Can Taiwan’s Chip Giant Make Nice With Trump?

Ray Wang

Source Link

U.S. President Donald Trump has vowed to impose tariffs on Taiwan’s semiconductor industry and has previously accused Taiwan of stealing the U.S. chip industry. These accusations should be a concern for Taiwan, but—like much of Trump’s talk—is likely intended as a negotiating tactic.

The primary strategic goal for the administration is to revitalize advanced semiconductor manufacturing in the United States. In 2022, the United States accounted for less than 1 percent of global fabrication capacity in advanced logic chip manufacturing—although the figure is projected to grow to 28 percent by 2032 as foreign chipmakers, such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC) in Arizona and Samsung in Texas, gradually ramp up advanced chip production. Both were incentivized by the Biden administration’s CHIPS and Science Act. Now, Trump is also seeking to rescue struggling U.S. chipmaker Intel—particularly its foundry division, Intel Foundry Services (IFS).

To China, DeepSeek is more than an app—it's a strategic turning point

TYE GRAHAM and PETER W. SINGER

Source Link

During this year’s Lunar New Year celebrations, a remote village in China’s Guangdong province became an unexpected center of attention. Crowds of visitors flocked to the hometown of DeepSeek’s founder, Liang Wenfeng, eager to glimpse the modest house where one of China’s most influential AI pioneers had grown up. Once an unremarkable rural enclave, the village was now decorated with banners reading, "Welcome home, Wenfeng—your hometown is proud of you!"

The celebrations contrasted sharply with the U.S. reaction to the Hangzhou-based company's announcement of a ChatGPT-like AI tool: “a collective wail from the White House, Wall Street and Silicon Valley.” For U.S. political leaders, it was, as President Trump said, a “wakeup call” that China could not just compete, but maybe leap ahead in key technologies with major national security implications. It poked a hole in the self-confident narrative of the handful of U.S. tech oligarchs who increasingly drive domestic politics. And it shocked stock markets, sparking a sell-off among major AI firms over $1 trillion.

But to Chinese policymakers and defense analysts, DeepSeek means far more than local pride in a hometown kid made good. They view it as a breakthrough that reinforces China’s strategic autonomy and reshapes the balance of power in the U.S.-China AI competition. By demonstrating an ability to innovate under sanctions, bypass Western technological barriers, and accelerate AI advancements on its own terms, China has sent a stark message: it can and will compete at the highest levels of AI development.

Race to the Future: Accelerating America’s Technological Edge in the Tech Competition with China

Mohammed Soliman

Source Link

The 21st century will be defined by a race between two competing technological models—one driven by state-directed industrial policy, the other by entrepreneurial dynamism. At stake is not just economic leadership but the architecture of global power itself. The technologies shaping this contest—AI, hypersonic aviation, space-based infrastructure—require vast energy resources, streamlined regulatory frameworks, and a skilled workforce. The challenge for the United States is not merely to innovate faster than China but to remove the bureaucratic inertia that threatens to slow its progress.

If the U.S. fails to counterbalance China’s long-term vision, it risks ceding entire technological domains to Beijing. This requires radical reforms: streamlining approvals for next-generation aviation and satellite networks, accelerating nuclear and geothermal energy permitting, and expanding AI semiconductor research beyond the constraints of traditional funding cycles. The U.S. must also double down on STEM education and workforce development. Studies published in 2023, using the most available data from 2020, shows that China graduates 3.57 million STEM students annually—over four times the U.S. total. Washington cannot compete on numbers alone, but it can aggressively scale AI and semiconductor vocational training through apprenticeship programs, military reskilling initiatives, and federally backed innovation hubs.

Did We Learn Anything From the War in Ukraine?

Olena Guseinova

Source Link

Three years into Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the world is still grappling with the war’s implications. While the conflict has upended long-held Western assumptions about the post-Cold War order, some have yet to fully grasp the fact that realpolitik is not merely back in fashion – it never truly left the scene.

Europe was forced to confront this sobering reality the hard way. Will the Indo-Pacific do better? Much will depend on the conclusions regional powers draw from Ukraine’s experience. The war may have offered a wealth of insights, but their interpretations remain highly contested. If misread – whether due to perceived regional differences, a lingering belief in the resilience of the liberal order, or misplaced faith in China’s pragmatism – the region risks echoing the strategic missteps that proved disastrous for Europe. To avoid such pitfalls, the Indo-Pacific must critically reassess and internalise the war’s most vital lessons.

Russia Is Celebrating the Destruction of a German Howitzer in Ukraine

Christian D. Orr

Source Link

That said, most Western media anecdotes pertain to the stunning individual achievements of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the air, on the land, and on the sea, to Vladimir Putin’s great embarrassment. Meanwhile, coverage of individual Russian battlefield triumphs has been comparatively less. But in what might be a reflection of how the times are changing—to include a change in the fortunes of war—at least one Western media outlet has reported a Russian tactical victory that has Putin’s troops absolutely giddy.

What happened to Ukraine’s German-made howitzer?

The story comes to us from reporter Joe Brennan in an article for AS USA (the English language edition of Spain’s Diario AS) republished on MSN last week with the title “Euphoria among Russian soldiers on stumbling upon what they had been chasing for 3 years: ‘As if they had invaded Berlin’.” 

he Pentagon should abandon Soviet-era centralized planning

Bryan Clark and Dan Patt

Source Link

Ukraine’s battlefield transformation shows how fast a military can adapt when it stops trying to predict the future. After less than two years at war, Ukraine ditched a clunky, centrally-planned acquisition system and replaced it with a weapon delivery pipeline driven by real-time operational feedback, commercial partnerships, and direct engagement with frontline operators. The Pentagon should follow suit.

The top-down requirements process Ukraine’s military inherited from Moscow in the 1990s kept headquarters analysts employed but left 87 percent of needs unfulfilled. Today, warfighters get the final say in what gets built. Drones that once relied on GPS and luck now use automated navigation and targeting algorithms to overcome operator error and Russian jamming, raising success rates from 20 percent to 70 percent. The newest generation uses fiber-optic cable for communication to eliminate the threat of electronic interference.

The Pentagon’s approach to weapon development looks more like the one used by Soviet apparatchiks. Requirements officers in the Joint Staff and military services try to guess capability gaps and potential solutions years in advance. By the time these analyses emerge from the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) two years later, the threat has changed, technology has marched on, and a different solution is likely needed.

A Bridge Too Far?

Lee Smith

Source Link

A lively and sometimes fractious debate over Donald Trump administration foreign policy is now in full swing in D.C. It started on X when pro-Trump activist Charlie Kirk posted that Sen. Tom Cotton was keeping Trump nominee Elbridge (“Bridge”) Colby from getting confirmed at the Defense Department—and it culminated with the vice president of the United States stomping on Tablet colleague Park MacDougald.

It was X, formerly Twitter, in its Platonic form, what the app was meant to be but rarely has been, a public forum inviting the famous and unknown to trade their thoughts and feelings in hope that all may profit from the exchange—sort of like when Hollywood star James Woods answers questions about the big-name actors he’s worked with, and he responds with grace and tact to give the public an inside view.

In this case, though, big-name political figures were the stars—and the gloves were off. Kirk wrote Cotton was impeding Colby because he’s “one of the most important pieces to stop the Bush/Cheney cabal at DOD,” and invited X users to venture their own theories. The editor of Tablet’s Scroll newsletter posted in response that it had nothing to do with a neocon cabal at DOD. The reason Republican senators had a problem with Colby is because he is in effect a Democrat.

Hamas’s Theater of the Macabre

Yair Rosenberg

Source Link

At first, Thursday’s festivities in Gaza seemed like just another sordid spectacle in a 16-month exhibition of debasement. In front of a raucous crowd, Hamas gunmen displayed coffins containing the remains of four Israelis: an octagenarian peace activist named Oded Lifshitz, child hostages Ariel and Kfir Bibas—ages 4 years and nine months, respectively, when kidnapped—and their mother, Shiri. A label affixed to the latter’s coffin declared that she had been “arrested” on October 7, presumably for the crime of existing while Jewish. All four corpses were handed over to the Red Cross for transfer to Israel as part of the ongoing cease-fire deal.

Then Israeli coroners concluded that the two children had been murdered by their captors and that the woman’s body wasn’t their mother’s after all. A moment of particularly acute horror briefly broke through the headlines that have been dominated by President Donald Trump’s turn on Ukraine. “I condemn the parading of bodies and displaying of the coffins of the deceased Israeli hostages by Hamas on Thursday,” declared United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, an otherwise relentless critic of Israel. “Any handover of the remains of the deceased must comply with the prohibition of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.”

Here’s how Trump can still win in Ukraine

Jonathan Sweet and Mark Toth

Source Link

Monday marked the third anniversary of Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. Although President Trump, NATO and the European Union continue spinning their wheels trying to agree on an end state to the war, Russia continues attacking Ukrainian civilian population centers and energy infrastructure, and conducting relentless “meat assaults” on the front lines.

Team Trump is becoming lost in a fog of its own making. Trump cannot bring himself to see Putin as a dictator, and his administration is astonishingly blaming Ukraine and NATO for causing Russia to invade.

It is only getting worse. During an interview on Fox New Sunday with Shannon Bream, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth refused to blame Putin. Instead, he deflected, saying, “Fair to say it’s a very complicated situation.”

Yesterday, the U.S. voted against a U.N. General Assembly resolution declaring Russia the aggressor in Ukraine and calling for the immediate complete withdrawal of all Russian forces from Ukraine. The resolution passed anyway, leaving the White House astonishingly standing on the Moscow’s side.

How to prevent the next war in Europe: A five-point plan

Claudia Major, Carlo Masala, Christian Mölling & Jana Puglierin

Source Link

Great-power thinking, disdain for alliances, and a bitter culture war—these three terms describe the new relationship between Europe and the United States following recent developments at the Munich Security Conference.

Although much remains to be seen, the general direction is clear: the US is stepping back from its leading political and military role.

Washington has initiated negotiations with Russia over the heads of Ukraine and other Europeans—presenting everyone with a fait accompli. The US is right to call on Europeans to contribute more to defence and has announced a rebalancing of its own policy towards Asia.

While the substance of these pronouncements was hardly surprising, their scope and sharpness were. The US has not (yet), as feared, announced it will withdraw its troops from Europe. But its actions and behaviour do not appear to be those of an ally. Europe must now try to shape this transatlantic rift itself.

With recent developments, the risk of another war in Europe has increased. In the logic of great-power politics, President Donald Trump immediately offered Russian president Vladimir Putin negotiations—without prior involvement of Ukraine—as if it were no longer a sovereign state.

The Spectre of Populism Is Haunting the EU

Mick Hume

Source Link

Sunday’s German elections showed the likely future direction of European politics. An uncertain future in which the old right and left parties of the establishment are struggling to hold their ground, and hold onto power, in the face of a growing populist revolt.

And if the establishment forces cannot contain the revolt in Germany, the powerful heart of the European Union, what chance will they have elsewhere?

When it became clear that his party had topped the polls, Friedrich Merz, leader of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and Germany’s next chancellor, tried to declare an “historic” victory. The results did indeed make history, though not in the way that Merz claimed.

The CDU, with its ally the Christian Social Union (CSU), won just 28.5% of the vote—the Christian Democrats’ second-worst result in a modern general election, up only 4% on its lowest-ever result last time. The ruling Social Democratic Party (SPD) under Olaf Scholz received 16.4% of the vote—its worst-ever result.

The World Trump Wants

Michael Kimmage

Source Link

In the two decades that followed the Cold War’s end, globalism gained ground over nationalism. Simultaneously, the rise of increasingly complex systems and networks—institutional, financial, and technological—overshadowed the role of the individual in politics. But in the early 2010s, a profound shift began. By learning to harness the tools of this century, a cadre of charismatic figures revived the archetypes of the previous one: the strong leader, the great nation, the proud civilization.

The shift arguably began in Russia. In 2012, Vladimir Putin ended a short experiment during which he left the presidency and spent four years as prime minister while a compliant ally served as president. Putin returned to the top job and consolidated his authority, crushing all opposition and devoting himself to rebuilding “the Russian world,” restoring the great-power status that had evaporated with the fall of the Soviet Union, and resisting the dominance of the United States and its allies. Two years later, Xi Jinping made it to the top in China. His aims were like Putin’s but far grander in scale—and China had far greater capabilities. In 2014, Narendra Modi, a man with vast aspirations for India, completed his long political ascent to the prime minister’s office and established Hindu nationalism as his country’s dominant ideology. That same year, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who had spent just over a decade as Turkey’s hard-driving prime minister, became its president. In short order, Erdogan transformed his country’s factionalized democratic ensemble into an autocratic one-man show.

Die Linke is back

Ulrike Franke

Source Link

The results from the German election are in. The winner is Friedrich Merz’s conservative Christian Democrats, although with the second-worst result in the party’s history: 28.5%. Politically, there is only one two-party coalition possible, the alliance formerly known as the “grand coalition”, i.e. a coalition of the conservatives and the social democrats (SPD) who secured just 16.4% of the vote.

Together, they have 328 seats in the Bundestag, 12 more than needed for a majority, an acceptable, though not great margin. Hence, a CDU-led government with a Chancellor Merz and the SPD as the smaller coalition partner seems almost guaranteed, despite rumblings within the SPD. This, to be clear, is not a coalition formed out of enthusiasm or political compatibility, but mainly a lack of alternatives.

Most international observers have, beyond the question of who will form the government, focused on the other obvious winner of these elections: the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) which secured a whopping 20.8% of the votes, coming in second. It gained over 10 percentage points compared to three years ago, and in some constituencies in East Germany, got over 40% of the votes. AfD is entering the parliament with 152 MPs. (Mathematically, a CDU/CSU coalition with the AfD is also possible, this option has however been categorically excluded by Merz who referred to the so-called “firewall” towards the far-right, which has gained some international notoriety after having been criticized recently by US- Vice President J.D. Vance.)

The Enduring Mystery of Trump’s Relationship With Russia

Michael Hirsh

Source Link

With Donald Trump threatening to retake the U.S. presidency next week in the face of Russia’s ongoing aggression in Ukraine, it’s time to take stock of a deeply unsettling fact. After years of investigations by U.S. government bodies from the Justice Department to the FBI to Congress, the American public has no idea if Russian President Vladimir Putin has “something” on Trump—in other words, some compromising information about the would-be 47th president’s past, or what the Russians call kompromat.

Eight years after the FBI first began probing Trump’s Russia connections in mid-2016, national security officials are still puzzled by the former U.S. president’s unrelenting deference to Putin, as well as the enduring mystery of Trump’s decades-old relationship with Russian and former Soviet investors and financiers, some of whom helped save his failing businesses years ago.

American AI Is High on Its Own Supply

Bhaskar Chakravorti

Source Link

The most powerful people in the United States are obsessed with spending more on artificial intelligence (AI). Besides Greenland and Gaza, President Donald Trump has signaled that he wants total dominance of the technology. Elon Musk wants OpenAI, a leading player, for himself. And OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is aiming for artificial general intelligence, or AGI, which mimics all human capabilities—and he’s pushing for “exponentially increasing investment” to get there.

Even as a hitherto obscure Chinese lab, DeepSeek, has demonstrated a cost- and energy-efficient approach to AI development, the U.S. tech industry has taken the present situation as its own Sputnik moment. Americans have derived all the wrong lessons: spend even more on AI; trust Chinese technology even less; and reach back to analogies from the 19th-century English coal industry to justify the seemingly unjustifiable 21st-century expenditures in AI.

The AfD Is Now Germany’s Mainstream

Paul Hockenos

Source Link

When Germany’s election results were announced on Feb. 23 at the packed headquarters of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) in Berlin, the hall erupted into wild rejoicing. The party’s leadership, among it frontperson Alice Weidel, and hundreds of supporters waving German flags immediately recognized the party’s 21 percent tally as a conspicuous victory—exactly twice its 2021 result—even though the conservative Christian Democrats (CDU) won more votes by 8 percentage points, and with this the mandate to form a government.

Despite the fact that Germany’s other parties refuse to govern with it, the AfD—an extremist xenophobic party with ties to neo-Nazis—has definitively broken out of the margins and is positioned squarely at the center of German politics. It is now Germany’s second-strongest party; the largest opposition party in the Bundestag; the favored party of the working class; the no. 1 party in Germany’s eastern states; a darling of the new U.S. administration; and it also boasts representation in the regional legislatures of all but one German state and in the EU parliament, too, where it is buttressed by like-minded allies.

Can the Ukraine War End in 2025? A Realistic Strategy for Peace

Michael O'Hanlon

Source Link

After three years of fighting, Russia and Ukraine have established mainly a stalemate, even if the battle is trending slightly in Russia’s favor at present.

Yet Russia is suffering more than 1,000 casualties a day, killed and wounded, and Ukraine perhaps half as many (out of a population only one-fourth as large). Both sides may decide that it is no longer worth sacrificing so much blood and treasure for minimal territorial gains.

President Trump’s return to the White House also changes the conversation, given his emphasis on the importance of ending the fighting soon as America’s top priority in the war (and I believe Trump is correct in this view, provided that Ukraine can remain a sovereign and independent country, even if I disagree with Mr. Trump about the causes of the war and the legitimacy of the Zelensky presidency).

To be sure, the wrong peace deal could embolden Putin to reignite the war somewhere down the road after rearming (if too soft) or permanently poison Russia’s relations with the West and perhaps even increase the odds of war between Russia and NATO (if too harsh) or lead to the overthrow of the Zelensky government in Ukraine and installment of a puppet regime subservient to Moscow (if too impatient/rushed).

America Needs a Sovereign Wealth Fund

Steve Bowsher and Sarah Sewall

Source Link

In January 2025, shortly after being inaugurated, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an order calling for the creation of a U.S.-owned sovereign wealth fund. An SWF, Trump said, would “promote the long-term financial health and international leadership of the United States” through direct investment in “great national endeavors,” such as manufacturing and medical research. Although unmentioned by the administration, an SWF could also help maintain the United States’ technological superiority over China.

A More Corrupt World Will Be Bad for America

Richard Nephew

Source Link

Some years ago, while serving as the U.S. State Department’s first coordinator on global anticorruption, I visited a country in West Africa as part of my fieldwork. During my visit, an American businessman whose company was operating an important national enterprise told me about a government official who had solicited a bribe from him. When I asked how he got out of the situation, he said it was simple: “I told him that I wasn’t going to go to jail for him.”

The Right U.S. Strategy for Russia-Ukraine Negotiations

Thomas Wright

Source Link

Ukraine has considerable leverage in upcoming negotiations with Russia—as long as the United States stands by Kyiv and adopts a negotiating strategy that creates real dilemmas for Moscow. U.S. support for Ukraine has been cast into doubt in recent weeks after a flurry of comments by Trump administration officials offering unilateral concessions to Moscow and criticizing Ukraine. Bilateral talks between Russia and the United States in Riyadh have heightened concerns in Ukraine and Europe. But these moves are a choice, not a necessity. A good deal is still within reach if Washington is willing to pursue it.

The Trump administration should enter these negotiations with a clear sense of U.S. interests, a correct diagnosis of the problem to be solved, a preferred ranking of possible outcomes, and a strategy for how to accomplish its objective. If it does that, it can secure a free and independent Ukraine with the ability to defend itself and deter future attack. If the United States fails to help Ukraine exploit the advantage it has on the eve of talks, it will give Moscow a lifeline, which it will not just use in its quest to dominate Ukraine but also to damage U.S. interests globally.

In Pentagon shakeup, some see bid for more secret actions, less oversight

PATRICK TUCKER

Source Link

The selection of John Daniel Caine as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff may signal a new emphasis on irregular warfare, covert and clandestine operations, enabling swifter action with fewer legal constraints and less congressional scrutiny, say former military and senior defense officials who have worked in the intelligence community, special operations, the Defense Department, and the White House.

The nomination of Caine—a retired Air Force lieutenant general—and the early dismissal of Gen. CQ Brown were part of an unprecedented purge announced on Friday by President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who also announced their intent to replace Adm. Lisa Franchetti, chief of naval operations; and the judge advocates general—essentially the top lawyers—of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. Hegseth was also reported to have fired his senior military assistant, Lt. Gen. Jennifer Short.

“General Caine is an accomplished pilot, national security expert, successful entrepreneur, and a ‘warfighter’ with significant interagency and special operations experience,” Trump said in Friday post announcing the moves.

How to inoculate yourself (and others) against viral misinformation

Sara Goudarzi

Source Link

In 2020, as COVID-19 began to spread around the globe, theories surrounding the pandemic also started to circulate. One such supposition—as absurd as it might seem—was the idea that there was a correlation between 5G cellular telephone towers and the increased number of infections. This utterly false idea began to trend on social media and spread through messaging apps. Thousands, including celebrities and politicians, circulated this complete falsehood, leading to the burning of dozens of wireless communication towers in Europe. Although misinformation isn’t new, the rate with which it spreads is unprecedented, much as biological pathogens now travel much more quickly than in the past via today’s high-speed transportation systems.

But what if there was a way to protect people against misinformation viruses? Sander van der Linden, professor of social psychology at the University of Cambridge and director of the Cambridge Social Decision-Making Lab, wrote the book FOOLPROOF: Why Misinformation Infects Our Minds and How to Build Immunity; in it, he explains that there are ways to build immunity against falsehoods, much as vaccines that protect against pathogens.

Donald Trump is a reckless president, but not yet a lawless one

Source Link

All American presidents eventually arrive at the realisation that they ought to have more power. But most do at least accept that Congress and the courts should play some part in governing the country. Donald Trump, however, seems to see Article II of the constitution, which lays out the president’s powers, as a blank cheque. He has a tendency to explain to friendly audiences, “I have the right to do whatever I want as president.” This week on social media, in much the same vein, he pooh-poohed pedantic legal constraints on his actions: “He who saves his Country does not violate any Law.”

Donald Trump: the would-be king

Source Link

IN HIS FIRST whirlwind month in office, Donald Trump has made his base exultant and left his opponents reeling. With his blitzkrieg, Mr Trump is trying to turn the presidency into the dominant branch of government. The question is how far his campaign goes before he is checked—if he is checked—and where it will leave the republic.

The Battlefield of the 21st Century

Arlind Sadiku

Source Link

Around the world, nations are pouring billions into military defense, acquiring advanced fighter jets, naval warships, and missile defense systems. However, while these assets strengthen traditional military power, they do little to protect against one of the most immediate and destructive threats of the modern era: cyber warfare.

In today's interconnected world, a cyberattack can be as devastating as a conventional military assault, if not worse. A single, well-coordinated cyber strike could shut down national power grids, paralyze banking systems, disable critical communications, and disrupt emergency services—all without a single bullet being fired. Yet, despite these growing threats, most governments continue to focus their defense spending on physical military assets while neglecting the digital battlefield.

Cyber warfare is no longer just a supplementary tool of conflict—it is a primary weapon. The modern battlefield is shifting from physical confrontations to digital sabotage, and nations must rethink their defense strategies before they find themselves vulnerable to a devastating attack.