East Asia

What kind of trade policy will the United States have under President Donald Trump? This is a hot issue, as Trump has made unorthodox pronouncements on trade issues during and after the election campaign. If he acts on even some of the positions he took, it will create a sea change in trade policy in the US and possibly the world.

I have spent two years making a documentary film, The Coming War on China, in which the evidence and witnesses warn that nuclear war is no longer a shadow, but a contingency. The greatest build-up of American-led military forces since the Second World War is well under way. They are in the northern hemisphere, on the western borders of Russia, and in Asia and the Pacific, confronting China.

Guevara, born in Argentina, joined the movement led by Fidel Castro and other Cuban revolutionaries and became a commander in the Cuban Rebel Army. After the overthrow of the U.S.-backed dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista in 1959, he became one of the central leaders of the new workers and farmers government. Guevara held a number of posts,

While trade experts warn that a recent spending spree by Chinese companies — many of them supported by the Chinese government — will harm the competitiveness of European business in the long-term, Berlin and Brussels are struggling to come up with a political response.

Nobody knows what to expect, and the deep uncertainty surrounding Trump has been compounded by his contradictory statements and lack of details on how he will address the world’s problems. However, Beijing is confident that the world’s most important bilateral relationship will remain strong. Soon after Trump’s victory, Chinese President Xi Jinping congratulated the President-elect, and President Xi said he hoped they could work together to boost China-U.S. relations.

Wall Street and the Pentagon greeted the onset of 2016 as a ‘banner year’, a glorious turning point in the quest for malleable regimes willing to sell-off the most lucrative economic resources, to sign off on onerous new debt to Wall Street and to grant use of their strategic military bases to the Pentagon.

Tuesday night’s debate between the vice presidential candidates of the Democratic and Republican parties was a display of mudslinging, lies, canned rhetoric and phony promises on a par with the first debate between the presidential candidates the previous week, with one telling exception.

India’s attack was patently illegal and highly provocative. US strategic think tanks frequently refer to disputed Kashmir as the most dangerous “nuclear flashpoint” in the world. Yet American officials have studiously avoided making any criticism of India, a “global strategic partner” of US imperialism and pillar of its military-strategic offensive against China.

The whipping up of a scandal last week against Labor Senator Sam Dastyari for accepting $1,670 from a Chinese company is escalating into a general witchhunt against any politician, business figure or organisation that questions a militarist policy toward Beijing. Dastyari has been branded a “Manchurian candidate.” Across the media, allegations are being made that

Indian Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar and his US counterpart, Ashton Carter, announced Monday that they have signed an agreement that gives US combat planes and warships and their personnel routine access to Indian military bases for resupply, repairs, and rest. The India-US Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) also allows the Pentagon