States

Europe fled from Russia’s gas to fall into the arms of the United States. The Third Gulf War proves that it was a trap

by

Behind troop movements and sea blockades for the Third Gulf Warthere is a much quieter script twist that is shaking the foundations of the continental economy: false European security. A problem that comes from the other side of the pond. After the energy crisis due to the Ukrainian War (still valid), Europe thought it had solved its great energy vulnerability by changing the gas that arrived through Russian gas pipelines for liquefied natural gas (LNG) that crossed the Atlantic in ships from the United States. The idea of ​​the European Union was to bet its imports on Washington to diversify sources and avoid future geopolitical blackmail. However, the American lifeline has turned out to be punctured. With the global market in maximum tension due to the war in Iran, the US is not guaranteeing European supply and makes gas subject to trade wars and political whims. The real Achilles heel. Europe now depends on the United States for two-thirds of its LNG imports, according to the center for economic studies Bruegel. As global supply falls due to the conflict, Asian buyers — who traditionally sourced from the Gulf — are competing aggressively for flexible gas ships. The result is a bidding war to the highest bidder: according to Bruegelseveral shipments of American LNG have already been diverted from Europe to Asia in the midst of the conflict. At the diplomatic and commercial level, the situation with our “savior partner” is enormously unstable. In the midst of this crisis, Donald Trump has come to criticize European allies, urging them on social networks to “get their own oil,” according to Bloomberg. As if that were not enough, political friction over the conditions of the trade agreement between the EU and the US has caused senior US officials to threaten retaliation, casting serious doubts on Washington’s previous commitment to sell $750 billion in energy products (including its precious LNG) to the European bloc. The price of the “green illusion”. The impact of this imbalance is being brutal for European pockets. According to the Financial Times Based on data provided by the European Commission itself, the bill for EU fossil fuel imports has increased by 14 billion euros in just 30 days of conflict. Gas prices have experienced a rise of 70%, while oil prices have become more expensive by 60%. This puts in front of the mirror what in Euractiv have baptized as “the green illusion” of Europe: a glaring structural failure in the energy transition. Despite having invested nearly one trillion euros in renewable energy, the European Union’s energy dependence on imports remains at 60%, practically the same figure as in 2004. An ineffective design. The reason for this price contagion lies in the very design of the European electricity market. By operating with a marginalist system, the most expensive technology (usually gas) is the one that sets the price of electricity for everyone, as explained in Strategic Energy. In countries heavily dependent on gas to generate electricity, such as Italy, gas sets the price 89% of the time, exposing citizens directly to international volatility. However, there is hope if you do your homework. In Spain, the enormous growth of wind and solar energy has caused the gas only mark the price of electricity 15% of the hours, much better shielding the country against these external shocks. In fact, it’s not all bad news: solar electricity generation has saved the EU from spending 2 billion euros in fossil fuel imports only in the first 20 days of March. And now what? It doesn’t look like we’ll get a break anytime soon. The crisis will not be brief, as the European Commissioner for Energy, Dan Jørgensen, has strongly warned. who has made it clear thateven if peace were declared tomorrow, prices would not return to normal in the foreseeable future. The European Commission is already finalizing a “toolbox” with emergency measures that will suddenly return us to the scenarios of 2022. On the table in Brussels is the possibility of recovering taxes on extraordinary profits that fell from the sky (windfall tax) for energy companies. Drastic measures in sight. Brussels also foresees drastic measures to contain demand based in the well-known 10-point plan of the International Energy Agency. This would translate into recommendations to Member States to encourage teleworking, reduce speed limits on motorways and promote both public transport and car sharing. At the strategic level, to stop the bleeding in LNG prices and prevent the US from playing against Europe with Asia over shipments, the think tank Bruegel proposes a radical solution: that the EU act as a bloc and coordinate its gas purchases directly with large importers such as Japan and South Korea to avoid a bidding war. The invisible problem. To understand the complete picture, we must talk about the great bottleneck that almost no one talks about: concrete and copper. European renewable deployment is colliding with a lack of capacity in electricity networks. According to a report from the climate think tank Emberat least 120 GW of planned renewable energy projects in Europe are at risk simply because the grid cannot support them. The logjam is monumental, with almost 700 GW of renewable projects stuck in connection queues awaiting permits across European countries reporting this data. And this is not just a problem of the macro plants of large corporations; It directly affects the average citizen. According to calculations in the same report, 1.5 million European homes could face delays in being able to connect the solar panels on their roofs due to obsolete distribution networks that do not have the capacity to take on the energy. A chronic gap. The underlying problem is a chronic gap in the system itself. As pointed out EuractivEurope has changed how it generates its electricity, but it has not electrified its real economy. Cars continue to burn oil, heavy industry continues to use fossil gas and the general electrification of the economy has been stagnant for ten years. Europe has spent … Read more

The United States had not manufactured its most critical uranium for 20 years. He has just resurrected his production with an old metallurgy trick

by

In the hills of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, lies a place that carries the weight of contemporary history in its foundation: the Y-12 National Security Complex. According to the files of the US Department of Energy (DOE)these facilities were born in 1943 as a vital cog in the Manhattan Project. However, for more than two decades, the halls of its most advanced nuclear processing sector had remained in a prolonged dormancy. Today, that industrial silence has been broken. The United States has just ended a long gap in its domestic processing capabilities. The milestone that marks this rebirth is as visual as it is forceful: the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has successfully manufactured its first “button” of purified enriched uranium, an achievement that opens a new era in the American nuclear deterrent. In short. From the NNSA have confirmed the restart of uranium purification at the Y-12 complex. It is not a sudden step; This achievement comes months after, in September 2025, the start of the project will be authorized electrorefining. This is the first authorization of its kind since the opening of the Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility 15 years ago. More in depth. The new process allows installation slam the door definitively on the old Y-12 plants. For years, uranium processing depended on complex chemical treatments that were inefficient and, above all, posed greater risks for workers. The new era abandons these legacy systems in favor of much cleaner and safer technology. A strategic milestone. According to the statement from the NNSAthis purified uranium is a critical material that will support unavoidable national security missions, from the production of nuclear weapons to providing the fuel needed for the reactors of the United States Navy’s aircraft carriers and submarines. This effort is not a coincidence, but respond directly to the security and defense guidelines promoted under the mandate of President Donald Trump. Added to this military strategy is a pressing need for independence of resources. In November of last year, the US Geological Survey (USGS) added uranium to its final list of 60 critical minerals. This government directive has a clear objective: to shield the country against the risks of interruption in global supply chains. The “magic” of electrorefining. The secret behind this renaissance is called electrorefining. Although it may sound like science fiction, it is based on well-established commercial processes commonly used to purify everyday metals such as aluminum, titanium or copper. The method was originally developed by the prestigious Argonne National Laboratory and later perfected by the Y-12 development team itself. A simple process (at first glance). To understand how it works, the magazine Science Direct explains it in a simple way: The process uses an electrolytic cell where two electrodes are immersed in a chemical solution. One of them acts as an anode (where the impure recycled material is placed) and the other as a cathode. Through a controlled electrical reaction, metal ions travel to the cathode, where the pure metal is deposited, while the impurities fall to the bottom as an “anode sludge.” The result: An astonishing 99.9% purity. The format: An NNSA spokesperson He explained that the process It first generates “purified uranium crystals,” which are then melted in a furnace to create the compact, secure, high-purity uranium “buttons.” Additionally, Nikolai Sokov, senior researcher at the Vienna Center for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, explained that this innovative technology allows recovering and recycling uranium from various byproducts. Along the same lines, this method drastically reduces the waste generated compared to old chemical treatments. The weight of history: environmental debt. No story about the Y-12 complex would be complete without looking at its darker side. The background documents of the US Department of Energy rreveal the heavy inheritance of the Cold War. During the 1950s and 1960s, facilities used massive amounts of mercury for lithium separation. The ecological toll was devastating: an estimated 700,000 pounds (more than 317,000 kilos) of mercury were lost in the buildings and the surrounding environment. Today, to contrast technological advancement with the mistakes of the past, the top priority of the Environmental Management (EM) program at Y-12 is the cleanup of this mercury. He DOE informs that it is being built the Outfall 200 Mercury Treatment Facility. Scheduled for 2027, this plant will be capable of treating up to 3,000 gallons of water per minute. This vital infrastructure will allow older, more contaminated facilities (such as Alpha-2 by 2029 and Beta-1 by 2030) to be safely demolished without mercury ending up in the nearby Upper East Fork Poplar Creek. A process of metamorphosis. Audrey Beldio, NNSA Principal Deputy Administrator for Production Modernization, summed it up forcefully in the statements. project startup: “Electrorefining revolutionizes the processing of enriched uranium.” With uranium flowing again into Y-12, the United States is not just abandoning aging infrastructure. It is sending a clear message to the world: after twenty years of lethargy, the US nuclear sector has taken a leap towards a future where technological efficiency, the safety of its workers and the reliability of its arsenal are once again the spearhead of its defense policy. Image | HeUraniumC Xataka | While the West does not decide on nuclear, China already has a reactor 100 times more efficient than traditional ones

If Apple is forced to choose between the United States and China, Tim Cook is very clear about which one he will choose

by

Tech CEOs are on tour, and they’re pointing east. a few days ago, Lisa SueAMD boss, went to visit samsung for the first time. The result is a contract for the South Korean company to manufacture the next-generation memory for the American company’s AI platform. For his part, Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, was traveling through China. And, after all the pressures from Donald Trump For Apple to manufacture in the United States, Cook is clear about one thing. China is Apple’s base. The best. believe me. Tim Cook has transcended. Although it seems that he has little left in the position (at some point he will have to retire and John Ternus aims to be the successor), Cook has become an almost political figure. This is demonstrated in his travels through other countries or in the United States itself. His trip to China has consisted of several phases. He first visited the Apple Store by Taikoo Li, but the highlight was the trip to Beijing to meet with the Minister of Commerce. One of the points of the meeting was the bilateral relationship between the two. Because Apple is a huge customer for the Chinese technology industry, but China is also a safe asset for Apple. So much so that, as reported by the state portal Xinhua, Cook stated that “China is the most important production base for Apple, as well as its main source in the supply chain.” China’s pressure. The visit occurred at a time when things are as they are between China and the United States, but also with Apple. The details of the commercial and technological war between the powers are something that we have covered almost daily, but with Apple there is also a mess created due to the commissions in the App Store. China has demanded greater flexibility from Apple on store restrictions and Apple’s response is a reduction in commission from 30% to 25%. It’s just a little bit of giving in and a show of goodwill on Apple’s part, but China continues to ask that they loosen control over the App Store, which translates into allowing more third-party payment options to cut what they consider like a monopoly. Come on, Apple, in the eyes of Chinese regulators, still have homework. And the pressure from home. But at the same time that Cook’s visit to China takes place and it is declared that it is the great base of the company, something is moving. On the one hand, India wants to become the new China, and in 2025 Apple achieved a milestone: that one in four iPhones are assembled in India. Assembling is not the same as manufacturing, where China continues to lead the way. And the United States wants to turn the tables. Within its protectionist policies, Donald Trump’s government is trying to get its technology companies to create value on homeland. Intel’s billion-dollar rescue It was an example of the extent to which the US wants its technology to be manufactured in its territory and the truth is that it is bearing fruit. Apple or NVIDIA already have some assignments for Intelbut these incentives are also encouraging foreign companies such as SK Hynix, Samsung or, above all, TSMC those that are taking over the Americans in their territory. Many millions at stake. But despite the demands and demands, a powerful gentleman is a gift of money, and China is a huge market with great potential. It is evident that we can think that “what is Cook going to say in China, which is wonderful, of course”, but we must not forget that this is a company that, like all others, seeks the greatest benefits. And China not only has the capacity to meet Apple’s needs in terms of device manufacturing: it is a market to exploit. A few weeks ago we echoed how the company’s sales marked the best quarter since the first of 2022ending years of declines in Chinese territory (where Huawei has been making a strong comeback), but it’s not just Apple that is pursuing entry into China. NVIDIA has spent months putting pressure on his government to let them sell the H200s in China. Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA, commented that the Chinese cake is one of 50,000 million dollars and publicly asked the US government to stop being jealous and start collaborating in the name of capitalism. Cook has had a similar message on his trip to China, one supported by Li Qiang, Prime Minister of China who pointed out that if industrial issues are politicized, “the supply chain becomes a weapon, costs will only increase for companies and the momentum for development will be weakened.” In the end, they have gone to puncture where it hurts: the pocket. Images | Tessa Bury In Xataka | The decline of “Apple culture.” Blind devotion has evolved into critical enthusiasm

why the United States needs the old continent more than it admits

by

That the United States is the absolute reference of the West is a reality that we have been seeing all our lives: American Way of Life from the 1950s to the hackneyed phrase “without us, you would all be speaking German” that Trump took it upon himself to remember in Davos and that we have seen countless times in war films. Spain has its own version of that story with Welcome, Mister Marshall. But Trump returned to the White House willing to fulfill his promise to “Make American Great Again” at any price: immigration management with ICE as the executing arm about their citizenship, threats to Greenland or tariffs as a tool of permanent pressure. His ways are more reminiscent of a school bully than of a leader running one of the most powerful countries on the planet. And Europe? Well, between caution, diplomacy and even turning the other cheek. The million-dollar question is whether Europe has as little room for maneuver as it appears. The answer, according to a recent analysis from the German institute Dezernat Zukunft, no. United States > Europe. In case it was necessary to remember the power of the United States in general, it has the largest GDP in the world according to the IMFit is also the country with more military spendingthe dollar It is the world reserve currency par excellence since 1945. Furthermore, leads in digital infrastructure and semiconductors (in design and sales), almost half the world share. In fact, as Dezernat Zukunft points outnot even the 10 largest European countries combined compete with those key indicators of material power. But power is not negotiating ability. The United States is the strongest in the yard, but Europe has the leverage. And here the game board changes. A close example: the gas key. Russia’s GDP It is less than the ninth part of the EUbut Russia has something that Europe needs: the gas required to heat in winter. Changing suppliers overnight was unfeasible. Europe is a succulent client. The magnificent seven (Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet, Nvidia, Tesla, Meta) have an important part of their market in Europe. According to estimates by Dezernat Zukunftthese big tech companies generate more than $500 billion annually in Europe alone. If the old continent closes the market or fines them, their stock market shares would suffer a severe blow. And this point is not only important for companies. The magnificent seven They represent a third of the entire S&P 500the index in which the pension plans of millions of Americans are invested. If these big tech companies lose Europe, North American seniors earn less when they retire and that can be dramatic on a social and political level. Europe controls nuclear fuel. On Donald Trump’s roadmap Nuclear power plants are being built everywhere, but the United States does not have enough enriched uranium to supply itself in the short or medium term. Europe, through companies such as Urenco and Orano, is the main supplier of enriched uranium to the US, according to data from the Energy Information Agency. If the EU turns off the tap by prioritizing its own supply, the United States would have a problem meeting its nuclear needs, a key element for powering AI data centers. Because in the artificial intelligence race, The US desperately needs energy. Europe manufactures the turbines. To achieve enough electricity to meet the demand of data centers for AI, a specific type of gas turbines (40 – 60 MW) is also needed and here a European company is the queen: Siemens Energy. Siemens Energy’s SGT-800 has delivery times of one to three years, in a market where general deadlines have skyrocketed to seven years due to the demand for data centers, according to Utility Dive. Europe does not even need to turn its back on the United States, prioritizing its own orders would be enough for US artificial intelligence projects to suffer a few valuable years of delay. And time is money: the cost for large US technology operators could exceed 50 billion euros, according to Dezernat Zukunft estimates. American debt is fragile. The US dollar accounts for 58% of world reserves, but its weight as a reserve currency has been declining for two decades. USA accumulate a deficit of 1.8 trillion dollars annually that is financed by issuing debt and needs buyers. The problem is that central banks have stopped buying that debt: now it is speculative investment funds based in London that support the market. For the German institute, Europe has regulatory tools to discourage the purchase of American debt and favor European debt. If American bond rates rise, mortgages, credit and public spending in the US become more expensive. And we have seen it recently: when 30-year bonds exceeded 5%, Trump backed down in their tariffs. Europe is the best customer for gas. USA is the main supplier of LNG to the EU. However, if war conflicts allow it, starting in 2027 The International Energy Agency plans a gas surplus that will change the balance: sellers will need buyers and not the other way around. Dezernat Zukunft explains that due to geographical proximity, Europe is the best customer for the US, so if the United States tried to use gas as a weapon, it would be making a fatal mistake: it would sink the profits of its gas industry and Europe could buy gas from other countries. In fact, the EU is already working on it. Who needs who more. Although from an objective and abstract point of view parameters such as the largest army or the most powerful economy make Europe look weaker compared to the United States, Dezernat Zukunft highlights one power: that of necessity. And on some issues, the US needs Europe as much or more than Europe needs the US. It is not that Europe does not have cards to play, it is that it is difficult for it to agree to play them. In Xataka | Europe has realized that it cannot … Read more

In the Iraq War, Spain was left “alone” supporting the United States. 23 years later, she has been left alone refusing to help him

by

If a Spaniard from March 2003 could take a look at the press today (03/04/2026) it is most likely that he would not understand anything. And not because of the lack of context, references or the (logical) change of political leaders. Probably what would catch your attention is the 180º turn in the geopolitical chessboard that concerns the US and Europe. Let’s remember. In 2003 José María Aznar he posed smiling together with George W. Bush and Tony Blair to confirm itself as one of the great supporters of the US in the Iraq war. Today the opposite happens. Spain has become almost the loose European verse for his rejection of Trump’s offensive in Iran. It seems like a simple historical curiosity, but it says a lot about how Europe, the US and their relationship have changed over the last two decades. Trump’s anger. This is not the first time that Donald Trump publicly displayed his lack of harmony with Moncloa. In October, in full tug-of-war over the percentage of GDP that should be allocated to defense, the Republican came to suggest that Spain should be “expelled” from NATO. Rarely, however, has the US leader spoken out with the emphatic (and angry) expression he used yesterday when talking about the negative of Pedro Sánchez’s Government to have the US army use the Morón and Rota bases to attack Iran. “Spain has been terrible”. In the threatening tone that has become the hallmark of his second term, Trump made it clear that he does not take no for an answer. “Spain has been terrible,” started . “In fact I have told Scott (Bressent, Treasury Secretary) to cut all relations with her. Spain said we cannot use their bases. We could if we wanted to. Nobody is going to tell us no. But we don’t have to. They have been unfriendly.” In case there were any doubts, the Republican threatened with cutting “everything that has to do with Spain” and pronounced the cursed word: “Embargo.” He didn’t go much further, but neither that nor the fact that other previous announcements have fallen on deaf ears has prevented his words from causing an earthquake. Especially among the sectors that would have it worst if Washington decided to move forward and “cut off trade” with Spain, an otherwise complex scenario since trade policy does not depend on Madrid, but on the European Union. “No to war”. The problem is not only that Spain has refused to allow the US to use the bases in Rota and Morón to bomb Iran. Probably what has raised the most blisters in Washington is that Sánchez has clearly positioned himself against the actions of the US and Israel in the Middle East. did it yesterday and he has done it again this morning with a deliberately emphatic message: “Spain’s position is the same as in Ukraine or Gaza. No to war.” During his speech, Sánchez even recalled the Iraq war, which left (he denounced) “a more insecure world.” His position also has an internal reading: the ‘no to war’ of 2003 was a shock for the PSOE. One club, three positions. Sánchez’s position is not only important for what he says, but also for where and especially when he says it. His speech clashes with that of other European leaders who have been much more understanding of the US and Israeli attacks on Iran. In fact, just a few days ago their counterparts from France, the United Kingdom and Germany they have closed ranks with Trump. On Sunday the three powers (E3) released a statement in which they demanded that Tehran stop its “attacks” and they advanced their willingness to coordinate with the United States. “We will take measures to defend our interests and those of our allies in the region, potentially with necessary and proportionate defensive actions to destroy Iran’s ability to fire missiles and drones,” states the joint writing by Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer and Friedrich Merz. It should be remembered that on Sunday a French naval base in Abu Dhabi suffered an attack with drones and on Monday another drone impact against the British RAF facilities in Cyprus. Tehran has also hit bases with German troops. Madrid’s position thus clearly differs from that of Paris, London and Berlin. Also from that of the community club, which has opted for a more ambiguous position. Although the European Commission has not been slow to guarantee its “full” solidarity with its members in a veiled support for Spain in the face of Trump’s threats, the truth is that Brussels maintains a very different tone from that of Sánchez. On Monday Von der Leyen claimed that “diplomacy” is “the only solution” to the open crisis in Iran and, although he condemned Tehran’s attacks on Middle Eastern neighbors, he did not mention the bombings launched by the US and Israel. Just 23 years later… This morning Sánchez not only insisted on his “no to war.” He also wanted draw a parallel with what happened in 2003 when the Government of Spain, then headed by Aznar, decided to clearly support the US deployment in Iraq, distancing of its European partners. “The world has been here before. 23 years ago another US administration led us to an unjust war. The Iraq war generated a drastic increase in terrorism, a serious immigration and economic crisis. That was the gift of the Azores trio, a more insecure world and a worse life,” Sánchez claimed. Ironies of history, the socialist refers to the famous photo taken just 23 years ago, in March 2003, in the Azores and in which Bush, Blair and Aznar pose smiling. Have things changed that much? The truth is that yes. And not only because where Bush, Blair and Aznar sat 23 years ago, today Trump, Starmer and Sánchez sit (respectively). The most relevant change affects the roles and dealings with Washington. In 2003, the invasion of Iraq caused a fracture of Europe into two blocks well differentiated. One, against … Read more

The United States has found how to protect its most vulnerable ships on the high seas: with escort drones

by

The planet’s oceans and seas are anything but a pond of oil, and not precisely because of the climate: the Black Sea with the war between Russia and Ukrainethe Baltic Sea with hybrid warfare and ghost fleets, Strait of Hormuz tensions through which 20% of the world’s oil passes or the Red Sea crisiswith Houthi drones and missiles. And those are just some of the hot spots that cause logistics and merchant vessels to face serious problems in carrying out their functions. The possibility of sending the navy as a companion for those routes where the atmosphere is heated is obviously not an option. So the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has contracted to a company to solve it with an autonomous escort system with drones. Context. If the Strait of Hormuz is a strategic point for international trade, the Bab el-Mandeb Strait is not far behind: 12% of world maritime trade passes through it, according to the Middle East Research Center. But since 2023, passing through there is a minefield, which has led to thousands of boats (according to Wikipedia citing Pentagon sources) follow an alternative route that involves going around all of Africa passing through the Cape of Good Hope. That’s 20,000 extra kilometers, ten more days of travel and the consequent expense in fuel. This specific case is not a mere example: it is what has led DARPA to make the decision to count on Raytheon to unclog this bottleneck as soon as possible, as explains the company’s president of Advanced Technology, Colin Whelan. Why is it important. Because 80% of world trade circulates by sea and there are a series of straits that are critical and that, in the event of conflict, act as bottlenecks due to their vulnerability. And the effects are immediate in the form of delays in supplies and prices. The protection of merchant ships to date required a naval escort in a slow, expensive operation and for which there are not enough troops to allocate them to that mission. What Pulling Guard proposes is autonomous protection without requiring extra crew or structural modifications. What is Raytheon? That company is not any: Raytheon is the arms division of the RTX group, the largest aerospace and defense company in the world, with 180,000 workers and $88 billion in turnover in 2025. With more than a century behind it and headquartered in Virginia, it has missiles such as the Patriot or the Tomahawk on its resume. It is one of the Pentagon’s Big Five contractors and is a regular in DARPA contracting. What is Pulling Guard. Pulling Guard is the system developed by Raytheon, a semi-autonomous platform towed by the ship it protects. From this, a drone operates with electro-optical and infrared sensors to detect potential threats and transmit information in real time to remote operators on the ground or on board. The latter are in charge of making decisions without the crew exposing themselves. It has two phases: in the first it is an advanced surveillance system and in the second it integrates weapons. Pulling Guard is neither a passive shield nor a preventive warning system: it is, in short, a light autonomous combat unit attached to a civilian ship. What we still don’t know. Beyond technical unknowns such as the budget, the phase schedule or the type of integrated weapons, this proposal raises two tricky questions: international law and gray areas. Without going any further, from issues such as what rules of engagement apply to the remote operator from the ground authorizing fire, who is legally responsible for the attack or what happens if the system acts in the waters of a third state. Not to mention something more mundane like flag registrations or insurance companies. Or something even more basic: does the ship lose its civilian status by carrying this system? In Xataka | The US Navy already knows how to fool enemy radars: drones that create ghost fleets In Xataka | The US is preparing a new radar for Greenland with one objective: to monitor every movement of Russia and China in the Arctic Cover | Raytheo

China is building submarines faster than anyone else. And that’s a problem for the United States.

by

In a tense geopolitical moment on a global scale with several open fronts such as Greenland, whose melting ice is allowing us to see nuclear submarinesChina just achieved a historic milestone: it is manufacturing nuclear submarines faster than any other country in the world, according to a report by the International Institute for Strategic Studies. This is a complete surprise to the United States, the power that until now held this title, and threatens the advantage that Washington has maintained for decades. Brief notes on nuclear submarines. Without wanting to delve into their characteristics, it is worth distinguishing what types there are: He SSBN is a nuclear-powered submarine designed to launch ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads (some with intercontinental range). They are strategic second response platforms, practically undetectable and guarantee that if someone attacks first, they will receive a response. The SSN/SSGN are nuclear attack submarines (the second, guided missiles), true maritime control weapons: they can attack land or sea targets, block routes and operate for months without resupply. Context. American hegemony underwater lasts for decades, but Beijing has on its roadmap modernize its military capabilities by 2035: it already has the largest surface fleet in the world in the words of the Pentagon and now he has turned on the turbo to reach the last bastion of the United States: the depths. The data. China has surpassed the United States in the pace of launching nuclear-powered submarines (SSN/SSBN). Thus, between 2021 and 2025, the Asian giant launched 10 units compared to Washington’s seven, according to has discovered the IISS through satellite analysis of the Bohai shipyard in Huludao (northern China), as the epicenter of the industrial leap. In a decade, China has gone from being far behind to leading the race: Why is it important. This shift in underwater hegemony has three implications, one of which points directly to the US: Nuclear deterrence. The new submarines Type 094 and future Type 096 They expand China’s nuclear response capacity in the face of possible nuclear attacks. A preemptive attack is strategically unfeasible. Maritime control of commercial routes. SSGNs with high-speed missile systems add a layer of threat to foreign combat groups in the Indo-Pacific, complicating access for the US and its allies to potentially conflictive areas, such as the South China Sea or Taiwan. At a time when The United States is betting on boarding As a sign of maritime control, China has in this fleet a safeguard for its commercial routes. The United States cannot cope with that pace. John Phelan, US Secretary of the Navy, recognized in Congress that “All of our programs are a disaster, honestly. Our best-performing program is six months behind schedule and 57% over budget.” Phelan mentions the erosion of this industry, which according to the Government Accountability Office Today it faces problems such as aging infrastructure and a shortage of qualified labor. The surprise figures. The IISS Military Balance 2025 leaves other interesting figures to better diagnose the reality of both powers in nuclear submarines: Launch rate from 2021 to 2025: seven from the US to 10 from China. The difference in tonnage is notable: while those from China weigh 79,000 tons, those from the US are 55,500. Active nuclear fleet: The United States wins by a landslide, with 65 units compared to China’s 12 units (plus another 46 conventional ones). Quantity vs quality. We have already seen in the previous point that the United States continues to gain in numbers (still) and it is not the only reason for optimism for the country led by Trump. CNN echoes the IISS report where he explains that “Chinese designs are almost certainly behind American and European submarines in terms of quality.” Among other qualities, in noise: Chinese submarines are noisier, which makes them more vulnerable, they explain. But as a captain warns Retired US Navy Half USNI Officer, Biggest Fleets Win. In Xataka | In the midst of rearmament, Spain has just surprised Europe: 5,000 million for 34 warships and four submarines In Xataka | The new fear of Western fleets is not nuclear. They are conventional submarines armed with surprise and a flag: China Cover | CSR Report RL33153 China Naval Modernization: Implications for US Navy Capabilities—Background and Issues for Congress by Ronald O’Rourke dated February 28, 2014 – United States Naval Institute News Blog, Public Domain

There is a paradise island that you only enter armed. And the United Kingdom wants to “liberate” it from the United States

by

Prima facie, chagos It’s just a handful of perfect islands lost in the middle of the Indian Ocean, too small and remote to matter to anyone. But precisely that distance, that silence and that almost total absence of glances, have turned the archipelago into one of the most uncomfortable places of the map, one where paradise and power have been coexisting for decades without giving explanations. A paradise taken by force. part of history we tell it a few months ago. In the middle of the Indian Ocean, the Chagos Archipelago was for centuries a forgotten place, inhabited by a community that developed your own culture far from the great powers, until in the middle of the Cold War the United Kingdom decided to turn it into a global strategic piece. To make this possible, London separated the islands of Mauritius and, in agreement with the United Statessystematically expelled the entire local population between the late 1960s and early 1970s, emptying Diego Garcia to build a joint military base that has since operated outside of public scrutiny. We are talking about a territory where civil life disappeared completely. No one enters here without a weapon. For more than half a century, Diego Garcia is a geopolitical anomaly: a tropical island with perfect beaches and intact reefs that cannot be accessed without military authorization and where the armed presence it’s the norm. Officially administered by the United Kingdom and rented to the United States, the base has been key in operations in the Middle East and Central Asiaand has been surrounded by persistent accusations about secret flights, clandestine detentions and activities that have never been fully clarified. What happens inside remains, to a large extent, a state secret shared. Diego Garcia Island Invisible expelled. As the base grew, the Chagossians were trapped in exile, many of them scattered between Mauritius and Seychellesdeprived of their land, of adequate compensation and for decades even of the right to return. Their towns were swallowed up by the jungle, abandoned churches and cemeteries, and their history was minimized by official documents that described them as temporary workers, not as a community with deep roots. To this day, many continue to die without having seen the place where they were born, while decisions about their future are made. systematically without them. The transfer in small print. Thus, after years of international pressure and a strong opinion of the International Court of Justice, a few days ago London announced its intention to return sovereignty from Chagos to Mauritius, a gesture presented as the closing of a colonial wound with an important “but” in the background. It happens that the agreement includes a key condition: the Diego García base would remain operational for decades (99 years), thus shielding Anglo-American military interests. For many Chagossians, devolution without the island of Diego García is not a real liberation, but a repetition of the same pattern under another name. The clash between allies. The latest twist has come when the United States stopped the processwary of any change that could affect one of its most sensitive military installations, and provoking open tensions with the United Kingdom while returning the negotiations to the starting box in the already closed offices. Thus, Chagos it is again the scene of a dispute where the discourse of international law and decolonization collides with the logic of global security, confirming the central idea that has run through its entire history: on this paradisiacal island, neither the landscape nor its former inhabitants rule, but rather an armed silence of which, still todayyou can’t really know what the hell is going on inside. Image | Anne Sheppard, POT In Xataka | A Finnish couple found an uninhabited island on Google Maps. Today they rent it for 2,400 euros per night In Xataka | One of the most remote islands was taken 60 years ago by the United Kingdom and the United States. Since then, what happens there has been a secret.

BYD sells a total of zero cars in the United States. And, despite everything, it has denounced the United States for its tariffs

by

Not a year ago and it seems like a thousand lives have passed. In case you don’t remember, I’ll give you some background: the United States and China went to war about a year ago. A trade war who left us images to remember, like the photo of Donald Trump with the “reciprocal tariffs” table either the penguins who will now have to pay for putting their products there. Assuming, of course, that the penguins knew how to design, develop, produce and sell products. Beyond Pepín Tre’s own approaches, the truth is that we have been in tug-of-war between the United States and China for almost a year. In OctoberDonald Trump and Xi Jinping met to try to relieve tensions. It is one more of the chapters that has left us a most bizarre year in which, for example, China has been playing its own solitary tricks, redefining the origin of products, classifying them by their place of manufacture and not by the place of development or packaging and, thus, make the entry of chips accessible without lifting restrictions on other types of products. The last chapter of this story seems to be being written by BYD. The Chinese company is not selling cars in the United States. And what has already been approved by Joe Biden before the entry of Donald Trump, with bans on the sale of all cars with Chinese software or hardware, it does not seem to make things easy for the Asian company either. Despite this, BYD has made a tough decision: sue the United States. They believe that the tariffs they are paying are not legal. They doubt that the regulations used by Donald Trump allow tariffs to be imposed. And that is why they demand that all the money paid since April be returned to them. But what money? Much more than cars… although with cars in mind As we have told you in Xatakathe Asian company is much more than a car producer. In fact, and this is part of its secret, BYD did not start out as a regular car manufacturer. BYD, in addition to cars, produces batteries or heat pumps. Vertical integration is part of your secret to saving costs. From this evolution and opening new horizons, its automobile division was launched. But also buses and trucks. Because when BYD arrived in Europe it had already been there for many years selling their buses for our continent. And the same thing happens in the United States. It does not sell cars, but it does sell buses, trucks and batteries. In fact, according to Reuters750 BYD employees work in the United States in its North American division. Up to four BYD subsidiaries from which buses, trucks, batteries and renewable energy systems come out are those that have filed their lawsuit in the United States Court of International Trade. In it they defend that “the text of the IEEPA (the International Emergency Economic Powers Act on which the “reciprocal tariffs” policy was based) does not use the word “tariff” or any term of equivalent meaning.” Since Donald Trump announced the tariffs that he was going to impose on practically everyone, doubts about their legality or otherwise have been on the table. The United States Government dusted off the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to move them forward, a rule of the Cold war. However, doubts about whether or not this rule should go through Congress were on the table from day one. Even the Senate has voted against the tariffs to some countries but the resolution is purely aesthetic. Now, BYD claims that nowhere in the law does it specify that tariffs can be imposed on products coming from abroad. It is a theory supported by various companies that in recent months have also presented their own lawsuits in the same terms, such as Toyota, Costco or Prada, they point out in CarNewsChina. The decision of the court in charge of the lawsuit is key because if it rules in favor of the companies, the United States would have to return all the money collected since April. But it would also open the door for products to be exported without these special tariffs being applied, they would simply have to comply with the tariffs that were already active before April 2025. That is to say, At stake is not only money that BYD may have lost on the products it has sold there. At stake is also market entry which, with current tariffs, is almost impossible. Besides, Canada has opened the door to Chinese electric cars and Geely has dropped that their intention is also to sell their Chinese cars in the United States. The big question, as in the case of BYD, is how they intend to do it before the end of the decade with the restrictions that are currently imposed. It is a question that neither BYD nor Geely have answered. Photo | BYD and Joshua Hoehne In Xataka | “They are going to regret it”: Canada has generated even more tension with the US by opening the door to Chinese electric cars

more and more states are opposed to building them

by

The US is finding increasing resistance ahead of the construction of new data centers to feed AI, and New York has been the last state in joining it. Two Democratic legislators have presented a bill that would suspend the construction of new facilities in the state for three years, becoming the sixth territory to consider this type of measure in just a few weeks. Why is this happening? The bipartisan rejection of data centers has spread like wildfire across the country. In December, Bernie Sanders became the first national politician to ask for a general moratoriumarguing that it was necessary to “ensure that the benefits of technology work for everyone, not just the 1%.” Now, from Florida to Vermont, lawmakers from both parties are pushing for temporary pauses. According to Wired, more than 200 environmental organizations they signed a letter calling data center expansion “one of the biggest environmental and social threats of our generation.” In detail. The proposal, introduced by state Sen. Liz Krueger and Assemblywoman Anna Kelles, establishes a minimum three-year moratorium on issuing construction permits. During that period, the Department of Environmental Conservation and the Public Utilities Commission would evaluate the impact of these infrastructures to suggest new regulations. Just like share In the middle, the state currently has more than 130 data centers, and electricity demand linked to new projects has reached 10 gigawatts, triple what it was just a year ago. Among the developments underway is a 450-megawatt center built on a former coal plant. Where else is it happening. Georgia, Maryland, Oklahoma, Vermont and Virginia have also introduced bills this year to temporarily pause data center development. Although Georgia, Vermont and Virginia are Democratic initiatives, in Oklahoma and Maryland they have been led by Republicans. According to share Wired, as of late December at least 14 states had cities or counties that had suspended building permits. And Virginia, with more than 60 related bills introduced this year, has become the legislative epicenter of this battle. The hidden cost. data centers consume massive amounts of energy and waterand local communities fear an increase in your electric bills greater than what they have had to face until now. Just like account In New York, Gov. Kathy Hochul last month launched an initiative to force data centers to “pay their fair share.” “I don’t think there are many people who want to have higher energy bills just so some chatbot can corrupt a 13-year-old boy online,” declared Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. Resistance from below. Beyond the legislators, there is also citizen opposition that is pausing multimillion-dollar projects. According to Data Center Watch, between March and June 2025 they were delayed or canceled developments valued at 98 billion dollars. In Monterey Park, California, a six week campaign has achieved a 45-day moratorium and a commitment from the city council to explore a permanent ban. Between the lines. What is happening in the United States with data centers is a reflection of the problem that the evolution of AI brings with it: that it is generating a physical infrastructure the costs of which the communities where it is installed are not willing to assume. Many companies promise jobs with their construction, but once operational they hardly require personnel. They promise fiscal investment, but they skyrocket energy consumption and pollute with noise and emissions. A Morning Consult survey revealed that a majority of voters support banning the construction of data centers near where they live and believe they are partially responsible for rising electricity prices. And now what. The industry has begun to react. Just like share Wired, Microsoft presented last month, with support from the White House, a series of commitments to be a “good neighbor” in the communities where it builds. Dan Diorio, vice president of state policy for the Data Center Coalition, assured the outlet that the industry “recognizes the importance of continued efforts to better educate and inform the public about the industry.” The needs of Big Tech to advance their operations collide more than ever with public opinion, and it does not look like the gap is going to narrow anytime soon. Cover image | Tim Mossholder and Kevin Ache In Xataka | Something is changing in the markets and AI: Amazon’s exaggerated spending announcement has been followed by a stock market crash

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.