Connect with us

Asia

Pelosi’s gamble could turn the risk of war into a reality

Published

on

The echoes of the visit to Taiwan by the US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, are still resonating. The visit, which is considered by some experts to be Pelosi’s “personal solo-show”, and by other experts to be a “part of Washington’s Asia-Pacific Strategy” has also sparked a massive controversy within the United States itself.

Beijing has already warned that it will take drastic countermeasures, considering Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan as a “violation of its national sovereignty and territorial integrity”. Even the Biden administration is known to have notified the possible risks of the visit to the Pelosi’s office. Despite this, this action from the Speaker of the US House of Representatives Pelosi, who refrained to step down from her plan, has drawn reactions as a part of its consequences that further escalated tensions in the Asia-Pacific, and was described as a “provocation” among the international community.

Following Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, Beijing has announced to halt some of its dialogue partnerships and cooperation mechanisms with Washington as an immediate countermeasure. It was not only China that show a reaction to Pelosi’s visit. The Taiwanese policy of Nancy Pelosi, which insisted on taking this visit despite the notice from both the US Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Biden administration, has both created a controversy back in the US, and has made Washington’s Taiwan policy to be questioned once again. Washington’s controversial actions in Taiwan, despite its announcement of respect for the One-China policy, has led to criticism within the US public opinion.

‘Policy of Strategic Uncertainty’

According to a White House official who provided information about the internal negotiations anonymously to the Washington Post; Nearly all senior members of the Biden’s office of national security, have privately expressed deep concerns about this trip and the timing of it. Officials have summarized the possible outcomes of Pelosi’s visit directly to her office, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark A. Milley has personally briefed Pelosi on this subject.

The article also states that Pelosi’s visit was independent of the White House and that nothing had changed in China-US relations, prior to this visit. However, Chinese leaders fear that visits to Taiwan by foreign state officials may potentially give Taiwan a diplomatic legitimacy as an independent country, and that they worry Pelosi’s visit may set an example by some other world leaders or officials. On the other hand, there are references to the upcoming National People’s Congress of the Chinese Communist Party, and Xi Jinping’s plans for a third term in leadership. And in the case of Washington’s policies on Taiwan, a policy of “strategic uncertainty” that neither supports nor opposes Taiwanese independence, is being reported.

Was it even worth it?

In the analysis article published in The Atlantic journal, Pelosi’s visit was described as a ‘gamble’ and was commented that “this Taiwan gamble strengthens the tendencies within US-China relations that can lead both countries towards conflict in East Asia”. It was reported that the policymakers in Washington see the country’s future being heavily dependent on Asia and are determined to expand the alliances in the region to consolidate US influence in Asia, and to bring China in check.

While it is stated that Taiwan is directly on the fault lines between the two rivaling powers and their geopolitical agendas, these agendas are summarized as follows; “For the United States, Taiwan is not only a long-term friend, but also an important economic partner and a link in the network of democracies that support the American influence in the Asia-Pacific. And for China, it is an indispensable component of the country’s ascension to a superpower status”.

The analysis expresses concerns that Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan could resonate far beyond the Taiwan Strait and even beyond East Asia, prompting Beijing to “intensify its efforts to thwart the US-backed global order” and for Xi Jinping to consolidate its anti-American pact with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin. It is argued that all this could cause a greater chaos in East Asia, and with China’s intensified military exercises around the island could turn into a conflict, thus further disrupting the already troubled global supply chains. Article referring to the possibility that Beijing will increase its pressures over Taiwan and perhaps even take the risk to go to war, and that the US and its allies may be dragged into a regional conflict, the article describes Pelosi’s visit as “a step in a process transforming a war over Taiwan from a remote possibility to a real risk that should worry the world.”

It is being reported that there are rough debates among the country’s public opinion over whether Pelosi’s visit was even “worth it”, in context of these possibilities which make the war much more probable. While it was given that realists who look at the situation with a “cold logic” agree that “it was not worth it”, while The Atlantic argues that “Pelosi’s persistence is necessary to show the Chinese and to the world that the United States does not take a step back”.

Salami slicing…

Bonnie Glaser, director of the Asia Program of the German Marshall Fund, points to the Biden administration’s inconsistency in its Taiwan policy, as one of the causes of this crisis, in a podcast of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), one of the institutions that shape the US foreign policies. Glaser stated that the US has a lack of clarity, consistency and even a lack of discipline in its stance on Taiwan, and that although Washington says it respects One-China Policy and does not support Taiwanese independence on paper, still acts much differently from this perspective. Glaser resembles this policy to a “salami slicing” strategy, and says China is well-aware of this tactic and therefore reacted strongly to Pelosi’s visit.

The only winner here is Pelosi

An expert on China at the Atlantic Council, a Washington-based think tank, Shirley Martey Hargis argues that this visit to Taiwan is not a strategically reliable decision since it will lead to a deterioration in the US-China relations, and in the relatively peaceful environment of East Asia. According to Shirley, there is only one long-term winner here: and that would be Pelosi herself. Saying that the visit has unnecessarily escalated tensions with China, Shirley also commented that it positions the United States in a two-front war, one front in Ukraine and one in Taiwan. Shirley says Taiwan “remains as a passive player in the US-China wrestling”.

A provocative action

The New Yorker journal has called Pelosi’s visit as “provocative politics”. The article, which argues that Pelosi’s initial aim was to provide a “small cheerleading”, while emphasizing that eventually the domestic politics of the US and China came into play and that Taiwan has gotten itself into a position of “a pawn caught in the middle”.

Noting that this action did not benefit Taiwan, but likely harmed Taiwan’s own security and “made US-China relations, which were already pretty bad, worse than they were before” the article also comments that “recovery may be much more difficult than we thought three weeks ago”

While it is argued that American politicians “have to be strategic and thoughtful about the cost and benefit of a particular action unless they actually want to drive the most important diplomatic relationship in the contemporary world into the ground”. It is stressed in the article that Pelosi’s solo-show also puts the Taiwanese government in a very difficult position.

This will make matters much worse

CNBC described the visit as “like pouring salt in an open wound for China”. Stephen Roach, a Yale University senior fellow and former Federal Reserve economist, has told CNBC that this visit to Taiwan has increased the US-China tensions and the risk of alienating these countries. “We are on a trajectory of escalating conflict, and this will certainly make matters worse,” Roach said, calling the visit a “new headache” for the Biden administration.

The economist Roach stated that this trip put China on the defensive and forced Beijing to show its determination to continue Taiwan’s eventual reunification with the mainland, while noting that he did not expect any overt military action from Beijing despite the current situation.

CNN channel also noted that Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan risks creating more instability between the United States and China. The analysts stated that this visit has sparked a harsh “rhetorical response” between the two countries, while also fueling fears in Washington that it would cause Beijing to “build an unprecedented escalation of the crisis in the Taiwan Strait”.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Asia

Chinese Politburo signals cautious confidence as Beijing pivots toward targeted tech support

Published

1 hour ago

on

03/08/2026

By

The mid-year meeting of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Politburo has long served as a critical evaluation point for Beijing. The session provides the central government with an opportunity to review developments from the first half of the year and steer the country toward a more realistic economic course in the months ahead.

The latest statement from the top leadership signals cautious confidence. The release indicates that policymakers are favoring a stable, targeted approach over the broad-based stimulus measures that characterized previous years. As China manages its economic transition, the post-Covid era of aggressive spending has clearly drawn to a close. In its place, a strategic and structural approach has taken hold, prioritizing resilience and stability over short-term capital injections.

According to the outcomes of the Politburo meeting, the policy orientation will continue to target specific sectors. Financial support will be directed away from the property market and toward high-tech emerging industries such as artificial intelligence and semiconductors. In the real estate sector, the objective remains stabilizing market confidence and keeping debt risks under control.

Infrastructure investment is likewise being reshaped around the concept of “new infrastructure.” The focus is no longer solely on concrete and physical structures; smart power grids, information technology networks, and data infrastructure have taken precedence.

This approach signifies an investment in future competitiveness rather than simply pumping capital into the economy’s more stagnant sectors. Serving as a new driver of growth, digital infrastructure fulfills a dual purpose: supporting domestic demand in the short term while safeguarding technological competitiveness over the long term.

Finally, Beijing is signaling a more conciliatory posture in international trade. The Chinese leadership aims to establish a more balanced trade framework to mitigate concerns voiced by trade partners such as the European Union over what has been termed “China Shock 2.0.”

As the administration prepares for critical leadership changes next year, its primary focus will remain on stability across both economic and social spheres.

China continues to strike a balance between realistic growth targets and systemic restructuring, maintaining policy leeway to absorb potential external shocks. Beijing’s economic strategy reflects a pragmatic assessment of both domestic and international challenges.

Struggling with weak demand, the domestic economy is not yet in a position to anchor national growth independently. Expansion continues to rely heavily on a record trade surplus alongside the impressive export performance of high-tech and clean energy sectors. However, this reliance has drawn pushback from several trading partners.

To stimulate domestic economic activity and ease trade tensions, Beijing unveiled its first standalone five-year plan focused on consumption. Released in July by the National Development and Reform Commission and the Ministry of Commerce, the plan targets an increase in retail sales to 60 trillion yuan (approximately $8.9 trillion) by 2030. This represents an increase of roughly 20% compared to 2025 levels.

To improve profit margins for small businesses, regulatory authorities are tackling the issue of “involution”—described as excessive internal competition—by curbing platform monopolies and preventing destructive price wars. While these structural adjustments may take longer to yield results, they are viewed as a more sustainable and effective alternative to direct cash handouts.

Continue Reading

Asia

Chinese chipmaker profits surge 2,500% on explosive AI computing demand

Published

6 days ago

on

28/07/2026

By

Major Chinese microchip manufacturers saw their profits surge by 2,579.5% in the first half of 2026, driven by unprecedented demand for artificial intelligence and computing capacity.

Data from China’s National Bureau of Statistics, cited by the South China Morning Post (SCMP), underscored the industry’s sharp upward trajectory.

Yu Weining, senior statistician at China’s National Bureau of Statistics, explained that this surge is directly connected to the accelerating integration of artificial intelligence across various sectors.

Yu noted that this process has increased the need for computing capacity. The demand for computational processes also lifted profits across the entire electronics industry by 97% year-on-year.

Profits of major Chinese industrial enterprises with an annual revenue exceeding 20 million yuan ($2.9 million) rose 18.7% in the first six months of the year, reaching 4 trillion yuan.

In the first half of 2025, before the global data center construction process had begun, industrial profits had dropped by 1.8% to 3.4 trillion yuan, while profit growth in the electronics sector remained at 3.5%.

The SCMP reported that the global AI boom has generated explosive demand for high-performance computing systems and memory chips, causing a structural pivot in China’s industrial landscape.

Data showed that integrated circuit production in the first half of the year grew by 23% year-on-year to reach approximately 280 billion units.

This figure means that the country produced an average of more than 1.5 billion chips per day.

The profit growth is also corroborated by forecasts from China’s leading chipmakers. Shenzhen Longsys Electronics, one of the largest memory module manufacturers, expects its profits to increase by more than 600-fold in the first half of the year.

Flash memory maker GigaDevice projects that its net profit will surge by approximately 1,099% year-on-year due to supply shortages and rising product prices.

Chinese companies in the AI chip segment are also demonstrating strong profit growth, albeit at a more moderate pace compared to the memory market.

Hygon Information Technology, which develops central processing units and computing units for artificial intelligence, projects that its profits will rise by up to 52.3%.

CXMT hits record high on Shanghai Stock Exchange

Shares of Chinese chipmaker CXMT gained more than 500% on their first day of trading on the Shanghai Stock Exchange on July 27, jumping from 8.66 yuan to 55 yuan.

As a result of this sharp surge in its shares, CXMT’s market valuation reached 3.65 trillion yuan ($539 billion), making the company China’s most valuable publicly traded firm.

At the peak of the rally—even though quoted prices underwent a slight correction toward the close of the trading day—CXMT surpassed Tencent, which was trading on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange with a market capitalization of $514 billion.

Continue Reading

Asia

Massive student movement over exam leaks forces resignation of India’s education minister

Published

7 days ago

on

27/07/2026

By

Indian public examination reform proposals follow education minister’s resignation after nationwide youth protests

India’s federal government introduced legislation in parliament on Monday to amend the law governing public examinations, days after the “Cockroach” movement forced the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan following nationwide youth protests.

The bill incorporates enhanced sanctions, including longer prison sentences and higher fines for those found responsible for exam leaks and irregularities.

The demonstrations are widely viewed as the most significant youth-led challenge faced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi since he took office in 2014.

What triggered the protests?

Nearly 2 million students took the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET), an undergraduate medical entrance examination, in May. The federal National Testing Agency cancelled the exam on May 12 following allegations that question papers had been leaked. The examination was re-administered on June 21.

Young people took to the streets to protest against examination fraud, youth unemployment, and a perceived lack of future prospects.

According to a BBC report, the unemployment rate among university and college graduates aged 15 to 25 in the country stands at a critically high level of 40%. The addition of corruption in public examinations to existing economic strain broke the patience of the youth.

Abhijeet Dipke, founder of the Cockroach Public Party (CJP) movement, led the protests.

The movement derived its name from remarks made in May by Supreme Court Judge Surya Kant, who used the terms “cockroach” and “parasite” in a derogatory reference to unemployed youth and protesters. Young demonstrators adopted the insult as a symbol and named their movement after it.

How the movement unfolded

Young protesters organized street demonstrations demanding the resignation of Education Minister Pradhan. Dipke, who initiated the movement in New Delhi, subsequently organized protests in other parts of the country.

Sonam Wangchuk, one of the protesters, began a hunger strike at the demonstration site in support of the movement. As his physical condition deteriorated, authorities forcibly transferred him to a hospital.

The reaction to Wangchuk’s forcible removal from the protest site caused crowds at the venue to expand rapidly.

Tens of thousands of protesters faced tear gas and baton charges by police while attempting to march on parliament. Some demonstrators engaged in clashes with law enforcement officers.

CJP leaders held talks with ministers from the Modi government, who requested time to evaluate the protesters’ demands internally.

Modi called for unity among lawmakers in the ruling coalition to implement strict measures against exam paper leaks, punish those responsible, and establish a secure, leak-proof system.

Opposition representatives led by Rahul Gandhi staged a sit-in at the entrance of Modi’s official residence demanding Pradhan’s resignation. They were briefly detained by police before being released.

Opposition lawmakers supporting the student protesters disrupted proceedings in parliament. Demonstrations expanded to other regions of the country, including the financial hub of Mumbai.

In his first direct statement regarding the protests, published in a post on X, Modi announced that special courts would be established to prosecute individuals involved in exam paper leaks. Protesters rejected the proposal.

Movement leaders held a second round of talks with the government after Wangchuk ended his 26-day hunger strike.

Following those discussions, the government requested time until the afternoon of the following day to respond to the demand for Pradhan’s resignation.

Education Minister Pradhan subsequently announced his resignation, stating that he was stepping down in light of the situation at the protest site and across the country, as well as to prevent “external forces” from exploiting the environment.

On July 26, Modi announced the creation of a task force headed by technology entrepreneur Nandan Nilekani to overhaul the country’s examination system.

On Monday, July 27, the government presented a bill to parliament proposing amendments to the law governing public examinations. The legislation introduces stiffer penalties for offenders, including extended prison terms and increased monetary fines.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey