tech

Istanbul, Turkiye – When investigations by Al Jazeera and other media outlets in 2024 revealed that Israeli-linked artificial intelligence (AI) systems such as Lavender and Gospel had helped generate thousands of military targets in Gaza, critics warned that warfare was entering a new era – one driven not only by soldiers and bombs, but by algorithms, data, and surveillance technology.

Then, in September 2024, thousands of pagers and walkie-talkies used by members of Hezbollah exploded in coordinated attacks in Lebanon, widely attributed to Israeli intelligence operations that had turned ordinary communication devices into weapons.

And, last year, reporting by Al Jazeera also raised concerns about the use of cloud and data infrastructure linked to major US technology companies in Israeli surveillance operations involving Palestinians.

For a growing number of scholars, economists and political thinkers, such developments reflect more than just the changing nature of conflict. They show how power in the modern world is increasingly exercised not just through military force, but through technology, finance and control over information.

That argument has revived broader debates around decolonisation – a term historically associated with the dismantling of European empires after World War II, when countries across Asia, Africa and the Middle East gained formal independence.

But many proponents of what is termed “decolonial theory” – a school of thought arguing that colonial-era systems of power and hierarchy still shape modern politics, economics and knowledge – argue that colonial power structures never fully disappeared. Instead, they evolved, embedding themselves in global financial systems, technology platforms, media networks and even the production of knowledge itself.

Dependence of Global South countries on Western technology, digital infrastructure and global markets can create new forms of political and economic vulnerability, particularly across the Global South.

“A generation may have grown up believing they had never experienced colonialism or exploitation,” Esra Albayrak, board chair of the NUN Foundation for Education and Culture and daughter of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, told Al Jazeera during the World Decolonization Forum in Istanbul on May 11-12.

“Yet, mentally, they may still be living under colonial influence.”

The war in Gaza marked a turning point, Albayrak says, shining a spotlight on how international principles are not applied equally. Global institutions have so far failed to stop what many countries and rights groups have described as genocide against Palestinians.

“The world is sounding an alarm, and we can no longer afford to remain indifferent to it,” she said.

A techno-feudal era

Albayrak argues that a handful of technology companies are emerging as new, invisible centres of power, shaping how information is produced, circulated and consumed in the digital age.

She describes the digital sphere as the realm of what she calls “future colonialism”, warning that AI systems trained largely on Western-centric data risk reinforcing existing global inequalities.

“When AI systems are run by those tech companies and trained on Western sources, they risk carrying the hierarchies of the past into tomorrow’s digital world, as they now have personalised data, suppressing identity,” Albayrak said.

By this, she means that most major AI models are still trained largely on English-language and Western-produced data – a pattern critics say risks sidelining non-Western languages, cultures and perspectives.

On social media platforms, algorithms tend to amplify some conflicts while rendering others nearly invisible, effectively shaping what billions of users see, discuss and remember online.

Walter D Mignolo, professor at Duke University, argues that while what we historically see as “formal colonialism” may have largely ended, systems of Western dominance continue through economics, culture, technology and knowledge production.

“Coloniality is not over. It is all over the world,” Mignolo said, arguing that modern ideas of development and progress often have the effect of pressuring societies to conform to Western norms.

Rather than simply resisting those systems, he said, societies must find a way to “re-exist” by rebuilding intellectual and cultural autonomy outside dominant global frameworks.

Colonisers in the financial age

The March 2026 Global Debt Report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) reveals that 44 countries face severe debt burdens, often aggravated by global conflicts, forcing some governments to spend more on interest payments than on health or education.

This is not a new phenomenon, as developing countries have been labouring under the weight of foreign debt for decades.

But British political economist and author Ann Pettifor told Al Jazeera that modern forms of domination are now increasingly embedded not in empires or nation-states, but in financial systems operating beyond democratic oversight.

Pettifor points to the growing influence of “shadow” banking networks – financial institutions operating largely outside traditional banking regulations – and giant asset managers such as BlackRock, which manages $13 trillion in assets.

Much of the global financial architecture now functions largely outside the regulatory control of governments, she says, including that of Western states themselves.

“This is not a state colonising other states,” Pettifor said. “This is the financial system colonising the whole world, including my country and the US.”

She argues that elected governments increasingly struggle to control key economic realities – from energy prices to commodity markets – because those systems are dictated by global financial actors operating far beyond public accountability.

In Nigeria, for example, Pettifor says, efforts to expand domestic refining capacity continue to face pressure from international financial institutions and global energy markets to keep fuel prices tied to global markets and maintain reliance on imported refined oil products, despite its vast oil reserves.

Coordinated cooperation between developing nations may be necessary to challenge the dominance of Western-centred financial systems, Pettifor says, pointing to growing efforts across parts of West Africa to expand regional refining capacity and reduce dependence on imported fuel. Yet such ambitions can also leave critical sectors dependent on the decisions and influence of a small number of powerful private actors.

Global financial markets, algorithm-driven platforms, and foreign-controlled digital infrastructure increasingly define everyday life – from fuel and food prices to the information people consume online and the technologies governments and societies depend on, observers say.

A ‘mastery complex’

As wars become increasingly influenced by AI, digital infrastructure and financial dependency, debates around colonisation are focusing less on territorial control and more on who influences energy prices, lending systems, access to technology and the flow of information across borders, observers say.

Albayrak draws a parallel between today’s debates around technology and global power and Rudyard Kipling’s 1899 poem “The White Man’s Burden”, published as the US took control of the Philippines following the Spanish-American War. The poem framed colonial expansion as a moral obligation to “civilise” other societies rather than an exercise of domination.

Albayrak said such traces of “mastery complex” still survive today, though in different forms – not necessarily through military occupation, but through technological, financial and informational influence.

But what the world really needs, she argues, is a global order built not on hierarchy, but on shared responsibility.

“The burden should belong to humanity collectively.”

The latest developments surrounding Nvidia’s H200 chip sales to China highlight the growing complexity of the technological rivalry between the United States and China. Although Washington has reportedly approved several major Chinese firms to purchase Nvidia’s advanced artificial intelligence chips, no deliveries have taken place so far.

The situation reflects how geopolitical competition is increasingly disrupting even officially approved commercial agreements in the semiconductor sector.

Nvidia, the world’s leading artificial intelligence chip manufacturer, now finds itself caught between United States export control policies and China’s push for technological self reliance.

What Is the H200 Chip?

The H200 is Nvidia’s second most powerful artificial intelligence chip and is designed for advanced AI model training and data center operations.

The chip is particularly valuable for companies developing large language models, cloud computing systems, and next generation AI applications.

Before export restrictions tightened, Nvidia dominated China’s advanced AI chip market with an estimated market share of around 95 percent.

China also represented a major source of revenue for Nvidia, making access to the Chinese market strategically important for the company’s long term growth.

Which Chinese Companies Were Approved?

According to reports, the United States Commerce Department approved around ten Chinese firms to purchase H200 chips.

These reportedly include major Chinese technology companies such as:

• Alibaba
• Tencent
• ByteDance
• JD.com

Several distributors were also reportedly approved, including:

Under the licensing terms, each approved customer could reportedly purchase up to 75,000 chips.

However, despite these approvals, no actual sales or deliveries have yet been completed.

Why Have the Sales Stalled?

The delays appear to stem from concerns on both the United States and Chinese sides.

Chinese Concerns

Chinese authorities reportedly fear that reliance on Nvidia chips could undermine Beijing’s efforts to strengthen its domestic semiconductor industry.

China has invested heavily in local AI chip development, particularly through companies such as Huawei.

Beijing increasingly sees semiconductor self sufficiency as a national security priority amid escalating technological competition with Washington.

There are also concerns within China regarding supply chain security and possible vulnerabilities linked to imported American technology.

Recent Chinese regulations aimed at reducing foreign dependence in critical technology sectors have reportedly intensified scrutiny of these chip purchases.

United States Restrictions

The United States has simultaneously imposed strict export control requirements on advanced semiconductor sales to China.

Chinese buyers must reportedly prove that the chips will not be used for military purposes and that adequate security procedures are in place.

Nvidia must also satisfy inventory and compliance conditions under American export laws.

Additionally, reports suggest the Trump administration negotiated an unusual arrangement in which the United States would receive a portion of revenue generated from the chip sales. This reportedly requires the chips to pass through American territory before shipment to China.

Such conditions have further complicated the transaction process.

Jensen Huang’s Diplomatic Push

Nvidia Chief Executive Officer Jensen Huang has emerged as a key figure in efforts to preserve Nvidia’s access to the Chinese market.

Huang reportedly joined President Donald Trump during a diplomatic visit linked to talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

His participation underscores the economic significance of the semiconductor dispute and the importance of China to Nvidia’s business strategy.

Huang has repeatedly warned that export controls risk permanently weakening Nvidia’s position in China while encouraging Chinese firms to accelerate domestic alternatives.

The Larger Strategic Battle

The Nvidia dispute reflects a broader struggle between the United States and China over technological dominance in artificial intelligence.

Washington increasingly views advanced semiconductor technology as a strategic national security asset. American policymakers fear that unrestricted access to advanced AI chips could strengthen China’s military and technological capabilities.

China, meanwhile, sees semiconductor independence as essential to reducing vulnerability to foreign pressure and sanctions.

As a result, both sides are attempting to balance economic interests with long term strategic competition.

Implications for the Global AI Industry

The uncertainty surrounding Nvidia’s China business could have major implications for the global artificial intelligence industry.

If Chinese companies lose access to Nvidia chips, they may accelerate investment in domestic alternatives, potentially reshaping the global semiconductor market over time.

At the same time, restrictions on AI chip trade risk fragmenting the global technology ecosystem into competing American and Chinese spheres.

This could reduce international collaboration, disrupt supply chains, and intensify geopolitical competition over emerging technologies.

Future Outlook

Despite current delays, neither the United States nor China appears willing to completely sever technological and commercial ties.

However, the Nvidia case demonstrates that semiconductor trade between the two powers is becoming increasingly politicized and strategically sensitive.

The future of AI competition may ultimately depend not only on innovation, but also on which country can build the most resilient and independent technology ecosystem.

For Nvidia, maintaining its position between the world’s two largest economies will likely remain one of its greatest strategic challenges.

Conclusion

The stalled Nvidia H200 deal illustrates how deeply geopolitical tensions now shape the global technology industry.

Although the United States has approved limited chip exports to China, political distrust, national security concerns, and strategic competition continue to obstruct implementation.

As artificial intelligence becomes central to economic and military power, semiconductor trade is no longer simply a commercial issue. It has become a defining arena in the broader contest between Washington and Beijing for technological leadership in the twenty first century.

With information from Reuters,

Just weeks after Justin Bieber’s well-received Coachella headline gig, the singer played a small private event for tech, entertainment and defense industry moguls. Executives at controversial firms, such as surveillance tech giant Palantir, were also on the bill.

Bieber was a headliner at WNDR, entertainment executive Jeffrey Katzenberg’s invitation-only confab at the Rosewood Miramar in Montecito last week. The programming for the event was first reported by Puck.

The ultra A-list talks and guests included director James Cameron and former Disney CEO Bob Iger, YouTube CEO Neal Mohan, FIFA President Gianni Infantino, Oprah Winfrey and Julia Roberts, comedians Chris Rock and Trevor Noah and artist Jeff Koons on a panel discussion with LACMA chief Michael Govan.

Bieber, meanwhile, performed a Wednesday poolside set for attendees at the Rosewood. The “Swag” singer reportedly became the highest-paid headliner in Coachella history last month, and its most lucrative merch seller.

Representatives for Bieber did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

While there was lighter programming (like a karaoke party with pop producers StarGate and a talk about snacks with chef Nancy Silverton), the bill included talks and cameos from major weapons and surveillance technology firms noted for their support for — or deep engagement with — the Trump administration.

One panel featured Anduril Industries’ Palmer Luckey, who recently welcomed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to its Southern California headquarters. “We are rebuilding the Arsenal of Freedom,” Hegseth said after the Anduril visit.

Palantir Chief Executive Alex Karp led another talk. Palantir’s AI-driven defense and surveillance software has faced scrutiny around how tech like its Maven Smart System may have been used to target civilians in the Iran war.

Karp also published a recent book, “The Technological Republic,” where he wrote that “We must resist the shallow temptation of a vacant and hollow pluralism. We, in America and more broadly the West, have for the past half century resisted defining national cultures in the name of inclusivity. But inclusion into what?”

Katzenberg’s WNDR conference is one of several recent multi-discipline, ultra-elite gatherings hosted by CEOs, including Jeff Bezos and Eric Schmidt. Katzenberg founded his investment firm WndrCo in 2017.

The emails continually fill my inbox: Startups exclaiming they have engineered a solution to protect homes from wildfires.

I’ve been pitched a system that monitors fires via satellite so it can automatically turn on water cannons when fire gets too close. Another offered high-tech speakers that homeowners can place around their home that blasts powerful but silent sound waves designed to disrupt the chemical process of combustion.

One recent one was so outlandish, I couldn’t ignore it:

An entrepreneur together with a former mayor of Malibu were appearing on Shark Tank to pitch a new system to literally lower an entire home into a subterranean vault when a wildfire approaches.

Many fire officials and experts are optimistic we really can find part of the solution to California’s wildfire crisis in the proliferating world of home defense tech. But they also warn these wild ideas are often expensive as well as largely unproven.

Of course I tuned in to Shark Tank.

“I know, this sounds like a magic trick,” entrepreneur Holden Forrest told the Sharks.

“It sounds crazy,” investor and businesswoman Barbara Corcoran interjected.

Nonetheless, Corcoran, who lost her Pacific Palisades home in the 2025 fires, invested $1 million in exchange for a 20% ownership stake in the company — on the condition that its first proof-of-concept home is her own.

If you, like Corcoran, want to put down some serious money for exciting new tech, there are a few things you should know.

This kind of tech is often significantly more expensive than proven, less flashy approaches to reduce the risk of your home burning — such as covering vents with mesh so embers can’t sneak into the home and multipaned windows that are less likely to shatter in the extreme heat, allowing flames and embers to enter.

For example, Forrest expects the retractable homes to cost around $1,000 per square foot. The company hopes to eventually get it down to around $400.

For reference, Palisades fire survivors expect to pay around $800 per square foot to rebuild, while Eaton fire survivors expect to pay just shy of $600. It’s also more than a new series of fire-resilient homes in the Palisades that incorporate both tried-and-true and flashy new tech, sitting around $700.

Fire safety experts also warn that some of this technology can encourage dangerous behavior such as ignoring evacuation orders and staying to defend homes. For example, even when water cannon companies insist their technology can function autonomously, some homeowners nonetheless stay behind to operate them.

Forrest rejected the idea that his technology, HiberTec Homes, would encourage homeowners to disobey evacuation orders — he argued the opposite. The trust that comes with knowing your home will survive actually decreases the likelihood residents will stay behind, he told the Sharks.

Many of the new home protection systems remain unproven, in part because it takes time for researchers to evaluate them. There are three steps to that:

First, scientists head to the lab to see whether the physics behind the tech works as expected in controlled tests.

Second, they investigate individual homes that used the tech in major fires to piece together whether the same physics held together in the chaos and immense power of real-world fires.

Third, they determine whether what they saw in the lab and on the ground translates to a reduced risk at scale. To do this researchers survey thousands of structures that faced wildfires and compare the percentage with the tech that survived with the percentage without the tech that survived.

If you live in a fire-prone area, and you understand the risks and uncertainties of new tech and have money to spare, by all means, build the wildfire bunker of your dreams — just email me an invite to check it out.

Otherwise, Cal Fire maintains a list of the less flashy solutions that have already gone through their scientific paces.

More recent wildfire news

After months of fierce debate between fire officials and residents in fire-prone areas, California released a new “Zone Zero” proposal outlining landscaping restrictions within 5 feet of people’s homes. Unlike previous proposals, many Southern Californians seem to be … OK with this one.

California regulators determined State Farm “delayed, underpaid, and buried policyholders in red tape.” The Department of Insurance may now seek to suspend the company’s license. Meanwhile, the U.S. Justice Department filed a brief supporting 60 fire victims who are suing State Farm and other insurers, my colleague Laurence Darmiento reports.

Survivors of the 2023 Maui fires could start receiving their share of a $4-billion settlement with Hawaiian Electric, the state of Hawaii, Maui County and other defendants as early as June. However, few will break even, reports Stewart Yerton of Honolulu Civil Beat. Lawyers will get a slice for legal fees; the Internal Revenue Service may claw back as much as a third if Congress doesn’t resurrect a tax exemption for such settlements; and insurers who paid out claims will get 10% of the money.

Oh — and this Saturday is Fire Service Day. There’s a good chance your local fire station will hold an open house, complete with fire equipment demos and maybe even free pancakes.

A few last things in climate news

Tom Steyer, a Wall Street prodigy turned billionaire who made a portion of his money off investments in coal-fired power plants, is now trying to use that money to convince Californians he’s the best candidate on climate and energy affordability. Read my colleagues Ben Wieder and Hayley Smith’s full profile here.

The last California-bound oil tanker to pass through the Strait of Hormuz before the Iran war reached the Port of Long Beach, my colleague Blanca Begert reports. After the ship finishes offloading its crude oil, California will have to manage a deficit of roughly 200,000 barrels of oil per day.

The company that produces the widely used weedkiller Roundup promised to “provide a small thanks” to the Environmental Protection Agency administrator after the agency asserted it would not approve a label for the weedkiller warning it causes cancer, reports Sky Chadde of Investigate Midwest. The revelation came at a congressional hearing last week as the company seeks immunity in the Supreme Court.

This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our Boiling Point podcast here.

For more wildfire news, follow @nohaggerty on X and @nohaggerty.bsky.social on Bluesky.

SHAKIRA suffered major tech issues during her huge Copacabana Beach concert over the weekend.

The global superstar faced backlash as eagle-eyed viewers spotted the mishaps during the performance.

An estimated 2 million people attended the show in Rio De Janeiro, where the popstar delivered a nearly 30-song set that included guest appearances by Anitta, Maria Bethania, and Caetano Veloso.

Although she performed in style, the sound and visuals didn’t match up at times.

Clips from the gig quickly went viral on X, but while some viewers were left disappointed, others weren’t surprised, saying it’s common at large-scale shows.

Taking to X, one person said: “If ur gonna lip at least make it believable”.

SHAK SHOCK

Shakira slammed for VERY cold reaction as cameraman falls over in front of her

STAGE HORROR

Worker crushed to death while building stage for Shakira’s Rio de Janeiro show

Another added: “This is genuinely a f******* mess”.

The Colombian singer’s performance follows similar shows by Lady Gaga last year and Madonna in 2024, which were also attended by huge crowds.

“I arrived here when I was 18 years old, dreaming about singing for you,” Shakira told the crowd. “And now look at this. Life is magical.”

She sang several fan favourites during her set, including Hips Don’t Lie, La Tortura, Waka Waka, Whenever Wherever, She Wolf and La Bicicleta.

The show also featured a massive drone show, which amazed the crowd.

Despite being a free concert, Shakira’s show was expected to generate an estimated $150 million in tourism revenue to the city, according to local government.

This isn’t the first mishap the pop star has had live on stage.

In February, Shakira suffered a nasty fall during a live stage performance, with the singer twisting her ankle in the middle of her concert.

She was performing in San Salvador when she left fans worried during a mid-song tumble.

Singing her hit song Si Te Vas during the night, Shakira was walking across the stage when her right ankle suddenly twisted.

She then completely toppled to her side, falling onto her elbow as she brought her microphone stand down with her.

During the moment, Shakira stopped singing as gasps could be heard amongst the audience.

But ever the professional, she quickly got herself back up and managed to continue the song – with the star’s band continuing as her guitarist cheered her on.

China currently boasts one of the lowest rates of homicide, violent crime, and gun and explosive incidents globally. The Chinese-style sense of security is a comprehensive system integrating advanced technology, community engagement, and continuous improvement in living standards. This has positioned China as one of the safest countries in the world, according to the 2025 Global Security Report, with 98.2% of Chinese citizens feeling safe by 2025, further solidifying its status as a globally stable destination. The pillars of this Chinese-style sense of security are built upon advanced digital technologies, relying on smart networks and modern surveillance systems such as facial recognition and artificial intelligence to enhance the security network within China.

The phrase “Chinese-style security” refers to China’s model for achieving social stability and reducing crime rates. This model is based primarily on three pillars: proactive prevention systems, where, rather than simply addressing crime after it occurs, China focuses on prevention and control through extensive security networks and a constant police presence in key areas; the continuation of the community mobilization system (the Fengqiao model), a historical concept (currently revived) that involves citizens and local committees in resolving community disputes before they escalate into crimes or legal cases, thus promoting the idea of ​​self-regulation and public cooperation with Chinese authorities; and the use of digitalization and artificial intelligence technologies, where China has heavily invested in smart city technologies and the Skynet system. Skynet utilizes millions of cameras equipped with facial recognition and big data analytics to predict suspicious activities and track wanted individuals with high precision. This combination aims to create a secure environment that supports economic growth within China, despite the occasional international debates it sparks regarding the balance between public security and individual privacy.

Data and reports confirm exceptional social stability in China, with citizens’ sense of security exceeding 98% for six consecutive years. This security is attributed to effective governance, advanced digital technologies, and a high standard of living, making China a safe destination for investment and a source of stability. Key features of Chinese governance and the sense of security include increased levels of trust and optimism, with the Chinese people ranking among the world’s highest in trust in the government and optimism about the future, according to trust index reports. A robust safety net exists, built on Chinese-style security through crime prevention systems, community mobilization, and enhanced digitalization. These systemic features, along with numerous other advantages, reflect the stability within China and the state’s ability to fulfill its commitments and provide a safe and stable social environment, earning international praise, particularly in light of global geopolitical conflicts. With the continuation of Chinese-style modernization, ongoing modernization has contributed to raising living standards, thus strengthening the sense of security within China.

Accordingly, the Chinese government and the authorities of the ruling Communist Party of China support several pillars and points that support this approach to enhance the sense of security within the country. Based on current developments, focusing on security as the foundation for development in China, the stability of the situation in China is seen as a key element in boosting investor confidence and building a safe and stable living environment for citizens, which contributes to economic growth. With the intensification of the Chinese-style modernization model, modernization in China is not limited to economic growth but also focuses on improving the quality of life, providing employment opportunities, and upgrading social services, which significantly raises living standards. With the stable sense of security, China, through well-considered social policies, has succeeded in maintaining a high level of social security, which enhances public trust in the government and contributes to long-term stability. This has resulted in continued international praise (amidst crises). At a time when several regions around the world are experiencing geopolitical conflicts, China’s stability stands out as a model attracting the attention and scrutiny of international observers, particularly due to the Chinese state’s ability to effectively manage its internal affairs compared to many systems worldwide, including American and Western ones. This strengthens China’s capacity to lead the developing Global South and strongly promote its model of Chinese governance.

Based on the preceding understanding and analysis, we can see how the development for security strategy can form a fundamental pillar within the Chinese governance system. Improving living standards contributes to consolidating social stability and public security within China. This analysis highlights a delicate equation in the contemporary Chinese landscape, where continuous development (Chinese-style modernization) is linked to social stability, creating a secure environment in a turbulent world.

May 1 (Asia Today) — North Korea has transferred missile technology to Iran over more than 40 years, evolving from early Scud missile supplies to capabilities approaching intercontinental ballistic missiles, while also helping build factories, underground facilities and naval systems, according to U.S. experts.

Bruce Bechtol made the assessment at the annual International Council on Korean Studies conference titled “Challenges of the U.S.-South Korea Alliance 2026,” co-hosted in Washington by the Hudson Institute and the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea.

Bechtol, co-author of the book Rogue Allies: Iran and North Korea’s Strategic Partnership, said Iran began acquiring Scud missiles in the early 1980s during the Iran-Iraq War. Initially supplied in limited numbers by Libya, Iran later established contact with North Korea and imported roughly 100 Scud missiles, which it used to strike Iraqi cities during what became known as the “War of the Cities.”

He said Iran subsequently ordered an additional 200 to 250 Scud-C missiles and, with North Korean assistance, produced and upgraded them domestically. This led to the development of Iran’s current short-range ballistic missile, the Qiam, which has an estimated range of about 800 kilometers.

Bechtol added that Iran attended North Korea’s Nodong missile test in 1993, along with a Pakistani delegation, and later signed a contract to acquire about 150 Nodong missiles. North Korean engineers helped build production facilities near Isfahan, where Iran manufactured the missiles under the name Shahab-3.

He said North Korean specialists further modified these systems, leading to the development of the Emad missile, with a range of about 1,750 kilometers, and the Ghadr missile, with a range of about 1,900 kilometers. Both systems have been used repeatedly and are capable of reaching targets across Israel.

Bechtol also said North Korea sold 19 Musudan missiles – based on the Soviet-era submarine-launched ballistic missile R-27 – to Iran after obtaining the technology from Russian scientists following the collapse of the Soviet Union. He noted that Iran modified the missile for land-based launch, which introduced structural instability and limited its success rate to about 50%.

Based on the Musudan platform, Iran developed the Khorramshahr missile, which can carry a warhead approximately four times heavier than the original design and has an estimated range of 2,000 kilometers. The Israeli military has estimated its penetration rate at about 8%.

Bechtol cited media reports that North Korea transferred 80-ton-class rocket boosters – equivalent to first-stage propulsion systems for intercontinental ballistic missiles – to Iran even during negotiations over the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. He noted that the United States imposed sanctions on both countries in 2016 and 2019 in response.

He said a 2021 report by a United Nations panel of experts also detailed such transfers and assessed that technologies similar to those used in North Korea’s Hwasong-12 and Hwasong-15 missiles had been shared with Iran.

Bechtol further claimed that ballistic missiles fired by Iran toward the U.S.-U.K. base on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean in March – from a distance of about 4,000 kilometers – were based on North Korean technology.

Beyond missiles, North Korea has supported Iran and its allied groups by providing military hardware and infrastructure. Bechtol said Pyongyang sold 14 Yono-class submarines – the same type used in the 2010 sinking of South Korea’s Cheonan warship – and helped build production facilities for them. North Korea also supplied 46 fast infiltration boats and assisted in constructing related manufacturing sites.

He said North Korean engineers were involved in building underground nuclear-related facilities in Natanz and Isfahan, which he described as difficult to destroy without the use of U.S. B-2 bombers.

Bechtol also pointed to evidence that North Korean weapons were used by Hamas during its October 2023 attack on Israel, including 122 mm rockets, anti-tank weapons, Type 73 machine guns and Type 58 rifles marked in Korean.

Separately, an Israeli research center reported that North Korean arms exporter Korea Mining Development Trading Corporation helped build two tunnels in Lebanon for Hezbollah, measuring about 25 miles (40 kilometers) and 45 miles (72 kilometers), at a cost of about $13 million.

Bechtol said North Korea has also generated significant revenue through military cooperation. Citing research from the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses, he estimated that Pyongyang earned about $20 billion over roughly 15 months from transactions with Russia since late 2023 – close to its annual gross domestic product of about $26 billion.

Andrew Scobell said cooperation among China, Russia, Iran and North Korea – sometimes referred to as “CRINK” – is not a formal multilateral alliance but rather a collection of bilateral relationships.

Scobell added that North Korea appears to have exercised restraint in supplying weapons to Iran following U.S. and Israeli strikes earlier this year, citing intelligence assessments reported by international media.

Former U.N. sanctions panel expert William Newcomb said North Korea’s proliferation activities have contributed significantly to instability in the Middle East and called for a comprehensive assessment of their global economic impact, suggesting the cost could exceed $1 trillion.

Scobell also noted that North Korea’s strategic value to Russia could decline significantly if the war in Ukraine ends, indicating that the current level of cooperation is closely tied to ongoing conflict dynamics.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260501010000016

WASHINGTON, April 28 (UPI) — Supreme Court justices appeared divided Tuesday morning about whether a U.S. tech company can be held liable for aiding the Chinese government’s alleged torture of a spiritual minority.

The case is centers on whether practitioners in China of the Falun Gong religion — also called Falun Dafa — can sue California-based tech company Cisco Systems for aiding and abetting violations of the 18th-century Alien Tort Statute and the Torture Victim Protection Act, which was enacted in 1992.

Cisco attorney Kannon Shanmugam called for barring aiding and abetting liability. He argued that allowing liability to be implied would harm the government’s separation of power.

Much of Tuesday’s debate hinged on whether the statute’s 200-year-old “law of nations” wording was applicable to the relatively more modern concept of human rights abuses, as well as whether the first Congress meant for the victim protection act to include second liability for aiding and abetting torture.

The case marks the latest attempt to define the scope of the statue, which for over two centuries has allowed foreigners to bring lawsuits in U.S. courts for serious violations of international law.

More than 20 years ago, Cisco developed and sold to the Chinese government a surveillance system, which the government used to find, interrogate and allegedly torture Falun Gong practitioners.

During arguments for Cisco Systems Inc. vs. Doe I, some justices emphasized Cisco’s awareness of their technology’s role in persecution, while others said that including liability for aiding torture in the alien tort statue contradicted with historical precedent and had foreign policy risks.

But no clear majority converged around either position in the conservative majority court.

“We’ve maybe misled Congress into thinking, ‘Oh, we don’t need to do anything about these human rights things, the courts are taking care of it,'” Justice Brett Kavanaugh said.

“I’m concerned at a separation of powers level that we’re not really allowing suits to go forward, but Congress thinks we are because of a lack of clarity in our case law.”

Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sotomayor appeared more supportive of those who brought forward the original lawsuit — several Chinese nationals and one U.S. citizen.

Addressing the wording of the Torture Victim Protection Act, Sotomayor told Shanmugam: “I’m not sure how you get to your position that ‘subjects to’ can’t mean aiding and abetting because command liability doesn’t necessarily require subjecting someone to the torture.”

“It makes someone who’s in a command position who knows of the torture and permits it to happen … aiding and abetting. We’ve defined aiding and abetting as an active step in permitting and encouraging the substantive act.”

The Alien Tort Statute grants federal district courts original jurisdiction over any civil action in which an alien sues for a tort “committed in violation of the law of nations or of a treaty of the United States.”

“What’s the point of previous [Supreme Court] decisions that determined U.S. corporations could be defendants?” said Sophia Cope, senior staff attorney at Electronic Frontier Foundation, who helped write an amicus brief in support of the Falun Gong members.

“Excluding second liability from the ATS would be a huge loophole for companies to sell services which are used for human rights violations.”

By rejecting judicially created aiding and abetting liability, the court would close the last major loophole that the plaintiffs’ lawyers have “exploited” to keep cases with such claims under the ATS and TVPA alive, said Cory Andrews, vice-president of litigation at the Washington Legal Foundation. The foundation submitted a brief in support of Cisco in February.

“It would reaffirm that the ATS is a narrow 1789 statute, not a modern vehicle for global human-rights enforcement,” Andrews said.

The case had its origins 15 years ago. In 2011, the plaintiffs — 13 Chinese nationals and one U.S. citizen — filed the original suit in the District Court for the Northern District of California, claiming they were targeted using Cisco’s technology and then detained and tortured.

The district court dismissed the claims, but it was brought to the Supreme Court after a panel of federal judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit agreed in 2023 that the plaintiffs had met a legal threshold to continue with the lawsuit.

A decision is expected by the end of June.

Texas Tech quarterback Brendan Sorsby is entering a residential treatment program for a gambling addiction and will be away from the team indefinitely, he and the Red Raiders announced Monday in a joint statement.

According to ESPN, Sorsby decided to seek treatment after it was discovered he made “thousands of online bets on a variety of sports via a gambling app.”

Multiple media outlets are reporting that Sorsby placed bets on Indiana football to win games during the 2022 season, when he was a redshirt freshman for the Hoosiers. He reportedly did not place bets on the one game in which he participated that season.

“We love Brendan and support his decision to seek professional help,” Texas Tech coach Joey McGuire said in a statement. “Taking this step requires courage, and our primary focus is on him as a person. Our program is behind Brendan as he prioritizes his health.”

The team said it would have no further statement on Sorsby’s status or treatment progress at this time.

The NCAA is investigating Sorsby’s gambling, according to multiple media reports.

“Due to confidentiality rules put in place by NCAA member schools, the NCAA will not comment on current, pending or potential investigations,” the NCAA said Monday in a statement released to news organizations.

“However, the NCAA takes sports betting very seriously and is committed to the protection of student-athlete well-being and the integrity of competition. The Assn. works with integrity monitoring services, state regulators and other stakeholders to conduct appropriate due diligence whenever reports are received.”

The most recent NCAA guidelines about sports wagering state that student-athletes who bet on their own games or on other sports at their school could “potentially face permanent loss of collegiate eligibility.” Betting on their sport in games not involving their school could result in “the loss of 50% of one season of eligibility will be considered.”

Other violations could also result in loss of eligibility with the amount of time missed based on the amount of money wagered.

Sorsby spent two seasons at Indiana and two at Cincinnati before transferring to Texas Tech this offseason for his final year of eligibility. He has completed 61.4% of his passes for 7,208 yards with 60 touchdowns and 18 interceptions, and rushed for 1,295 yards and 22 touchdowns.

Cincinnati has filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio against Sorsby for allegedly breaching the name, image and likeness contract he signed in July that stated a $1-million buyout would be required within 30 days if he transferred.

On Monday, Sorsby’s attorneys filed a motion to dismiss, stating that “the parties’ contractual intent to pay Mr. Sorsby for playing football was fully realized, and UC’s attempt to now unlawfully penalize Mr. Sorsby for exercising his transfer right under the NCAA’s rules and UC’s efforts to discourage and threaten other players from doing the same thing is invalid as a matter of law.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Bejing tightens scrutiny of artificial intelligence industry amid intensifying geopolitical rivalry with the US over the technology.

China has said it is blocking tech giant Meta from an acquisition of artificial intelligence (AI) startup Manus, tightening scrutiny of investment in domestic startups developing frontier technologies from the United States.

China’s National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) said on Monday that it was prohibiting the foreign acquisition of Manus, without specifically naming Meta.

The move highlights Beijing’s increased concern over US acquisitions of Chinese AI talent and intellectual property, as Washington tries to limit Chinese tech firms’ access to advanced US chips.

It was not immediately clear on what grounds China was seeking the annulment of a deal involving a Singapore-based company and how, if at all, a completed acquisition transaction would be unwound.

Manus, which has Chinese roots but is based in Singapore, provides general-purpose AI agents designed to carry out complex tasks with minimal human intervention.

The call to annul the deal was made by the commission in accordance with Chinese laws and regulations, the NDRC’s statement said.

California-based Meta said in response to the statement: “The transaction complied fully with applicable law. We anticipate an appropriate resolution to the inquiry.”

A White House spokesperson said in a statement that the Trump administration “will continue defending America’s leading and innovative technology sector against undue foreign interference of any sort”.

Meta announced in December that it was acquiring Manus. It is a rare case of a major US tech group buying an AI company with strong links to China. The deal was forecasted to help expand AI offerings across Meta’s platforms.

Meta had said there would be “no continuing Chinese ownership interests in Manus” and that Manus would discontinue its services and operations in China.

But China said in January that it would investigate whether the acquisition would be consistent with its laws and regulations.

After a $75m fundraising round led by US venture firm Benchmark in May 2025, Manus shut its China offices, laying off dozens of employees. It then moved its operations to Singapore.

This enabled Manus’s parent company, Butterfly Effect, to reincorporate ⁠in Singapore and bypass US investment restrictions on Chinese AI firms, as well as Chinese rules limiting domestic AI firms’ ability to transfer their IP and capital overseas.

The Chinese bid to block the deal comes weeks before a planned mid-May summit between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing.

Chinese startup says DeepSeek-V4-Pro beats all rival open models for maths and coding.

China’s DeepSeek has unveiled the latest versions of its signature artificial intelligence-powered chatbot, a year after its flagship model sent shockwaves through the global tech scene.

The Chinese startup launched preview versions of DeepSeek-V4-Pro and DeepSeek-V4-Flash on Friday as it touted its ability to go toe-to-toe with US rivals such as OpenAI and Google.

Like DeepSeek’s previous chatbots, V4-Pro and V4-Flash follow an open-source model, meaning developers are free to use and modify the source code at will.

DeepSeek-V4-Pro beats all rival open models for maths and coding, and trails only Google’s Gemini 3.1-Pro, a closed model, for world knowledge, DeepSeek said in an announcement on social media.

The “pro” version’s performance falls only “marginally short” of OpenAI’s GPT‑5.4 and Gemini 3.1-Pro, “suggesting a developmental trajectory that trails state-of-the-art frontier models by approximately 3 to 6 months,” the Hangzhou-based startup said.

The “flash” model has similar reasoning abilities to the “pro” version, while offering faster response times and “highly cost-effective” usage pricing, the firm said.

The release comes after DeepSeek-R1 stunned the tech sector upon its launch in January last year with capabilities broadly comparable with those of ChatGPT and Gemini.

Marc Andreessen, a prominent Silicon Valley venture capitalist with close ties to United States President Donald Trump, hailed the model’s release at the time as “AI’s Sputnik moment”.

The performance of the Chinese-developed model attracted particular attention as its developers claimed to have spent less than $6m on computing costs – a fraction of the multibillion-dollar budgets that are usual in Silicon Valley.

Some tech analysts challenged DeepSeek’s account of working with such scant resources, arguing that the startup most likely had access to greater funding and more advanced chips than acknowledged.

DeepSeek’s arrival on the scene prompted blowback in some countries amid concerns about data protection and Chinese government censorship.

Multiple US states, Australia, Taiwan, South Korea, Denmark and Italy introduced bans or other restrictions on DeepSeek-R1 shortly after its release, citing privacy and national security concerns.