Today

A Georgia judge has dismissed the sprawling 2020 election interference case against Donald Trump, ending the final effort to prosecute the president for allegedly attempting to overturn his loss to Joe Biden.

Peter Skandalakis, who took over the case after the initial prosecutor’s removal, asked Judge Scott McAfee to dismiss the charges on Wednesday.

Trump’s lawyer Steve Sadow praised the decision to end the “political persecution” against the president.

The dismissal concludes the last of Trump’s four criminal cases, only one of which saw trial and resulted in a conviction.

A Georgia appeals court removed Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from the case after it determined a romantic relationship with a special prosecutor created an “appearance of impropriety”.

Skandalakis, executive director of the nonpartisan agency Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia, appointed himself to the case after Willis’ disqualification and when other state prosecutors declined to take the case.

In Wednesday’s motion to a Fulton County judge, he said he was discontinuing the case “to serve the interests of justice and promote judicial finality”.

“As a former elected official who ran as both a Democrat and a Republican and now is the Executive Director of a non-partisan agency, this decision is not guided by a desire to advance an agenda but is based on my beliefs and understanding of the law,” Skandalakis added.

Around five million votes for president were cast in Georgia in 2020, with Biden winning the critical swing state by just under 12,000 votes.

Trump and some of his allies refused to accept the result, and the state quickly became a focal point for efforts to overturn the election.

In January 2021, The Washington Post published a recording of Trump speaking with Georgia’s Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger.

“I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have. Because we won the state,” Trump said in the recording.

Willis began investigating Trump’s activities soon after the report, convening a special grand jury to weigh the facts.

Willis filed an indictment in August 2023 alleging that Trump conspired with 18 other defendants to interfere in the election result. The charges included racketeering and other state offences.

The group “refused to accept that Trump lost, and they knowingly and wilfully joined a conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump”.

Four co-defendants took plea deals with prosecutors that resulted mostly in fines, suspended sentences and community service, including attorneys Sidney Powell, Kenneth Cheseboro, and Jenna Ellis.

Wednesday’s dismissal also applies to the remaining co-defendants, including former New York mayor and Trump’s former attorney Rudy Giuliani and Mark Meadows, chief of staff during Trump’s first presidency.

Mr Sadow, president Trump’s lead attorney in the case, praised the decision to drop the charges.

“The political persecution of President Trump by disqualified DA Fani Willis is finally over,” he said. “This case should never have been brought. A fair and impartial prosecutor has put an end to this lawfare.”

The Georgia election interference case was once considered the most threatening of Trump’s four criminal indictments, because he could not pardon himself from state-level charges if he returned to office.

Prosecutors brought Trump to the Fulton County Jail, where they took his mugshot.

Legal experts who closely followed the case were not surprised by its dismissal. A judge tossed out several of the charges in 2024, and Willis was disqualified a few months later.

Willis’ removal raised doubts about whether a replacement would take up such a complicated prosecution. Trump’s 2024 election essentially put his case on hold until his term ends in 2029.

“It was incredibly unlikely it was going to go forward anyway, because the amount of financial resources and man hours necessary to take on this case didn’t seem to be within the scope of what Peter Skandalakis had,” said Anthony Michael Kreis, a professor at the Georgia State College of Law.

However, Mr Kries was surprised by some of Skandalakis’ reasoning for dropping the case.

“I think the report itself to me is a little more surprising because it seems to give the president and some of his allies a lot of benefit of the doubt, given what the evidence brought forth looked like,” he said.

Trump has also faced a series of other criminal proceedings.

These include a 2024 conviction in a New York hush-money case, and he is appealing against it.

Two additional federal cases – one alleging he conspired to overturn the 2020 election and another accusing him of unlawfully retaining classified documents – were dropped following his return to the White House.

He also faces several high-profile civil lawsuits which are progressing through the appeals courts.

Earlier this month, Trump asked the US Supreme Court to review the $5m (£3.6m) civil case brought by writer E Jean Carroll, after a federal appeals court upheld the award and declined to rehear the matter. The court said he defamed and sexually abused Ms Carroll, allegations he denies.

In August, a New York appeals court threw out a $500m civil fraud penalty against Trump that resulted from a separate, civil fraud lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

The British Army has suspended the use of its controversial new Ajax armored fighting vehicles after dozens of soldiers became ill after riding in them. The U.K. Ministry of Defense confirmed that “around 30 personnel presented noise and vibration symptoms” following an exercise involving the tracked vehicles.

The Ministry of Defense said that the Army immediately put a two-week pause on using Ajax, following Exercise Iron Fist conducted on Salisbury Plain over the weekend. The ministry added that the “vast majority” of the soldiers affected “have now been medically cleared and are continuing on duty.” Others, however, “continue to receive expert medical care.” The statements were provided to Sky News by a Ministry of Defense spokesperson. Reportedly, the affected soldiers spent between 10 and 15 hours in the vehicles.

The decision was made by Luke Pollard, the defense procurement minister, and will now see a safety investigation carried out on the armored fighting vehicles. In the meantime, the Ministry of Defense said that “a small amount of testing of the vehicle will continue, in order to ensure that any issues can be identified and resolved.”

Speaking at Rusi, Luke Pollard said that safety was a “top priority” for the MoD and that’s why he ordered training be paused on Ajax until the military can establish the cause of the issues. He said he declared the vehicles safe earlier this month based on written evidence…

— Larisa Brown (@larisamlbrown) November 25, 2025

Perhaps most troubling is the fact that these kinds of issues are by no means new for the vehicle.

In the summer, soldiers were hospitalized after suffering hearing and other injuries caused by loud noise and vibrations inside the vehicles.

Earlier this month, the Ministry of Defense confirmed that a “small number” of soldiers had reported noise and vibration issues after trials that involved three variants of the tracked vehicle.

#1 Another wave of Ajax noise & vibration (N&V) chatter has followed IOC. I’m not going to weigh in on either side, but here’s how we might spot if N&V issues are real or rumour – an off-the-cuff thread. pic.twitter.com/OIqEy22Vkt

— Jon Hawkes (@JonHawkes275) November 26, 2025

However, a ministry spokesperson also told Deborah Haynes of Sky News that, following an investigation, “no systemic issues were found.”

Also in November, defense procurement minister Pollard said that “After all the problems [Ajax] may have had in the past, we have put those to bed now.”

Pollard was speaking as the Ministry of Defense announced the initial operating capability (IOC) for Ajax. This milestone required a squadron of 27 vehicles ready to deploy on operations from a pool of 50. By this point, 165 of the vehicles had been delivered from a total of 589 on order, in six different versions (Atlas armored recovery vehicle, Apollo armored repair vehicle, Ares armored personnel carrier, Ajax reconnaissance vehicle, Athena command post vehicle, and Argus engineering vehicle).

Ajax is a disaster.

It’s incredible that the platform was signed off for Initial Operating Capability given the ongoing issues with injuries to vehicle crews.

Coupled with the lack of clarity about how Ares and Athena will be used by the Infantry, our armoured capability is in… pic.twitter.com/7jJYr6bYiT

— Ben Obese-Jecty MP (@BenObeseJecty) November 25, 2025

The nature of the noise and vibration problem was already well known by that point.

In 2021, the Ministry of Defense published a review that revealed that, for almost two years, senior officers and ministry officials were aware of problems with the vehicles that put troops at risk.

The same review noted that, although the potential for hearing damage had been identified in December 2018, it wasn’t until November 2020 that trials were suspended for the first time. A year later, more than 300 soldiers had been offered hearing tests, and 17 of them were still receiving specialist treatment.

As well as these problems, the Ajax program has seen serious delays.

At one point, IOC was expected in 2017. In June 2021, the Ministry of Defense said that, although IOC had been delayed by another year, it had “90 percent confidence” that it would be declared in September 2021. Ultimately, the Army would have to wait until November 2025 for that milestone.

The summer of 2021 also saw a damning report into Ajax from the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), a British defense and security think tank.

That report described it as a program in crisis, highlighting the vehicle’s excessive noise and vibration and asking what it said were the two fundamental questions about Ajax: “Whether the vehicle can be fixed, and whether it is worth saving.”

The RUSI report also provided more details on how the noise and vibration issues manifest themselves.

Taking noise first, RUSI reported that the main problem was due to the integration of the Bowman headsets for the crew radios. These headsets picked up the engine noise from what “has long been recognized as a noisy vehicle” and put the sound directly into the crews’ ears. While that problem can clearly be fixed with different headsets, it does raise alarming questions about how these noise tests were carried out.

Second and more worrying is the vibration issue, which is at least partly derived from problems with quality control in the fabrication of the vehicle hulls by General Dynamics Land Systems UK (GDLUK). The vibration not only leads to significant crew discomfort but also has other effects: “Preventing the main armament from stabilizing on the move, damaging the electronic systems that make Ajax a step-change in capability, and leading to a high rate of component failure, with the idler and rear road wheels shearing off with concerning regularity.”

If the future of the Ajax program was questionable in 2021, it is even more precarious now.

What is clear is that the British Army badly needs modern armored fighting vehicles.

The Ajax is the first new tracked armored fighting vehicle for the Army in almost 30 years. Some of the equipment it’s replacing, like the FV432 armored personnel carrier dates back to the 1960s.

Armed with a 40mm main gun, the Ajax is based on the ASCOD 2 armored fighting vehicles used by Spain and Austria and was selected by the United Kingdom in 2010 as the winner of the Future Rapid Effect System contract.

Ajax was never based on a “proven design” – it was based on Pizarro II which had been cancelled in Spain a couple of years before UK selection as a result of the Global Finacial Crisis. In effect, it wasn’t even based on a paper design. And then saw over 1400 design changes… https://t.co/RzmGQmdZ9K

— Francis Tusa (@FTusa284) November 26, 2025

The GDLUK proposal fought off competition from the rival CV90 offered by BAE Systems.

That saddest thing about this is that in a sane world the CV90 in UK service would be getting its major mid-life upgrade about now and we’d be planning for its replacement. https://t.co/wMlEF42WkM

— Defence With A ‘C’ (@defencewithac) November 26, 2025

The service’s most modern tracked infantry fighting vehicle, the Warrior, entered service in 1988. In 2021, the Ministry of Defense announced its intention to replace the Warrior with the Boxer, an 8×8 wheeled armored personnel carrier, which would appear to make the introduction of a new tracked IFV all the more urgent.

On the other hand, the decision to give up the Warrior shows that armored infantry is no longer a core capability within the British Army.

As the RUSI report states:

“If grouped within the Heavy Brigade Combat Teams alongside Challenger 3, Ajax cannot deliver infantry to the objective and cannot perform the divisional reconnaissance function. Alternatively, if made part of the Deep Recce Strike Brigade Combat Team, Ajax will struggle to be sustained operating independently. Ajax’s inability to peer-to-peer recover also makes it a poor independent unit, while its weight, complexity, and size make it hard to deploy with lighter forces, despite the British Army seeking to operate further afield with greater frequency.”

With a total program cost of £5.5 billion (around $7.3 billion), this is a huge investment for a vehicle the importance of which within the British Army is somewhat unclear, and which still has unresolved issues that can threaten the health of soldiers. That price tag also doesn’t consider the costs of any future technical fixes to the vehicle.

As it stands, the British Army will use Ajax primarily as a reconnaissance vehicle, a mission that it doesn’t appear immediately suited to, based on its considerable size and weight. The situation would have been different if the Army had planned to retain the Warrior IFV. After all, when Ajax was first drafted, it was expected to work in support of Warrior.

Since the Ajax program was launched, drones have also significantly reshaped the battlefield. Not only do drones offer a cheaper, more survivable, and more flexible way of conducting reconnaissance, including from standoff distances, but the presence of attack drones adds a new dimension of threat to vehicles like Ajax.

⚙️ There will be a huge amount of pressure to move from Ajax to a raft of pet-favourite IFV’s for Armoured Infantry.

We must resist knee-jerk reactions. A series of entirely sensible short term decision making is part of the reason the Army is where it is. We need a longer term,… https://t.co/f596X0A4qS pic.twitter.com/WX8F8yc8S3

— The Other Chris (@TotherChris) November 26, 2025

Although the Ministry of Defense says that Ajax’s armor is designed to protect against at least some kinds of kamikaze drones, it also admits that the vehicles have yet to be fitted with electronic countermeasures to defeat such threats.

This would seem to be a prerequisite for any kind of operational capability, which makes it all the more puzzling that the Ministry of Defense is already talking about deploying Ajax as part of a future British Army presence in Ukraine, provided there is a ceasefire and an agreement covering such a force.

“When we have the ability to deploy incredibly capable platforms like Ajax and the brilliant men and women trained to use it to its fullest effect,” Pollard told Sky News, “there’s a clear opportunity for us to be able to enhance NATO’s capabilities on the eastern flank and any coalition of the willing deployment potentially in the future.”

Before that happens, the longstanding problems related to vehicle noise and vibration will have to be resolved, and a comprehensive counter-drone system will need to be installed. But with the latest pause on its use, it’s increasingly questionable if the Ajax program will survive long enough for that to happen.

Contact the author: [email protected]

British Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced the latest budget on Wednesday, setting out sweeping tax hikes which are projected to raise 26.1 billion pounds ($34.4bn) for the public purse by 2030.

The budget had been highly anticipated as a “make or break” moment for the UK’s governing Labour party, which has grappled with poor polling over the past year. Earlier this year, an opinion poll by YouGov found that if an election were to be held now, the far-right Reform UK Party, which takes a hard line on immigration, would come to power.

In an embarrassing turn, the country’s Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) published its economic outlook as a result of the budget on its website two hours before the announcement – something it never normally does until afterwards. Reeves called the blunder “deeply disappointing” and a “serious error”.

Reeves acknowledged that the tax rises – to be paid in large part by freezing existing income tax thresholds, meaning more people will pay higher tax as their incomes rise with inflation – would adversely affect working people. This breaks a key pledge Labour made in its manifesto before last year’s general election.

“We are asking everyone to make a contribution,” Reeves told parliament.

However, she said the tax rises would help pay for nearly 22 billion pounds ($28.9bn) in fiscal headroom within five years. Reeves also said government borrowing would fall each year. Borrowing in 2025-26 is expected to be 138.3bn pounds ($183bn), falling to 112.1 billion pounds ($148.3bn) the year after and to 67.2 billion pounds ($88.9bn) by 2031.

While the UK’s budget deficit is forecast at 28.8 billion pounds for the financial year 2026/2027, Reeves said this would move to surplus in 2028 and forecast a 24.6 billion pound ($32.55) surplus for 2030/2031.

That will pay for welfare spending and means there “will be no return to austerity measures”, Reeves said.

“I said there would be no return to austerity, and I meant it. This budget will maintain our investment in our economy and our National Health Service. I said I would cut the cost of living, and I meant it. This budget will bring down inflation and provide immediate relief for families. I said that I would cut debt and borrowing, and I meant it,” Reeves said.

Here are five key takeaways from this budget.

1. Labour broke its promise not to raise taxes for working people

Reeves raised taxes by about 40 billion pounds ($52.6bn) in last year’s budget – the biggest hike in revenue-raising measures in decades – in what she said would be a one-off needed to put the government’s finances on an even keel.

This time around, while she did not increase income tax or National Insurance Contributions for working people, she did extend a freeze on the income thresholds at which tax must be paid.

This means that more people will be dragged into higher tax brackets as their income rises with inflation. The move will pull 780,000 more people into paying basic-rate income tax for the first time by the 2029-2030 fiscal year along with 920,000 more higher-rate taxpayers and 4,000 additional-rate payers.

“This ‘fiscal drag’ means that hundreds of thousands will start paying income tax for the first time, and all existing taxpayers will face higher liabilities,” Irem Guceri, associate professor of economics and public policy at Oxford University’s Blavatnik School of Government, said.

The previous Conservative government had already frozen these thresholds until 2028. Reeves, who was highly critical of that action at the time – saying it hurt working people – now plans to extend that to 2031.

“I know that maintaining these thresholds is a decision that will affect working people,” she said. “I said that last year, and I won’t pretend otherwise now.”

“I can confirm that I will not be increasing National Insurance, the basic, higher or additional rates of income tax or VAT [value added tax]”, the chancellor added.

Reeves said she will also target wealthier people via a “mansion tax” on those who own property worth more than 2 million pounds ($2.65m) and is reducing the amount of tax relief some higher earners can obtain on pension contributions. She also announced a 2 percentage point increase in tax rates on rental income, dividends and capital gains.

Nigel Green, chief executive of the financial advice firm DeVere, said these moves will have wider “behavioural impacts”. “People make long-term decisions about where to work, where to build wealth and where to retire,” he said.

“When rules around pensions tighten sharply, it undermines confidence in the broader system. Wealth moves where governments show stability over decades, not sudden extractions,” he added.

Following the announcement, Kemi Badenoch, leader of the opposition Conservative party, described Reeves decision to raise taxes, despite promising not to do so again, as “a total humiliation”.

2. Labour will spend money on welfare

One of the highly anticipated announcements of the budget was the scrapping of the two-child benefit cap from April 2026. Currently, parents can only claim special tax credits worth about 3,455 pounds ($4,571) per child for their first two children. The cap was imposed by the previous Conservative government. Reeves said this would lift thousands of children out of poverty.

“The removal of the two-child limit in child benefit is likely to provide significant support to families currently living in poverty,” Guceri said.

Experts said the move would appeal strongly to Labour Party backbenchers. “The two-child benefit cap is widely despised among rebellious Labour MPs as a major contributor to child poverty,” said Colm Murphy, senior lecturer in British politics at Queen Mary University, London. “Repeal was critical for Reeves to have any chance of political survival.”

Gregory Thwaites, research director at Resolution Foundation (RF), a British think tank that focuses on improving living standards, also said the move was a positive step towards reducing child poverty in the UK.

“That’s something that we’ve been campaigning for RF for some time, and we’re very pleased to see that. And then there are some welcome reforms to the tax system, as well. So, for example, charging the people who own very expensive properties a bit more money that will, that’s very welcome, as well,” Thwaites told Al Jazeera.

“Ultimately, budgetary responsibility should not just be seen in terms of fiscal balance but also measures of broader wellbeing,” said professor Jasper Kenter, professorial research fellow at Aberystwyth Business School. “Lifting the two-child benefit cap is important in this regard.”

GMB workers’ union General Secretary Gary Smith welcomed Reeves’s decision to tax wealth and to increase welfare spending, calling this budget the “final nail in the coffin for the Conservatives’ failed austerity project”.

“Key public services, essential national infrastructure, and communities across the UK suffered deep wounds because the Tories made the wrong economic choices – we must never go back to those dark days,” a statement from Smith read.

“The challenge for Labour is to grip the task of rebuilding our economy and country, lock in essential investment to create growth, and start bringing a bit of hope to people,” the statement added.

3. UK’s hated ‘rape clause’ will be scrapped

Reeves said she would scrap the so-called “rape clause”, which exempts women from the two-child benefit cap policy if they can prove their child was conceived non-consensually.

She described the exemption requirement as “vile, grotesque, dehumanising, cruel”.

“I’m proud to be Britain’s first female chancellor,” Reeves told parliament. “I take the responsibilities that come with that seriously. I will not tolerate the grotesque indignity to women of the rape clause any longer.”

4. Slower-than-expected economic growth forecast

In response to the budget, the OBR upgraded its forecast for economic growth for this year from 1 percent to 1.5 percent.

However, it downgraded economic growth for the following four years. GDP growth in 2026 is now expected to be 1.4 percent (down from 1.9 percent), while the OBR has downgraded its forecast for each of 2027, 2028 and 2029 to 1.5 percent (down from approximately 1.8 percent).

Much of the downgrade stems from lower expectations for productivity growth. Reeves insisted the sluggish outlook was the legacy of the previous Conservative government, however.

Reeves also announced a freeze on fuel duty and rail fares, as well as support with energy bills, causing the OBR to revise inflation down by 0.4 percentage points for next year, Guceri said. However, the OBR revised up its forecast for this year to 3.5 percent, “reflecting stronger real wage growth and persistent food price pressures”, she added.

5. The pound and financial markets responded positively

Sterling rose by 0.3 percent against the dollar to $1.3213 just in advance of the budget announcement, before settling back to roughly where it started by the end of it.

London’s blue-chip FTSE index and the FTSE 250 index rose by about 0.6 percent each in the wake of the budget.

“So far, markets showed little reaction to the Budget – something the Chancellor will view as a success,” Guceri said.

It has been a whiplash-inducing month for the American rancher, one of United States President Donald Trump’s most steadfast voting blocs.

Starting with an October 19 quip from Trump that the US would increase beef imports from Argentina to the ensuing rancher backlash against the announcement of an investigation into the hyperconsolidated US meatpacking industry and the dropping of tariffs on Brazilian beef, ranchers have found themselves caught between the president’s desires to appease both them and the American consumer in the face of high beef prices.

US ranchers have enjoyed rising cattle prices, largely the result of the lowest herd numbers for beef cattle since the 1950s. Other factors constricting supply include the closure of the Mexican border to live cattle due to concerns over screwworm and steep tariffs on foreign beef.

Cattle prices paid to ranchers are separate from consumer beef prices, which, as of September, were $6.32 for a pound (453 grams) of ground beef, an 11 percent rise from September 2024 when they were $5.67 a pound. The Bureau of Labor Statistics did not release economic data, including the consumer price index for last month, because of the government shutdown.

Trump had no patience for the typically loyal ranchers objecting to his plan to import more Argentinian beef, which they saw as a threat to their recent economic gains.

“If it weren’t for me, they would be doing just as they’ve done for the past 20 years – Terrible! It would be nice if they would understand that,” Trump wrote in an October post on his Truth Social platform.

While Corbitt Wall, a commercial cattle manager and market analyst, is clear that he “totally supports Trump and everything he does”, he also saw hubris and a misunderstanding of the cattle industry by the president.

“There was not a person in the cattle business on any level that was not insulted by that post,” he told Al Jazeera.

Wall religiously follows prices across the cattle trade from ranch to slaughterhouse and has watched the futures market for cattle slide down by more than 15 percent since Trump’s October 21 announcement.

Futures prices dictate what ranchers can expect to sell cattle for down the line and sway current sale prices as well. For ranchers’ sake, Wall said he hopes Trump leaves the cattle market alone.

“He doesn’t live in this world, in this cattle world, and doesn’t realise the impact that a statement can make in our business,” Wall said.

Years of rough seasons

Oregon rancher David Packham said that while cattle prices have jumped in ranchers’ favour, many are still struggling in the face of years of rough seasons.

Years of drought across the country raised feed costs for all and pushed some ranchers to sell off cattle. Sticker prices on farm equipment from tractors to pick-up trucks have ballooned as well, especially on the back of supply chain challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, and are expected to rise further on account of Trump’s tariffs.

Packham said he has regularly sold cattle at a loss and doesn’t want consumers to think ranchers are living high off the hog.

“I’m looking at a 40-year-old tractor that I use on a daily basis just to keep putting off replacing it, making repairs, although it’s difficult to find parts for now, just to keep it limping along because I couldn’t afford $100,000 for a new tractor,” Packham said. “When I say we’re not really making a whole lot of money, it’s because we have all this loss carryover.”

Packham was a registered Republican until Trump’s first term. The president’s Argentina comments and the subsequent chaos for the cattle industry have propped open a door for ranchers critical of Trump, but they represent a minority within the community, he said.

“I’m noticing more and more of them [ranchers] that had been cautiously neutral, that are now kind of like me and just saying, ‘You know what? No. This is bulls***. He’s a train wreck,’” Packham said.

‘Perennial issue’

One action ranchers can support, however, is Trump’s November 7 announcement of a Department of Justice investigation into the big four US meatpackers – Tyson, JBS, Cargill and National Beef – “for potential collusion, price fixing and price manipulation”.

Historically, ranchers looking to sell cattle have held little negotiating power as the four companies control more than 80 percent of the market.

However, a prior Department of Justice investigation into meatpacker price-fixing was started under the first Trump administration in 2020 due to a gulf created by falling cattle prices and rising consumer beef prices. The investigation continued under President Joe Biden’s administration but was never publicly concluded. According to Bloomberg News, the investigation was quietly closed with no findings just weeks before Trump announced the November antitrust probe.

James MacDonald, a research professor in agricultural and resource economics at the University of Maryland, views the administration’s antitrust investigation announcement as “entirely for political consumption”.

“It is a perennial issue that p***es off ranchers, and you can gain some political ground by attacking the packers,” MacDonald said.

Packham would prefer the new investigation to come at a different time and said that given the squeeze from the tight cattle market, packers are operating under slimmer margins and not from a position of absolute power.

On Friday, Tyson announced the closure of a Nebraska beef-processing plant that employed more than 3,000 people. MacDonald called the decision a “shock” indicative of the depths of the US beef shortage. The current low cattle inventory in the US came from years of drought, which wiped out grazing lands and slowed herd rebuilding. Replenishing the cattle supply chain is a years-long process.

“That’s sort of a fact and a fundamental, and it’s not going to change for a while,” MacDonald said.

MacDonald also doesn’t believe the increased Argentina imports will ease this shortage or lower prices as the country largely sends lower-grade, lean beef to the US, accounting for only 2 percent of imports. He expected that while the reintroduction of largely lean Brazilian beef will impact the import market, it holds less weight on overall beef supply.

McDonald also cited heifer retention numbers, which indicate how many female cattle that ranchers hold back to produce future herds years down the line, which are still low.

Tyson likely factored in these numbers when making the decision to shutter its Nebraska plant, and it doesn’t seem like the industry is expecting herd numbers to rebound either, McDonald told Al Jazeera.

“It’s Tyson saying we don’t think cattle supplies are going to recover anytime soon,” MacDonald said.

While the actual mechanisms of Trump’s recent policies might not budge consumers’ bottom lines or change the cattle market for the time being, Wall is more concerned about the ripple effects from the news cycle, saying ranchers “live and die” by the cattle markets. While his faith is shaken, Wall regardless believes that ranchers, conservative as ever, will show up for Trump when election time comes around.

“You look at what the other side has to offer, and there’s no way people are going to go for that,” Wall said. “So in the long run, they’ll stick with him.”

The controversial US-Israeli backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is closing operations, after five months of massacres, stampedes and chaos. Despite that, the GHF says it did its job “successfully.” Soraya Lennie explains the group’s chaotic legacy.

The pressure on Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro continues to ratchet up. The cartel he allegedly leads was officially designated as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO) on Monday, a move Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said last week increases U.S. military options in the region. In addition, Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is now in Puerto Rico amid the largest U.S. military buildup in the Caribbean since the 1962 Cuban missile crisis.

Venezuela on Monday denounced the FTO designation against Cartel de los Soles, also known as Cartel of the Suns. The move was first proposed by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Nov. 17.

Venezuela “categorically, firmly, and absolutely rejects the new and ridiculous fabrication by the United States Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, who designates the nonexistent Cartel of the Suns as a terrorist organization,” Venezuelan Foreign Minister Yvan Gil said Monday on Telegram. The move rehashes “an infamous and vile lie to justify an illegitimate and illegal intervention against Venezuela, under the classic U.S. regime change format. This new maneuver will meet the same fate as previous and recurrent aggressions against our country: failure.”

You can catch up with our most recent coverage about what has been dubbed Operation Southern Spear in our story here.

In an interview last week, Hegseth was pointedly vague about what the designation of Cartel De Los Soles means to potential U.S. military operations against Maduro. No decisions related to countering Maduro’s cartel are “off the table,” Hegseth explained, but “nothing is automatically on the table,” either.

On Sunday, however, Reuters reported that the United States “is poised to launch a new phase of Venezuela-related operations in the coming days.”

It remains unknown what actions U.S. President Donald Trump will authorize; however, “covert operations would likely be the first part of the new action against Maduro,” according to Reuters. “Two U.S. officials told Reuters the options under consideration included attempting to overthrow Maduro.”

We’ve reached out to the White House and Pentagon for more details. The Pentagon referred us to the White House.

As we noted before: “If expanded strikes on land targets occur after the November 24th horizon, they could be limited to strictly cartel and drug production target sets that do not include state facilities. These could include labs, logistical nodes, such as port facilities, and cartel personnel. Striking military installations and other state infrastructure that the U.S. believes actively facilitate the drug trade would be a further escalation. Going directly after the Maduro regime and its military capabilities as a whole would be the farthest rung up the escalation ladder.”

There was also reporting that Trump administration officials discussed the possibility of dropping leaflets on Venezuela’s capital city of Caracas as a kind of psychological warfare to pressure Maduro. However, it was suggested that the operation could take place on Maduro’s 63rd birthday, which was Sunday. That did not happen.

Caine and his senior enlisted advisor, David L. Isom, are visiting Puerto Rico “to engage with service members and thank them for their outstanding support to regional missions,” the Joint Chiefs of Staff said in a statement. “They will also visit and thank Sailors operating at sea for their dedicated, unwavering service in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility.”

His visit comes as the U.S. has assembled a considerable military presence.

There are currently 11 U.S. Navy surface combatants and four support vessels in the region, a U.S. Navy official told The War Zone on Monday. The official added that there are about 100 total U.S. Navy vessels deployed around the globe. That means about 15% of the Navy’s deployed surface fleet is now in the Caribbean.

The collection of military might also includes a special operations mothership and an array of aerial assets like F-35B stealth fighters, MQ-9 Reaper drones, P-8 maritime patrol aircraft, and AC-130 Ghostrider gunships. There are also about 15,000 U.S. personnel deployed to the region. The massing of U.S. forces is a major presence for the region, but nothing like what we have seen for actual invasion or full-spectrum war operations.

While the timing of any potential military operation against Maduro remains publicly unknown, the increasingly tense situation is having a visible effect on civilian aviation. Several airlines have cancelled flights to and from Venezuela and as of Monday morning, the airspace around the South American nation was largely free of commercial aviation, according to the latest tracking by FlightRadar24. U.S. air carriers have been prohibited from traveling to or from Venezuela since 2019.

The cleared airspace follows the FAA issuing a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) on Friday, warning pilots about flying over or near Venezuela.

“Operators are advised to exercise caution when operating in the Maiquetia Flight Information Region (SVZM FIR) at all altitudes due to the worsening security situation and heightened military activity in or around Venezuela,” the NOTAM read. In effect until Feb 19, it also requires that U.S. civil aviation operators file at least a 72-hour notice before flying in the area.

The NOTAM was issued due to “an increase in Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) interference” near Venezuela since September, the FAA stated on Friday. 

Another factor was “increasing Venezuelan military readiness,” the FAA added.

“Some civil aircraft recently reported GNSS interference while transiting the SVZM FIR, which, in some cases, caused lingering effects throughout the flight,” according to the FAA notice. “GNSS jammers and spoofers can affect aircraft out to 250 nautical miles and can impact a wide variety of critical communication, navigation, surveillance, and safety equipment on aircraft.”

Moreover, since early September, Venezuela “has conducted multiple military exercises and directed the mass mobilization of thousands of military and reserve forces,” the FAA explained. “While Venezuela has at no point expressed an intent to target civil aviation, the Venezuelan military possesses advanced fighter aircraft and multiple weapons systems capable of reaching or exceeding civil aircraft operating altitudes, as well as potential low-altitude risk from man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS) and anti-aircraft artillery.” You can read more about Venezuela’s air defenses in our deep dive here.

The FAA added that it will “continue to monitor the risk environment for U.S. civil aviation operating in the region and make adjustments, as appropriate, to safeguard U.S. civil aviation.”

In addition to the NOTAM near Venezuela, the FAA on Friday also posted one extending from Curacao deep out into the Caribbean. It runs through Dec. 31. This where the U.S. has been operating at sea and in the air heavily, as well as where interactions with Venezuelan fighter aircraft and U.S. ships have occurred.

“Aircraft operators are advised to exercise extreme caution when operating” in the Curacao area,” according to that NOTAM. “Frequent pilot reports and primary radar within [the area] indicates the presence of non-identified aircraft operations…Pilots are requested to report any unusual airborne activity immediately” to air traffic control.

U.S. military aircraft are also frequently conducting training and probing exercises near Venezuela. A glaring example took place Nov. 20 during what U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) calls a “bomber attack demo.” It included B-52H Stratofortress crews from Minot Air Force Base, KC-135 aerial refueling tankers from MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida, and fighter aircraft already deployed to the region.

“Operation Southern Spear support showcases our vow to deter illicit drug networks & defend the homeland,” SOUTHCOM said on X.

As we explained in an earlier story, the B-52s “are capable of unleashing waves of standoff cruise missiles and can carry a host of other conventional munitions that can be employed against targets on land and at sea. Though the Venezuelan armed forces have limited air defense capabilities, they could still pose a threat. Standoff strikes from aircraft like the B-52 and other assets would be a likely component of any future U.S. direct action against targets inside the country to help reduce risks to friendly forces. They could even target air defense systems to help clear the way for follow-on operations.”

SOUTHCOM’s statement followed our reporting that U.S. aviation assets, including a U.S. Air Force RC-135V Rivet Joint electronic surveillance plane, were “testing Venezuelan sensors and responses,” a U.S. official told us last week. “It was part of the pressure campaign to show U.S. capabilities in the Caribbean.”

SOUTHCOM on Monday pushed back against a claim that it was restricting Thanksgiving and Christmas leave “in preparation for possible land strikes in the next 10 days to two weeks.

“Our service members and civilian employees are always afforded the opportunity to take leave throughout the year, and that includes holiday periods,” a SOUTHCOM spokesperson told us Monday. “The American people can be assured that SOUTHCOM remains steadfast in its mission year-round to protect the security of the Western Hemisphere and the safety of the American Homeland.”

🚨 SOUTHCOM is restricting / limiting leave over the Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays, in preparation for possible land strikes in the next 10 days to two weeks, I am told by a source.

— Kellie Meyer (@KellieMeyerNews) November 24, 2025

As the world waits and wonders about Trump’s next move, another aerial mission toward Venezuela could soon be in the offing. Flight trackers noticed a gathering of KC-46 Pegasus aerial refuelers at MacDill, which has become a domestic support hub for Southern Spear. Refuelers from MacDill, which normally only beds the KC-135s, have frequently provided gas to strategic bombers flying over the Caribbean.

RCH 020/027/024 (KC-46) repositioning to MacDill AFB this morning. Looks like these will be for refueling bombers on another Caribbean mission. pic.twitter.com/dFGnYCCh2N

— Thenewarea51 (@thenewarea51) November 23, 2025

The destination of these bombers is unknown at the moment. We will continue to monitor this increasingly tense situation in the Caribbean and provide updates when warranted.

Contact the author: [email protected]

Who: Arsenal vs Bayern Munich
What: Matchday 5, League Phase, UEFA Champions League
Where: Emirates Stadium, North London, England, UK
When: Wednesday at 8pm (20:00 GMT)
How to follow: We’ll have all the build-up on Al Jazeera Sport from 17:00 GMT in advance of our text commentary stream.

English Premier League leaders Arsenal host the German Bundesliga’s top-ranked team Bayern Munich in a heavyweight UEFA Champions League (UCL) matchup of the two frontrunning European mega clubs on Wednesday.

The sides are also ranked No 1 and No 2 in the current UCL standings, with both clubs protecting perfect records in the League Phase of the competition.

Here is all to know ahead of their top of the table clash at Emirates Stadium:

Who have Arsenal and Bayern Munich beaten so far in the UCL League Phase?

After four matchdays in the League Phase, Bayern Munich sits top of the standings with four wins and a maximum 12 points against Chelsea (3-0), Pafos (5-1), Club Brugge (4-0) and most recently, a victory over reigning UCL champions Paris Saint-Germain (2-1) away in France on November 4.

Arsenal is second on the table, equal with their German rival on points (12) and goal difference (+11). Their four wins have come against Athletic Bilbao (2-0), Olympiacos (2-0), Atletico Madrid (4-0) and Slavia Praha (3-0).

The only other team remaining in the competition with a perfect 4-0 record is Inter Milan.

Will Odegaard play against Bayern Munich?

Arsenal captain Martin Odegaard is a strong possibility to play against Bayern Munich in what would be his first match since injuring his knee in early October.

The Norwegian midfielder participated in training on Tuesday afternoon and is expected to be in the squad.

Arsenal manager Mikel Arteta confirmed Odegaard is under consideration for Wednesday’s fixture.

“He [Odegaard] was very close for the previous game. We are hopeful that tomorrow [Wednesday] he can be in the squad as well.”

Where did Arsenal and Bayern Munich finish in last season’s Champions League?

The Gunners reached the semifinals of the Champions League for the first time since 2008–09, upsetting Real Madrid in the quarterfinals (5-1 on aggregate) before losing to eventual champion Paris Saint-Germain.

Bayern Munich’s UCL campaign came to an end at the quarterfinal stage with a closely contested defeat to Inter Milan (4-3 on aggregate).

Form guide: last five matches

Arsenal: W-W-W-D-W (Premier League, most recent result last)

Bayern Munich: W-W-W-D-W (Bundesliga, most recent result last)

Head-to-head: Arsenal-Bayern Munich

The sides last played on April 17, 2024, with Joshua Kimmich’s 63rd-minute header handing Bayern Munich a 1-0 quarterfinal victory (3-2 on aggregate) over Arsenal in the Champions League, sending the Germans through to the last-four of the 2023-24 competition.

In total, the sides have played against each other 14 times, with Bayern dominating the historical matchup:

• Bayern Munich – 8 wins
• Arsenal – 3 wins
• Draws – 3

Arsenal’s team news

Arsenal will line up against Bayern without a recognised striker, with Kai Havertz (knee) and Viktor Gyokeres (hamstring) still rehabbing injuries.

Gabriel Jesus will also be held back from the Champions League fixture, although the Brazilian forward is back in full training after undergoing knee surgery.

“He is quite close, to be fair, and earlier than we expected,” Arteta said.

“In the next few days, he is going to have another step to make with a game that we are going to organise for him. After that, he is just going to be knocking on the door.

Arsenal’s possible starting XI

Raya (goalkeeper); Timber, Saliba, Hincapie, Lewis-Skelly; Eze, Zubimendi, Rice; Saka, Merino, Trossard

Bayern Munich’s team news

Kimmich, the player who buried Arsenal the last time they played back in 2024, was a question mark at the beginning of the week after sustaining a knock picked up during the FIFA international break, but is believed to be ready to play on Wednesday.

Explosive winger Luis Diaz is suspended for the Arsenal clash. The Colombian might be replaced by rising 17-year-old star Lennart Karl, who became Bayern’s youngest-ever Champions League scorer when he started against Brugge on October 22.

Injured duo Jamal Musiala and Alphonso Davies will be unavailable for selection.

Bayern manager Vincent Kompany will again lead the line with English international Harry Kane, who returns to his home city of London for this fixture.

Bayern Munich’s possible starting XI:

Neuer (goalkeeper); Laimer, Upamecano, Tah, Guerreiro; Pavlovic, Kimmich; Olise, Karl, Gnabry; Kane

Berlin, Germany – Organisers of a pro-Palestine conference are suing authorities in Berlin who shut the event down last April soon after it began.

They hope a panel of judges at the Berlin Administrative Court will rule that police acted unlawfully in cracking down on the Palestine Congress, a forum of solidarity activists and human rights experts who were gathering to discuss Israel’s genocide in Gaza and Germany’s alleged complicity.

The hearing begins on Wednesday.

The defendant, the State of Berlin, argues the police were right to act preemptively as they predicted criminal statements would be made at the conference, specifically incitement to hatred, dissemination of propaganda or use of symbols of unconstitutional and “terrorist” organisations.

The police justified this prediction in part on the basis that in a news conference held prior to the event, organisers allegedly did not distance themselves from the Hamas-led incursion into southern Israel on October 7, 2023.

On the day in question, April 12, 2024, officers in riot gear descended in their hundreds on the venue usually used for wedding receptions and pulled the plug – cutting off the power to ensure that none of the planned speeches could be heard or broadcast via livestream.

“I’m not aware of any other instance where a conference was shut down without any crime having been committed,” Michael Ploese, the lawyer representing the conference organisers, told Al Jazeera.

He said that German law only allowed restrictions on gatherings in private rooms where there was  high probability that a criminal act would be committed, and that the right to freedom of expression usually took precedence.

Among the groups organising the conference was Juedische Stimme (Jewish Voice), a sister group of the US collective of the same name that organises Jewish peace activists who are critical of Israeli actions regarding Palestine.

“I saw it as a success that we had even been able to begin it at all, but I wasn’t expecting it all to end an hour later,” said Wieland Hoban, the chair of Juedische Stimme, who gave opening remarks at the conference.

Adding to the sense of repression, the British Palestinian doctor Ghassan Abu Sittah, one of the main speakers, said officials at the airport in Berlin prevented him from continuing his journey and told him to return to the United Kingdom.

Yanis Varoufakis, the Greek left-wing economist and former minister of finance, posted online the speech he had planned to make. Like Abu Sittah, Varoufakis faced an entry ban after the furore. The Berlin Administrative Court later ruled that the ban on Abu Sittah’s political activity was unlawful.

Throughout Israel’s genocidal war against Palestinians in Gaza, German police and security services have repeatedly claimed protests in support of those being bombarded are anti-Semitic or are to be interpreted as revering Hamas. Thousands of individual protesters have been arrested, and many planned demonstrations have been banned outright.

Germany is Israel’s biggest diplomatic supporter in Europe and enforces strict limits on speech that criticises or attacks Israel, with some arguing this is necessary because of Germany’s genocide of six million Jews in the Holocaust.

It is a justification that Wieland Hoban rejects, saying the laws are even used against Jewish people who speak up for Palestine.

“Even if you lost family in the Holocaust, you can still be lectured by some German about what you can say,” said Hoban. “Simply mentioning the Holocaust can get you accused of relativierung” – a word that is used to suggest someone is playing down the Holocaust by drawing comparisons to other, lesser, crimes against humanity.

Last month, a group of United  Nations experts said they were alarmed by the “pattern of police violence and apparent suppression of Palestine solidarity activism by Germany”.

If this week’s case goes in favour of the conference organisers, it will be a blow to Germany’s controversial stance.

Videos of police using force to shut down nonviolent protests for Gaza on the streets of German cities have coursed around the world.

But what marked the state’s intervention in the Palestine Congress apart was that it represented the silencing of an event consisting of talks and debates in an indoor venue – a sphere of political expression that lawyers had previously thought was off-limits for police repression.

Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency says strict air quality standards were introduced without sufficient review.

United States President Donald Trump’s administration has moved to roll back tougher limits on deadly soot pollution, prompting condemnation from environmental groups.

The Trump administration’s latest bid to weaken environmental standards comes after the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) filed a court motion arguing that former President Joe Biden’s administration exceeded its authority when it tightened air quality standards in 2024.

In a motion filed on Monday, lawyers for Trump’s EPA asked a Washington, DC, appeals court to throw out the tougher standard, arguing it was introduced without the “rigorous, stepwise process” required under the 1963 Clean Air Act.

The EPA initially defended the tougher standard amid a flurry of legal challenges from Republican-led states and business groups, which argued the rule would raise costs, before reversing course under Trump appointee Lee Zeldin.

“EPA has concluded that the position it advanced earlier is erroneous,” lawyers for the EPA said in the filing, arguing that the agency should complete a “thorough review of the underlying criteria and corresponding standards” before revising the limit.

Under Biden appointee Michael S Regan, the EPA last year substantially lowered acceptable soot levels, from 12 micrograms per cubic metre of air to 9 micrograms per cubic metre of air.

The agency said at the time that the tougher standard would prevent up to 4,500 premature deaths and 290,000 lost workdays by 2032.

Upon taking office earlier this year, Zeldin, a former Republican lawmaker, pledged to roll back dozens of environmental regulations as part of what he dubbed the “largest deregulatory action in the history of the United States”.

Patrice Simms, an environmental lawyer at the nonprofit organisation Earthjustice, said lowering air quality standards would harm public health.

“Trump has made it clear that his agenda is all about saving corporations money, and this administration’s EPA has nothing to do with protecting people’s health, saving lives, or serving children, families or communities,” Simms said in a statement.

“We will continue to defend this life-saving standard.”

Patrick Drupp, the director of climate policy at the Sierra Club, also condemned the EPA’s move, calling it “reckless” and “a complete betrayal” of the agency’s mission.

“While this administration continues to strip away access to affordable healthcare, they are simultaneously allowing fossil fuel companies to cut corners and make Americans sicker,” Drupp said.

The Navy is ending its commitment to build the troubled Constellation class frigates, service secretary John Phelan announced today on social media. The move is the first of what Phelan said will be several changes designed to speed up Navy ship production.

“From day one, I made it clear: I won’t spend a dollar if it doesn’t strengthen readiness or our ability to win,” Phelan explained. “To keep that promise, we’re reshaping how we build and field the Fleet—working with industry to deliver warfighting advantage, beginning with a strategic shift away from the Constellation class frigate program.”

“The Navy and our industry partners have reached a comprehensive framework that terminates for the Navy’s convenience the last four ships of the class, which have not begun construction,” Phelan said in a video he posted on X. “We greatly value the shipbuilders of Wisconsin and Michigan. While work continues on the first two ships, those ships remain under review as we work through this strategic shift.”

The Navy first announced in 2020 that it had picked Marinette Marine in Wisconsin, a wholly owned subsidiary of Italy’s Fincantieri, to build the Constellation class, which was to be based on an off-the-shelf design. Construction of the USS Constellation began in August 2022. The Navy currently has a total of six of the ships on order, out of what was expected to be an initial tranche of at least 10 of the frigates. The first example was slated to be delivered in 2029, however, Phelan’s decision means the last four ships in this class will no longer be built.

As we have noted in the past: “Major changes to the Constellation‘s configuration compared to its parent Franco-Italian Fregata Europea Multi-Missione (FREMM) have already led to serious delays and cost increases, and there are growing questions about the program’s future. A key program goal had been to take an in-service design that would only need relatively minor modifications to make it ready for Navy use, which would help keep the work on schedule and budget. The opposite has now happened.”

The design changes have also contributed to major delays and cost growth. The original plan was for USS Constellation to be delivered in 2026. The Navy had also been aiming for a unit cost of $1 billion, or potentially even less, as production of the frigates ramped up. More recent estimates have put the price tag for each of the ships at around $1.4 billion.

In an exclusive interview with The War Zone in April from the sidelines of the Sea Air Space conference in Maryland, Mark Vandroff, senior vice president of Government Affairs at Fincantieri Marine Group, confirmed that little progress had been made on the first frigate of the class.

“First ship is under construction up in Marinette, roughly 10 percent done,” Vandroff said at the time. We’re “working to finalize the design with the Navy. That has been progressing. We’ve made a lot of progress in the last year, and we expect to have the functional design wrapped up here in late spring, early summer.”

“What I would say is, with the Navy, we’re converging the design,” Vandroff added when asked specifically for an update on changes to the Constellation class design from the parent FREMM. “You know, we’re responsible for producing the functional design. The Navy has to approve the functional design. So, as we go back and forth to get our design to be fully approved by the Navy, we’re converging on that final design.”

A big part of the problems with the Constellation class were the constant design changes, which prompted concerns about expected performance.

As far as what comes next, Phelan didn’t offer any specific examples.

“Shipbuilding is a foremost concern,” he posited. “The Navy needs ships, and we look forward to building them in every shipyard that we can. A key factor in this decision is the need to grow the fleet faster to meet tomorrow’s threats.”

“This framework,” he continued, “puts the Navy on a path to more rapidly construct new classes of ships and deliver the capability our war fighters need in greater numbers and on a more urgent timeline. This is an imperative, and I hope to have more to share very soon.”

We’ve reached out to the Navy for more details. 

Update: 5:03 PM Eastern –

A senior Navy official offered some additional context about what might come next.

“The Navy will work with Congress in the coming weeks to seek the reappropriation of a portion of the unspent frigate funds on more readily producible ships in Marinette,” an official confirmed to us. “We do hope to retain the unspent frigate funds, as I mentioned, and have them reallocated to other ships that can be built in Marinette and delivered to the fleet faster.”

Update: 5:16 PM Eastern –

Fincantieri provided the following statement on the program cancellation.

“As part of a general fleet review launched by the U.S. Navy, aimed at transitioning towards a future model focused on technological excellence, manned and unmanned vessels, and long-term sustainability, Fincantieri and the U.S. Navy have reached a significant agreement that provides for reshaping the future of the Constellation class Program, currently under construction at Fincantieri Marinette Marine (FMM), in Wisconsin. In this framework, Fincantieri is consolidating its strategic partnership with the Navy, confirming its role as a key player in defining the future of American maritime defense through advanced industrial capabilities and long-term investments.

Working closely with the U.S. Navy, the Group will help deliver new classes of vessels. Fincantieri is expected to receive new orders to deliver classes of vessels in segments that best serve the immediate interests of the nation and the renaissance of U.S. shipbuilding, such as amphibious, icebreaking and other special missions. Fincantieri is in fact ready to execute the contracts planned in coordination with the U.S. Navy. Entering the future and in alignment with the Group’s industrial capabilities and potential, Fincantieri will support the U.S. Navy as it redefines strategic choices in the Small Surface Combatants segment, manned or unmanned.  

Considering the above, the agreement encompasses the continuity of work for two Constellation class frigates currently under construction and provides for the discontinuity of the contract for the four other Constellation class frigates already under contract, reflecting the evolving strategic priorities of the U.S. Navy. On top of the aforementioned award of future orders, in order to cover the above, the agreement indemnifies Fincantieri Marine Group on existing economic commitments and industrial impacts through measures provided by the U.S. Navy, and as a result of the contractual decision made for its own convenience. 

This new arrangement guarantees continuity and workload visibility for Fincantieri’s personnel and the Wisconsin System of Yards – a vital pillar of the U.S. maritime industrial base – capitalizing on the investments and expertise developed to date. Over the past years, Fincantieri has invested more than $800 million in its four U.S. shipyards, including Marinette, Green Bay, Sturgeon Bay, and Jacksonville with the aim of ensuring maximum production efficiency, flexibility, and technological innovation. These investments have enabled the consolidation of an advanced industrial supply chain, capable of meeting the U.S. Navy’s new priorities, including rapid delivery, modularity, and scalability of naval platforms.

Fincantieri Marine Group currently employs approximately 3,750 highly skilled workers in the United States, having recently increased its workforce by 850 workers to meet demand and strengthen its industrial base. This significant expansion underscores the Group’s commitment to supporting the local economy and the broader national maritime supply chain.”

In addition, George Moutafis, CEO of Fincantieri Marine Group, also weighed in.

“The agreement reached with the U.S. Navy marks a new chapter in our strategic partnership, built on mutual trust, a shared vision and commitment to excellence. The path forward defined on the Constellation class program provides for the necessary stability for our teams and the entire Wisconsin System of Yards, allowing us to continue investing in innovation and skills. As the Navy transitions to new vessel types, we stand ready to support their evolving needs, leveraging the strength of our American facilities and the expertise we have fostered. Our investments in the U.S. shipyards are a testament to our long-term vision: to be a cornerstone of the U.S. maritime industrial base and a driving force to sustain the momentum of the national shipbuilding renaissance, the American shipbuilding renaissance.

In the future development model, Fincantieri positions itself as one of the reference shipyards for the U.S. Navy, confirming its strategic role in supporting the Navy’s evolving needs. The Group is looking forward to working with all stakeholders in the supply chain on the execution of the new redefined path forward, further developing the skills and expertise cultivated in its American facilities and supporting the sustainable growth of the sector.”

This is a developing story.

Contact the author: [email protected] 

Taiwan has unveiled a T$1.25 trillion (US$39.9 billion) supplementary defence budget, marking one of its most significant military spending increases in recent years. The announcement comes after a sustained period of Chinese military pressure, including near-daily incursions into Taiwan’s air defence identification zone and expanding naval activities. Beijing continues to assert that Taiwan is its territory, while Taipei rejects these claims and argues that China’s actions threaten regional stability. President Lai Ching-te, who has previously signaled a desire to strengthen Taiwan’s defences, aims to increase military expenditure to 5% of GDP by 2030 a major shift for an island long reliant on the United States for support. The new spending plan reflects Taipei’s conclusion that the security environment has deteriorated to a point requiring a rapid buildup of deterrence capabilities.

WHY IT MATTERS

This defence package is significant because it signals that Taiwan is preparing for a prolonged period of heightened tension with China. By raising spending above 3% of GDP for the first time since 2009, Taiwan is accelerating efforts to modernize its armed forces and expand asymmetric capabilities a key strategy for countering a much larger Chinese military. The move also has implications for broader Indo-Pacific security, as Taiwan sits at the center of major global supply chains, especially semiconductors. Any conflict involving the island would have worldwide economic repercussions. Additionally, the announcement tests the United States’ commitment under its legal obligation to help Taiwan defend itself, particularly as the Trump administration has so far approved only a limited number of arms sales this year. The overall decision underscores the growing sense in Taipei that deterrence, rather than diplomacy alone, is essential for survival.

A range of actors will be directly affected by Taiwan’s expanded defence spending. For Taiwan itself, the budget reflects both political determination and public concern, as leaders balance the urgency of national security with domestic expectations about economic priorities. China stands on the opposite end of the debate, condemning the move as wasteful, provocative, and orchestrated by foreign powers, and warning that it will only destabilize cross-strait relations. The United States remains a pivotal player, as Taiwan’s primary security partner and arms supplier, and its actions in the coming months will shape Beijing’s and Taipei’s strategy alike. Regional governments such as Japan, South Korea, and Southeast Asian nations are also stakeholders, because escalation in the Taiwan Strait would directly affect their own security and trade routes. Beyond governments, the global technology sector especially companies dependent on Taiwan’s semiconductor production is intricately tied to the island’s stability and therefore to its defence posture.

WHAT’S NEXT

The supplementary defence budget will now move to Taiwan’s legislature, where it is expected to pass given the governing party’s support for military strengthening. Once approved, the government is likely to detail specific procurement plans, which may include new air-defence systems, long-range missiles, drone platforms, and naval upgrades aimed at deterring a potential blockade or invasion. Attention will also focus on Washington, where upcoming decisions on arms transfers will indicate the level of U.S. engagement in Taiwan’s defence strategy. China is expected to respond with a combination of military signaling such as increased air and naval patrols and sharper rhetoric accusing Taiwan of escalating tensions. Regionally, allies and partners may adjust military planning and enhance coordination as they assess the implications of Taiwan’s defence buildup for broader Indo-Pacific stability. Over the next several months, the situation is likely to remain fluid as each stakeholder reacts to the shifting balance of power across the Taiwan Strait.

With information from Reuters.

China’s Foreign Ministry said Trump initiated call with Xi Jinping and that communication was crucial for developing stable US-China relations.

Chinese President Xi Jinping has “more or less agreed” to increase purchases of goods from the United States, President Donald Trump said, a day after a phone call between the two leaders was described by Beijing as “positive, friendly and constructive”.

Speaking to reporters on board Air Force One on Tuesday evening, Trump said he asked the Chinese leader during the call to accelerate purchases from the US.

“I think we will be pleasantly surprised by the actions of President Xi,” Trump said.

“I asked him, I’d like you to buy it a little faster. I’d like you to buy more. And he’s more or less agreed to do that,” he said.

Trump’s upbeat forecast on trade with China comes after Beijing announced last month that it would resume purchases of US soya beans and would halt expanded curbs on rare earths exports to the US amid detente in the tariff war with Washington.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that China had pledged to buy 12 million metric tonnes of soya beans from US farmers this year, but the Reuters news agency reports that the pace of Chinese purchases had been less than initially expected.

China has so far ordered nearly two million metric tonnes of US soya beans, according to data by the US Department of Agriculture, Reuters reports.

The call on Monday between Trump and Xi comes just weeks after the two leaders met in South Korea, where they agreed to a framework for a trade deal that has yet to be finalised.

“China and the United States once fought side by side against fascism and militarism, and should now work together to safeguard the outcomes of World War II,” Xi was quoted as telling Trump in the call, China’s official Xinhua news agency reports.

Xi also told Trump that “Taiwan’s return to China is an integral part of the post-war international order”.

China regards Taiwan as part of its territory and has not ruled out the use of force to unite the self-ruled, democratic island with the Chinese mainland.

The US has been traditionally opposed to China’s potential use of force to seize Taiwan and is obligated by a domestic law to provide sufficient military hardware to Taipei to deter any armed attack.

But Trump has maintained strategic ambiguity about whether he would commit US troops in case of a war in the Taiwan Strait, while his administration has urged Taiwan to increase its defence budget.

Trump made no mention of Xi’s comments on Taiwan in a later post on Truth Social, where he spoke of a “very good” call with the Chinese leader, which he said covered many topics, including Ukraine, Fentanyl and US farm products.

“Our relationship with China is extremely strong! This call was a follow up to our highly successful meeting in South Korea, three weeks ago. Since then, there has been significant progress on both sides in keeping our agreements current and accurate,” Trump said.

“Now we can set our sights on the big picture,” he said.

The US leader also said that he had accepted Xi’s invitation to visit Beijing in April, and had invited Xi for a state visit to the US later in the year.

China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said on Tuesday that Washington had initiated the call between Trump and Xi, which spokesperson Mao Ning called “positive, friendly and constructive”.

Mao also said that “communication between the two heads of state on issues of common concern is crucial for the stable development of China-US relations”.

Additional reporting by Bonnie Liao.

Nine of the top 10 mega-cities are in Asia, with Bangladesh’s Dhaka projected to be the world’s largest city by 2050.

A new United Nations report has found that Indonesia’s capital Jakarta is the world’s largest city with 41.9 million people living there, followed by Dhaka in Bangladesh, which is home to 36.6 million.

A low-lying coastal city located in the west of the densely populated island of Java, Jakarta rose from second place to replace Tokyo, which had been named the world’s largest city in the UN’s most recent assessment published back in 2000.

The Japanese capital’s relatively steady population of 33.4 million saw it fall to third place behind Bangladesh’s densely populated capital, Dhaka, which jumped to second place from ninth and is now projected to become the world’s largest city by 2050.

The World Urbanization Prospects 2025 report from the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs also found that the number of megacities – urban areas with more than 10 million inhabitants – has increased to 33, four times more than the eight megacities that existed worldwide in 1975.

Asia is home to 19 of the world’s 33 megacities, and nine out of the top 10. In addition to Jakarta, Dhaka and Tokyo, the other Asian cities in the top 10 are: New Delhi, India (30.2 million); Shanghai, China (29.6 million); Guangzhou, China (27.6 million); Manila, Philippines (24.7 million); Kolkata, India (22.5 million); and Seoul, South Korea (22.5 million).

With a population of 32 million people, Egypt’s Cairo is the only city in the top 10 that is outside Asia, according to the UN.

Sao Paulo in Brazil, with 18.9 million people, is the largest city in the Americas, while Lagos in Nigeria also grew rapidly, making it the largest city in sub-Saharan Africa.

Still growing

Dhaka’s rapid growth has partly been driven by people from rural areas moving to the capital, searching for opportunities or fleeing hometowns due to problems including flooding and rising sea levels, made worse by climate change.

Jakarta is also facing problems due to rising sea levels. It is estimated that up to one quarter of the city could be under water by 2050.

The problem is so serious that Indonesia’s government is building a new purpose-built capital city in Nusantara in Borneo island’s East Kalimantan province. Yet while the city’s officials and parliamentary buildings will have a new home, the UN estimates that 10 million more people will be living in Jakarta by 2050.

The city’s growing population will also have to contend with concerns over inequality and affordability, which saw thousands of people take to the streets of the Indonesian city earlier this year, reflecting rising anger over the conditions of low-income workers, including app-based motorcycle ride-share and delivery riders.

Meanwhile, according to the UN report, Iran’s capital Tehran, which is facing water rations because it is close to running out of water, currently has a population of nine million people.

The new assessment also saw changes as the UN adopted new measures to try to address inconsistencies in how different countries defined urbanisation.

The UN also said that in most cases its report reflected the size of individual cities, rather than two cities that have grown together, with a small number of exceptions.

The new definition defined a city as a “contiguous agglomeration” of one-kilometre-square grid cells with a density of at least 1,500 inhabitants per square kilometre and a total population of at least 50,000.

For the second time in a week, Japanese fighters scrambled to intercept a suspected Chinese drone flying near the island of Yonaguni. The events come amid growing tensions between the Asian neighbors and highlight the increasing strategic importance of Japan’s southernmost island, which has seen an expanded presence of Japanese and U.S. forces.

Located just 70 miles east of Taiwan, Yonaguni is an increasingly important part of the allied effort to defend the so-called first island chain from Chinese aggression. It is roughly seven miles long and three miles across at its widest point, it has two small ports and an airfield. It’s where Japan wants to set up an air defense system. It’s also where the U.S. Marine Corps recently set up a forward arming and refueling point (FARP), its first that close to the breakaway Chinese nation.

Amid all this tumult, U.S. President Donald Trump spoke with leaders of both nations today and Monday to discuss the future of Taiwan, among other issues. We’ll address that more later in this story.

“On November 24…we confirmed that an estimated Chinese unmanned aerial vehicle had passed between Yonaguni Island and Taiwan, and in response,” the Japanese Ministry of Defense (MoD) stated on X. “We scrambled fighter jets from the Air Self-Defense Force’s Southwest Air Defense Force to intercept it.”

Once detected, the suspected drone flew south for about 250 miles, then cut east for about another 100 miles before returning along the same route, according to a map published by the Japanese MoD, which provided no additional details about the incident.

Meanwhile, Taiwan’s Ministry of Defense reported a Chinese drone and a helicopter traveled along a similar route on Monday, but it is unclear if the two incidents are related.

Monday’s interception by Japan followed a similar incident a week earlier.

Chinese drone flights are fairly routine along this path around Taiwan and during major drills, the skies see a heavier presence of Chinese military aviation assets. However, tensions have increased between the two nations with a long history of sometimes violent enmity. In particular, Beijing is enraged by Tokyo’s announcement that it will place surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) on Yonaguni and Japan considers any attack on Taiwan an existential threat. China has made no secret about wanting to subsume Taiwan, by force if necessary, a concern we have frequently addressed.

Speaking to reporters during a visit to Yonaguni on Sunday, Japan’s defense minister said his country is moving forward with plans to deploy an unspecified number of air defense systems on the island.

“The deployment can help lower the chance of an armed attack on our country,” Shinjiro Koizumi explained. “The view that it will heighten regional tensions is not accurate.” 

In January, former Defense Minister Gen Nakatani said Tokyo wanted to base Type 03 Chu-SAM missiles on Yonaguni, Bloomberg News noted. 

The medium-range Chu-SAM was first introduced in 2003, according to the U.S. Army, and its missiles can hit aerial targets up to roughly 30 miles away.

“The SAM’s vehicle chassis is based on the Kato Works Ltd/Mitsubishi Heavy Industries NK series heavy crane truck,” the Army explained. “It uses a state-of-the-art active electronically scanned array radar.”

The Chu-SAM system includes a command center, radar unit, launcher, and transloader, with each unit equipped with six missiles that travel at Mach 2.5, the Army noted, adding that it “can track up to 100 targets simultaneously and target 12 at the same time, engaging fighter jets, helicopters, and cruise missiles.”

Given its stated range, the Chu-SAM system can engage aerial targets roughly halfway between Yonaguni and Taiwan’s east coast (likely even farther in reality), an area Chinese aviation assets are likely to fly should it plan to invade the island nation.

Once again, this could be just one system, Japan also has the U.S. Patriot system, as well.

Koizumi’s comments about the Chu-SAM raised hackles in Beijing.

“Japan’s deployment of offensive weapons in the southwest Islands close to China’s Taiwan region is a deliberate move that breeds regional tensions and stokes military confrontation,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters on Monday. “Given Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s erroneous remarks on Taiwan, this move is extremely dangerous and should put Japan’s neighboring countries and the international community on high alert.”

Mao was referencing another Chinese point of contention.

The newly elected Japanese Prime Minister recently stated that a Chinese military blockade of Taiwan would constitute a “survival-threatening” situation, thereby enabling “collective defense” alongside U.S. military forces, Newsweek reported.

“It was the first time such an explicit remark had been made by a sitting prime minister of Japan, which like the United States has long been deliberately vague as to whether it would intervene militarily in the event of an attack on Taiwan,” NBC News posited.

As this turmoil unfolded, a Chinese company released a video simulating an attack on Japanese ships and other targets using its newly introduced YKJ-1000 hypersonic missile. Although it isn’t clear if the timing is related, it is another indicator of the increasingly bellicose messaging between the two neighbors.

Trump has taken a mixed approach toward Taiwan.

The American president has at times expressed a degree of thinly veiled skepticism about Taiwan’s value to the U.S., The Diplomat noted. He has also implied the U.S. is committed to Taiwan’s freedom. In his latest administration, Trump has signed off on a $700 million deal to sell Taipei National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System (NASAMS) medium-range air defense systems, a plan first put forward under the Biden administration. In addition, Trump authorized a $330 million deal to sell Taiwan aircraft parts.

Meanwhile, as we mentioned earlier in this story, the Trump administration has also authorized the temporary deployment of Marines to Yonaguni to set up a FARP to extend the range of helicopter patrols from the island.

“No U.S. Marine CH-53E has ever before landed that far southwest in Japan, nor has a FARP ever been established there,” Maj. Patrick X. Kelly, executive officer of Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron (HMH) 462, said in a statement. “This evolution not only validated that MAG’s [Marine Aircraft Group 36] organic heavy-lift assault support helicopters, in support of its adjacent units and our JGSDF [Japan Ground Self-Defense Force] partners, can generate tempo anywhere the commander should choose, but also served as a huge leap forward in our relations between the U.S. Marines and the JGSDF.”

“FARPs significantly extend MAG-36’s operational reach,” said Col. Lee W. Hemming, commanding officer of MAG-36. “Our ability to rapidly establish and disassemble these sites in austere environments enhances our capacity to respond to, and support, disaster relief and other critical operations throughout the region – particularly in conjunction with our Japanese Self-Defense Forces partners. This collaborative FARP capability underscores our commitment to regional security and humanitarian assistance.”

Given its proximity to Taiwan, Yonaguni also makes sense as a forward staging area for standoff weapons to strike Chinese targets, including ships, and advanced radars to track their movement, if Japan decides to go that route. Marine Corps doctrine calls for troops to be staged in China’s weapons engagement zone ahead of any conflict, and more islands in the region will likely become increasingly armed, but none are as close to Taiwan as this one.

The U.S. Army’s Typhon ground-based missile system, which can fire Tomahawk cruise missiles and SM-6 multi-purpose missiles, was recently deployed to Japan, but some 1,200 miles to the northeast on Honshu Island. Last year, we wrote about reported plans for the U.S. Marine Corps units and their High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) to be rushed to the southwestern Japanese islands near Taiwan in case of a Chinese invasion. The anonymously sourced Kyodo News report about that move didn’t specifically mention Yonaguni, but it makes sense that it could be a destination for such future efforts.

Another Marine weapons system that might even make more sense for Yonaguni is Navy-Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS) armed with Naval Strike Missiles (NSMs). In previous reporting, we noted that these highly mobile missile systems have been deployed to Luzon in the Philippines. The NSM is well suited for fighting in the littorals. With the baseline NSM’s range of around 110 nautical miles, placing these systems on Yonaguni would hold Chinese vessels operating near the northern part and the backside of Taiwan at risk. They can also strike fixed targets on land. NMESIS is highly mobile on land, making its launchers very hard to target at distance by adversary forces.

While weapons like NMESIS on Yonaguni could pose a real threat to Chinese forces trying to take the island, getting them there in the case of a Chinese move on Taiwan will likely be a great challenge. The idea would be to have them there permanently or rush them there at the start of a crisis, before the shooting begins. This would work as a deterrent to keep the fighting from starting, as well as tactical capability once the fighting begins.

Still, Beijing has a very large arsenal of missiles, aircraft and ships on hand and in development that could rain fire on Yonaguni. Any U.S. logistic missions having to push materiel forward in a time of crisis to the island would be traveling deep within China’s anti-access bubble, as well, which may be entirely unsurvivable. So, once things light off, if weapons are fired from the island, or even preemptive action by China, could widen the conflict significantly, and any forces on the island could be cutoff and under fire.

As previously mentioned, amid the boiling tensions, Trump spoke with both Chinese President Xi Jinping and Takaichi on Monday.

“Taiwan’s return to China is an important component of the post-war international order,” Xi told Trump, according to an official account of the conversation by China’s state media. For his part, Trump affirmed that the U.S. “understands the importance of the Taiwan issue to China,” Chinese media said.

“Takaichi said Trump briefed her on his overnight phone call with China’s Xi and the current state of U.S.-China relations,” according to The Associated Press. “She said that she and Trump also discussed strengthening the Japan-U.S. alliance and ‘development and challenges that the Indo-Pacific region is faced with.’”

“We confirmed the close coordination between Japan and the United States,” the Japanese leader added, declining to give any other details of her talks with Trump, citing diplomatic protocol.

Regardless of diplomatic platitudes, when it comes to Yonaguni Island, moving surface-to-air missiles there is largely a defensive overture. It’s also the first step in providing protection for additional assets, should Japan choose to allow their deployment. But for now, it certainly has gotten Beijing’s attention.

Contact the author: [email protected]

US and China have long competed to become world powers, particularly in the technology sector. Since 2022, the US has systematically restricted the supply of high-performance NVIDIA chips to China. In today’s world, competition for power is no longer achieved through traditional means, such as military power. The US uses chips (semiconductors) as an instrument of political pressure. This policy is not just about economic or trade value, but has become part of technological statecraft designed to counter China’s military potential and its use of Artificial Intelligence (AI).

Semiconductors as a Provision of Power

The US policy of restricting high-end semiconductors to China shows a paradigm shift, chips (semiconductors) are not only industrial commodities, but have shifted to become a tool for achieving power. Export controls on high-performance chips and components that enable their production have been implemented by the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS). These steps show that the US is restructuring the geopolitical arena of technology.

AI today relies heavily on chips that can process vast amounts of data. The US restricts the export of high-end chips, such as the NVIDIA H100 and A100. A country’s AI development capacity could be severely compromised without access to these chips. The H100 is more than just a technological component; it serves as a strategic enabler that determines a country’s ability to maintain military dominance.

NVIDIA and the Security Logic Behind Export Control

The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) on 2023 announcement expanded export oversight, not only targeting on specific chip models but also on component values, most notably in frontier algorithm development. The NVIDIA A100 and H100 are highly advanced datacenter and AI chips. The guidelines are particularly high for training complex AI models on supercomputers, even for military applications or demanding research.

To prevent misuse, the US government has implemented licensing requirements for chips like the A100 and H100 chips, which have put chips like the A300 and H800, made by NVIDIA, under increased scrutiny, despite being categorized as “weak service” chips. Export restrictions stem from concerns that NVIDIA GPUs could be used by China in training AI models related to the US military, not only to slow China’s technological progress but also to safeguard its own national interests.

The US understands very well that high-performance chips are “brain machines” that can accelerate the development of military superiority, intelligence analysis, and even autonomous systems. So it is very clear that limiting the capacity of computing and high-performance hardware is the way to go. To delay a rival’s capabilities without resorting to direct military confrontation. This is a concrete manifestation of the shift in the “battlefield” taking place in the technological and regulatory arenas.

Vulnerable Supply Chains and Dependence on Taiwan

In chip control, the US must recognize that there are undeniable realities. NVIDIA’s chip production goes through a fabrication process that is almost entirely carried out in Taiwan, a country that lies in the geopolitical conflict between Washington and Beijing. The Congressional Research Service (2024) shows that approximately 90% of global advanced semiconductor chip production is based in Taiwan, manufactured by the leading Taiwanese foundry, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. (TSMC). This creates a structural dependency that poses serious risks to US economic and technological security.

If semiconductor production were concentrated in a single region, it would create vulnerabilities that could destabilize the global technological system. Therefore, any tensions in the Taiwan Strait would disrupt US access to the computing infrastructure it maintains. Export restrictions are just one step in a much more complex strategy, requiring the US to diversify production locations and ensure that the chip supply chain is not concentrated in a single region.

Effectiveness and Adaptation Room for China

NVIDIA’s chip restrictions were intended to curb the pace of AI modernization in China, but China was still able to optimize the model’s efficiency. This demonstrates that limiting hardware performance doesn’t always equate to limiting innovation. On the other hand, unofficial market entities have emerged, allowing NVIDIA GPUs to remain accessible through third parties. This adaptation demonstrates that hardware control has limitations, especially when demand remains high and global distribution networks are not always transparent.

Looking at its overall effectiveness, US policy has been effective in slowing China’s computing capabilities, but it hasn’t stopped its strategic potential. Instead, it’s encouraging China to be self-sufficient in strengthening its technological foundation, even though the quality of local chips hasn’t yet matched NVIDA’s standards. In other words, restricting NVIDIA’s chip exports isn’t meant to end competition, but rather to transform it into a race toward technological independence. The policy’s effectiveness will only last as long as China finds a way to adapt, while China is working to fill that gap.

Policy Directions with Greater Strategic Opportunities

The effectiveness of the compute policy is based on a governance architecture that holds every allied country accountable to the same standards. Without a disciplined framework, export controls on China are merely an illusion that is easily penetrated by gaps in different economic and regulatory interests. By creating strategic alignment, which forces every democratic country to reduce the fragmentation of interests, it can open up greater policy opportunities to emerge. Many developing countries see this semiconductor race as a competition for dominance, not as an effort to maintain security.

In other words, a successful computing policy is not one that simply limits China’s space, but one that manages technological gaps without creating competing computing blocs. The geopolitical challenge is maintaining superiority without forcing the world into two technological divides that would be difficult to control. The US strategy to secure a leading position in future technologies requires flexibility in responding to global dynamics.

A Future Determined by Computational Capacity

The debate over NVIDIA chips demonstrates the growing integration of political and technological power. US policy aims not only to restrain the flow of strategic goods but also to build a new computing-based power architecture. However, this policy also presents challenges, including dependence on Taiwan, China’s flexibility, and economic pressure on US chip companies.

In a global world that continues to move toward an AI-driven economy, the future will be determined by who can manage geopolitical risks, understand supply chain dynamics, and design visionary policies. Ultimately, GPU regulation is no longer simply a matter of export control; it demonstrates how countries navigate a power struggle now measured in microchips.