The findings, released Wednesday, indicate that favorable views of China now exceed those of the United States in 25 of the 36 countries and territories surveyed. The shift reflects changing perceptions during a period marked by geopolitical tensions, strained U.S. relations with some allies, and evolving views of China’s international role.

According to the survey, the United States is viewed more positively than China in only six countries.

Pew says global attitudes have shifted toward China

Pew surveyed more than 42,000 respondents across 35 countries, as well as the West Bank and east Jerusalem, between February and May. The polling period coincided with the conflict involving the United States, Israel and Iran.

Laura Silver, associate director of Pew’s Global Attitudes Research and one of the study’s researchers, said this is the first time since the organization began tracking international opinion that China has achieved a clear advantage over the United States in global favorability.

Silver said the change follows the fading impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on public perceptions and a broader decline in international confidence in the United States.

“There was just an actual relationship between the outbreak of the war and the sense that the U.S. is just not contributing to peace and stability and that people have less confidence in Donald Trump,” she said.

She also cited Trump’s comments about Greenland, the U.S. military raid that captured Venezuela’s then-leader Nicolás Maduro, and Washington’s handling of the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza as factors contributing to declining international approval.

“The U.S. has done a lot in terms of global engagement in recent months to years that is not being perceived positively internationally,” Silver said.

Xi receives stronger ratings than Trump in many countries

The survey found that respondents in 22 of the 36 countries and territories expressed greater confidence in Xi than Trump, including in Canada, Mexico, France, Germany and the United Kingdom. Even so, Pew noted that confidence in both leaders remained relatively low across many surveyed countries.

Silver said China has also benefited from comparisons with the United States, with respondents in many countries viewing Beijing as a more reliable international partner.

“By comparison, we know that China is seen to be a more reliable partner in many places. It’s more likely to be seen to contribute to global peace and stability,” she said.

The White House rejected the findings’ broader implications.

White House spokesperson Olivia Wales said Trump “has done more for global stability than anyone else,” pointing to what she described as the president’s role in “obliterated Iran’s nuclear facilities” and “eliminated hundreds of narcoterrorists.”

“President Trump is the leader of the free world, and thanks to his bold leadership the United States of America has never been stronger,” Wales said.

The Chinese Embassy in Washington said the survey “demonstrates that China’s governance achievements and development progress are widely recognized.”

Allied countries show significant changes in opinion

Some of the largest shifts were recorded among traditional U.S. allies.

In Canada, favorable views of the United States declined to 33% from 57% in 2023, while positive opinions of China increased from 14% to 44% over the same period.

Relations between Washington and Ottawa have been strained after Trump imposed tariffs on Canadian goods and repeatedly suggested Canada could become “the 51st state.”

Several major European countries—including France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Sweden and the Netherlands—also shifted toward viewing China more favorably than the United States.

In the United Kingdom, where about six in ten respondents viewed the United States positively in 2023, opinions of China and the United States are now roughly equal. Three years earlier, the United States held a 32-percentage-point advantage.

U.S. retains advantage on personal freedoms

Despite China’s improved standing, respondents continued to rate the United States more favorably on respect for personal freedoms, although Pew said that advantage has narrowed since 2021.

The report attributed the shrinking gap primarily to declining confidence that the U.S. government respects the personal freedoms of its own citizens rather than to a substantial improvement in perceptions of China’s record.

Israel recorded the strongest support for the United States among surveyed countries, with about eight in ten respondents expressing favorable views of America compared with 19% for China.

The other countries where the United States remained more popular than China were Japan, India, South Korea, the Philippines and Poland, although Pew found that favorable views of the United States have declined in those countries in recent years as well.

Pew said the survey carries margins of error ranging from 2.3 to 5.5 percentage points, depending on the country.

This report is based on reporting by The Associated Press.

Article Topics: China | United States | Global Public Opinion | Xi Jinping | Donald Trump | Pew Research Center | International Relations | Public Diplomacy

The post Global Survey Finds China and Xi Viewed More Favorably Than U.S. and Trump in Many Countries appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

China’s Commerce Ministry said exports of certain “dual-use” goods — products with both civilian and military applications — would be prohibited to 10 U.S. companies. The move follows a recent U.S. decision to place additional Chinese firms on a list of companies alleged to have links to China’s military.

Officials stated that the measures were intended to protect China’s national security and respond to what the ministry described as the U.S. government’s improper expansion of its list of Chinese military-linked companies.

The latest restrictions add to growing friction between Beijing and Washington over technology, defense industries, and national security concerns. The measures could affect supply chains connected to advanced manufacturing, aerospace, and critical minerals.

Export Restrictions Target Defense-Related Firms

According to China’s Commerce Ministry, Chinese companies will be barred from exporting dual-use products to the affected American firms. The ministry also said entities and individuals in third countries would not be permitted to transfer Chinese-origin dual-use goods to the sanctioned companies.

However, authorities indicated that export approvals could still be granted when shipments are considered genuinely necessary.

The companies named in the sanctions include drone manufacturers, aerospace firms, defense contractors, and companies involved in rare earth production. Among those listed are AVEOX, Red Cat Holdings, Teal Drones, IMSAR, Jaia Robotics, Ball Aerospace & Technologies, Oshkosh Defense, L3Harris Maritime Services, MP Materials, and USA Rare Earth.

Additional Procurement Restrictions Announced

In a separate action, China’s Finance Ministry said government entities would no longer be allowed to purchase products from 46 American companies.

The list includes multiple business units associated with major U.S. defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and General Dynamics.

The ministry’s statement did not provide a detailed explanation for the procurement ban.

Response to U.S. Technology Restrictions

Earlier this month, the U.S. Defense Department added several Chinese technology companies, including Alibaba and Baidu, to its list of firms that it says are connected to the Chinese military.

The designation prevents those companies from receiving U.S. military contracts.

Baidu rejected the allegation, describing claims that it is a military company as “totally baseless.”

China’s Commerce Ministry argued that the U.S. measures conflict with understandings reached during talks between Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump during Trump’s visit to China in May.

The latest actions underscore continued strategic competition between the two countries, with technology access, defense industries, and critical supply chains remaining key areas of dispute.

Tags: China, United States, Trade Dispute, Sanctions, Defense Industry, Technology, Xi Jinping, Donald Trump

The post China Targets U.S. Defense Firms With Export Curbs After New American Sanctions appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The debate centers on China, whose economic and geopolitical influence has expanded dramatically since the G7 was established in 1975. While the group was created as a gathering of leading industrial democracies to address global economic challenges, China’s rise has transformed the international landscape, making its absence increasingly noticeable.

The issue underscores a broader strategic question facing the world’s leading democracies: whether global challenges can be effectively addressed without direct participation from the world’s second-largest economy.

China’s Economic Rise Changes the Equation

When leaders first met at the Château de Rambouillet outside Paris in 1975, China was undergoing significant political and economic upheaval under the leadership of Mao Zedong. At the time, the country was far from becoming a central player in the global economy.

Over the decades that followed, China experienced rapid economic growth, emerging as a major manufacturing center and trading power. Today, its economy exceeds those of most G7 members, with only the United States maintaining a larger economic output among the group’s countries.

John Kirton, a University of Toronto specialist on the G7, said China’s transformation has prompted increasing discussion about whether the organization would benefit from Chinese participation.

He described China’s evolution from a relatively limited economic actor into a major global force, arguing that some observers see potential advantages in including Beijing within the forum.

Democracy Remains a Core Membership Principle

Despite China’s economic weight, membership in the G7 has traditionally been linked to democratic governance.

The leaders who established the group emphasized their shared responsibility for governing open and democratic societies committed to individual liberty and social progress. That principle has remained a defining characteristic of the organization.

Under the leadership of Chinese President Xi Jinping, China continues to operate under a one-party political system led by the Communist Party. Various international assessments of political freedoms and civil liberties place China well below G7 countries on measures of democratic governance.

The democratic foundation of the group remains one of the most significant obstacles to any discussion about expanding membership to include China.

China Expected to Dominate Summit Discussions

Although China is not a participant, its influence is expected to feature prominently in discussions among G7 leaders.

China’s large trade surplus, control of critical mineral supplies, advances in technology, expanding military capabilities, and role as the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases have made it a central issue for many advanced economies.

French President Emmanuel Macron, hosting the summit, has allocated time for discussions on trade relations with China amid concerns that growing Chinese exports could place additional pressure on industries in G7 countries.

Cédric Dupont of the Geneva Graduate Institute said China may represent one of the few issues capable of generating broad agreement among leaders who have recently differed on several international questions.

Beijing Watches Closely

China’s government has previously criticized the G7 as an exclusive grouping that reflects outdated geopolitical divisions.

Ahead of the summit, China’s Foreign Ministry told The Associated Press that the G7 should promote international cooperation rather than deepen confrontation and division.

At the same time, analysts note that Beijing continues to pay close attention to the forum because of the substantial economic, technological, financial, and military influence represented by its members.

Wang Zichen, a Beijing-based analyst, said Chinese officials view the G7 as increasingly aligned with Western efforts to address challenges associated with China’s growing power.

Concerns Over Membership Expansion

While some observers argue that China’s participation could improve international cooperation, others believe its inclusion would undermine the group’s ability to operate effectively.

Analysts point to differences over governance, security issues, and foreign policy positions involving Russia, Iran, and other major international concerns. They also warn that China’s economic influence could create divisions among existing members.

Kirton argued that Chinese membership could test the unity of the organization by encouraging countries to pursue individual economic advantages rather than collective positions.

Chris Alden of the London School of Economics and Political Science similarly suggested that adding China would make consensus-building within the group considerably more difficult.

Russia’s Experience Still Shapes the Debate

The G7’s previous expansion remains a significant factor in discussions about membership.

Russia joined the group in 1998, creating what became known as the G8. However, Moscow’s participation ended after Russian President Vladimir Putin’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, leading the remaining members to suspend Russia’s involvement.

The experience reinforced concerns among many G7 governments about extending full membership to countries that do not share the democratic principles that underpin the organization.

As global power continues to shift, China’s exclusion remains both a symbol of the G7’s democratic identity and a reminder of the challenges facing international institutions in an increasingly multipolar world.

Tags: China, G7, Donald Trump, Xi Jinping, Global Economy

The post China’s Absence From G7 Summits Highlights a Growing Global Dilemma appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

While Trump’s state visit in 2017 emphasized economic negotiations and symbolic diplomacy between the world’s two largest economies, Putin’s repeated engagements with Chinese leader Xi Jinping have increasingly focused on geopolitical coordination, energy ties, and opposition to Western-led alliances. Together, the visits illustrate how China has positioned itself as both an economic superpower and a strategic balancing force in a changing international system.

The differences between the two leaders’ visits also reveal the contrasting nature of China’s relationships with the United States and Russia. Washington and Beijing remain deeply interconnected economically despite ongoing rivalry, while Moscow and Beijing have developed closer political and strategic alignment amid deteriorating relations with the West.

At the same time, the visits share important similarities. Both were carefully choreographed displays of diplomacy designed to project stability, leadership, and international influence. Both also highlighted China’s preference for long-term statecraft built around symbolism, hierarchy, and strategic signaling.

Historical Context Behind U.S.-China Relations

Trump’s 2017 state visit to China occurred during a period of growing tension between Washington and Beijing over trade imbalances, intellectual property concerns, and industrial policy. However, the relationship at the time still operated within an established framework of engagement developed over decades.

Since the normalization of diplomatic relations in 1979, economic interdependence between the United States and China had expanded rapidly. According to World Bank and IMF data, China’s rise as a manufacturing and export powerhouse became deeply tied to global markets, including American consumers and corporations.

Trump entered office criticizing existing trade arrangements and arguing that China had benefited disproportionately from globalization. Reuters and AP reporting at the time noted that the administration sought to reduce the U.S. trade deficit and pressure Beijing on market access and technology practices.

Despite the confrontational rhetoric, Trump’s visit retained many elements of traditional state diplomacy. Chinese officials organized an elaborate state reception in Beijing’s Forbidden City, emphasizing ceremony and personal engagement between Trump and Xi.

The symbolism reflected Beijing’s long-standing preference for relationship-based diplomacy. Chinese leadership has often used large-scale state visits to demonstrate political respect and reinforce the importance of bilateral stability, even amid disagreements.

Putin’s Visits Reflect Strategic Alignment

Putin’s visits to China have unfolded in a markedly different context. Russia’s relations with Western countries deteriorated significantly after the 2014 annexation of Crimea and deepened further following the 2022 war in Ukraine.

As Western sanctions expanded, Moscow increasingly turned toward China for economic, diplomatic, and strategic support. Bloomberg and Financial Times reporting have highlighted how China became a critical trading partner for Russia, particularly in energy exports, technology imports, and financial transactions.

Unlike Trump’s visit, which centered heavily on trade negotiations and bilateral disputes, Putin’s engagements with Xi have frequently emphasized shared geopolitical narratives. The two governments have criticized what they describe as Western unilateralism and advocated for a more multipolar international order.

Joint statements issued during Putin’s visits often stress sovereignty, non-interference, and opposition to U.S.-led security structures. Analysts cited by Reuters and BBC News have noted that these themes align closely with both countries’ broader strategic messaging.

The Russia-China relationship, however, is not a formal military alliance. While cooperation has deepened, both governments maintain independent foreign policy priorities. China has also sought to avoid direct violations of major Western sanctions regimes that could threaten its access to global financial markets.

Economic Ties Define the U.S.-China Relationship

One of the clearest distinctions between the Trump and Putin visits lies in the structure of each country’s relationship with China.

The United States and China remain economically intertwined on a scale unmatched by Russia-China trade relations. Even during periods of political tension, bilateral commerce between Washington and Beijing has involved hundreds of billions of dollars annually.

Trump’s visit featured major business announcements involving aviation, agriculture, and energy. Chinese state media and U.S. officials highlighted large commercial agreements, although economists later debated how much of the announced investment translated into binding commitments.

The economic dimension of the visit reflected the reality that both countries depend heavily on each other despite strategic competition. U.S. companies rely on Chinese manufacturing networks and consumer markets, while China remains connected to global demand, dollar-based finance, and advanced technology systems dominated by Western economies.

By contrast, Russia’s economic relationship with China is narrower and more concentrated in commodities and energy. Russia supplies oil, natural gas, and raw materials, while China exports manufactured goods, electronics, and industrial products.

According to data cited by the International Energy Agency and Reuters, China became one of the largest buyers of Russian energy following Western sanctions on Moscow. This helped Russia offset some lost European markets while allowing China to secure discounted energy supplies.

Diplomacy and Political Theater

Both Trump and Putin experienced highly choreographed diplomatic receptions in China, but the political messaging differed significantly.

Trump’s visit was designed in part to manage tensions while showcasing personal diplomacy between two powerful leaders. Chinese officials used ceremonial events, cultural performances, and state banquets to cultivate rapport with the U.S. president.

The emphasis on spectacle reflected Beijing’s understanding of Trump’s political style and media-focused leadership approach. Analysts at the time noted that China sought to reduce immediate friction by emphasizing respect and symbolic partnership.

Putin’s visits, meanwhile, have often conveyed ideological and strategic solidarity. State media coverage in both countries has highlighted friendship narratives, military cooperation, and resistance to Western pressure.

Images of Xi and Putin together have become central symbols of an emerging partnership between authoritarian major powers. AP News reporting has noted that both leaders frequently emphasize their personal relationship as a stabilizing factor in bilateral ties.

China’s diplomatic approach in both cases demonstrates a broader pattern: tailoring statecraft to the political priorities of visiting leaders while reinforcing Beijing’s image as a major global power center.

Military and Security Dimensions

Security concerns also distinguish the two relationships.

The United States and China are strategic competitors in the Indo-Pacific region. Disputes over Taiwan, the South China Sea, technology restrictions, cybersecurity, and military positioning have intensified over the past decade.

Trump’s presidency saw the beginning of a sharper strategic shift in Washington toward long-term competition with China. Although the 2017 visit itself emphasized diplomacy and economic dialogue, it occurred against the backdrop of growing U.S. concerns about Chinese military expansion and technological ambitions.

Russia and China, by comparison, increasingly cooperate on defense issues. Joint military exercises, strategic bomber patrols, and security consultations have expanded in recent years.

Still, analysts cited by the BBC and Financial Times have argued that limits remain in the partnership. Historical mistrust, demographic imbalances along the shared border, and differing long-term interests continue to shape the relationship.

China has also remained cautious about becoming directly entangled in Russia’s military conflicts. Beijing has attempted to balance its partnership with Moscow against its broader economic interests and international reputation.

Global Implications of the Two Relationships

The Trump and Putin visits reflected two different challenges facing China’s foreign policy.

With the United States, China faces competition with another global superpower possessing comparable economic influence, military reach, and technological capabilities. The relationship combines rivalry with deep mutual dependence.

With Russia, China occupies a comparatively stronger economic position. Moscow increasingly depends on Chinese markets and financial networks, giving Beijing greater leverage within the partnership.

These dynamics have broader implications for the international system. The U.S.-China relationship shapes global trade, finance, technology standards, and geopolitical stability. The Russia-China partnership influences energy markets, security alignments, and debates over the future structure of international institutions.

International organizations including the IMF and World Bank have repeatedly warned that fragmentation between major powers could disrupt global economic growth and increase instability across supply chains and financial systems.

Why the Comparisons Continue to Matter

Comparisons between Trump’s and Putin’s visits to China continue because they reveal how Beijing manages relationships with competing global powers. The visits also illustrate China’s broader diplomatic strategy of balancing economic pragmatism with geopolitical ambition.

The contrast between the two relationships highlights how China adapts its diplomacy according to shifting global circumstances. Engagement with the United States has centered on managing competition without complete economic rupture, while relations with Russia increasingly involve strategic coordination amid broader confrontation with the West.

At the same time, both visits demonstrated China’s growing confidence on the world stage. Beijing positioned itself not simply as a regional power, but as a central actor capable of shaping major international relationships across economics, diplomacy, and security.

As geopolitical competition continues to evolve, the significance of these diplomatic encounters extends beyond ceremonial symbolism. They offer insight into the changing balance of power and the increasingly complex relationships defining the international order.

The post The Differences — and Similarities — in the Trump and Putin Visits to China appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Speaking after a multi-day summit in Beijing, Trump said he had not yet decided whether to move forward with the proposed military package for Taiwan, a self-governed island claimed by China. The issue emerged as one of the most sensitive topics during the talks, according to international reports.

The potential arms sale, reportedly valued at around $14 billion, has become a critical test of the administration’s approach toward China as both governments attempt to balance economic cooperation with growing geopolitical rivalry in the Indo-Pacific.

Taiwan Remains Central to Strategic Rivalry

Chinese officials reiterated during the summit that Taiwan remains a “core interest” for Beijing and warned that mishandling the issue could destabilize relations between the world’s two largest economies. According to Chinese government accounts cited by international media, Xi warned that tensions surrounding Taiwan could lead to broader confrontation if not carefully managed.

Trump acknowledged that Taiwan featured prominently in discussions but stopped short of committing to the arms package. He said the United States wanted to avoid a broader conflict in the region while continuing diplomatic engagement with Beijing.

The administration had previously approved an $11 billion weapons package for Taipei in late 2025, while lawmakers later backed an additional package requiring presidential approval before proceeding to Congress.

Regional Allies Watch Closely

Analysts say uncertainty surrounding the arms deal is being closely monitored across Asia, where regional governments view Taiwan as central to broader Indo-Pacific security.

According to Reuters and Financial Times reporting, Trump’s willingness to discuss Taiwan-related military sales directly with Xi has raised concerns among some US allies and policy experts who fear it could weaken longstanding American commitments to Taiwan’s defense posture.

The issue also intersects with longstanding US policy frameworks, including the “Six Assurances” established during the Reagan administration, which state that Washington would not formally consult Beijing regarding arms sales to Taiwan.

Taiwanese officials have continued to publicly emphasize strong ties with Washington. Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te recently described relations with the United States as “rock solid” amid renewed Chinese pressure and military activity near the island.

Broader Diplomatic Agenda Emerges

Despite disagreements over Taiwan, the summit produced signs of limited diplomatic progress on other strategic issues, including trade and nuclear arms discussions.

Trump said Xi responded positively to proposals involving future nuclear arms negotiations among the United States, China, and Russia, though analysts cautioned that significant differences remain between the countries’ military capabilities and strategic priorities.

The leaders also discussed tensions involving Iran and global energy security, including concerns over stability in the Strait of Hormuz, according to multiple reports.

Observers say the summit reflected a broader effort by both governments to prevent further deterioration in relations while preserving leverage on key geopolitical disputes, particularly Taiwan.

The post Trump Considers Taiwan Arms Deal After High-Stakes Summit With Xi Jinping appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The summit, scheduled for May 14–15, follows a fragile trade truce that reduced tariff pressure after years of escalating economic restrictions and retaliatory measures. Reporting from the Associated Press indicated that both governments are expected to extend the current tariff pause while pursuing narrower economic agreements rather than a broad breakthrough.

Although Trump has publicly promoted the negotiations as evidence of improving ties with Beijing, trade volumes between the two countries remain significantly below previous levels. China has reduced imports of some American goods while diversifying supply chains and strengthening trade relationships elsewhere in Asia, the Middle East, and Africa.

The meeting also takes place amid mounting geopolitical strain caused by the Iran conflict, growing competition over artificial intelligence, and renewed tensions surrounding Taiwan. Analysts say these overlapping disputes have transformed the summit into a broader test of whether Washington and Beijing can manage strategic rivalry without triggering deeper economic or military confrontation.

Trade Stability Masks Deeper Economic Friction

The recent easing of tariffs has provided temporary relief to manufacturers, exporters, and financial markets after months of uncertainty. According to Associated Press reporting, negotiators are discussing additional Chinese purchases of U.S. agricultural products and commercial aircraft while Washington considers limited adjustments to export restrictions.

Despite those efforts, structural disagreements remain unresolved. U.S. officials continue pressing China over industrial subsidies, access to rare earth minerals, and restrictions affecting advanced semiconductor technology. Beijing, meanwhile, opposes American export controls that it argues are designed to slow China’s technological development.

Economists note that the two countries are increasingly reshaping supply chains rather than restoring the deep integration that defined earlier decades of globalization. Chinese exports to the United States have continued to decline, while U.S. companies have shifted portions of production to countries including Vietnam, India, and Mexico.

Taiwan and Regional Security Raise Diplomatic Stakes

Taiwan is expected to remain one of the most sensitive topics during the summit. Beijing has intensified pressure on Washington to reduce military and diplomatic support for the self-governing island, which China claims as its own territory.

Trump’s approach toward Taiwan has generated uncertainty among regional allies after he signaled a more transactional foreign policy stance during his second term. While his administration approved major arms sales to Taipei, analysts interviewed by AP warned that Chinese officials may test whether Washington is willing to soften its position in exchange for economic concessions.

At the same time, tensions linked to the Iran conflict have complicated the broader diplomatic environment. Washington is urging Beijing to use its influence with Tehran to help stabilize energy markets and reduce pressure on shipping routes through the Strait of Hormuz, a corridor critical to China’s oil imports.

Strategic Competition Continues Beyond Trade

The summit reflects a wider shift in global geopolitics in which economic negotiations are increasingly tied to national security and technological competition. Chinese officials have sought to present Beijing as a stable international actor capable of balancing global tensions, contrasting that image with what they describe as unpredictability in U.S. foreign policy.

Meanwhile, the White House continues to frame China as America’s principal long-term strategic competitor despite the temporary easing of tariff disputes. Analysts at the Council on Foreign Relations and other institutions noted that both governments appear focused more on managing rivalry than resolving it.

Business leaders accompanying the U.S. delegation are expected to push for greater market access and more predictable trade rules, but few observers anticipate major structural agreements emerging from the summit. Instead, diplomats and analysts widely expect incremental measures aimed at preventing further deterioration in relations while preserving economic stability ahead of politically sensitive election cycles in both countries.

The outcome of the Beijing meeting is likely to shape not only bilateral economic policy but also broader questions surrounding global supply chains, regional security in Asia, and the future balance of power between Washington and Beijing.

The post Trump and Xi Ease Trade Tensions but Deep Divisions Shadow Beijing Summit appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The post China Expands Iran Diplomacy Ahead of High-Stakes Trump-Xi Summit appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

A Chinese military court sentenced former defense ministers Wei Fenghe and Li Shangfu to death with a two-year reprieve after convicting them of bribery-related offenses, according to state media reports cited by The Associated Press, Reuters and Xinhua. Wei was found guilty of accepting bribes, while Li was convicted of both taking and offering bribes.

Under Chinese law, suspended death sentences are commonly commuted to life imprisonment after two years if the individual commits no further serious offenses during the reprieve period. However, Chinese courts reportedly ruled that neither former minister would be eligible for parole or additional sentence reductions once their penalties convert to life terms.

The sentencing marks a dramatic escalation in Xi’s long-running anti-corruption campaign, which has increasingly targeted the People’s Liberation Army and senior defense procurement networks. Analysts say the purge reflects both efforts to combat entrenched corruption and attempts to reinforce political loyalty within China’s military hierarchy.

Xi Jinping Expands Grip Over Military Leadership

The convictions come amid a broader restructuring of China’s military leadership under Xi Jinping, who has steadily consolidated authority over the armed forces since taking power in 2012.

According to AP and Reuters reporting, China’s once-powerful Central Military Commission has been significantly reshaped following multiple purges, investigations and unexplained disappearances involving senior officers. Both Wei and Li previously served on the commission, the Communist Party body that oversees the military and answers directly to Xi.

Li’s downfall attracted particular international attention because he served as defense minister for only several months before disappearing from public view in 2023 and later being formally removed from office. Before becoming defense minister, Li oversaw military procurement and aerospace development programs and had previously been sanctioned by the United States over Chinese purchases of Russian military equipment.

Wei, who preceded Li as defense minister, was among China’s highest-ranking military officials and played a key role in overseeing the modernization of China’s missile and nuclear capabilities through the People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force.

Security analysts say the sentencing demonstrates Xi’s determination to remove officials suspected of disloyalty or corruption even at the highest levels of military command.

Military Readiness and Strategic Stability Under Scrutiny

The expanding purge has also fueled questions among foreign defense analysts about the operational impact on China’s military readiness and long-term strategic planning.

Reuters and the Financial Times reported that more than 100 senior military officials and defense-industry executives have reportedly been investigated, dismissed or removed since 2023, affecting key branches including the Rocket Force and procurement sectors central to China’s modernization goals.

Analysts interviewed by international outlets said repeated leadership removals could disrupt command continuity and weaken morale within the two-million-member People’s Liberation Army. Others argue the campaign may ultimately strengthen centralized discipline and improve accountability inside military procurement systems long viewed as vulnerable to corruption.

The purge comes as China continues expanding military pressure around Taiwan, increasing naval operations in the South China Sea and accelerating development of advanced missile, cyber and aerospace capabilities. Some Western analysts believe Beijing views internal discipline as essential to preparing the military for potential future regional crises.

International Implications Extend Beyond Corruption Cases

The sentencing of two former defense ministers also carries broader geopolitical significance as China seeks to project military strength while navigating growing strategic competition with the United States and its regional allies.

Foreign governments and defense observers have closely monitored the repeated disappearances and investigations involving senior Chinese military officials because the removals have created uncertainty over the stability of Beijing’s defense leadership structure. The rapid turnover has complicated military diplomacy and disrupted communication channels between China and Western defense officials.

At the same time, Chinese authorities continue portraying the anti-corruption campaign as evidence of institutional discipline and centralized party control. State media framed the convictions as proof that no military official is beyond accountability under Communist Party oversight.

The unusually harsh punishments are expected to reinforce Xi’s broader message that political loyalty, ideological discipline and centralized authority remain central priorities as China navigates intensifying regional tensions and a rapidly evolving global security environment.

The post China’s Military Purge Deepens as Former Defense Chiefs Receive Suspended Death Sentences appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff confirmed that the missile was launched eastward and landed in waters between the Korean Peninsula and Japan. No damage to neighboring countries was reported, and further details such as flight range and altitude were not immediately disclosed.

Strategic Timing Before APEC Summit

The launch comes at a sensitive moment for regional diplomacy. South Korea is preparing to host the APEC summit in Gyeongju from October 30 to November 1, where discussions will focus on economic integration and trade. Although the event does not include military components, it attracts significant geopolitical attention due to the participation of global leaders.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump was expected to visit South Korea ahead of the summit for bilateral meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping and South Korean President Lee Jae Myung. However, South Korean officials have indicated that Trump is unlikely to attend the main conference.

Analysts suggest that Pyongyang’s missile launch could be intended as a show of strength to reinforce its demand for recognition as a nuclear weapons state. “North Korea often stages such provocations ahead of major diplomatic gatherings to assert its relevance and bargaining power,” said a defense expert from Seoul National University.

Pattern of Missile Activity and Diplomatic Maneuvering

Wednesday’s test marks North Korea’s first missile launch since May 8, when it tested short-range systems simulating nuclear counterstrikes against U.S. and South Korean forces. It is also the first test conducted under President Lee’s administration, which took office in June with a pledge to promote peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has intensified weapons development since diplomatic talks with Trump collapsed in 2019 over the issue of U.S.-led economic sanctions. The breakdown of negotiations marked a turning point, pushing Pyongyang to prioritize military capability over dialogue.

In recent months, however, Kim has signaled a conditional openness to returning to talks if Washington abandons its demand for full denuclearization — a key sticking point in past negotiations. Trump, for his part, has expressed optimism about potential renewed diplomacy.

Showcasing Military Power and International Alignment

Earlier this month, Pyongyang unveiled a new intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) during a grand military parade marking the 80th anniversary of the ruling Workers’ Party. The event was attended by high-profile guests, including Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin, underscoring North Korea’s growing alignment with Beijing and Moscow amid ongoing global tensions.

State media described the newly displayed Hwasong-20 ICBM as North Korea’s “most powerful nuclear strategic weapon system.” Defense analysts believe the missile is designed to carry multiple nuclear warheads, making it capable of overwhelming U.S. missile defenses. Experts also warned that Pyongyang could conduct a test launch of the weapon in the coming months.

“The display of the Hwasong-20 sends a clear message: North Korea intends to solidify its status as a nuclear power,” said Dr. Park Jae-hyun, a Seoul-based military analyst. “By showcasing advanced systems, Kim aims to enhance his leverage in any future negotiations with Washington.”

Growing Diplomatic Ambitions

North Korea’s recent activities appear to be part of a broader strategy to elevate Kim Jong Un’s international stature. His joint appearances with Xi and Putin at regional events have reinforced an image of Pyongyang’s engagement with global powers despite ongoing UN sanctions and diplomatic isolation.

For Seoul, the missile launch represents a renewed security challenge. President Lee’s administration has emphasized both deterrence and dialogue, seeking to balance military preparedness with the pursuit of peace. The South Korean government has condemned the launch, calling it a violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions that prohibit North Korea from testing ballistic missile technologies.

International observers are watching closely to see whether the latest provocation leads to renewed tensions or renewed diplomatic overtures. While Washington and Seoul have maintained that denuclearization remains the goal, Pyongyang’s insistence on nuclear state recognition continues to complicate negotiations.

Regional and Global Implications

The timing of the missile launch, just before a major multilateral economic summit, adds to geopolitical uncertainty in East Asia. Japan, the United States, and South Korea have stepped up trilateral security coordination in recent months, citing North Korea’s evolving nuclear and missile capabilities as a shared concern.

The United Nations, meanwhile, has warned that North Korea’s continued weapons testing undermines regional stability and diverts resources from urgent humanitarian needs within the country. According to the UN World Food Programme, North Korea faces ongoing food shortages affecting millions of its citizens.

Despite growing global condemnation, Pyongyang remains defiant, viewing its missile program as essential to national defense and regime survival. As the APEC summit approaches, attention will turn to how regional leaders respond — and whether this latest test signals a new phase in North Korea’s long-standing strategy of provocation and negotiation.

Source: AP News – North Korea has fired a ballistic missile toward the east, Seoul says

The post North Korea Conducts First Ballistic Missile Test in Five Months Ahead of Key Regional Summit appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

July 25, 2025 – 9:18 AM

In a high-stakes summit marked by growing distrust and unresolved disputes, the European Union and China managed to issue a rare joint commitment on climate change—but little else. Held Thursday in Beijing, the bilateral meeting was dominated by friction over trade imbalances, Ukraine, and competing global strategies, leaving both sides at odds despite their shared environmental concerns.

Climate change becomes rare point of agreement

Amid a strained diplomatic atmosphere, the EU and China agreed to a joint declaration urging stronger action to fight climate change. Both parties reaffirmed their support for the Paris Agreement and called for ambitious global efforts leading into the COP30 summit in Brazil.

“In the fluid and turbulent international situation today, it is crucial that all countries, notably the major economies, maintain policy continuity and stability and step up efforts to address climate change,” the joint statement read.

Chinese President Xi Jinping and top EU officials, including European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa, underscored their intent to coordinate more closely on environmental issues—offering a narrow but notable area of cooperation amid broader discord.

Trade tensions dominate the summit

The climate agreement stood in stark contrast to tense exchanges over trade. Von der Leyen called for a more balanced and reciprocal relationship, noting that while cooperation had deepened, economic imbalances had worsened.

“We have reached an inflection point. Rebalancing our bilateral relation is essential,” she said in her opening remarks, pointing to the EU’s €300 billion trade deficit with China.

China’s rapid export growth—particularly in green technology and electric vehicles (EVs)—has alarmed EU industries and prompted calls for stronger trade defenses. European automakers are especially concerned about losing ground to heavily subsidized Chinese EVs, which are rapidly gaining market share across the bloc.

No progress on Ukraine, human rights, or cyber concerns

Despite repeated pleas, the EU failed to sway Beijing on its neutral stance toward Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Costa urged China to leverage its influence over Moscow, echoing a long-standing European demand. But Xi avoided direct mention of the conflict and instead emphasized global stability and the need for “setting aside differences and seeking common ground.”

The summit also offered no breakthroughs on other contentious issues, including alleged Chinese cyberattacks, espionage, export controls on rare earth minerals, and concerns over human rights violations in regions such as Xinjiang, Tibet, and Hong Kong.

Von der Leyen and Costa reportedly raised these matters behind closed doors, but China offered no indication of shifting its position. Instead, Xi criticized the EU’s restrictive trade measures and urged Brussels to provide a “fair business environment” for Chinese firms operating in Europe.

U.S. pressure complicates EU-China ties

The summit took place against the backdrop of increasing geopolitical pressure from the United States. The EU is navigating a delicate path between Washington’s hardline approach to Beijing and its own economic interests with China.

“Europe is being very careful not to antagonize President Trump even further by looking maybe too close to China,” said Fabian Zuleeg, chief economist at the European Policy Center. “It will be very hard to achieve something concrete.”

EU leaders are also grappling with the threat of new U.S. tariffs and global economic volatility, which add urgency to their push for trade diversification and strategic autonomy.

Incremental gains on rare earths and minerals

One minor concession came from China’s agreement to “upgrade” its export system for critical minerals, which are vital for the EU’s green transition. Von der Leyen announced a new supply mechanism to fast-track exports of rare earth materials, although details remain scarce.

Analysts expressed skepticism. “It’s unlikely to be a miracle solution for what may become a go-to coercion tool for Beijing in the years ahead,” said Noah Barkin of the Rhodium Group, referencing China’s past use of rare earth exports as geopolitical leverage.

China’s curbs on critical minerals have previously disrupted global supply chains, affecting industries from electronics to electric vehicles. The EU, heavily reliant on China for these resources, is working to reduce that dependency.

Retaliatory trade actions deepen rift

In response to the EU’s tariffs on Chinese EVs, Beijing has launched investigations into European pork, dairy products, and luxury spirits such as French cognac and armagnac. These moves, along with concerns over tighter EU regulations on medical devices and other industries, reflect escalating trade retaliation.

China also bristled at the EU’s latest sanctions over Ukraine, which included two Chinese banks. In a statement, the Commerce Ministry pledged to take “necessary measures to resolutely safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises and financial institutions.”

Europe pivots to broader alliances

Increasingly wary of relying on either the U.S. or China, the EU is pursuing trade partnerships beyond the world’s two largest economies. Ahead of the Beijing talks, von der Leyen and Costa traveled to Japan to launch a new economic alliance.

The EU is also finalizing trade agreements with South American countries, Mexico, and Indonesia, in a bid to expand its strategic options and reduce economic vulnerability.

“Both Europe and Japan see a world around us where protectionist instincts grow, weaknesses get weaponized, and every dependency exploited,” von der Leyen said in Tokyo. “So it is normal that two like-minded partners come together to make each other stronger.”

A summit of low expectations—and limited results

Originally planned as a two-day meeting, the summit was cut down to a single day with little fanfare. Analysts and officials had forecasted low expectations—and the results largely confirmed them.

“There’s clearly a sense of frustration on the European side after years of being ignored by Beijing,” said Barkin. “We’ll likely see more assertive trade tools rolled out in the coming months.”

Despite the modest progress on climate, the overall tone of the summit underscored the EU’s growing impatience with what it views as unfair economic practices and geopolitical intransigence from Beijing.

Final takeaway

The EU-China summit reaffirmed the global importance of cooperation on climate—but also highlighted the deep and growing rift on nearly every other front. As both powers brace for more challenges ahead, their relationship remains stuck in a cycle of strategic rivalry, economic dependency, and cautious diplomacy.

Source: AP News – Europe and China agree to take action on climate change and nothing else in tense Beijing summit

The post EU-China summit yields climate deal amid deep tensions appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.