Daily news and analysis. We keep you informed and inspired.
This is World Today. State leaders of China and Brazil hold phone talks calling for self-reliance in the global south.
Beijing and Washington extend tariff truce by another 90 days.
And U.S. President Donald Trump announces deployment of National Guard to the country's capital.
Welcome to Road Today, a news program with a different perspective.
I'm Ge'anna in Beijing. To listen to this episode again or to catch up on previous episodes, you can download our podcast by searching Road Today.
Our top story, Chinese President Xi Jinping has held phone talks with Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.
President Xi said China stands ready to work with Brazil to deliver more outcomes from their mutually beneficial cooperation and set an example of solidarity and self-reliance among major global south countries.
He said China supports the Brazilian people in defending national sovereignty and Brazil in safeguarding legitimate rights and interests.
Lula said Brazil looks forward to enhancing cooperation with China and further advance bilateral ties.
He said Brazil is ready to strengthen communication and coordination with China in BRICS and other multilateral systems, oppose unilateral and bullying acts, and uphold the common interests of all countries.
To delve into this, let's bring in Professor Cao Ting, Director of Center for Latin American Studies of Fudan University.
Thanks for joining us, Professor. Professor, President Xi described China-Brazil relations as being at their best in history.
In your view, what are the key factors behind this positive momentum?
Well, I think there are several key factors behind this positive momentum.
First, Brazil and China both adhere to the principle of mutual respect and equality.
We respect each other's development models, national conditions, and core interests. and conduct exchanges and cooperation on the basis of equality and mutual benefit, which lays a solid political foundation for bilateral relations.
Second, I think there is a high degree of compatibility in their development strategies.
Both China and Brazil are committed to promoting economic development and improving people's livelihood.
The two countries have carried out in-depth cooperation in fields such as trade, investment, energy, agriculture and infrastructure, which has brought tangible benefits to both peoples.
Now China has been the largest trade partner for Brazil and Chinese companies have made significant investment in energy and infrastructure sectors in Brazil.
Third, I think Brazil and China maintain close coordination and cooperation in international affairs.
We have common positions and interests on many international and regional issues, like promoting multilateralism, safeguarding the rights and interests of developing countries and addressing global challenges, for example, climate change and food security.
We have worked together to promote reforms of the global governance system. and made positive contributions to maintaining world peace and stability.
In recent years, we have close coordination with Brazil on the Ukraine crisis, promoting the political segment of the crisis.
In a word, thanks to the joint efforts of both sides, Now China and Brazil relations are at the best in the history.
It is believed that under the joint efforts of the both sides, the bilateral relations will continue to develop in a positive direction.
Professor, to be more precise, both leaders emphasized aligning development strategies.
What specific areas of cooperation do you see as having the greatest potential for concrete results?
Well, I think China and Brazil have significant potential for pragmatical cooperation in several areas.
For China, we focus on high quality development, technology, innovation and green transition, while Brazil emphasizes infrastructure upgrading, economic diversification, food security and sustainable development.
So I think first, we can have a lot of cooperation in the agriculture and food security sector, because we know that Brazil is a global leader in agricultural production, while China is the world's largest consumer of agricultural products.
We can expand direct trade of agricultural commodities, such as soybean, beef and some fruits.
China also has a lot of experience in agricultural technology, so we can support Brazil to boost productivity and sustainability.
And the second part, I think we can have a lot of cooperation in energy sectors because we know that Brazil has abundant renewable energy resources, while China is a global leader in renewable energy technology, equipment manufacturing and investment.
So China can construct renewable energy projects like wind and solar farms for Brazil to help Brazil diversify its energy mix.
In terms of energy infrastructure, the two countries can strengthen collaboration on transmission grids and bioenergy.
In terms of infrastructure, I think Brazil needs to upgrade its logistics and transportation networks. while China has a lot of experience in infrastructure construction.
So we can promote the construction of railways or highways and some ports in Brazil.
The fourth part, I think we can have a lot of cooperation in the digital economy because Brazil is also developing its digital market and 5G.
So we can help Brazil in this sector. In the world, I think we have a lot of potential in promoting our pragmatical cooperation in the future.
Indeed. Professor, the two sides also agreed to strengthen coordination in BRICS.
How can BRICS further unite the Global South countries and promote a more fair international order?
Well, we know that now the BRICS group now consists of 11 members.
So these 11 countries now account for approximately half of the world's population, nearly 36% of the global GDP and 23% of international trade.
So as a key platform for emerging nations, I think BRICS can unite the global South and advance a fairer order in the future.
For example, we can deepen the inclusive economic cooperation expanding the new development banks' lending for infrastructure and green projects.
We can promote the local currency settlement between our member countries, and we can facilitate tech transfer in digital agriculture and green sectors.
I think we can strengthen the coordination in multilateral forums to push governance reforms, such as increasing developing countries' voting power in some important international institutions such as IMF.
And we can also develop shared principles in digital governance and AI, emphasizing people-centered development.
I think we can also jointly tackle climate change issues and food insecurity and public health.
In the world, I think BRICS countries need to adhere to an open and inclusive attitude, further strengthen position coordination and communication to promote our cooperation and also promote our cooperation in global governance.
Only in this way can we further unite countries of the global south and contribute to building a fair and just world order.
Building on what has been mentioned, Brazil's President Lula also stressed defending national sovereignty and opposing unilateral bullying.
How do you interpret these remarks and what message do you think he's aiming to send?
Well, Lula's remarks reflect a consistent stance shared by many developing countries and align with the broader aspirations of the global south. amid evolving international dynamics.
First, I think his words underscore resistance to external interference in domestic affairs, whether through political pressure, tariffs, or unilateral sanctions imposed by dominant powers.
No matter what kind of pressure other countries may apply, Brazil as an independent sovereign state has the right to decide its own internal affairs and its government will not yield.
And second, his words show that random sanctions, trade protectionism or big countries forcing their rules on others without global agreement has hurt developing economies the most, mess up the global supply chains and weaken international groups.
By highlighting this, Lula shows support for nations, especially in the global south, that suffer most from those one-sided actions.
So Lula wants to send some messages such as Brazil calls for a more equitable international order, where decisions are made through inclusive multilateralism rather than the whims of dominant powers.
Lula's remarks are both a defense of Brazil's own autonomy and a broader appeal to strengthen solidarity among nations seeking to build a more balanced, fair global system.
Speaking of that, President Lula also discussed the current state of Brazil-US relations.
So considering ongoing trade negotiations and tariff pressures from the US, what are Brazil's tariff strategy and consideration against the United States?
Yeah, we have just read the words of Lula facing the same tariff of the United States.
I think Brazil has not completely abandoned pragmatic negotiations with the United States on tariff issues while taking a tough stance against the United States.
Lula stated that he's not in a hurry to reach an agreement with the United States or take countermeasures.
Meanwhile, I think Brazil has engaged in dialogue and communication with various U.S. parties through multiple channels to maintain stability in bilateral economic relations.
We know since July, Brazil has conducted multiple rounds of negotiations with the US government and companies, and several senior Brazilian government officials, including Vice President Agmin, as well as members of the Congress have held negotiations with the US side on many occasions And industry associations such as the National Confederation of Industry of Brazil has also actively communicated with U.S. companies, calling on the governments of both countries to return to the track of rational consultation.
And Brazilian government has also actively countered the United States through international multilateral institutions.
And last week, the Brazilian government submitted a request for consultations with the United States under the WTO dispute settlement mechanism, challenging the tariff measures imposed by the U.S. side.
We also have seen that Brazil is also actively strengthening economic and trade exchanges with other emerging economies to deepen solidarity and cooperation.
Last week, Lula called Indian Prime Minister Modi to discuss issues such as deepening Brazil-Indian cooperation and responding to the unilateral tariff measures of the U.S.
And both sides have reaffirmed their commitment to safeguarding multilateralism and agreed to expand the trade.
And Brazil will also delegation to visit Mexico at the end of August.
And this bid aims to expand the cooperation in fields such as agriculture and manufacture.
In addition, the Brazilian government is committed to addressing the economic impact of the additional tariffs imposed by the U.S. through a series of domestic policies.
And Brazil is considering allocating about 30 billion rails, about 5 billion U.S. dollars from the National Bank for Economic and Social Development to support enterprises affected by the tariffs.
Thanks, Professor, for your valuable insights.
That was Professor Cao Ting, Director of the Center for Latin American Studies of Fudan University.
This is Rail Today. Stay with us. China and the United States will extend their pause on certain tariffs for 90 days until November 10.
The pause covers 24 percent of reciprocal tariffs of U.S. side as well as countermeasures of the Chinese side by 90 days.
The move was announced in a joint statement after trade talks in Stockholm just hours before the truce was set to expire on Tuesday.
China's State Council also confirmed the extension, keeping the 10% baseline tariff in place.
So for more on this, joining us on the line is Liu Zhijing, Senior Fellow of Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at Renmin University of China.
First of all, what are your main takeaways from the newly released joint statement between China and the United States?
I think this joint statement has sent very positive signals to the international market for two points.
One is that it tells all the partners and the trading partners to negotiate in a friendly way and very frank and also friendly method to be negotiated.
Only by dialogue and also friendly negotiation can reach good results from both sides, especially for China and the United States.
We have big disputes in the past, but nowadays I think everything can be discussed and negotiated for a final solution.
We know the talks wrapped up on July 30th, but the joint statement wasn't released until most recently, just hours before the truce was set to expire on Tuesday.
How do you see the timing of this announcement?
And compared with the previous suspension, what new signals does this fresh 90-day tariff pause between China and the U.S. send?
We should say the timing is very interesting.
We noticed that the time to announce this joint statement is very sensitive and a critical point and attracting more attention of the international community because China and the United States are the both largest economies.
So how both sides find a good solution will have a very significant impact on the global market.
So from the Times, we see that both sides see the very importance of close cooperation from both sides, and especially both sides understand each other's problems and core interests to be concerned.
So we need time for preparation to find a best solution from both sides, not only for the companies involved, but also for the future of both countries.
In this way, the 90 days that the extension are really good at the very positive side of both development.
At the moment, we see the United States and China both have very peaceful and calm attitude to each other.
That means we have already found which is the core interest of both sides to be pay greater attention and to be considered as to protect each other's core interests, only by doing so that both countries can find a good and a better solution to solve all disputes we are facing, especially to deal with the uncertainties and challenges from globally.
Building on that, how might this move affect bilateral trade relations in both the short and long term?
I think in short or long term, we have a very positive effect.
First, both sides have rebuilt again the mutual trust and mutual confidence in each other.
Even we have before that very hot discussions and even quarrels with some parts of the negotiation.
But nowadays I think that both sides have found a compromise. to sit down and to find a better solution to solve all these problems.
And from the long run, we see that both companies and investors have more confidence to deal with each other because we will see that even we have more conflicts or disputes before, but at the end, we still can find a good solution. by the friendly and frankly.
So that always means only by dialogue on the negotiation and also equal discussion, any questions and any disputes can be solved.
But we know Washington has been using tariffs to spark trade disputes and is still in economic tussles with countries like Brazil and India.
So given the recent new developments, what new economic considerations might be behind this latest extension from the U.S. side?
From the U.S. side, we can see that it always tries its best to take advantage from other countries.
As we know from Brazil and India, the United States has tried to give more pressure. to ask this country to pay more high tariffs but of course they are confronted with the harder resistance from these two countries because there were harm and the damage of the country's economy generally so that's why i think the united states is trying to make more pressure that to get the people a better solution especially wish to have more advantage from these two countries But as we know, Brazil and India have their own interests. especially for some core industrial materials and also from the agriculture and the high technology from these two countries.
The United States also needs some assistance and support from these two countries, but at the moment they could not find a good compromise.
This is another example to the rest of the world that to solve all these disputes can be only done result with friendly and equally negotiation.
So that's why the 90 days extension from United States with China still shows that a good a way and a good method of even solving how to deal with our disputes in different countries.
Of course, we know that different countries have different main points and strengths, but actually at the last, any side don't need to have very friendly and equal discussions to solve these problems, especially by tariffs or conflicts.
Then from the perspective of U.S. businesses and consumers, how does this decision help manufacturing and retail industries that rely on Chinese supply chains?
And what tangible benefits could ordinary Americans see in prices, jobs, and daily living costs, for example? yeah that is a really very practical question as we know the 90 days extension what means the 90 days already at end of this year that means during this 90 days the united states can still buy or import the cheap product from china for what reason for the holiday uses so in this way we can find that for christmas and other holidays that the united states will have a very good preparation to supply with the ordinary people with Chinese high quality, but the cheap prices of products in order to meet the demand of the society.
That is also one of the best way to remain the social order in the United States.
So I think the 90 days extension is mainly at the benefits or advantage of the United States market, especially for those ordinary people.
And so many American companies were so happy because in the 90 days, in the next 90 days, they can import so many products for storage for the next six months, next year even.
So this is really very good for the market, the price stabilizing in the United States.
Anyhow, for Chinese exporters also have a good chance to have more production. and provide more good products in the in the market but also can show to the rest of the world chinese supply chain industrial chain is the best and the very effective one that to be serving for the interest of the whole world then from china's point of view what strategic significance does continuing to suspend some tariffs on u.s goods have for stabilizing key industries and optimizing the country's trade structure actually for this negotiation or the 90 days extension especially for china also has a good chance to import some products from the united states including the some high-tech or ai spare parts and chips, for instance, allowed for Chinese market.
This is another way that we can ensure that China's production line and industrial line can be in stabilizing and healthy production.
This is very important also for the Chinese industry to continue for further development.
Because as we know, the Chinese AI technology and the robots, even in the aviation industry, like aircraft, spare parts and services, we need also the parts from the United States of the supply chain.
From both sides, I think we can meet the demands of the market.
We can support with each other in this time period.
This is also very positive for Chinese industry and the supply chain.
Of course, also very nice and positive for the American side.
Then finally, what are the chances these temporary truths could pave the way for a longer-term trade deal?
Or is it simply delaying another escalation? in my opinion according to the history experience i think this is only one short term but improvement from both sides but i'm afraid that after this time period the american side could also escalate the tension between china and the united states especially when China's raw materials supply and other key products provided from the Chinese side will not meet the demands of the American side, I think somebody will try to have more measures and pressure to press China, even to escalate the tension for the future.
But at the moment, in the coming three months, I think, Everything will be set to order with peaceful and calm manners.
That was Liu Zhijing, Senior Fellow of Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at Renmin University of China.
Coming up, U.S. President Donald Trump announces deployment of National Guard to the country's capital.
Azerbaijan and Armenia sign a peace deal to reestablish diplomatic relations.
You are listening to Road Today. We'll be back after a short break.
Welcome back to Road Today with me, Geanna, in Beijing.
U.S. President Donald Trump has declared a public safety emergency for Washington, D.C.
Trump said he's placing the nation's Capitol Police Department under federal control and activating 800 members of the National Guard in the hopes of reducing crime.
He added that his administration will be removing homeless encampments from the streets of the capital and that he will pursue similar actions in other cities if they don't bring down crime rates.
Residents in Washington, D.C. have rallied against Trump's push for federal takeover of the city, saying D.C. is their home and Trump can't have it.
So for more on this, my colleague Zhao Ying spoke with Harvey Zoding, former vice president of ABC TV Network and a senior felon of the Center for China and Globalization.
What do you see as the primary motivations behind Trump's moves?
There are several things at work here, I think.
Trump's trying to divert attention from the probable disclosure of Trump being involved in the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. that has the real potential of bringing him down.
And so we've seen in the last couple days, even his vice president, J.D.
Vance, is talking up the scandal and doing no favors to his boss, a boss he'd love to replace.
Also, I would say, And more likely, his advisors like Stephen Miller are operating from a larger playbook.
And that playbook is to urbanize America, cutting one thin slice after another from Hungarian sausage that was once a democracy.
Trump's also in the process of rallying his MAGA base because they thrive on the law and order narrative.
And as well, they also thrive on a racist narrative that Blacks and Hispanics are running amok in the nation's capital where they're the majority.
At the same time, he's sticking it to woke Democrats that he hates.
So it's a combination of several factors.
Yeah, but how unusual is it for an American president to take direct control of the city's police department?
And what legal authority is he relying on to do so?
Hmm. Well, you have to remember Washington, D.C. is a special case.
It's a federal district that was created by the Constitution.
It's surrounded by states like Virginia and Maryland, but it has a special status.
So the president's exercising authority granted by Section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, which permits him to assume temporary control of the district's police department in what it says condition of an emergency nature.
And so this federalization that Trump is doing can last up to 30 days after which an extension requires approval from both houses of Congress.
The act was designed to balance local self-governance in D.C. with Congress's constitutional power to manage the federal district.
So it makes the District of Columbia unique and uniquely subject to direct federal control compared to other U.S. cities that are ruled or follow the rules of other different statutes.
And I have to say that D.C. is different.
It's not part of any state. It was created by the Constitution as a federal district.
And Congress has exclusive authority over its affairs.
And I remember when the Home Rule Act went into effect, I believe in the 1970s, and it gave limited local autonomy to a mayor and council, but with significant federal oversight.
And the president, though, now citing emergency powers, could federalize the police.
It's a mechanism not available for cities in states.
There's normal cities in states. Okay. And Trump has ordered the immediate removal of homeless residents from the city.
From a legal and human rights standpoint, can the federal government force unhoused people to leave D.C.?
Well... Can it force legal immigrants to the United States to be unlawfully deported to other places, including other countries and other dangerous countries?
So he can order the removal of homeless residents probably on a temporary basis within the country.
But we don't know exactly where he's going to take those people.
He said it's far, far away from Washington.
And far, far away can mean beyond the borders of the United States of America.
Though he hasn't been specific, but knowing the way that he's broken the law with reckless abandon, especially in this second term of his administration, anything is possible.
And if it's illegal, that would have to go through the courts or hopefully in the longer picture, the Congress.
But there doesn't seem to be any pushback against what Trump's doing in terms of the many of his illegal moves.
The Democrats seem impotent to do anything.
And Trump is like a leader of a cult and Whatever he says goes in the Congress.
Our system of checks and balances in America is now broken.
It doesn't work. It's a great system, but it relies on the goodwill of people.
And if you have one rotten apple in the bunch, everything else becomes rotten as well.
Okay, well, yes, he named Democratic-led cities like D.C., New York, and Chicago, but not Republican-run cities with higher murder rates.
So what does that tell us about how crime is being framed politically?
I mean, it's self-evident truth. It speaks for itself.
You can see Trump's bias. You can see his point of view and how if he's not divorced from reality, he's only looking at this through a political lens.
And we know Trump is prone to lying, and this is just another one of his lies.
And the lie, like most of his other lies, has a purpose, and that's to have this different alternative universe.
Okay, but could such a visible forced displacement of homeless backfire politically?
It depends. Of course, this will appeal to his MAGA base.
It could backfire if the Democrats, independents and even Republicans who still have a spine, there don't seem to be many of them, if they organize and we are getting closer and closer to congressional primaries and congressional elections next year.
So it's possible that there could be a pushback.
But we're seeing President Trump and the Republicans doing everything possible to ensure a victory for them in the Congress.
And they're doing what's called gerrymandering, which means that they're changing district boundaries to benefit Republicans and make sure that there's a majority in the House of and Senate so President Trump can continue to rule without any checks and balances from Democrats.
That was Harvey Zoding, former vice president of ABC TV Network.
UN spokesperson Stefan Dujarek says the organization welcomes the joint declaration signed by the presidents of Azerbaijan, Armenia and the United States.
The secretary-general applauded the commitment of President Aliyev and Prime Minister Pashinyan to sustain dialogue and confidence-building and recognize the efforts of President Trump in facilitating this progress.
He reaffirmed the strong support of the United Nations for all efforts to advance lasting peace in the South Caucasus.
While not a formal peace treaty, the agreement marks a major diplomatic step toward normalizing relations.
Armenia and Azerbaijan have been locked in a dispute over the mountainous Nagorno-Karabakh region since 1988.
To dive into this, let's have Kamal Makiliyev, Associate Professor at the School of Global Studies at University of Gothenburg.
Thanks for joining us, Professor. Thank you for having me.
Professor, could you please briefly explain the historical background and context of the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia?
It's very hard to briefly explain such a complex conflict, but I will try.
The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan began back in the end of the 1980s, when they both have been still a part of the Soviet Union. over the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, which is a small autonomy created by the Soviets in the beginning of the creation of the Soviet Union itself as an Armenian ethnic autonomy within the boundaries of the Soviet Azerbaijan.
Back at the end of the 1980s, Armenian nationalist movement have lobbied the Soviet authorities in Armenia to push the central Soviet authorities to transfer this autonomy from the Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic to the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic.
That created the tension between two states that were not yet independent from the Soviet Union already back then there have been ethnic clashes but when the Soviet Union fell apart at the end of in 1991 both countries over the newly independent states have entered into war with each other the war but Armenia won and That war ended with a ceasefire agreement, First Karabakh War, it's called, in 1994, and led to the occupation of the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, of Azerbaijan, and as well as seven regions that have been surrounding it.
Armenians have basically ethnically cleansed around 600,000 Azerbaijanis from these territories.
There have been exchange of population, 250,000 or approximate number, of course, of Azerbaijanis have been expelled from Armenia and around 300,000-350,000 Armenians have been expelled from Azerbaijani proper.
Up until now, nowadays, or rather until 2020, the countries have been trying to reach the peace by negotiations.
This process has been led by the cooperation with the United States, Russia, and France in different formats, most prominent means group of OSCE. where they have been co-chairs, but that process ultimately failed.
And in 2020, Azerbaijan declared that it was going to use its right for self-defense to de-occupy its territories.
It was able to de-occupy its territories in 2020 partially, but then the process finished by the military operation in 2023.
After that, the countries tried to reach peace. to prevent any kind of further armed conflict between them and establish diplomatic relations.
And that's how we arrived to this point in talks.
Thanks for the clear explanation. Professor, we know the peace deal marks a substantive step toward ending a 37-year territorial dispute.
We've heard two different views recently.
One sees the deal as a typical Trump-style agreement where The form always substance, while the other consider it as an inevitable outcome of shifting regional dynamics.
How do you interpret these perspectives and what's your overall assessment of this agreement?
I would say the truth is in the middle between those two.
It is true, but there is much less substance than in the form that's been presented. during this signing ceremony and this peace deal.
And that's because it was not actually the signing of the peace agreement, it was initiating it.
But at the same time, it was very much a step forward towards comprehensive peace because it also led to the resolution of several key issues there.
One of them is the dissolution of the dysfunctional means group of OSCE, which was what Azerbaijan asked from Armenia to do together.
And the other one is, of course, the connection between Azerbaijan mainland and its exclave, Nakhchivan, through a corridor that would provide unimpeded access, but still will stay within the sovereign territory of Armenia, which is a breakthrough.
Professor, one of the major focus is that both sides have formally recognized each other's territorial sovereignty and their existing borders and agreed to begin formally demarcating their boundaries on this basis.
Reports say this means that the governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan have reached an official consensus under international law regarding the status of the Nagorno-Karabakh region.
What's your take on this? I would say that the agreement under international law on Nagorno-Karabakh status was not necessary because the Nagorno-Karabakh under international law has always been part of Azerbaijan that have been recognized by the international law and by international community since the beginning of the conflict.
That wasn't the question. Putting that, I know the media usually puts that on dispute, but how I argued in my academic articles and opinion articles, that was never an actual issue.
It's just that the media perspective is not always aligned with international legal perspective.
So what they actually did is that they put this on paper. between Armenia and Azerbaijan because apart from Armenia, nobody really disputed the international legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh.
But even Armenia did not recognize Nagorno-Karabakh as a separate state.
But I think it's very significant because while Armenia vocally acknowledged that even as early as 2023 that Nagorno-Karabakh belongs under international law to Azerbaijan, the fact that it's now on paper is very significant.
According to the deal, the U.S. will lead the construction of the Zangerzer Corridor, which will be rebranded as Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity, and it grants exclusive development rights to the United States.
So how does this arrangement reflect a Trump-style peace promotion model, and what direct impacts might it have on the geopolitical and economic landscape of the region?
I think the Trump style model that we're referring to is mostly based on the kind of transactional team over things.
It acknowledges that the sides need to be connected by the common trade interest, by the common economic interest, by the common interest that goes beyond the political for the successful peace.
And I think that logic is not faulty in this particular case because it seems like this is now working towards the side coming to a peace model that will start with a pragmatic approach kind of beginnings, not normative beginnings, not based in the morality of peace, but in that the peace is necessary for both countries' economic development, for example.
And this logic seems to be working, but this, of course, gives Trump a certain brand, right?
Actually, the name for the route was suggested by Armenian side based on the open sources that I have seen.
And it's it is making this personal for Trump also to be invested in and kind of have this kind of cover of a guarantee that his presidency can have for the success of a peace process so that the sides would not back off and that there won't be a third party's intervention in order to make peace impossible.
Professor, one last question. The agreement calls for the termination of the OSCE Minsk Group mechanism.
While Russia's influence in the region appears to be waning and the U.S. expanding its presence, does this indicate a geopolitical reshuffling in the region?
How might neighboring powers such as Russia, Turkey and Iran respond to these changes?
Well, it is actually a step back for the United States towards the South Caucasus because it has been pulling out of the South Caucasus since 2010, 2011.
I have wrote about this and I said that this would be strategic mistakes for the United States even back then.
And I think that this return right now, of course, is going to ruffle the feathers of Russia and Iran.
Turkey is looking much more favorable in this.
But there is not much Iran and Russia can do right now in terms of geopolitics, because both have significantly weakened their powers due to conflicts that they all have, one with Ukraine and the other with Israel.
And right now, the focus has not been so much on the Caucasus.
And the powers started to be much less significant.
And that's why we can see that the United States used this opportunity to step in and use the peace process between Armenia and Azerbaijan to return to its stance akin to the beginning of the 1990s, where the U.S. have been much more active in the region.
So, of course, it's going to be leading not to reshuffling, but to minimize, draw geopolitical influence from Russia and Iran. and much more rise on Turkey, Azerbaijan, and United States.
Thanks, Professor, for your in-depth analysis.
That was Kamal Makliyaliyev, Associate Professor at the School of Global Studies at University of Gothenburg.
Coming up, we'll take a look at the just-concluded World Robot Conference.
The 2025 Road Robot Conference concluded in Beijing on Tuesday.
More than 100 cutting-edge products have made their debut at the five-day event.
This year's conference was themed on intelligent robotics.
With more, Zhao Yang spoke with Li Lun, assistant professor of economics at Peking University.
So Professor Li Lun, thank you very much for joining us.
This year's World Robot Conference in Beijing showcased more than 100 new products and over 50 humanoid robot manufacturers.
This is the largest number for this event.
So how would you describe the overall atmosphere for this year's robot conference and what have impressed you most?
So if you look at this conference, so different from some other conferences, for example, in cars or other products.
So this year's conference in robot is welcoming large crowds with many children and families.
So this shows strong public curiosity and enthusiasm for these robots.
And as you mentioned, this conference showcased more than 100 new products and many manufacturers.
The overall atmosphere, I would say, is very futuristic and also very interactive.
You could see, for example, robot matches, boxing matches to many of the demonstrations of the human robots.
Besides the standard exhibits, for example, like the high-precision robot arms, service robots, we're also seeing many different applications and many different new companies, for example, like UP Tech.
And we're also seeing, you know, e-commerce platforms like JD.com.
So if, for example, you're interested, you could directly buy some of these robots online.
So overall, I think, the atmosphere is very bustling and very, you know, it's very welcoming for kids as well.
And some industrial insiders say the year 2024 was the year of concept for humanoid robots.
Well, the year 2025 this year is the year of getting down to work.
So what do you make of that? And what impressed you about the transition from flashy demos to the real world applications? so yeah that's a very good question i think in 2024 uh because because the humanoid robots is a new product so you know the focus is mainly on the wow factor so you know it's completely new people are just getting used to it in 2025 the concept or the technology is becoming more commonplace so you know a lot of companies multiple companies can produce similar human robots.
So they're beginning to enter the competition to kind of refine their features and reduce their costs and make sure that their products can enter the applications and scenarios in many cases.
So the competition is mostly centered around real world deployment.
So firms are seeking to find market share in every aspect because I would say competition is the key to innovation because new firms, they all want to catch as much market share as quickly as possible, as much as possible.
So this competition really drives them to kind of develop new features.
For example, we see that some humanoid robots is able to change its own battery, making sure that it's able to work 24 seven.
So this is kind of innovation as a result for the intense competition.
And many of the showcase the humanoid robots can now bend, climb, grip and adapt to different unstructured environments.
So which of the technical breakthroughs do you think will accelerate the mass adoption?
And what will be the future application scenarios?
Yeah, so I think You're definitely right that these technical breakthroughs in the hardware, for example, in the mobility or the dexterity of the robots is definitely crucial for mainstream adoption.
But I think currently the bottleneck is uh not in hardware but more in software because you know uh for robots to enter all you know our households um you know they they we need to make sure that they're able to complete the daily work for example cleaning for example you know carrying you know heavy products for example you know elderly care but these daily work are pretty complex and they require different skill sets So we don't want to have one robot for one job like we did before, for example, the sweeping robots to clean the floor and other robots to do other things.
We want one robot to do all the work that relate to us.
So this requires a very good software intelligence.
So basically the ability to handle, you know, various different tasks without, you know, having to reprogram the software.
So I think that's the main bottleneck for the wide adoption of, you know, human robots in households.
But in manufacturing, I think the adoption or the application will be much sooner because in most manufacturing and warehouse, you know, cases, the task is simpler.
So robots will only have to finish the one job that's given to them.
So I think after the wide adoption in two or three years of warehouse or inventory in manufacturing, so we're probably going to see the adoption in households following that.
And the government has rolled out supporting policies, the R&D programs, and even created robotics valleys in Shenzhen.
So how critical is this policy push to China's rapid progress in the robotic industry?
Yeah, I think this is how China's industrial policy really kind of repeats its success story after we've done in, for example, the EV industry.
For example, both the tax incentives and the government funding for these robotic industries is very crucial to take them between the step of pilot program and research program to last commercialization.
So this is how This is very similar to how we scaled the production of EVs.
So we first give a very widespread industrial policy, which shortens the cycle between innovation to production.
And we attract a lot of players and a lot of competition into the industry.
And gradually we kind of benefit and reduce these fundings a little bit to make sure that the best player wins out.
So I think this These policies are actually repeating what we've been doing to EV, and I'm pretty confident that we're going to achieve similar results or even better results than EV.
And China already has the most complete industrial system in the world.
So how does that serve as an edge in humanoid robots compared to other countries like the US, Japan or Europe?
So we already have a head start in this game because China is already the largest producer and also the largest market for humanoid robots and industrial robots.
We also, as you mentioned, have a very complete industrial chain or supply chain, which means all the components from, you know, the motors to the AI chips, you know, to the joints for the robots are all available domestically.
So they're not going to be affected by the tariffs and by, you know, the shipping costs at all.
So this provides the, you know, a very good atmosphere for the industry to scale and also, you know, for the competition to take place.
Also, I think because we have a large demand for manufacturing applications, both, you know, assembling electronics or, you know, assembling automotive automotive parts or, you know, for the logistics, for the e-commerce companies.
So these, you know, these can all serve as testing grounds for humanoid robots.
And we can hopefully in the process speed up the refinement and testing process so that the application can be made much faster in the future.
And some robots are already working in Beijing's pharmacies, handling 5,000 types of medicine daily.
So what does the future with the widespread humanoid robots look like in the near future?
Or looking forward, maybe in 10 years, what will be the most common role for humanoid robots in daily life?
So I think the example that we're seeing that robots in the pharmacies handling more than 5,000 types of medicine, this shows that robots, especially service robots, can handle these jobs that require precision, speed, and in some sense, they're repetitive.
So I think robots can definitely handle these type of job better than human in the future.
So I think in the future, in 10 years, I think some of the roles for robots can include healthcare support, for example, elderly care, for example, you know, hospital logistics, you know, carrying the medicines upstairs and downstairs.
Also in terms of public service, information desks or assisting the tourism.
The thing that we all hope to happen is for household help, for example, cleaning, cooking, or doing some basic inspection and repairs.
And last but not the least, I think robots are very suitable for hazardous or dangerous work, for example, in terms of firefighting, in terms of disaster relief.
In terms of inspection of difficult or dangerous atmosphere.
So I think all of the purpose is to basically free human beings to make us do higher value and more creative and maybe supervisory roles in the future.
That was Li Lun, Assistant Professor of Economics at Peking University.
That's all the time for this edition of World Today.
To listen to this episode again or to catch up on previous episodes, you can download our podcast by searching World Today.
For further discussion, you can also follow us on X at CDTM Radio.
I'm Gaena in Beijing. Thank you so much for listening.
Bye for now.
