标签： Asia

Amid escalating anti-government protests in Iran, former US President Donald Trump has declared an immediate 25% tariff on all nations conducting business with the Islamic Republic. The announcement, made via Truth Social on Monday, positions the tariff as a punitive measure against any country engaging commercially with Iran, with the cost to be levied on all their business dealings with the United States.

This policy directly impacts key Iranian trading partners, including China, Russia, India, and Turkey, and is expected to result in increased costs for American importers. China, which accounts for approximately 30% of Iran’s total foreign trade, issued a firm rebuttal. Chinese Embassy spokesperson Liu Pengyu stated on X that ‘tariff wars and trade wars have no winners,’ condemning the move as illicit unilateral sanctioning and vowing to safeguard China’s legitimate rights and interests.

The geopolitical tension unfolds against a backdrop of severe domestic unrest in Iran. A virtual US embassy security alert has urgently advised American citizens to depart Iran immediately, offering specific guidance for land departure to Armenia or Turkey if commercial options are unavailable. The United States maintains no physical diplomatic presence in Iran, with Switzerland acting as its protecting power.

Iranian officials report significant casualties from the ongoing protests, with an estimated 2,000 fatalities—a figure substantially higher than the 640 previously tallied by human rights groups. Over 10,700 individuals have been arrested, and the nation has been subjected to an internet blackout exceeding 100 hours. The protests, ignited on December 28 by economic grievances including a historic devaluation of the rial and 42% inflation, have intensified into a broader anti-government movement.

Iranian leadership has accused the US and Israel of backing ‘armed rioters’ and sowing chaos. Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian stated Tehran is prepared for either ‘war or dialogue,’ while President Masoud Pezeshkian alleged a foreign plot to create disorder. Iran has also issued warnings of potential strikes on Israeli and US military bases should its territory be attacked.

In response, Israel has elevated its security alert level. Trump, commenting on the situation, indicated his administration is monitoring events closely and considering ‘very strong options,’ promising a retaliatory response of unprecedented scale if Iran acts against US interests.

As the Fifth Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Commission for Discipline Inspection convenes from January 12-14, 2026, an American youth offers a contemporary perspective on China’s enduring governance philosophy through the lens of the historic “cave-dwelling conversation” in Yan’an. This reflection addresses a perennial question in political systems worldwide: how does a long-governing party effectively maintain oversight of its own supervisors?

The analytical examination reveals China’s distinctive approach centers on a dual mechanism combining robust public oversight with institutional self-reform. This governance model establishes clear operational boundaries for power while maintaining it within structured institutional constraints. The system demonstrates a consistent willingness to identify and rectify errors through transparent processes.

This governance framework emerges from historical precedents but continues to evolve through contemporary anti-corruption initiatives and disciplinary reforms. The ongoing plenary session represents the latest development in this continuous refinement process, addressing both conduct standards and systemic supervision mechanisms.

The American perspective highlights how China’s solution to the supervision dilemma differs from Western models, emphasizing internal reform processes alongside public accountability channels. This approach maintains that effective governance requires both institutional constraints and the political determination to implement them consistently, even when addressing internal challenges.

In a landmark legal proceeding that has captivated South Korea, prosecutors have formally requested the death penalty for former President Yoon Suk Yeol, who stands accused of masterminding an attempted insurrection through his abrupt imposition of martial law in December 2024. The Seoul court heard closing arguments in a trial that has merged cases against three senior figures from Yoon’s administration, including former defense minister Kim Yong-hyun and former police chief Cho Ji-ho.

The prosecution’s case centers on Yoon’s December 2024 declaration of military rule, which plunged the nation into political chaos despite lasting only hours. While no fatalities resulted from the attempted power grab, prosecutors argued that Yoon’s intentions were fundamentally violent, presenting as evidence a memo from one of the martial law planners that discussed ‘disposing’ of hundreds of journalists, labor activists, and lawmakers. A military commander testified that Yoon had directly ordered the arrest of opposition lawmakers.

Yoon’s defense maintains that the martial law declaration was merely symbolic, intended to draw public attention to alleged wrongdoings by the opposition Democratic Party. The former president has denied all charges, characterizing himself as a patriot attempting to protect South Korea from North Korean threats amid domestic political tensions.

The case represents an extraordinary fall from power for Yoon, who became South Korea’s first sitting president to be arrested and charged. His impeachment following the failed power grab triggered snap elections that brought current President Lee Jae Myung to power in June.

South Korea’s legal system mandates that prosecutors must seek either death or life imprisonment for insurrection convictions. The nation has not carried out an execution in nearly three decades, with the last death sentence for a former leader being imposed on military dictator Chun Doo-hwan in 1996 for his 1979 coup—a sentence later commuted to life imprisonment.

A verdict in Yoon’s case is anticipated in February, with the court’s decision likely to have profound implications for South Korea’s political landscape and democratic institutions.

SEOUL, South Korea — In an unprecedented legal development, special prosecutors have formally requested capital punishment for former President Yoon Suk Yeol, who faces charges of rebellion for his controversial imposition of martial law in December 2024. The dramatic demand emerged during Tuesday’s hearing at Seoul Central District Court, where independent counsel Cho Eun-suk’s team presented their final arguments.

Yoon, who was removed from office in April following the political crisis, maintains that his martial law declaration represented a peaceful effort to alert citizens to what he characterized as the dangerous obstructionism of the liberal opposition Democratic Party. He had previously denounced the legislature as ‘a den of criminals’ and ‘anti-state forces.’

The December 2024 decree marked South Korea’s first implementation of martial law in over four decades, triggering traumatic national memories of military dictatorships from the 1970s-1980s. The order deployed armed troops throughout Seoul streets, surrounding the National Assembly and election offices—a move that evoked historical parallels to authoritarian regimes.

In extraordinary overnight proceedings, lawmakers from across the political spectrum, including members of Yoon’s own party, rushed to block the presidential directive. Their successful assembly vote to overturn the decree created a constitutional crisis that plunged the nation into political chaos, disrupted high-level diplomacy, and unsettled financial markets.

The court is anticipated to deliver its verdict in February, concluding a trial that has captivated the nation and highlighted deep political divisions. Yoon previously made history as South Korea’s first sitting president to be detained in January 2023, following his vehement resistance against impeachment attempts.

Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi of Japan has signaled her intention to dissolve the House of Representatives, setting the stage for a snap general election that could reshape the nation’s political landscape. According to Kyodo News sources, the Japanese leader communicated this decision to senior officials within the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) ahead of the regular Diet session scheduled for January 23rd.

The anticipated dissolution could trigger one of two potential election timelines: either a campaign period commencing January 27th with voting on February 8th, or a later schedule beginning February 3rd with ballots cast on February 15th. This strategic move comes despite sustained criticism from both opposition parties and factions within the LDP itself, who accuse the Prime Minister of prioritizing political advantage over public welfare.

Recent opinion polls indicate relatively robust public support for the Takaichi administration, particularly regarding its emphasis on economic measures addressing rising living costs. The Prime Minister has consistently highlighted livelihood issues, including inflation countermeasures, as central to her policy agenda.

However, media analysts warn that dissolving the lower house at the start of the regular Diet session could significantly delay passage of the fiscal 2026 budget, potentially pushing final approval to April or beyond. Such a scenario would likely force the government to implement a provisional budget to maintain national operations—a stopgap measure expected to have substantial repercussions for public services and economic stability.