Global Pulse

标签： Asia

亚洲

  • Soybeans on Beijing agenda but US farmers should temper optimism

    Soybeans on Beijing agenda but US farmers should temper optimism

    Eight years after former and current US President Donald Trump labeled China a hostile revisionist power seeking to displace American influence in Asia in his first-term National Security Strategy, his 2025 iteration of the document marks a striking departure in tone. The harsh, confrontational labels that defined the 2017 strategy have been stripped out entirely, replaced with muted, generic language that avoids direct naming even when addressing points of friction.

    The updated strategy retains core policy priorities: it commits the US to rebalancing bilateral trade relations and lists deterrence of conflict over Taiwan as a key national security goal, but frames both goals in neutral terms. Most notably, a section targeting foreign influence in the Western Hemisphere that clearly targets Chinese infrastructure investments never mentions China by name, referring only to vague “non-hemispheric competitors” and foreign firms operating in the region.

    This shift in language corresponds to measurable softening in policy, even as the Trump administration maintains pressure on China across multiple fronts. The White House has rolled back some of the steep tariffs imposed during earlier trade wars and relaxed restrictions on sales of US high-end semiconductors to Chinese buyers—a change that has spurred sharp criticism from longstanding China hawks within Republican policy circles.
    Matt Pottinger, who served as deputy national security advisor during Trump’s first term and helped craft the administration’s original hardline China approach, used January congressional testimony to push back against the semiconductor sales, warning that the relaxed rules would accelerate China’s military modernization efforts.

    The trade war that defined Trump’s first term and returned in his second has hit American agricultural producers hardest of all, a reality that has shaped the administration’s shifting approach. During 2025’s trade escalation, China halted all purchases of American soybeans for several months in retaliation for new 100% tariffs on Chinese imports. A recent analysis from *The Economist* confirmed that the US agriculture sector has suffered greater damage from reciprocal Chinese tariffs than any other American industry.

    A tentative truce was reached last fall: China agreed to resume soybean purchases, and Trump agreed to cut existing tariffs on Chinese goods. But both sides remain skeptical that the fragile agreement will hold long-term, framing the deal as a temporary pause in hostilities rather than a permanent resolution of trade tensions.

    That makes the upcoming summit between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, scheduled for May 14 and 15 in Beijing, a critical test for the bilateral relationship. Soybean trade will top the agenda, but it is far from the only issue on the table. China is pushing for further cuts to remaining US tariffs and diplomatic action to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, which has faced disruptive tensions. Washington’s priorities include securing more reliable access to rare earth minerals and cracking down on the flow of fentanyl precursors out of China.

    For Trump, securing a commitment for continued Chinese soybean purchases is a key political and economic priority, and analysts widely expect Xi to allow Trump to claim a diplomatic win ahead of any future electoral cycles. But even a cordial summit with a positive closing statement will not resolve the deep structural tensions between the two powers. Both sides have proven they can inflict significant economic pain on one another, and both have shown willingness to use that leverage to advance their negotiating positions.

    In the weeks leading up to the summit, China has already demonstrated its willingness to push back against US actions twice. First, Chinese regulators ordered Meta Platforms to unwind its $2 billion acquisition of domestic Chinese AI startup Manus. Second, after the US Treasury sanctioned five small Chinese refiners for purchasing Iranian crude oil, Beijing retaliated by activating its anti-sanctions blocking rules for the first time, allowing the targeted firms to sue any financial or insurance entity that complies with the US sanctions in Chinese courts.

    Lingling Wei, a veteran Wall Street Journal China correspondent with deep access to Chinese leadership circles, reports that top Chinese officials believe they have developed a framework for managing US-China relations with Trump at the helm: “The U.S. president can be exhausted and outwaited, and calibrated escalation resets the bargaining floor instead of blowing up the relationship.”

    The question remains whether Beijing is overestimating its ability to influence Trump. While Trump is invested in making the summit appear a success, he has little incentive to be seen as easily manipulated. Analysts say it would not be surprising to see a new show of force from Washington after the summit to remind Beijing of American leverage.

    For the moment, the status quo is an uneasy truce, not a permanent peace. With luck, the temporary pause will hold, allowing bilateral trade including soybean exports to continue flowing. But China has already begun long-term preparations for a future breakdown in trade, working aggressively to reduce its dependence on American soybeans. Beijing has ramped up purchases of Brazilian soybeans and invested in Brazilian infrastructure to speed export logistics, while also developing alternative fermented pig feed to reduce overall domestic soybean consumption.

    That reality leaves American soybean producers with a clear lesson, analysts say: they too must prepare for the worst. While some level of exports to China will likely continue even if the truce holds, farmers need to aggressively expand sales to other domestic and international markets to insulate themselves from future disruptions. Just as China seeks to end its reliance on American agriculture, American farmers must end their reliance on the Chinese market.

  • Mass sex abuse allegations force closure of boarding school in Indonesia

    Mass sex abuse allegations force closure of boarding school in Indonesia

    On May 2, hundreds of angry demonstrators gathered at the Ndholo Kusumo Islamic girls’ boarding school in Tlogosari village, Central Java, to confront the institution’s 58-year-old founder and caretaker Kiai Ashari. Brandishing banners with slogans including “Women are not sexual objects” and “The Predator,” the crowd shouted insults at Ashari as local police escorted him off the property. The longtime school leader stands accused of years of sexual abuse against dozens of his female students, most of whom are low-income orphans.

    This shocking allegation is not an isolated incident in Indonesia. It has sparked nationwide public outrage and pulled back the curtain on deep-rooted systemic gaps that allow sexual abuse to thrive in the country’s network of independent Islamic boarding schools. Though most witnesses who initially spoke out against Ashari have since retracted their statements, one survivor has formally filed a police complaint, and her legal team says as many as 50 other girls may have been victimized.

    “Based on the victim’s account, the number of victims ranges from 30 to 50 children,” Ali Yusron, the attorney representing the complainant, told the BBC. “I am representing one victim, but the unfolding legal process confirms many more were harmed. One survivor’s courage has brought the full scope of these abuses to light.”

    Authorities first named Ashari as a suspect on April 28. Police initially claimed on May 4 that he had not yet been taken into custody but assured the public he would not attempt to flee. Ashari contradicted that assurance hours later, slipping out of the Pati regency and traveling across Java to Bogor, Jakarta, and Solo before law enforcement intercepted him on the night of May 6 at a mosque in Wonogiri, Central Java.

    Pati Police Chief Jaka Wahyudi confirmed the allegations against Ashari on May 7, detailing that the surviving complainant was abused 10 times across different locations between February 2020 and January 2024. According to the official account, Ashari would enter the victim’s dorm room under the pretense of requesting a massage, then coerce her to remove her clothing and commit multiple indecent sexual acts, including unwanted touching, squeezing, and kissing. After the 10th assault, the victim finally disclosed the abuse to her father, who filed an official police report.

    This is far from the first time Ashari has faced credible accusations of sexual abuse against his students. Court records and police investigations show the first allegations against him date back to 2022. “The victims are all female students, mostly attending intermediate religious school (MTs),” Ali explained. “Over three consecutive years, new victims were targeted as he cycled through students.”

    In early 2024, Pati Police’s Women and Children’s Services Unit received new reports of sexual offenses against underage teenage students at the school, but many of those initial claims were later dropped after witnesses withdrew their statements. Chief Jaka told the BBC that the 2024 investigation faced significant roadblocks, with four separate victims choosing to retract their testimonies.

    Chief Jaka explained: “The victims and their families said they wanted to resolve the matter privately and amicably. Many witnesses withdrew their statements out of concern for their children’s future safety and prospects in the community.” The case lay dormant for two years before investigators finally formally named Ashari as a suspect last month, and authorities are still working to identify and interview all potential victims.

    Beyond the individual accusations against Ashari, the case has exposed a repeating pattern of abuse enabled by problematic teachings and weak oversight. Many perpetrators in these boarding schools manipulate students through false religious doctrine: Ashari, for example, convinced his female students he was a saint with supernatural powers, and a descendant of the Prophet Muhammad who deserved unquestioned obedience.

    Imam Nahe’i, a member of the Nahdlatul Ulama (PBNU) Anti-Sexual Violence Unit (SAKA) and a former commissioner of Indonesia’s National Commission on Violence Against Women, told the BBC that most sexual abuse cases in Islamic boarding schools follow this same manipulative template. “Caretakers often spread teachings rooted in shamanism and mysticism, rather than rational religious doctrine,” he said. “Many claim to be spiritual guardians, and tell students if they disobey them, they will go to hell.”

    Worse, Imam Nahe’i added, many boarding schools normalize inappropriate physical contact with students – including touching, hugging, and kissing – creating a culture that tolerates escalating sexual violence. He cited an ongoing case in Sumenep where abuse continued unchecked from 2017 until it was exposed only recently, proof that surrounding communities and school leaders have long turned a blind eye to harm. A longtime educator at a large Islamic boarding school himself, Imam Nahe’i said he found most of his fellow teachers do not even correctly understand what constitutes sexual violence.

    “Many of them think sexual violence only counts if it involves penetration,” he explained. “If it doesn’t reach that point, they don’t see it as sexual violence – they just write it off as a sin, not a serious crime.”

    The broader systemic failure also stems from a profound lack of government oversight. While Indonesia’s Ministry of Religious Affairs passed formal regulations in 2022 to address sexual violence in educational settings, most Islamic boarding schools are privately founded by independent religious leaders rather than operated by the state, making them far harder to regulate. Many fall through the cracks of existing oversight frameworks, creating barriers to reporting abuse and protecting vulnerable students. As Imam Nahe’i put it, existing national regulations simply do not have jurisdiction to enforce standards at these independent institutions.

    “To create clear binding regulations and dedicated task forces for Islamic boarding schools, the Ministry of Religion needs to prioritize this issue urgently,” he said. “On top of that, supervision of newly established private boarding schools from both the ministry and local communities needs to be far stricter.”

    In response to the latest scandal, authorities have taken immediate action against Ndholo Kusumo, which first received its operating permit in 2021 and hosted 252 enrolled students before the allegations broke. The school has been shut down, all students have been sent to temporary housing or to their families, and the Ministry of Religious Affairs has permanently revoked the institution’s operating license. The ministry has confirmed that displaced students – particularly the orphaned students who make up a large share of Ashari’s alleged victims – will be able to continue their education via online learning or transfer to other accredited boarding schools.

    Basnang Said, Director of Islamic Boarding Schools at the Ministry of Religious Affairs, explained that the immediate closure was intended to let authorities prioritize the criminal investigation while protecting students and maintaining public order. New student admissions at the school are suspended indefinitely until all institutional reforms to child protection, student care, and governance are completed and independently audited. If the school fails to meet mandatory safety standards, its deactivation will become permanent.

    The ministry has also issued new nationwide guidance calling for any boarding school caretaker or educator accused of sexual abuse to be immediately removed from their post and evicted from school grounds. All Islamic boarding schools across Indonesia have been ordered to hire new teaching and care staff that meet strict standards of moral integrity, and are prepared to provide 24-hour supervised care for all enrolled students.

  • ‘Watermelon deaths’ in Mumbai puzzle investigators

    ‘Watermelon deaths’ in Mumbai puzzle investigators

    It has been nearly three weeks since a family of four was discovered dead in their cramped Mumbai apartment, yet investigators have still not uncovered how the tragedy unfolded. The Dokadia family — 46-year-old Abdullah, his 42-year-old wife Nasreen, and their teenage daughters Ayesha, 16, and Zainab, 13 — were found unresponsive at their first-floor residence in the crowded Pydhonie neighborhood of south Mumbai on April 25, a case that has gripped India’s national media from the first hours of the tragedy.

    When news of the deaths first broke, local media immediately coined the haunting nickname the ‘watermelon deaths’, referencing the last meal the family consumed before falling fatally ill. Unsubstantiated early reports spread rapidly across news outlets and social media claiming the fruit had been intentionally poisoned or adulterated with toxic chemicals to extend its shelf life. Widespread public panic followed, sending demand for watermelon — one of India’s most beloved and widely consumed summer treats — plummeting and dragging local market prices down by nearly 40% in less than a week.

    Initial accounts from first responders show that on the night of the deaths, the Dokadias hosted extended family for dinner, serving the traditional spiced rice dish biryani. Guests left the apartment around 10:30 p.m., and a few hours later, the family ate a sliced watermelon as a late-night snack. Minutes after finishing the fruit, all four began suffering from severe vomiting and diarrhea. Neighbors, alerted by frantic calls, rushed to the apartment, where fourth-floor resident and doctor Zaid Qureshi immediately administered CPR to 13-year-old Zainab, who was struggling to breathe.

    “I did everything I could to stabilize her, but her condition just kept worsening,” Dr. Qureshi told BBC Marathi. All four family members were rushed first to a nearby local hospital, before being transferred to Mumbai’s larger JJ Hospital, where they were pronounced dead within hours.

    For weeks, investigative focus centered exclusively on the watermelon, as it was the final food the family consumed before becoming ill. Police seized all leftover food from the apartment, including the watermelon rind and leftover biryani, and sent samples to Mumbai’s Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) for toxicology testing.

    Last week, FSL officials released a breakthrough finding: the deadly agent that killed the Dokadias was zinc phosphide, a highly potent rodenticide commonly used across India to control rat populations. FSL director Dr Vijay Thakare confirmed that the chemical was detected in tissue samples taken from the victims’ organs — including their livers, kidneys and spleens — as well as in their stomach contents, bile and abdominal fat. Critically, zinc phosphide was also found in the leftover watermelon samples, but not detected in any other food items from the meal, including the biryani.

    Local health experts explain that even small amounts of zinc phosphide can kill a human within hours. When the chemical comes into contact with moisture in the digestive tract, it releases phosphine gas, which blocks cells from absorbing oxygen, causing rapid organ failure. Mumbai-based physician Dr Bhushan Rokade notes that the symptoms reported by neighbors match a classic zinc phosphide poisoning: vomiting, chest tightness, severe respiratory distress, and catastrophic shock.

    The Dokadia’s apartment building has long struggled with a widespread rodent infestation, according to local reports, with many residents relying on zinc phosphide-based poison pellets to kill rats. But despite this context, the case remains frustratingly open, with investigators still no closer to answering the two biggest questions: how did the rat poison end up in the family’s watermelon, and what was the motive if foul play was involved?

    On Wednesday, senior Mumbai police sources told the BBC that all possible scenarios are still on the table, and none have been ruled out. “We are still collecting evidence and examining every potential angle,” a senior investigating officer said. “We have not eliminated homicide, accidental poisoning, or even collective suicide as possibilities.” So far, investigators have interviewed more than 40 to 50 people, including relatives, neighbors, friends, and Abdullah Dokadia’s work colleagues, and multiple investigative teams have been assigned to untangle the case.

    Three weeks after the tragedy shook the neighborhood, the family’s building remains quiet, and the Mumbai watermelon market has only just begun to recover from the demand crash. But for investigators, the core mystery of how four healthy people ended up dead from zinc phosphide poisoning remains unsolved. “We will keep working until we find the answers,” the senior officer said.

  • Jury convicts man accused of running secret Chinese spy outpost in New York City

    Jury convicts man accused of running secret Chinese spy outpost in New York City

    NEW YORK – After a high-profile federal trial that underscores escalating U.S. tensions over transnational Chinese surveillance operations on American soil, a 64-year-old Chinese-American man has been found guilty of acting as an unregistered illegal foreign agent and deleting communications tied to a Chinese government contact. Lu Jianwang, who also goes by Harry Lu, was acquitted of a separate conspiracy charge, delivering a mixed outcome to a case that has highlighted deep divides over how U.S. law enforcement addresses China’s global transnational repression efforts.

    Federal prosecutors allege that Lu and co-defendant Chen Jinping founded the secret outpost in Manhattan’s Chinatown in 2022, shortly after Lu attended an official ceremony in China’s Fujian province where China’s Ministry of Public Security unveiled a global network of 30 so-called “overseas police stations.” The Chinese government has publicly acknowledged operating these outposts to monitor and target individuals it labels as opponents to its interests, including pro-democracy dissidents living abroad.

    The Manhattan outpost operated out of shared office space with the America ChangLe Association, a community group co-run by Lu – a U.S. citizen for decades – and his brother Jimmy. The organization characterizes itself as a social hub for Fujianese immigrants in the city, a framing the defense has leaned into heavily throughout the legal proceedings. During the trial, Lu’s legal team argued the space was never a covert spy hub, but rather a legitimate community resource that helped overseas Chinese renew their Chinese driver’s licenses remotely when COVID-19 border restrictions shut down cross-border travel, alongside serving as a gathering spot for locals to play mahjong and ping-pong. Defense attorney John Carman has repeatedly dismissed the prosecution’s case as an overreach, claiming prosecutors twisted an innocent bureaucratic misstep by a well-meaning community leader into a fabricated espionage narrative, dressing up a routine paperwork violation with baseless claims of intelligence gathering.

    Prosecutors pushed back on that narrative, noting that even if Lu’s only official activity was facilitating driver’s license renewals on behalf of the Chinese government, that still violates U.S. laws requiring foreign agents to formally register their activities with U.S. authorities. Jurors were presented with direct evidence during the trial, including a large banner hung at the Chinatown location explicitly labeling the space the “Fuzhou Police Overseas Service Station, New York USA.”

    The case traces back to an FBI raid conducted in October 2022, launched after investigators received a tip from a watchdog organization that tracks transnational repression by Chinese authorities. During the raid, agents seized digital devices including a computer and multiple cellphones, rummaged through documents, and accessed locked storage cabinets and a safe on the property. The day after the search, prosecutors confirm Lu admitted to FBI agents that he had launched the outpost, communicated with his Chinese government handler via the messaging platform WeChat, and deliberately deleted all of those conversations ahead of the raid.

    Lu spoke briefly to supporters as he exited Brooklyn Federal Court following the verdict, but declined to respond to questions from assembled reporters. He remains free on bail as he awaits sentencing, which has not yet been scheduled. His co-defendant Chen Jinping accepted a guilty plea in December 2024 to one count of conspiracy to act as an unregistered foreign agent, resolving her part of the case ahead of Lu’s trial.

    The conviction comes amid growing bipartisan concern in the U.S. over China’s widespread campaign of transnational repression, which has targeted dissidents, activists, and minority groups living in countries across the globe. The verdict is expected to add fuel to ongoing debates over how U.S. law enforcement should balance national security concerns with protecting the rights of Chinese-American communities.

  • Activists raise alarm over ‘flood’ of military supplies from India to Israel

    Activists raise alarm over ‘flood’ of military supplies from India to Israel

    A coalition of pro-Palestinian advocacy groups — the global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement and No Harbour for Genocide (NHFG) — has sounded a urgent alarm over a surge of military-grade material shipments from India to Israeli weapons manufacturers, uncovering six separate consignments of military-spec steel that activists say are destined for artillery production for the Israeli military.

    The six shipments, tracked by the coalition, collectively total roughly 806 tonnes of military-grade steel. Activists calculate this volume is sufficient to manufacture up to 17,458 155mm artillery shells, a core ammunition type used extensively by the Israeli military in its ongoing campaigns in Gaza and Lebanon. Three of the shipments, transported by Geneva-based global shipping giant Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC), are currently detained at Italian ports: two in Calabria’s Gioia Tauro and one in Cagliari, Sardinia. Activists are escalating pressure on Italian authorities to conduct full inspections of the cargo. MSC has not responded to multiple requests for comment from Middle East Eye (MEE) on the matter. The remaining three shipments were diverted away from Mediterranean routes and rerouted to Sri Lanka, with shippers reportedly searching for an alternative path to deliver the cargo to Israel, according to the coalition.

    Activists have confirmed all six shipments originate from R L Steels & Energy Limited, a firm based in Aurangabad, India, and are ultimately bound for a key ammunition production facility owned by Elbit Systems Land (formerly IMI Systems) in Ramat Hasharon, Israel. The $1 million worth of cargo departed India’s Jawaharlal Nehru Port in Maharashtra between January and March 2026. This is not the first time the Indian firm has supplied military material to Israeli arms manufacturers: in October 2025, R L Steels delivered 125 tonnes of military-grade steel to Israel as part of a larger 440-tonne military cargo that also included 175 tonnes of 155mm artillery shell bodies and 140 tonnes of mortar component parts, according to prior reporting from The Ditch.

    Ilham Yaseen, military embargo coordinator for the BDS movement, told MEE that the series of shipments expose what the movement calls a ‘flood’ of military supplies flowing from India to Israel amid ongoing Israeli military campaigns. Founded in 2005, BDS organizes nonviolent pressure campaigns to push Israel to comply with international law. Yaseen said the movement is demanding global pressure to block these shipments from reaching Israeli forces, and to hold both India’s far-right national government and any complicit Indian private firms accountable for facilitating what the movement calls Israeli atrocity crimes in Palestinian and Lebanese territories.

    Activists emphasize that the shipments come in a clear context: India has stepped in to fill critical gaps in Israeli military supply chains that have emerged over 2.5 years of active conflict in Gaza, despite a 2024 International Court of Justice ruling that calls on all UN member states to avoid any action that could support Israel’s military campaign, which has been formally recognized as genocide by the United Nations, hundreds of genocide scholars, and leading global human rights organizations. Since the outbreak of full-scale war in October 2023, more than 200,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed or injured, and activists note that even amid a recent temporary ceasefire, what they describe as a ‘slow-motion genocide’ continues in the besieged enclave. Israeli military operations in southern Lebanon have also killed more than 3,000 people since hostilities escalated in 2025.

    A NHFG spokesperson explained that while Israel maintains a large domestic military industrial complex, it relies on imported raw materials for large-scale ammunition production. ‘This military steel is going directly to the Ramat Hasharon ammunition plant, which produces no civilian goods — 100 percent of its output is for military use,’ the spokesperson confirmed. The Ramat Hasharon facility was previously scheduled for permanent closure, but the urgent need for uninterrupted artillery production amid the current conflicts has led the Israeli government to keep it open and even ramp up output, according to activists.

    Israel’s demand for 155mm artillery shells surged immediately after the October 7, 2023 Hamas attacks on southern Israel: Israeli forces fired more than 100,000 shells into Gaza and Lebanon in the first few months of the conflict alone, depleting stockpiles so rapidly that the Israeli government requested emergency additional shipments of 155mm rounds from the United States as early as mid-October 2023. India has a well-documented recent history of expanding military shipments to Israel: in early 2024, New Delhi delivered Indian-assembled Hermes 900 drones to Israel, followed by multiple shipments of other military equipment including rockets. NHFG says the newly tracked steel shipments are critical to helping Israel resolve its ongoing 155mm shell shortfall.

    India’s federal government has already faced sustained criticism from domestic and international civil society for its ongoing military trade with Israel. New Delhi abstained from a April 2024 United Nations Human Rights Council vote that called for a global arms embargo on Israel, and in September 2025, the Indian Supreme Court immediately dismissed a petition filed by Indian activists and lawyers seeking a formal ban on all arms shipments to Israel.

    Yaseen noted that imposing a military embargo on Israel at this juncture is both a moral and legal obligation for all states, adding: ‘India was once a global leader advancing UN principles and multilateralism rooted in justice, freedom, and equality. Today, its far-right government has turned India into a world leader in arming genocide and apartheid.’

    Activists also uncovered evidence that shippers have deliberately structured the supply chain to obscure the origin and final destination of the cargo. Four of the six shipments share identical export codes and product grades, and are routed through a procurement intermediary called Banyan Group International (BGI), a firm that markets itself as a bridge connecting Israeli companies seeking to source raw materials from Indian suppliers. BGI did not respond to MEE’s request for comment. Activists say the use of intermediaries is a deliberate tactic to separate the end Israeli buyer from the Indian source of the material to avoid scrutiny.

    As activists began tracking the MSC-chartered vessels carrying the cargo starting in February 2026, shippers have repeatedly altered routes and moved between ports to avoid detection, echoing tactics documented in an April 2026 NHFG report that found Greek shipping firms have hidden military cargo destinations and disabled vessel tracking systems to bypass Turkey’s official trade embargo on Israel. The current shipments have already faced widespread opposition across Europe: Spanish authorities initially blocked one vessel from docking, Portuguese parliamentarians raised formal questions about a port call in Sines, and Greek dockworkers refused to unload the suspected cargo, before three shipments were ultimately detained in Italy for potential inspection.

  • Watermelons and Handala: Germany outlines symbols of ‘secular pro-Palestinian extremism’

    Watermelons and Handala: Germany outlines symbols of ‘secular pro-Palestinian extremism’

    Germany’s Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), the country’s domestic domestic intelligence service, has released a controversial new dossier categorizing grassroots secular pro-Palestinian organizing within Germany as a form of extremism, triggering widespread debate over civil liberties, political speech, and the country’s official policy toward the Israel-Gaza conflict.

    The document outlines three core focus areas: the alleged ties between antisemitism and secular pro-Palestinian extremism, common symbols and markers used by activist groups, and cross-ideological networking between pro-Palestinian organizers, left-wing extremists and Islamists. BfV notes that the movement is highly diverse, made up of long-standing established groups as well as newer formations that emerged following the October 7, 2023 attacks led by Hamas. According to the dossier, all these factions are united by what BfV frames as inherent hostility toward Israel, regularly rejecting the country’s right to exist and spreading rhetoric that runs counter to norms of international understanding.

    The report specifically calls out pro-Palestinian protests against Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, noting that in Berlin, the epicenter of German pro-Palestinian activism, events frequently feature anti-Israel and occasionally antisemitic statements and displays. The dossier names the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and the global Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement as key “relevant actors,” claiming that even groups that publicly support a two-state solution implicitly endorse terrorist activity by Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and the PFLP, and frame the October 7 attacks as legitimate resistance. It also warns that so-called extremist Palestinian individuals are driving rising radicalization and increasing willingness to use violence.

    In its section on protest symbols, BfV even frames widely used pro-Palestinian messaging as evidence of extremism. The popular slogan “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” and the sliced watermelon symbol — which uses the fruit’s red, green, black and white colors to echo the Palestinian flag, often as a subtle nod to Palestinian solidarity when public display of the flag is restricted — are both labeled as attempts to deny Israel’s right to exist. “The outline of the entire State of Israel is depicted in the colours of the Palestinian flag (as a sliced watermelon), thereby denying Israel’s right to exist,” the report reads. The dossier also alleges that pro-Palestinian extremists act as a unifying ideological bridge between disparate extremist factions across the political and religious spectrum, from Islamist groups to German and Turkish left-wing and even right-wing extremist networks, exploiting the humanitarian crisis in Gaza to radicalize mainstream civil society. The report only mentions the word “genocide” once when referring to accusations against Israel, referring to the death of more than 73,000 Palestinians and widespread destruction of Gaza simply as the “situation.” Notably, the BfV’s broad claims of antisemitism and extremism are not backed by specific cited examples in the document.

    The release of the dossier comes as German law enforcement has already waged a sweeping crackdown on pro-Palestinian demonstrations across the country, with broad political backing rooted in Germany’s official “Staatsräson” — a core state principle that enshrines unconditional support for Israel as a central part of German national identity, a commitment tied to the country’s Nazi-era history of the Holocaust that killed six million Jews. In recent months, Berlin police have repeatedly broken up peaceful pro-Palestinian gatherings, arresting dozens of demonstrators including minor protesters. Video footage from multiple days of actions in April 2026 shows officers forcibly dragging non-violent protesters to the ground and aggressively restraining them, with no evidence of protester violence prior to police intervention.

    One protester interviewed by Middle East Eye, whose reporting first documented the crackdown, said demonstrators have faced ongoing repression simply for their Palestinian identity and opposition to Israel’s military campaign. “They [have been] arrest[ing] us for three years until now,” the protester said. “Just because we are Palestinian, and they are committed to a genocide. They are fascism.”

    The repression extends beyond street protests. In March 2026, families and legal representatives of anti-arms trade activists who were arrested for breaking into a facility run by Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer in Germany accused authorities of subjecting the detainees to extreme solitary confinement under harsh, restrictive prison conditions.

    Germany’s unwavering political support for Israel has shaped both its domestic and foreign policy in recent years. Berlin is the world’s second-largest arms supplier to Israel, trailing only the United States. While Berlin briefly paused some arms transfers in October 2025 after Israel launched its ground offensive to seize full control of Gaza City, shipments resumed just one month later. In April 2026, Germany joined Italy to block a joint motion put forward by Spain, Ireland, and Slovenia at the EU level to suspend the bloc’s trade agreement with Israel over its conduct in Gaza. German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul dismissed the proposal as inappropriate, arguing that critical conversations about Gaza must happen through constructive dialogue with Israel rather than punitive measures.

    The BfV’s core claim that pro-Palestinian activism amounts to extremism because it rejects Israel’s right to exist has also sparked legal and political pushback. International law scholars note that while defenders of Israel regularly invoke the country’s right to exist, no provision of international law guarantees this right to any sovereign state; statehood is widely recognized as a political reality rather than a legally granted status. Critics also argue that the BfV’s framing conflates criticism of Israeli government policy with antisemitism, noting that the agency’s claim that activists fail to distinguish between the Israeli state and global Jewish communities echoes the very conflation it accuses protesters of making. Since the start of Israel’s current military campaign in Gaza, the country has expanded its territorial control through force, having already displaced 750,000 Palestinians during its founding in 1948. Today, Israeli forces occupy more than half of the Gaza Strip and have advanced into southern Lebanon, redrawing de facto borders across the region.

  • ‘Europe must become more Jewish’ says owner of Telegraph and Politico

    ‘Europe must become more Jewish’ says owner of Telegraph and Politico

    In a provocative address to the World Jewish Congress (WJC) Governing Board in Geneva this week, Mathias Dopfner, CEO of global media giant Axel Springer – owner of major outlets including The Telegraph and Politico – declared that anti-Zionism is indistinguishable from racism, while laying out a series of divisive policy proposals that have reignited debates over media independence, censorship and immigration.

    Dopfner’s hardline stance on Israel is not new. Back in April, the media executive made international headlines when he told Politico journalists that any staff who refused to publicly back Israel must resign, a move that stoked widespread fears over the editorial independence of the political news outlet, which Axel Springer acquired in 2021. Opening his WJC speech, he doubled down on his ideological commitments, telling attendees: “I’m a goy, and I’m Zionist, with all my heart, out of conviction, and with passion.”

    In a wide-ranging address that included sharp anti-immigrant rhetoric and broad attacks on cultural institutions, universities, musicians, artists and the United Nations, Dopfner launched a particularly scathing attack on the UN Human Rights Council. The body has drawn repeated international condemnation of Israel over documented war crimes, systemic human rights abuses and the imposition of apartheid rule in occupied Palestinian territories; Dopfner derided the council as the “human rights Twistings Council”, claiming it unfairly targets Israel.

    Dopfner claimed that anti-Zionist sentiment – which he framed as any widespread, repeated criticism of the Israeli state – is spreading rapidly across North America and Europe, taking root in university campuses, arts and cultural circles, social media platforms and public street protests. While he conceded that criticism of Israel is not inherently forbidden, he argued that such critique should not become a normalized “everyday” conversation. He went further, claiming that rising criticism of Israel has rendered major Western European nations including Germany, France, the UK and Spain no longer “truly safe countries for Jews”.

    Turning specifically to UK politics, he attacked the country’s Green Party, which has seen growing electoral support in part driven by its public criticism of Israeli policy. He took particular issue with the party’s framing of Zionism as a racist ideology, retorting: “There must be a misunderstanding here. It is not Zionism that is racism. It is anti-Zionism that is racism.”

    Dopfner argued that the rise of anti-Zionism is fueled by “envy” of Jewish communal success, a claim that omitted any reference to Israel’s 56-year military occupation of Palestinian land, or ongoing public calls by sitting Israeli politicians for the establishment of a “Greater Israel” spanning territory from the Nile River in Egypt to the Euphrates in Iraq. “Only a self-assured, proud Jewish identity can help reduce envy and [the] new antisemitism,” he added.

    Framing growing global criticism of Israel as a leading warning sign of rising authoritarianism in the West, Dopfner put forward a slate of draconian policy measures. Conflating all anti-Zionists with antisemites, he argued that anti-Zionists “regardless of their origin, must be expelled wherever legally possible”. He praised UK Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch for advancing similar policy proposals, arguing every democratic nation should adopt such measures. He also called for sweeping changes to European immigration policy, urging the continent to introduce preferential immigration and citizenship pathways exclusively for Jewish families, framing this as a counterbalance to what he called “Christian and particularly Muslim influences” in Europe. “Europe must become more Jewish,” he concluded.

    Dopfner also joined growing calls for the forced sale or full censorship of TikTok in Europe, pointing to the 2025 US order forcing the platform to sell off its US operations to non-Chinese owners – a deal that would see pro-Zionist billionaire and close Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ally Larry Ellison take control of the platform. “In America, TikTok has been forced to be sold… Europe should follow this example,” he said, warning that failure to root out anti-Zionism would lead the West to “destroy itself”.

    Political analysts note Dopfner’s high-profile public intervention is part of a broader coordinated push by pro-Israel leaders to counter mounting global condemnation and diplomatic isolation of Israel, which has intensified sharply following Israel’s military campaign in Gaza that the UN and multiple international human rights organizations have ruled constitutes a genocide. Dopfner’s comments also echo growing alarm among pro-Israel elites expressed at the 2025 Tikvah Jewish Leadership Conference in the US, where billionaires, investment bankers, media leaders, lawyers and Zionist Christian activists gathered to address what they described as a growing global backlash against Israeli policy. That gathering, which brought together leaders from the WJC, the Jewish Leadership Conference and the Jewish Federations of North America’s General Assembly, collectively called for expanded censorship of voices across the political spectrum that criticize Israel – framed by attendees as an effort to “save America from the barbarians”.

  • Who is the real Wes Streeting? His record on Israel and foreign policy examined

    Who is the real Wes Streeting? His record on Israel and foreign policy examined

    A stunning political upheaval is unfolding in UK politics, with British Health Secretary Wes Streeting reportedly preparing to launch a leadership challenge against incumbent Prime Minister Keir Starmer — a move many senior MPs have already labeled an internal party coup.

    According to senior party sources, Streeting held a brief 10-minute closed-door meeting with Starmer at 10 Downing Street on Wednesday morning, and is now on track to step down from the cabinet and officially trigger a contest for the Labour leadership this Thursday. For the Ilford North MP, who aligns with the Labour Party’s right wing, this leadership bid is a race against the clock: he aims to unseat Starmer before the party’s soft left wing can unify behind a rival contender, most notably Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham, who has long been floated as a potential candidate and could launch his own challenge if he secures a seat in parliament.

    Crucially, Labour Together, the influential think tank that was instrumental in securing Starmer’s 2020 leadership victory, is widely understood to be backing Streeting. The group is eager to preserve its hold on power within a future Labour government should Starmer step down.

    Regardless of which candidate ultimately prevails in a leadership contest, political analysts widely agree that a shift in British foreign policy is all but guaranteed — and few policy areas will see more change than the UK’s long-standing military and political alliance with Israel. The Israeli war in Gaza has been a deeply divisive flashpoint in British politics for more than two years, and the recent US-Israeli military campaign against Iran has already sent ripple effects through the British economy, driving up energy costs and stoking inflation. In the most recent local elections, the Green Party — the most prominent political voice opposing UK support for Israel — eroded Labour’s voter base far more severely than the right-wing Reform Party, underscoring how deeply the Israel issue has shifted voter loyalties on the left.

    Any new prime minister replacing Starmer, whether through voluntary resignation or forced ousting, will be desperate to push back against the Green Party’s electoral gains and win back disillusioned left-wing voters. That political pressure almost certainly means a policy adjustment on Israel, but questions about what a Streeting-led government would actually do remain shrouded in contradiction. Middle East Eye’s deep dive into Streeting’s public and private record on Israel and the Middle East reveals a pattern of conflicting statements that have left even close political observers unsure of his true positions.

    Streeting is a long-standing, active member of Labour Friends of Israel (LFI), a pro-Israel parliamentary lobby group. A senior Westminster source confirmed that Streeting meets regularly with LFI leadership in parliament. He has also received significant financial donations from Trevor Chinn, a 90-year-old former car industry magnate and philanthropist who was awarded the Israeli Presidential Medal of Honour in November 2024 for his lifelong service to the State of Israel. Between 2021 and 2024, Chinn donated more than £15,000 (approximately $20,200) to Streeting, and gave an additional £5,000 in 2025 — after Streeting became Health Secretary — to “support campaigning in Ilford North”.

    Chinn’s father served as president of the UK branch of the Jewish National Fund (JNF), an organization that has long provided funding for Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, which are classified as illegal under international law. Public organizational records show that between 2015 and 2018, the UK JNF transferred more than £1 million to Hashomer Hachadash, a Zionist militia operating in the occupied West Bank. Chinn himself is a long-time supporter of both LFI and its Conservative counterpart, Conservative Friends of Israel, and two former officials from Tony Blair’s Labour government described him to Middle East Eye as a “very strong supporter of Israel” who was brought in as an unofficial advisor to Blair’s cabinet.

    Despite these deep ties to pro-Israel lobbying, Streeting has a documented history of engaging with Palestinian stakeholders as well. In February 2016, he joined a trip to Israel and the occupied West Bank organized by Medical Aid for Palestinians and the Council for the Advancement of Arab-British Understanding, where he met with then-Palestinian Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah and sitting members of the Israeli Knesset, and visited a Palestinian community school in Khan al-Ahmar that was facing ongoing intimidation from Israeli settlers and military forces at the time. Later, he became the first member of Starmer’s shadow cabinet to visit Israel after Starmer won the Labour leadership, on a separate trip funded by LFI. He framed that visit as a four-day “fact-finding mission” during which he met with Israeli politicians, diplomats, academics and health experts, and later praised Israel’s medical innovation, saying “Israel is 10 years ahead of the NHS.”

    After the 7 October 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, when Starmer’s then-opposition Labour Party backed the Conservative government’s policy of supporting Israel’s siege and bombing campaign in Gaza, Streeting aligned fully with official party line. Speaking to Sky News on 25 October 2023, he repeated Israel’s widely circulated claim that Hamas “cowardly [uses] innocent civilians, children, women, men as human shields” and echoed the Israeli assertion that “Hamas uses buildings like schools and hospitals as bunkers.” He refused to back calls for a permanent ceasefire, instead calling only for a temporary “humanitarian pause,” arguing that “Israel is a democracy… I don’t know if Hamas will abide by the rules for a pause.” In January 2024, he dismissed South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice as a “distraction from what needs to happen, which is the diplomatic heavy lifting to bring about an end to this conflict.”

    By mid-2024, however, Streeting began to ramp up public criticism of Israeli actions. “You look at the scale of the bloodshed, you look at the scale of destruction in Gaza, the number of civilian casualties,” he noted in one interview. “They are disproportionate, and it’s horrible.” In the 2024 UK general election, Streeting only narrowly held onto his Ilford North seat, where British Palestinian independent candidate Leanne Mohammed came within just 600 votes of unseating him — a result widely interpreted as a reflection of widespread voter anger in the diverse constituency over Labour’s pro-Israel policies. A senior Labour source familiar with Streeting’s thinking confirmed to Middle East Eye that as Health Secretary, Streeting privately pressured Starmer to toughen his public criticism of Israel.

    Under Starmer’s premiership, UK-Israel diplomatic relations did cool gradually: the UK introduced a partial arms embargo on Israel in September 2024. Yet Starmer’s government continued widespread military cooperation with Israel throughout the Gaza campaign, most notably carrying out hundreds of surveillance flights over Gaza and sharing real-time intelligence with Israeli forces. In March 2025, Starmer walked back previous comments from then-Foreign Secretary David Lammy that Israel was committing a “breach of international law.”

    Streeting never publicly accused Israel of war crimes, but he continued to edge toward stronger criticism: in April 2025, he said Israeli attacks on Gaza were “intolerable” and “cannot be justified as self-defence.” By September that year, he went further, arguing that Israel’s actions in Gaza were “leading Israel to pariah status” and added that Israeli President Isaac Herzog “needs to answer the allegations of war crimes, of ethnic cleansing and of genocide that are being levelled at the government of Israel.”

    That public shift, however, was thrown into new context in February 2026, when private text messages exchanged between Streeting and Peter Mandelson — former British ambassador to the U.S. and a controversial associate of the late Jeffrey Epstein — were leaked to the press. Multiple senior Labour sources told Middle East Eye that Streeting himself orchestrated the leak, in a bid to shore up left-wing support for his leadership bid and increase pressure on Starmer. One senior party official said Streeting was “intentionally presenting himself as more critical of Israel than official Labour policy” to appeal to disaffected voters.

    The leaked texts revealed that Streeting privately acknowledged Israel was “committing war crimes before our eyes” as early as July 2025, and explicitly endorsed imposing economic and political sanctions on Israel. He told Mandelson that the Israeli government “talks the language of ethnic cleansing, and I have met with our own medics out there who describe the most chilling and distressing scenes of calculated brutality against women and children.” He noted that he had been a member of LFI for more than 20 years, adding: “I have never been a shrinking violet on Israel. [Israel is engaged in] rogue state behaviour. Let them pay the price as pariahs with sanctions applied to the state, not just a few ministers.”

    While some left-wing critics welcomed Streeting’s private candor, the leak sparked fierce backlash from across the political spectrum. Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn published an open letter to Streeting, accusing him of a “shameful failure” for remaining in Starmer’s cabinet even as he privately condemned Israel’s war crimes in Gaza. Corbyn argued that “once a government acknowledges that Israel is committing war crimes, then any continued military or political support is an admission from the government that it is knowingly aiding and abetting those war crimes.” He pressed Streeting to answer a series of critical questions: why he did not resign from a government he believed was supporting war crimes, whether he believed the current Labour government was complicit in Israeli war crimes, whether he would cooperate with the International Criminal Court’s investigation into UK complicity, and what specific steps he had taken internally to end British military and political support for Israel. Corbyn noted that “our history books will shame government ministers who could have stopped the genocide in Gaza, but chose to stay silent instead,” and confirmed to Middle East Eye that Streeting has not responded to the letter.

    In the run-up to 2026 local elections, Streeting also publicly attacked pro-Palestinian politicians challenging Labour in his own constituency, framing their criticism of Labour’s Israel policy as “sectarian politics.” In Redbridge, the east London borough that contains Streeting’s Ilford North seat, the Redbridge Independents — a local grouping backed by Corbyn’s Your Party — won nine council seats last week. In March, Middle East Eye reported that Streeting sent a campaign letter to constituents accusing Redbridge Independents of being “a divisive political party that aims to only represent some of us, more focused on foreign conflicts than on fixing potholes.” He doubled down in April, telling The Times that “We’re voting for Redbridge council, not the UN Security Council. Who you choose to run your local council matters and the Redbridge Independents represent a divisive brand of sectarian politics.”

    Critics have pointed out the contradiction in this attack, noting that Starmer himself made foreign policy a central campaign issue during the same local elections, when he attacked Reform Party leader Nigel Farage and Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch over their stances on the Iran war, arguing that “Nigel Farage and Kemi Badenoch would have jumped into this war with both feet without thinking through the consequences… Britain would have been “in a war without a plan” had they been in power, adding that he “won’t be dragged in” to the US-Israeli war. Senior Labour MP John McDonnell, a prominent left-wing critic of Labour’s Israel policy, criticized Streeting’s attack on the independents, telling Middle East Eye that “one interpretation verges on a Reform [style] dog whistle politics. The last thing we need is more divisive politics in these elections.”

    Today, as Streeting prepares for what could be one of the most dramatic internal leadership challenges in modern British political history, his true positions on Israel and foreign policy remain an enigma to most observers. His public and private stances shift dramatically depending on his audience, shaped by his long ties to pro-Israel lobbying, his precarious hold on a marginal seat, and his ambition to become prime minister. If Streeting follows through on his plan to launch a leadership challenge, he will finally be forced to lay out a clear, consistent foreign policy agenda for the UK — and he will almost certainly craft that agenda with an eye toward holding his marginal seat and winning the next general election.

  • Trump has actually started to decouple US from China

    Trump has actually started to decouple US from China

    As former President Donald Trump prepares to travel to Beijing for high-stakes trade talks accompanied by a contingent of leading American CEOs, all eyes are turning to the core promise that defined his two election campaigns: rolling back decades of U.S. economic integration with China. While much has been written about Trump’s unorthodox model of state-aligned corporate policy, which blends tariffs, export controls, government equity stakes and personal pressure to advance American commercial interests, this analysis digs into a more pressing question: nearly a decade after Trump first took office on a decoupling platform, how much progress has the U.S. actually made?

    To contextualize the current state of relations, it is necessary to revisit the bilateral economic model that dominated the mid-2010s. Back then, the division of labor was clear: U.S. companies led research and development, designed finished products, then sent blueprints to China for final assembly. Components often came from third-party Asian economies like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, though Chinese suppliers were increasingly common, before finished goods were shipped back to the U.S. for marketing, sales and after-sales service by American firms.

    This arrangement left both nations dissatisfied. American observers argued that shifting labor-intensive assembly to China had gutted U.S. manufacturing employment – a claim backed by empirical evidence – and warned that outsourcing low-value work would eventually lead to the loss of higher-value, high-skill activities down the line, a projection that has proven increasingly plausible. For their part, Chinese leaders resented being trapped in the low-value-added segment of global supply chains, watching the bulk of profits flow to foreign firms. As a result, both sides began implementing policies to dismantle the old framework and build a new commercial order.

    China deployed targeted industrial policy to onshore high-value component manufacturing and cultivate homegrown “national champion” brands, while successive U.S. administrations under both Trump and Joe Biden worked to cut American trade dependence on China, alongside tightening export controls on critical strategic technologies like semiconductors – a step China later matched with its own restrictions on rare earth exports. It is widely acknowledged that China has already delivered on its half of the decoupling: today, far more Chinese-made finished goods rely on domestic components, and the country has climbed the global value chain to produce globally competitive brands including BYD, Huawei, Xiaomi, DJI and CATL.

    The question that remains fiercely contested is whether the U.S. has succeeded in its goal of reducing reliance on Chinese manufacturing. On the surface, hard data suggests significant change: the share of U.S. imports sourced from China has fallen sharply since the first Trump-era tariffs took effect. Analysis from The Wall Street Journal shows that while some firms have relocated production back to the U.S. to avoid tariffs, the shift remains modest: a 2025 survey of Ohio manufacturers found just 9% had reshored some production from China, up from 4% in 2021, with 60% of that reshoring activity coming from China. Most production exiting China has moved to Mexico and Southeast Asian nations instead.

    The impact of tariffs is clear even from Trump’s first, less aggressive term: U.S. buyers shifted imports of tariffed goods away from China while maintaining non-tariffed imports, and the expanded tariffs implemented in Trump’s second term – which far outpace duties levied on U.S. allies – have accelerated this shift. The reallocation has been concentrated heavily in other Asian economies and Mexico, with product-specific trends marking the change: first-term tariffs targeted low-value goods like furniture, footwear and apparel, where China’s market share was already declining gradually due to rising domestic labor costs. More recent duties have cut into Chinese exports of consumer electronics including personal computers and smartphones; just two years ago, most U.S.-bound PCs were assembled in China, and today the majority are assembled in Vietnam.

    Decoupling is not limited to trade flows: the trend is equally pronounced in foreign direct investment. 2025 saw a wave of reports about U.S. multinationals moving production capacity out of China, and this anecdotal evidence is reflected in aggregate data, which shows a sharp collapse in foreign direct investment inflows to China. Most of this diverted investment has landed in Southeast Asia, though advanced manufacturing capacity has largely shifted to Europe. Three core factors are driving this capital exodus. First, tariffs have made manufacturing in China for export to the U.S. far more costly, giving multinational firms a direct financial incentive to halt new factory investments in China. Second, repeated experiences of technology appropriation by Chinese domestic firms, often with implicit or explicit government support, have cooled multinationals’ enthusiasm for accessing China’s market – many firms have entered China chasing access to its huge consumer base, only to lose their core technological advantages to local competitors that do not play by global market rules. Third, rising geopolitical tensions over Taiwan and the South China Sea have raised the specter of conflict, which would leave foreign-held factories in China at risk of blockade or expropriation, forcing companies to reevaluate their supply chain risk exposure.

    Despite these clear trends, a contingent of decoupling skeptics – the so-called “macro camp” – argues that any apparent shift is largely illusory. This group, which brings together unlikely ideological allies from protectionist economists frustrated that tariffs have not reduced global trade imbalances to free-trade advocates at outlets like *The Economist* and the Peterson Institute who argue tariffs are inherently ineffective, claims that persistent U.S. trade deficits and Chinese trade surpluses prove Chinese goods are still reaching the U.S. via hidden indirect routes. I have long pushed back against this framing: the persistence of aggregate macro imbalances does not prove Chinese goods are still entering the U.S. at the same rate. China can simply find new export markets for its goods, while the U.S. sources imports from new suppliers, leaving overall global imbalances intact even as bilateral trade between the two powers shrinks.

    That said, to resolve this debate it is necessary to test the most common claims that decoupling is a myth. The most frequent argument is transshipment: the idea that Chinese firms evade tariffs by labeling goods “Made in Vietnam” or another third country before shipping them to the U.S. But analysis from economist Gerard DiPippo finds transshipment plays only a minor role, accounting for at most 18% of China’s lost U.S. export volume, and likely far less. DiPippo’s analysis compares what products China stopped exporting to the U.S. and what products China increased exports of to Vietnam after tariffs took effect; if large-scale transshipment were occurring, these product categories would align, and they generally do not.

    A more credible argument focuses on trade mismeasurement. A persistent gap exists between the value of goods the U.S. records as imports from China and the value of goods China records as exports to the U.S., with China’s recorded decline far smaller than the U.S.’s. Much of this gap has been attributed to the de minimis exemption, which allowed Chinese firms to ship small packages directly to U.S. consumers tariff-free. Chinese manufacturers exploited this loophole by breaking large bulk orders into multiple small shipments to avoid duties. However, Trump closed this loophole via executive order in mid-2025, so it cannot explain the continued decline in Chinese exports to the U.S. over the past year.

    The most convincing argument for continued hidden reliance on Chinese manufacturing centers on intermediate goods. Just as 2011’s “Made in China” iPhones relied heavily on components from Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, today’s “Made in Vietnam” iPhones often include large volumes of Chinese-made parts. Since high-value components account for the majority of a finished electronics product’s total value, this would mean the U.S. remains indirectly dependent on China even as final assembly shifts abroad. A 2024 study by Hsu, Peng and Wu found this effect is substantial, concluding that U.S. importers retain significant indirect dependence on China via third-party suppliers in Vietnam and Mexico. The major limitation of this research, however, is that its data only extends through 2022, the same cutoff for the OECD’s value-added trade data – the other key source for measuring indirect dependence. Even with this limitation, OECD data shows that U.S. import dependence on China on a value-added basis was declining before the COVID-19 pandemic, ticked back up during pandemic-related supply chain disruptions, and resumed its decline in 2022, matching the trend for gross import volumes.

    What does this all add up to? The old bilateral model, where U.S. firms designed products and China assembled them for American consumers, is well and truly gone. The new normal is one where Chinese firms sell intermediate components to assemblers in other countries, which then export finished goods to the U.S. This is not an insignificant shift. It demonstrates that Chinese firms have successfully moved up the global value chain to become direct competitors to foreign multinationals. At the same time, final assembly, while the least profitable segment of the value chain, is still economically meaningful: it was the starting point for China’s own decades-long industrialization drive. The fact that U.S. tariffs have pushed this assembly work out of China is a meaningful change. It does not eliminate U.S. dependence on Chinese manufacturing entirely, but it reduces it. And just as China moved from assembly to component manufacturing over time, there are early signs that Vietnam and other emerging manufacturing hubs could follow the same path. There is no inherent reason China must remain the world’s default factory: other nations can develop industrial capacity just as China did.

    Building a fully non-Chinese supply chain will not happen quickly or easily, and progress has been slower than headline trade numbers often suggest. But the U.S. has made a clear, promising start, and tariffs on China have been a core driver of that progress. While much of Trump’s trade policy has been haphazard, misdirected and marred by corruption, the decoupling project – which was continued by the Biden administration – has begun to deliver tangible results. It would be a missed opportunity if Trump abandons this progress on his upcoming trip in exchange for trivial short-term concessions like increased Chinese purchases of U.S. soybeans.

  • Iran has regained access to most missile and underground sites, US intelligence finds

    Iran has regained access to most missile and underground sites, US intelligence finds

    A newly disclosed classified US intelligence assessment from earlier this month directly contradicts public statements from senior Trump administration officials who have claimed to have “decimated” Iran’s military missile capabilities, according to a new report published Tuesday by The New York Times. The findings, shared with US policymakers, paint a far different picture of Iran’s current operational capacity than the White House has presented to the public. The assessment confirms that Iran has restored operational access to 30 out of 33 key missile sites positioned along the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical chokepoints for global energy trade. Through this narrow waterway, roughly one-fifth of the world’s total oil and liquefied natural gas supplies transit each day, meaning restored Iranian capabilities pose a renewed threat to international commercial shipping and US naval forces deployed in the region. Citing intelligence sources familiar with the document, The NYT reports that Iran can now deploy mobile missile launchers from many of these sites to reposition weapons across the country, and in some cases, can conduct direct missile launches from the existing launchpads at the restored facilities. Overall, Iran retains approximately 70 percent of its pre-war stockpile of missiles and 70 percent of its national fleet of mobile launchers, the assessment found. When it comes to Iran’s network of hardened underground missile storage and launch facilities, US military intelligence gathered via satellite imagery and other advanced surveillance methods indicates that Tehran has regained access to roughly 90 percent of these sites, which are now either partially or fully operational. These findings align with an earlier report from The Washington Post published last week, which cited separate US intelligence assessments showing Iran retained around 75 percent of its mobile launchers and 70 percent of its pre-war missile inventory. The gap between classified intelligence conclusions and the administration’s public rhetoric traces back to the strategic choices US military planners made when launching the joint US-Israeli offensive against Iran that began on February 28. According to The NYT’s reporting, when strikes targeted Iranian missile sites, US forces largely chose to seal off the entrances to underground facilities rather than completely destroying them from the inside out – a decision driven largely by critical shortages of heavy bunker-busting munitions. Military planners prioritized preserving existing stocks of these specialized weapons for potential high-intensity conflicts with North Korea and China, leading to a more restrained approach to destroying Iran’s hardened infrastructure. Additional reporting from The NYT has previously confirmed that the Iran offensive has already severely depleted US stockpiles of multiple key munitions types, including Tomahawk cruise missiles, Patriot interceptor missiles, MGM-140 Army Tactical Missiles, and Precision Strike missiles. To date, the US has fired roughly 1,100 long-range stealth cruise missiles in the campaign – a number equal to nearly the entire remaining stockpile the US held before the war began. It has also expended 1,300 Patriot interceptors, a volume that would take more than two years to replace at 2025 production rates. The Trump administration has pushed back hard against these reports, doubling down on its claims of a resounding victory in the campaign. A White House spokesperson rejected the NYT’s reporting, reiterating that Iran’s capabilities had been “crushed” and claiming that anyone who suggests Iran has reconstituted its missile forces is either “delusional or a mouthpiece” for Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. Acting Pentagon press secretary Joel Valdez also issued a sharp rebuke, calling the NYT’s reporting “disgraceful” and accusing the outlet of acting as a public relations arm for the Iranian regime. Valdez insisted that Operation Epic Fury, the official name for the US-led offensive, stands as a “historic accomplishment.” Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine also pushed back on claims of depleted munitions during a Tuesday appearance before a House appropriations subcommittee, telling lawmakers that the US currently “has sufficient munitions for what we’re tasked to do right now.” After the February 28 opening of the offensive, which began with a massive wave of joint US-Israeli airstrikes across Iran, Tehran responded with its own missile and drone strikes targeting Israel and allied Gulf Arab states, and temporarily closed the Strait of Hormuz to commercial traffic.