Cyber-Espionage Through IoT Standardization in Agriculture

China’s infiltration into agricultural IoT (Internet of Things) networks represents a critical yet underexplored dimension of its global technological strategy. Through key players such as Huawei and Alibaba Cloud, Beijing has embedded IoT technologies into agricultural systems in Latin America, Africa, and Asia. These initiatives, often framed as development partnerships aimed at improving food production and supply chain resilience, concurrently enable the collection of extensive agricultural and environmental data with profound strategic and geopolitical implications.

Agricultural IoT systems are revolutionizing farming practices by collecting real-time, high-resolution data on variables such as soil moisture, nutrient levels, weather conditions, pest infestations, irrigation patterns, crop growth rates, and logistical movements. Chinese companies like Huawei and Alibaba are at the forefront of this technological advancement, designing platforms that support precision agriculture through the integration of advanced sensors, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence to optimize farm management.

In Kenya, Huawei has actively collaborated with local partners and the Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization to implement smart farming solutions aimed at enhancing agricultural productivity and sustainability. By deploying IoT sensors that monitor critical agricultural parameters and transmitting this data to cloud platforms where AI algorithms provide actionable insights, farmers have reportedly increased crop yields. These initiatives not only boost local agricultural productivity but also strengthen China’s presence in the region’s agricultural sector.

Similarly, in 2020, the Malaysian government entered into a strategic partnership with Alibaba Cloud to advance its Smart Agriculture Agenda, reflecting a commitment to leveraging digital technologies for agricultural transformation. For instance, in 2019, Malaysian agritech company Regaltech partnered with Alibaba Cloud to develop a smart farming platform for durian plantations. Utilizing Alibaba’s ET Agricultural Brain, an AI-powered platform that analyzes vast amounts of agricultural data, IoT devices and drones monitor crop health, optimize resource usage, and automate farming processes. These systems have shown promising results in improving yield quality and consistency while reducing labor costs due to automation.

The strategic implications of this data aggregation are profound. In Argentina—a key supplier of soybeans to China—IOT systems provide granular insights into the production of vital commodities such as soybeans and maize. In 2022, Argentina exported 4.8 million metric tons of soybeans to China, largely for use as animal feed in its burgeoning livestock industry. By analyzing longitudinal data on crop yields, climatic conditions, and supply chain dynamics, Chinese entities can gain the ability to forecast agricultural outputs, identify vulnerabilities to droughts or pest outbreaks, and strategize imports with precision. These insights not only inform economic decisions but also equip Beijing with leverage in trade negotiations with critical partners.

The geopolitical utility of such data is striking. For instance, in sub-Saharan Africa, IoT systems monitoring declining yields of staple crops due to drought could enable China to secure imports before market disruptions occur. In 2022, China’s agricultural machinery market was valued at over $24 billion, with significant exports to African nations incorporating IoT-enabled “smart farming” solutions underpinned by Chinese cloud infrastructure. These systems, while marketed as tools for development, create dependencies that enhance China’s influence. Data access, often governed by opaque agreements, allows Beijing to maintain strategic leverage over countries that adopt these technologies, especially in scenarios involving climate shocks or food crises.

Moreover, agricultural IoT data could be weaponized to manipulate trade dynamics. A pertinent case is Kazakhstan, where Chinese investments in agricultural infrastructure have integrated IoT systems for monitoring key crops such as wheat and soybeans. With precise yield data, Beijing can forecast shortages or surpluses, negotiate trade terms to its advantage, and adjust import strategies accordingly. Historical parallels, such as China’s imposition of tariffs on Australian barley and wine in 2020 following diplomatic tensions, underscore its willingness to leverage trade relationships for geopolitical objectives. While these actions did not involve IoT, they highlight a pattern of exploiting economic dependencies as instruments of influence.

The situation in Pakistan under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) provides another revealing example. China has introduced advanced irrigation systems and IoT-based crop management technologies to modernize Pakistani agriculture. Although data-sharing agreements remain unclear, the integration of IoT systems grants China a window into wheat and cotton production trends, enabling preemptive adjustments to imports or policy recommendations that align with its broader geopolitical goals. Similarly, in Laos and Cambodia, Chinese IoT technologies embedded in agricultural systems raise concerns about data sovereignty. These systems potentially allow Beijing to identify food security vulnerabilities, influencing domestic policies and reinforcing economic reliance on Chinese infrastructure.

China’s push for global IoT standardization through initiatives like China Standards 2035 is central to its ambitions in technology and data governance. By embedding proprietary IoT protocols into international frameworks, Beijing ensures that its technologies remain indispensable to global IoT networks. Huawei and ZTE are at the forefront of exporting IoT solutions, particularly to Latin America, where Huawei’s smart agriculture platforms have gained traction. The integration of Chinese-developed encryption technologies ensures compatibility with domestic platforms, consolidating China’s control over these ecosystems and enhancing its capacity to collect and process strategic data.

This influence extends to the control of information flows. Under China’s Data Security Law, companies must share data with state authorities under specific conditions, raising the potential for Beijing to access sensitive information from regions dependent on Chinese technologies. Cross-referencing IoT agricultural data with trade and infrastructure insights could yield comprehensive, multi-layered intelligence on partner nations. Although no concrete evidence has emerged to confirm systematic exploitation of IoT data, such capabilities align with China’s data-driven strategy to extend its influence globally.

The cybersecurity risks associated with agricultural IoT also warrant attention. The 2021 cyberattack on Brazil’s JBS Foods, which disrupted global supply chains for weeks, illustrates the vulnerabilities inherent in digitized agricultural systems. If IoT networks established by Chinese companies were similarly targeted, recovery efforts could be hindered by Beijing’s potential control over critical data, complicating mitigation and policy responses. Such scenarios highlight the dual-use nature of IoT technologies as tools for both development and strategic leverage.

Despite the growing significance of agricultural IoT in China’s digital strategy, it remains an underexplored topic. Analysts and policymakers often focus on areas like telecommunications and AI, neglecting intersections with food security, climate vulnerability, and geopolitical stability. For instance, the USDA’s 2021 report on agricultural innovation failed to address strategic risks posed by foreign-controlled IoT systems. Meanwhile, Huawei continues to expand its presence in Latin America, embedding IoT technologies in a region that plays a pivotal role in global agricultural exports.

Advanced Biometric Surveillance and Behavioral Data Exploitation

Complementing its cyber-espionage activities in agriculture, China has significantly advanced its capabilities in biometric surveillance and behavioral data exploitation. This represents a critical axis of its global digital strategy, intertwining technological innovation with its broader geopolitical ambitions. State-backed enterprises such as Hikvision and Dahua, alongside AI pioneers like SenseTime and Megvii, have spearheaded the development of technologies that extend far beyond traditional facial recognition. Innovations such as gait recognition, voiceprint identification, and emotion detection systems enable unprecedented behavioral monitoring, offering granular insights that elevate surveillance capabilities to new levels.

By 2023, Chinese firms had exported biometric surveillance systems to more than 80 countries across Africa, South Asia, Latin America, and Eastern Europe. For instance, the Safe City initiative in Kenya, involving approximately 1,800 Hikvision cameras integrated into centralized police monitoring networks in Nairobi, underscores the depth of Chinese involvement. Similarly, in Lahore, Pakistan, Huawei’s surveillance infrastructure merges biometric data with urban management systems under the aegis of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. Beyond hardware installations, Chinese firms embed proprietary software ecosystems and advanced machine learning algorithms into these projects, consolidating control over data pipelines and fostering dependencies on Chinese-managed platforms.

The implications of these systems extend well beyond surface-level monitoring. In Zimbabwe, Chinese surveillance cameras equipped with AI analytics have reportedly been deployed to profile political dissidents. In Serbia, a Chinese-developed Safe City system sparked controversy when facial recognition technology was used to track anti-government protesters. These deployments often come with opaque licensing agreements, debt-financed installations, and extensive service contracts, creating long-term technological and financial dependencies.

Chinese biometric surveillance technologies have achieved levels of precision previously considered theoretical. For example, Watrix, a global leader in gait recognition, claims its systems can identify individuals with 96% accuracy from distances exceeding 50 meters, even in crowded environments or when faces are obscured. Such technologies have been deployed in sensitive regions like Xinjiang, where authorities use them to monitor Uighur populations and flag “abnormal behavior.” Meanwhile, in Shanghai, hospitals employ gait recognition systems to restrict unauthorized access, highlighting the technology’s versatility across both security and civilian applications.

Emotion recognition, another frontier in Chinese AI, adds further depth to the surveillance arsenal. By analyzing micro-expressions, vocal intonations, and physiological cues, these systems can infer emotional states with applications ranging from education to law enforcement. For example, in Hangzhou’s Smart Schools initiative, cameras reportedly monitor students’ emotions to optimize classroom management—a practice raising ethical concerns about privacy and mental health. In Xinjiang, similar systems are allegedly employed to evaluate detainees’ stress levels during interrogations. These tools serve China’s broader strategy of “stability maintenance,” embedding surveillance into everyday life to ensure societal control.

Domestically, biometric surveillance underpins China’s Social Credit System, which fuses big data analytics with behavior monitoring to regulate individual and corporate conduct. In cities like Shenzhen, facial recognition cameras identify jaywalkers, publicly displaying their images to shame violators. Some systems go further, sending offenders text messages and linking penalties to their social accounts. While the system’s broader claims—such as restricting access to education or healthcare—remain contentious, its documented impacts include travel restrictions. By 2018, millions of citizens with low social credit scores were barred from purchasing airline and high-speed rail tickets, illustrating how the system enforces compliance through access limitations.

Internationally, the export of Chinese surveillance technology poses profound risks, especially in nations with weak regulatory frameworks. These countries effectively import not just the hardware but also a governance model that facilitates authoritarian practices. In Uganda, Huawei’s $126 million CCTV system, ostensibly designed for crime prevention in Kampala, has been criticized for its use in monitoring opposition figures. In Ethiopia, allegations of misuse have been compounded by reports of data breaches linked to Chinese-built infrastructure, such as the African Union headquarters. These examples illustrate the dual vulnerabilities of technological dependency and political exploitation.

The integration of Chinese standards into emerging markets’ governance infrastructures represents a strategic entrenchment of Beijing’s influence. These systems often come with opaque agreements, proprietary protocols, and maintenance requirements that bind adopters to Chinese firms, embedding surveillance into the operational fabric of public administration. Beyond operational functionality, such exports normalize invasive practices, undermining democratic norms and fostering climates of fear. For nations lacking stringent safeguards, this erosion of civil liberties not only suppresses opposition but also undermines sovereignty, creating a governance model that aligns more closely with authoritarian principles than with democratic ideals.

Integration of Strategies and Global Implications

China’s strategic integration of cyber-espionage in agricultural IoT networks and the global export of advanced biometric surveillance systems is more than a pursuit of technological advancement—it is a deliberate effort to reshape geopolitical influence through digital means. By embedding its technology into the critical infrastructures of emerging economies, Beijing gains unparalleled access to vast datasets that serve both economic and political objectives.

One emerging scenario is the potential intersection of these datasets in influencing food aid decisions during political unrest. Agricultural IoT systems could identify regions at risk of famine, while biometric data profiles assess local populations to gauge levels of dissent or compliance. By aligning aid distribution with behavioral trends, China could selectively stabilize or destabilize regions to further its strategic goals, deepening reliance on its technological and economic infrastructure.

Through proprietary standards and AI-driven insights, China embeds global dependencies that not only reduce partner nations’ autonomy but also enhance Beijing’s ability to shape international norms. This data-driven approach cements China’s influence in a new era of geopolitical power defined by digital dependencies.

Carlo J.V. Caro has a master’s degree from Columbia University and is a political and military analyst. 

Here are the links to watch the Elizabeth Farah Show interviews on other platforms:

Elizabeth Farah on X
WND on X
WND on Rumble
WND on YouTube
WND on Facebook

JUST ANNOUNCED: South Korean President declares MARTIAL LAW. South Korea’s security forces enter the building of the National Assembly in Seoul. Tanks have taken to the streets. pic.twitter.com/4DLgGCu9gA

— AJ Huber (@Huberton) December 3, 2024

South Korea President Declares Martial Law

윤대통령 종북세력 척결하겠다 비상계엄 선포 pic.twitter.com/tPydUzKpDU

— wind (@windinwindow) December 3, 2024

BREAKING: PARLIAMENT VOTES TO LIFT MARTIAL LAW!

The Speaker of South Korea’s parliament announced that the vote to lift martial law passed without any obstacles.

The decision was met with applause from the parliamentarians, signaling widespread support for ending the… pic.twitter.com/seuJz0DAaU

— TabZ (@TabZLIVE) December 3, 2024

WATCH: People celebrating after South Korea’s parliament blocks martial law and soldiers withdraw pic.twitter.com/K8GIbF98FV

— BNO News (@BNONews) December 3, 2024

Elizabeth Farah, founder of WorldNetDaily, and Erik Prince, former Navy SEAL and founder of Blackwater warn that even with Trump’s election victory, the fight to protect America’s future is far from over.

Our military is being weakened, our borders are wide open, Big Tech is invading our privacy, and China is buying up land and spreading its influence.

These aren’t distant problems—they affect your safety, your freedoms, and your family’s future. It’s time to act: demand leaders who will secure the country, hold the government accountable, and stop policies that put America at risk.

WATCH:

Here are the links to watch The Elizabeth Farah Show on other platforms:

Elizabeth Farah on X
WND on X
WND on Rumble
WND on YouTube
WND on Facebook

American zoos have dished out millions to China for panda conservation projects, but the money has instead largely been spent developing China’s economy, according to The New York Times.

U.S. zoos have sent tens of millions of dollars to China for the right to host pandas in the U.S., according to the NYT. Despite the U.S. government requiring that the funds be allocated toward panda conservation, the Chinese government has spent millions on various other expenses, including roads, apartment buildings and museums.

American zoos pay around $1 million annually to receive pandas from China, according to the NYT. Some of the American zoos were aware that the funds were not always being used to protect pandas, but were concerned that they may have to stop displaying pandas and return them to China if the payments ceased.

Many American zoos rely on displaying pandas to boost merchandise sales and attract visitors, according to the NYT. Some U.S. regulators have previously raised concerns about Chinese administrator’s use of the funds, and regulators halted payments to China in 2003 due to inadequate documentation.

“There was always pushing back and forth about how the U.S. shouldn’t ask anything,” Kenneth Stansell, a former Fish and Wildlife official, told the NYT.

Two giant Chinese pandas arrived in Washington, D.C. in October and are set to debut at the Smithsonian’s National Zoo in January 2025, according to CNN. The zoo has already begun to release panda-themed merchandise, according to Washingtonian.

“It’s really alarming that they’re approving these things in the first place,” said Delcianna Winders, an animal-law professor at Vermont Law and Graduate School, the NYT reported. “And then there’s no follow-up to track that the money is actually going to what it’s supposed to be going to.”

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

A new report from the Wall Street Journal has detailed how local governments in China are withholding wages from government-paid employees and pensioners in a desperate bid to save cash.

According to the report, dozens of medical staff in the city of Shanwei, located in southeast China, protested by occupying a hall within a public hospital in October over unpaid wages and bonuses. Retired city employees of Yichun, in the northeast of China, also gathered to protest pensions that had not been paid out for months.

The growing debt of local governments is stretching into the trillions, which the WSJ notes is largely “borrowed off the books,” as China’s shadow banking, which are loans outside of traditional banking, continues to swell.

Currently, China’s debt officially sits at just under $10 trillion. When factoring in shadow banking, the true debt reaches over $30 trillion.

The report further notes social media has been putting on a spotlight on months-long wage arrears, and it suggests cities are “strapped for cash” and drowning in debt, while recent cash injections via stimulus to local governments by the Chinese Communist Party, have only just “scratched the surface.”

Authorities are now cutting medical benefits and attempting to find unpaid taxes to bolster their budgets, but the ongoing impact will eventually affect China’s private business sector, employers of civil servants, contractors, and could lead to China’s economic growth grinding to a halt.

China’s Local Governments Hold Back Wages in Desperate Scrape for Cash—Beijing’s recent attempt to address the trillions in hidden debt held by local governments only scratches the surface@hannahmiao_ @RebeccaYFeng @TByGraceZhu https://t.co/mW4QWzCPythttps://t.co/mW4QWzCPyt

— Jonathan Cheng (@JChengWSJ) November 29, 2024

Employees of Shanghai-based Guoli True Leather Company protested this week after not receiving wages for months.
.

China’s economic slowdown is worsening the situation on ground. Employees of Shanghai Guoli True Leather Company protesting to Demand Wages.
Many Chinese companies are unable to pay salaries & meet expenses due to economic woes, unsustainable debts & dwindling domestic sales. pic.twitter.com/LCYPJbGF4z

— Padma Namgail (@PadmaNamgail14) November 23, 2024

However, wage issues are not a new issue in China. In 2023, employees of state-owned companies said they hadn’t been paid for over 45 months, while pensioners said their promised benefits and medical insurance payments had been reduced.

“We haven’t been paid for 45 months.”
“We demand our wages, we want to work. Hundreds of employees demand our wages.”
In front of the Jilin Grain Group Co., Ltd., employees are protesting with banners. How have these people been able to survive without receiving their wages for… pic.twitter.com/8RGfNmfjcG

— Inconvenient Truths by Jennifer Zeng (@jenniferzeng97) September 18, 2023

#Guangzhou retirees protesting in front of the Social Security Bureau as their pensions and medical insurance payments were reduced.
Local governments in #China are having financial problems now. I talked about this here: https://t.co/P6HHpAxLPP pic.twitter.com/p7DOKuXv2r

— Inconvenient Truths by Jennifer Zeng (@jenniferzeng97) January 14, 2023

A scheduled stopover visit to the U.S. state of Hawaii for Taiwan’s President Lai Ching-te has prompted an angry response from China, whose officials are now urging the Biden administration to not allow Lai to land on U.S. soil.

According to TaiwanPlus News, Lai begins his first official trip as president on November 30th, and will be travelling around the Pacific, transiting in Hawaii and possibly the U.S. territory of Guam. Lai, who has been labelled a “separatist” by China, will be visiting the island nations of Tuvalu, Palau, and the Marshall Islands – three of Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic allies.

China is accusing Lai of seeking independence for Taiwan by bolstering its diplomatic ties with the U.S. and other allies, something China says violates its one-China principle. China urged the White House to reconsider allowing Lai to land on U.S. soil, and to “stop enabling” Taiwan’s “separatist” forces.

Taiwan, officially called the Republic of China, is a self-ruling democratic island settled by Nationalist forces in 1949 after they fled the mainland after they were defeated by the Chinese Communist Party led by Mao Zedong.

China claims ownership of Taiwan in its entirety, rejecting its independence, despite evidence the island’s human habitation dates back tens of thousands of years, predating the arrival of the Chinese.

China’s Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson Chen Binhua said during a news conference China rejects any narrative that implies Taiwan is a separate entity from China, and accused Lai of relying on outside nations to gain support for Taiwan’s independence

“This so-called ‘transit’ by the leader of the Taiwan authorities is essentially seeking independence by relying on [forces from] the outside,” Chen said, “Any attempt to create a ‘one China, one Taiwan’ and ‘two Chinas’ [narrative] along with other provocative acts that violate the one-China policy principle, will certainly be opposed by China.”

Chen noted that allowing Lai to land in Hawaii would send “the wrong signals” to forces that support Taiwan’s independence.

“We urge the United States side to abide by the one-China principle and the provisions of the three joint communiques of China and the United States, and to stop sending the wrong signals to the forces for ‘Taiwan independence,'” Chen said.

According to the Strait Times, China could carry out military drills near Taiwan shortly after Lai wraps up his trip around the Pacific.

#BREAKING | UPDATE
CHINA IS PREPARING FOR MORE MILITARY DRILLS WAR GAMES IN THE NEXT
UPCOMING DAYS PRACTICE FOR THE INVASION OF TAIWAN.

THEY HELD SIMILAR DRILLS A COUPLE MONTHS AGO SURROUNDING TAIWAN FOR POTENTIAL
INVASION pic.twitter.com/dkcLk2a97E

— Todd Paron (@tparon) November 27, 2024

Warning bells are going off over the increasing threat China poses to the world’s data, and the vast network of undersea fiber optic cables that connects almost the entire globe to the internet.

According to a report from Regtechtimes, the internet often takes multiple paths before it reaches its destination, travellng along undersea internet cables that criss-cross along vast areas of sea and ocean through a process called routing protocols. Software-Defined Networking is an advanced technology that can change data routes and allow data to travel more efficiently.

While this system is valuable, it also brings risk as data can be spied on, manipulated, slowed down or blocked. China is a leading investor in SDN technology, and a number of Chinese companies with ties to the Chinese Communist Party are some of the largest investors.

“Through these tools, China can secretly redirect internet traffic through its own networks, even when the data wasn’t supposed to pass through its territory,” the report states, adding one cable which connects Europe and Africa called PEACE can be redirected through Chinese systems despite it physically avoiding China.

The report further notes China has been mapping the ocean floor in great detail using underwater robots and research vessels, collecting data in the South China Sea, the Arctic, and the Indian Ocean. The mapping helps China plan submarine routes, locations of sensors, the deployment of underwater weapons – and exposes the location of undersea internet cables.

DW News reported last week there were suspicions China intentionally severed two fiber optic cables in the Baltic Sea, one connecting Finland to Germany, and the other between Sweden and Lithuania.

The Danish Navy reportedly said it had shadowed a Chinese cargo ship leaving the Baltic Sea after the cables had been cut. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius called the incident an act of sabotage.

“Nobody believes that these cables were cut by mistake. I don’t believe the theory that it was anchors that accidentally caused damage to these cables. So we have to conclude without knowing exactly who did it, that it was a hybrid action… We must also assume, without knowing it of course, that it is sabotage,” Pistorius said.

Kadri Liik, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said assuming the act was indeed sabotage, it would likely benefit the entity who carried it out by disrupting operations in the area.

“Always such things create problems. You need to send crews to repair it, you need to have spare capacity, and certain things [are] actually harder to repair than others,” Liik said.

The People’s Republic of China on Wednesday released three American prisoners who had spent years languishing in Chinese prisons after being unlawfully detained – in exchange for Chinese nationals serving prison sentences in the U.S.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the release of the three American prisoners – Mark Swidan, Kai Li and John Leung – was part of the Biden administration’s effort to bring home American citizens locked up abroad.

The WSJ further reported that while U.S. officials refused to say who they release for the American detainees, there were at least two Chinese prisoners who were detained in the U.S., one an intelligence officer who was serving a 20-year sentence, no longer on the Bureau of Prisons database.

The longest sentence served was by Swidan, a Texas resident who was not initially charged with a crime but was held in a southern Chinese prison since 2012. Swidan was then handed a suspended death sentence after he was convicted of a drug case.

Chinese-born U.S. citizen Kai Li, a New York businessman, was detained in 2016 and sentenced to 10 years in prison after he was accused of espionage. John Leung, a U.S. passport holder, was also convicted of espionage in 2023.

The Foley Foundation’s 2024 Hostage Report, states there are at least 11 American citizens being unlawfully detained by Chinese authorities. They are serving sentences that range from eight to 18 years.

Overall, the report notes there are a total of 46 Americans currently being held hostage or wrongfully detained across 16 different nations, with 80% of all cases being wrongful detention, while 15% of all cases are hostage situations. China is one of the leading nations with the largest number of American detainees.

However, the report further acknowledged some human rights groups have estimated there could be up to 200 American citizens in various stages of prosecution in China. Exit bans, which prevent someone from leaving China without formal detention, have also been used continuously on American citizens.

It is now a truism that political leaders don’t initiate wars with the expectation that they will be protracted contests of attrition. It is an interesting counter-factual conjecture whether Russian President Vladimir Putin, if he had a crystal ball two or three years into the war in Ukraine, would have still started his war, even without evidence of his defeat. John Mearsheimer, in his 1984 Conventional Deterrence, has a slew of case studies where failed blitzkrieg offensives transformed themselves into intractable slogs. U.S. journalist William L. Shirer reported that Hitler knew of his short war-long war gamble, as he had warned his military staffers that if the ensuing war became protracted, Germany could only hold out for a few years. The same consideration applies to Chinese Communist General Secretary Xi Jinping’s conception of the time horizon to complete an invasion of Taiwan. Short wars are of course rational, as a fait accompli would pre-empt any response by a slow-mobilizing U.S. alliance. However, if the lightning attack fails, then Putin and Xi would risk becoming victims of regime change by the extent of the re-organization they would need to impose on their citizens and industry in order to strengthen their respective countries.

The widespread expectations of a short war at the beginning of the Twentieth-Century were reasonable given the experience of the destructive firepower of the new rifles and heavy artillery during the 1870-71 Franco-Prussian War, and the rationality that no political leader should want to pay the cost of another generationally-long French revolution cum Napoleonic struggle (1792-1815). Most of the major power conflicts in nineteenth century Europe, with the notable exception of the Crimean War, were concluded within just a few months, primarily for diplomatic reasons. It was also widely believed that the high rate of munitions expenditure in a conventional conflict between NATO and the Warsaw Pact in Europe would have quickly led to a stalemate, negotiations, or use of nuclear weapons. All of the 1965 and 1971 Indo-Pakistan Wars, and the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, were terminated in part due to the unexpectedly high rate of munitions expenditure, especially of artillery rounds.

A small minority of observers, such as Jewish-Polish financier, Jan Bloch, and, British Secretary of State Herbert Kitchener, shared a more realistic appraisal of the political impossibility of a short war. Bloch, in his 1898 Future of War, saw that industrialized economies could, and by political dynamics, would be compelled to sustain the mobilization of millions of soldiers through to exhaustion. Kitchener’s pessimism of the First World War was based on his experience of the protracted 1899-1902 Second Boer War. Reagan administration defense official, Fred Charles Ikle, in his 1971 Every War Must End, showed that wars become lengthened because of the empowerment of less compromising governmental officials making greater promises to an increasingly vengeful public as casualties mount.

German author Fritz Sternberg, in his 1938 Germany and a Lightning War (also the book to first mention Blitzkrieg), was one of the few authors to predict in detail the shortcomings of Hitler’s war plan espoused in his 1925 Mein Kampf. Sternberg believed that the scale of USSR’s geography and its matching manufacturing made a quick Nazi victory, or even an eventual triumph, impossible. As an example of the detail of his analysis, Sternberg suggested that Hitler was likely aware that Stalingrad contained a quarter of the USSR’s weapons manufacturing capacity, and was a gateway to Baku, which provided the USSR 80 percent of its oil, and that therefore it would be a major military objective. Hungarian professor Ivan Lajos, in his 1939 Germany’s War Chances, confirms Sternberg, adding that Soviet industry was 500 km behind its frontiers, and had a higher output than Germany’s. Both Sternberg and Lajos noted that in German military journals as early as 1936, staff planners discounted the likelihood of a short war or of a miracle weapon to achieve victory, noting the attritional nature of war between industrial powers. Erich von Ludendorff made a similar attritional argument in his 1936 The Total War.

Long wars also risk the loss of allies and the provocation into being of new adversaries. Sternberg argued that Italy would likely abandon Germany, for a second time, given Rome’s economic weakness. For Lajos, even a small risk of alienating the U.S. should have been obvious to Hitler, given that U.S. industrial production outweighed the totals of Germany, Great Britain and France combined. The U.S. manufactured more automobiles than the rest of the world and extracted two-thirds of all of the world’s oil, advantages that were especially decisive in winning the type of armored warfare Germany was embarking on. In fact, Germany’s automobile industry was even behind France. Sternberg further emphasized that regardless of the inconvenience caused by the Japanese and Italian fleets to commercial lanes, the undefeatable Anglo-U.S. fleets had such a reach that they could ship war materiel from their manufacturing bases to the littoral of any ally on the globe, ultimately defeating their adversaries. Shirer noted that General Thomas, head of the Economic and Armaments Branch of OKW, reported to Commander of the German armed forces under Hitler, Wilhelm Keitel, that Germany lacked the resources and food to fight an Anglo-French coalition that would inevitably result from an invasion of Poland.

Like the First World War, and unlike the Second World War, the economic and energy balance between the U.S. and its allies versus the China-Russia axis and its allies, is far more even, and therefore likely to produce a protracted attrition war, punctuated by the use of nuclear weapons as one side begins to lose. 2024 World Bank data shows that China accounts for 31.6 percent of the world’s manufacturing capacity, as compared with 15.9 percent for the U.S., and 22 percent for major U.S. allies in the top ten (Japan, Germany, India, South Korea, Italy, Mexico, and France). Both South Korea and Indonesia manufacture more than Russia (2.7 and 1.81 versus 1.8 percent), and Mexico out-produces Frances (1.7 to 1.6 percent). Brazil has a larger manufacturing base than the U.K., Turkey more than Spain, and Iran more than Sweden. Although China produced far more cars (27 million) than the U.S. (10m), a better surrogate for armored vehicle output is 2022 commercial vehicle manufacturing: U.S. (8.3m), China (3.2m), Morocco (2.9m), Thailand (1.3m) Japan (1.3m), and India (1m). The U.S. and its NATO allies still account for over 95 percent of total global aircraft production by valuation, which is a good proxy for technical sophistication. However, by gross tonnage of merchant vessels in 2023, China accounts for 33M, South Korea by 18m, Japan by 10m, and the rest of world by just 4m, which is worrying. The U.S. ranks just ahead of Iran and behind Indonesia, Turkey, Netherlands, and Russia. Most unsettling is that the U.S. ($5.9bn) ranks behind China (27.1bn) in value of machine tools, even if including all of its major state allies (Italy, Germany, Japan, South Korea and India (21.2bn)).

Sternberg was remarkably accurate in his predictions of Hitler’s plans, his reckless diplomacy, and the fact that despite the prevalence of armored warfare, that it was attrition by industrial capacity that would determine victory. However, Sternberg’s aversion to Nazism and his consequent isolation from German sentiment, meant that his predictions of a revolt against Hitler among the soldiers, workers, farmers, middle and factory-owning classes, was not only false, but failed to appreciate the resilience of the Nazi state, and the modern state in general. This is a serious issue for those seeking victory in Ukraine by the overthrow by coup of Russian President Vladimir Putin, or avoiding war over Taiwan by threatening to conjure the same coup threat against the Chinese Communist Party General Secretary Xi Jinping. Predicting how protracted wars end, like the Russo-Ukraine War, or whether China could seize Taiwan and survive the ensuing naval blockade, what damage North Korea could inflict on its neighbor, and how Iran could seize and if it can be expelled from the Straits of Hormuz, is a very complex technical issue best handled by fine-grained wargaming.

The implications of the short war illusion is that deterrence by the democracies must always be primed for a demonstration of its capability and credibility. Allegations of long-term planning by Putin and Xi are really just a jumble of short and episodic domestic political maneuvers to stay in power, and Western deterrence must be visible enough to be incorporated into those calculations. The democracies must not pattern the traditional Western complacent practice of allowing the enemy to conduct a surprise attack in order to mobilize its domestic population, like the 1940 Fall of France or the 1941 strike on Pearl Harbor. During the Cold War, NATO was faced with the dreaded choice of triggering a tactical nuclear war either at the commencement of hostilities along the East German border before most of NATO’s divisions were overrun, or in a last-ditch desperate defense on the Rhine, and it was this uncertainty that held the USSR at bay. Concurrently, given China’s overwhelming manufacturing capability, which may be sustained by Russia’s energy supplies in the event of a U.S. naval blockade of China’s Middle Eastern oil, requires that NATO must also demonstrate that it has a plan for a protracted years-long conflict. Nuclear deterrence must also be robust enough in the event that imminent failure leads to considerations of a desperate nuclear attack by the Kremlin or Beijing. One important strategy, given the increasing shift of manufacturing to the developing world, is to cultivate allies by the difficult mission of creating new liberal democracies.

Dr. Julian Spencer-Churchill is associate professor of international relations at Concordia University, and author of Militarization and War (2007) and of Strategic Nuclear Sharing (2014). He has published extensively on Pakistan security issues and arms control and completed research contracts at the Office of Treaty Verification at the Office of the Secretary of the Navy, and the then Ballistic Missile Defense Office (BMDO). He has also conducted fieldwork in Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, and Egypt, and is a consultant. He is a former Operations Officer, 3 Field Engineer Regiment, from the latter end of the Cold War to shortly after 9/11.

SUPPORT TRUTHFUL JOURNALISM. MAKE A DONATION TO THE NONPROFIT WND NEWS CENTER. THANK YOU!

Experts are sounding the alarm on China’s increasingly aggressive trade deals in Latin America and South America as its ambition to become the world’s largest economy has put the U.S. in a position where it must choose between the safety of Americans, and continued trade with China.

During an interview with Fox News host Maria Bartiromo, American journalist, lawyer, political commentator, and writer Gordan Chang said China has used its influence to make deals with trading partners who used to be considered “America’s backyard.”

“A lot of Americans consider Latin America, South America, to be America’s backyard. Well, it’s really China’s backyard. You know, China is South America’s largest trading partner. If it weren’t for Mexican trade with the U.S., China would be Latin America’s biggest partner,” Chang said.

Chang noted trade between the U.S. and South America could be improved if the U.S. is willing to enter into more free trade agreements with the region, and further stated this would help the U.S. decouple from China.

“We can win back this region with trade. We only have one free trade agreement with Central America and three with South America. If we tie trade to the United States, what we can do is we can free ourselves from China. We can end the migrant crisis. We can shorten our supply chains and clean the air. So what’s not to like?” Chang asked.

The deadly fentanyl coming across the southern border, which has increased exponentially during President Joe Biden’s time in office, is something Chang says was intentional and fully supported by the Chinese Communist Party.

“Killing tens of thousands of Americans every year… this a Communist Party project. This is not just some Chinese criminals because the Communist Party knows and it approves it and they support it… and all across the board [they] help.”

Chang pointed out it is important to acknowledge that the drugs coming across the border are China’s project, because it is backing the intentional murder of Americans. He then noted the U.S. needs to start imposing some severe costs to China.

“At least 60% tariffs on Chinese goods. You do that, you cripple China. You do not give them the opportunity and the resources to go after and kill Americans (with) fentanyl, with COVID, with everything else,” Chang noted.

The U.S. China Economic and Security Review Commission recommends the U.S. toughen its trade relationship with China in its annual report to Congress. The Commission also wants the U.S. to end its permanent normal trade relationship with Beijing for the first time.

China currently gets accommodations through trade deals, because they continue to claim they are only an emerging economy, despite the fact China is the second largest economy in the entire world.

Bartiromo also questioned whether China is still “an emerging economy,” and Chang noted China is obviously not an emerging economy, and further stated China should absolutely lose its normal trading relationship with the U.S. because it is using those deals to finance its military to one day fight against the U.S.

“That gives them basically everything that we give to everybody else. So it’s reciprocity on steroids. The thing is, China uses all of this trade to develop its military, which is configured to kill Americans. They use it to support their fentanyl gangs. The list goes on and on.”

While outwardly China has been talking about wanting “peace and prosperity” around the world, the reality is China is providing the means for other countries to wage war.

“They could not afford to assault us, would not be for our money, and by the way, you know Russia… couldn’t continue the war in Ukraine without China’s support. Iran could not have assaulted Israel without China’s support. This is China behind all of these proxy wars, setting the world on fire, and we’re financing it,” Chang stressed.

China’s economy is also on a “knife’s edge,” and while its economy continues to slump, China continues to build infrastructure like a massive high-speed rail system for future populations, when in fact, China’s population has now dropped below recovery rates.

“They’ve got too much of everything. You know, the high speed rail line system, it is not economically viable on its own, and they’re adding… more… They’ve got enough vacant apartments for 1.3 billion people. Basically they’ve got infrastructure for a country that is much larger than it actually is… [and] population is going to decline,” Chang said.

China’s population decline has been so dramatic over the past few decades due to the CCP’s one-child policy, that it will likely never recover.

“By the end of this century, China probably will have only one-third the number of people that it has today. And I don’t know how they’re going to deal with this, because there’s no solutions for them,” Chang said.

China is behind ‘proxy wars’ and ‘setting the world on fire’: Gordon Chang pic.twitter.com/ES1KjUCpDq

— Mornings with Maria (@MorningsMaria) November 21, 2024

A new research study has found surprising results – if the People’s Republic of China is unable to persuade its Southeast Asian neighbors to allow it to lead the region, global dominance will be a much harder task for China to achieve.

Researchers Selina Ho and Terence Lee from the National University of Singapore, conducted a survey of elites spread throughout Southeast Asian nations who were “least likely to acquiesce” to a China-led regional order. The survey gauged how they perceive China, its influence, and whether or not it has the authority to govern.

Results indicated that while China is viewed as influential by elites in the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia, and Malaysia, most felt China did not have the authority to preside over the region, with the difference in political values being one of the biggest points of contention.

According to the study, China has often thought of Southeast Asia as its “periphery,” but has over time attempted to use its influence to shape the Sino-centric identity in the region – which would allow China to establish itself as a leading power in a hierarchy of its own making.

China wants to be a great power, and has ambitions of bringing the region to heel by shaping the foundations of regional identity, which researchers explain is similar to the U.S. in Latin America, Russia in Eastern Europe, and India in South Asia.

“They build their material capabilities and attempt to expel rival great powers, using institutions, culture, norms, and ideas to entrench their dominance. They are also likely to interfere in the domestic affairs and external policies of their neighbors to prevent rival powers from gaining a foothold in the region,” the study states.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations, commonly known as ASEAN, includes the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia, Laos, Cambodia, Brunei, Myanmar, and Malaysia. All have different cultural practices, religious views, and political discourse. Because of this, researchers state China will struggle to establish regional order without their backing.

In order to get the full support of the region, researchers suggest China must prove its ambitions are beneficial and legitimate, because China cannot be installed as a regional hegemon by force, it must be granted through negotiation.

China has already laid the foundation for its dominance around the globe through its various programs like the Belt and Road Initiative, the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative, and the Global Civilization Initiative. These programs are mostly set up in developing countries, and don’t always benefit those receiving China’s “help.”

An example of this would be the recent inauguration of a new megaport built and owned by China and located in Lima, Peru. Locals say they have been squeezed out of their fishing grounds by China, while the majority of the city doesn’t have running water or sanitation.

Overall, 50.4% of ASEAN elites said ASEAN nations were the most influential in Southeast Asia, while 36.2% said China is the most influential, while only 9.6% see the U.S. as influential. The U.S. was unsurprisingly influential on Filipino elites, as the Philippines is a U.S. ally, and currently at odds with China over territory in the South China Sea.

A report from the Council on Foreign Relations warned China’s aggressive posturing and U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s policies on China could force some smaller nations in Southeast Asia and South Asia to choose between the two most powerful economies in the world.

The report states a survey by the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, a think tank based in Singapore, showed the majority of respondents from Southeast Asia preferred China over the U.S., thanks in part to President Joe Biden missing the East Asia Summit two years in a row, and not focusing on the region. This has forced smaller Asian nations to seek alliances outside of its region for defense and investment.

“Instead, they are building more robust ties with Asia’s major regional powers – most notably, a much more economically and strategically assertive Japan – but also with Australia, South Korea, the European Union (which is of course not in Asia but is playing a much bigger role there in recent years), and to some extent India, among others,” the report states.

However, tensions between China and the U.S. further deteriorated Monday, after U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin issued a warning over China’s actions in the South China Sea, particularly in regards to the Philippines.

While visiting the Philippine province of Palawan, Austin expressed his confidence the Trump administration will continue to support the U.S.-Philippine alliance, including $500 million in new military funding.

“We stand with the Philippines, and we condemn dangerous actions by the PRC against lawful Philippine operations in the South China Sea…The behavior of the PRC has been concerning. They’ve used dangerous and escalatory measures to enforce their expansive South China Sea maritime claims,” Austin said.

Meanwhile, Chinese news outlet the Global Times reported it is the U.S. who is militarizing the region, and escalating tensions. Ding Duo, a deputy director of the Institute of Maritime Law and Policy at China’s National Institute for South China Sea Studies, told the Global Times the military-intelligence deal further integrates U.S. military bases in the Philippines.

“We can predict that Manila will act as a primary information collector for the U.S. in the frontline of engaging with other countries in regions like the South China Sea,” Ding said.

The US has been promoting militarization in this region, and the Philippines – a nation that had fought for its national independence for many decades in history – continues to sacrifice its sovereignty and succumb to US interests now. It’s regrettable, a Chinese expert… pic.twitter.com/MJVvQ1fzsw

— Global Times (@globaltimesnews) November 18, 2024

Collin Koh, senior fellow at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies at the Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, said on X the escalating tensions in the South China Sea are a direct result of China’s aggression toward the Philippines.

False narratives and unilateral actions have been the hallmarks of PRC behavior in SCS, especially in undermining PH legitimate sovereign rights in its EEZ. They’re the root causes of the spike in tensions that complicate the problem. https://t.co/mKSd9TQkC1

— Collin Koh (@CollinSLKoh) November 15, 2024

On the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Cooperation summit over the weekend, lame duck U.S. President Joe Biden was cautioned by China’s President Xi to not cross certain unnegotiable “red lines” that could strain U.S.-China relations if not respected.

Xi said during his meeting with Biden that decoupling from China or disrupting supply chains is not a solution to conflict, and touted “mutual beneficial cooperation” as the only thing that can lead to productivity between the world’s two largest economies.

“Small yard, high fence, is not what a major country should pursue. Only openness and sharing can improve the well-being of humanity,” Xi said.

According to the Independent, Xi outlined four red lines that the U.S. must not cross – China’s political and economic systems, its development interests, its record on human rights and democracy, and Taiwan.

China claims Taiwan as its own territory in its entirety. The democratically run nation was founded by China’s Nationalists – officially named the Republic of China – when they fled mainland China to Taiwan after Mao Zedong’s Communist army defeated them during China’s civil war in 1949. China has repeatedly said it would not rule out the use of force to claim back Taiwan.

“The Taiwan question, democracy and human rights, China’s path and system, and China’s development right are four red lines for China,” Xi reportedly told Biden, “They must not be challenged. These are the most important guardrails and safety nets for China-U.S. relations.”

Xi further warned against the U.S. trying to hold back China’s ambitions, even over Taiwan.

“A new Cold War should not be fought and cannot be won. Containing China is unwise, unacceptable and bound to fail,” Xi said, adding the U.S. should handle the “Taiwan question with extra prudence.”

Xi did, however, reach out to the incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump, and said the two nations can expand cooperation and “inject more certainty and positive energy into the turbulent world.”

“China is ready to work with a new U.S. administration to maintain communication, expand cooperation, and manage differences, so as to strive for a steady transition of the China-U.S. relationship for the benefit of the two peoples,” Xi said.

According to a read out of the meeting published by the White House, Biden reiterated the U.S. position on the One China policy, calling for China to stop destabilizing military actions around Taiwan.

“On Taiwan, President Biden underscored that the United States’ one China policy remains unchanged, guided by the Taiwan Relations Act, the three Joint Communiques, and the Six Assurances,” the White House statement reads.

“He [Biden] reiterated that the United States opposes any unilateral changes to the status quo from either side, that we expect cross-Strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, and that the world has an interest in peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.”

American journalist, lawyer, political commentator, and writer Gordan Chang wrote in an op-ed for Newsweek on Monday that South America had “disrespected” the U.S. and Biden at the APEC summit, and was in stark contrast to how Xi was welcomed.

“Peru gave Xi Jinping a warm welcome last week when he arrived for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Lima,” Chang said, adding, “The Chinese leader was even accorded the honor of a state visit. Joe Biden, in contrast, got a bare-bones greeting as Air Force One landed.”

“Peru then proceeded to treat the American president as if he were from a backwater state, even making sure the humiliation was seen in public. For instance, in the group photo of leaders attending the summit, Xi was standing in the place of honor, to the right of Peruvian President Dina Boluarte in the front row. Biden was placed in the back in the corner.”

Chang then noted in the midst of the disrespect from South American nations toward the U.S., often seen as America’s “backyard,” China is trading and investing into nations like Peru to bolster its “dominance of the region.”

As we can see from #Peru’s repeated humiliation of #JoeBiden in #Lima, #SouthAmerica is #China’s “backyard,” not #America’s: https://t.co/ZwnfdFThtu. @bungarsargon @NewsweekOpinion

— Gordon G. Chang (@GordonGChang) November 18, 2024

Chang was also critical of Xi’s rhetoric of peace, a move he says began prior to the elections, as an attempt by Xi to paint Trump as a bad guy.

#China’s turn toward peace, first evident just before our elections, is due to both internal factors and one very important external one: #Trump. #XiJinping believes he can paint the incoming president as a disrupter. #Xi can’t do that if he is disrupting the world himself.

— Gordon G. Chang (@GordonGChang) November 18, 2024

During the summit, Biden further expressed concern over China’s support for Russia’s war against Ukraine, and reconfirmed the U.S. commitment on “upholding international law and freedom of navigation, overflight, and peace and stability in the South China Sea and East China Sea.”

China is currently at odds with several nations within the South China Sea, which China also claims almost in its entirety using its highly contested nine-dash line maps. One of those nations is the Philippines, a U.S. ally.

Recent months have seen clashes between the Philippine Coast Guard and Chinese Coast Guard vessels, with China aggressively ramming Philippine ships and damaging hulls, as well as attacking Filipino Coast Guard officers with spears and axes.

Conflict has been escalating over the ownership of Spratly Islands and its shoals, rich fishing grounds with recently discovered oil and gas reserves situated within the economic exclusion zone of the Philippines.

4 #Filipinos hurt after 2 #China Coast Guard ships use water cannons on PH Ayungin resupply vessel, shattering the wind shield of the ship on March 5.pic.twitter.com/S6aATJTJmU

— Indo-Pacific News – Geo-Politics & Defense (@IndoPac_Info) March 5, 2024

New: Philippine ships “encountered dangerous maneuvers & obstruction from 4x China Coast Guard & 6x Chinese Maritime Militia vessels.”

The CCG “employed jet stream water cannons, targeting the PCG vessel from both sides, resulting in damage.”@jaytaryelapic.twitter.com/h2wIstvcoN

— Ian Ellis (@ianellisjones) April 30, 2024

China’s Coast Guard rammed the Philippine Coast Guard’s BRP Teresa Magbanua in Sabina/Eacoda Shoal, as the PH ship was anchored to reaffirm PH control of the shoal.

China’s actions show intent to take over the shoal & remove the PH ship as they also brought tug boats to tow it. pic.twitter.com/KHoipTlKpR

— Indo-Pacific News – Geo-Politics & Defense (@IndoPac_Info) August 31, 2024

Despite the repeated attacks against Philippine vessels, China took offense to the Philippines’ intention to purchase weapons from the U.S., which would include anti-missile and intermediate-range missile systems.

China’s Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian said Thursday the move by the Philippines is “provocative” and “dangerous.”

“Let me stress again that the Philippines, by bringing in this offensive strategic weapon, is enabling a country outside the region to fuel tensions and antagonism in this region, and incite geopolitical confrontation and arms race,” Lin said.

Lin noted this is an “extremely irresponsible choice” by the Philippines and threatens regional security.

“What the region needs is peace and prosperity, not the missile system or confrontation. We once again urge the Philippines to heed the call from regional countries and their peoples, correct its wrongdoings as soon as possible, quickly pull out the Typhon missile system as publicly pledged, and stop going further down the wrong path,” Lin said.

On Monday when asked about the Philippine military and U.S. intelligence exchanging information, Lin stated the only way to uphold peace in the region was to maintain “good-neighborliness.”

“No military agreement, or defense and security cooperation, in whatever form, should target any third party or harm the interests of any third party. Nor should it undermine regional peace or exacerbate regional tensions. The only right choice for safeguarding national security and regional peace and stability is to uphold good-neighborliness and friendship and maintain strategic independence,” Lin said.

As President-elect Donald Trump prepares for his return to the White House, China has been secretly working on a land-based prototype nuclear reactor to power its warships, a move that signals China is moving further toward competing with the U.S. for global dominance.

According to satellite images and Chinese government documents obtained by the Associated Press, China has been rapidly modernizing and morphing its vast naval fleet, the largest in the world, into a “blue water navy” able to operate for long periods of time away from mainland China out in the open ocean.

Tong Zhao, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told the AP nuclear-powered warships would elevate China into “the exclusive ranks of first-class naval power,” which currently includes the U.S. and France.

“For China’s leadership, such a development would symbolize national prestige, fueling domestic nationalism and elevating the country’s global image as a leading power,” Zhao said.

The AP further reported that researchers from the Middlebury Institute of International Studies in California have said the satellite images suggest the nuclear reactor was built in the Leshan mountains, located within the Sichuan province.

“Satellite images show China working on nuclear propulsion for new aircraft carrier” https://t.co/2wtvv3U4xL

— Brian Roemmele (@BrianRoemmele) November 11, 2024

Senior fellow with the China Power Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies Matthew Funaoile told Business Insider, moving further into nuclear-powered territory is a “goal” for China.

“They know that this is the hallmark of technology for propulsion on aircraft carriers,” Funaoile said.

Furthermore, China currently has three conventionally powered ships – the Liaoning, the Shandong, and the Fujian. According to Funaoile, China has the ability to develop capabilities that outpace its peers. He did, however, note nuclear propulsion development is a complex process, and could take time before all three carriers, along with a fourth currently under construction, are fully nuclear-powered.

Trumps meteoric victory over Vice President Kamala Harris disrupted China’s plans to further its own interests, with some analysts saying the ambitions of China are not just going to wane and disappear. China has been preparing for such an event to unfold and the acceleration in weapons development and manufacturing plays a part of that because it could lead to conflict.

Brandon Weichert, a National Interest national security analyst, a geopolitical analyst, and former congressional staffer, wrote in a recent op-ed the real threat to the U.S. is China’s growing fleet of nuclear-powered submarines, something Trump will have to deal with, especially with China’s plans to have at least 21 new nuclear submarines operational by 2030.

“The priority for the Trump administration when it comes to the U.S. Navy must be twofold. First, it must concentrate on building more submarines. Second, as part of that new submarine building program U.S. Navy shipyards must undergo the most radical modernization program since the Second World War,” Weichert wrote.

Weichert noted the U.S. must build up its capabilities quickly, and warned if some radical change doesn’t happen soon, China will surpass the U.S. submarine fleet in both quality and quantity.

“This must happen in an expedited manner. America was once the ‘arsenal of democracy.’ It can be that once again. But it cannot achieve this lofty goal by doing that which has always been done for the last 30 years.”

Newly nominated Secretary of Defense for the Trump administration Pete Hegseth said during an interview the amount of bureaucracy within the U.S. weapons procurement system is slowing down any real progress.

“The Pentagon has a perfect record in all of its war games against China. We lose every time,” Hegseth said, noting the U.S. is lagging behind China by a decade, further pointing out it is important to diversify weapons systems.

“China’s building an army specifically dedicated to defeating the United States of America, that is their strategic outset… If our whole power projection platform is aircraft carriers, and you have the ability to project power that way strategically around the globe…if 15 hypersonic missiles can take out our 10 aircraft carriers in the first 20 minutes of a conflict, what does that look like?”

Meet Pete Hegseth, your new Secretary of Defense:

“The Pentagon runs perfect war game simulations, we lose every time to China… They’re building an army…We have our heads up our asses.”

Pete is an old school American first warrior. pic.twitter.com/KpWXE6dCjQ

— Autism Capital (@AutismCapital) November 13, 2024

Kyle Bass, chief investment officer of Hayman Capital Management LP told Bloomberg Trump’s so-called “China Hawks” are just realists on the threat China’s President Xi Jinping poses to the U.S., which extends past the military, and into the economy as well.

“Xi Jinping has been telling you what he’s going to do since 2017 in every public speech, every public appearance he’s made,”\ Bass said, adding investing in China is a “fool’s errand” and a “horrible idea going forward.”

After President-elect Donald Trump’s monumental win in the 2024 presidential election, a trade war between the world’s two largest economies is about to reignite, with diplomacy already deteriorating over China’s warning to Trump over U.S.-Taiwan relations.

Spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in the U.S. Liu Pengyu told Newsweek the question over Taiwan’s ownership is the biggest point of contention between the U.S. and China, noting Trump should “abide by the One China principle.”

“The U.S. government needs to earnestly abide by the One China principle and the three China-U.S. joint communiques and prudently handle Taiwan-related issues so as to avoid severe damage to China-U.S. relations and cross-Strait peace and stability.”

Various reports have noted Taiwan could potentially enter into a new $15 billion arms deal with the U.S. which includes the purchase of F-35 fighter jets, retired navy warships, and Advanced Hawkeyes.

The potential deal would add to already existing agreements made to purchase missile systems from the U.S. in early October worth $2 billion, and another $20 billion in weapons Taiwan purchased in 2023, which Taiwan has complained has not yet been fulfilled.

Unsurprisingly, the arms deals between Taiwan and the U.S. raised the ire of China, who strictly maintains “Taiwan is an inalienable part of China’s territory” through its One China principle, and cites international recognition of the principle as its legitimizer.

China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Lin Jian said in late October his nation firmly opposed any military contact between the U.S. and Taiwan after Taiwan announced it was purchasing 1,000 attack drones from defense contractor AeroVironment and defense tech firm Anduril Industries – both American companies.

“Taiwan is a province of China. There is no so-called ‘defense ministry’ in the province. China is firmly opposed to any U.S. military contact with Taiwan. This position is consistent and unequivocal,” Lin said, adding the American companies had been sanctioned.

Spokesperson for China’s Ministry of National Defense Zhang Xiaogang said the U.S. had gone back on its promises to stop arming Taiwan.

“The United States has reneged on its own promise and is intensifying efforts to arm Taiwan, emboldening the ‘Taiwan independence’ separatist forces, and pushing Taiwan closer towards the abyss of a military conflict,” Zhang said.

The spokesperson then accused the U.S. of exploiting Taiwan, stating it was taking money to feed the military-industrial complex, and further blamed growing tension on Taiwan “separatists.”

“Records have proven time and time again that the ‘Taiwan independence’ separatists and foreign interference are the source of chaos that undermine the status quo, cause cross-strait issues, and disrupt regional stability,” Zhang said.

Established in the 1970s, the “One China” policy is the U.S.’ way to acknowledge there is only one China, including Taiwan – which is officially called the Republic of China – but doesn’t directly endorse China’s sovereignty over Taiwan, according to Newsweek. Because of this, the U.S. is able to maintain an unofficial relationship with Taiwan.

During Trump’s first term in office, his administration imposed high tariffs on Chinese goods imported into the U.S. in 2018. The move caused a blow to China’s economy, however, relations further soured in 2020 when China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology leaked COVID-19 from its labs, killing millions and disrupting the world’s supply chains.

Trump has since promised during his campaign to slap at least 60% tariffs on all Chinese exports once he is back in the White House, but the Chinese Embassy has advised Trump against increasing tariffs, saying it will hurt both economies.

“There is no winner in a trade war, nor will the world benefit from it. Further increasing tariffs on Chinese products will only significantly drive up the cost of imported goods, inflict more loss on American companies and consumers, and will eventually backfire,” the Chinese Embassy told Newsweek.

China has recently been trying to energize its economy with a series of stimulus packages after its property and infrastructure markets collapsed. Analysts have warned the $1.4 billion recently approved will do little to stimulate consumption, and is nothing more than a “debt-swap” program.

Part of the reason for China’s lagging economy was the strict zero-COVID policies enforced on Chinese citizens during the pandemic, with the government keeping the restrictions in place longer than any other country, only removing them in December 2022, after protests swept the nation, according to the BBC.

The extended lockdowns cooled China’s growth, while China’s strengthening trade partnership with Russian President Vladimir Putin, as well as its rising prominence within BRICS, and the advantage it gained thanks to the Biden-Harris administration’s weaknesses improved China’s economy temporarily, but it is still in a very vulnerable situation.

The increasing pressure on China is likely to be further exacerbated by incoming American patriots to Trump’s new administration, with appointees harshly criticizing China in the past, and being given top positions in the U.S.’s defense against China.

Dubbed a “China Hawk” by mainstream media, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., will be appointed U.S. Secretary of State, and is the first person to hold that position while simultaneously being sanctioned by China, according to Bloomberg.

In a 58-page Senate report authored by Rubio titled The World China Made: ‘Made In China 2025’ Nine Years Later, it details China’s meteoric rise as a global superpower, and how it used the U.S. to get into that position.

In the report’s foreword, Rubio states Communist China is “the most powerful adversary the United states has faced in living memory.” Rubio notes China poses a far greater threat than Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, simply because China is able to better compete against the U.S. economically, and also militarily.

“It [China] controls the largest industrial base in the world, fuels its factories with market-distorting subsidies and rampant theft,” Rubio said, adding, “Beijing will have greater sway over which set of values defines the 21st century: liberty and representative government, or authoritarianism and oppression.”

During an interview with World Over, Rubio questioned why no one holds China responsible for the blatant disregard for the U.S. when it comes to stealing intellectual property, but noted Trump will hold them accountable.

“Why do Chinese companies get to do whatever they want in our economy, but our companies do not? So all Donald Trump is saying is we’re going to get along but we’re gonna get along in an even playing field, not one in which China continues to be allowed to cheat and steal, and get away with things that are bad for America,” Rubio said.

“It’s time to level the playing field with China. No more cheating. No more stealing. No more free passes.”

Senator Marco Rubio,

Secretary of the State, United States of America.

It’s time we tightened the noose on Chinese malpractices. @SenMarcoRubio pic.twitter.com/NMLzljH5cp

— William Turner (@WilliamTur21) November 12, 2024

A weapons package worth $15 billion soon could be purchased by Taiwan from the U.S., in order to demonstrate to President-elect Donald Trump that the island nation is serious about its defense against China.

According to a report from the Financial Times, Taiwan could purchase Patriot missiles, retired warships, Advanced Hawkeyes and F-35 fighter jets,

A former Trump administration official told FT Taiwan wants to make the purchase to “show they are serious,” and noted if Taiwan goes through with the deal, “they will go to the U.S. national security advisor… and present a very aggressive package of American hardware.”

FT further reported a senior Taiwanese national security official said there had been informal talks with Trump’s team about an arms deal that would demonstrate how serious Taiwan is about its own defense – this only coming a few short months after China carried out “drills” around Taiwan, cutting off key port entries.

“There are quite a few big platforms and other items that our armed forces have had their eyes on for a long time but have not been able to acquire, so there’s a lot to choose from,” the official told FT.

However, according to Reuters, Taiwan has denied any arms deals with the U.S. in the foreseeable future, with the Taiwanese government releasing a statement saying there are no new discussions in the works.

“There has been a period of consolidation and discussion between Taiwan and the United States on military needs, but there is no new stage of discussion at this time,” it said.

Reuters further reported Taiwan has complained they have not yet received the $20 billion in weapons they have ordered from the U.S.

In May, Trump told Fox News host Maria Bartiromo that Taiwan took much of the U.S. chip-making, but noted if China takes Taiwan, China could potentially turn the world “off.”

“If China takes Taiwan, they will turn the world off, potentially, I mean potentially, but remember this …Taiwan took our business away, we should have stopped them, we should have taxed them, we should have tariffed them.”

Trump suggests the US may not come to Taiwan’s defense if China attacks it, because he claims Taiwan “took our business away”.

*China spent over $5.5m at Trump-owned businesses during his presidency. @atruparpic.twitter.com/u1Ur2nIE8d
https://t.co/u1Ur2nJbXL

— The Intellectualist (@highbrow_nobrow) May 25, 2024

In late October, the Biden administration approved a $2 billion second-hand arms deal with Taiwan, which included ground-based radar systems for medium and long-range air surveillance, and National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems, along with other equipment.

In case you missed it: a $2 billion arms deal for Taiwan.https://t.co/AlSdiEtgEz

— Rich Smith (@RichSmithFool) November 9, 2024

In response, China said it would take countermeasures against Taiwan. During an interview with TaiwanPlus News, Ben Lewis, co-founder of PLATracker, an organization that tracks Chinese military activity around Taiwan, said “countermeasures” is a broad term for coercion, and the arms deal between the Biden administration and Taiwan is “significant.”

“These weapons are very significant, I mean NASAMs, you know, is a power capability, it has been combat-tested in Ukraine … It’s something that Taiwan needs in terms of bolstering its air defense,” Lewis said, adding the best way for Taiwan to defend against China is through its air defense.

China says that it will take “countermeasures” over a US$2 billion arms deal by the U.S. to Taiwan. For more on what this means, TaiwanPlus spoke to Ben Lewis, co-founder of PLATracker, an organization that tracks Chinese military activity around Taiwan. pic.twitter.com/gsj4Pux0XM

— TaiwanPlus News (@taiwanplusnews) October 28, 2024

Whether the $15 billion arms deal comes to fruition or not, China will unveil its new stealth J-35 fighter jet ahead of the nation’s biannual International Aviation and Aerospace Expo, according to TaiwanPlus News. The stealth aircraft has a similar shape to the U.S.’s F-35 fighter jet, and China plans to use the jets on its aircraft carriers.

American Economic Institute nonresident Senior Fellow and Tufts University professor Michael Beckley said in a keynote address to the 2024 World Knowledge Forum that China is on the decline, and is unlikely to just bow-out of its declining economic and geopolitical position. Specifically, China’s economy is not just slowing down, but actually reversing.

“China’s rise is not just slowing down, it’s not just ending, it’s starting to reverse,” Beckley noted, adding the “China hangover” has begun, where many countries who have tied their economic growth to China, are now feeling the sting of China’s slowdown.

“They got rich selling into the China market, they became dependent on Chinese loans, but now the slowdown in China’s economy, which lifted up so many economies around the world, is gonna drag more of them back down, and already countries are starting to point the finger at China.”

The slowdown is happening alongside China being put into a precarious geopolitical position, which could force it to conflict with its adversaries. Beckley believes China will not react well to the pressures.

“It’s [China] a classic “Peaking Power,” meaning it was once rising, but now its facing slowing growth, both in greater geopolitical push back, and what we’ve seen from past peaking powers in history; is that they don’t just mellow-out and dial back their ambitions – they tend to crack down on dissent at home, and then expand aggressively abroad,” Beckley said, adding China is already heading down that path.

Topline: Over 9,000 U.S.-funded military research projects in the past decade have been co-authored with people affiliated with the Chinese government, including work on innovations related to drones and nuclear weapons, according to a new Congressional report.

Key facts: The audit, conducted by the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, and the House Education and Workforce Committee, estimates that hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars have “contributed to China’s technological advancements and military modernization.”

Researchers at U.S. universities often receive funding from the Department of Defense to study technology that will aid “warfighting capabilities.” Many of them later take jobs with the Chinese government, including 2,500 who now work directly for China’s defense research team.

The report claims that China now “can and will use [the research] against U.S. servicemembers in the event of a conflict.”

For example, one professor who received at least $7.8 million from the U.S. to research metallic hydrogen later accepted a job at the Chinese Academy of Science. He presented his research to the Chinese Academy of Engineering Physics, which designs nuclear warheads for the Chinese government.

The audit did not disclose the professor’s name or workplace, but noted that he is still receiving federal funding because he is not currently collaborating with China.

Another scientist received $5 million from the DOD over the course of decades that aided his research into semiconductors made with graphene instead of silicone. Once he made a breakthrough in 2014, he moved to China and opened a special laboratory at Tianjin University based on his findings.

One UCLA professor received a $500,000 U.S. grant to start an artificial intelligence company in Los Angeles in 2017, but the next year he moved the startup to China. He is researching “high-level robot autonomy and cognitive robot platforms for intelligence and surveillance.”

Other universities, including Georgia Tech and the University of Pittsburgh, have opened campuses in China that, according to the audit, “conceal a sophisticated system for transferring critical U.S. technologies … to blacklisted entities linked to China’s defense and security apparatus.”

The report focuses on the DOD but estimates that an additional 60,000 research projects funded by the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health and more have benefitted China.

Search all federal, state and local government salaries and vendor spending with the AI search bot, Benjamin, at OpenTheBooks.com. 

Background: Defense research is just one way that federal funds flow into adversarial countries.

Last year, OpenTheBooks.com and Sen. Joni Ernst quantified $490 million of U.S. money sent to China and $870 million sent to Russia since 2017.

The funds covered a hodgepodge of projects, including $77,000 for Russian podcasts on being queer and $25,000 to help the Chinese surfing community combat climate change.

Summary: American taxpayers are already spending too much to fix domestic issues. There’s certainly no need to be helping rival countries develop their military.

The #WasteOfTheDay is brought to you by the forensic auditors at OpenTheBooks.com

SUPPORT TRUTHFUL JOURNALISM. MAKE A DONATION TO THE NONPROFIT WND NEWS CENTER. THANK YOU!

With North Korean troops poised to join Russia in its war against Ukraine, the threat could compel the U.S. into military action against North Korea, say some U.S. leaders. But would that be a wise, or even a sane, move?

According to a Daily Mail report, thousands of North Korean troops could enter the war between Russia and Ukraine in the days ahead. As many as 10,000 North Korean troops are currently training in Russia. Will the U.S. get involved? Despite the landslide election of Donald Trump as America’s 47th president, who has promised to extricate America from foreign wars as much as possible, Joe Biden is still the commander in chief of America’s armed forces for the next two and a half months. And he has proven more than willing to involve the U.S. in foreign conflicts, particularly Ukraine.

WorldNetDaily spoke to Army Lt. Col. (Ret.) Darin Gaub, a former UH-60 Blackhawk pilot and co-founder of Restore Liberty. According to Gaub, should Donald Trump regain the presidency, “Trump would respond by reinforcing his statement that this war should never have started, that it needs to end, and that he will make sure it ends within days of his taking office.” For Gaub, “the war continues with no end in sight, and people are dying for no reason.”

What does Congress think? For Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, the current predicament warrants that America must “seriously consider taking direct military action against the North Korean troops.”

This is nothing short of preposterous, Gaub argues. “For a congressman to weigh in like this,” he told WND, “it continues to prove to me that the experts in geopolitics and global strategy in military are not our politicians.”

“Just because you’re the chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence doesn’t mean you have any real idea of how to respond to this,” Gaub argued. “The people who voted for Turner should be flooding his office after a statement like this, questioning his comment.”

“I’m not sure what gives him the right to tell people on a mass scale that the U.S. should get involved in taking military action against North Korean troops that might invade Ukraine,” Gaub said. Consider the U.S. involvement thus far, he said: “The entire Ukraine action is a testimony to America’s lack of the ability to define a strategy with an end state that the American people can get behind and understand.”

Gaub added: “Since we haven’t been able to do that for over two and a half years now in Ukraine, why would the American people suddenly expect we can now do that? With the thought of adding another adversary nation like North Korea to the mix,” he said, “[Rep. Turner] would struggle to convince me that there’s a strategic value to expanding America’s role in this conflict.”

What’s more, he continued, “That role sure sounds a lot like some sort of boots-on-the-ground moment, and that’s just simply something the U.S. doesn’t need to be involved in.” Of equal concern to Gaub is the amount of funding and resources sent to Ukraine when “there’s a complete lack of accountability, lack of strategy, and the lack of defined purpose.”

For Gaub, “Every artillery shell signed off by Gov. Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania that goes to Ukraine is an artillery shell that’s not in the hands of an American combat soldier training or otherwise.” He lamented, “We’re hurting our own readiness by shipping our readiness to foreign nations.”

“America may be a good ally to some nations around the world,” Gaub concluded, “but the closer we bring ourselves to not being able to fight and win our own conflicts when we have to, we’re really not helping anybody.”