Amidst sequential escalation of US-China 'heated cold war', Pentagon has released a new report on January 16, airing US concerns about China’s growing military capability. The report highlights a contingency about a possible attack on Taiwan.

This is an important development after the coercive&nbsp;speech of Chinese President Xi Jinping at the beginning of 2019.

This Pentagon report, however, needs to be read in the context of US-China conflict.

The interpretation of the report indicates the expeditionary design of Chinese military strategy with global ambition, exploiting its increased ‘comprehensive national power’ (CNP) with improved technology, economics, military hardware. Chinese rapid advancement in hypersonic weaponry, cyber warfare, sea and air power have allowed it to look beyond its “active defence strategy” and slow-moving “incremental encroachment strategy”.

It puts a spotlight on the increasing number of bases which can be turned into military bases at short notice.&nbsp;The continuous increase in its defence budget has helped People's Liberation Army (PLA) to modernise, posing a serious challenge to regional neighbours.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;

The US position&nbsp;

As per the information in open domain, the report does not cover US position in response to Chinese growing military capability in the context of Taiwan as it is strategically important to them. In a joint communique with PRC (The People's Republic of China) in 1972, the US had adopted the line of declaration of independence by Taiwan.

The US, however, remains opposed to any unilateral changes in status quo by either side. The US will, therefore, like to have a democratic, independently governed Taiwan as an ally, where they have adequate strategic and economic leverage, instead of it forming part of Communist PRC. 
 
Neither Taiwan nor China nor the US have crossed the redline&nbsp;so far. The US security assurance in terms of Taiwan Relations Act, indirectly promises to make available "such defence equipment and services, as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defence capability."

Last year, the US defence budget was more than the next seven countries put together including China; I do not see China posing a military challenge or competition to the US in a global arena, however, in the near vicinity of its eastern seaboard, it may pose some challenge in the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait. The recently signed Taiwan Travel Act, the sale of military hardware to Taiwan indicates that the US is in no mood to give a walkover when it comes to Taiwan.

China's position

PRC claims Taiwan as its integral part and is looking for its peaceful reunification, which continues to be a dream. PRC passed the Anti-Secession Law in 2005, authorising war - in case of island formally declaring statehood: hence any effort towards its independence will invite Chinese action to protect its sovereign territory. The speeches by Chinese president have brought the US and Taiwan much closer and much sooner than what Xi would have expected. Taiwan seems to have got bolder today and is talking of self-defence indicating that Chinese coercion has not worked so far.&nbsp;

Will China use force against Taiwan &nbsp;

President Xi Jinping has ordered the Southern Theatre Command, responsible for monitoring the South China Sea and Taiwan, to get ready for war, but in my opinion, China will not use force against Taiwan due to many reasons. First, adventurism by China in Taiwan at the time of trade war with the US does not make any economic sense as bulks of Taiwan’s investments are already in China with Taiwan having a trade surplus of approximately $30 billion with China. China gains nothing but has a lot to lose if it attacks Taiwan. Second, its adventurism will amount to crossing the red line defined by the US, which treats Taiwan no less than an ally.&nbsp;

The threatening speech by Chinese president against Taiwan and all the countries helping them is to deter Taiwan from getting stronger to pursue the path of independence. &nbsp; 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Amidst sequential escalation of US-China 'heated cold war', Pentagon has released a new report on January 16, airing US concerns about China’s growing military capability.

Amidst sequential escalation of US-China 'heated cold war', Pentagon has released a new report on January 16, airing US concerns about China’s growing military capability. The report highlights a contingency about a possible attack on Taiwan. This is an important development after the coercive speech of Chinese President Xi Jinping at the beginning of 2019. This Pentagon report, however, needs to be read in the context of US-China conflict. The interpretation of the report indicates the expeditionary design of Chinese military strategy with global ambition, exploiting its increased ‘comprehensive national power’ (CNP) with improved technology, economics, military hardware. Chinese rapid advancement in hypersonic weaponry, cyber warfare, sea and air power have allowed it to look beyond its “active defence strategy” and slow-moving “incremental encroachment strategy”. It puts a spotlight on the increasing number of bases which can be turned into military bases at short notice. The continuous increase in its defence budget has helped People's Liberation Army (PLA) to modernise, posing a serious challenge to regional neighbours. The US position As per the information in open domain, the report does not cover US position in response to Chinese growing military capability in the context of Taiwan as it is strategically important to them. In a joint communique with PRC (The People's Republic of China) in 1972, the US had adopted the line of declaration of independence by Taiwan. The US, however, remains opposed to any unilateral changes in status quo by either side. The US will, therefore, like to have a democratic, independently governed Taiwan as an ally, where they have adequate strategic and economic leverage, instead of it forming part of Communist PRC. Neither Taiwan nor China nor the US have crossed the redline so far. The US security assurance in terms of Taiwan Relations Act, indirectly promises to make available "such defence equipment and services, as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defence capability." Last year, the US defence budget was more than the next seven countries put together including China; I do not see China posing a military challenge or competition to the US in a global arena, however, in the near vicinity of its eastern seaboard, it may pose some challenge in the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait. The recently signed Taiwan Travel Act, the sale of military hardware to Taiwan indicates that the US is in no mood to give a walkover when it comes to Taiwan. China's position PRC claims Taiwan as its integral part and is looking for its peaceful reunification, which continues to be a dream. PRC passed the Anti-Secession Law in 2005, authorising war - in case of island formally declaring statehood: hence any effort towards its independence will invite Chinese action to protect its sovereign territory. The speeches by Chinese president have brought the US and Taiwan much closer and much sooner than what Xi would have expected. Taiwan seems to have got bolder today and is talking of self-defence indicating that Chinese coercion has not worked so far. Will China use force against Taiwan President Xi Jinping has ordered the Southern Theatre Command, responsible for monitoring the South China Sea and Taiwan, to get ready for war, but in my opinion, China will not use force against Taiwan due to many reasons. First, adventurism by China in Taiwan at the time of trade war with the US does not make any economic sense as bulks of Taiwan’s investments are already in China with Taiwan having a trade surplus of approximately $30 billion with China. China gains nothing but has a lot to lose if it attacks Taiwan. Second, its adventurism will amount to crossing the red line defined by the US, which treats Taiwan no less than an ally. The threatening speech by Chinese president against Taiwan and all the countries helping them is to deter Taiwan from getting stronger to pursue the path of independence. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Decoding report which raises concerns over China attacking Taiwan

Canada's ambassador met in Beijing Friday with a detained former diplomat for the first time since he was arrested in China amid sharpening East-West tensions over trade and other issues.

Michael Kovrig, the former diplomat, and a second Canadian, Michael Spavor, were taken into custody earlier in the week after a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/do-not-politicise-extradition-cases-canada-warns-us-183654">top Chinese tech executive was arrested</a> in Vancouver at the request of the United States.

Canada's foreign ministry said its ambassador to Beijing, John McCallum, was granted consular access to Kovrig and is pressing for access to Spavor. Speaking to The Canadian Press, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau predicted that access would take place "shortly."

"We are being absolutely clear on standing up for our citizens who have been detained, trying to figure out why, trying to work with China to demonstrate that this not acceptable," he told Citytv in Toronto.

Meanwhile, in Washington, Canada's foreign and defence ministers held talks with their US counterparts on the row.

The Canadians were arrested for what China has said is suspicion of "harm to national security" -- a phrase often used by Beijing when alleging espionage.

But the detentions are widely believed to be retaliation for Canada's arrest December 1 of Meng Wanzhou, the chief financial officer of Chinese telecom giant Huawei.

Meng was arrested while changing planes in Vancouver, outraging China and sparking a diplomatic standoff between the North American allies and Beijing.

"This is one of the situations you get in when the two largest economies in the world, China and the United States, start picking a fight with each other," Trudeau said.&nbsp;

"The escalating trade war between them is going to have all sorts of unintended consequences for Canada, potentially the entire global economy. We're very worried about that."

The United States has accused her of lying to bankers about the use of a covert subsidiary to sell to Iran in breach of sanctions. If convicted, she faces more than 30 years in prison.

On Tuesday, a Canadian judge ordered Meng's release on Can$10 million ($7.5 million US) bail, pending a US extradition hearing.

Visit shelved

Canadian Tourism Minister Melanie Joly, meanwhile, shelved a trip to China next week to promote tourism.

Since Beijing approved Canada as a tourist destination for its citizens in 2010, the number of Chinese tourists visiting Canada has risen by 20 percent per year to almost 700,000 in 2017.

Ottawa had hoped to double the figure by 2021, opening seven new visa application offices in China this year to facilitate the processing of travel documents. But those targets are now in doubt amid a public backlash in China.

Kovrig, who works for the International Crisis Group (ICG) think tank, was being investigated by the Beijing bureau of state security, while the agency's office in northeastern Liaoning province was handling the probe into Spavor, Lu said.

Spavor is a China-based business consultant who facilitates trips to North Korea, met with its leader Kim Jong Un and arranged some of retired NBA star Dennis Rodman's trips to the country.

China's foreign ministry said ICG was not registered in China and its employees would be "in violation" of the law if they engage in activities in the country.

ICG closed its office in the Chinese capital after Beijing passed a law on NGOs, which came into force in 2017, to better control the activities on its soil of foreign organizations.

Kovrig was based in Hong Kong for ICG, working on foreign policy and security issues in the region, particularly on the Korean Peninsula.

Canada's ambassador met in Beijing Friday with a detained former diplomat for the first time since he was arrested in China amid sharpening East-West tensions over trade and other issues.

Canada's ambassador met in Beijing Friday with a detained former diplomat for the first time since he was arrested in China amid sharpening East-West tensions over trade and other issues. Michael Kovrig, the former diplomat, and a second Canadian, Michael Spavor, were taken into custody earlier in the week after a top Chinese tech executive was arrested in Vancouver at the request of the United States. Canada's foreign ministry said its ambassador to Beijing, John McCallum, was granted consular access to Kovrig and is pressing for access to Spavor. Speaking to The Canadian Press, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau predicted that access would take place "shortly." "We are being absolutely clear on standing up for our citizens who have been detained, trying to figure out why, trying to work with China to demonstrate that this not acceptable," he told Citytv in Toronto. Meanwhile, in Washington, Canada's foreign and defence ministers held talks with their US counterparts on the row. The Canadians were arrested for what China has said is suspicion of "harm to national security" -- a phrase often used by Beijing when alleging espionage. But the detentions are widely believed to be retaliation for Canada's arrest December 1 of Meng Wanzhou, the chief financial officer of Chinese telecom giant Huawei. Meng was arrested while changing planes in Vancouver, outraging China and sparking a diplomatic standoff between the North American allies and Beijing. "This is one of the situations you get in when the two largest economies in the world, China and the United States, start picking a fight with each other," Trudeau said. "The escalating trade war between them is going to have all sorts of unintended consequences for Canada, potentially the entire global economy. We're very worried about that." The United States has accused her of lying to bankers about the use of a covert subsidiary to sell to Iran in breach of sanctions. If convicted, she faces more than 30 years in prison. On Tuesday, a Canadian judge ordered Meng's release on Can$10 million ($7.5 million US) bail, pending a US extradition hearing. Visit shelved Canadian Tourism Minister Melanie Joly, meanwhile, shelved a trip to China next week to promote tourism. Since Beijing approved Canada as a tourist destination for its citizens in 2010, the number of Chinese tourists visiting Canada has risen by 20 percent per year to almost 700,000 in 2017. Ottawa had hoped to double the figure by 2021, opening seven new visa application offices in China this year to facilitate the processing of travel documents. But those targets are now in doubt amid a public backlash in China. Kovrig, who works for the International Crisis Group (ICG) think tank, was being investigated by the Beijing bureau of state security, while the agency's office in northeastern Liaoning province was handling the probe into Spavor, Lu said. Spavor is a China-based business consultant who facilitates trips to North Korea, met with its leader Kim Jong Un and arranged some of retired NBA star Dennis Rodman's trips to the country. China's foreign ministry said ICG was not registered in China and its employees would be "in violation" of the law if they engage in activities in the country. ICG closed its office in the Chinese capital after Beijing passed a law on NGOs, which came into force in 2017, to better control the activities on its soil of foreign organizations. Kovrig was based in Hong Kong for ICG, working on foreign policy and security issues in the region, particularly on the Korean Peninsula.

Canada granted consular access to ex-diplomat held by China: Official

President Donald Trump on Friday predicted a major <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-and-china-called-a-truce-in-the-trade-war-now-what-181070">US-China trade deal</a> in the near future, saying that Beijing's negotiating position had been weakened by the impact of the tariffs war between the world's top two economies.

"China wants to make a big and very comprehensive deal. It could happen, and rather soon!" Trump tweeted.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
China just announced that their economy is growing much slower than anticipated because of our Trade War with them. They have just suspended U.S. Tariff Hikes. U.S. is doing very well. China wants to make a big and very comprehensive deal. It could happen, and rather soon!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1073617541476569088?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 14, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

His optimism followed China's decision earlier Friday to back off from extra punitive duties that had been imposed this summer on US-made cars and auto parts.

The move was seen as the first concrete result of the US leader's<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-china-agree-to-trade-war-ceasefire-more-talks-180930"> G20 talks with his counterpart Xi Jinping </a>earlier this month.

Those tariffs now fall from 40 per cent to 15 per cent -- the same rate imposed on all foreign-made vehicles. The relief will last for three months from January 1.

"Suspension of the tariffs is a concrete measure to implement the consensus reached by the two heads of state," said the announcement by the State Council's Tariff Commission Office, noting it applied to 211 product codes.

Trump said the climbdown showed that China had been forced to blink in their on-off spat, after months of heavy <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/china-envoy-warns-of-dire-consequences-if-us-hardliners-hold-sway-179861">US tariffs</a> on Chinese imports.

"China just announced that their economy is growing much slower than anticipated because of our Trade War with them. They have just suspended U.S. Tariff Hikes. US&nbsp;is doing very well," Trump said.

Beijing's move also demonstrated that talks to resolve the trade conflict have survived the tension sparked by Canada's arrest of a top Chinese telecom executive at the behest of US law enforcement.

Meng Wanzhou, chief financial officer of telecoms behemoth Huawei, has been released on bail in Canada. China wants her unconditional release. Washington wants her extradited for allegedly violating US sanctions on Iran.

China apparently retaliated by detaining two Canadians on suspicion of "harm to national security" -- a phrase often used by Beijing when alleging espionage.

Washington insists that the case is driven purely by the US Justice Department, rather than anything to do with the trade dispute, but Trump has muddied the waters by suggesting he might intervene if that would help the trade talks.

Tit for tat

Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping agreed on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Buenos Aires on December 1 to a 90-day truce while they tried to find a solution to the escalating trade dispute.

Confusion and unease over what agreement the two sides reached in Argentina has roiled stock markets.

But trade negotiators talked on the phone this week to discuss a timetable for talks. Friday's announcement in Beijing also confirms what Trump said on December 2 about China acting on the auto tariffs.

"We hope that both sides will -- in accordance with the consensus reached by the two heads of state, on the premise of mutual respect, mutual equality, faithfulness, words and actions -- intensify consultations in the direction of cancelling all of the extra tariff increases," the State Council's statement said.

Stand to benefit

The tariff suspension will benefit US carmakers like Tesla and Ford which have seen China sales tumble.

"It is essential that governments work together to advance balanced and fair trade. We look forward to learning more," a spokesman for Ford said after Trump announced China would cut car tariffs.

International automakers Daimler, maker of the Mercedes-Benz, and BMW have also exported American-made SUVs to China.

US exports to China fell 25 per cent on-year in November as the higher tariffs on hundreds of American goods hurt demand.

In another signal that China may move to satisfy Trump, the country's top legislature announced Friday that it would hold a session from December 23-29 to discuss legislation on foreign investment and draft revisions to the patent law.

The United States has long complained of a lack of fair access for foreign companies in China and rampant theft of intellectual property.

For now, the National People's Congress Standing Committee has not provided details about the draft legislation.

Maintaining and resolving the trade truce could help stabilize sentiment in China, where confidence in the economy has been hurt by the trade frictions with Washington.

Earlier on Friday, economic data showed Chinese consumer spending grew at its slowest pace in 15 years and factories eased up in November, raising the prospect that Beijing could turn to fresh stimulus measures to help the sputtering economy.

China's top officials on the Politburo said in a statement Thursday that major economic indicators will be kept within a reasonable range next year.

"The meeting also signalled further market opening," economists at Trivium Research wrote in a newsletter.

President Donald Trump on Friday predicted a major US-China trade deal in the near future, saying that Beijing's negotiating position had been weakened by the impact of the tariffs war between the world's top two economies.

President Donald Trump on Friday predicted a major US-China trade deal in the near future, saying that Beijing's negotiating position had been weakened by the impact of the tariffs war between the world's top two economies. "China wants to make a big and very comprehensive deal. It could happen, and rather soon!" Trump tweeted. China just announced that their economy is growing much slower than anticipated because of our Trade War with them. They have just suspended U.S. Tariff Hikes. U.S. is doing very well. China wants to make a big and very comprehensive deal. It could happen, and rather soon! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 14, 2018 × His optimism followed China's decision earlier Friday to back off from extra punitive duties that had been imposed this summer on US-made cars and auto parts. The move was seen as the first concrete result of the US leader's G20 talks with his counterpart Xi Jinping earlier this month. Those tariffs now fall from 40 per cent to 15 per cent -- the same rate imposed on all foreign-made vehicles. The relief will last for three months from January 1. "Suspension of the tariffs is a concrete measure to implement the consensus reached by the two heads of state," said the announcement by the State Council's Tariff Commission Office, noting it applied to 211 product codes. Trump said the climbdown showed that China had been forced to blink in their on-off spat, after months of heavy US tariffs on Chinese imports. "China just announced that their economy is growing much slower than anticipated because of our Trade War with them. They have just suspended U.S. Tariff Hikes. US is doing very well," Trump said. Beijing's move also demonstrated that talks to resolve the trade conflict have survived the tension sparked by Canada's arrest of a top Chinese telecom executive at the behest of US law enforcement. Meng Wanzhou, chief financial officer of telecoms behemoth Huawei, has been released on bail in Canada. China wants her unconditional release. Washington wants her extradited for allegedly violating US sanctions on Iran. China apparently retaliated by detaining two Canadians on suspicion of "harm to national security" -- a phrase often used by Beijing when alleging espionage. Washington insists that the case is driven purely by the US Justice Department, rather than anything to do with the trade dispute, but Trump has muddied the waters by suggesting he might intervene if that would help the trade talks. Tit for tat Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping agreed on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Buenos Aires on December 1 to a 90-day truce while they tried to find a solution to the escalating trade dispute. Confusion and unease over what agreement the two sides reached in Argentina has roiled stock markets. But trade negotiators talked on the phone this week to discuss a timetable for talks. Friday's announcement in Beijing also confirms what Trump said on December 2 about China acting on the auto tariffs. "We hope that both sides will -- in accordance with the consensus reached by the two heads of state, on the premise of mutual respect, mutual equality, faithfulness, words and actions -- intensify consultations in the direction of cancelling all of the extra tariff increases," the State Council's statement said. Stand to benefit The tariff suspension will benefit US carmakers like Tesla and Ford which have seen China sales tumble. "It is essential that governments work together to advance balanced and fair trade. We look forward to learning more," a spokesman for Ford said after Trump announced China would cut car tariffs. International automakers Daimler, maker of the Mercedes-Benz, and BMW have also exported American-made SUVs to China. US exports to China fell 25 per cent on-year in November as the higher tariffs on hundreds of American goods hurt demand. In another signal that China may move to satisfy Trump, the country's top legislature announced Friday that it would hold a session from December 23-29 to discuss legislation on foreign investment and draft revisions to the patent law. The United States has long complained of a lack of fair access for foreign companies in China and rampant theft of intellectual property. For now, the National People's Congress Standing Committee has not provided details about the draft legislation. Maintaining and resolving the trade truce could help stabilize sentiment in China, where confidence in the economy has been hurt by the trade frictions with Washington. Earlier on Friday, economic data showed Chinese consumer spending grew at its slowest pace in 15 years and factories eased up in November, raising the prospect that Beijing could turn to fresh stimulus measures to help the sputtering economy. China's top officials on the Politburo said in a statement Thursday that major economic indicators will be kept within a reasonable range next year. "The meeting also signalled further market opening," economists at Trivium Research wrote in a newsletter.

'Big' China-US trade deal could happen rather soon : Trump

India's bid to start trade with China in domestic currency has suffered a setback when China outrightly rejected the demand. The move could have not only helped India bridge the trade deficit with China but could also have acted as a booster for the depreciating rupee.

The trade deficit between the two Asian neighbours has ballooned to $63 billion in China's favour. This is over a nine-fold increase over the past decade, claimed a Reuters report.&nbsp;

India's export to China has improved in the last few years but there hasn't been any colossal change in the trends. It's export to China had grown by 13 per cent in FY17, by 31 per cent in FY18, and by around 17 per cent in the first half of FY19.&nbsp;

While India wants to supply more sugar, medicines, soymeal, rapeseed meal, and rice to China, the latter want to increase its export of dairy products, apples and pears.&nbsp;

The meeting between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of G20 Summit has not yielded anything good for India except a progress in talks.&nbsp;

China had imposed a ban on Soymeal import from India over quality issues in 2011. India is trying hard to get the ban removed. Also, the trade tariff truce between China and the US is good news for global markets but not for India.&nbsp;

India and China need to iron out their differences as neither of the two neighbours can afford to sit back comfortably amid&nbsp;uncertainty about the US trade policy.

However, bridging a trade deficit of this magnitude will not be an easy task for India especially when the Sino-US trade battle is seeing a temporary truce. The escalation of the issue may have forced China to look for alternatives like India. Nonetheless, the trade war is a temporary solution. China and India must work collectively to find a permanent solution to the persisting issues.

As of now, India is trying to catch a train which has just left the platform with China onboard.&nbsp; 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

India's bid to start trade with China in domestic currency has suffered a setback when China outrightly rejected the demand. The move could have not only helped India bridge the trade deficit with China but could also have acted as a booster for the depreciating rupee.

India's bid to start trade with China in domestic currency has suffered a setback when China outrightly rejected the demand. The move could have not only helped India bridge the trade deficit with China but could also have acted as a booster for the depreciating rupee. The trade deficit between the two Asian neighbours has ballooned to $63 billion in China's favour. This is over a nine-fold increase over the past decade, claimed a Reuters report. India's export to China has improved in the last few years but there hasn't been any colossal change in the trends. It's export to China had grown by 13 per cent in FY17, by 31 per cent in FY18, and by around 17 per cent in the first half of FY19. While India wants to supply more sugar, medicines, soymeal, rapeseed meal, and rice to China, the latter want to increase its export of dairy products, apples and pears. The meeting between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of G20 Summit has not yielded anything good for India except a progress in talks. China had imposed a ban on Soymeal import from India over quality issues in 2011. India is trying hard to get the ban removed. Also, the trade tariff truce between China and the US is good news for global markets but not for India. India and China need to iron out their differences as neither of the two neighbours can afford to sit back comfortably amid uncertainty about the US trade policy. However, bridging a trade deficit of this magnitude will not be an easy task for India especially when the Sino-US trade battle is seeing a temporary truce. The escalation of the issue may have forced China to look for alternatives like India. Nonetheless, the trade war is a temporary solution. China and India must work collectively to find a permanent solution to the persisting issues. As of now, India is trying to catch a train which has just left the platform with China onboard. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

India, China must take steps to bridge trade deficit

The United States has delivered Russia a 60-day ultimatum on Tuesday to come “clean” about what Washington says is a violation of the 1987 nuclear arms control treaty, saying it would be forced to start a six-month process of withdrawal if nothing changes.&nbsp;

In response, Putin, in televised comments, accused the United States of blaming Russia for violations as a pretext for Washington to exit the pact. A tripolar world is in the offing or appears to have already crystallised as the 21st century meanders on. The nature of this sparring suggests that some kind or sort of a putative confrontation is welling up between the United States and Russia.&nbsp;

Whether or not, this particular spat denotes into something ungainly might be beside the point. But, what can be culled from it is that world politics is or actually has moved beyond the post-cold war “unipolarity”. We might be witnessing the emergence or even crystallisation of a tripolar international system. (Polarity is a term that denotes the number of “poles” or power centres in the international system).

The United States, Russia and China appear to be the main contenders and competitors in the emerging international politics and the international system. The tripolar world that is emerging is unlike the system structure of bipolarity that was the defining feature of world politics after World War 3. This time around then instead of the two poles, the former Soviet Union and the United States which, obiter dictum, accorded some degree of stability to the system, there are three poles.

But, this is not the whole “ story” or picture.

&nbsp;The interesting feature of the tripolar system is the different trajectories of the three contenders and the structural context. Consider China first. The country “emerged” after its historic 1978 reforms which entailed a comprehensive modernisation of its economy, opening up to the world, ensconcing the country in the sinews of globalisation but, at the same time, retaining its political system and ideology thereof. All this laid the basis of China’s military modernisation and putative Great Power status.

Russia, after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, has been on a revanchist course. It has employed hybrid techniques to what it thinks is reclaiming its erstwhile Great Power status. The country, akin to a judo player, is punching above its weight with great success.

The United States, albeit still a power to reckon with, having a lead in almost all indices of power is in relative decline. And, with an “insurgent” in the White House, in the form of Donald Trump, who is upending the rules, norms and regimes of the post war liberal order, the country thinks that by being pugnacious, it can rejig world politics and international relations to its advantage.

This is the structural context and nature of international relations in the second decade of the 21st century.

The question now is: how will tripolarity pan out? Will there be great power conflict and war? Or, can countervailing factors dampen and ameliorate this potential conflict?

As the spat between the United States and Russia suggests, there might accrue militarisation of foreign policies of major states. This means military build-ups, intense security dilemmas and arms races. The world then might be armed to the teeth, so to speak. That there would be tension is the axiomatic corollary that flows from militarisation of world politics. Various flashpoints in the world, the Middle East, the Koreas and even South Asia would then become more visible and significant in the foreign policies of the troika of Russia, the United States and China. (The site of jostling, jockeying and contention would also include the Indian Ocean Region(IoR).

All in all, the world will be a more tense and fraught place with the likelihood of a major military confrontation looking on the horizon. Will or can there be redemption? Perhaps.

But, this would lie in the return of vigorous and astute diplomacy. However, a more important countervailing force to intense and militarised conflict would be “complex interdependence”, that is, the thick flows and webs of crisscrossing commercial and capital flows that would enmesh countries in a paradigm, coming out or opting out of which would be to the detriment of each. &nbsp;As of now, however, it would appear that complex interdependence is waning or even dissipating. The challenge then for diplomacy and statecraft is to build and weave together this paradigm together, for peace within and without. The world and its people do not need a conflagration that is either an echo of 1914 or 1945, albeit in a permutation and combination that is far deadlier. Let sobriety, proportion and peace prevail!

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

The United States has delivered Russia a 60-day ultimatum on Tuesday to come “clean” about what Washington says is a violation of the 1987 nuclear arms control treaty, saying it would be forced to start a six-month process of withdrawal if nothing changes.

The United States has delivered Russia a 60-day ultimatum on Tuesday to come “clean” about what Washington says is a violation of the 1987 nuclear arms control treaty, saying it would be forced to start a six-month process of withdrawal if nothing changes. In response, Putin, in televised comments, accused the United States of blaming Russia for violations as a pretext for Washington to exit the pact. A tripolar world is in the offing or appears to have already crystallised as the 21st century meanders on. The nature of this sparring suggests that some kind or sort of a putative confrontation is welling up between the United States and Russia. Whether or not, this particular spat denotes into something ungainly might be beside the point. But, what can be culled from it is that world politics is or actually has moved beyond the post-cold war “unipolarity”. We might be witnessing the emergence or even crystallisation of a tripolar international system. (Polarity is a term that denotes the number of “poles” or power centres in the international system). The United States, Russia and China appear to be the main contenders and competitors in the emerging international politics and the international system. The tripolar world that is emerging is unlike the system structure of bipolarity that was the defining feature of world politics after World War 3. This time around then instead of the two poles, the former Soviet Union and the United States which, obiter dictum, accorded some degree of stability to the system, there are three poles. But, this is not the whole “ story” or picture. The interesting feature of the tripolar system is the different trajectories of the three contenders and the structural context. Consider China first. The country “emerged” after its historic 1978 reforms which entailed a comprehensive modernisation of its economy, opening up to the world, ensconcing the country in the sinews of globalisation but, at the same time, retaining its political system and ideology thereof. All this laid the basis of China’s military modernisation and putative Great Power status. Russia, after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, has been on a revanchist course. It has employed hybrid techniques to what it thinks is reclaiming its erstwhile Great Power status. The country, akin to a judo player, is punching above its weight with great success. The United States, albeit still a power to reckon with, having a lead in almost all indices of power is in relative decline. And, with an “insurgent” in the White House, in the form of Donald Trump, who is upending the rules, norms and regimes of the post war liberal order, the country thinks that by being pugnacious, it can rejig world politics and international relations to its advantage. This is the structural context and nature of international relations in the second decade of the 21st century. The question now is: how will tripolarity pan out? Will there be great power conflict and war? Or, can countervailing factors dampen and ameliorate this potential conflict? As the spat between the United States and Russia suggests, there might accrue militarisation of foreign policies of major states. This means military build-ups, intense security dilemmas and arms races. The world then might be armed to the teeth, so to speak. That there would be tension is the axiomatic corollary that flows from militarisation of world politics. Various flashpoints in the world, the Middle East, the Koreas and even South Asia would then become more visible and significant in the foreign policies of the troika of Russia, the United States and China. (The site of jostling, jockeying and contention would also include the Indian Ocean Region(IoR). All in all, the world will be a more tense and fraught place with the likelihood of a major military confrontation looking on the horizon. Will or can there be redemption? Perhaps. But, this would lie in the return of vigorous and astute diplomacy. However, a more important countervailing force to intense and militarised conflict would be “complex interdependence”, that is, the thick flows and webs of crisscrossing commercial and capital flows that would enmesh countries in a paradigm, coming out or opting out of which would be to the detriment of each. As of now, however, it would appear that complex interdependence is waning or even dissipating. The challenge then for diplomacy and statecraft is to build and weave together this paradigm together, for peace within and without. The world and its people do not need a conflagration that is either an echo of 1914 or 1945, albeit in a permutation and combination that is far deadlier. Let sobriety, proportion and peace prevail! (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

A Tripolar world portends a new Cold War

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) has agreed to hear complaints from a range of countries over United States’ steel and aluminium tariffs, as well as complaints from Washington over retaliatory duties. The August trade body’s Dispute Settlement Body(DBS) will establish panels to review US President Donald Trump's decision to hit a long line of countries with tariffs of 25 per cent on steel and 10 per cent on aluminium. In more senses than one, this is unalloyed good news.&nbsp;

The reasons pertain to the very nature of the WTO, the international trade and economics architecture which accrued from long and painful deliberations and negotiations post the Second World War and the extent global governance architecture and their survival.

It may be pointed out here that Donald Trump in his schemata and diagnosis of what plagued America, has opted for a narrow mercantilism and the protectionism that it entails, to “make America great again(MAGA). This approach as axiomatically entailed a confrontational stance not only with countries as diverse as China, Mexico, Canada and the European Union but also constitutes an assault on the intergovernmental and global governance architecture in place. 
&nbsp; 
The WTO, whose precursor was the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT), has been a positive enabler of and for global trade, so much so that after the inception of the GATT and the then WTO world trade demonstrated a stupendous increase, even more than world output.&nbsp;

While economists continue to debate, contend and even quibble over the contribution of freer trade to economic growth and development, it has been empirically demonstrated that over the past six decades or so, there has been an unprecedented decline in global poverty rates. This decline has been attributed to the freeing of trade in goods and, to an extent, services. The WTO and its precursor have been central to these sanguine developments. However, there has also been a corresponding increase in inequality in many countries, especially in the Western world, including the United States. The reasons accrue not merely from the nature of trade and trade opening but the political economy and inadequate policy grids to deal with freer trade and its immediate consequences.

The WTO not only brought freed trade but also brought countries closer and enmeshed these into a complex interdependence paradigm which has been held to be an antidote to political conflicts and even war. But, enter Trump, and his version of trade and trade policy, there has been a veritable assault not only on international relations and world order in place after the Second Great War but also on intergovernmental organizations like the WTO. If Trump succeeds in decimating this order, world politics and economics will devolve into a zero-sum game where states and nations will seek to take advantage over other states, among other things. This zero-sum competition will have spillover political consequences with global and local conflicts looming on the horizon.&nbsp;

The corollary effect would also be felt on globalisation (which has already been impeded) and will be supplanted by deglobalisation. Added up, the world will be actually poorer, in the expansive sense and definition of the term. Even the United States will not be immune to negative structural winds from deglobalisation and shrinkage of world trade. While there might be immediate “windfalls” to reap, in the long term, the country will also be stung. 
&nbsp; 
With no one to turn to for dispute resolution, the zero-sum conflict between constituent states of the international system, would not merely fracture the international trading system but also its apex bodies like the WTO, leading to anarchy in the economic, trade and financial domains.&nbsp;

However, now with the putative activism of the WTO’s &nbsp;Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), there are reasons for hope. The world trade architecture might be salvaged and its institutions might occupy “pride of place” over visceral and reflexive mercantilism and protectionism. In the ultimate analysis, as history demonstrates, trade cannot entirely be the solvent of political conflicts but it can, to a large extent, dissipate these. The Japanese trading state might serve as a classic example of trade and trade policy ameliorating the worst instincts of a given nation. 
 
Alarmingly, if the WTO does not step up or is actually ignored, the zero-sum economic competition could take an uglier form and shape, with political divisions and conflicts supplanting these. Saving the WTO and making it central to trade and its concomitants is then not only an economic imperative but also a political and a moral one.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) has agreed to hear complaints from a range of countries over United States’ steel and aluminium tariffs, as well as complaints from Washington over retaliatory duties.

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) has agreed to hear complaints from a range of countries over United States’ steel and aluminium tariffs, as well as complaints from Washington over retaliatory duties. The August trade body’s Dispute Settlement Body(DBS) will establish panels to review US President Donald Trump's decision to hit a long line of countries with tariffs of 25 per cent on steel and 10 per cent on aluminium. In more senses than one, this is unalloyed good news. The reasons pertain to the very nature of the WTO, the international trade and economics architecture which accrued from long and painful deliberations and negotiations post the Second World War and the extent global governance architecture and their survival. It may be pointed out here that Donald Trump in his schemata and diagnosis of what plagued America, has opted for a narrow mercantilism and the protectionism that it entails, to “make America great again(MAGA). This approach as axiomatically entailed a confrontational stance not only with countries as diverse as China, Mexico, Canada and the European Union but also constitutes an assault on the intergovernmental and global governance architecture in place. The WTO, whose precursor was the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT), has been a positive enabler of and for global trade, so much so that after the inception of the GATT and the then WTO world trade demonstrated a stupendous increase, even more than world output. While economists continue to debate, contend and even quibble over the contribution of freer trade to economic growth and development, it has been empirically demonstrated that over the past six decades or so, there has been an unprecedented decline in global poverty rates. This decline has been attributed to the freeing of trade in goods and, to an extent, services. The WTO and its precursor have been central to these sanguine developments. However, there has also been a corresponding increase in inequality in many countries, especially in the Western world, including the United States. The reasons accrue not merely from the nature of trade and trade opening but the political economy and inadequate policy grids to deal with freer trade and its immediate consequences. The WTO not only brought freed trade but also brought countries closer and enmeshed these into a complex interdependence paradigm which has been held to be an antidote to political conflicts and even war. But, enter Trump, and his version of trade and trade policy, there has been a veritable assault not only on international relations and world order in place after the Second Great War but also on intergovernmental organizations like the WTO. If Trump succeeds in decimating this order, world politics and economics will devolve into a zero-sum game where states and nations will seek to take advantage over other states, among other things. This zero-sum competition will have spillover political consequences with global and local conflicts looming on the horizon. The corollary effect would also be felt on globalisation (which has already been impeded) and will be supplanted by deglobalisation. Added up, the world will be actually poorer, in the expansive sense and definition of the term. Even the United States will not be immune to negative structural winds from deglobalisation and shrinkage of world trade. While there might be immediate “windfalls” to reap, in the long term, the country will also be stung. With no one to turn to for dispute resolution, the zero-sum conflict between constituent states of the international system, would not merely fracture the international trading system but also its apex bodies like the WTO, leading to anarchy in the economic, trade and financial domains. However, now with the putative activism of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), there are reasons for hope. The world trade architecture might be salvaged and its institutions might occupy “pride of place” over visceral and reflexive mercantilism and protectionism. In the ultimate analysis, as history demonstrates, trade cannot entirely be the solvent of political conflicts but it can, to a large extent, dissipate these. The Japanese trading state might serve as a classic example of trade and trade policy ameliorating the worst instincts of a given nation. Alarmingly, if the WTO does not step up or is actually ignored, the zero-sum economic competition could take an uglier form and shape, with political divisions and conflicts supplanting these. Saving the WTO and making it central to trade and its concomitants is then not only an economic imperative but also a political and a moral one. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Trade conflict: World Trade Organisation's primacy must be restored

American lawmakers recently created the International Development Finance Corporation (IDFC) to finance infrastructure projects in low-income countries. The IDFC’s primary aim is to counter China’s growing influence, and it signals a dramatic new chapter in the fragile relationship between the US and China.

Tensions between the two countries have been high, as they struggle over trade, intellectual property rights and military control of the South China Sea. They are now also racing to connect the world by financing large-scale infrastructure projects such as highways, railways and ports.

The IDFC enjoyed bipartisan support and was rushed through Congress as a matter of urgency. It was initially part of the BUILD Act, which was passed by the House of Representatives. The Senate then incorporated it into the FAA Reauthorization Act and passed it by a margin of 93-6 (with one abstention). The US president, Donald Trump, signed the IDFC into law while Capitol Hill was gripped by the bitter feud over the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

The 2008 financial crisis destabilised the so-called Chimerica order of the global economy, which balanced China’s export-led growth with a period of overconsumption in the US. Following the financial crisis, the Chinese government countered slackening demand from the US by financing infrastructure projects in low-income countries.

And so over the past decade, China has quietly become a leader in the construction sector and, according to some commentators, is poised to establish a global monopoly. Indeed, its signature Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) aims to integrate Asia, Africa and Europe via large-scale infrastructure projects. The World Bank has even suggested that the BRI may constitute “a new approach” to development.

Infrastructure-led connectivity 
 
The BRI is consistent with a global trend to enhance infrastructure-led connectivity. This prioritises long-distance and cross-border connections and infrastructure to link resource extraction, agribusiness and manufacturing with global markets and supply chains.

In addition to the BRI, examples from low and middle-income countries include the Greater Mekong Subregion in South-East Asia, and the Lamu Port, South Sudan, Ethiopia Transport Corridor (LAPSSET), in East Africa. While enhanced connectivity can indeed foster economic growth, it can also have harmful consequences, such as in South America where the extension of infrastructure networks in remote areas has caused rapid environmental degradation.

Nevertheless, from a realpolitik perspective, whichever country funds connective infrastructure initiatives can benefit by determining how territories are integrated into the global economy. Control of overseas ports, airports, railways and roadways can enable a country to align parts of the global economy with their own.

This explains why the race to connect the world is not limited to the US and China. The European Union has launched an initiative to invest in infrastructure that enhances its connectivity with Asia. Similarly, Japan, Australia, the UK and others in the G20 are active in the Global Infrastructure Hub, which was created to encourage private investment in connective infrastructure around the world.

The US strikes back 
 
The American IDFC differs from the EU and G20 initiatives because it signals that US policymakers intend to contain rather than compete with China. It has been granted an initial budget of $60 billion to invest in infrastructure projects in low-income countries, and this is designed to “provide countries with a robust alternative to state-directed investments by authoritarian governments”.

So how does it work? The IDFC is loosely modelled on the Chinese approach to infrastructure finance. Chinese development assistance is typically bilateral and prioritises long-term political objectives over profit. This explains why China funds infrastructure projects that institutional investors in the OECD deem too risky. The US is now taking on China by allowing the IDFC to operate in a similar fashion. Unencumbered by shareholder demands, the IDFC’s mandate is “to complement and be guided by overall United States foreign policy, development, and national security objectives”. In other words, it is meant to put politics before profit.

The question is whether this strategy really will contain China’s expanding sphere of influence.

Certainly, the IDFC needs a significantly larger budget to threaten China’s growing influence. After all, China finances multiple infrastructure projects beyond the BRI. In a recent summit with African leaders in Beijing, for example, Xi Jinping committed to invest $60 billion in the continent, independent of the BRI. Furthermore, China is the largest shareholder in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and enjoys influence in the New Development Bank – both of which also pursue objectives consistent with the BRI. Multilateral investment banks such as the World Bank have also already invested in infrastructure projects that complement the BRI.

Making growth sustainable and inclusive 
 
Ultimately, then, the IDFC will be unable to limit China’s growing influence with a mere $60 billion, and China’s sphere of influence will continue to expand regardless.

But the race to connect the world is significant because it will have tremendous impacts on emerging economies that suffer from inadequate infrastructure. Indeed, this scramble between the US and China will likely accelerate economic integration in places that have historically been isolated.

Both countries prioritise geopolitical objectives over developmental outcomes, so the challenge for recipient countries is to ensure such funding and initiatives foster sustainable, inclusive growth.

Chinese investment is required by Beijing to comply with local social and environmental laws, yet many low-income countries lack strong regulations. The IDFC, meanwhile, is required to “annually evaluate and report to the Board and Congress regarding compliance with environmental, social, labor, human rights, and transparency standards”. But it is unclear what standards the IDFC will embrace in any of these fields.

The quickening race between China and the US to connect the world does present opportunities for low-income countries held back by poor infrastructure. The question is whether the “beneficiaries” can ensure that the projects are sustainable and equitable in the long-run. If they can’t, much of the infrastructure will likely just further line American and Chinese pockets.

(Seth Schindler is Senior Lecturer in Urban Development &amp; Transformation, University of Manchester; &nbsp;Juan Miguel Kanai is Lecturer in Human Geography, University of Sheffield)

(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/us-sparks-new-development-race-with-china-but-can-it-win-105203">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

American lawmakers recently created the International Development Finance Corporation (IDFC) to finance infrastructure projects in low-income countries. The IDFC’s primary aim is to counter China’s growing influence, and it signals a dramatic new chapter in the fragile relationship between the US and China.

American lawmakers recently created the International Development Finance Corporation (IDFC) to finance infrastructure projects in low-income countries. The IDFC’s primary aim is to counter China’s growing influence, and it signals a dramatic new chapter in the fragile relationship between the US and China. Tensions between the two countries have been high, as they struggle over trade, intellectual property rights and military control of the South China Sea. They are now also racing to connect the world by financing large-scale infrastructure projects such as highways, railways and ports. The IDFC enjoyed bipartisan support and was rushed through Congress as a matter of urgency. It was initially part of the BUILD Act, which was passed by the House of Representatives. The Senate then incorporated it into the FAA Reauthorization Act and passed it by a margin of 93-6 (with one abstention). The US president, Donald Trump, signed the IDFC into law while Capitol Hill was gripped by the bitter feud over the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. The 2008 financial crisis destabilised the so-called Chimerica order of the global economy, which balanced China’s export-led growth with a period of overconsumption in the US. Following the financial crisis, the Chinese government countered slackening demand from the US by financing infrastructure projects in low-income countries. And so over the past decade, China has quietly become a leader in the construction sector and, according to some commentators, is poised to establish a global monopoly. Indeed, its signature Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) aims to integrate Asia, Africa and Europe via large-scale infrastructure projects. The World Bank has even suggested that the BRI may constitute “a new approach” to development. Infrastructure-led connectivity The BRI is consistent with a global trend to enhance infrastructure-led connectivity. This prioritises long-distance and cross-border connections and infrastructure to link resource extraction, agribusiness and manufacturing with global markets and supply chains. In addition to the BRI, examples from low and middle-income countries include the Greater Mekong Subregion in South-East Asia, and the Lamu Port, South Sudan, Ethiopia Transport Corridor (LAPSSET), in East Africa. While enhanced connectivity can indeed foster economic growth, it can also have harmful consequences, such as in South America where the extension of infrastructure networks in remote areas has caused rapid environmental degradation. Nevertheless, from a realpolitik perspective, whichever country funds connective infrastructure initiatives can benefit by determining how territories are integrated into the global economy. Control of overseas ports, airports, railways and roadways can enable a country to align parts of the global economy with their own. This explains why the race to connect the world is not limited to the US and China. The European Union has launched an initiative to invest in infrastructure that enhances its connectivity with Asia. Similarly, Japan, Australia, the UK and others in the G20 are active in the Global Infrastructure Hub, which was created to encourage private investment in connective infrastructure around the world. The US strikes back The American IDFC differs from the EU and G20 initiatives because it signals that US policymakers intend to contain rather than compete with China. It has been granted an initial budget of $60 billion to invest in infrastructure projects in low-income countries, and this is designed to “provide countries with a robust alternative to state-directed investments by authoritarian governments”. So how does it work? The IDFC is loosely modelled on the Chinese approach to infrastructure finance. Chinese development assistance is typically bilateral and prioritises long-term political objectives over profit. This explains why China funds infrastructure projects that institutional investors in the OECD deem too risky. The US is now taking on China by allowing the IDFC to operate in a similar fashion. Unencumbered by shareholder demands, the IDFC’s mandate is “to complement and be guided by overall United States foreign policy, development, and national security objectives”. In other words, it is meant to put politics before profit. The question is whether this strategy really will contain China’s expanding sphere of influence. Certainly, the IDFC needs a significantly larger budget to threaten China’s growing influence. After all, China finances multiple infrastructure projects beyond the BRI. In a recent summit with African leaders in Beijing, for example, Xi Jinping committed to invest $60 billion in the continent, independent of the BRI. Furthermore, China is the largest shareholder in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and enjoys influence in the New Development Bank – both of which also pursue objectives consistent with the BRI. Multilateral investment banks such as the World Bank have also already invested in infrastructure projects that complement the BRI. Making growth sustainable and inclusive Ultimately, then, the IDFC will be unable to limit China’s growing influence with a mere $60 billion, and China’s sphere of influence will continue to expand regardless. But the race to connect the world is significant because it will have tremendous impacts on emerging economies that suffer from inadequate infrastructure. Indeed, this scramble between the US and China will likely accelerate economic integration in places that have historically been isolated. Both countries prioritise geopolitical objectives over developmental outcomes, so the challenge for recipient countries is to ensure such funding and initiatives foster sustainable, inclusive growth. Chinese investment is required by Beijing to comply with local social and environmental laws, yet many low-income countries lack strong regulations. The IDFC, meanwhile, is required to “annually evaluate and report to the Board and Congress regarding compliance with environmental, social, labor, human rights, and transparency standards”. But it is unclear what standards the IDFC will embrace in any of these fields. The quickening race between China and the US to connect the world does present opportunities for low-income countries held back by poor infrastructure. The question is whether the “beneficiaries” can ensure that the projects are sustainable and equitable in the long-run. If they can’t, much of the infrastructure will likely just further line American and Chinese pockets. (Seth Schindler is Senior Lecturer in Urban Development & Transformation, University of Manchester; Juan Miguel Kanai is Lecturer in Human Geography, University of Sheffield) (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US sparks new development race with China – but can it win?

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/business-economy/full-blown-us-china-trade-war-will-slow-global-growth-by-less-than-1-imf-170313">Full-blown US-China trade war will slow global growth by less than 1%: IMF</a>

An all-out trade war would slow the growth of the global economy, but not stop its expansion, with the United States and China also escaping a recession, according to forecasts published Tuesday by the International Monetary Fund.

In its latest World Economic Outlook report, the IMF conducted a series of calculations of the impact from the trade tariffs that the administration of US President Donald Trump has already implemented and has threatened to impose, as well as reprisals from China and other nations.

Yet, even in its worst-case scenario, the IMF found that the disruption won't kill off growth and drag the global economy into recession.

 
<a href="http://www.wionews.com/business-economy/alphabet-to-shut-google-social-site-after-user-data-exposed-170306">Google+ to shut down after data of at least 500,000 users exposed</a>

Alphabet Inc's Google will shut down the consumer version of its failed social network Google+ and tighten its data sharing policies after announcing on Monday that private profile data of at least 500,000 users may have been exposed to hundreds of external developers.

The issue was discovered and patched in March as part of a review of how Google shares data with other applications, Google said in a blog post. No developer exploited the vulnerability or misused data, the review found.

 
<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/kavanaugh-seeks-new-tone-after-supreme-court-fight-trump-apologises-for-process-170304">Trump apologises to Kavanaugh, says he is innocent of sexual assault charges</a>

US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh sought to put a bruising confirmation battle behind him on Monday at a White House ceremony in which President Donald Trump declared him innocent of sexual misconduct and apologised for the heated process.

"On behalf of our nation, I want to apologise to Brett and the entire Kavanaugh family for the terrible pain and suffering you have been forced to endure," Trump said at the start of a ceremonial swearing-in in the East Room of the White House.

"Those who step forward to serve our country deserve a fair and dignified evaluation, not a campaign of political and personal destruction based on lies and deception," he said.

 
<a href="http://www.wionews.com/sports/jeremy-lalrinnunga-claims-indias-first-youth-olympics-gold-170318">Jeremy Lalrinnunga wins India's first Youth Olympics gold</a>

Weightlifter Jeremy Lalrinnunga notched up India's maiden gold medal at the Youth Olympics, claiming the top honours in the men's 62 kg category here.&nbsp;

The 15-year-old from Aizwal, who is also a world youth silver-medallist, lifted a total of 274 kg (124 kg +150 kg) to finish on top in the Argentine capital on Monday night.

 
<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-he-likes-taylor-swifts-music-about-25-less-after-she-endorses-democrats-170321">Trump says he likes Taylor Swift's music 'about 25% less' after she endorses Democrats</a>

US President Donald Trump has said he likes Taylor Swift's music "about 25 per cent less" after the pop superstar endorsed the Democrats running for office in Tennessee in the upcoming US midterm elections.&nbsp;Tennessee is Swift's home state.&nbsp;

Swift backed Phil Bredesen and Jim Cooper, who are running for the Senate and the House of Representatives. She also launched a fierce attack on Bredesen's opponent, the Republican Marsha Blackburn, who currently serves in the House.

Swift made her comments on Sunday on Instagram.&nbsp;

Full-blown US-China trade war will slow global growth by less than 1%: IMF An all-out trade war would slow the growth of the global economy, but not stop its expansion, with the United States and China also escaping a recession, according to forecasts published Tuesday by the International Monetary Fund.

Full-blown US-China trade war will slow global growth by less than 1%: IMF An all-out trade war would slow the growth of the global economy, but not stop its expansion, with the United States and China also escaping a recession, according to forecasts published Tuesday by the International Monetary Fund. In its latest World Economic Outlook report, the IMF conducted a series of calculations of the impact from the trade tariffs that the administration of US President Donald Trump has already implemented and has threatened to impose, as well as reprisals from China and other nations. Yet, even in its worst-case scenario, the IMF found that the disruption won't kill off growth and drag the global economy into recession. Google+ to shut down after data of at least 500,000 users exposed Alphabet Inc's Google will shut down the consumer version of its failed social network Google+ and tighten its data sharing policies after announcing on Monday that private profile data of at least 500,000 users may have been exposed to hundreds of external developers. The issue was discovered and patched in March as part of a review of how Google shares data with other applications, Google said in a blog post. No developer exploited the vulnerability or misused data, the review found. Trump apologises to Kavanaugh, says he is innocent of sexual assault charges US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh sought to put a bruising confirmation battle behind him on Monday at a White House ceremony in which President Donald Trump declared him innocent of sexual misconduct and apologised for the heated process. "On behalf of our nation, I want to apologise to Brett and the entire Kavanaugh family for the terrible pain and suffering you have been forced to endure," Trump said at the start of a ceremonial swearing-in in the East Room of the White House. "Those who step forward to serve our country deserve a fair and dignified evaluation, not a campaign of political and personal destruction based on lies and deception," he said. Jeremy Lalrinnunga wins India's first Youth Olympics gold Weightlifter Jeremy Lalrinnunga notched up India's maiden gold medal at the Youth Olympics, claiming the top honours in the men's 62 kg category here. The 15-year-old from Aizwal, who is also a world youth silver-medallist, lifted a total of 274 kg (124 kg +150 kg) to finish on top in the Argentine capital on Monday night. Trump says he likes Taylor Swift's music 'about 25% less' after she endorses Democrats US President Donald Trump has said he likes Taylor Swift's music "about 25 per cent less" after the pop superstar endorsed the Democrats running for office in Tennessee in the upcoming US midterm elections. Tennessee is Swift's home state. Swift backed Phil Bredesen and Jim Cooper, who are running for the Senate and the House of Representatives. She also launched a fierce attack on Bredesen's opponent, the Republican Marsha Blackburn, who currently serves in the House. Swift made her comments on Sunday on Instagram.

News brief: Big stories of the day

President Trump while unveiling the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), said that India wants to open trade talks with the US immediately.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/trump-looks-forward-visit-india-us-official-168366">Also Read:&nbsp;Trump looks forward to </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/trump-looks-forward-visit-india-us-official-168366">visit</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/trump-looks-forward-visit-india-us-official-168366"> India, says US official</a>

Calling India a&nbsp;"tariff king", Trump said: "India called us and they say, we want to start negotiations immediately."&nbsp;

On Saturday, Trump had said India does not want him to impose tariffs on Indian products reaching American shores. The US president had accused India of imposing 100 per cent tariffs on US&nbsp;products.

The president had earlier said that India enjoyed a competitive advantage over&nbsp;the US, asserting,"Take India. You talk about free trade. So, let's say they (Indians) charge us 60 per cent tariff on a product. And for the same product when they send it in (America), we charge them nothing. So now I want to charge them 25 per cent or 20 or 10 or something."

Trump had earlier slammed India for reported high import tariff on Harley-Davidson motorcycles calling it “unfair” even though India had cut import duty by upto 50 per cent.

Addressing a rally on Saturday, the president said he can give an example of other countries which are "brutal" at what they do to the United States. "I could give you (examples of) others that are brutal, just brutal what they do to us, how they take advantage of the stupidity. We never even had people negotiate, they just do whatever they want," the president told the rally.

The United States is India's biggest trading partner with two-way trade pegged at over $100 billion a year. India had earlier imposed retaliatory tariff on 29 US products worth $235 million after the US decided to impose import duties on Indian steel and aluminium.

The US is already engaged in an escalating trade war with China with both sides imposing tit-for-tat tariffs worth over $60 billion.

President Trump while unveiling the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), said that India wants to open trade talks with the US immediately. Also Read: Trump looks forward to visit India, says US official Calling India a "tariff king", Trump said: "India called us and they say, we want to start negotiations immediately.

President Trump while unveiling the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), said that India wants to open trade talks with the US immediately. Also Read: Trump looks forward to visit India, says US official Calling India a "tariff king", Trump said: "India called us and they say, we want to start negotiations immediately." On Saturday, Trump had said India does not want him to impose tariffs on Indian products reaching American shores. The US president had accused India of imposing 100 per cent tariffs on US products. The president had earlier said that India enjoyed a competitive advantage over the US, asserting,"Take India. You talk about free trade. So, let's say they (Indians) charge us 60 per cent tariff on a product. And for the same product when they send it in (America), we charge them nothing. So now I want to charge them 25 per cent or 20 or 10 or something." Trump had earlier slammed India for reported high import tariff on Harley-Davidson motorcycles calling it “unfair” even though India had cut import duty by upto 50 per cent. Addressing a rally on Saturday, the president said he can give an example of other countries which are "brutal" at what they do to the United States. "I could give you (examples of) others that are brutal, just brutal what they do to us, how they take advantage of the stupidity. We never even had people negotiate, they just do whatever they want," the president told the rally. The United States is India's biggest trading partner with two-way trade pegged at over $100 billion a year. India had earlier imposed retaliatory tariff on 29 US products worth $235 million after the US decided to impose import duties on Indian steel and aluminium. The US is already engaged in an escalating trade war with China with both sides imposing tit-for-tat tariffs worth over $60 billion.

Tariff king India wants trade talks with US immediately, says Trump

China will import $8 billion of goods and attract $600 billion of foreign investment in the next five years, foreign minister Wang Yi said on Friday.

China's overseas investment will reach $750 billion in the next five years, the foreign ministry said in a statement on its website, citing Wang at a conference in Vietnam.

Wang said China would widen market access and open up its financial sector.

The practices of unilateralism and protectionism would be a form of regression, and not only would they lead to a dead end, they would damage one's own interests, he said.

Wang said China would widen market access and open up its financial sector.

China will import $8 billion of goods and attract $600 billion of foreign investment in the next five years, foreign minister Wang Yi said on Friday. China's overseas investment will reach $750 billion in the next five years, the foreign ministry said in a statement on its website, citing Wang at a conference in Vietnam. Wang said China would widen market access and open up its financial sector. The practices of unilateralism and protectionism would be a form of regression, and not only would they lead to a dead end, they would damage one's own interests, he said.

China to import goods worth $8 billion in next five years: Foreign minister Wang Yi

us-china-trade

Us China Trade, News on Us China Trade, stories on Us China Trade, articles on Us China Trade, Us China Trade stories at Wion, Us China Trade news, Us China Trade latest news

us china-trade