Monique Pollard, adding that new running shoes and sportswear products are expected to offset the declines in Nike’s classic sneaker franchises at wholesale partner stores.

Marketing spending was up 15 percent year on year in the quarter.

On Thursday, Nike hosted an event in which its sponsored athlete Faith Kipyegon attempted to run a mile in under four minutes. Paced by other star athletes in the glitzy event that was livestreamed from a Paris stadium, Kipyegon fell short of the goal but set a new unofficial record.

Nike forecast first-quarter revenue to fall in the mid-single digits, slightly better than analysts’ expectations of a 7.3 percent drop, according to data compiled by LSEG. Its fourth-quarter sales fell 12 percent  to $11.10bn, but still beat estimates of a 14.9 percent drop to $10.72bn.

China continued to be a pain point, with executives saying a turnaround in the country will take time as Nike contends with tougher economic conditions and competition.

Looming trade deal as prices rise

Nike’s woes come as a trade deal with China could be on the horizon. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessett said on Friday that the administration could have a deal with Beijing by Labor Day, which is on September 1.

Under the deal, the US will likely impose 55 percent tariffs across the board on Chinese goods, down from 145 percent, still a significant burden on businesses.

According to a survey from Allianz Global Trade last month, 38 percent of businesses say they will need to raise prices for consumers, with Nike being the latest.

In April, competitor Adidas said it would need to eventually raise prices for US consumers.

“Cost increases due to higher tariffs will eventually cause price increases,” CEO Bjorn Gulden said at the time.

Walmart said last month that its customers will see higher price tags in its stores as the nation’s biggest big box retailer prepares for back to school shopping season.

Target, which had a bad first quarter driven by boycotts and the looming threat of tariffs, also has been hit as the big box retailer gets 30 percent of its goods from China.

The United States has reached an agreement with China on accelerating shipments of rare earth minerals to the US, amid efforts to end a trade war between the world’s two biggest economies.

US President Donald Trump said on Thursday that the US had signed a deal with China the previous day, without providing more details, adding that he expects to soon have a trade deal with India as well.

Thursday’s announcement follows talks in Geneva in May, which led the US and China to reduce mutual tariffs.

In June, talks in London set a framework for negotiations. Thursday’s announcement appeared to formalise that agreement.

“The [Trump] administration and China agreed to an additional understanding for a framework to implement the Geneva agreement,” a White House official said on Thursday.

China also confirmed the framework for a deal, with its Ministry of Commerce stating that it will review and approve applications for items subject to export control rules.

What do we know about the US-China deal?

During US-China trade talks in Geneva, Beijing committed to removing non-tariff countermeasures imposed against the US following Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” announcement on April 2.

That was when Washington announced so-called “reciprocal” import duties but later paused most of them, with the exception of its 145 percent tariff on China, for 90 days to allow for negotiations. This pause is due to come to an end on July 9.

In retaliation, China imposed its own tariff of 125 percent on US goods, suspended exports on a wide range of critical minerals, upending supply chains crucial to US carmakers, semiconductor companies and military contractors.

But on Thursday, US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told Bloomberg TV that “they’re [China] going to deliver rare earths to us”, and once they do that “we’ll take down our countermeasures”. Those US countermeasures include export curbs on materials such as ethane, which is used to make plastic, and chip software.

A spokesperson for the Chinese Commerce Ministry said on Friday: “In recent days, after approval, both sides have further confirmed details on the framework.”

The spokesperson added: “The Chinese side will review and approve eligible applications for export of controlled items in accordance with the law. The US side will correspondingly cancel a series of restrictive measures taken against China.”

In early June, China granted temporary export licences to rare earth suppliers of the top three US automakers, according to two sources familiar with the matter, as supply chain disruptions began to surface from export curbs on those materials.

This week’s deal, which Lutnick said was signed on Wednesday, would amount to a wider agreement by codifying the terms laid out in Geneva, including a commitment from China to deliver rare earths to all US firms.

Why are Chinese rare earth minerals so vital?

China’s export of rare earth elements is central to ongoing trade negotiations with the US. Beijing has a virtual monopoly of critical minerals, mining 70 percent of the world’s rare earths and processing roughly 90 percent of their supply.

Critical minerals, a group of 17 elements which are essential to numerous manufacturing processes, have become particularly important for the auto industry, which relies on rare earth magnets for steering systems, engines and catalytic converters.

Car manufacturers have already complained about factories being brought to a near halt because of supply chain shortages of rare earths and the magnets they are used to make. A Ford executive said earlier this week that the company was living “hand to mouth”.

Rare earths are also vital for the transition to clean energy and are used in an array of products, including wind turbines, smartphones and televisions. They are also used to make fighter jets, missile systems and AI processors.

What other trade deals does Trump claim to be close to agreeing?

Lutnick told Bloomberg that Trump is also preparing to finalise a suite of trade deals in the coming weeks, ahead of his July 9 deadline for reinstating higher trade tariffs, which he paused on April 9.

“We’re going to do top 10 deals, put them in the right category, and then these other countries will fit behind,” he said.

Lutnick didn’t specify which nations would be part of that first wave of trade pacts. Earlier on Thursday, however, Trump suggested the US was nearing an agreement with India.

Indian trade officials, led by chief negotiator Rajesh Agarwal, are expected to hold meetings in Washington for two days this week, Bloomberg News has reported.

In recent months, US officials have also held talks with countries, including Vietnam, South Korea, Japan and the EU.

So far, only the United Kingdom has reached a trade agreement with the US, while China secured lower reciprocal tariffs in Geneva.

Still, the pact with the UK left several questions unaddressed, including the discount rates applied to certain British metal exports.

Which deals is the US still struggling to strike?

The majority of America’s major trade partners – from Canada to Vietnam and South Korea – are all expected to have fraught discussions with Washington before reciprocal tariffs expire in early July.

Most countries are hoping to have tariffs whittled down by as much as possible, and, failing that, to extend the July deadline, but there is no certainty yet for any of them.

Talks which have been particularly tricky include:

European Union

A major question mark remains over an agreement with the European Union, which ran a $235.6bn trade surplus with the US in 2024.

The hurdle facing EU leaders and the European Commission, which oversees trade issues for the 27-member bloc, is whether to accept an “asymmetrical” trade deal with the US, under which terms could be more favourable to the US in order to get a deal done faster.

Some member states are thought to be opposed to tit-for-tat retaliation, preferring a quick tariff deal over a perfect one.

But others disagree. France has rejected the notion of any deal skewed in favour of the US and is instead pushing for a complete removal of tariffs.

Japan

Japan is keen on settling all potential US tariffs in one fell swoop. But a sticking point in negotiations has been the 25 percent tariffs on cars and car parts imposed by Trump.

Washington is focused on autos because that sector is responsible for most of its trade deficit with Japan.

But Tokyo views its automotive industry as a key pillar in its economy as it generates about 10 percent of gross domestic product (GDP).

On Thursday, Japan’s chief trade negotiator, Ryosei Akazawa, reiterated Tokyo’s position, telling reporters: “We consider the 25 percent automobile tariff to be unacceptable.”

Could the US extend its tariffs deadline past July?

President Trump could decide to extend the deadline for reimposing tariffs on most of the world’s countries, the White House said on Thursday.

Trump’s July deadline for restarting tariffs is “not critical”, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters.

“Perhaps it could be extended, but that’s a decision for the president to make,” Leavitt said.

She also said that if any of those countries refuse to make a trade deal with the US by the deadlines, “the president can simply provide these countries with a deal”.

“And that means the president can pick a reciprocal tariff rate that he believes is advantageous for the United States, and for the American worker,” she added.

Meanwhile, White House National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett told Fox Business on Tuesday: “We know that we’re very, very close to a few countries.”

Through the 12 days of the recent Israel-Iran conflict, China moved quickly to position itself as a potential mediator and voice of reason amid a spiralling regional crisis.

The day after Israel’s unprovoked attack on Iran on June 13, Beijing reached out to both sides to express its desire for a mediated solution even as the country’s top diplomat, Foreign Minister Wang Yi, condemned Israel’s actions as a violation of international law.

Chinese President Xi Jinping soon followed with calls for de-escalation, while at the United Nations Security Council, China joined Russia and Pakistan in calling for an “immediate and unconditional ceasefire”.

When Iran threatened to blockade the strategically important Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of the world’s oil passes, Beijing was also quick to speak out.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs instead called for the “international community to step up efforts to de-escalate conflicts and prevent regional turmoil from having a greater impact on global economic development”.

Beijing’s stance throughout the conflict remained true to its longstanding noninterference approach to foreign hostilities. But experts say it did little to help shore up its ambition of becoming an influential player in the Middle East, and instead exposed the limitations of its clout in the region.

Why China was worried

Unlike some countries, and the United States in particular, China traditionally approaches foreign policy “through a lens of strategic pragmatism rather than ideological solidarity”, said Evangeline Cheng, a research associate at the National University of Singapore’s Middle East Institute.

This approach means China will always focus on protecting its economic interests, of which it has many in the Middle East, Cheng told Al Jazeera.

China has investments in Israel’s burgeoning tech sector and its Belt and Road infrastructure project spans Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, Kuwait, Iraq, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates.

Critically, China relies on the Middle East for more than half of its crude oil imports, and it’s the top consumer of Iranian oil. A protracted war would have disrupted its oil supplies, as would an Iranian blockade of the strategically important Strait of Hormuz – something threatened by Tehran’s parliament during the conflict.

“War and security instability not only undermines Chinese investment and trade and business… but also the oil price and gas energy security in general,” said Alam Saleh, a senior Lecturer in Iranian Studies at the Australian National University.

“Therefore, China seeks stability, and it disagrees and opposes any kind of military solution for any type of conflict and confrontations, no matter with whom,” he said.

John Gong, a professor of economics at the University of International Business and Economics in Beijing, told Al Jazeera that China’s top concern through the conflict was to avoid “skyrocketing oil prices” that would threaten its energy security.

Flexing diplomatic muscle, protecting economic might

Aware of China’s friendly relations with Iran and Beijing’s economic fears, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio called on Beijing to keep Tehran from closing the Strait of Hormuz as ceasefire negotiations stumbled forward this week.

It was a brief moment of acknowledgement of Beijing’s influence, but experts say China’s overall diplomatic influence remains limited.

“China’s offer to mediate highlights its desire to be seen as a responsible global player, but its actual leverage remains limited,” Cheng said. “Without military capabilities or deep political influence in the region, and with Israel wary of Beijing’s ties to Iran, China’s role is necessarily constrained.”

To be sure, Beijing has demonstrated its ability to broker major diplomatic deals in the region. In 2023, it mediated the normalisation of relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia. While seen as a huge diplomatic win for China, experts say Beijing owed much of its success to fellow mediators, Oman and Iraq. China also mediated an agreement between Palestinian factions, including Hamas and Fatah, in July 2024, under which they committed to working together on Gaza’s governance after the end of Israel’s ongoing war on the enclave.

But William Yang, a senior analyst for Northeast Asia at the Brussels-based International Crisis Group, said the odds were stacked against China from the beginning of the latest conflict due to Israel’s wariness towards its relationship with Iran.

In 2021, China and Iran signed a 25-year “strategic partnership”, and Iran is an active participant in the Belt and Road project. Iran has also joined the Beijing-led Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and this year took part in China’s “Maritime Security Belt” naval exercises.

Iran’s “resolute opposition to American hegemony” also aligns well with China’s diplomatic interests more broadly, compared with Israel’s close ties to the US, Yang said.

China’s dilemma

It’s a scenario that could be repeated in the future, he said.

“This case also reinforces the dilemma that China faces: while it wants to be viewed as a great power that is capable of mediating in major global conflicts, its close relationship with specific parties in some of the ongoing conflicts diminishes Beijing’s ability to play such a role,” Yang said.

For now, Beijing will continue to rely on the US as a security guarantor in the region, he added.

“It’s clear that China will continue to focus on deepening economic engagement with countries in the Middle East while taking advantage of the US presence in the region, which remains the primary security guarantor for regional countries,” Yang said.

“On the other hand, the US involvement in the conflict, including changing the course of the war by bombing Iranian nuclear sites, creates the condition for China to take the moral high ground in the diplomatic sphere and present itself as the more restrained, calm and responsible major power,” he said.

Six people have died from floods in China’s Guizhou province, state media said, after more than 80,000 people were driven from their homes this week.

Towns and villages by a key river in China’s Guangxi lay half-submerged as floodwaters from a province upstream roared into the mountainous region, with the expected landfall of a tropical cyclone later on Thursday compounding disaster risk.

The flooding that overwhelmed the counties of Rongjiang and Congjiang in Guizhou province on Tuesday has spread downstream to other parts of southwest China, including rural settlements in Guangxi by the Liu River, which originates from Guizhou.

On Thursday, state broadcaster CCTV said “exceptionally large floods” had swept through Guizhou’s Rongjiang county since Tuesday.

China is enduring a summer of extreme weather.

This week, authorities issued the second-highest heat warning for the capital, Beijing, on one of its hottest days of the year so far.

Tens of thousands of people were evacuated last week in Hunan province – neighbouring Guizhou – due to heavy rain.

‘Exceptionally large floods’ swept through Guizhou’s Rongjiang county, forcing some 80,000 people to flee their homes.

At least six people have died and more than 80,000 people were evacuated from their homes after floods inundated China’s Guizhou province, state media reported, as a tropical depression made landfall in the island province.

State broadcaster CCTV reported on Thursday that “exceptionally large floods” had swept through Guizhou’s Rongjiang county since Tuesday.

Deluges in Guizhou – classified as a southwestern province by the Chinese government – have prompted authorities to activate the highest-level emergency flood response, evacuating about 80,900 people.

“As of 11am on Thursday… six people have unfortunately lost their lives,” the report said, citing the local flood control headquarters.

“Many low-lying areas in the county were flooded, and the infrastructure of some towns was seriously damaged, resulting in traffic obstruction, communications blackouts, and some people being trapped,” the broadcaster said.

“The water level in the county has now retreated below the warning level,” it added, saying “post-disaster recovery and reconstruction and investigation of trapped people are under way.”

State news agency Xinhua reported on Wednesday that a football field in Rongjiang was “submerged under three metres (10ft) of water”, and a resident said they were rescued from the third floor of their home.

Images published by Xinhua also showed rescue operations carried out by emergency services. Tents have been set up to serve as temporary shelters for those who were displaced.

In other parts of Guizhou, where the floods have subsided, people were also seen clearing up the debris and thick layers of mud that covered the lower sections of some business establishments and other buildings.

Meanwhile, a tropical depression made landfall in Hainan early on Thursday, according to the country’s National Meteorological Centre.

The tropical depression is expected to move from the city of Wenchang across the island’s northeast tip, before heading back into the South China Sea and making a second landfall in China’s southern Guangdong province and gradually weakening.

The storm will again test the flood defences of the densely populated Guangdong province, as well as Guangxi and Hunan further inland.

China is enduring a summer of extreme weather.

This week, authorities issued the second-highest heat warning for the capital, Beijing, on one of its hottest days of the year so far.

Tens of thousands of people were evacuated last week in Hunan province – neighbouring Guizhou – due to heavy rain brought about by Typhoon Wutip.

CHEAP Chinese firms could soon be cut out from government contracts under new rules championing British industry, The Sun can reveal.

Ministers want to prioritise UK-based firms in critical sectors like steel, energy, and cyber, putting them at the front of the queue.

The shake-up would allow the public sector to sidestep foreign tender bids, giving homegrown heroes a bigger slice of Whitehall’s £400bn procurement pot.

Currently, foreign suppliers can undercut British businesses with cheap labour and rock-bottom prices.

But in a push to bolster national security and create jobs across the UK, the likes of British Steel would be prioritised.

Under the new blueprint, now up for consultation, Whitehall departments would also favour British Steel for the £725bn of infrastructure spending earmarked for the next decade.

Meanwhile, firms slow to pay small and medium businesses will be kicked out of the procurement race.

Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Pat McFadden, said: “Strong industry is essential to our national security.

“The new rules being considered will give us the power to protect our national industries, ensuring more money goes to them as we buy goods and services in government.

“Our reforms will boost growth and ensure British industry is supported to deliver national security and our Plan for Change.”

Gareth Stace, UK Steel boss, hailed the move as a game-changer, saying: “The publication of this guidance for steel procurement and the launch of the consultation are unequivocally positive news for the UK steel industry.

“These changes rightly recognise the strategic importance of steelmaking to national security and the vital role of resilient domestic supply chains.”

1

THE HAGUE — Days before NATO was set to convene in the Netherlands, one of its top commanders, Pierre Vandier, tasked with transforming the alliance for the next fight, put out a call: Britain will need to step up its intelligence contributions to the alliance going forward.

“The UK has this in its DNA,” Vandier said.

It was an acknowledgment that the United States, pivoting toward a far greater intelligence threat from China, may leave its European allies behind in their own existential fight with Russia. A lack of reliability on the world’s leading AI superpower, European officials say, will render the continent vulnerable in a race for intelligence superiority set to revolutionize global battlefields.

The rush toward artificial intelligence has been a strong undercurrent at the NATO Summit in the Hague this week, serving not only as a gathering for leaders of the alliance, but also as a defense industry forum for emerging power players in Silicon Valley, treated in Holland’s gilded halls as a new kind of royalty.

“AI is going to be an important part of warfare going forward, but it’s still very new, and NATO tends not to be at the tip of the spear of innovation — and there is some division within the alliance on how to develop AI, when it comes to AI regulation and safety,” said Max Bergmann, director of the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“Tech companies don’t hold the same pride of place in the European economic system, and they’re not consumed with the need to compete with China militarily — they are much more focused on Russia,” Bergmann added. “While the U.S. is about winning the AI race, Europeans are watching what’s happening in Ukraine and saying, ‘we just need to deter Russia.’”

So far, for European capitals, that has meant incorporating powerful data collection and processing systems into defense departments and improving the performance of automated surveillance systems and drones — skills well within Europe’s capabilities. Several German and French companies, such as Helsing, Azur and Quantum Systems, are already developing products based on what they are seeing in Ukraine.

But the next fight will require technologies that dwarf existing drone capabilities, experts said.

“We’ve been predicting for a while that there would be integration of AI into military research and development and defense systems, and I expect, for example, that advanced cyber capabilities will play an important role in the coming years,” said Jonas Vollmer, chief operating officer of the AI Futures Project. “Europe has influence, but it is grappling with the difficult reality that they don’t have access or strong domestic development of frontier AI systems, and they are pretty far behind.”

Last year, NATO allies agreed to speed up the adoption of artificial intelligence in its operations. There are signs the bloc senses urgency to do so, signing an agreement with Palantir, a U.S.-based technology company, to incorporate AI into its warfighting systems after just six months of negotiations.

The United States and China are far ahead of competitors in the race for AI superiority, measured in raw computing power and proximity to general artificial intelligence — AI that has human-level cognitive capabilities to learn and develop on its own – and ultimately to superintelligence, surpassing the human mind.

Still, the United Kingdom is a serious player in the field. The kingdom ranks third in government investment in AI research anywhere in the world and maintains strong partnerships with some of the most powerful U.S. players.

In its most recent defense strategy, also published shortly before the NATO summit, Britain committed to integrate artificial intelligence into its “NATO-first” national security approach. “Forecasts of when Artificial General Intelligence will occur are uncertain but shortening, with profound implications for Defence,” the document reads.

Europe’s race for intelligence capabilities is driven, in part, by lessons learned on the battlefields of Ukraine. But Russia is not seen as an AI powerhouse in and of itself. Moscow instead uses low-cost tests of drone incursions and cyberattacks to keep pressure on the alliance, Vandier told the Times of London in an interview. “The aim, I think, is to consume all our energy in purely defensive actions, which are very costly,” he said.

Whether Russia can enhance its own AI capabilities is an open question.

“The key ingredients of being at the frontier with AI are talent and data centers,” said Vollmer, of the AI Futures Project.

“Russia lags far behind on both,” he added, “but they can collaborate with China, of course.”

In what marks a major shift for NATO, the bloc’s member states have agreed to raise defence spending to five percent of gross domestic product (GDP).

The move will inject billions more dollars into armies and weapons, raising questions over how governments will foot the bill.

With public budgets under strain, many European politicians dismissed the target as unachievable earlier this year, when US President Donald Trump demanded it.

Europe’s priorities now appear to be shifting to security, citing growing threats from Russia.

And Chinese goods are flooding markets from Southeast Asia to Europe.

Plus, top economists call for debt relief in developing nations.

Following the U.S. attack on Iran’s primary nuclear facilities at Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan, Tehran faces nothing but bad options. Militarily, Iran can escalate the conflict by attacking U.S. forces and allies in the region, as it did on Monday with missile attacks on U.S. bases in Qatar and Iraq. Iran could also close the Strait of Hormuz, withdraw from the nuclear nonproliferation treaty or even attempt a rapid “breakout” run to a bomb with its residual capabilities. Each of these options virtually assures an American military response that goes far beyond Iran’s nuclear program, possibly leading to a targeted campaign to topple the regime, the Islamic Republic’s greatest nightmare.

A more likely military response would therefore be for Iran to respond by continuing to attack Israel — as it did just hours after the U.S. strike — in an attempt to turn the conflict into a war of attrition that Israel can ill afford. Israel could escalate to try to end the war more swiftly and avoid prolonging losses.

Diplomatically, Iran can return to negotiations but rebuff President Trump’s demand for an “unconditional surrender,” whose terms he had not spelled out. In reality, these would likely include the complete dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear and missile programs and significant curbs to its regional role, along with long-term inspections and more. Should Tehran rebuff these demands, it would greatly increase the risk of further American military action, including against the regime itself — targeting military and civilian leaders and infrastructure, not just nuclear sites.

Alternatively, it can essentially accede to Trump’s demands, in which case it avoids direct American intervention and the war ends, but Iran loses its ultimate security guarantor — the nuclear capability — and virtually all of its leverage to seek any concessions in further international talks. The regime would also appear so weak that the probability of a domestic uprising would increase exponentially.

Whichever option Iran chooses, the very future of the Islamic Republic has never been in greater peril. Accordingly, the prospects for a dramatic positive transformation of the Middle Eastern strategic landscape have never been greater.

The decades-long American effort to establish a regional coalition of Arab states and Israel, to contain Iran, will be given a significant boost, as the former gains confidence to do so in the face of a greatly weakened Iran and resurgent U.S. in the region. The dangers of proliferation, at least in the Middle East, might be greatly reduced. Israel will have demonstrated — albeit this time only with critical American assistance — that the “Begin doctrine” (Israeli determination to take all means necessary to prevent a hostile regional state from developing nuclear weapons) still applies. Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the three most likely proliferators in the region after Iran, will have little reason to pursue nuclear weapons.

Russia’s and China’s inability to provide their Iranian ally with any practical backing during the war stands in stark contrast to the U.S. and Israel and is particularly galling for Iran because of its strong support for the Kremlin during Russia’s war in Ukraine. Moscow and Beijing will suffer a significant reduction in their regional standing, accruing to Washington’s benefit. The Middle East will once again be considered a clearly American-dominated region, in which Russia and China will have to tread more carefully.

There are some in the U.S. who fear Mideast conflicts distract American attention from the competition with China — the only nation approaching the economic influence of the U.S. today — and Russia. But taking a direct role in this Iran-Israel conflict has not diverted American focus from Moscow and Beijing. On the contrary, it has significantly strengthened Washington’s global stature compared with both countries. China will be more hesitant to attack Taiwan now that the U.S. has demonstrated willingness to bomb aggressors against American allies.

An Israel whose enemies have been dramatically weakened, and which no longer faces an existential threat from Iran, would be in a far better position to make progress on the Palestinian issue, beginning with an end to the war in Gaza. Indeed, it would not be far-fetched to assume that Trump, always transactional, may have made this a precondition for his support for Israel in the war. Saudi-Israeli normalization will be back on the table.

Netanyahu has prepared for this moment for 30 years, for the opportunity to put an end to the only existential threat Israel continues to face. From the reviled leader whose administration allowed the Oct. 7 fiasco and various outrages in domestic affairs, he now stands to be remembered as one of Israel’s great heroes. Moreover, a favorable outcome to the war may very well save him from what otherwise appears to have been a looming electoral defeat — which could have been followed by jail time, given the corruption charges he faces.

The bigger question is whether Netanyahu — whose deep understanding of Israel’s overall strategic circumstances no one has ever doubted — will wish to use this opportunity to crown his legacy not just with saving Israel from an existential military threat, but also from an almost equally severe demographic challenge to its own future as a Jewish and democratic state. Fordo may be gone; the Palestinians remain. He would truly cement his standing in history if he ended the Gaza war and paved the way to a resolution of the Palestinian issue.

Both Netanyahu and Trump deserve credit for taking daring action, and they must be prepared to continue doing so. This is not the time to be fainthearted but to continue pressing the advantage. They have engaged in a classic case of coercive diplomacy, the use of military force for diplomatic ends, and must see it through to the desired end: a diplomatic agreement with Iran that ensures, with an inspections regime of unprecedented intrusiveness, that it can never again develop nuclear capabilities for military purposes, puts severe limits on its missile capabilities and curtails its malign regional role.

Even with a tentative cease-fire now in place, achieving an agreement of this sort will not be easy. The Iranians are unlikely to fully accede to American demands unless they truly feel that they have their backs to the wall, and even then, they are unusually effective negotiators. Persistence, focus and attention for detail, not known to be Trump’s forte, will now be called for. A historic opening has been made; it must not be squandered.

Chuck Freilich, a former Israeli deputy national security advisor, is a senior fellow at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies. Colin P. Clarke is the director of research at the Soufan Group, a security and intelligence consulting firm based in New York City.

A New Chapter in Global Escalation

Israel’s attack on the heart of Iran in June 2025 was not just the latest episode in the long history of the Middle East conflict. It was a loud signal that great power rivalry is now transforming into an open struggle, with Asia and the Global South as the main arenas of interest. For China, which has always maintained a balance between Iran and Israel, this war is a real test of its diplomatic strategy and national interests.

China: From Balancing to Taking Sides?

China has historically pursued a policy of “dual engagement” in the Middle East—strengthening economic ties with Israel while building a strategic partnership with Iran, especially in the areas of energy and security. However, the 2025 war revealed a significant shift in Beijing’s attitude. Just a day after the Israeli attack, China’s Ambassador to the UN, Fu Cong, openly called Israel’s actions a violation of Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, while urging an end to Israel’s “military adventurism.” This strong statement was reinforced by President Xi Jinping and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who reiterated their support for Iran’s right to self-defense and rejected further US military involvement.

This policy is not just rhetoric. China is a major buyer of Iranian oil, with more than 80% of Iran’s oil exports going to China—even amid Western sanctions. The 25-year partnership signed in 2021 deepens energy dependence and infrastructure investment, making Iran a key pillar of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in the region. This relationship, economically and geopolitically, positions China as the main defender of Iran’s interests in global forums.

However, this position carries significant risks. China-Israel relations, which previously flourished in the technology and infrastructure sectors, are now experiencing serious rifts. Israel and its Western allies see China’s stance as a bias that undermines trust and narrows the space for dialogue. Iran, on the other hand, views China as an important strategic partner in the face of Western pressure, although it remains aware of the limits of Beijing’s commitment to direct military involvement.

Immediate Impact on Asia and the Global South: Energy, Economics, and Uncertainty

The domino effects of the conflict were immediately felt in Asia and the Global South. The surge in world oil prices—topping $75 per barrel—triggered inflation, increased the fiscal burden on energy-importing countries, and depressed people’s purchasing power. Indonesia, India, and ASEAN countries immediately evacuated residents from conflict zones, strengthened energy reserves, and prepared for economic contingency scenarios.

Asia’s dependence on Middle Eastern energy has now become a strategic vulnerability that cannot be ignored. Any threat to the Strait of Hormuz, a vital route for one-third of the world’s oil supply, immediately shakes markets and creates investment uncertainty. For countries in the Global South, energy price volatility means the risk of slowing growth, weakening currencies, and rising living costs—issues that exacerbate inequality and increase the potential for domestic political instability.

China as Mediator: Ambitions, Challenges, and Realities

China is seeking to capitalize on this momentum to assert itself as a global mediator. Beijing has actively offered itself as a mediator, pushed for a ceasefire, and called for multilateral dialogue in forums such as the UN and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). In its official narrative and state media editorials, China has emphasized the importance of a political solution, respect for sovereignty, and rejection of Western-style “unilateral intervention.”

However, the effectiveness of China’s mediation role faces real limitations. China’s influence over Israel is very limited, given Tel Aviv’s closeness to Washington and skepticism of Beijing’s neutrality. On the other hand, China’s over-involvement risks provoking a confrontation with the United States, which remains the dominant player in the Middle East. The reality on the ground shows that while China has been able to construct a narrative as a new counterbalance, its ability to truly change the dynamics of the conflict is still constrained by its limited military and political leverage.

Strategic Implications: Global Polarization and the Future of Asia

The Iran-Israel conflict deepens global polarization between Israel’s pro-Israel bloc (the US and its Western allies) and Iran’s pro-Iran bloc (China, Russia, and much of the Global South). Asian and Global South countries are now faced with a strategic dilemma: balancing relations with the two great powers without getting caught up in a rivalry that could undermine regional stability.

For China, this conflict is a test of its ambition to become a leader of the Global South and a counterweight to Western dominance. Beijing’s firm stance in defending the principle of sovereignty and rejecting military intervention is a strong message to developing countries that have long felt marginalized in the global order. However, the challenge ahead is how to transform this diplomatic capital into real influence in resolving conflicts and building inclusive collective security mechanisms.

Conclusion: Asia and the Global South as Deciders of the Future

The Iran-Israel conflict and China’s response mark a new chapter in world geopolitics. Asia and the Global South are no longer spectators, but rather determiners of the future of the global order. By strengthening solidarity, policy innovation, and collective diplomacy, developing countries can take a greater role in maintaining world peace and prosperity. The challenges are great, but the opportunities to build a more inclusive and equitable world order are now wide open—and China, along with Asia and the Global South, is at the center of that change.

Russia called the US strikes on Iran ‘unjustified’ and ‘unprovoked’, while China warned they ‘set a bad precedent’.

Russia and China have strongly condemned US attacks on Iranian nuclear sites, warning they could drag the world into a broader war and set a dangerous international precedent.

The reactions came just hours before Iran launched missiles at the US base in Qatar on Monday in response to Sunday’s strikes.

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday described the American strikes as “unjustified” and said they were pushing the world towards a perilous tipping point.

Speaking after talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi at the Kremlin, Putin said Moscow would try to help the Iranian people but stopped short of detailing how.

“The absolutely unprovoked aggression against Iran has no basis and no justification,” Putin told Araghchi. “For our part, we are making efforts to assist the Iranian people.”

The Chinese government also weighed in, with Foreign Minister Wang Yi condemning both the Israeli strikes on Iran and the US bombardment of its nuclear facilities. He said the rationale of attacking over “possible future threats” sent the wrong signal to the world and urged a return to diplomacy.

Wang called for all parties to “immediately resume dialogue and negotiation”, warning the escalation risked destabilising the region.

Bringing the world ‘to a very dangerous line’

Tensions have soared in recent days, with US President Donald Trump and Israeli officials openly discussing the possibility of assassinating Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and pushing for regime change – moves the Kremlin warned could plunge the region into a full-blown war.

During the high-level Kremlin meeting on Monday, Araghchi reportedly handed Putin a message from Khamenei, though the contents were not disclosed. A senior Iranian source told the Reuters news agency the letter called for increased Russian support, but Moscow has not confirmed receiving any such appeal.

Later, while addressing a gathering of elite military recruits, Putin spoke more broadly about growing instability. “Extra-regional powers are also being drawn into the conflict,” he said. “All this brings the world to a very dangerous line.”

Despite signing a 20-year strategic pact with Iran earlier this year, Russia has avoided making concrete military commitments to defend Tehran, and the agreement lacks any mutual defence clause.

Iranian frustration

Iranian officials, speaking anonymously to Reuters, expressed frustration with Moscow’s perceived inaction. They said Tehran felt let down by both Russia and China, despite repeated calls for support.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov declined to say whether Iran had asked for weapons or military aid but insisted Moscow’s ties with Tehran remained strong. “Our strategic partnership with Iran is unbreakable,” Ryabkov said, adding that Iran had every right to defend itself.

Still, the Kremlin appears wary of any move that might provoke a direct confrontation with Washington, particularly as Trump seeks to ease tensions with Moscow amid the war in Ukraine. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said US-Iran developments would not affect the Russia-US dialogue, calling them “separate processes”.

Memories of US-led wars in the Middle East still linger. At Sunday’s United Nations Security Council session, Russia’s UN envoy Vassily Nebenzia drew comparisons with the 2003 Iraq invasion. He recalled how the US falsely claimed Iraq held weapons of mass destruction.

“Again, we’re being asked to believe the US’s fairytales,” Nebenzia said. “This cements our conviction that history has taught our US colleagues nothing.”

Russia, China and Pakistan have jointly submitted a resolution calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire in the Middle East.

Lehe Ledu Liangjiang Holiday Hotel, a popular family resort in Chongqing, has become a huge viral hit in China thanks to its red panda wake-up service, that is now attracting heat

A Chinese hotel has been told it must stop waking guests up with red pandas.

Lehe Ledu Liangjiang Holiday Hotel, a popular family resort in Chongqing, currently offers guests the chance to be awakened by the russet-tinted mammals. Many guests are attracted to the hotel solely for its red panda wake-up experience, which involves one of the fluffy animals being led into a guest’s bedroom in the morning.

The animal is then allowed to walk around the room freely and climb onto the duvet-covered bed if it wishes. The service has become a hit online, earning the title “the world’s cutest wake-up service.”

One British couple, Reanne and Ben, documented the experience on their YouTube channel On Tour With Dridgers. In their video, the red panda can be seen wandering along the hotel corridor with a staff member, entering the room, chomping a chunk of apple, and then climbing onto the couple’s bed.

The seemingly friendly and relaxed panda allows the duo to stroke it while eating apple from their hands.

READ MORE: Tourists could be banned from Spanish beaches locals warn have become ‘theme parks’

Now, the Chongqing Forestry Bureau has asked the hotel to stop all activities that allow contact between guests and red pandas. It has sent a team to the hotel to conduct an on-site investigation and said it will release the results of this visit soon.

While the nature of the Forestry Bureau’s concerns is not currently clear, the attraction has long attracted criticism online from those who warn it could lead to injury of both animal and human, as well as the transmission of diseases. The general welfare of the pandas is also a concern.

READ MORE: One of world’s friendliest countries plotting to charge tourists more than localsREAD MORE: Hotel insider’s warning as she explains why you should never use free toiletries

The hotel said that the red pandas are borrowed from a zoo, have been vaccinated, and are cared for by dedicated staff. They told China Newsweek that four red pandas are kept on-site and are on a rota for guest visits.

Sun Quanhui, a scientist from the World Animal Protection organisation, told the Global Times that red pandas are a nationally protected wild species. Sun said that they should not be kept as pets or used for tourism-related entertainment, warning that their sensitive natures could lead them to become stressed in such an environment.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called on China to prevent Iran from closing the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important shipping routes.

His comments came after Iran’s state-run Press TV reported that parliament had approved a plan to close the Strait but added that the final decision lies with the Supreme National Security Council.

Any disruption to the supply of oil would have profound consequences for the economy. China in particular is the world’s largest buyer of Iranian oil and has a close relationship with Tehran.

Oil prices surged following the US attack on Iranian nuclear sites, with the price of the benchmark Brent crude reaching its highest level in five months.

“I encourage the Chinese government in Beijing to call them (Iran) about that, because they heavily depend on the Straits of Hormuz for their oil,” Marco Rubio had said in an interview with Fox News on Sunday.

“If they [close the Straits]… it will be economic suicide for them. And we retain options to deal with that, but other countries should be looking at that as well. It would hurt other countries’ economies a lot worse than ours.”

Around 20% of the world’s oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, with major oil and gas producers in the Middle East using the waterway to transport energy from the region.

Any attempt to disrupt operations in the Strait could could send global oil prices skyrocketing.

They jumped to their highest since January, with the price of Brent crude reaching $78.89 a barrel as of 23:22 GMT Sunday.

“The US is now positioned with an overwhelming defence posture in the region to be prepared for any Iran counter attacks. But the risk for oil prices is the situation could escalate severely further,” said Saul Kavonic, Head of Energy Research at MST Financial.

The cost of crude oil affects everything from how much it costs to fill up your car to the price of food at the supermarket.

China in particular buys more oil from Iran than any other nation – with its oil imports from Iran surpassing 1.8 million barrels per day last month, according to data by ship tracking firm Vortexa.

Other major Asian economies including India, Japan and South Korea also rely heavily on crude oil that passes through the Strait.

Energy analyst Vandana Hari has said Iran has “little to gain and too much to lose” from closing the Strait.

“Iran risks turning its oil and gas producing neighbours in the Gulf into enemies and invoking the ire of its key market China by disrupting traffic in the Strait”, Hari told BBC News.

The US joined the conflict between Iran and Israel over the weekend, with President Donald Trump saying Washington had “obliterated” Tehran’s key nuclear sites.

However, it’s not clear how much damage the strikes inflicted, with the UN’s nuclear watchdog saying it was unable to assess the damage at the heavily fortified Fordo underground nuclear site. Iran has said there was only minor damage to Fordo.

Trump also warned Iran that they would face “far worse” future attacks if they did not abandon their nuclear programme.

On Monday, Beijing said the US strikes had damaged Washington’s credibility and called for an immediate ceasefire.

China’s UN Ambassador Fu Cong said all parties should restrain “the impulse of force… and adding fuel to the fire”, according to a state-run CCTV report.

In an editorial, Beijing’s state newspaper Global Times also said US involvement in Iran “had further complicated and destabilised the Middle East situation” and that it was pushing the conflict to an “uncontrollable state”.

Here are the key events on day 10 of the Israel-Iran conflict.

Here’s where things stand on Sunday, June 22:

Fighting

• United States President Donald Trump told the world that strikes had been launched by his country’s military against three key Iranian nuclear sites.
• Trump claimed in a post that the heavily fortified Fordow nuclear facility was “gone”.
• The US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth told reporters at the Pentagon that the US strikes were an “incredible and overwhelming success”, without providing any evidence or details.
• US Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a further threat against Iran, saying any retaliation would be “the worst mistake they’ve ever made.”
• During an address to a meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in Istanbul, Turkiye, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the US crossed “a very big red line” by attacking Iran’s three nuclear facilities.
• The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran said the nuclear sites in Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan were “attacked by enemies of [Iran] in a barbaric act that violated international law, especially the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty”.

• Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu congratulated Trump on a ‘bold decision’ to attack Iran.
• Israeli emergency services say Iranian rockets and falling shrapnel hit 10 locations. The latest Iranian retaliation followed the US strikes.
• Israel’s military said it carried out more attacks on western Iran against what it claimed are “military targets”.
• The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said Iran’s most recent missile strikes targeted Israel’s Ben Gurion International Airport, along with research facilities.
• The IRGC is now deploying one of its most advanced missiles, the Kheibar Shekan, as part of its retaliatory measures. Unveiled in 2022, the missile also known as Khorramshahr-4 is believed to have the heaviest payload of Iran’s ballistic missile arsenal.

Casualties and disruptions

• The head of Iran’s Red Crescent Society, Pir Hossein Kolivand, said that there have been no fatalities in the US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
• An adviser to Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said that Iran had been anticipating the US attack on Fordow. “The site has long been evacuated and has not suffered any irreversible damage in the attack,” the adviser said.
• The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran has said that radiation system data and field surveys do not show signs of contamination or danger to residents near the sites of Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz.
• The Israel Airports Authority says it has closed its airspace until further notice “due to recent developments”, referring to the US attack on Iran.
• Airline carriers have continued to steer clear of significant areas of the Middle East following the US strikes, according to Flightradar24.
• A man convicted of spying for Israel has been executed, the Iranian judicial news outlet Mizan Online reports.
• At least 27 people have been wounded in Israel after Iran launched 40 missiles shortly after the US attacks. One of the targets hit was Ramat Aviv in Tel Aviv, with missiles tearing holes in the facades of apartment blocks.
• The semiofficial Tasnim news agency reported that Israel bombed the city of Tabriz, targeting the IRGC’s Martyr Madani camp, wounding at least two.
• Iranian authorities said nine security personnel were killed after Israeli forces struck two military sites in the central province of Yazd, Iran’s Fars News Agency reported.
• Gulf states, home to multiple US military bases, are on high alert after the bombardment of Iran raised the possibility of a widening war in the region.
• Bahrain has told 70 percent of government employees to work from home until further notice.

US opposition to attacks

• In one of the first responses to the attack by a Democratic member of the US Congress, Sara Jacobs said: “Trump’s strikes against Iran are not only unconstitutional, but an escalation that risks bringing the US into another endless and deadly war.”
• House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said that Trump did not seek congressional authorisation for the strikes and will bear full responsibility for “any adverse consequences”.
• Rashida Tlaib, a Palestinian-American congresswoman, said Trump’s ordering of strikes on Iran without the approval of lawmakers is a “blatant violation” of the US Constitution.
• Republican congressman Thomas Massie, who has been leading a legislative effort to curb Trump’s ability to attack Iran without the approval of Congress, said the strikes violate the US Constitution, which gives lawmakers the authority over war decisions.
• US Senator Chris Murphy joined the Democratic chorus of criticism. “I was briefed on the intelligence last week,” he said. “Iran posed no imminent threat of attack to the United States.”

Global reactions, politics and diplomacy

• The United Nations Security Council convened an emergency session following the US-led strikes, prompting sharp rebukes from several member states, and renewed calls for a ceasefire in the Middle East, as allies Israel and the US lauded the attack.

• UN chief Antonio Guterres warned the region stood “on the brink of a deadly downward spiral.”

• The head of the International Committee of the Red Cross said international law isn’t a choice but an obligation.

• China “strongly condemned” the US attack, noting its nuclear facilities were under the safeguards of the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency.

• Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, said the “absolute majority” of nations are against “the actions of Israel and the United States”.
• Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Palestinian group Hamas and Yemen’s Houthis, all allies of Iran, condemned what Hezbollah called the “barbaric and treacherous” US attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

• Saudi Arabia said that it’s “following with deep concern the developments in the Islamic Republic of Iran, particularly the targeting of Iranian nuclear facilities by the United States of America.”
• Gulf nations Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates all also expressed concern over what the attacks could portend for the region.
• Turkiye’s Foreign Ministry warned that the US strikes have made the risk of escalation more likely.
• British Prime Minister Keir Starmer backed the US military action, saying the attacks “alleviate” the “threat” posed by Tehran’s nuclear programme.
• The European Union’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, is calling for a return to dialogue. “Iran must not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon,” she said, “as it would be a threat to international security.”

Tensions soar at UN as Iran, allies condemn US military action, while US, Israel reject censure.

The United Nations Security Council has convened an emergency session following US-led strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, prompting sharp rebukes from several member states and renewed calls for a ceasefire in the Middle East, as allies Israel and the US lauded the attack.

Russia, China and Pakistan have proposed a resolution demanding an “immediate and unconditional ceasefire”, according to diplomats familiar with the draft circulated on Sunday. While the proposal does not explicitly name the United States or Israel, it condemns the attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities. A vote has not yet been scheduled.

To pass, the resolution requires the backing of at least nine members and no vetoes from the five permanent members — the US, UK, France, Russia and China, which makes it a non-starter since the US will not censure itself.

Speaking to the Council, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned the region stood “on the brink of a deadly downward spiral.”

“The bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities by the United States marks a perilous turn in a region that is already reeling,” Guterres said. “We now risk descending into a rathole of retaliation after retaliation. We must act – immediately and decisively – to halt the fighting and return to serious, sustained negotiations on the Iran nuclear programme.”

Acting US ambassador Dorothy Shea defended the military action, stating that Washington had moved to dismantle Iran’s enrichment capacity in order to protect both its citizens and allies.

“The time finally came for the United States, in defence of its ally and our own interests, to act decisively,” Shea told the chamber. “Iran should not escalate… any Iranian attack, direct or indirect, against Americans or American bases will be met with devastating retaliation.”

Iran’s Ambassador Ali Bahreini said the Israeli and US attacks on Iran did not come about “in a vacuum”, adding that they are the result of “politically motivated actions” of the US and its European partners.

He said the US “decided to destroy diplomacy” and pointedly made it clear that the Iranian military will decide on the  “timing, nature and scale” of its response.

Meanwhile, Israel’s UN envoy Danny Danon said the attacks had made the world “a safer place”, rejecting calls for condemnation. “That’s for the Iranian people to decide, not for us,” he said when asked whether Israel supported regime change in Tehran

China’s ambassador Fu Cong condemned the US strikes and urged restraint. “We call for an immediate ceasefire,” he said. “China is deeply concerned about the risk of the situation getting out of control.”

Russia’s UN envoy Vasily Nebenzya described the attacks as yet another sign of Washington’s disregard for global norms. “The US has opened a Pandora’s box,” he said. “No one knows what catastrophe or suffering will follow.”

Pakistan’s ambassador Asim Iftikhar Ahmad also condemned the US bombing, calling it deeply troubling. “The sharp rise in tensions and violence as a result of Israeli aggression and unlawful actions is profoundly disturbing,” he said. “Pakistan stands in solidarity with the government and brotherly people of Iran during this challenging time.” This came the day after Pakistan suggested US President Donald Trump be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Trump’s announcement that American forces had “obliterated” Iran’s key nuclear sites marked the most significant Western military action against Tehran since the 1979 revolution.

The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, told the Council that while the scale of underground damage remains unclear, impact craters were visible at the Fordow enrichment site. The entrances to tunnels at Isfahan appeared to have been struck, while Natanz — long a target of Israeli sabotage — had been hit again.

Iran has castigated Grossi for being complicit in paving the way for Israel and the US to attack it.

The United Nations nuclear watchdog’s Board of Governors approved a resolution declaring Iran was not complying with its commitment to international nuclear safeguards the day before Israel launched its initial attack on June 13.

June 20 (UPI) — Tesla Friday signed a $556.8 million agreement to build a grid-scale battery storage station in China.

The deal is with China Kangfu International Leasing Co., as well as the Shanghai local government.

It’s the first Tesla large-scale battery storage facility in China.

In a statement on Chinese social media site Weibo, Tesla said, “Tesla’s first grid-side energy storage power station project in mainland China has been officially signed.The grid-side energy storage power station is a ‘smart regulator’ for urban electricity, which can flexibly adjust grid resources.”

Tesla said that, when complete, this project is expected to become the largest grid-side energy storage project in China.

Utility-scale battery energy storage assists energy grid management by keeping supply and demand in balance. More is being built worldwide.

Tesla competed against two Chinese companies that offer similar products. CATL and automaker BYD have significant global market share in these battery storage products.

China plans to add nearly 5 gigawatts of electricity supply powered by batteries by the end of 2025, which would bring the total capacity to 40 gigawatts.

Dispatches from northern China, Jia Zhangke’s movies constitute their own cinematic universe. Repeatedly returning to themes of globalization and alienation, the 55-year-old director has meticulously chronicled his country’s uneasy plunge into the 21st century as rampant industrialization risks deadening those left behind.

But his latest drama, “Caught by the Tides,” which opens at the Frida Cinema today, presents a bold, reflexive remix of his preoccupations. Drawing from nearly 25 years of footage, including images from his most acclaimed films, Jia has crafted a poignant new story with an assist from fragments of old tales. He has always been interested in how the weight of time bears down on his characters — now his actors age in front of our eyes.

When “Caught by the Tides” premiered at last year’s Cannes Film Festival, critics leaned on a handy, if somewhat inaccurate, comparison to describe Jia’s achievement: “Boyhood,” which followed a young actor over the course of 12 years, a new segment of the picture shot annually. But Richard Linklater preplanned his magnum opus. Jia, on the other hand, approached his film more accidentally, using the pandemic shutdown as an excuse to revisit his own archives.

“It struck me that the footage had no linear, cause-and-effect pattern,” Jia explained in a director’s statement. “Instead, there was a more complex relationship, not unlike something from quantum physics, in which the direction of life is influenced and ultimately determined by variable factors that are hard to pinpoint.”

The result is a story in three chapters, each one subtly building emotionally from the last. In the first, it is 2001, as Qiaoqiao (Zhao Tao) lives in Datong, where she dates Bin (Li Zhubin). Early on, Qiaoqiao gleefully sings with friends, but it will be the last time we hear her voice. It’s a testament to Zhao’s arresting performance that many viewers may not notice her silence. She’s so present even without speaking, her alert eyes taking in everything, her understated reactions expressing plenty.

Young and with her whole life ahead of her, Qiaoqiao longs to be a singer, but her future is short-circuited by Bin’s text announcing that he’s leaving to seek better financial opportunities elsewhere. He promises to send word once he’s established himself, but we suspect she may never see this restless, callous schemer again. Not long after, Bin ghosts Qiaoqiao, prompting her to journey after him.

“Caught by the Tides” richly rewards viewers familiar with Jia’s filmography with scenes and outtakes from his earlier movies. Zhao, who in real life married Jia more than a decade ago, has been a highlight of his movies starting with his 2000 breakthrough “Platform,” and so when we see Qiaoqiao at the start of “Caught by the Tides,” we’re actually watching footage shot around that time. (Jia’s 2002 drama “Unknown Pleasures” starred Zhao as a budding singer named Qiaoqiao. Li also appeared in “Unknown Pleasures,” as well as subsequent Jia pictures.)

But the uninitiated shouldn’t feel intimidated to begin their Jia immersion here. Those new to his work will easily discern the film’s older footage, some of it captured on grainy DV cameras, while newer material boasts the elegant, widescreen compositions that have become his specialty. “Caught by the Tides” serves as a handy primer on Jia’s fascination with China’s political, cultural and economic evolution, amplifying those dependable themes with the benefit of working across a larger canvas of a quarter-century.

Still, by the time Qiaoqiao traverses the Yangtze River near the Three Gorges Dam — a controversial construction project that imperiled local small towns and provided the backdrop for Jia’s 2006 film “Still Life” — the director’s fans may feel a bittersweet sense of déjà vu. We have been here before, reminded of his earlier characters who similarly struggled to find love and purpose.

The film’s second chapter, which takes place during 2006, highlights Qiaoqiao’s romantic despair and, separately, Bin’s growing desperation to make a name for himself. (This isn’t the first Jia drama in which characters dabble in criminal activity.) By the time we arrive at the finale, set during the age of COVID anxiety, their inevitable reunion results in a moving resolution, one that suggests the ebb and flow of desire but, also, the passage of time’s inexorable erosion of individuals and nations.

Indeed, it’s not just Zhao and Li who look different by the end of “Caught by the Tides” but Shanxi Province itself — now a place of modern supermarkets, sculpted walkways and robots. Unchecked technological advancement is no longer a distant threat to China but a clear and present danger, dispassionately gobbling up communities, jobs and Qiaoqiao’s and Bin’s dreams. When these two former lovers see each other again, a lifetime having passed on screen, they don’t need words. In this beautiful summation work, Jia has said it all.

Taipei says an estimated 15 Chinese aircraft crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait on Friday.

Taiwan‘s defence ministry says that it has detected more than 70 Chinese military aircraft around the island in the last 24 hours, just days after a British naval vessel sailed through the sensitive Taiwan Strait.

The latest sightings reported on Friday come as Beijing continues to ramp up the deployment of fighter jets and naval vessels around Taiwan in recent months to press its claim of sovereignty of the island, which Taipei rejects.

Along with 50 aircraft, six Chinese naval vessels were detected in the 24 hours to 6am on Friday (22:00 GMT on Thursday), the defence ministry said.

An additional 24 Chinese aircraft, including fighters and drones, were spotted since 08:50am (00:50 GMT) on Friday, the ministry said in a separate statement.

Among the second batch of aircraft, 15 crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait in conducting air-sea joint training with Chinese naval vessels, the ministry said, adding it “monitored the situation and responded accordingly”.

China insists that democratic, self-ruled Taiwan is part of its territory and has threatened to use force to bring the island under its control. Taiwan has allied itself with the United States, angering Beijing.

The latest incursions came after the British Royal Navy patrol vessel HMS Spey sailed through the Taiwan Strait on June 18, Taiwan’s foreign ministry said on Thursday.

China strongly condemned Britain’s latest move as a deliberate attempt to “cause trouble”.

Britain’s Royal Navy said the patrol vessel conducted a routine navigation through the narrow waterway that was part of a long-planned deployment and took place in full compliance with international law.

The Eastern Theatre Command of China’s People’s Liberation Army said the Wednesday sailing of the ship was “public hyping” and that its forces followed and monitored the Spey.

The UK, United States and other countries view the 180km (112-mile) Taiwan Strait as international waters that should be open to all vessels.

In February, a Canadian warship also passed through the Strait, days after a US destroyer and a US ocean survey ship made the passage.

The last time a British Navy ship transited the Taiwan Strait was in 2021, when the HMS Richmond, a frigate deployed with Britain’s aircraft carrier strike group, sailed through from Japan to Vietnam.

In April, Taiwan detected 76 Chinese aircraft and 15 naval vessels around the island, when Beijing conducted live-fire exercises that included simulated strikes aimed at the island’s key ports and energy sites.

The highest number of Chinese aircraft recorded was 153 on October 15, 2024, after China staged large-scale military drills in response to a speech by Taiwan’s President William Lai Ching-te on National Day, days earlier.

The 22nd Shangri-La Dialogue, held in late May 2025 in Singapore, continued to clearly reflect the escalating strategic tensions between the United States and China in the Indo-Pacific region. Mutual criticism of freedom of navigation, militarization of the South China Sea, and the “rules-based” international order created an atmosphere of near-confrontation.

In that context, Vietnam—a country with a strategic position and close relations with both the United States and China—has once again attracted the attention of international analysts as a potential model of the “soft balancing” strategy. The question is, can Vietnam continue to maintain an independent and autonomous foreign policy while the great powers are increasingly exerting pressure?

US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s speech at Shangri-La Dialogue 2025 reaffirmed America’s “unwavering” commitment to the security of its allies and partners in Asia, with a particular emphasis on “freedom of navigation in the South China Sea” and opposition to “unilateral actions that change the status quo.” Hegseth also announced the expansion of defense cooperation with many Southeast Asian countries, including Vietnam.

In turn, China has criticized the United States for using the Shangri-La Dialogue to “create disputes, sow discord, provoke confrontation, and pursue selfish interests,” after US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth called China a threat in the Indo-Pacific region.

The war of words between the United States and China at Shangri-La 22 not only reflects the stance of the two powers but also an effort to shape the understanding of regional security, leaving countries like Vietnam facing many difficult choices.

Since 2023, when upgrading relations with the US to a “comprehensive strategic partnership,” Vietnam has entered a new phase in its policy of “multilateralization and diversification” of international relations. Bilateral trade turnover between Vietnam and the US has exceeded the 124 billion USD mark in 2024, while the US has also actively promoted cooperation in technology, cybersecurity, and maritime patrol support.

However, China remains Vietnam’s largest trading partner, with total two-way trade reaching a peak of over 230 billion USD in 2023. In addition, China is also an important source of input materials in many manufacturing and processing sectors.

Geostrategically, Vietnam is caught between two increasingly clear poles of influence. Leaning too heavily toward one side not only violates Hanoi’s principle of independent and autonomous diplomacy but also carries the risk of being drawn into conflicts that are not its own.

Vietnam’s “four no’s” defense policy—no participation in military alliances; no alliance with one country against another; no allowing foreign countries to set up military bases; No use of force or threat of use of force—continues to be affirmed after Shangri-La.

However, the challenge lies in practical implementation in the context of the US increasing its military presence in the East Sea, while China continues to consolidate artificial outposts and increase its maritime law enforcement forces.

Vietnam has been strengthening its defense capabilities, but it is not seeking a rigid alliance. Its defense procurement from multiple sources (Russia, Israel, South Korea, India, etc.) reflects its desire to maintain a flexible neutrality. In addition, Vietnam prioritizes bilateral and multilateral defense dialogues—including the ADMM+ and the ASEAN Maritime Security Capacity Building Initiative—to maintain regional stability.

For many experts, Vietnam is currently one of the few ASEAN countries with the capacity and courage to maintain a “dual pivot ”strategy”—maintaining warm relations with the US while maintaining stability with China. After the 22nd Shangri-La Dialogue, Vietnam will continue to play an active role in maintaining the stability of the regional power structure. By raising its voice, it will strengthen ASEAN’s central role, from the East Sea issue to building military-security dialogue mechanisms.

However, it cannot be denied that the increasing strategic pressure from both sides may hurt Vietnam’s independent policy space, especially when some countries in the region have begun to lean heavily towards one side; for example, the Philippines has increased military exercises and signed many extensive military agreements with the US.

Vietnam needs to continue moving in the direction of “not choosing sides, but choosing interests.” This means prioritizing substantive projects: energy transition, green technology, improving maritime security capacity, and responding to climate change.

Equally important is to promote bilateral and multilateral dialogue channels to resolve disagreements, especially the East Sea issue. In the context of the Code of Conduct (COC) still not reaching consensus after nearly two decades of negotiations, Vietnam’s proactive mediating role in ASEAN is extremely necessary.

Finally, Vietnam needs to invest more heavily in its domestic “strategic analytical capacity” and foreign policy advisory apparatus to provide flexible, realistic options and respond promptly to strategic movements in the region.

Thus, after the 22nd Shangri-La Dialogue, although no solution to regional security conflicts emerged, it was a clear reminder that US-China competition will continue, even more fiercely. In that environment, Vietnam has no other choice but to uphold the principles of independence, self-reliance, and cooperation while strengthening internal strength, expanding partnerships, and firmly maintaining a principled stance.

It is not an easy road. But as history has shown, Vietnam’s sobriety and steadfastness in the midst of major strategic currents is the foundation for long-term stability and development.