Hello and welcome to World Today.
I'm Dinh Hun in Beijing.
Coming up, we will take a look at how China's newly announced high -tech fund is going to grow AI and other emerging industries.
In Syria, Kurdish -led SDF agrees to integrate with government forces.
This city group has raised the recommendation for China equities.
And India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi is going to support the Mauritius sovereignty over Chagos Archipelago during a visit to the country.
To listen to this episode again or to catch upon our previous episodes, download our podcast by searching World Today.
China will establish a national venture capital guidance fund to strengthen innovation.
The head of the China's National Development and Reform Commission announced this particular move at the two sessions.
Zhengshan jie said they aim to attract a trillion yuan in capital which the fund was some hundred and thirty eight billion US dollars over twenty years from local governments and a private industry.
The funds will focus on cutting -edge areas including artificial intelligence, quantum technology, hydrogen energy, and energy storage.
Tuesday was the last day of this year's two sessions during which many social and economic issues were discussed.
For more on this, my colleague Zhao Yang spoke with Professor Jeong Gong from the University of International business and economics.
So, Professor Gong, developing new quality productive forces and speeding up the development of modernized industrial system, that was mentioned in terms of the major tasks for China in 2025, and the Chinese top economic planner, the NDRC, said it will set up a national venture capital guidance fund to strengthen the development of innovative companies.
So, how do you see the role of this new fund in supporting the development of new quality productive forces?
Well, it's a major development in my view.
It looks to me it's like a sovereign venture capital fund, which is something no government in the world has ever done before.
Granted, the government being involved in venture capital business is not entirely new here in China.
As a matter of fact, many local governments across the country have set up funds similar to this, but not as large as this, investing in new startup companies and some of the results have been turning out very surprisingly good.
And so I think the business model that governments investing in startup companies, the government being involved in venture capital business is viable, in my view.
The experiences in China so far have been proven that this is indeed doable.
Now, this time we're talking about the central government setting up fund the scale of a trillion yuan doing this.
You know this certainly exceeds scale greatly of what the local governments have been doing for years.
So I think it's a interesting development that the central government is indeed doing something like this to set up such a large fund.
And you know as I said it's the first venture in itself in the in the history of venture capital in the entire world, that the central government has set up a sovereign venture capital fund to do this.
So we'll have to see how this can be done and will this be as successful as some of the best local governments have done and achieved in China in the venture capital space.
but I think it's a you know it has its merits in a sense that the national government the central government can pull resources I mean they surely do it be investing the most promising ventures in the future and you know VC is the VC business is not just about investing I think it's all sort of our mobilizing sources to support the invested entities to make sure that these businesses can grow to make it easier to grow its business.
Certainly, the central government has many more resources to do that.
So, what sectors will be the primary focus of this VC guidance fund?
Well, I think it's going to be the huge suspects in the sunrise industries, the things that are emerging all over the horizon.
You can easily think of quantum computing, quantum communications, AI, robotics in the biotechnology area, and all these new technologies emerge on the horizon.
I think these areas will certainly be the focus of the investment from the new funds, national funds.
And you mentioned artificial intelligence, quantum computing, et cetera, et cetera.
So what do you make of the AI applications and ecosystem in China?
and does China have enough talents for AI development?
Well, you asked two questions essentially.
One about the ecosystem.
Certainly, China does have an ecosystem to support the development of technologies, and examples have shown this can be done, you know, very much due to the very large market here in China.
very much a comprehensive industrial base that stand to benefit, that stand to first use the latest AI developments.
This is already being done, I think, across the country.
Many businesses have already said—have already taken action, actually, to apply the latest AI technologies.
I think the governments, many local governments, have also committed that they are rapidly adapting their businesses, their services, functions, common functions towards the AI direction.
So I think you know, this is very unique about China's system that, you know, once something that the government advocates for application, you know, things can happen very, very rapidly.
Now your second question is about whether China has enough talent for it.
Absolutely. I think, you know, we have a They're very smart people here in China, and our education system is very much attuned to a STEM education, STEM style type of education, meaning science, technology, engineering, mathematics, which are critical for AI development.
So, you know, we've seen some quite impressive breakthroughs in AI space against the backdrop of very severe sanctions imposed by Washington and in the chip area, semiconductor area.
China can still achieve some impressive breakthroughs in AI.
So that means that we do have the talent.
So I never thought about China's talent capabilities of devoting resources to the latest technology.
And with the rise of deep -seek, China's tech innovation activities have drawn attention from both domestic and international investors.
So will this enthusiasm for Chinese assets continue over the long run?
I think starting from the beginning of the year, the international narrative of China's future about China's innovation capability is starting to change.
I think now the international investors, of course including domestic investors, are starting to change the view about China's future prospect.
Not just in terms of economic growth, but also in terms of technological growth.
All of a sudden China is the place where a lot of innovations are taking place.
The myth about corporate China cannot innovate.
It is totally debunked.
I think this wave of new innovations is going to continue.
The momentum is going to continue.
So I think the enthusiasm for Chinese assets is going to last for quite some time.
So at least, I think in the short run, this is very sustainable.
You're going to see resources pouring into this area.
The sovereign fund, VC fund, which we've been talking about, It's one example of that great things will happen.
And China also continues to focus on consumption and expand the consumer trade -in programs for appliances and big -ticket items, and $300 billion of special treasury bonds will support this effort.
So why do you think are China policymakers emphasizing the trade -in program as a key way to spur the consumption rather than direct cash handouts?
Well, this is one of the measures to boost consumption.
It is better than cash handout, because very simply, when people get cash, you know, it's quite likely that at least a percentage of the people will just, you know, stack their cash, a percentage of their cash, in the bank.
They're not going to spend all of their money, I think.
I mean, you know, we have a fairly high saving rates here in China.
So trading programs make sure that the subsidies are indeed being spent on consumption, being spent on buying things.
Essentially, it's a rebate in my view.
I mean, it's just a rebate.
As a matter of fact, I think the trading money, the money to support the trading, is indeed actually part of it is actually coming from the taxes collected on the consumption, essentially giving the taxes back to the consumers, just giving people a break and paying taxes on sales.
So, you know, in this way, make sure that people are indeed spending the money buying things.
And that's counted as consumption.
So, obviously, it's more effective than just giving people cash, which people may or may not spend in the end.
And the government work report also set its deficit to GDP ratio at around 4 % from the previous last year's 3%.
So how do you see this deficit number?
I think a 1 % increase is still reasonable and manageable, and this way, it also frees up the local governments to continue their normal business, to incur expenditures that it should incur.
And I think China's GDP has a fairly large portion of it attributed to government spending and the local government spent about half of that pie.
So it's important that the local government's continued abnormal business continues to incur expenditures that it should incur.
So I think, even though the national debt increases a little bit, but I think you look at the percentage of central government status percentage of the GDP is very more numbered, a little bit over 80 percent, which is not high at all compared to many other countries.
So I think the overall national debt is too manageable, and this year's 1 % increase is also very manageable.
Professor Zhang Gong from the University of International Business and Economics talking to my colleague Zhao Yang.
Coming up, in Syria, Kurdish -led SPF agrees to integrate with the government forces.
Stay tuned. Hello, my name is Alessandro Golombieff's space shader.
I'm a professor of public policy management at Tsinghua University in Beijing.
I am a great listener of the world today.
In my opinion, the world today is one of the best China radio programs.
In the world today, we can get the best news and analysis in what is happening now in the world.
So please, come to join us.
You're listening to World Today, I'm King Hunting Beijing.
A Kurdish -led militia alliance has agreed to a deal to integrate all military and civilian institutions into the Syrian state, the Syrian Democratic Forces or SDF will seize hostilities and hand over the border posts, airports and some vital oil and gas fields under its control.
The deal has recognized the Kurdish minority as an integral part of the Syrian state, vowing to guarantee the rights for all Syrians to participation and a representation in the political process.
SDF's Commander Mazzlom Abdi is calling the deal a real opportunity to build a new Syria.
For your information, the SDF is currently in control over more than 46 ,000 square kilometers of territory in the country's northeast, where it defeated the Islamic State Group back in the year 2019 with the help of an American -led coalition.
So joining us now on the line is Dr. Wang Jing, a Middle East experts with Northwest University in Xi 'an, China.
Thank you very much for joining us.
My pleasure. So to Serie A's interim president, Ahmad Elsheim, how big of a step forward does this agreement represent if we talk about, say, uniting a very divided, a very fractured country after Al shara's Sunni dominant Islamic group let this rebel offensive to overthrow Bashar al -Assad late last year.
I think this represents a very major process because we know that the hostilities between the Syrian defense forces, the so -called SDF for short, and the Syrian central interim government led by President Ahmad al Shah.
has already lasted quite a long time.
Not just after the last December when the interim government started to organize but actually, it could be traced back to nearly a decade ago when the Syrian turmoil just started.
So, it could be understood as a very major reconciliation between the two sides and also could understand as a political reconstruction process.
So, that is why it is very meaningful and very crucial not only for the Syrian different factions to end their hostility right now, but it's also I think it would be very meaningful in the future for Syrian different factions to start the new political process and to organize a new political authority inside the country.
So, that is very crucial.
And it's a very major step forward in the history of Syrian government as well.
the Syrian and the Syrian people.
Hmm. The SDF has actually has tens of thousands of well -armed, well -trained fighters.
That's an open fact.
And during the 13 year long civil war in Syria, it was actually aligned with neither the Assad government nor the opposition right.
So now if If all these military forces that previously belong to the SDF can be integrated into the Syrian state, to what extent will this arrangement strengthen the military power of the government?
I think it's very difficult to say, because on the one hand, it means a kind of the decrease of the uncertainties we're talking about, as you mentioned, because the other military forces and the different military factions, it will be integrated into the newly established and newly organized military authority.
So it is a good thing.
Then it might decrease the uncertainties, it might decrease the hostilities between military factions.
But on the other hand, it's just the kind of the starting point, and we don't know how how much the willingness of the Syrian Interim Government as well as the Syrian Interim Government -led military authority will do to kind of impose the new authority to the different factions, particularly the local military factions, including the SDF.
And also we don't know how much a kind of agreement could be reached in the future, For example, we in the regard of the arrangement of the military of a personnel's in the arrangement of the retired military personnel's and the arrangement in the arrangement of the weaponry materials and the controlling area.
So it's difficult to say how this step would means the major success of the kind of the military reconstruction.
but it's a good thing because we're talking about new beginning and a new starting point and I think it would finally benefit everybody if this process goes well in the future.
So do you think the process to seize hostility and the process for integration will be will be moving on in a smooth manner as we know the SDF was previously actually in conflict with Turkish backed former Syrian rebel factions that are aligned to the current government.
And to what extent do you think this particular deal we are talking about today will manage to deescalate the SDF's conflict with neighboring Turkey because as we know the YPG, namely the biggest faction in the SDF, it is actually viewed by Ankara as a terrorist organization.
I think it's a good thing because we know that Turkey enjoyed a very very particularly close relation with Syrian interim government led by Lechman Shah as well as led by the HTS and also it means that the decrease of the turmoil and uncertainties in the northern Syria, which means it also could ease the tension between the border of the border between Syria as well and Turkey.
So I think it's a good thing.
But it's also hard to say, because it's just at the beginning point, it just represents the willingness of the SDF to cooperate closely with shah, and we don't know this kind of agreement would be turned into 100 % of success of the close cooperation, and we know it would be whether or not it will be turned into the 100 % of the successful integration of different factions and different military branches in the future between Syrian government as well as the Syrian SDF at local current forces.
So I think we should also wait and see, but it's good saying it's a positive step that would to influence the future direction of the Syrian political and military reconstruction.
It was also where positively influence the military ties between Tokyo and Syria.
Mm -hmm, so about 10 ,000 IS -IS fighters are currently detained in those SDF -ROM prisons.
Let's put it this way and some 46 ,000 other people who are in one way or another linked to IS -IS are also held in and several other camps.
If all these people we are talking about here are to be transferred from those SDF, run facilities to the Syrian states, what do you think are some of the risks, potential risks, that deserve particular care or attention?
I think we are facing a very major kind of attention, or the major kind of turning point.
Because when we are talking about the new cooperation on the new integration it also as you mentioned we cannot overlook the possible uncertainty that would rise in the regard of the military factions with close ties to the IS and also there were some kind of potentials in the future that the ISAs were coming back and also there might be the comeback of the Islamic terrorists and extremists.
But as was repeatedly mentioned, it's a good thing because we don't know, we all know that the extremism and terrorism, they all come out of the areas fall of crisis, for the hostilities and the fall of wars.
When the wars come to over, when the hostilities started to decrease, It also squeeze the area for the extremism and terrorism.
So it might be a very positive starting point, but as we mentioned, that we should wait and see what happened next.
We hope that it will go as well, but there will be a lot of challenges and uncertainties.
Of course. Now, Kurdish people account for about 10 % of the Syrian population.
How will things look like when they are integrated into the country's political process?
I think they are now, actually they now have a very crucial choice right now.
The Kurdish people, as you mentioned, they account for kind of 10 % of the Syrian population.
and also they have very close ties with the Turkey curse and also they have the very close ties with the Kurds inside Iraq although they have different ideologies and they have different political belongings but actually their relations are very particular.
So that's just why I think it's a kind of choice and also important opportunity for Kurds to find new ways to manage their ties with the Syrian and other different ethnic groups, particularly with the Syrian Arabs and other interim governments and other military and political factions.
So actually, this is the kind of the new beginning point and the turning point inside the Syria history.
And we hope that the Syrian Kurds will face new opportunities for their own life and for their own safety without the harassment and without the threats of war, without the threat of hostilities from other factions.
So that is why I think it not only will benefit the Kurdish people, but it will benefit the Turkish people and also will benefit the Arab people both inside Syria and outside Syria, so I think it's a very important opportunity and we should wait and see what will happen next.
Thank you very much for joining us today.
That was Dr. Wang Jing, a Middle East expert, was North Western University in Xi 'an, China.
We have just discussed this very latest development whereby the Kurdish -Latin Malaysia Alliance has agreed to a deal to integrate our military and civilian institutions into the Syrian state.
So, more to come. Citigroup has cut recommendations for American equities and lifts views on China.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is to support a Mauritius sovereignty over Chaco Archipelago during a visit to the country.
We'll be back after a short break.
Welcome. I'm Elav Elart, Economics professor and member of the Data Science and AI center at New York University, Shanghai.
On the World Today program, you can find in -depth and impartial insight as well as critical commentary on key trends in the Chinese economy.
financial technology, business, and blockchain to prepare for the world tomorrow.
Join me on World Today.
You're back with world today I'm Dinh Khan in Beijing.
City analysts have upgraded their recommendations for China equities to overweight from neutral.
The report was issued on Monday.
City economists have revised their forecast for Chinese GDP growth to 4 .7 % this year from a previous forecast at 4 .5%.
City strategist notes that Chinese equities look attractive even after the recent rally, citing Deep seek artificial intelligence technology breakthrough, the government support for the tax sector, et cetera.
So joining us now on the line is Dr. Leo Chieqin, senior fellow was the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, Renming University of China.
Thank you very much for joining us Technically speaking, first of all, can you help us explain what does an upgrade from neutral to overweight mean here?
You know, in the equity market, there are some criteria to identify the different quality of equities.
If the situation in China, for instance, or in other countries has been estimated as overweight, that means it becomes more positive that encourage the investor to have more investment in this country or in this country's stock market or in the equity market.
So neutral is something like middle point, that it could be better, could be worse, so you have to make your own judgment according to your assessment or according to the developing situation.
You are willing to invested in the country.
I think the Chinese equitable performance is quite well and positive.
That's why I think this is all overwritten, by some international investments that is quite right decision or the right suggestion.
So based on what you have explained, What you have elaborated just now realistically speaking, are we going to see more and increased investments into China equities, especially China's tax sector?
I think that the future for China's technical industry or smart industry, I think, is very positive and optimistic, especially in recent months.
I think that some big movement and the changing situation in China has made the Western countries, especially the scientific fields in the Western countries under pressure, so I have to say that like Deep Seek, they make some deep chicken in the Western scientific fields.
So, in this way, that I think there's a China's equity marketing special technical companies that are growing up and that becoming more mature, and also becoming more optimistic in the more innovation, because the innovation forces of this young generation in China, is becoming very attractive for many investors.
So, this is the main reason that I believe in the time to come that more and more foreign investors will invest in the Chinese technical companies.
So by the way, Dr. Liu, how would you look at this very assessment by CT economists or strategists saying that despite their recent rally, Chinese equities remain cheap in terms of their valuation?
Do you think, what do you think this would entail?
Yeah, you know, in the past the time that many Western investors looked at China in a different angle that the value of China's scientific market, especially the value of the equity has been lower estimated.
That's why we see that many investors are trying to change their strategy to China because the value of the equity has been lower than it should be because China actually in the techno firm companies are quite well formed but the still values cannot come up.
That's why our A share or the stock market they have always turbulent in their past time.
This is the main reason that because of the pricing system or mechanism in China is always influenced by some special factors from outside.
Nowadays, I think that when China's technical companies have increased and shown their wonderful the performance that changes the outlook of this market in China.
That's why, I think, there are many foreign investors, especially those who have joined a company like a city, like other world -famous companies, that are trying to have an exchange of their new outlook on China's future.
I take a point. So you have already mentioned about this point briefly.
More on that. What do you think CTE strategists recommendation tell us about the importance of bolstering innovation in China to Chinese equities, future attractiveness or competitiveness.
that. You know, the decisive factor to make a judgment of the equity or quality always remains on the attractiveness and also the quality of innovation.
Because without innovation, I think that equity value cannot be really well overgraded or over estimated.
This is a big point.
So that's why the investments also need the courage or need a boosting forces to believe that what they are going to invest, that they really have a right and a good future.
So that's why they made the decision that China's future, especially in the innovation and its attractiveness, are very unique because of two reasons.
one is that the Chinese young generation now grow up with unique innovation.
This is what we can see in the past two months, that that make the whole world shocked, because of the China's innovation forces showing that the new quality and productive force has been really put in the enforcement in the reality.
The second, the attractiveness is also from systematically overall policy of the state and from the enterprises are well stable and also long -sighted viewpoints.
This is a bigger challenge for other countries because many other countries have a very short -sighted view to make the policy support.
But China always has long -sighted places.
We have a 5 -year plan.
We have even a 10 -year plan to make all these industries further development.
This is a good confidence for all investors.
The power of planning.
I definitely take your point.
While the city group has upgraded its recommendation on Chinese equities, in this same report issued on Monday, it has actually downgraded its views regarding American equities.
Some people say this is a sign of the growing divergence in the outlook towards the world's top two markets.
Whether that's really the case, let's wait and see.
But thank you very much for joining us.
Professor Liu Zijing, Senior Fellow with the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, rooming University of China.
You're listening to World Today, we'll be back.
You're listening to World Today, I'm Dean Hunan Beijing.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is on a two -day official visit to Mauritius for talks regarding upgrading strategic ties.
His trip comes days after US President Donald Trump signaled support for a deal between Mauritius and Britain over the future of a US -British military base.
Mauritius became independent in the late 1960s, but London retained control of the Charghos archipelago.
The archipelago comprises more than 60 islands in the Indian Ocean.
The largest island has been used as a joint British US military base since the 1970s.
India has historically backed Mauritius' claim over these islands, but more recently supported America's presence in the Indian Ocean.
Britain is currently seeking to finalize a deal on handling sovereignty of the islands back to Mauritius.
So joining us now on the line is Dr. Hanan Husain, co -founder of Initiate Futures and International Affairs Think Tank.
So thank you very much for joining us today, Hanan.
Of course, I mean, India has close political and security ties to Mauritius and one thing interesting to note here is that this time the Prime Minister Modi is being received in Mauritius as the chief guest on this country's National Day, which is an anniversary of its historical independence from Britain.
Indian officials who have organized the Modi's trip this time say the settling of the Chagol's sovereignty issue is welcoming news for New Delhi.
So what do you make of this message from India?
That's I think so. I think it's it's a bit more complicated than what New Delhi has sought to project.
I think there are a lot of reservations, for example, on how the sovereignty issue is going to be handled out because when you look at the motivations from London, that's less about prioritizing Mauritius's independence and sovereignty and sense of autonomy.
It's more focused on advancing, you know, and protecting the U .S.-UK military base, which is based on the largest islands within this chain.
So as London pursues that objective and India puts its weight behind U .S.-UK military interests, it brings this broader argument into perspective that maybe Mauritius' sovereignty and independence, something which India may signal support for, is not something which India supports on ground.
and that defense relations as well as threat perception from the UK and the US is more of the predominant theme in India's backing as we speak.
So on the part of the Indian government do you think there is a mentality that somehow views the Indian Ocean as its own sphere of influence and some people say it is in the interests of India to retain the US presence and the British presence for that matter only Chagos archipelago.
What is your take on this?
I think it'll be in India's interest to maintain that presence if it comes without additional baggage or controversy.
I think from where things stand, India has made a little surprise out of its efforts to use Mauritius to expand what it sees as deepening influence in the Indian Ocean.
We have seen, for example, key proof points such as India's ability to develop sea and air links to the distant Agalaga Islands within Mauritius.
So that kind of gives strength to many who believe that this could advance, for example, India's surveillance objectives with the Indian Ocean and elsewhere.
But I think it boils down to what Mauritius ultimately thinks and it was quite a telling statement from the Prime Minister's office to say that, look, we know that US and other interests by due regard to this deal are focused more on threat perceptions as opposed to all else.
And I think as long as that reservation becomes outstanding, no matter how much India tries to expand its influence, it faces limits.
So by the way, what could be the Mauritius perspective on this whole issue?
I think Mauritius's perspective would first of all be to include voices that were historically led out by the deal and of course, the historical transfer of this, I think when we look at finalizing the deal, the Togosian voices, which is a group of those living in exile with regard to these islands, their voices and their interests, there's a lot of space for them to be accommodated.
And, I think, the current approach being adopted is not something which factors indigenous voices.
I'll tell you why that's important, because there should be seen as a holdover from colonial times.
We have had the, you know, an advisory opinion also coming in 2019 from ICJ, which said that the process of decolonization of Mauritius was not lawfully completed, and then Mauritius with also had these outstanding reservations that it was illegally forced to give up the island in return for its own independence.
So when the process of independence, something which is an empowering factor for Mauritius, has been left incomplete historically, I think in order for this deal to come off as fulfilling for Mauritius, it has to factor indigenous voices which were also expelled and kept to the sidelines.
You cannot negotiate something in the interests of the people by leaving the people on the sidelines.
So unless there's an effort to expand the ambit of this deal and bring in those voices and get their endorsements, we would still see this something that is a bit underwhelming as opposed to something that's fulfilling.
When you were mentioning about those voices from the indigenous group, you were talking about those original inhabitants of those archipelago or those islands that were in a forcible manner expelled from their homeland to make way for for the construction of this UK US military base in the in the 1960s and 70s, I guess that's that that was that was the point you were making, right?
Yeah. That was the point that I was making.
And I think forcible expulsion by definition is something that has been decided against the will of the people.
So if the defense right now is to present this deal in the interest of the people, we need to hear from the people first.
That's what logic would dictate.
And I think beyond that, there are a lot of options for Mauritius to do that.
For example, you know, if adequate opportunities and time are afforded to the people, that could lead to efforts to activate the diaspora and get their views intact.
Because, look, ultimately this concerns sovereignty being ceded to Mauritius and Mauritius's sense of sovereignty is, in some ways, kind of downplayed by memories of British colonialism and the holdovers and the unresolved issues since then.
The idea is to truly back Mauritius's sovereignty.
We'll need to hear from the people who believe that they are being critical of these voices but that the criticism is still falling on deaf ears.
Hmm so in other words if we are to raise a question like this whether such a deal finalized between the UK and Mauritius is a good thing in general I guess that will be a question that will prove to be too simplistic or one -sided?
Yeah because right now as we speak there's still some details to be hammered out we do not have the exact specifics on what this deal would actually look like it's plan, as far as we say, and that a consensus, a formal consensus is to come so I think, yes, the deal from where it stands is focused more on security interests and that is leading to what seems as a trade off on on sovereignty being brought back to Mauritius.
But if it is to be presented as a security deal, I think it should be decided as one.
But if it's something that concerns sovereignty of Mauritius, then I think the autonomy of the people is a question that has to be handled and addressed adequately.
So the final question, before we let you go briefly, what do you think this whole Chagol's sovereign issue tells us about how historical colonialism or imperialism could complicate today's international politics or international affairs?
I think it says a lot.
It says, first of all, if you look at the timing of the issue, There may have been many opportunities in the past to settle this issue in the interest of the people.
It's difficult to buy into the argument that the voices that feel sidelined today did not harbor those sentiments going back years or decades.
So why now? And what are the interests that are driving it?
That's I think one thing.
And I think colonialism on another end is something that has reflected historical injustices.
You even look to many parts of Africa.
and that sense of ownership that was lost on the people because of the excesses of certain empires.
So with that kind of sensitivity in the background, I think current arrangements complicate and oversimplify it by focusing on largely linear defense, security interests, but then using sovereignty to advance it.
When sovereignty needs to be valued for what it was, and when countries have sought independence from colonial rule.
The goal is that nations that were colonial powers and now detest it need to come through on their own understanding by ensuring that these countries do not face any other obstacles of sovereignty.
So, yes, it does complicate it.
Security and political interests and to simplify the injustices and reservations that these countries face.
Thank you very much for joining us, Hana Hussein, co -founder of Initiate Futures an International Affairs Think Tank.
You're listening to World Today, we'll be back.
A new report is suggesting that the war in Ukraine has helped grow the US dominance of the global arms industry.
Data compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute shows that American arms exports increased by more than a fifth between 2020 2020 and 2024, compared with the previous five -year window, reaching 43 % of the worldwide total.
Over the past two decades, the US has averaged somewhere around 35 % of global arms exports.
At 43%, the US share is actually more than four times as much as the next biggest exporter, namely the France.
The U .S. delivered weapons to a total of 107 countries, between 2020 and 2024.
Ukraine has been the biggest recipients of heavy weapons in this period, having increased its import almost a hundred fold.
So joining us now underlying is Dr. Kamau Makini -Aliyev from the Raul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanity in Rialau, in Sweden.
Thank you very much for joining us!
Thank you for having me.
So first of all, do you feel any surprise about this finding?
Yes, actually that increase in the amount of global export exports of arms by the United States is It's quite striking.
Traditionally, the United States averages only for around 35 percent.
And that is the data over the past two decades.
And such a significant jump to 43 percent suggests that the conflict in Ukraine has not only accelerated defense spending worldwide, but also markedly boosted and precisely American market dominance.
This is actually not go in Ukraine's role as the largest heavy weapons recipient.
but with its imports increasing nearly 100 fold from what it was previously, and this centerlines for me how the war has reshaped the global arm flows and the market priorities with quite clear concentration in Eastern Europe and Mid -O -Easter.
Do you think it is fair to say that those American weapon producers have benefited from this war?
Yes, absolutely, it's very fair to say that United States weapons manufacturers, they have reaped the significant benefits from the conflict in Ukraine with the U .S.
arms exports growing by 21 % between the previous five year period, you know, 2020 to 2024.
The American firms now supply weapons to around more than 100 countries.
I think the number is 107 countries, actually.
And this growth not only reinforces the strategic economic gains of these companies but it also reflects broader influence of the United States military industrial complex in shaping foreign policy, that means that the foreign policy of the dogs is being gradually overtaken by the foreign policy of the hogs in the United States, in practical terms so the source shows that this complex comprising defense contractors, these bulk of defense contractors, think tanking government agencies.
They have long been credited with steering United States foreign policy towards outcomes that reinforce American geopolitical and economic interest.
But then the expanded arms sales, especially into the volatile region, serve as both a revenue booster for the companies and the two to project this kind of American global influence.
So actually when we talk about say US President Donald Trump's tendency to withdraw or to withhold support for Ukraine, we see a very heavy element in terms of his America First policy, so do you think this idea or this new finding that the war in Ukraine has actually helped to grow American dominance of the global arms industry, do you think this is going to alter US president Donald Trump's thinking on whether or not to withdraw military support for Ukraine?
This is a very interesting question and why is it so interesting is because Well, the President Trump stands on military support of Ukraine.
It actually have always been framed as very much transactional terms, right, demanding economic or strategic returns for such a system.
Yeah. And from one side, yes, Trump is with, you know, in not the favor of continued military support because he thinks that it's too much spending, but it's unnecessary to spend this and it doesn't strategically move the United States' interests forward.
But on the other hand, this kind of data also shows that the United States is actually ripping a lot of benefits when it comes to especially military influence globally.
So will the data change the very firm stance that Trump has had before?
It's very hard to say, because on one side there is this reluctance to continue of military aid and Trump is doing his best to actually come to the point when that is significantly reduced or even nothing, but on the other hand, this transactionality in his policy also favors the data that has been presented right now, that has actually helped growing.
So my answer is I don't really know.
It's very difficult to predict because the biggest element of Trumpism is unpredictability to be fair.
So, the final question before we'll let you go.
From a European perspective, will this reality that the United States is increasing its dominance in the global arms industry incentivize European countries to somehow to do more for their own defense industries?
Well to be quite frank from European perspective, In the reality of growing U .S.
domination in global arms, experts could serve as a wake -up call.
Because European NATO members, they now import over 60 % of their weapons from the United States, and this is up from 52 % in early periods that the Stockholm Institute have looked at.
They might view this dependence as a strategic vulnerability, and probably they should view it as a strategic vulnerability.
So, such reliance can limit their autonomy in defense planning and the diplomatic negotiations even.
So, in response, I think European policymakers may be incentivized to invest more in developing domestic defense industries or strengthening pan -European cooperation.
The efforts that they hinted at by initiatives like the EU's new defense funding proposals, for example, or building a more self -reliant defense industrial base that would gradually help reduce strategic dependence on United States suppliers and that can potentially lead to more balanced transatlantic security framework in the long run, but it will take time.
Thank you very much for joining us.
Dr. Kamel Makilialia from Raoul Wellemberg Institute for Human Rights and Community, and Rialao in Sweden.
Unfortunately, that's all the time for this edition of World Today.
A quick recap of today's headline news.
In Syria, Kurdish -led SDF agrees to integrate with government forces.
City Group has raised the recommendation for China's equities.
To listen to this episode again, or to catch up on our previous episodes, download our podcast by searching World Today.
I'm D. Honey Beijing.
Thank you so much for listening.
Bye for now.
