military

On its way to increasing military production, Spain already has two new candidates: Seat and Ford

by

Europe rearms. The war in Ukraine and the constant pressure from the United States Government for European countries to increase their defense spending has driven a rearmament that crosses Europe and has raised blisters among the nations that invest the least in defense. One of them is Spain. But Spain, like many other European countries, is already looking for spaces to increase its weapons production. And he has an idea: car factories. What has happened? Spain is already considering using car factories to promote its military modernization programs. That’s what it says Expansiona medium that points to internal Defense sources as the voices that advance the conversations that the Government would have had with companies such as Ford and Seat. According to this medium, the conversations are part of the implementation of “the budgets and sizing of the new military modernization programs (PEM) that are going to be launched.” The objective is to define the budget to be used and where it could go, with the intention of presenting them around summer and assigning them at the end of the year. Seat and Ford? That Seat and Ford are the first to be mentioned makes a lot of sense. With its conversion towards the electric carMartorell planned to reduce staff and resize its facilities. In 2022 they estimated a surplus of almost 2,000 direct jobs and with a commitment to new technology, the El Prat plant focused on gearboxes is one of the most notable. For its part, Ford seems to be looking for a new future to its Almussafes plant or, at least, part of it. The company has significantly reduced its production and, although it has confirmed the assembly of a new modeleverything indicates that Ford does not fully trust the plant. In fact, the latest rumors suggested that The Chinese company Geely wanted to take over part of the facilities. With a view to Defense. Although there is now open talk of converting part of the plants of these two companies into spaces to produce military material, the truth is that this idea has been floating around Seat for a few weeks. Last March it already emerged that Seat negotiated with Indra to manufacture light military vehicles. The agreement, they assured in Five Dayswould have the approval of the Government, which already stated last year that the reconversion of the automobile industrial sector could involve, at least in part, supporting Defense. It also coincides with the increase in Indra’s investments in the military field. Not only in Spain. Reconditioning automobile facilities to produce war material is not an idea that was born in Spain, far from it. In Germany, there have been negotiations that one of the Volkswagen plants begins to manufacture tanks. Last year there was also talk of Renault’s turnaround, pioneer in tank productionto manufacture drones bound for Ukraine. And not just vehicles. Last March there was already talk of the possibility that Volkswagen will start producing parts for missiles at its Osnabrück plant, according to Financial Times. The intention is that trucks would leave their facilities to transport them but also basic equipment such as shuttles or electrical generators to activate them. A key moment. If governments are looking with eager eyes at European automobile plants, it is because they know that the industry is not going through its best moment. The conversion to electric cars points to massive layoffsespecially because they lack a good part of the mechanical components that are present in any combustion car. Furthermore, its simplification points to shorter assembly times, a greater presence of robots and less human capital. These massive layoffs could be saved, at least in part, with the reconversion of these plants. It must be taken into account that manufacturing in Europe is more expensive than doing so in Asia or countries with preferential trade agreements with Europe such as Morocco either Türkiye. This is moving part of European production to these countries. Especially the smaller ones that are more complicated to make profitable. Spain is of the countries that are suffering the least from the blow because, at the level of salaries and energy costs, we are more competitive than plants from Germany or France. However, both Volkswagen with Seat and Ford, Stellantis either mercedes They have dropped that they are willing to reduce their workforce and production in our country. Photo | Caesar and seat In Xataka | Ford invested 1 billion to produce electric cars in Europe. Now it will invest money in laying off 1,000 employees

Someone has calculated which countries in the world have increased their military spending the most and there is a surprise: Spain is in the lead

by

With the beating of war drums in the background, the invasion of Ukraine encystedthe tension climbing in the Middle East and Donald Trump feinting with removing the US from NATO at the same time required more investment military to its partners, in 2025 the world has chosen a clear path: spend more money on defense. Quite a bit more. SIPRI calculations show that global military spending increased by 2.9% last year to almost 2.9 trillion dollars. This increase is largely explained by the effort made in Asia, Russia and Europe, where an unexpected protagonist stands out: Spain. Despite the differences With the leadership of NATO and the loud friction with Trump, the reality is that Spain is one of the countries that has increased its investment most clearly and is already in the “Top 15” in volume of war spending. What has happened? Which the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) has just published a study on military spending in 2025. It is a valuable tool because it helps us understand two things: how much the planet is investing in strengthening its war capacity and, more importantly, how that flow of money is distributed geographically. Reading it is particularly interesting in Spain for another reason: it shows that, despite the friction that Madrid has had with the White House and the address of NATO on account of military spending, Spain has made a notable investment effort. In fact, on the SIPRI list it stands out as one of the countries that has increased its defense spending the most, surpassing other European partners. Click on the image to go to the tweet. How much does Spain invest? If we base ourselves on the SIPRI data, 34,256 million of euros. The figure is important because of its scope, but above all because of the trend it shows: it shows that last year military spending increased by 50% in Spain. If we look back even further, to 2016, the increase is 122%. It is also the first time Since the mid-90s, the allocation for weapons exceeds 2% of GDP. If these data were not sufficient in themselves, they stand out even more when compared with the rest of the countries analyzed. Although the US, China and Russia lead the investment effort in terms of spending volume, when we look at the increase in spending there is only one nation that exceeds 50% of Spain. Which? Belgium, with an increase of 59%, although its level of spending is much lower than that of Spain (14.5 billion dollars). In fact, the increase in investment has allowed our country to position itself in the global “TOP 15”, behind Poland or South Korea and ahead of Canada. How is it possible? That jump is largely due to Industrial and Technological Plan for Security and Defense approved a year ago and that, according to the ministrycontemplated an initial investment of 10,471 million already in 2025. However, the SIPRI tables reflect that Spain continues to dedicate much fewer resources to defense than other EU (and NATO) partners, such as Germany, France, Italy or Poland, which in the last decade has skyrocketed its spending. Why is it important? For what we mentioned before: 2025 will be remembered for many debates, but there was one in particular that grabbed headlines for months and made Spain stand out worldwide. Despite Trump’s pressure for NATO partners to increase their defense spending from 2% to 5% of GDP, Madrid claimed that it could meet its commitments with an investment of ‘only’ 2.1%. His position was not liked in the White House, but it ended up leading to a pact with those responsible for the Atlantic Alliance. How much does the rest spend? That is another of the readings that leaves the study of SIPRI. In general, its technicians estimate that military spending increased by 2.9% worldwide in 2025, to around $2.9 million. It is the eleventh consecutive year in which the amount of resources that the planet allocates to the war machine has increased and explains that today the “global military burden” (its weight with respect to GDP) reaches 2.5%, marking its highest level since 2009. Are there differences? Yes. That increase was not distributed equally throughout the world. While in the US military spending suffered an annual contraction of 7.5%, in Europe military spending grew by 14% to reach 864,000 million of dollars. The same trend continued in Russia (+5.9%) and Ukraine (+20%), immersed in a war since 2022, or China (+7.4%) and Japan (+9.7%). That the US distances itself from this trend is something purely circumstantial. If its war expenditure decreased in 2025, it was due to the change in policy regarding the military support offered by Ukraine. In fact, SIPRI recalls that the US Congress has already given the green light to a considerable increase in military spending for this year and it is not unreasonable that something similar could happen in 2027. Image | Ministry of Defense In Xataka | Nobody saw it coming: Ukraine’s scariest drone doesn’t move, just waits for a Russian soldier to appear

Germany already has its first military plan since World War II. And it’s going to take thousands of soldiers to carry it out.

by

For decades, Germany avoided any gesture that recalled its military past, to the point that even talking about its own strategy generated political discomfort. That reflection had deep roots: on September 1, 1939, the invasion of Poland by Nazi Germany marked the beginning of the Second World War and left a mark that conditioned for generations the way in which the country understood the use of force. Almost a century later, that silence begins to be broken, but in a radically different context. A historic turn. Germany has taken a step that breaks decades of strategic caution by presenting its first comprehensive military strategy in the modern era, a 35 page document which bluntly assumes that the European security environment has changed irreversibly. In that sense, the invasion of ukraine has acted as a catalyst for a profound change in German mentality, forcing Berlin to move from a contained role within NATO to a much more active and defining one. For the first time since World War II, Germany not only talks about contributing, but to leadleaving behind his traditional discomfort with military protagonism. Except Washington. Although the official discourse continues to describe the United States as an indispensable pillar, the substance of the strategy points in another direction: Europe must learn to stand on its own. Washington is increasingly looking towards the Indo-Pacific and demands that its European allies greater involvementwhich has led Berlin to prepare for scenarios in which American support is not as automatic or immediate, at the very least. Without saying it openly, Germany is beginning to design a European defense framework where its role does not depend so much on North American coverage, but on your own ability to organize, coordinate and sustain the defense of the continent. The most powerful army in Europe. That’s the idea. The German plan is clear in its ambition: to convert the Bundeswehr into the conventional army strongest on the continent. To this end, a significant increase in troops is proposed, going from about 185,000 soldiers to figures that, adding active forces and reservists, could approach or exceed the 460,000 troops in the coming decades. This growth is not only numerical, but also structural, with a special emphasis on reinforce reserveswhich become a central element of national defense. The idea that emerges is forceful, one in which, if Europe wants to defend itself without depending entirely from the United States, will need a much larger military mass, and Germany is willing to lead that effort. A construction in phases. German rearmament is not considered as an immediate leap, but as a step process which will extend for more than a decade. In a first phase, the objective is to maximize readiness and rapid response capacity, ensuring that forces can operate at any time. Subsequently, it seeks to systematically expand capabilities in all domains, aligning with NATO objectives but with greater operational autonomy. Finally and finally, the horizon points to a deep technological transformationone where innovation, artificial intelligence and new forms of war define military superiority. Beyond the numbers. Yes, because the German strategy also reflects a more complex understanding of modern conflict, where the borders between military, civil and economic are increasingly blurred. Hybrid warfare, autonomous systems and the importance of information control force us to rethink not only how many soldiers or tanks are needed, but what effects they should be able to generate. In this context, the German strategy recognizes key shortcomings in Europesuch as intelligence, surveillance or long-range attack capacity, and proposes correcting them quickly so as not to be at a disadvantage against powers such as Russia. Europe as its own military pillar. The underlying message is difficult to ignore: the defense of the continent is already can’t rest exclusively in the traditional NATO structure as it was understood in recent decades. In this way, Germany wants to position itself like the axis on which a more militarily autonomous Europe could be articulated, capable of deterring and, if necessary, fight for herself. There is no doubt, the approach implies assuming a responsibility that was avoided for a long time, and that now appears inevitable in the face of a more unstable environment and a US ally. less focused on Europe. Human muscle. It is the last of the legs to analyze, because the entire German approach converges on a central idea that is beginning to take shape: if Europe wants to sustain a credible defense without completely depending from the United Statesyou will need mobilize hundreds of thousands of soldiers and rebuild a military base that had been reduced for years. Viewed this way, Germany is not only increasing its own forces, but is leading the way for what could be a continental effort much older. In that scenario, the question may no longer be just whether Europe can defend itself, but rather how much time, resources and personnel it is willing to devote to achieving this. Image | 7th Army Training Command, Pexels In Xataka | Germany was a sleeping military giant: now it has been awakened and it is already surpassing the US in bullets produced per year In Xataka | Germany is experiencing a new “industrial miracle” that it already experienced 90 years ago: that of weapons

The Pentagon wants to invest $54 billion in drones. It is more than the entire military budget of countries like Ukraine

by

The defense budget that the Pentagon has presented for fiscal year 2027 amounts to $1.5 trillion. It is the largest year-on-year increase in military spending since World War II, but in that colossal figure there is another that deserves special attention. This is the $53.6 billion allocated exclusively to drones and autonomous warfare technologies. That amount alone exceeds the Ukraine’s full defense budget either of countries like South Korea or Italy. Spain is even further away. autonomous defense. The money for this specific program will be managed by the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group (DAWG), an agency created at the end of 2025. In the 2026 budget it received 226 million dollars, but in 2027 that figure would be multiplied almost by 240. The United States has realized the relevance that drones have gained in war conflicts and wants to be prepared for this new era of defense. Obsolete investment. The Pentagon itself recognized something striking: the vast majority of the money requested will be used to buy technology that already exists, not to develop future solutions. One of the top officials of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Lieutenant General Steven Whitney, admitted that technological evolution on the battlefield currently happens in weeks, not years. It’s like admitting that what you buy now may become obsolete almost immediately. Ukraine showed that change has changed. The urgency of this budget does not come from nowhere. The war in Ukraine has rewritten the rules of modern combat In such a way that there are many countries that are processing how to assume these changes. Iranian Shahed droneswhich cost about $20,000 per unit, have proven capable of saturating air defense systems that cost hundreds of times more. Relatively affordable quadcopter drones have destroyed multi-million euro tanks and armored vehicles. Defense budgets in 2025. The US already spent 921 billion dollars last year, this year it wants to spend 50% more. Everything goes very fast. The speed of tactical adaptation on the Ukrainian front has been so high that innovations and tactics that work in January may be obsolete by March. Not because someone has invented something better, but because the adversary has found a way to counter those strategies. The Pentagon has reached an unusual conclusion: the traditional model of weapons acquisition that operated in cycles of years or even decades is structurally incompatible with the speed at which current war conflicts are developing. The irony of the Shahed. Among the most striking details of the budget is the confirmation that the American army has adapted the technology of the Iranian Shahed dronewhich is the same one that has been attacking cities and energy infrastructures in Ukraine for years. The US has done reverse engineering of your adversary’s design to incorporate it into your own arsenal. This clearly illustrates the current war reality: the origin of the technology does not matter, but its effectiveness. Risks. This tension between “we have to spend more” and the speed at which it is necessary to adapt to this reality poses an enormous risk. Buy en masse what works today guarantees that solutions will be available tomorrow. The problem is that these solutions may be technically inferior to those that the adversary has developed in the meantime. The same thing happens if you decide not to buy anything until you have the perfect technology, because that means arriving late (or not arriving at all). It is a dilemma similar to that of technology companies and their investment in infrastructure: they have to buy solutions now that they know that they will end up being obsolete in the short or medium term. Final approval is missing. The US Congress will have to approve the budget, which introduces an important political variable. Beyond that, there is a fundamental question in those 54,000 million in this budget. If drone technology evolves in weeks, there is no money that will be able to buy that adaptability to the modern battlefield. And that even with this immense budget superiority cannot be guaranteed makes clear the sign of the times. In Xataka | The percentage of GDP that each country allocates to Defense, shown in this graph with an unavoidable protagonist

We sensed that Iran bombed US military bases with help. Some coordinates have revealed its name, and it is Made in China

by

During the Gulf War, a group of Iraqi soldiers were located in the middle of the desert not by ground patrols, but by images taken from satellites that detected recent vehicle tracks in the sand. That episode marked one of the first moments in which looking from space began to be so decisive how to shoot from the ground. A satellite as an invisible weapon. A series of leaked documents held by the Financial Times have revealed that Iran not only had missiles and drones to attack US bases, but also a much quieter and decisive tool: an observation satellite capable of provide precise coordinates before and after each blow. The system, known like TEE-01Bwas acquired by the Aerospace Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in late 2024, after its launch from China, and allowed Iranian commanders to monitor key installations throughout the region, identify targets with a level of detail unprecedented for the country and evaluate the impact of their attacks in almost real time. In other words, what seemed like a direct fire war actually hid a previous layer of orbital intelligence which multiplied the effectiveness of each operation. A secret agreement. The middle counted in its exclusive that behind this capacity is a little visible but strategic agreement with Chinese actors, one that not only facilitated access to the satellite already in orbit, but also to the infrastructure necessary to operate it from any point in the world. This model, based on the “in orbit” transfer and in networks of globally distributed ground stations (a little-known export model by which spacecraft launched in China are transferred to customers abroad once they reach orbit), allowed Iran to overcome one of its main weaknesses: the vulnerability of its own facilities to attack. By outsourcing control and data flow, Tehran turned a commercial asset on a military tool difficult to neutralize. Satellite image of the Prince Sultan Air Base From limited precision to a qualitative leap. The technical impact of this jump is key to understanding its importance. Compared to its previous systems, incapable of clearly identifying complex targets, the new satellite offered high resolution images (the TEE-01B is capable of capturing images with a resolution of approximately half a meter) that allowed aircraft, vehicles and changes in military infrastructure to be distinguished. This transformed Iranian attack planning from general estimates to data-driven decisions, and consolidated a combination of human intelligence, satellite imagery, and external support that significantly elevated Iran’s operational capabilities. Attack on the bases. Among the records they obtained showed that the satellite captured images from Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia on March 13, 14 and 15. On March 14, Donald Trump confirmed that American planes at the base had been hit. Five US Air Force refueling aircraft were damaged. The satellite also carried out surveillance of the Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan and from locations near the naval base of the Fifth Fleet of the United States in Manama, Bahrain, and the airport in Erbil, Iraq, around the date of the attacks claimed by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard against facilities in those areas. Launch of TEE-01B And more bases. Other areas monitored by the satellite included Camp Buehring and Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait, the US military base Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti and Duqm International Airport in Oman. Also included in the Persian Gulf civil infrastructure monitored was the Khor Fakkan container port and the Qidfa desalination and power plant in the United Arab Emirates, as well as the Alba plant in Bahrain, one of the largest aluminum smelters in the world. Decades of relationship that explain the present. In parallel to FT reportthe New York Times published this morning one piece where he explains that these types of advances are not an isolated event, but rather the result of a relationship built over decades between Iran and China in the military and technological field. Since the 1980s, when Beijing supplied weapons directly, to recent decades, when it has opted for more discreet support based on components, dual technology and knowledge transfer, cooperation has evolved. to adapt to sanctions and regional balances. In that process, China has gone from selling weapons to facilitating capabilities that allow Iran to develop and improve its own without openly exposing itself. Strategic ambiguity as a tool. One of the most relevant elements of this relationship has been its ambiguous characterwhere the border between civil and military is constantly blurred. Commercial companies, seemingly neutral technologies and systems designed for civilian uses end up being integrated into military structures, offering China a way to influence without assuming directly the political cost of explicit support. This approach allows for simultaneous relations with Iran’s regional rivals while strengthening its strategic capabilities. A new type of war. In short, the end result is a scenario in which the battlefield no longer begins on land, but miles away from herin orbit, where information has become the most decisive factor and actor. The combination of satellites, global networks and discreet agreements It redefines that way of waging war, allowing actors with fewer resources to compensate for their limitations through access to advanced technology. In that context, the history of the TEE-01B It is not just that of a satellite, but how a network of cooperation and decades of technological evolution can completely transform the way an attack is planned and executed. Image | US Navy, Planet Labs In Xataka | The US already has the first response to its blockade of Hormuz: a boomerang of unpredictable consequences called China In Xataka | The US has closed all exits from the Strait of Hormuz. And now Iran can put into practice what it has been preparing for 25 years

that the US has to abandon its military bases

by

The US military deployment in the Middle East has been supported in large fixed installations capable of housing thousands of soldiers and operating continuously, a structure inherited from conflicts where air dominance reduced direct threats to those positions to a minimum. However, the advance of drones and precision missiles that logic has changedby allowing even highly protected infrastructures to be reached from long distances with relative ease. Iran empties US bases. The Iranian attacks have modified completely the balance on the ground, to the point of leaving many of the main US bases in the region practically unusable. We are talking about key facilities in Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain or Saudi Arabia that have suffered damage on radars, runways, command centers or logistical infrastructures, forcing them to evacuate or drastically reduce their activity. What was a solid network for years military projection It has become a set of vulnerable positions, exposed to missiles and drones that can hit accurately and sustainably. To the hotels. counted the new york times that the most striking consequence of this situation is that part of the US troops have had to abandon their bases and relocate in hotels, offices and spaces improvised ones spread throughout the region. In practice, this has led to a “remote” war, in which many troops operate outside traditional military installations, far from the environments designed to sustain complex operations. It is a certainly unusual image, one where the soldiers of a superpower, perhaps the greatest of all, are working dispersed in civilian environments to be able to continue participating in the conflict. Dispersal to survive. This fragmented deployment is not accidental, but a direct response to Iran’s ability to locate and attack concentrated targets. Keeping troops on large bases has become too riskyso the Pentagon has chosen to disperse them to reduce the impact of possible attacks. There is no doubt that the strategy has an obvious cost, since it makes coordination difficult, limits the use of certain teams and reduces operational efficiency compared to a centralized structure. Satellite image of Al Udeid air base in Qatar in February Further and better. It we have counted before. Unlike previous conflicts such as Iraq or Afghanistan, where threats were more limited, Iran has ballistic missiles and drones capable of hitting targets throughout the region. This has forced a complete rethinking of the security concept of US bases, which for decades were built under the premise that the surrounding territory could be controlled. Now, that assumption is no longer valid, and any fixed installation becomes a potential target. The paradox between civilians. Plus: relocation in hotels and civil spaces introduces an especially delicate dimension, as it blurs the line between military objectives and civilian environments. In fact, Iran has not been slow to take advantage of this circumstance to accuse the United States of use the population as a human shield, while encouraging to identify and report the presence of troops wherever they are. This creates a scenario of great tension, where the protection of the troops depends in part on their invisibility, but that same invisibility increases the risk for the civilians around them. Increasingly difficult to get rid of. Because from the sidewalk of Washington, operate from improvised locations means losing key capabilities. Heavy equipment, advanced command systems or even specialized infrastructure cannot be easily moved to a hotel or office, limiting the scope and effectiveness of operations. Although the US military maintains its ability to act, the quality and speed of response suffers, making warfare more complex and less efficient. The real change. What happened also reflects a deeper change in the nature of modern conflict. The great bases, the same ones that once were the pillar of presence American military abroad, are no longer safe spaces against adversaries with advanced capabilities. The combination of long-range missiles and drones has turned any fixed point into a vulnerable target, and that forces us to completely rethink not only the way we fight, but also where and how a war can be sustained. Image | Plant Labs In Xataka | Iran has found the perfect deal in Hormuz: a “guest list” that can pass after paying two million per ship In Xataka | Iran and Russia had been silently exchanging drones and material in the Caspian Sea for months: Israel has just revealed it

In 2021 a man made a military prediction and since then Taiwan and the US have been preparing for a date: 2027

by

In a military sense, there are few things as influential as a date that no one has officially set. Sometimes one sentence in a parliamentary hearing is enough for governments, armies and analysts to begin reorganizing budgets, exercises and strategies for years. In the Indo-Pacific, a figure pronounced some time ago ended up becoming a kind geopolitical clock. In fact, today marks the planning of various powers. The prediction on the calendar. In March 2021, a seemingly technical testimony before the US Senate ended up becoming one of the most influential points of reference in the Indo-Pacific military strategy. Then Admiral Philip Davidson warned that the rapid growth of Chinese military power could endanger Taiwan “within the next six years,” a statement that implicitly set a date: 2027. That estimate, based on intelligence analysis on the modernization of the People’s Liberation Army, quickly became what many strategists called the “Davidson window”. Since then, the number was installed in military planning of Washington, Taipei and their allies, triggering an investment careerwar exercises and military reinforcements throughout the Pacific. 2027 and the centenary. Of course, the reason why that date seemed plausible was closely related to the people themselves. Beijing’s strategic objectives. 2027 marks the centenary of the armed wing of the Chinese Communist Party, the People’s Liberation Army, and Xi Jinping’s leadership has set that year as a key stage to complete a major phase of military modernization. The plan is part of a broader calendar that seeks to have “basically modernized” armed forces by 2035 and capable of rivaling any world power around 2049. Although Beijing has never officially announced that this anniversary is linked to an invasion of Taiwan, the temporal coincidence between military modernization and increasing demonstrations of strength around the island has reinforced the perception that 2027 could become a critical moment. The strategy in the Pacific. As the years went by, that prediction took on a life of its own. Washington increased significantly its military spending aimed at competing with China and began to reinforce strategic infrastructure on Pacific islands to facilitate the deployment of forces. At the same time, the United States approved billions of dollars in arms sales to Taiwan, while Taipei began to adjust its military planning around a possible invasion scenario towards the end of the decade. Even the major Taiwanese military exercises have passed to simulate explicitly a Chinese attack in 2027, reflecting how a single strategic estimate ended up becoming a true geopolitical clock for the entire region. A surprise attack. For a long time, military analysis assumed that a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be impossible to conceal. A deployment of hundreds or thousands of ships, troops and equipment along the Chinese coast would generate obvious signals detectable by satellites and intelligence services weeks before the start of the operation. However, some analysts now warn that this assumption could be too optimistic. Recent research has suggested that China could attempt forms of attack faster or surprisingleveraging new tactics and technologies to reduce advance notice time. This scenario is especially worrying to Taiwan, which has historically relied on having enough time to react and mobilize its defenses. Increasingly intense military career. Meanwhile, Chinese military power has continued to expand at great speed. Beijing’s defense budget has increased steadily over the last decade and the country has introduced new capabilities that could be key in an eventual conflict: long-range missiles, advanced drones, new aircraft carriers and ships designed to transport troops and material to hostile coasts. These transformations do not guarantee that an invasion is imminent, of course, but they are changing the balance military in the Taiwan Strait and fueling concerns about the future of the region. The domino effect of other wars. The international context adds another layer of uncertainty to this strategic calculation. Conflicts in other regions, especially the Middle East, are forcing the United States to consume large quantities of ammunition, interceptors and military resources that were originally intended to reinforce deterrence in Asia. Analysts warn that a prolonged war in other theaters could delay deliveries of weapons to Taiwan and further strain US defense industrial capacity, where there is already a significant delay in military orders destined for the island. A strategic watch. Although neither China nor the United States have officially set a timetable for a conflict, the idea of ​​2027 has become a point psychological reference for governments, military and analysts. Some believe that this date has fueled unnecessary fears and an arms race in the region, while others believe that it has served to wake up Washington and its allies facing a historic change in the balance of power. In any case, the prediction made in 2021 has left a more than profound mark: today, in the barracks, offices and strategy centers of the Indo-Pacific, the calendar advances with a figure marked in red. 2027… and China. Image | 中文（臺灣）：​中華民國總統府, 總統府, Al Jazeera In Xataka | “We have never seen anything like this”: if China invades Taiwan, Taiwan will not notice because a drone has been disguised as an optical illusion for months In Xataka | An island has become the new red line against China: it has Taiwan in front of it and Japan is going to fill it with missiles

While in the US there is a civil war over military AI, a European one has sneaked into the French Armed Forces: Mistral

by

One of the big topics of conversation in recent weeks is the civil war in the United States. between two of the AI ​​giants and the Government itself. To sum up, Anthropic gave in his artificial intelligence Claude to the Pentagon to integrate it into all its systems along with Palantir. It is estimated that it has been a key tool for capture Nicolás Madurobut also to attack Iranbut since the US wanted to go further and Anthropic refused, OpenAI took its place. It is a very strange situation because the result could be that The US blacklists Anthropic as if it were Huawei. It would be the first time they have done that to an American company and it is something that tells us two things. The first is that governments need big technology companies and their tools. The second is that technology companies also have a lot to gain. And, while all that noise is happening in the United States, in Europe another AI company has ‘sneaked’ into its country’s security systems. We refer to a Mistral that, without making noisehas been building its portfolio of contacts in European defense systems for some time. A local AI for the security of Europe With all the spotlights pointing to ChatGPT, Claude and Chinese equivalents such as DeepSeekothers have been carving out a niche for themselves. Almost without a sound, and overnight, a French company called Mistral was building multilingual models that rivaled the American alternatives that captured all eyes. Founded in June 2023, Mistral will soon converted in the French technological jewel, but also in the Europe’s AI gem. Its managers, engineers who came from Google (deepmind) and Meta, managed to attract the attention of NVIDIA, ASML, Samsung, IBM, Salesforce or a Microsoft that invested 15 million euros and incorporated Mistral models into Azure. Mistral’s policy is to release the code of its models so that anyone can analyze, use and adapt it. According to them, it is something that will accelerate innovation and, without the muscle of the American giants, their approach is to a large model with other smaller and specialized ones. At the beginning of this year, the bombshell arrived. The Ministry of the Armed Forces of France arrive to an agreement with Mistral AI to integrate the company’s models, software and services in public entities related to the ministry. For example, the Atomic Energy Commission, the National Office of Aerospace Studies and Research, the Hydrographic and Oceanographic Service of the Navy and, also, the Armed Forces. It is the Ministry of Defense Artificial Intelligence Agency that will supervise all operations, but the idea is to “deploy Mistral tools in France’s infrastructure, ensuring full control over data and critical technologies.” From the Government, it was noted that, with these new tools, they can prepare the Armed Forces for the challenges of the future. However, the fact that Mistral is the Defense model in France may matter little to us… unless we take two things into account. The first: shortly after this agreement became known, public information on how Mistral is seeking Defense contracts outside France. They are getting more and more into this path, signing agreements with Helsinga German defense startup, and Arthur Mensch, CEO of Mistral, argued that its AI models will be “instrumental in the development of a new generation of defense systems.” Here comes the second thing to take into account. Mensch himself commented that these tools “will ensure Europe’s strategic advantage on the global stage”. This is important because Europe is now at a point where it has realized that the partners and allies of the past may not be the same as those of the future. European sovereignty At the user level we see movements like those of independence from American technologiesbut at a political level, Mistral responds to that search for European sovereignty. Instead of leaving your Defense-related systems in the hands of a foreign company, these agreements mean that it is a European company that is on the inside. And, in the end, this is not just about AI. In recent months we are seeing how Europe is moving to have a more powerful voice in terms of semiconductors, computing for artificial intelligence and even in the new space race. For a long time it has been said that others innovate and Europe legislates, but the current situation It has caused Europe to continue legislating while doing everything else. Images | Mistral AI, Amio Cajander In Xataka | The United States wants to be “sovereign” on a technological level. The problem is that everything it builds depends on other countries

Tencent has a significant stake in US military training tools. Trump is going to stand up to it

by

The Trump administration is debating if it forces the Chinese giant Tencent to get rid of its stakes in the largest Western video game companies. At stake are Riot Games, Epic Games and Supercell (more than a billion players) and the Unreal Engine, used in military simulations. The ghost of TikTok returns, but this time the affected market is different. Why Tencent. Tencent is not only the largest video game company in the world. It is also the largest silent shareholder in the Western industry: it owns 100% of Riot Games, 28% of Epic Games and majority control of Supercell, the Finnish company behind ‘Clash of Clans’. To this we must add participations in Larian, Remedy, Ubisoft and Discord, among dozens of other studios. For years, that capital has flowed to the West: the studios needed investment, Tencent had liquidity, and no one was looking for trouble. The White House sniffs. Washington, however, he has had doubts for years. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) began to review these investments during Trump’s first termand the case became one of the longest in the history of the organization, going through two administrations without reaching a clear resolution. What worries the White House is that video game platforms collect financial information, personal data and chat logs from hundreds of millions of users, many of them Americans. These databases are candy for any intelligence agency. The Epic case. The Unreal Engine adds an extra issue in which the White House has a special interest. The engine not only gives life to video games like ‘Fortnite’; It is also used by defense contractors and the US military itself for military simulation and training. In fact, the country’s Armed Forces have worked directly with Epic for years on that development. That Tencent is a shareholder in the company that builds this technology is what turns this issue into a national security problem. So much so that in January 2025, the Pentagon formally classified Tencent as a company linked to the Chinese military. Tencent rejected that classification, but the Pentagon did not withdraw it. There are problems. During the Biden administration, the issue was entrenched by an internal disagreement that no one knew how to resolve: Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco defended forced disinvestment, but the Treasury Department preferred to keep investments under data segregation protocols. Without consensus, the case was frozen. The cabinet meeting scheduled for March 4 was postponed due to scheduling conflicts. That same day, Tencent shares fell 1.72%. Parallels with TikTok. There are similaritiesbut also differences. With ByteDance, the US forced the creation of a new entity with 80% in the hands of US investors, as a condition of operating there. But the problem with Tencent is that it does not operate on American soil, but rather is a shareholder in companies already established there. Getting rid of these stakes is not the same as closing an app, it is more a restructuring of private capital. The consequences in the case of Tencent would go beyond Riot and Epic: the Chinese company has been the main injector of capital into studios for a decade, and a forced disinvestment would change the financing conditions of the entire sector, favoring large publishers. When will there be a solution? The decision has an undeclared but known deadline: Trump travels to China in April to meet with Xi Jinping. Forcing Tencent to sell would send a message of maximum pressure before sitting down to negotiate. In any case, neither the US Treasury, nor Tencent, nor Epic nor Riot have made public statements. Silence, in this type of situation, is louder than if they were discussing it loudly. In Xataka – China has made a drastic decision: prioritize ‘its’ technology, even if it is worse

no to all military use

by

The race to dominate artificial intelligence has narrowed to a handful of actors capable of competing at the highest level. Anthropic is part of that small group along with names like OpenAI or Google, and their models Claude they have gained ground in areas such as programming. In that big moment, however, the company faces a delicate decision: maintain certain limits on the military use of its technology, even at the cost of straining its relationship with the United States Department of Defense. The standard that changes everything. According to Axiosciting a senior administration official, the Pentagon is pressuring four leading AI laboratories to allow the use of their models for “all lawful purposes,” including in especially sensitive areas such as weapons development, intelligence gathering or battlefield operations. Anthropic, however, would not have accepted those conditions after months of difficult negotiations, which has led the Department of Defense to consider reviewing its relationship with the company. The lines you don’t want to cross. Faced with this broad demand, those led by Dario Amodei have made it clear that they maintain specific limits. The company insists that two areas remain out of discussion. A spokesperson told the aforementioned media that the company remains “committed to using cutting-edge AI in support of US national security,” but clarified that conversations with the Department of Defense have focused on “our strict limits around fully autonomous weapons and mass domestic surveillance,” and that these issues do not “relate to current operations.” The episode that ended up raising the tension. The Wall Street Journal statedciting people with knowledge of the matter, that Claude was used in a US military operation in Venezuela to capture Nicolás Maduro through the relationship with Palantir. In that same text, the AI ​​company responded that they cannot comment on whether their technology was used in a specific military operation, classified or not. And he added that any use, whether in the private sector or in the Government, must comply with its use policies. What is at stake. Beyond that episode, Axios reported that from the US military level “everything is on the table,” including the possibility of reducing or even breaking the relationship with Anthropic. The same senior official cited by the media added that, if this path is chosen, there would have to be “an orderly replacement,” which suggests that the process would require a certain amount of time. WSJ provides another interesting fact: last year a $200 million contract was signed between Anthropic and the Department of Defense. The substance of the dispute. At a time when AI companies seek to consolidate incomejustify valuations and demonstrate usefulness in critical environments, the relationship with the defense sector is a showcase and a source of first-rate business. At the same time, it is also an area where ethical and strategic limits become more visible. Anthropic’s decision to maintain certain restrictions may reinforce its identity as a security-oriented company, but also limit its access to million-dollar contracts. Images | Anthropic | Oleg Ivanov In Xataka | Data centers in space promise to save the planet. And also ruin the earth’s orbit

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.