Showing posts sorted by date for query NORTH KOREA. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query NORTH KOREA. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Tuesday, June 09, 2026

China’s Subsidy Machine Is Reshaping Global Capitalism

ALL CAPITALI$M IS STATE CAPITALI$M

  • Governments are pouring record amounts into strategic industries, with global subsidies reaching $108 billion as countries try to secure supply chains.

  • China is outspending the West by a wide margin, providing firms with 3–8 times more state support than OECD peers and helping Chinese companies dominate sectors such as semiconductors and solar panels.

  • The result is a growing global subsidy race, as Western countries respond with tariffs and incentives while debating whether free-market capitalism can compete against China's state-backed industrial strategy.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the geopolitical conflicts to follow exposed severe weaknesses in global supply networks, prompting governments, caught off guard and complacent, to pour money into critical sectors like semiconductors, critical minerals, and pharmaceuticals to prevent future shortages and reduce dependence on geopolitical rivals. Consequently, governments across the globe have increasingly been doling out state subsidies to local firms in a bid to secure supply chains, accelerate the transition to green energy, and protect domestic manufacturing against aggressive foreign competitors. A landmark report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has revealed that global state subsidies have surged to a total of $108 billion, good for an average of 1.3% of company revenues across 15 key industrial sectors and the highest level since the 2008-2009 financial crisis. But China takes this game far more seriously, giving the state natural resource power the West only dreams of, and making this the onset of what could be a subsidy race that changes the rules of capitalism in order to compete with Beijing.

According to the OECD, Chinese firms in strategic sectors received between three and eight times more state support than competitors in OECD countries over the past 20 years, giving Chinese firms a huge leg up in highly competitive markets. Indeed, OECD estimates that this massive government aid--spanning direct grants and below-market loans-- drove roughly 60% of Chinese companies' global market share gains over the past two decades. Chinese companies receive subsidies equivalent to roughly 2.5% of their revenue, compared to just 0.3% seen by firms in peer nations like Japan and South Korea.

The disparity is most extreme in the semiconductor and solar panel industries, with China's booming semiconductor sector receiving government subsidies equivalent to ~10% of revenues in recent years, compared to 2% of revenues for the global semiconductor sector. China's state-backed investment vehicles, including "Big Fund III" established in 2024, are channeling roughly $47.5 billion into advanced logic and memory capacity. And, Beijing’s largesse is driving massive growth here: China's integrated circuit (IC) exports surged by 83.7% year-over-year to $103.5 billion in the first four months of 2026, reflecting a massive expansion in domestic chip manufacturing capabilities driven by billions in state-backed investments and soaring domestic demand.

Chinese memory firms are now challenging global industry leaders: Domestic players like Yangtze Memory Technologies Corp (YMTC) and ChangXin Memory Technologies (CXMT) are rapidly taking market share and preparing for major public listings to fund further expansion, with YMTC poised to become the world's third-largest NAND flash producer after South Korea’s Samsung (OTCPK:SSNLF) and SK Hynix. Despite global trade restrictions, Chinese firms are achieving important breakthroughs: Chinese engineers have reportedly developed working prototypes of advanced EUV lithography machines, a critical step toward complete manufacturing self-sufficiency by 2028-2030. Additionally, companies like Huawei are pioneering new "logic folding" architectures to boost performance without relying on traditional miniaturization methods.

China’s solar panel manufacturing continues to receive heavy state funding, helping it to dominate the global market regardless of short-term market conditions.

State-backed Chinese subsidies averaged nearly 3.2% of annual firm revenues, enabling manufacturers to heavily outinvest competitors and secure over 80% control of the entire photovoltaic supply chain.

This generosity has incentivized Chinese producers to expand manufacturing under any market conditions. China's annual solar manufacturing capacity has reached approximately 1,200 GW, nearly double the total global installation demand. According to the OECD, this aggressive support has resulted in subsidy-fueled overcapacity and driven the average selling price of solar panels down by 90% over the last decade and a half, often forcing panels to be sold below the break-even point.

But while it may give states more power to wield, the OECD warns that these ongoing, large-scale subsidies are fueling global industrial overcapacity, artificially depressing international prices and undercutting firms that are actually better and more innovative.

And overly generous government subsidies have backfired on Chinese companies before. Whereas the overcapacity and subsequent price cuts have made solar energy highly affordable globally and driven historic deployment records in emerging markets (such as a 176% jump in Chinese module exports to Africa), it has also resulted in severe financial distress, declining profitability and heavy domestic consolidation for Chinese solar companies. To address those problems and maintain some balance, Beijing has begun to phase out support. For instance, the Chinese government reduced and fully abolished the 9% Value Added Tax (VAT) export rebate on photovoltaic products, while battery energy storage systems saw their export tax rebates reduced from 9% to 6%, with a full phase-out expected by 2027.

Meanwhile, Western nations and trading blocs are increasingly trying to come up with ways to keep China’s clean energy hegemony in check with its own incentives. But more often, with retaliation. Most recently, the U.S. unveiled significant levies across China’s renewable sector products, including 50% tariffs on solar cells (whether or not assembled into modules) and strict actions against Chinese steel, aluminum, and advanced batteries. The Trump administration has also announced a 100% punitive tariff on Chinese EVs, making entry into the American market prohibitive. Additionally, the European Commission has adopted definitive countervailing duties of up to 35.3% on BEVs from China, valid for five years. These are applied on top of the standard 10% vehicle import duty.

The uncomfortable reality is that Western economies assumed for decades that private capital, comparative advantage, and open markets would determine the industrial winner. However, China has spent that time building national champions with patient state capital, cheap financing, protected domestic markets, and long-term strategic planning. Tariffs can slow the flow of Chinese products across borders, but little else. The West’s biggest economies now face the choice of whether to try to compete with China on similar terms or whether there is still faith in a private market free-for-all to operate in the national interest.

By Alex Kimani for Oilprice.com


New Geometry Of Innovation: China’s Path From Peripheral Outpost To The Technological Core Of Global Change – Analysis

 IFIMES
By Paweł Gałecki

The global economic architecture is undergoing one of the most significant transformations since the Industrial Revolution, and its epicenter is shifting from Western decision-making centers toward dynamic Asian ecosystems. China, which for the past four decades has been perceived in the economic consciousness primarily as the “world’s factory” – a place of cheap production, mass export, and global supply of components – is steadily evolving toward a model based on knowledge, research and development, and co-creation of technology. This fundamental metamorphosis is not merely a consequence of a natural economic cycle, but the result of a deliberate, long-term state strategy, supported by growing confidence from international corporations, academic institutions, and geopolitical partners from different continents. Statements by leaders of global technology corporations, strategists, and research experts clearly indicate that the narrative of China as merely an assembly site has been consigned to history. It has been replaced by a reality in which Beijing, Shanghai, Suzhou, and Shenzhen are becoming laboratories of the future, where solutions are born and then exported to the markets of Europe, North America, Africa, and the Middle East. This shift carries consequences for business models, supply chain architecture, regulatory standards, and long-term competitiveness strategies.

China as a Global Innovation Hub: Philips and Bosch Redefine the Future of Technology and Industry

Royal Philips, a Dutch conglomerate with more than a century of presence on the Chinese market, is an excellent example of strategic evolution. The company’s CEO, Roy Jakobs, recently stated unequivocally that China has transformed from a key market into one of the global centers of innovation. This assertion is not a marketing claim but a reflection of a deeply rooted operational strategy, whose pillar is the slogan “In China, for China, for the world.” Philips has built a comprehensive value chain in the Middle Kingdom: from advanced research and development, through production, commercial operations, sales and services, to strategic partnerships within the local healthcare ecosystem. Last year the group announced the establishment of the China Research and Innovation Headquarters in Beijing, which acts as a coordinator for regional R&D centers and an accelerator for localizing medical solutions. At the same time, the Suzhou facility integrates R&D functions, manufacturing, and global export, while Shenyang specializes in the development of computed tomography, serving as a global innovation center in this field. Such geographic and functional distribution of competencies demonstrates that China has ceased to be a peripheral outpost and has become a technological core generating value for more than a hundred countries where Philips provides its services.

Jakobs emphasized that the vast Chinese market and rapidly developing digital infrastructure create unique conditions for scaling innovations, which is crucial for the medical technology sector, where deployment time and accessibility of solutions can determine patients’ lives. The Chinese healthcare sector is currently undergoing a qualitative transformation: from models based on scale and reactive disease treatment toward proactive health management, therapy personalization, and continuous diagnostics. Artificial intelligence acts as a catalyst in this metamorphosis, enabling the processing of large medical datasets, optimization of hospital processes, and the development of telemedicine. By combining the global capabilities of corporations with China’s speed of adaptation and solution scalability, Philips intends to deepen cooperation in digital health, AI-based solutions, medical imaging, and green healthcare. Deep rooting in the local ecosystem, strengthened by investments in building capacity for medical personnel and alignment with China’s policy frameworks for sustainable development, becomes a strategic choice that allows the company to remain resilient and to influence both locally and globally.


A parallel but equally significant transformation is observed in the automotive sector, where Robert Bosch GmbH sees in China not only the largest and most dynamic market in the world, but above all a key source of technological innovation. Markus Heyn, member of the management board and chairman of Bosch Mobility, at the International Motor Show in Beijing in 2026 stressed that the group has full confidence in local domestic demand and research potential, which is reflected in the concentration of resources and prioritization of the Chinese market. A symbolic proof of deepening cooperation and the shift from supplier-recipient relationships to a value co-creation model is the joint development with a Chinese manufacturer of a low-voltage power solution. This system was designed specifically to meet the growing demand for computing power in vehicles, which are becoming increasingly software-integrated and dependent on advanced electronic systems. This solution will be developed and put into mass production in cooperation with Chinese customers, illustrating a new paradigm of collaboration where technologies are co-designed from the ground up rather than merely adapted to local specifications.

In 2025 Bosch Mobility achieved sales in China at the level of 122.3 billion yuan, which translates to about 17.83 billion US dollars and represents an annual growth of 4.9%. Importantly, about 70% of these revenues were generated by Chinese brands, which proves that local manufacturers have become the main driving force of innovation and consumers of advanced solutions. Bosch supported about 300 models of Chinese brands entering foreign markets. This path of knowledge transfer – from China to the rest of the world – is groundbreaking because it reverses the traditional direction of technology flow. For the German giant, China is currently the place where, outside Europe, the largest workforce engaged in the development of new technologies is located, and local R&D competencies, a global innovation network, and close cooperation with partners allow parallel development in electrification and intelligent transformation. Concentration on the local market and continued investment in expanding technological reach prove that the future of the automotive industry will be shaped in Chinese laboratories and production halls, and business success will depend on the ability to integrate with the local innovation ecosystem.

China–Saudi Arabia Strategic Partnership and the Rise of a Multipolar Innovation Economy

Economic and technological cooperation between China and Saudi Arabia constitutes another pillar of the new architecture of global value chains, based on mutual transfer of competencies, long-term partnerships, and a strategic development vision. Rayan Al Amoudi, executive director for strategy and business development at Nesma Infrastructure & Technology and chair of the China-Saudi Arabia Technological Innovation Center, points out that bilateral relations long ago exceeded the boundaries of trade and engineering contracts and have evolved toward cooperation encompassing technology transfer, production localization, joint investments, digital transformation, and AI development. The Saudi firm focuses with Chinese partners on areas such as smart cities, critical infrastructure, energy, and digitization of operational processes, which perfectly align with the national modernization agenda. The contemporary Saudi market no longer seeks only ready-made imported products for Saudi Arabia but expects technology to come with the partner, enabling the building of local competencies, knowledge transfer, and independence from a pure consumption model. The pace of corporate cooperation has significantly accelerated, and Chinese technology companies, such as Huawei, have made a deep impression with their expansion, solution quality, and ability to deliver complete systems. Local perception of Chinese technology has markedly improved: more and more government institutions and companies realize that they offer an optimal price-to-quality ratio, fully capable of meeting the requirements of advanced infrastructure and digital projects.


Looking to the future, Saudi Arabia and China see strong cooperation opportunities in green infrastructure, water treatment, digital transformation, and AI data centers. Saudi Arabia’s geographic, energy, and political advantages make it highly competitive in building regional artificial intelligence hubs, and local firms expect to play a larger role in these projects by leveraging Chinese experience and technologies. Saudi Vision 2030 proves highly compatible with China’s Belt and Road Initiative, and deepening exchanges in technology, industry, education, and people-to-people contacts opens broad prospects for economic cooperation based on mutual gain and long-term stability.

The global economic order is ceasing to be dominated by a one-way flow of technology and capital and is moving toward a networked, multipolar innovation ecosystem in which China evolves from the role of end producer to a strategic partner co-creating standards, funding research, and scaling solutions.

The dynamics of European investment and technological cooperation with China are taking on particular strategic significance in the context of growing trade tensions, export restrictions, and customs measures along the European Union – United States – People’s Republic of China axis. While Washington consistently tightens trade restrictions, imposes protective tariffs on Chinese goods, introduces anti-subsidy mechanisms, and promotes a “de-risking” strategy aimed at reducing dependence on Chinese supply chains in strategic sectors, the European Union is in a difficult position of balancing between protecting its own industry, implementing the Green Deal objectives, and maintaining access to key technologies and markets. European giants such as Philips and Bosch are not withdrawing from China; on the contrary – they are deepening localization of research, co-creating products, scaling innovations, and treating the Chinese ecosystem as a source of solutions exported globally. Customs actions and trade barriers may, in the short term, lengthen supply chains, raise operating costs, and force restructuring of business models. However, at the same time these same mechanisms compel companies to greater flexibility, production localization in multiple regions, diversification of partnerships, and investments in compliance with new climate and digital standards.


European investment in China, as well as partnerships with Middle Eastern countries, show that the future of global trade will not be based on isolation and protectionism but on managed interdependence, where tariffs, regulations, and technological standards will become negotiating tools and quality filters rather than absolute barriers. For companies this means the necessity of building resilient, multipolar value chains with operational redundancy and localization of key competencies. For the European Union – balancing between strategic autonomy and openness to cooperation that accelerates economic and climate transformation. For China – continuing the transformation toward a knowledge-based, innovation – and sustainability-driven economy that will constitute a stable pillar of the new economic architecture of the twenty-first century.



The article presents the stance of the author and does not necessarily reflect the stance of IFIMES.


About IFIMES

IFIMES – International Institute for Middle-East and Balkan studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council ECOSOC/UN since 2018. IFIMES is also the publisher of the biannual international scientific journal European Perspectives. IFIMES gathers and selects various information and sources on key conflict areas in the world. The Institute analyses mutual relations among parties with an aim to promote the importance of reconciliation, early prevention/preventive diplomacy and disarmament/ confidence building measures in the regional or global conflict resolution of the existing conflicts and the role of preventive actions against new global disputes.

View all posts by IFIMES →

Kuwait Offers First Crude Cargoes to Asia since Iran War Started

Kuwait, one of OPEC’s top producers and one of the exporters most affected by the near-closure of the Strait of Hormuz, is offering its crude to Asian buyers for the first time since the Iran war choked off transit through the critical chokepoint.

At least 4 million barrels of Kuwaiti crude loaded on two supertankers capable of carrying 2 million barrels each are being directly offered by the national oil company Kuwait Petroleum Corporation (KPC) to buyers in China and South Korea, anonymous traders with knowledge of the matter told Bloomberg on Tuesday.

The two very large crude carriers (VLCC) have cleared the Strait of Hormuz and the cargoes can now be taken to ports in Asia promptly, according to the traders.

The first Kuwaiti crude offering of cargoes that have passed through the world’s most critical oil chokepoint since February 28 signal that some of the crude supply out of the Persian Gulf is making its way to buyers despite the collapse of tanker traffic and the months-long delays in deliveries.

Unlike Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Kuwait does not have a pipeline alternative to bypass the Strait of Hormuz, which has severely stifled its crude oil exports in recent months.

However, traffic at Hormuz is becoming increasingly opaque and difficult to track, with the market and analysts flying blind in guesstimating how much crude supply from the Middle East is trickling through the Strait.

Kuwait will likely need up to 12 weeks after the Strait of Hormuz re-opens to restore the oil production that has been curtailed since the war began on February 28, a KPC official said last week.

Kuwait doesn’t have an export outlet not depending on the Strait of Hormuz.

Iraq, whose exports have been also severely restricted, at least has a pipeline north through Kurdistan to the Turkish Mediterranean port of Ceyhan, whose capacity Baghdad plans to triple in three months to about 770,000 barrels per day.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia has hiked flows on the East-West pipeline to maximize oil exports from the Red Sea port on Yanbu, while the UAE started construction on a new pipeline to Fujairah, which will bypass Hormuz and will become operational next year.

By Charles Kennedy for Oilprice.com

Monday, June 08, 2026

 

South Korea election victory marred by ongoing ballot crisis

South Korea election victory marred by ongoing ballot crisis
/ Daniel Bernard - UnsplashFacebook
By IntelliNews June 8, 2026

The ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) scored a sweeping victory across local administrations in recent elections, but missed out on the ultimate capital prize, while the conservative opposition salvaged a critical political lifeline. At the same time, an unprecedented administrative failure by election authorities left thousands of voters without ballots, triggering violent street demonstrations and allegations of systematic electoral fraud, The Korea Herald reports.

This dramatic split vote on the southern half of the Korean peninsula points to a highly volatile regional landscape. While the DPK now controls the vast majority of provincial governments nationwide, its absolute failure to breach the capital proves it lacks an uncontested national mandate. More critically, the National Election Commission’s administrative blunders have completely destroyed public confidence in South Korea’s democratic architecture at a moment when hyper-polarisation is running at record levels.

The DPK captured 12 out of 16 mayoral and gubernatorial races across the country, the National Election Commission (NEC) announced on June 4. The main opposition People Power Party (PPP) retained only four jurisdictions, clinging firmly to its core southeastern heartlands of Daegu, North Gyeongsang Province, and South Gyeongsang Province, along with the capital city, Seoul. The outcome reverses the trends of the 2022 local elections when the DPK won a mere five of 17 metropolitan and provincial seats. Despite building a massive national footprint in this cycle, senior liberal officials voiced immediate anger over the loss of Seoul. The defeat in the capital is a serious blow because the DPK went into the mosst recent poll carrying a comfortable double-digit lead across major independent opinion surveys, while President Lee Jae Myung maintained a rock-solid personal approval rating of 60%.

According to The Korea Herald, PPP candidate Oh Se-hoon bypassed DPK challenger Chong Won-o to secure an unprecedented fifth term as Seoul mayor. Chong was personally selected and heavily backed by President Lee. DPK Chair Rep. Jung Chung-rae stated during a press briefing that whilst he felt deep gratitude to the electorate for giving the party a sweeping victory across the country, it was incredibly painful that they failed to reclaim Seoul. Former DPK leader Song Young-gil expressed almost identical levels of frustration during a radio interview with MBC, noting that the party’s central campaign strategy failed to convert the administration’s massive popularity into a victory in the capital.

Logistical failures trigger institutional crisis

According to Chosun Biz, however, electoral politics immediately shifted to raw institutional panic as extensive ballot shortages halted voting. The NEC admitted it had miscalculated voter turnout and under-printed paper ballots for the election. Polling stations in the affluent, conservative-leaning district of Songpa-gu ran out of forms after receiving supplies covering only 50% of registered local voters.The deficit froze voting at 14 stations in Seoul and 17 sites nationwide. The administrative failure forced officials to stretch voting hours until 10:00 pm at disrupted stations, though hundreds of angry citizens walked away without voting.

The failure sparked an instant institutional crisis leading into the weekend as a crowd of 1,200 protesters launched an overnight siege at the central NEC headquarters in Gwacheon, Gyeonggi Province, Chosun Biz reports. Demonstrators blocked the exits, physically trapping employees inside the building and shoved staff who attempted to leave. The political fallout worsened by the hour, with PPP Floor Leader Rep. Song Eon-seog demanding a parliamentary probe and a special counsel investigation. Simultaneously, a conservative activist group filed a formal criminal complaint against NEC Chair Roh Tae-ak and Secretary-General Heo Cheol-hoon for dereliction of duty, and the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency opened a full criminal investigation.

The DPK hit back at the opposition's outrage, when DPK Secretary General Rep. Jo Seoung-lae remarked that the PPP screamed for a total suspension of the vote count and a re-run when it expected a heavy defeat, but completely buried those demands the moment the mayoral numbers turned in its favour. The standoff remains highly volatile in Jamsil-dong, Seoul, on June 8, where furious crowds numbering up to 8,000 physically blocked the transit of two remaining ballot boxes holding 2,000 uncounted votes. While these ballots are not enough to threaten the 53,000-vote lead held by Oh Se-hoon, the city election commission cannot legally certify the mayoral outcome until every single box is processed, leaving the governance of South Korea’s capital up in the air.

South Korea To Produce First Nuclear-Powered Submarines By Mid-2030s

Launch of South Korea's 'Dosan An Chang-Ho' KSS III submarine. 

Photo Credit: Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering (DSME)

June 8, 2026 
By Indo-Pacific Defense Forum


The Republic of Korea (ROK) will build its first nuclear-powered submarines by the mid-2030s and commission them by the end of that decade, Seoul’s Defense Ministry announced in late May 2026.

The vessels, conventionally armed and fueled by low-enriched uranium, are intended to counter North Korea’s submarine missile threats. The project will boost deterrence in the Indo-Pacific and benefit the United States and other Allies and Partners by adding an advanced asset in a critical domain.

“The nuclear-powered submarine, which will be built on the basis of a strong South Korea-U.S. alliance, is a symbol of our will to take responsibility for peace and security on the Korean Peninsula,” ROK President Lee Jae-myung said.

The U.S. approved the ROK’s pursuit of nuclear submarines after Lee and U.S. President Donald Trump met in South Korea in October 2025. The ROK Navy operates a fleet of conventional attack submarines, the newest of which have vertical launching systems capable of hosting cruise and ballistic missiles that could strike targets in North Korea. However, Seoul has said their operational range, speed and endurance are insufficient to deal with the North Korean threat, U.S. Naval Institute News reported.

“Nuclear-powered submarines are expected to play a key role in responding to North Korea’s nuclear and missile threats, based on their ability to remain submerged for an extended period with greater mobility,” ROK Defense Minister Ahn Gyu-back said.

The Defense Ministry said the submarines could shadow North Korean attack boats as soon as Pyongyang deploys them. In the event of conflict, ROK forces expect to be able to neutralize the regime’s subsurface strike capabilities before launch.

The submarine program is expected to create more than 40,000 jobs in the ROK’s shipbuilding, nuclear and defense industries, with the submarines set to be in service for 30 years.

Separately, the U.S. is working with Australia and the United Kingdom, under the AUKUS security alliance, on a project for Canberra to acquire nuclear-powered submarines that will boost deterrence and stability in the Indo-Pacific. Plans call for Australia to buy Virginia-class submarines from the U.S. and eventually deploy a new class of conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines, called SSN-AUKUS, jointly developed by the three nations.

A fleet of ROK nuclear-powered submarines offers similar benefits, analysts say.

“The logic mirrors Australia’s decision to acquire nuclear-powered, conventionally armed submarines under AUKUS. The United States is stronger when its close allies shoulder more responsibility at the high end of military capability,” researchers at the Rand Corp., a U.S.-based think tank, wrote in February. “A Korean nuclear-powered submarine also aligns with the broader alliance goal of balanced burden-sharing. Seoul has shown its willingness to invest in advanced military capabilities that contribute to collective deterrence and nuclear-powered submarines would be among the most consequential.”


This article was published by Indo-Pacific Defense FORUM


About Indo-Pacific Defense Forum

Indo-Pacific Defense Forum is sponsored by the United States Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM) and publishes daily online articles, daily social media updates and a quarterly magazine to provide timely updates on the Indo-Pacific security environment.

View all posts by Indo-Pacific Defense Forum →
Nuclear powers increasing deployment of warheads, SIPRI warns

The world’s nuclear-armed states are increasingly moving warheads from storage onto operational delivery systems, raising the risk of conflict despite a gradual decline in overall stockpiles, researchers warned on Monday. SIPRI said geopolitical rivalry and a new arms build-up could reverse decades of reductions in nuclear arsenals.


Issued on: 08/06/2026 - 
By: FRANCE 24

In this photo taken from video released by Russian Defence Ministry Press Service on Oct. 26, 2022, a Yars intercontinental ballistic missile is test-fired as part of Russia's nuclear drills. © AP

Researchers warned on Monday that nuclear-armed states were taking their arms out of storage and putting them on delivery systems, as the weapons of mass destruction are playing an increased role in global politics.

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said the world's nuclear powers had an estimated total of 12,187 warheads, with about 9,745 of them in stockpiles for potential use.

That was a marginal decrease compared with the year before, as since the end of the Cold War old warheads have generally been dismantled more quickly than new ones have been deployed, resulting in a decrease in the overall number.

"The more worrying news is that even though we have lower numbers of nuclear weapons, the level of nuclear dangers and nuclear risks are rising," SIPRI director Karim Haggag told AFP.

© France 24
09:29



SIPRI also predicts that the trend of declining nuclear arms stockpiles is likely to be reversed in the coming years "as the pace of dismantlement is slowing, while the deployment of new nuclear weapons is accelerating", it said in a statement.

Haggag also listed several worrying signs, such as a breakdown in strategic arms control, such as international agreements, and competition between great powers with nuclear arms.
Out of storage

Another worrying trend is one "whereby states that have nuclear weapons are taking them out of storage and deploying them on nuclear-capable delivery systems. And so we see more deployed nuclear weapons," Haggag said.

The United States and Russia together hold around 83 per cent of the world's stockpile of nuclear arms, with more than 5,000 warheads each.

Both countries have programmes to modernise their arsenals but both have also run into challenges.


Russia announces new nuclear missile ready to launch by end of year © AFP, Reuters, France 24
00:44


The United States' nuclear modernisation programme is progressing but has faced "planning and funding challenges that are likely to further delay and significantly increase the cost of the programme", SIPRI said.

Russia's programme has also struggled with failed tests of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), while economic sanctions and competing demands linked to the war in Ukraine also seem to have had an effect.
Geopolitical competition

China is expanding its nuclear arsenal faster than any other country.

"Intensifying geopolitical competition means a very strong incentive on the part of China to increase its reliance on nuclear weapons," Haggag said.

SIPRI estimates that China now has 620 warheads and, depending on how it decides to structure its forces, could have as many ICBMs as the United States and Russia by 2030.

But the institute noted that even if the country reaches 1,000 nuclear warheads by that time it will still only correspond to a quarter of each of the US and Russian stockpiles.

In Europe, France and the UK kept their nuclear arsenals steady at 290 and 225 respectively, but SIPRI noted that the UK's stockpile is expected to grow following a 2021 review that recommended a higher ceiling.

© France 24
01:55



France's President Emmanuel Macron likewise in March ordered an increase in the French stockpile.

SIPRI said that India is believed to have slightly expanded its nuclear arsenal to 190.

India's neighbour and arch-rival Pakistan's number remained stable at 170, but the country continued to accumulate fissile material, "suggesting that its nuclear arsenal might expand over the coming decade".

North Korea is also continuing to "fulfil its stated goal of 'exponentially' expanding its nuclear arsenal", according to SIPRI, which estimates that North Korea has about 60 nuclear warheads.

Israel – which does not acknowledge its nuclear weapons – is also believed to be modernising its arsenal, which SIPRI estimated was about 90 warheads at the start of the year.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)


Sunday, June 07, 2026

UK


“Have you noticed how we only win the World Cup under a Labour government?”

JUNE 5, 2026

Politicians seldom get it right when they talk about football, argues Mark Perryman.

In March 1966 Harold Wilson’s Labour Party won a landslide victory and just four months later Harold was there to celebrate when England for the first, and to date last, time lifted the World Cup at Wembley. 

Never mind the (disgraced) Peter Mandelson, England’s victory spurred Harold to the greatest piece of Labour spin-doctoring ever. Of course, Harold had been at the Final; infamously Harold sent one of his advisers to the BBC matchday studio to suggest he join commentator Kenneth Wolstenholme for some half-time punditry – an invitation that was promptly turned down. Perhaps they lacked the silky charm of (disgraced)  Peter Mandelson?!

Four years later, most unwisely Labour risked their 1970 General Election chances by choosing a date slap-bang in the middle of England’s defence of their World Cup at Mexico 1970.  The quarter-final defeat to West Germany  was widely blamed for Labour’s defeat just four days later.

Yes, really. Wilson’s Minister of Sport, and former League referee, Denis Howell, was better-placed than most to justify the impact: “The moment goalkeeper Bonetti made his third and final hash of it on the Sunday, everything simultaneously began to go wrong for Labour for the following Thursday.”

Labour and football, eh? Be careful what you wish for. Still at least 1970 General Election victor Ted Heath and his sundry Tory Prime Minister successors have proved incapable of robbing Harold’s sound-bite of it’s enduring truth.

But any kind of relationship between politics and international football in the particular context of England has a broader purpose than simply, win lose or draw supposedly being dependent on the party in government at the time. 

There is one crucial word that Harold gets spectacularly wrong: ‘we’. Great Britain is unique in international football, represented by four – and for the purposes of football at least – independent nations: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.  It doesn’t require either pedantry or nationalism to recognise this. It’s a fact perhaps lost on Harold, or Keir, who every time a summer football tournament comes around will promptly, and very publicly, choose an England shirt for his go-to leisure wear. This tells us, or at least it should, everything we need to know about Labour Unionism.

Gordon Brown might have thought he was being helpful travelling out to  support England at World Cup 2006 as the British Prime Minister. Precious few England fans were won over while in his native Scotland it went down like a lead proverbial. Of course, not all Scotland fans are nationalists. But when in 1992 Jim Sillars lost his Govan seat that he’d won in an infamous 1988 SNP by-election defeat of Labour and angrily described the Tartan Army as “90-minute nationalists,” it was a very different era to now. The SNP are no longer a minor party, but, via the Scottish Parliament, a governing party with a formidable number of MPs at Westminster. If Harold could have got away with ‘we’ in 1966, in Scotland, Wales and the North of Ireland, he certainly couldn’t today; yet Keir wears his `England shirt regardless.

Such confusion is both muti-faceted and deep-rooted in Englishness. World Cup Quiz question: which is the only team at this summer’s tournament to line up before kick-off without a National Anthem of their own for them and their fans to belt out? England! God Save the King is the National Anthem of the United Kingdom, not England and just try asking the Scotland team to dop Flower of Scotland to join in too!

This isn’t pedantry, it gets to the core of Englishness, a contradictory mix of nationalism and unionism. The most vivid example of this is the spate of hanging flags, Union Jacks and St George Crosses, from lamp posts in a movement to ‘Unite the Kingdom’. Much of this is wrapped up in a version of English patriotism which does little to distinguish itself from bad old-fashioned racism.

Contrast this to what Harold’s ‘we’ has become. The Wembley 1966 final was full of Union Jacks, the St George scarcely present. The tournament mascot  ‘World Cup Willy’ wore a Union Jack. Yes, the only time England has not only won, but hosted too a World Cup and the FA got our flag wrong! 

Few England fans this summer will make this mistake: the St George Cross is Universal, home and away. And in sheer numbers it will absolutely dwarf those of the lamp post hangers too.  And the purpose dwarves them too. A St George Cross celebrating a multicultural team managed by a German on its own doesn’t make for an anti-racist, Europeanised nation, but given the popular-political will is a very welcome first step in both directions.

In July 2024 Keir Starmer’s Labour Party won a landslide victory and just two years later Keir was there to celebrate when England for the second time lifted the World Cup at the New York New Jersey stadium. 

Well, that’s one Labour pledge all of England can get behind. 

Mark Perryman is the co-founder of the self-styled ‘ sporting outfitters of intellectual distinction’ aka Philosophy Football.

Special Offer The Philosophy Football Harold Wilson T-shirt is available to Labour Hub readers at 25% off and postage free. Quote coupon code LHWC26 at checkout. From here

Borders, Ballgames and Global Players


 June 5, 2026

Victor Wembenyama at 2025 NBA Cup. Photograph Source: Daiei Onoguchi – CC BY 4.0

The upcoming June 14 vote on limiting Switzerland’s population to 10 million is a daily reminder here in Geneva that nativist populism remains a powerful political force. In France, Marine Le Pen continues to build support on anti-immigration politics. Nigel Farage pushes similar anxieties in Britain. The AfD does the same in Germany. Donald Trump’s version is familiar: build walls, tighten borders, send ICE into cities. Across much of the West, hostility toward foreigners has become ordinary politics.

Which is why the recent announcement of the National Basketball Association’s All-NBA First Team was so striking. At the very moment politics is warning against outsiders, American sports is celebrating them. Four of the five players selected to the NBA’s top team were born outside the United States. The city game has gone global. (The phrase city game for basketball was popularized in Pete Axthelm’s The City Game, his classic account of New York basketball in the late 1960s.)

Chosen by a panel of 100 sportswriters and broadcasters covering the league, the All-NBA First Team included: Shai Gilgeous-Alexander of the Oklahoma City Thunder, from Canada; Nikola Jokić of the Denver Nuggets, from Serbia; Victor Wembanyama of the San Antonio Spurs, from France; Luka Dončić of the Los Angeles Lakers, from Slovenia. Only Cade Cunningham of the Detroit Pistons was American. Four of the league’s five best players were born abroad, representing four countries and starring in four different American cities.

That is not symbolic. It reflects a broader reality. As of the 2025–26 season, 135 NBA players were born outside the United States, the highest number in league history. They come from 43 countries across six continents. Roughly one in four players in the NBA is now international.

Now, for those who are not basketball fans, allow me to briefly explain the importance of basketball in the United States. It is one of America’s defining sports: invented in Springfield, Massachusetts, and perfected on playground courts like Rucker Park in Harlem. As Vinson Cunningham observed, “Basketball is one of New York’s great public spectacles: you can’t walk far without passing a hoop.” It is American in origin and mythology, embedded in the streets of New York, Detroit, Chicago, and Los Angeles. Yet the league’s brightest stars increasingly arrive with accents, translators, and passports from elsewhere.

My beloved New York Knicks reflect the same global pattern: OG Anunoby was born in London, Pacôme Dadiet in France, Ariel Hukporti in Germany, and Karl-Anthony Towns represents the Dominican Republic in international competition.

Although New York’s Madison Square Garden (MSG) is considered the sport’s Mecca, the sport reaches far beyond cities. Even in Midwestern rural states like Indiana, basketball courts are woven into everyday life in countless driveways. “Mr. Indiana Basketball” is a major statewide honor—closer to a civic title than a routine sports award. (For anyone curious about Indiana basketball culture, Gene Hackman’s Hoosiers remains the reference point.)

Basketball is not a simple sports niche—it is a major entertainment industry. The NBA Finals regularly draw between 10 and 20 million U.S. viewers per game. The NBA generates billions in annual revenue; franchise valuations are among the highest in global sports, with a huge merchandising market (jerseys, sneakers, etc.).

Basketball is not alone in this globalization. The pattern of more and more foreign stars repeats in what has long been considered the American sport, baseball. On Major League Baseball’s opening day in 2026, 249 players—26.3 percent of the league—were born outside the United States. The Dominican Republic led with 93 players, Venezuela had 60, Cuba 20, Canada 19, and Japan 14. Others came from Mexico, Puerto Rico, Panama, Curaçao, Colombia, South Korea, Australia, Aruba, the Bahamas, Honduras, Nicaragua, Taiwan, and South Africa.

The reigning king of American baseball is a non-American. Shohei Ohtani, born in Japan, is now arguably the most extraordinary player the sport has ever seen. Both an elite pitcher and an elite hitter, Ohtani rightly challenges Babe Ruth as the sport’s greatest player. He is already a four-time Most Valuable Player winner. More and more postgame interviews now happen through translators because many of the game’s biggest stars, like Ohtani, are not native English speakers.

Politicians increasingly tell voters to fear foreigners. In Switzerland, we are told non-Swiss workers cause traffic jams and drive up housing costs. But Switzerland’s own national soccer team offers a similar picture of globalization. Several of its most prominent players have dual citizenship or family roots abroad. Yet the same anti-immigration voters will root for the entire team during the upcoming World Cup.

Like Swiss soccer fans, Americans cheer foreign-born athletes not despite where they come from but because of what they bring: talent, discipline, style, and victory. Tens of thousands of fans in Oklahoma City rise for a Canadian. Denver adores a Serbian. San Antonio chants for a Frenchman. Los Angeles embraces a Slovenian. Baseball stadiums roar for a Japanese superstar.

Sports does not erase xenophobia. It does not resolve the asylum debate or settle border politics despite the Olympic ideal. There is an important paradox. The rhetoric of exclusion collides every day with a simpler reality: people admire excellence wherever it comes from when it helps their team win. The crowds see winners before they see nationality, even as many of them vote for politicians running on xenophobia. U.S. sports crowds—many of whom voted for Trump and admire his hard line on immigration—seem perfectly happy cheering non-Americans.

The NBA’s first team may say something larger about the country. Politicians may still campaign on borders and walls. Donald Trump and Stephen Miller may continue to denigrate foreigners, but America’s sports fans keep rooting for the world.

To understand the importance of the Knicks to New York, see The New Yorker editor David Remnick’s recent description of the first time the Knicks won the NBA crown: “May 8, 1970, was the night of all sporting New York nights,” he wrote. “Bliss it was in that dawn to be alive! So proclaimed the voices of the Knicks: John F. X. Condon at the Garden, Marv Albert on the air.”

How I remember that night! “Bliss it was to be alive.” After decades of waiting to see the Knicks back in the Finals and more than half a century since we last won the title, I just want my team to win this year, no matter who hits the winning baskets, American or otherwise. Go Knicks!

Daniel Warner is the author of An Ethic of Responsibility in International Relations. (Lynne Rienner). He lives in Geneva.