Gautam Adani, his nephew Sagar Adani and six others indicted for allegedly offering $265 million in bribes to Indian government officials for securing “lucrative solar energy supply contracts” with state electricity distribution companies …reports Asian Lite News
US prosecutors in New York indicted Adani Group Chairman Gautam S Adani, his nephew Sagar Adani and six others on Wednesday for allegedly offering Rs 2,029 crore ($265 million) in bribes to Indian government officials for securing “lucrative solar energy supply contracts” with state electricity distribution companies.
“This indictment alleges schemes to pay over $250 million in bribes to Indian government officials, to lie to investors and banks to raise billions of dollars, and to obstruct justice,” a press release issued by the US Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of New York, said quoting US Deputy Assistant Attorney General Lisa H Miller.
The other six defendants named are: i) Vneet Jaain, who is the CEO of Adani Green Energy Ltd, ii) Ranjit Gupta (who was CEO of Azure Power Global Ltd between 2019 and 2022), iii) Rupesh Agarwal, who also worked with Azure Power (between 2022 and 2023); iv, v, vi) Cyril Cabanes, a citizen of Australia and France, Saurabh Agarwal and Deepak Malhotra, all three who worked with a Canadian institutional investor.
An Adani Group spokesperson said the group would soon issue a statement. Sources in the Adani Group said the charges in the indictment are allegations and the defendants are presumed innocent unless proven guilty.
In a parallel move, the Securities and Exchange Commission Wednesday charged Gautam Adani and Sagar Adani, executives of Adani Green Energy Ltd., and Cyril Cabanes, an executive of Azure Power Global Ltd., with conduct arising out of a massive bribery scheme. SEC filed both the complaints in the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
In their indictment, the US prosecutors have anonymised the names of all entities and some individuals but noted in the footnote that their identities are known to the Grand Jury. Gautam Adani is named but is described as the Founder of an Indian Conglomerate, which is a diversified, multinational organisation with corporate offices in India. Sagar Adani (Executive Director of Adani Green Energy) is described as the Executive Director of an “Indian Energy Company” which is a publicly-listed renewable energy company in the Conglomerate’s portfolio. Ranjit Gupta, who was the CEO of Azure Power, and Rupesh Agarwal who was the Chief Strategy and Commercial Officer of Azure Power, are described with the same designations working for an “US Issuer”.
Explaining what it called the “corrupt solar project”, the prosecutors said the “Indian Energy Company” and the “US Issuer” won awards to supply 8 gigawatts and 4 gigawatts of solar power at a fixed rate to state-owned Solar Energy Corporation of India. But since SECI could not find any state electricity distribution companies to purchase this power, it could not enter into corresponding power purchase agreements with Adani Group and Azure Power.
As a result, in or about 2020, the defendants Gautam S Adani, Sagar R Adani, Vneet S Jaain, Ranjit Gupta and Co-Conspirator #2, among others, devised a scheme to offer, authorise, make and promise to make bribe payments to Indian government officials in exchange for the government officials causing state electricity distribution companies to enter into power supply agreements with SECI,” it said. Co-Conspirator #2 is one of the two conspirators who once worked with the “US Issuer” and “undertook extensive efforts to corruptly persuade government officials”.
Referring to a high-ranking government official of Andhra Pradesh as “Foreign Official #1”, it said “Rs 1,750 crore (approximately $228 million) of the corrupt payments was offered in exchange for… causing Andhra Pradesh’s state electricity distribution companies to agree to purchase seven gigawatts of solar power from SECI (state-owned Solar Energy Corporation of India) under the Manufacturing Linked Project.”
Gautam Adani, the indictment said, had personally met “Foreign Official #1” to advance the execution of a power supply agreement between SECI and Andhra Pradesh’s state electricity distribution companies thrice during August-November 2021.
Referring to communications about the bribery scheme between the defendants and conspirators, the indictment says, Gautam S Adani was referred to in code name as “SAG,” “Mr[.] A,” “Numero uno” and “the big man”, and Jaain as “V,” “snake” and “Numero uno minus one.”
Cong demands JPC probe
Reacting to the indictment and the SEC move, Congress leader and General Secretary in-charge of communications, Jairam Ramesh, said, “The indictment of Gautam Adani and others by the SEC vindicates the demand that the Congress has been making since Jan 2023 for a JPC investigation into the various Modani scams.”
Adani shares down by up to 20%
Shares of Adani group companies plummeted by up to 20 per cent after the indictment. Adani Green Energy plunged by 18.76 per cent, Adani Energy Solutions by 20 per cent, Adani Enterprises by 10 per cent, Adani Power by 13.98 per cent and Adani Ports by 10 per cent in the morning session. Adani shares dragged the benchmark Sensex by 0.85 per cent, or 655 points, to 76,922.56 and the NSE Nifty fell by 198 points to 23,319.95 on selling pressure.
The senators, led by progressive Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, held a media conference ahead of a vote on resolutions condemning the ongoing weapons sales. …reports Asian Lite News
A group of left-leaning U.S. senators called for a halt to arms sales to Israel, accusing the United States of enabling “atrocities” in Gaza through its military support, media reported.
The senators, led by progressive Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, held a media conference ahead of a vote on resolutions condemning the ongoing weapons sales.
These resolutions, expected to fail due to strong support for Israel among lawmakers, are part of a broader push by the progressive wing of the Democratic Party to reevaluate U.S. involvement in the Gaza conflict, AFP reported.
Sanders criticised the massive civilian toll in Gaza, pointing out the deaths of tens of thousands of Palestinians and the destruction of homes and infrastructure, much of which, he argued, is made possible through U.S. military aid.
Sanders, emphasising the United States’ role in the conflict, declared, “The United States of America is complicit in these atrocities,” urging an end to American complicity.
Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen, also speaking at the event, questioned whether the U.S. commitment to Israel had blinded American policymakers to the suffering in Gaza.
Trump described McMahon as a “fierce advocate for Parents’ Rights” and emphasised that her leadership would help shift control of education back to the states…reports Asian Lite News
President-Elect Donald Trump has nominated Linda McMahon, the former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), to lead the Department of Education, a position he has previously vowed to eliminate.
Trump described McMahon as a “fierce advocate for Parents’ Rights” and emphasised that her leadership would help shift control of education back to the states. “We will send Education BACK TO THE STATES, and Linda will spearhead that effort,” Trump said in a statement.
McMahon, who has been a close ally of Trump, currently serves as the co-chair of his transition team ahead of his return to the White House in January. This team is responsible for filling approximately 4,000 government positions.
Trump’s endorsement of McMahon comes as part of his ongoing efforts to reshape government agencies, particularly his promise to dismantle the federal Department of Education, which he reiterated during his September rally in Wisconsin. “We will ultimately eliminate the federal Department of Education,” he said at the time.
Although McMahon’s experience in education is limited, Trump highlighted her two-year tenure on the Connecticut Board of Education and 16 years of service on the board of trustees at Sacred Heart University, a private Catholic institution.
McMahon’s career has largely been shaped by her role in business, particularly her leadership at WWE, which she helped grow into a global entertainment powerhouse
In addition to her business acumen, McMahon has been a significant donor to Trump’s campaigns and served as the chair of the pro-Trump America First Policy Institute’s Center for the American Worker since 2021.
Her ties to Trump date back to the professional wrestling world, where she met him during her tenure at WWE. The two have shared a longstanding relationship, including a famous televised incident where Trump body-slammed her husband, WWE’s Vince McMahon, during a staged wrestling event.
McMahon’s previous political experience includes a stint as the head of the Small Business Administration (SBA) in 2017, a position she held until her departure from the administration.
Throughout his campaign, Trump had pledged to mobilize the National Guard to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with deportations….reports Asian Lite News
President-elect Donald Trump has confirmed his intention to use the U.S. military to carry out mass deportations of undocumented migrants.
On Monday, Trump posted “TRUE!!!” in response to a conservative commentator’s claim that he would declare a national emergency and use military resources for the deportation program.
Throughout his campaign, Trump had pledged to mobilize the National Guard to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with deportations.
As his inauguration date of January 20, 2025, approaches, Trump’s comments have raised concerns about how he plans to carry out what would be the largest mass deportation in U.S. history.
Despite his repeated claims of starting deportations on his first day in office, experts have questioned the feasibility of such a plan.
ICE, with its 20,000 agents and support personnel, would face significant logistical challenges in locating and removing millions of undocumented migrants.
Additionally, the financial burden of such an operation would be considerable. However, Trump has stated that cost would not prevent his administration from moving forward with the deportation efforts.
Trump recently named Tom Homan as his ‘Border Czar’ to oversee the deportation of illegal migrants and securing the borders.
Homan, 62, an advocate of “zero tolerance” for illegal migration served as the Acting Director of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency for a year-and-a-half during Trump’s earlier stint and left before being confirmed to the post by the Senate.
He started as a border agent and rose through the ranks.
In an interview with the Fox News, Homan said that he was going to prioritise deporting the illegal migrants who are “public security and national security threats”, and those already ordered by judges to be deported.
Another priority, he said would be finding the 300,000 children who came in unaccompanied by adults and President Joe Biden’s administration lost track of.
Many of them ended up as victims of forced labour and child sex trafficking, he said.
Homan told Fox News earlier this week that he plans to visit Trump’s Florida home this week to finalize the details of the mass deportation plan, including determining the role of the U.S. Department of Defence (DOD).
He suggested that the DOD could play a significant part in easing the burden on immigration agencies, noting that the speed of deportations will depend on the resources allocated to the effort.
The latest tranche of weapons comes as worries grow about an escalation in the conflict, with both sides pushing to gain any advantage that they can exploit if Trump demands a quick end to the war…reports Asian Lite News
The Pentagon will send Ukraine at least $275 million in new weapons, US officials said Tuesday, as the Biden administration rushes to do as much as it can to help Kyiv fight back against Russia in the remaining two months before President-elect Donald Trump takes office.
The latest tranche of weapons comes as worries grow about an escalation in the conflict, with both sides pushing to gain any advantage that they can exploit if Trump demands a quick end to the war — as he has vowed to do.
In rapid succession this week, President Joe Biden gave Ukraine the authority to fire longer-range missiles deeper into Russia and then Russian President Vladimir Putin formally lowered the threshold for using nuclear weapons.
US officials contend that Russia’s change in nuclear doctrine was expected, but Moscow is warning that Ukraine’s new use of the Army Tactical Missile System, known as ATACMS, inside Russia on Tuesday could trigger a strong response.
One American official said the US is seeing no indications that Russia is preparing to use a nuclear weapon in Ukraine. The US officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the aid package has not yet been made public.
Asked Tuesday if a Ukrainian attack with longer-range US missiles could potentially trigger use of nuclear weapons, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov answered affirmatively. He pointed to the doctrine’s provision that holds the door open for it after a conventional strike that raises critical threats for the “sovereignty and territorial integrity” of Russia and its ally Belarus.
A US official said Ukraine fired about eight ATACM missiles into Russia on Tuesday, and just two were intercepted. The official said the US is still assessing the damage but that the missiles struck an ammunition supply location in Karachev, in the Bryansk region.
The weapons in the new package of aid for Ukraine include an infusion of air defense, including High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS), as well as 155mm and 105mm artillery rounds, Javelin anti-armor munitions and other equipment and spare parts, US officials say.
The weapons will be provided through presidential drawdown authority, which allows the Pentagon quickly to pull supplies from its shelves to speed them to Ukraine’s front line.
Trump’s upcoming move to the White House has triggered a scramble by the Biden administration to ensure all the congressionally approved funding for Ukraine gets delivered and that Kyiv is in a strong position going into the winter.
The Biden administration would have to rush $7.1 billion in weapons from the Pentagon’s stockpiles to spend all of those funds before Trump is sworn in. That includes $4.3 billion from a foreign aid bill passed by Congress earlier this year and $2.8 billion still on the books in savings due to the Pentagon recalculating the value of systems sent.
As part of the wider effort, the administration also is on track to disperse its portion of a $50 billion loan to Ukraine, backed by frozen Russian assets, before Biden leaves the White House, according to two senior administration officials.
The officials, who were not authorized to comment publicly, said the US and Ukraine are now in “advanced stages” in discussing terms of the loan and are looking to complete the process for the $20 billion portion of the mammoth loan that the US is backing.
The goal is to get it done before the end of the year, one official said.
HIMARS – a game-changer in Russia-Ukraine conflict?.(photo:IN)
Biden agrees to give anti-personnel mines
Biden has agreed to give Ukraine anti-personnel land mines, a US defence official told the BBC, a move seen as an attempt to slow Russian troops who have been steadily advancing in Ukraine’s east in recent months. The official, who was speaking on condition of anonymity, said such mines would be delivered soon and Washington expected that they would be used on Ukraine’s territory.
Ukraine was also committed to not using the mines in densely-populated areas, the official said. Separately, the US State Department said it would close its embassy in Kyiv after it “received specific information of a potential significant air attack on 20 November”.
“Out of an abundance of caution, the embassy will be closed, and embassy employees are being instructed to shelter in place,” it said in a statement. “The US embassy recommends US citizens be prepared to immediately shelter in the event an air alert is announced.”
Overnight, both Ukraine and Russia reported major drone attacks on their respective territories. It was not immediately known whether there were any casualties. The provision of anti-personnel land mines is the latest move by the outgoing US administration to bolster Ukraine’s war effort before Donald Trump returns to the White House on 20 January.
Russia has deployed landmines liberally since the start of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 but international objections to the use of such weapons on the grounds that they pose a risk to civilians had prevented the Biden administration from signing off on them.
The US defence official confirmed to the BBC that Ukraine had pledged to use only mines that remained active for a limited period of time.
The US “non-persistent” mines differ from Russia’s as they become inert after a pre-set period of time – anywhere from four hours to two weeks. They are electrically fused and require battery power to detonate. Once the battery runs out, they will not detonate.
Washington has already been providing anti-tank mines to Ukraine, but the anti-personnel land mines – which can be rapidly deployed – are designed to blunt the advances of ground forces. Earlier, it was confirmed that US-made longer-range Army Tactical Missile System (Atacms) missiles had struck targets inside Russia only days after reports emerged that the White House had granted permission for their use.
The agreement was signed by US Defence Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III and his Philippine counterpart Gilberto Teodoro Quezon City, Manila…reports Asian Lite News
US and Philippines on Monday signed and agreement on sharing classified military information and technology as the two countries seek to deepen cooperation in a bid to counter Chinese influence in the region.
The Philippines-United States General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) .agreement aims to enhance the sharing of military information between the two nations, promoting greater cooperation and interoperability in defense and security matters.
Philippines Department of National Defence shared a post on X and wrote, “Signing of the PH-US General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA).”
Notably, the agreement was signed by US Defence Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III and his Philippine counterpart Gilberto Teodoro Quezon City, Manila.
Security agreements between the Philippines and the United States have strengthened, with both countries aiming to counter China’s aggressiveness in the South China Sea. The two countries have also resumed joint naval exercises, and the Philippines has granted US forces greater access to its military bases.
Following the signing of the agreement, Austin said that along with his Philippines counterpart, they are “committed to deepening alliance, strengthening regional security, and upholding shared values in Indo-Pacific.”
Sharing a post on X, Austin wrote, “Great to be in Manila at a transformative time for the US-Philippines alliance. I met with my good friend, the Secretary of National Defense Teodoro. Together, we’re committed to deepening our alliance, strengthening regional security, and upholding our shared values in the Indo-Pacific.”
Philippines-United States GSOMIA would lay the foundation for enhanced, expanded, and timely sharing of information and defence technology.
The United States established diplomatic relations with the Philippines in 1946.
US-Philippine relations are based on strong historical and cultural linkages and shared democratic values. The 1951 US-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty provides a strong foundation for robust security partnership. Vibrant people-to-people ties and strong economic cooperation provide meaningful ways to engage on a range of bilateral, regional, and global issues, according to the US Department of State.
The US-Philippine Bilateral Strategic Dialogue (BSD) is the annual forum for forward planning across the spectrum of our relationship. The most recent BSD took place in January 2023 when senior Philippine and US Department of State and Department of Defence officials convened in Manila.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defence Austin hosted their Philippine counterparts for a “2+2” ministerial in April 2023, and President Biden hosted President Marcos for a four-day official working visit in early May 2023. (ANI)
Waltz, considered a China hawk, serves on the House China Task Force, and is a member of the Congressional Taiwan Caucus…reports Asian Lite News
United States President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for national security advisor, Mike Waltz raised concerns over Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific and said that Beijing’s takeover of Taiwan would mean that Beijing would get control of over 80 per cent of world’s most advanced computer chips, Taiwan News reported.
“Not only would they control 80 per cent of the world’s most advanced computer chips, if you look at the geography they would control the shipping lanes into Japan, South Korea, Southeast Asia, about 50 per cent of global GDP,” Waltz said.
Last week, Trump tapped Representative Mike Waltz to serve as his national security advisor.
Waltz, considered a China hawk, serves on the House China Task Force, and is a member of the Congressional Taiwan Caucus. Further, Waltz also stressed Taiwan’s strategic importance and the need to arm the country to deter a Chinese invasion.
During a recent promotion event for his book at the Reagan Foundation in California, Waltz highlighted Taiwan’s strategic importance.
He also shared insights on the Ukraine-Russia conflict, revealing that Kyiv requested weapons from the Biden administration a month before Russia’s invasion in 2022 to deter Putin, but it refused, as reported by Taiwan News.
He said the reason by the White House was that the weapons delivery would be too provocative and escalatory, providing Putin with an excuse to invade.
Waltz said the Biden administration is “applying the same mentality to Taiwan right now.” He further added that its premise is that the US should not arm Taiwan because it would provoke Chinese leader Xi Jinping.
Referring to these actions as weakness, Waltz called them the “exact provocative action.” He accused the Biden administration of having “slow rolled us” into a stalemate by gradually allowing weapons into Ukraine, thus not enabling them to have a decisive effect.
Meanwhile, every day Taiwan reports an increased Chinese military presence around it.
Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defence (MND) reported Chinese military activity on Monday and detected six aircraft and as many vessels.
The Ministry of Defence stated that the aircraft and vessels operating around Taiwan were detected up until 6 am (UTC+8). Two of the aircraft crossed the median line and entered Taiwan’s southwestern and eastern ADIZ.
Notably, From May to November last year, Chinese aircraft intruded into Taiwan’s ADIZ 335 times, Ministry of National Defence data showed. In the same time this year, China entered the airspace at least 1,085 times, as per Taipei Times. (ANI)
Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election was just the latest in a long line of losses for incumbent parties in 2024…reports Asian Lite News
Whether on the left or the right, regardless of how long they’ve been in power, sitting governments around the world have been drubbed this year by disgruntled voters in what has been called the “super year” for elections.
Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election was just the latest in a long line of losses for incumbent parties in 2024, with people in some 70 countries accounting for about half the world’s population going to the polls.
Issues driving voter discontent have varied widely, though there has been almost universal malaise since the COVID-19 pandemic as people and businesses struggle to get back on their feet while facing stubbornly high prices, cash-strapped governments and a surge in migration.
“There’s an overall sense of frustration with political elites, viewing them as out of touch, that cuts across ideological lines,” said Richard Wike, director of global attitudes research at the Pew Research Center.
He noted that a Pew poll of 24 countries found that the appeal of democracy itself was slipping as voters reported increasing economic distress and a sense that no political faction truly represents them.
“Lots of factors are driving this,” Wike said, “but certainly feelings about the economy and inflation are a big factor.”
Since the pandemic hit in 2020, incumbents have been removed from office in 40 of 54 elections in Western democracies, said Steven Levitsky, a political scientist at Harvard University, revealing “a huge incumbent disadvantage.”
In Britain, the right-of-center Conservatives suffered their worst result since 1832 in July’s election, which returned the center-left Labour Party to power after 14 years.
But just across the English Channel, the far right rocked the governing parties of France and Germany, the European Union’s biggest and most powerful members, in June elections for the parliament of the 27-nation bloc.
The results pushed French President Emmanuel Macron to call a parliamentary election in hope of stemming a far-right surge at home. The anti-immigration National Rally party won the first round, but alliances and tactical voting knocked it down to third place in the second round, producing a fragile government atop a divided legislature.
In Asia, a group of South Korean liberal opposition parties, led by the Democratic Party, defeated the ruling conservative People Power Party in April’s parliamentary elections.
India’s Narendra Modi, meanwhile, had been widely expected to easily sweep to a third straight term in June but instead voters turned away from his Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party in droves, costing it its majority in parliament, though it was able to remain in power with the help of allies.
Likewise, Japanese voters in October punished the Liberal Democratic Party, which has governed the country nearly without interruption since 1955.
Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba will stay in power, but the greater-than-expected loss ended the LDP’s one-sided rule, giving the opposition a chance to achieve policy changes long opposed by the conservatives.
“If you were to ask me to explain Japan in a vacuum, that’s not too difficult,” said Paul Nadeau, an adjunct assistant professor at Temple University’s Japan campus in Tokyo.
“Voters were punishing an incumbent party for a corruption scandal, and this gave them a chance to express a lot more frustrations that they already had.”
Globally, however, it’s harder to draw conclusions.
“This is pretty consistent across different situations, different countries, different elections — incumbents are getting a crack on the shins,” he said. “And I don’t have any good big picture explanations for why that is.”
Rob Ford, professor of political science at the University of Manchester, said inflation has been a major driver of “the greatest wave of anti-incumbent voting ever seen” — though the reasons behind the backlash may also be “broader and more diffuse.”
“It could be something directly to do with the long-term effects of the COVID pandemic — a big wave of ill health, disrupted education, disrupted workplace experiences and so forth making people less happy everywhere, and they are taking it out on governments,” he said.
“A kind of electoral long COVID.”
In South Africa, high unemployment and inequality helped drive a dramatic loss of support for the African National Congress, which had governed for three decades since the end of the apartheid system of white minority rule. The party once led by Nelson Mandela lost its parliamentary majority in May’s election and was forced to go into coalition with opposition parties.
Other elections in Africa presented a mixed picture, said Alex Vines, director of the African Program at the international affairs think tank Chatham House, partially clouded by countries with authoritarian leaders whose reelections were not in doubt, like Rwanda’s long-serving President Paul Kagame who got 99 percent of the vote.
In African countries with strong democratic institutions, however, the pattern of incumbents being punished holds, Vines said.
“The countries with stronger institutions — South Africa, Senegal, Botswana — have witnessed either a government of national unity or change of party of government,” he said.
In Botswana, voters unexpectedly ejected a party that had ruled for 58 years since independence from Britain in an October election.
Vines said that across the continent, “you’ve got this electorate now who have no memory of decolonization or the end of apartheid and so have different priorities, who are also feeling the cost-of-living pressures.”
In Latin America, one major country stands out for bucking the anti-incumbent wave – Mexico.
Andrés Manuel López Obrador, limited to a single term, selected Claudia Sheinbaum, a member of his party, to succeed him. Sheinbaum easily won the presidency in June’s election.
Wike noted that Mexico is one of the few countries in Pew’s survey where voters reported satisfaction with economic conditions.
Some newcomers to office have already found that the honeymoon following their victories has been short, as people have rapidly turned on them.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has seen his approval ratings plummet from a jaded electorate that wants lower prices and better public services — but is deeply skeptical of politicians’ intention and ability to deliver change.
Ford, of the University of Manchester, said it’s a problem for democracy when voters, whose task is to hold governments to account, are so quick to pass judgment.
“If voters are the electoral equivalent of a hanging judge, putting politicians to the gallows whether they be guilty or innocent, then what incentive is there for governments to try?” he asked. “The angels and the devils get chucked out alike, but being an angel is harder.”
Trump first came to power as a challenger in the 2016 election, and then lost as an incumbent in the 2020 election to Joe Biden. This year, he defeated Biden’s vice president, Kamala Harris, who stepped in late in the race when the president unexpectedly dropped out.
Trump’s win is one of the conservative populist movement’s highest-profile triumphs. But another icon of the cause, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, saw his own party suffer its worst showing in decades in this year’s European Union election, demonstrating that no movement is safe from backlash.
Nadeau, of Temple University, suggested that perhaps analysts had previously misunderstood global electoral trends — parsing them as ideological shifts — “when all along it was actually an anti-incumbent mood.”
“Maybe it has always been anti-incumbent, and we were just misdiagnosing it,” he said.
Sino-US ties deteriorated sharply during Trump’s previous presidency, as he instigated a trade war. His position has not changed this time around, with accusations of intellectual property rights theft and unfair trade practices continuing….reports Asian Lite News
China watched the US elections on 5 November with as much interest as in any other part of the world. Bilateral relations between Beijing and Washington DC are fraught, and China officially maintained a neutral position on which candidate it wanted to win.
Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said Beijing would continue to engage “under the principles of mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation.”
However, before polling results were announced, the party mouthpiece Xinhua was already reflecting antipathy towards the USA in general, referring to the election as “political turmoil” that “revealed the state of American democracy.”
Sino-US ties deteriorated sharply during Trump’s previous presidency, as he instigated a trade war. His position has not changed this time around, with accusations of intellectual property rights theft and unfair trade practices continuing.
Trump’s 2017 National Security Strategy declared Beijing a revisionist power bent upon long-term strategic competition with the USA. His 2017-21 presidency emphasized hub- and-spokes architecture, such as US-Japan-Australia- India cooperation.
Biden’s subsequent approach of “invest, align and compete” built upon this, but his was more of a latticework of trilateral and multilateral coalitions like AUKUS, the Quad and Japan-US relations and South Korea.
Sourabh Gupta, a senior fellow at the Institute for China-America Studies in Washington, noted, “None of this pleases China. In its view, the Trump and Biden administration’s strategies were intended to build it out economically, isolate it diplomatically, encircle it militarily, and suppress its development technologically. The networking of alliances, partnerships and mini-lateral groupings is more an accelerant of major-power conflict than a building block for deterrence and stability, in its view. And expectations of change for the better, going forward, are minimal regardless of the victor on Nov. 5.”
However, Gupta reckoned a Harris presidency would have been the lesser of two evils for China, as the latter generally prefers continuity and it is seeking less disruption.
Historically, China has done well under Democrat leaders like Clinton and Obama. Taking a contrary view was Derek Grossman, a senior defence analyst at RAND, who commented before the election: “If Trump wins, then it’ll be the lesser of two evils for China. Harris represents continuity with the Biden administration, i.e. strengthening US alliances and partnerships to counter China. Trump does too, except he also presents opportunity for a grand strategic bargain. Ease up on Taiwan for a better trade deal? Maybe. Just maybe.”
American awareness has grown of Beijing’s desire to turn international norms on their head, and the USA has gone too far down the competitive track to turn back. Therefore, the USA will continue to discourage regional conflict with China, will promote Western values and “abiding by the rules”, counter Chinese government influence campaigns, maintain a technological and innovation edge, and fight unfair Chinese trade practices.
One method in Trump’s toolbox is trade sanctions and tariffs. During campaigning, Trump said of the Biden administration, “They allowed Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and others to unite. I want to break them up.” Trump makes a lot of his personal relationship with Vladimir Putin, and one of many imponderables is whether he will initiate a deal to end the Ukraine conflict. Such appeasement would unfairly disadvantage Kyiv, hand authoritarian Russia a win, and fracture allied support for Ukraine. Under such an eventuality, China would also be encouraged to believe that aggression bring great reward. Against the weak and ailing West, would Chairman Xi Jinping be encouraged to use force against Taiwan?
Bethany Allen, ASPI’s head of China investigations and analysis, remarked: “Trump is a wild card on foreign policy, including towards China. On the campaign trail he promised increased tariffs on China but criticized Taiwan. Anti-China sentiment runs deep in the Republican Party, but so does its opposition to US support for Ukraine.
A Russian win in Ukraine would be a major foreign policy victory for Xi Jinping, Putin’s top supporter, and would make the world safer for revisionist authoritarians such as Xi.” Indeed, what about Taiwan? Biden’s policy has emphasized the important strategic role Taiwan plays in the First Island Chain, whereas Trump states Taiwan does not have a bearing on US interests. He has previously, and incorrectly, argued that Taiwan stole the US semiconductor industry. He also said the island should pay for US protection.
Interestingly, the Republican National Committee’s 2024 party platform did not mention Taiwan at all, the first time since 1980. Could Trump flip decades of bipartisan support for Taiwan? Biden pledged American military intervention in the event of any Chinese attack on Taiwan, but it seems unlikely Trump would make such a thing sacrosanct. While there are questions over whether Trump will exact a price on China for its constant harassment of Taiwan, there is nonetheless likely to be continuity in US support for Taipei. Yet Trump will surely demand that Taiwan do far more to boost its own defences rather than using the USA as an insurance policy.
Regarding Taiwan, Sara A. Newland, Associate Professor of Government at Smith College, noted, “…US policy in the Taiwan Strait has long relied on a dual deterrence strategy intended to discourage Taiwan from declaring independence and to prevent Chinese military aggression toward Taiwan. If the new administration signals reluctance to assist in Taiwan’s defence, it will undercut the basis for a policy that has helped to sustain a difficult peace in the Taiwan Strait for over 40 years.”
She suggested that Trump’s election might spur higher domestic defence spending in Taiwan, something necessary in any case. “An unreliable partner in Washington may push Taiwan to continue to improve its own military preparedness,” Newland said.
Taiwan is putting a good face on things. President Lai Ching-te tweeted, for instance, “The longstanding Taiwan-US partnership, built on shared values interests, will continue to serve as a cornerstone for regional stability.”
Putin has weighed in to support his ally China too. Doubtlessly thrilling Xi, the Russian tsar said, “Everyone formally acknowledges, yes, Taiwan is part of China. But in reality?
In reality, it is acting in a completely different direction, provoking the situation towards escalation. We do support China and, because of this, we believe that [China] is conducting a completely reasonable policy.”
Trump’s transactional approach to politics opens the possibility of horse trading. However, Trump’s administration – replete with hardliners – could spell difficult times ahead. If such hawks emplace Taiwan as a centerpiece of their stance, this could cause endless trouble for Beijing.
Looking at Trump’s picks for key positions, he has already selected well-known hawks with track records of criticizing China. Mike Waltz will be the national security adviser, Pete Hegseth’s defense secretary and Marco Rubio secretary of state.
Indeed, the latter is sanctioned by Beijing, so officials will not be able to meet him unless China rescinds its sanction. Such a concentration of hostile people at the top of Trump’s government may signal the direction that bilateral relations will go.
Yet Trump’s unpredictability, fickleness and brashness are good at rubbing other countries up the wrong way too, so some Chinese analysts think another Trump presidency could weaken US ties and introduce fault lines with allies like Japan, the Philippines and South Korea. Reduced American involvement in Asia would help advance Chinese interests in the Asia-Pacific region. Nishank Motwani, a senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), said, “As president, Trump will likely reinforce foreign policy unpredictability.
This could undermine US commitments to NATO and Indo-Pacific allies, including Australia.
This in turn could embolden Russia, China, Iran and North Korea to act aggressively. Trump views alliances transactionally, favouring financial returns over strategic interests.”
Raji Pillai Rajagopalan, an ASPI resident senior fellow, added, “Trump’s presidency brings uncertainty, as he is unlikely to have a steady policy. It is more likely that each issue will be taken in isolation rather than as part of a strategic whole. Such unpredictability will likely scare adversaries such as China and Iran, as it did in Trump’s first term. But US partners will also be concerned by Trump’s shotgun approach, particularly on issues such as trade and economic security partnerships, if he does not distinguish between friends and foes.”
Professor Victor Shih, Director of the 21st Century China Center, observed, “…In the course of campaigning for the presidency, Trump has relied on significant financial help from some people with major financial stakes in China, such as Elon Musk. Thus, the way that China policy unfolds in the new Trump administration may be more complicated than people had expected.” Some 30% of Musk’s Tesla revenue comes from China.
Those American entrepreneurs who make money from the Chinese market could prove a mitigating factor on harsher sanctions and tariffs. With volatility assured under Trump, Shih said, “Of course, many global leaders, including Chinese leaders, have come to expect this and will calibrate their engagement with the United States accordingly. China has already shown its willingness to be strategically flexible by being one of the first countries to reach out to Trump to congratulate him on his victory. The next four years may well be characterized by episodes of transactional pragmatism instead of a tailspin toward worsening ties.”
Angela Huyue Zhang, professor of law at the University of Southern California, warned that a hard line could reap unintended consequences, however: “The US is likewise beginning to feel the unintended consequences of its own hostile approach toward China. The China Initiative has led to an exodus of talented Chinese scientists, many of whom have returned home. Meanwhile, the effectiveness of tough US sanctions and export controls is waning. Huawei, which initially struggled under these measures, has grown stronger of late, invigorated by state support and a firm resolve to achieve self- sufficiency. In its efforts to contain China, the US risks creating a more resilient rival – one strengthened by the very pressures meant to suppress it.”
The US-China Perception Monitor, dedicated to fostering dialogue between the two countries, published a submission from Professor Wang Dong of the School of International Studies, Peking University. Wang said, “With Trump’s reelection, the United States is likely to intensify its economic and security competition against China, thus bringing greater risks to bilateral relations … New McCarthyism might again be on the rise and the element of racism might become more prominent in US policy toward China. Predictably, there will be more unpredictability, uncertainty and instability in the China-US relationship. It is more likely than not that China-US relations under ‘Trump 2.0’ might increasingly slip into a new Cold War.”
Professor Xin Qiang, Deputy Director of the Center for American Studies, Fudan University, thought the same: “…President Trump, accompanied by hawkish officials, might turn to exert extreme pressure upon China. Such a set of policies, which has been interpreted and defined by China as ‘containment, suppression and encirclement’ in the name of ‘strategic competition’, will trigger harsher countermeasures from China.”
Xi met Biden in Lima on 16 November, and a communique from China’s Foreign Ministry said Biden and Xi had “jointly brought China-US dialogue and cooperation back on track.”
However, Xi also drew a line in the sand for the incoming president. He said it “is important not to challenge red lines and paramount principles”. And what are Beijing’s redlines? Xi stated, “The Taiwan question, democracy and human rights, China’s path and system, and China’s development rights are four red lines for China. They must not be challenged. These are the most important guardrails and safety nets for China-US relations.”
The ironic mention of democracy and human rights shows that China thinks it is succeeding in redefining these Western touchstones. China and the USA are deep in an era of strategic competition, whether they like it or not, and this reality is not going to alter significantly simply because of who is in charge of the USA.
The trajectory has already been set, and while some minor deviations may occur, the course is set. The question is whether the two countries can successfully manage that competition, or whether it will degenerate into downright rivalry and antagonism. (ANI)
Tarar emphasized that Trump is closely monitoring the situation, particularly following the ouster of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in August, which sparked protests and allegations of regular attacks on the minority Hindu community.
US President-elect Donald Trump is expected to take a strong stance on alleged human rights violations against Hindus in Bangladesh, according to Sajid Tarar, head of the “Muslims for Trump” organisation and a key supporter of Trump.
In an interview with PTI, Tarar emphasized that Trump is closely monitoring the situation, particularly following the ouster of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in August, which sparked protests and allegations of regular attacks on the minority Hindu community.
With Hindus comprising about 8% of Bangladesh’s population, Tarar suggested Trump’s administration would likely address these concerns directly.
Turning to Pakistan, Tarar clarified that Trump has no personal relationship with former Prime Minister Imran Khan, refuting claims by certain political groups, PTI reported.
While Trump hosted Khan at the White House during his presidency, Tarar underscored that Trump would not interfere in Pakistan’s judicial matters to influence Khan’s legal challenges.
However, he acknowledged that Trump might have a “soft corner” for Khan.
Tarar also pointed to Trump’s broader foreign policy priorities, including strengthening ties with India and rebuilding the Pentagon.
While maintaining a pragmatic approach to Pakistan due to its strategic location, Trump is expected to reassess US foreign policy across South Asia. Tarar described Trump’s second term as a turning point for both the US and global politics.
Bangladesh extends army’s magistracy power
The Bangladeshi interim government has extended the magistracy power given to commissioned army officers for another two months.
An official notification published by the Ministry of Public Administration on Saturday said their jurisdiction for exercising magistracy power will encompass all of Bangladesh.
The ministry issued a circular in this regard on Friday stating officers on deputation to Bangladesh Coast Guard and Border Guard Bangladesh will also be able to exercise magistracy power, reports Xinhua news agency.
Earlier on September 17, the government empowered only commissioned officers of the Bangladesh Army with executive magistrate authority for 60 days. An officer with magistracy power can arrest and send an individual to jail. In self-defence, the officer can open fire.
Later, on September 29, the government empowered commissioned officers of the Air Force and Navy with executive magistrate authority to help maintain law and order.
On August 5, the then Sheikh Hasina government was toppled. Three days later, on August 8, an interim government was formed under the leadership of Muhammad Yunus. Despite the formation of the interim government, army personnel remain deployed across the country to firmly tackle the anarchic situation.
Biden admin clarifies stance
The United States has clarified to Bangladesh that it does not support government involvement in violent crackdowns on peaceful protests.
This statement follows a recent clash between members of the Hindu community and law enforcement forces in Bangladesh’s port city of Chittagong, triggered by a Facebook post criticising ISKCON.
When questioned about the reported crackdowns on protests and the situation of minorities in Bangladesh, US State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller reiterated that the US supports the right to peaceful protest and opposes any government engagement in violent responses to such demonstrations.
“I’m not going to speak to private diplomatic engagements from here, but we have made it clear to the government of Bangladesh, as we do to countries around the world, that we support the right to peaceful protest and that no government should engage in violent crackdowns on peaceful demonstrations,” Matthew Miller stated during a press briefing.
Earlier, India condemned the November 6 attacks on the Hindu community in Chittagong, Bangladesh, asserting that such actions would only heighten tensions within the community.
Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal, addressing the weekly media briefing in New Delhi, said, “We have observed that there have been attacks on the Hindu community in Chittagong, Bangladesh. Their properties and business establishments have been looted following incendiary posts on social media targeting Hindu religious organisations.”
Jaiswal urged the Bangladesh government to take firm action against “extremist elements” and to ensure the safety of the Hindu community.
He added, “It is understood that extremist elements are behind these posts and the subsequent illegal, criminal activities. Such incidents are bound to create further tensions in the community. We once again urge the Government of Bangladesh to take strong measures to ensure the safety of Hindus and act decisively against extremist elements.”
Notably, in Chittagong, the clash between the Hindu community and law enforcement forces escalated, leading to an operation by joint police and army forces. According to the Bangla daily Prothom Alo, blank shots were also fired during the operation.
